Direct team swap is terrible

[spIash_damage]

---

@DarkLanX wrote:

What approach would you try? Not allowing people to switch or something similar?

---

I would eliminate Team Swap and the ability for 4 people to join a server from a backyard and play consecutive games all on the same team.

If this game was equipped for team play, I'd say go for the 4 people-same-team thing.  As it stands, it makes the servers unfair and hurts the community.  There's literally several threads about or posts mentioning this problem already and I've even read people who've said they're leaving the game already because of this.

I would make the top 2-4 players (depending on modes and player count) from each team separate/randomize after every match.  If it's Battle Arena, I'd take the top two and switch them around so the top player from each team pairs up with the 2nd player from the opposing team.  If it's a 10 man mode, swap the top 3 around.  If it's a 12 man mode, swap the top 4-5 around.  The algorithm would have to be more advanced to prevent one person from always being on the same team... but you get the idea.

I just want fairplay with highly skilled fraggers distributed evenly to both teams.  It's understandable that this is an impossible task to achieve every game... but as it stands, 90%+ of the PvP I play end with a winning score that doubles the losing team.  Not fun for anyone and I don't even enjoy winning a landslide like that; it's like beating up a kid.

[ToastedSarnie]

@spIash_damage All good points, but how do you decide who the top/strong players are? Rank is not necessarily indicative of a strong player, could be someone like myself in GW2 who is a decent but not exceptional
player who has a high rank just through having painfully worked my way up! There are lots of high ranking PvZ players who have awesome game skills but there are also newcomers who may not be experienced in THIS game, but have played many similar ones, so they are instantly strong despite low rank. And don't get me started on PvZ smurfs . . . 🤣

[DarkLanX]

@ToastedSarnie I think the scores or the number of vanquishes can be a way to pick the "top" players. It's not 100% accurate, but it's still something.

[spIash_damage]

@ToastedSarnie , @DarkLanX  is correct.

I generalize so much when I speak or type, I even annoy myself sometimes. 🤪

Top scorers from each round.  ... or combine the most xp earned with most frags to determine top players.

[ToastedSarnie]

@spIash_damage 🤣 Sorry, knew what you probably meant, was just using an @newbebop type spoon!

[ippig]

Sorry for reactivating this thread but yesterday playing TT was awful. Every match I played the players switched the team so that one team was outnumbered. I think PopCap should establish an XP boost for switching to the outnumbered team or some kind of passive bonus for the smaller team. Otherwise it happens like yesterday that so many people just leave the match due to losing it anyway. The worst match was where my team had 3 players versing 7 in the other team

[ToastedSarnie]

@ippig I've had a lot of that too. I know that some want or need to play a particular side but switching in the first place just causes so many problems. I like your idea of an xp boost or a bonus - is there a way you think it could be set up to avoid people abusing/exploiting it??

[ippig]

@ToastedSarnie Just had a few ideas but nothing concrete yet. First of all players who switch to the outnumbered team should get an xp boost for the rest of the match as long as they stay in the team. The players of the outnumbered team should have this bonus as well which should somehow related to the different sizes of the teams playing versus each other. Let's say 5% per missing player. Let me explain this: if one team is 2 players short then there will a bonus of 10% more xp. If one team is 4 players short it could be 20% more xp. Changed objective timers due to the size of the competing teams could also be an idea for a passive bonus although it is probably difficult to realize changing timers on the fly during the match.
The amount of xp is discussable. I just did it for better understanding.
Sure players could find a opportunity to abuse this mechanic to their personal advantage with bugs or glitches but so far it could work. If a player thinks he could just switch teams over and over again does not have any benefit because the bonus does not stack.
Damage or heal boosts won't work due to balancing issues.
What do you think?

[jnicol1975]

Re: automatically mixing up teams to create an even matchup. I remember in GW1 I used to get auto switched a LOT. However, it seemed to be only the mid-ranked players who got switched: the top ranked and low ranked  players stayed on the same team. Used to drive me bonkers, until I ranked up enough to be left alone. Did anyone else experience this?

I frequently experienced lopsided team numbers too, and it totally killed the fun. I would always switch to the smaller team to try and even things up, even if it meant being on the losing team. I like the proposal to reward players for switching to the smaller team, but I can see it being exploited by players switching to farm XP. (edit: I notice that ippig made suggestions for how XP might be awarded while I was composing my reply)

[spIash_damage]

@jnicol1975 Anyone that games with me knows I switch the the losing team 99% of the time teams are unfair.  I wish the matchmaking was better and team swap was completely removed so games would be balanced the majority of the time instead of unfair.