FTA fix for 2v2, PLEASE! (as in... well... you get the idea ;)

[Gf!sh]

Something which has been bought up recently (Burnocaster, anyone?):

(10-30-2012 08:27 PM)Ravernoth Wrote:  The FTA advantage is definitely there in 2v2, and can be felt against well organized teams.

In terms of wit balance, the fair amount to add to the second team is 3 wits, if OML would consider the asymmetric setup:
P2 starting with 7 wits and P4 with 6.

T1 = Team 1, T2 = Team 2
2 bonus wit spaces per team

'Correct' but asymmetric setup - 2 wits extra to P2, 1 wit to P4

Code:

Turn           1   2   3   4   5   6

T1 Total Wits  5   5  10  10  16  16
T2 Total Wits  0   7   7  13  13  19

T1 Advantage  +5  -2  +3  -3  +3  -3

Current Imbalance

Code:

Turn           1   2   3   4   5   6   7

T1 Total Wits  5   5  10  10  16  16  22
T2 Total Wits  0   5   5  10  10  16  16

T1 Advantage  +5   0  +5   0  +6   0  +6

If for whatever reason the asymmetric setup is not appealing, adding 2 wits to Team 2 would be an improvement but would still leave FTA:

Proposed setup - 1 wit extra each for P2 and P4

Code:

Turn           1   2   3   4   5   6

T1 Total Wits  5   5  10  10  16  16
T2 Total Wits  0   6   6  12  12  18

T1 Advantage  +5  -1  +4  -2  +4  -2

[Alvendor]

Think this might be the most important and easiest issue to fix! (assuming we found how to prevent the chat bug).

I like the asymmetric P2 starting with 7 wits and P4 with 6 thing to make it as balanced as possible.

Btw, you might wanna change "non-asymmetric" to symmetric, it is screwing with my brain =)

[Juslas]

There is not that many votes yet, but this is clearly top 20 team trouble.
But since FTA was addressed on 1v1 it should be fixed on 2v2, too.

[(Rone)]

imo, Machination still needs to be fixed. Even if this is implemented does that negate the Burnocaster effectively?

Also, I still don't know which one to vote for but definitely not the third choice.

---

(06-09-2013 10:03 PM)Alvendor Wrote:  Btw, you might wanna change "non-asymmetric" to symmetric, it is screwing with my brain =)

Mine too

[GreatGonzales]

5/7/5/6 please.

[[PETA] Doodat]

(06-12-2013 07:43 PM)Deadbeatman Wrote:  imo, Machination still needs to be fixed. Even if this is implemented does that negate the Burnocaster effectively?

Also, I still don't know which one to vote for but definitely not the third choice.

---

(06-09-2013 10:03 PM)Alvendor Wrote:  Btw, you might wanna change "non-asymmetric" to symmetric, it is screwing with my brain =)

Mine too

I think so, if I had one more wit, I would have been in a much better position than I was in the replay

[Szei]

All other changes/additions to Outwitters at this point, even ones which I would like, I honestly don't expect to be added. OML has moved on from Outwitters. This, however, is different. The absence of an FTA fix for 2v2 actually directly influences every match played. 1 or 2 wits can be the difference between a win and a loss. Even if team 2 can still win at the moment, as time goes on and players improve at this game mode, FTA will become increasingly problematic. We already saw an example of this on Machination shared by burnodrod and master caster, and I've also come up with a powerful P1 rush on Mechanism.

Hopefully making this fix isn't too much trouble for OML because I really think it is necessary to 2v2 in the long term.

[TheGreatErenan]

They did say they were still going to do bug fixes and try to address balance issues.

[Gf!sh]

Now, i do not habe experience with coding and such, but if i am correct, this should be able to be fixed with a single line of code, so i definitely think they could fix this pretty fast.

[Juslas]

And there is absolutely no need for beta testing.
None of the top players (nor teams) are against the fix, they demand it!
Mathematics about balance are clear - fix should be implemented today, please.

And if something goes wrong ...
we survived bramble buff, too.

By the way bramble can shine on 2v2, being the wining force!