Population balance in mmos (esp pvp)

Larion · 10-22-2008, 05:07 AM

This is one of the problems i have yet to see a proper solution for and the problem is in my opinion the biggest reasons why so many pvp server fail (best example is probably SZ in EQ back then or rather the first real one).

Do any of you see a solution for that?

My take would be to do a power balance. Since you can't lock one side and forbid players to join that side wouldn't it be a solution to have the overall power of a character depend on its sides active population?

I mean, having 2 sides with lets say 30% to 70% ration between the two (this would also be applicable for more factions, but for simplicities sake i will stick with 2 here) is not uncommon on "pvp servers" in any game.
Usually this really hurts the community and it is virtuall impossible to "fix the server", since players tend to want to play on the winning side, or the "cooler side" (wich is probably the reason why on pvp servers the "evil" side is usually higher populated).

If you would now alter the power of the character (dmg/hp/mana) based on the side he is on, you could, through a backdoor control the population and keep pvp alive on servers with population imbalance. Balancing would of course still be an issue, but you would have a tool to actualy control the population.
Or rather an automatism that doesn't require additional resources that keeps servers from "going bad".

Elerion · 10-22-2008, 05:11 AM

Planetside did that. It worked. Of course there was limited leveling up bullshit to be able to join the PvP there, so switching sides was of lower consequence.

Pyros · 10-22-2008, 05:45 AM

Or you can design your game without factions. Guilds and alliances are enough, you don't need artificial "sides", that only leads to issues. You just make a FFA world, and it autobalances itself, to a certain extent. At least the old times pvp mmos I played were like that, UO had "sides" but they weren't solid limits, you could switch overnight if you wanted, AC only had guilds(or monarchies as they were called), and it balanced itself, even though I'll admit at some point Blood was too big.

Last solution is add another side. 3sides makes it easier to balance than 2. That's the main mistake mythic made with WAR compared to daoc. While daoc had balance issues, it was still hard for one side to dominate another because of the 3rd which would take advantage of it. So the bigger sides usually had to fight on 2 fronts. WAR went the wow way, and it was a failure the very moment they decided to go 2 sides instead of 3 or 0.

If you decided to do 2sides, no amount of fixes, bonuses and whatever else will help to be honest. Some servers will definitely be imbalanced. And then those servers will become deserted(because it blows being on the lower side for most but the hardcore pvper, and even then it blows).

Dumar · 10-22-2008, 05:49 AM

pyros is right. but it won't change until companies stop being lemmings.

Wilfan · 10-22-2008, 06:03 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Pyros

Or you can design your game without factions. Guilds and alliances are enough, you don't need artificial "sides", that only leads to issues. You just make a FFA world, and it autobalances itself, to a certain extent.

According to the rumors, autobalancing failed in EVE China. Apparently 1-2 big out-of-game guild/corps/clans/whatever took over the game, didn't really fight among each other, then people got bored and left the game. Again, just rumors.

OTOH autobalancing works almost too perfectly in the main EVE.

Blide · 10-22-2008, 06:43 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wilfan

According to the rumors, autobalancing failed in EVE China. Apparently 1-2 big out-of-game guild/corps/clans/whatever took over the game, didn't really fight among each other, then people got bored and left the game. Again, just rumors.

If true, I'd be inclined to say that's a cultural issue and not so much one of game design. Obviously what works in an Asian MMO may not work in a western one and vice-versa, it's like comparing apples to oranges in my mind. If anything, that example proves that self balancing works in western MMOs but not in Asian ones. To me, that example would really only be relevant to western developers who want to try to expand into that market.

Genjiro · 10-22-2008, 06:52 AM

We played evil side on SZ, and the racial imbalances of shit like ogre+iksar vs other races made it an easy choice, since from a pve standpoint they were clearly better (ogres as tanks) and iksar as any class they could choose.

WoW is trying to combat it in places in WotLK, such as Wintergrasp by giving the smaller side a scaling buff if they are outnumbered and so forth. That's about all you really can do, and provide huge incentives for underpopulated sides. Faction increases, xp increases, easier to build castles and such if thats the kind of world you are playing in....if you provide enough benefits people will reroll or new players will be more inclined to choose that side to start with.

