Oktoberfest wrote:It's perfectly fine for multiplayer games. You get your "balance" and argue endlessly for your 1v1 min-max ranked things where apparently 5 points difference for a super heavy matters, and you let the other have fun.
Balance should have been done for 10v10 game, then we wouldn't have stupidities like 30 x30 point tanks = 2x170 point tanks.
And let the players play the game they want, not what you think is right.
You know, I've never even played a single ranked match. I think ranked is stupid too, so dismount your high horse. In any case you've missed the point.
A) It is impossible to balance 10v10. There are too many variables, too many things to consider. They're also inherently unreliable because it's common for at least a third of the players to leave the match. Furthermore, many people with slower internet/computers have trouble with 10v10s and are forcibly disconnected from the game. How can you balance around that? You can't, it's impossible. And therefore if it's impossible then it's in the interest of the developer to curb 10v10's and promote more balanced game modes and settings for the health of their competitive multiplayer game.
B) It's not what I think is right. I'm merely putting forward that Eugen and the community at large needs to decide how to go forward, and what settings should be supported. Right now it's simply too many, and the community health suffers as a result. Obviously I have my opinions and I'll advocate them, but it's important to see this issue as a community-wide one, and it needs developer-level consideration before the next Wargame is released.