enough said:
bad idea…. remember one of the reasons its being put in is because admins wouldnt balance teams.
no offense to the admins, but leave it in completely. its easier to live with a couple rounds of unbalance and then the LTB doing its job again then a whole bunch of maps rolling around unbalanced until an admin thats willing to switch teams up a bit rolls in.
plus, if no admin is there it wouldnt be on at all and it would be back to the 23-1 aztecs and 20-2 assaults
I thought it was put in because the admins just weren’t doing that great of a job with the balancing (when they were trying to balance). I would think it would be pretty hard to ignore half the server complaining about unbalanced teams. Plus, could just leave it on when no admins are present. Maybe just give admins the option to turn it off if they deem necessary.
But if that is the case then maybe an alternative way would be to have it wait longer before balancing the teams. For instance, the teams can be balanced but one side could still win 3 times in a row. Perhaps wait for a difference of 5 or 6 in the scores. The exception being if one side starts with 3 wins and over 70% of the kills, then it would go ahead and kick in. That may be a bit complicated though.
It’s late, so I’m rambling… would the balancer be able to work differently for different maps? With maps like aztec/dust/assault where one side has the map advantage, it seems like the best way to balance the teams would be to give the other side a slight kill advantage.
It would be awesome if the balancer could link up with the HL stats so it would know to equally disperse people in the top10 or something like that. Again, forgive for the rambling.