EmiliaEQ · 10-22-2008, 07:06 AM

1) Make a pure FFA Server
2) Provide Cool Looking & Balanced Classes
3) Provide Incentive to Reroll to the Weak Side (XP & Cash & Reward Bonus)

And let stuff balance out.

Inconsiderable · 10-22-2008, 08:16 AM

no hardcoded factions = no problem

softcoded factions (example: neocron) = either everybody works together against the crowded faction or those that get bored change to another faction

no factions (examples: uo, shadowbane, eve) = players create their own factions and therefor no need to control the balance between factions. However it might come in handy to have a mechanic that makes a player empire more difficult to expand the more it grows

TwiNCannoN · 10-22-2008, 09:15 AM

I think mythic's rolling population stuff worked well, at least Dark Crag has the best population I've ever seen - Dark Crag Statistics: Population Data

problem is they dropped the ball with the amount of servers on pre-release (too few) and the amount a week later (too many)

As for keeping a sustained balanced population, or trying to repair a broken one, not entirely sure. Give the players a chance to "cash in" their character in exchange for an appropriately leveled/geared one on the other side?

Granted factionless is the way to go... but developers are pussies.

Teron D'Amun · 10-22-2008, 10:02 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Wilfan

According to the rumors, autobalancing failed in EVE China. Apparently 1-2 big out-of-game guild/corps/clans/whatever took over the game, didn't really fight among each other, then people got bored and left the game. Again, just rumors.

OTOH autobalancing works almost too perfectly in the main EVE.

it didn't, a lot of different alliances are fighting the chinese version of bob who tries to take over the server
and that rumor also only arose because EVE China put in all the POS stuff without the means to remove it - dreadnoughts, so one single alliance could have been able to take over the entire galaxy by just placing deathstar poses in every system

Horse · 10-22-2008, 10:52 AM

Forcing teams is the issue.

Creating a network of alliances with meaningful targets and rewards alongwith realistic opportunity for new people would be great.

Capping alliance and guild size would help things out, and really enforcing some sort of playstyle where the largest alliances would have to attack each other for any sort of gains. Make it not desirable to attack smaller alliances to the point of having some sort of government altering gameplay "laws" to the point that being the largest alliance gives you some weight but not an iron grip on the rules over the majority of unorganized, or lesser organized, players.

Essentially EVE with a few tweaks and a way for single players to have more of an impact than an alliance. Maybe add a modifier on someone's vote if they're in an alliance based on it's relative power, not necessarily its size, and have a diplomatic side of the game with laws, rules and NPCs to enforce them.

Camerous · 10-22-2008, 11:53 AM

Don't force people to be on a "side" at all. In WoW it is so stupid that the factions can't group, talk, or interact with each other. It is an artificial block to a problem that was never even there.

Aamina · 10-22-2008, 12:01 PM

Sad to say, but EQ2 did this right. Just make a quest to "betray" and switch sides. People will keep switching till it fixes itself. I don't mind the 2 factions thing, just make us able to talk to each other and switch sides with some kind of betrayal.

Azrayne · 10-22-2008, 12:05 PM

I did a massive post about this discussing WAR pre-release somewhere, it's far too late to try and dig it up off WHA though, so just roughly:

1) The obvious is to offer faster progression on underpopulated factions. Provide incentive for people to play there, and make it so they can become competative faster.

2) Seperate queue's for each faction. WAR did this and it works well on high pop servers.

3) Faction specific transfers. Allow players from faction A on servers with faction A overpopulated to transfer to servers where faction A is underpopulated.

I had a handful of other idea's, but I can't remember them. Regardless, with these three monitored closely and applied appropriately I imagine you could keep the population on any MMO fairly balanced. The trick is to make it obvious which benefits are available and where, and have it implements from the word go. Mythic have done relatively well here, but they could have been a lot more on the ball and prevented the whole destruction overpopulation thing. The key is making sure people factor these things into their choices when they first start playing the game and are rolling their first few characters a week or two in.

