Scenario game fairness & pre-register stacking

[ChillswitchEngage]

For the many peeps here that go to scenarios and pre-register, how do you think it should be handled if one side ended up always being stacked? Prime example; this past scorched earth at black ops was 4:1 in favor of red for team size and they were (predictably) dominating the entire time. They usually do it so all the people who didn't pre-register fill the smaller team, but that did not work out here. Should groups of players be forcibly moved from a team they pre registered with just to make things fair? Or perhaps lower the spawn rate of the stacked team, or some other possible advantage to give to the smaller team?

What do you say MCB?

[Trbo323]

Oregon supergame uses a3 team system what can work well.

Red team, blue team yellow team

Yellow team is the renegades, their whole job is to balance the game if one team is getting freight trained.

The problem with that is the renegades themselves have gotten too big and they are just a full team now so rather than balance to the point that red or blue can fight them off with enough effort, they can't and whichever side the renegades join ends up talking a lot of ground. The renegades were set up to be a small team of skilled players that can come in and help but it's become popular to be on the renegade team and the organizers haven't done anything to keep the numbers in check

Sent from my motorola edge 2024 using Tapatalk

[RPP]

It seems really short sided for the refs/owners to leave a game completely lopsided the whole day/weekend. Why does it seem like owners frequently forget that people are paying for an experience? It seems pretty obvious that you start grabbing groups of players and having them switch sides.

[ChillswitchEngage]

Definitely agree, the promoters/refs should have just started switching over groups at that point. Also IMO, you could easily further incentivize people to voluntarily switch by offering admission passes or similar for another day of play. Not that it should be needed, the waivers should really just have some clause that you may be switched over at any time for game balancing reasons.

[Chuck E Ducky]

Best way is to balance is by skill set and knowing your customers. Having some skilled regulars that can you can just ask to switch sides to valence the game out really helps.

can’t always count on just numbers.

[autococker04]

This is the way I've seen it done recently. 10 or so guys that can switch sides or be split up depending on need.

[JohnB]

They def need to even out those teams. Or halfway through the day switch it up if it is that bad.

[superman]

We had the same thing happen recently at the cpx urban legends game. one side recruited heavy, the other side was super late to the game. we had 10+ players flip to the other team that were local just to help even it out. It really wasn't enough. Every time we came off the field it was like hitting the reset button.

[BrickHaus]

My home field has quite a few 30+ person teams, and reserves the right to move any of us at any time during or before the game if balancing is needed.

There are also purchasable upgrades you can acquire via the game, and the field will simply give the losing team some stuff to balance the game.

I remember I was general one time, and I went all out, jogging for months before the game to utilize my uav to the max. And I recruited people from the forums.

I recall air strikes costing 75,000 gold in game currency, and I couldn't afford one while dominating the field. After the lunch break I got radio calls that 3 bases got air struck back to back. Then 2 more a few minutes later.

I realized that the other team was given some ordinance to take some ground back. And I was totally cool with it.

[devilzcall]

The big games I see in Europe seem to put caps on team tickets. A lot of the bigger groups register very early to not run out.

i don’t like that sometimes it leads to stragglers not being able to register in the same team as their friends, but if the colors get too lopsided, blue team needs to pull even before registry for red can reopen.

[Nish]

I think a 3rd team works well a lot of the time, pulling people to even teams out or changing things up like be earlier mentioned free ordinances. Castle conquest was what, 4:1 by design but the smaller team respawned twice as often?

There are a lot of ways to do it. The biggest thing is for the field or promoter to have a plan for when it happens and for at least some of that plan to be communicated ahead of time to commanders so no one is surprised and bitt hurt when it happens. Almost no one is having fun if one team is stuck in their respawn so as long as everyone knows what to expect it's much more tolerable.

[Daltech]

I’d suggest giving the dominant team a stop light. Like the freeways in LA, you have to get on the freeway on ramp then wait at a light to get on the freeway.

ie: only let one player from the dominant team back in every 60 seconds.

I think the large issue at hand is finding qualified talented labor to referee for $8 an hour.

[BrickHaus]

A respawn window is a good idea.

[Nish]

LOL

Since a lot of scenario games are military themed call it the civil unrest rule. Soon as a team gets within X of the respawn the organizer starts slowing there respawn.

[DBrazXeno]

A lopsided game can be prevented before the scenario even begins. The owner, promoter, and generals should be routinely comparing the pre-reg numbers and team recruitment. Then make adjustments before game day to ensure a fair and balanced event.

RPP was right when he said people are paying for an experience. Nobody spends all that money for a scenario just to get lit up taking two steps in from respawn. It’s no fun for anyone and I have seen people pack their gear and leave because of mismatched games.

Restricting respawns and “air striking” the winning side artificially builds up a large force and they usually retake the field all over again.

The only exception for a lopsided game would be if it is part of the game dynamics. I ran a Left 4 Dead scenario based on the video game. It intentionally had a 3:1 zombie horde:survivor ratio and the balance was closely monitored.

[Jordan]

I've basically stopped playing at this point as recball is dead where I live and scenario games end up exactly as the OP described.

If I get lit up every time I leave my spawn, or worse, have to walk 10 minutes to get to my spawn (looking at you, Adrenaline) after I come off the field to grab air or paint, only to find out if missed the reinsertion windows and it'll be another 5 minutes to get to re-enter....

Nah. I'll stay home and work on the honey-do list. At least that way I can feel like I've accomplished something.

[Jsc5150]

From direct experience running scenarios:

Always balance the teams, absolute madness not to. Tell pre-registered squads/teams to register as groups so you can flop whole squads to balance numbers on game day.

Balance scenario teams on each side as well with lone wolves, Ffs balance any launchers, mechs/tanks too

If running a “symmetrical” game with capturable spawns, once a team is stuck in their spawn point, call it a capture, award points and reset. Don’t grind one team to dust early in the day.

Do asymmetrical games when possible, like one team on top of a hill with limited respawns and another at the bottom with unlimited respawns.


The trick is keep people on the field and out of the parking lot/staging area.

[Chuck E Ducky]

OSG dose a spawn Shut down. When the opposing team starts pushing into the spawn they shut it down and rotate respawn points. So one min your fighting down hill the next you might be fighting up it. They do the most well run big games I have ever played. They know their customers. Know who are just there to push the front line around and who wants to run points objective and props. It’s not about numbers it’s all about skill level. OSG has got it figured out for sure especially the numbers they pull. It’s pretty impressive honestly.

[Pyrate Jim]

Perhaps the best way I've seen was a tactic used at several fields. A mercenary force run by the field that could assist either team to help balance the point spread.
Usually, the field home team who would join one side for a mission or sabotage the other. Just to keep play interesting for both teams.

[TF_Aloha]

They could fix this by eliminating the ability to join a team once it gets say, 20% larger than the other team. Replace it with "Flexible w/ preference" option that doesn't guarantee a spot on Red, but puts you on a wait-list where you automatically get on Red once more people sign up for Blue.

It would actually help incentivize people to sign up earlier because aspiring Red players would want to be at the front of the standby line.

Additionally, I think that having 3 real teams would work even better at keeping things balanced throughout the event. I'm not talking about a renegade team that switches sides either, I mean 3 real teams, each accumulating points and each with a home base to defend. It will always be in the interest of the two teams currently losing to gang up on the current point leader, so it will be unlikely that one team just dominates all day. It would also naturally discourage spawn-camping, since if Team A is spawn-camping Team B, Team C has an opportunity to take A's base under-defended base.

[Chuck E Ducky]

I have never played a 3 team game that has actually worked well.