1
Imagine joining a lobby, only to find that one of the two teams has a selection of mainly light-medium tanks,
while the other team has a force made up of mainly heavies and TDs. That results in the light team, here
on out referred to as A team, finding it incredibly hard to fight against B team. B team
usually ends up destroying A team, with abnormally low casualties.
The worst is when the lobby is a mix of 2 tiers of tanks on both teams, and B team has high-tier heavies,
while A team's TDs and/or heavies are low tier. That's a terrible situation to be in, as A team has high tier
light tanks, not made for dealing with heavies, while their own heavy forces are of a lower tier.
I'd like to suggest a few ways to balance games, so that such terrible matchups never occur:
1) Creating an algorithm, or tweaking the already existing ones, so that it calculates how many of
A team's tanks can penetrate B team's tanks, and B for A. If the number of hard-to-penetrate (HTP)
tanks is too high, or the number of tanks able to destroy the tank in question are low, the algorithm will
place that tank in another lobby, or it will increase the number of tanks that can penetrate it (switching the
weak tanks with stronger ones).
2a) Reduce the amount of high-tier tanks able to join a low-tier lobby (instead of 3-4 a team, 2-3 or less,
depending on how large the power gap is between the high tier tanks of B team and the main force of A
team. Any excess high-tier players can join same tier lobbies, allowing for fairer matches.
2b) In addition to the above suggestion, we should not allow for 3-tier games to exist (for example a game
where both teams have 3 tier Vs, 3 Tier IVs and 1 Tier III. Even if the games are balanced, while a medium tier IV
can fight against a medium tier V and win, having a med. tier III fight a med. Tier V is a death sentence, as the armor,
health and damage values are nowhere near close to eachother.