Ideally, have some sort of system which would keep tabs on the games population and update these kinds of bonuses automatically. I can't imagine it'd be amazingly complex.

10-22-2008, 05:07 AM	#1 (permalink)
Larion Does not post pictures for religious reasons! Join Date: Nov 2003 Posts: 651 -51 Internets	Population balance in mmos (esp pvp) This is one of the problems i have yet to see a proper solution for and the problem is in my opinion the biggest reasons why so many pvp server fail (best example is probably SZ in EQ back then or rather the first real one). Do any of you see a solution for that? My take would be to do a power balance. Since you can't lock one side and forbid players to join that side wouldn't it be a solution to have the overall power of a character depend on its sides active population? I mean, having 2 sides with lets say 30% to 70% ration between the two (this would also be applicable for more factions, but for simplicities sake i will stick with 2 here) is not uncommon on "pvp servers" in any game. Usually this really hurts the community and it is virtuall impossible to "fix the server", since players tend to want to play on the winning side, or the "cooler side" (wich is probably the reason why on pvp servers the "evil" side is usually higher populated). If you would now alter the power of the character (dmg/hp/mana) based on the side he is on, you could, through a backdoor control the population and keep pvp alive on servers with population imbalance. Balancing would of course still be an issue, but you would have a tool to actualy control the population. Or rather an automatism that doesn't require additional resources that keeps servers from "going bad".

10-22-2008, 06:52 AM	#7 (permalink)
Genjiro We bawlin boi! Join Date: Apr 2006 Posts: 3,829	We played evil side on SZ, and the racial imbalances of shit like ogre+iksar vs other races made it an easy choice, since from a pve standpoint they were clearly better (ogres as tanks) and iksar as any class they could choose. WoW is trying to combat it in places in WotLK, such as Wintergrasp by giving the smaller side a scaling buff if they are outnumbered and so forth. That's about all you really can do, and provide huge incentives for underpopulated sides. Faction increases, xp increases, easier to build castles and such if thats the kind of world you are playing in....if you provide enough benefits people will reroll or new players will be more inclined to choose that side to start with. __________________ Genjiro--Legacy of Steel--EQ1 sexy monk (retired) Entreri--Guildleader of Ardent Legion--EQ2 (retired) "The men the American public admire most extravagantly are the most daring liars; the men they detest most violently are those who try to tell them the truth." -- H.L. Mencken

10-22-2008, 09:15 AM	#10 (permalink)
TwiNCannoN kill yourself irl Join Date: May 2003 Location: New York Posts: 1,249 +1 Internets	I think mythic's rolling population stuff worked well, at least Dark Crag has the best population I've ever seen - Dark Crag Statistics: Population Data problem is they dropped the ball with the amount of servers on pre-release (too few) and the amount a week later (too many) As for keeping a sustained balanced population, or trying to repair a broken one, not entirely sure. Give the players a chance to "cash in" their character in exchange for an appropriately leveled/geared one on the other side? Granted factionless is the way to go... but developers are pussies. __________________ <- what happens when you get stuck playing support 24/7 i write stuff sometimes

10-22-2008, 11:53 AM	#13 (permalink)
Camerous -internets from anon retards mean jack Join Date: Nov 2003 Location: Overthere next to that place Posts: 2,720 -79 Internets	Don't force people to be on a "side" at all. In WoW it is so stupid that the factions can't group, talk, or interact with each other. It is an artificial block to a problem that was never even there. __________________ Give me more -internets you little bishes!

Thread Tools
Show Printable Version Email this Page
Display Modes	Rate This Thread
Linear Mode Switch to Hybrid Mode Switch to Threaded Mode	Rate This Thread:

10-22-2008, 05:11 AM	#2 (permalink)
Elerion My milkshake Join Date: Nov 2004 Posts: 2,094 +6 Internets	Planetside did that. It worked. Of course there was limited leveling up bullshit to be able to join the PvP there, so switching sides was of lower consequence.

