Auto balancing

[Doorman]

Some excellent games one one of our myriad servers last night, can't remember which one.    With one exception. Even after 3 or 4 requests for a "CT to change to T please" calls, no-one was willing to make the ultimate sacrifice of changing to the disadvantaged team. Eventually the penny dropped!

 My question is this: What is so bad about auto team balancing? As I understand it, the top man fron the winning side is swopped for the low man on the losing side. Or have I got that wrong? I/we've all been on servers where auto is used and I for one have not found it unfair in any way.

In my view, this would put an end to,
1."You've joined the wrong side" tirades.
2."Would the next CT to die......." messages.
3. Spectators worrying about which team to join.
4. Something else, I've no doubt!  :whistle:
Yours, in my dotage, Ron.

[smilodon]

As I understand it team balancing works by never allowing a player to join a team where this would make that team two players more than the other team

i.e. CT=5 T=4. New player cannor join CT's but is forced to join T.
but CT=5 T=5. New player can join any team.

This is also true of map starts, where the balancing forces an even spread at match start.

The only issue I can see for this is that it makes no reference to the specific features of the map nor the quality of the players. As we know several maps are only 'balanced' when one team his several players up on the other (Italy and Rio to name two).

I've never heard of balancing across teams by auto swapping a top scorer for a low scorer ?? But I may just be thick.

[Doorman]

Originally posted by smilodon@Mar 25 2004, 09:10 AM
I've never heard of balancing across teams by auto swapping a top scorer for a low scorer ?? But I may just be thick.

I accept that this may be a misconception on my part. :unsure: That's why I asked.  

[Dr Sadako]

Originally posted by Doorman+Mar 25 2004, 10:14 AM-->

[Doorman]

OK, Thank you.