The side with fewer players enjoys the advantage

Suggestions
1

No one wants to fight with bot teammates because there is nothing more frustrating than this, bots are useless, they won’t even use your spawn points, your personal efforts are useless
Therefore, I think the side with fewer players should enjoy more advantage
For example: the side with fewer players will proportionally increase the enemy’s station speed, consume manpower and reduce its own respawn time according to the number of BOT teammates. If it is an attack, reduce the manpower consumed when respawning proportionally, reduce the station speed and the respawn speed.
In addition to that, give more EXP to players who are still fighting on the side of fewer players, so that they can get their due rewards, they should get extra EXP rewards proportional to the number of BOT teammates.
Otherwise, the game will always be one-sided. If the BOT can be harvested and the game can be played simply, who wants to go to the camp with fewer people?

9 Likes
2

Good idea, which was already badly implemented. Right now axis has been buffed with shorter timers and more manpower. But when we have full team of axis they steamroll allies no matter of number of allies players. So you suggest moving from static implementation of system to dynamic one.

3

It’s been implemented on a per faction basis when it should really be on a per team basis.

5

I don’t think so, bots are only occasionally accurate, they don’t seek cover or use respawn points, and the worst players are better than bots

3 Likes
6

Honestly I disagree. In many cases this can get quite out of hand, as the Pacific buff showed. Even 3 players can greatly outperform 9 players in this case.

I think the real solution lies in rewards. Give an increase in rewards in proportion to the imbalance of the teams. Say +15% per player difference. Xp and logistics order gains increased by lack of players. This not only compensates those with less players, but also incentivizes people to play on the less popular team, eventually increasing its popularity, solving the initial issue, WITHOUT destroying the balance of the game.

1 Like
7

Bots play the objective 100% of the time, players play the objective far less, therefor bots are instantly better than the average player.

8

In a game like Isonzo where the bots have actual pathfinding, that’s the case where bots are better than randoms, but here every bot runs single file through the same door, and all die to 1 guy with an SMG

10

Excuse me, of the devs didn’t want me to larp as a pirate on the edge of the water boundary for the entire battle they wouldn’t have added boats

1 Like
11

But the devs also want me to larp as a ship fired ATGM, so…

1 Like
12

LOL

To play a good game, i need join at least 10 games. In a few minutes i quit when i see bots X real players. I dont care win or lose. I wanna have fun. So, if you see many bots in your team, just leave and try another one.