10-22-2008, 05:45 AM	#3 (permalink)
Pyros Registered User Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 3,225 +39 Internets	Or you can design your game without factions. Guilds and alliances are enough, you don't need artificial "sides", that only leads to issues. You just make a FFA world, and it autobalances itself, to a certain extent. At least the old times pvp mmos I played were like that, UO had "sides" but they weren't solid limits, you could switch overnight if you wanted, AC only had guilds(or monarchies as they were called), and it balanced itself, even though I'll admit at some point Blood was too big. Last solution is add another side. 3sides makes it easier to balance than 2. That's the main mistake mythic made with WAR compared to daoc. While daoc had balance issues, it was still hard for one side to dominate another because of the 3rd which would take advantage of it. So the bigger sides usually had to fight on 2 fronts. WAR went the wow way, and it was a failure the very moment they decided to go 2 sides instead of 3 or 0. If you decided to do 2sides, no amount of fixes, bonuses and whatever else will help to be honest. Some servers will definitely be imbalanced. And then those servers will become deserted(because it blows being on the lower side for most but the hardcore pvper, and even then it blows).

10-22-2008, 07:06 AM	#8 (permalink)
EmiliaEQ Registered User Join Date: May 2002 Location: Paris 94 ! Posts: 730 -5 Internets	1) Make a pure FFA Server 2) Provide Cool Looking & Balanced Classes 3) Provide Incentive to Reroll to the Weak Side (XP & Cash & Reward Bonus) And let stuff balance out.

10-22-2008, 08:16 AM	#9 (permalink)
Inconsiderable the princess approves Join Date: Sep 2006 Posts: 1,492 -1 Internets	no hardcoded factions = no problem softcoded factions (example: neocron) = either everybody works together against the crowded faction or those that get bored change to another faction no factions (examples: uo, shadowbane, eve) = players create their own factions and therefor no need to control the balance between factions. However it might come in handy to have a mechanic that makes a player empire more difficult to expand the more it grows

10-22-2008, 10:52 AM	#12 (permalink)
Horse Registered User Join Date: Mar 2007 Posts: 1,973 -51 Internets	Forcing teams is the issue. Creating a network of alliances with meaningful targets and rewards alongwith realistic opportunity for new people would be great. Capping alliance and guild size would help things out, and really enforcing some sort of playstyle where the largest alliances would have to attack each other for any sort of gains. Make it not desirable to attack smaller alliances to the point of having some sort of government altering gameplay "laws" to the point that being the largest alliance gives you some weight but not an iron grip on the rules over the majority of unorganized, or lesser organized, players. Essentially EVE with a few tweaks and a way for single players to have more of an impact than an alliance. Maybe add a modifier on someone's vote if they're in an alliance based on it's relative power, not necessarily its size, and have a diplomatic side of the game with laws, rules and NPCs to enforce them.

10-22-2008, 12:05 PM	#15 (permalink)
Azrayne Registered User Join Date: Jan 2007 Location: Awsome Posts: 2,728	I did a massive post about this discussing WAR pre-release somewhere, it's far too late to try and dig it up off WHA though, so just roughly: 1) The obvious is to offer faster progression on underpopulated factions. Provide incentive for people to play there, and make it so they can become competative faster. 2) Seperate queue's for each faction. WAR did this and it works well on high pop servers. 3) Faction specific transfers. Allow players from faction A on servers with faction A overpopulated to transfer to servers where faction A is underpopulated. I had a handful of other idea's, but I can't remember them. Regardless, with these three monitored closely and applied appropriately I imagine you could keep the population on any MMO fairly balanced. The trick is to make it obvious which benefits are available and where, and have it implements from the word go. Mythic have done relatively well here, but they could have been a lot more on the ball and prevented the whole destruction overpopulation thing. The key is making sure people factor these things into their choices when they first start playing the game and are rolling their first few characters a week or two in. Ideally, have some sort of system which would keep tabs on the games population and update these kinds of bonuses automatically. I can't imagine it'd be amazingly complex.