Handicap bonus for teams outnumbered by at least 50%

Often team members will leave when there loseing or just dip mid match, give a handicap bonus.

Make it either, or bolth

A increase in passive gold gain calculated by empty player slots (avalible team members)
With a full team haveing current base gold gain
And one member lost, equal in percent to one members gold gain split to every player currently in the game

Or, a increase in damage or health split the same way.

This esentially gives a portion of the missing players buying or combat strangth. To each member of the representing team.

Balanceing can be discussed in the comments below! Id love to hear my faults in math. And how you think this would effect matches.

Of course not every match has a full team of players, so thats where we debate on how it could work in these scenarios

increased gold seems so much fairer than increased health/damage. I am so down for an increase in gold tho

5 Likes

YES i’ve been wanting to suggest this but per player that leaves for so long but kept forgoring lol

4 Likes

Two great minds think alike

2 Likes

gold gains would be fair but as a competitive player having a strength increase on the other team can ruin reputations if the guy has a dumb name

ok now this is actually a good suggestion

4 Likes
Coins/Sec. per # of Team Members

All of the following are per player
6 Players → 1 Coin/Sec.
5 Players → 1.2 Coins/Sec. = 1 Coin/Sec + 1 Coin/5 Sec.
4 Players → 1.5 Coins/Sec. = 1 Coin/Sec. + 1 Coin/2 Sec.
3 Players → 2 Coins/Sec.
2 Players → 3 Coins/Sec.
1 Player → 6 Coins/Sec.

This is how the income could work for unbalanced teams. Along with that, the two teams’ incomes could be lowered to the largest team’s player count so players don’t get unnecessarily rich.

Formulas

Red Team’s Income per player
max((# red players), (# blue players)) / (# red players) Coins/Sec.

Blue Team’s Income per player
max((# red players), (# blue players)) / (# blue players) Coins/Sec.

For example, this makes it so a 4v4 game will give 1 Coin/Sec. to each player instead of 1.5.
The team with the most players will always have an income of 1 Coin/Sec. per player.

4 Likes

I know it’s just very great idea! :blush:
I wonder why still isn’t hive implemented this.

1 Like

Smart, you sir are awesome.

3 Likes

Just basic algebra

3 Likes

That makes no sense.

3 Likes

it makes perfect sense.

1 Like
Every example of income per player for the smaller team

All of the following are Coins per player.
1v6 → 6 / Sec.
1v5 → 5 / Sec.
1v4 → 4 / Sec.
1v3 → 3 / Sec.
1v2 → 2 / Sec.
2v6 → 3 / Sec.
2v5 → 2.5 / Sec. = 2 / Sec. + 1 / (2 Sec.)
2v4 → 2 / Sec.
2v3 → 1.5 / Sec. = 1 / Sec. + 1 / (2 Sec.)
3v6 → 2 / Sec.
3v5 → ~1.67 / Sec. = 1 / Sec. + 2 / (3 Sec.) = I won’t equate this further for reasons explained below.
3v4 → ~1.33 / Sec. = 1 / Sec. + 1 / (3 Sec.)
4v6 → 1.5 / Sec. = 1 / Sec. + 1 / (2 Sec.)
4v5 → 1.25 / Sec. = 1 / Sec. + 1 / (4 Sec.)
5v6 → 1.2 / Sec. = 1 / Sec. + 1 / (5 Sec.)

At this level of complexity, Coins should be stored as a mixed number. I represented decimal incomes as the whole part plus one divided by the reciprocal of the fractional part.
However, this does not work for 3v5 since its fractional part has a numerator greater than one. It would be weird if the player got 1 Coin / Sec. along with 2 more Coins every 3 Sec.
The income each second would follow the pattern of ‘+1, +1, +3’ when it should more appropriately be ‘+2, +1, +2’ or ‘+1, +2, +2’ depending on if its rounded or floored.

Regarding what to do with the fraction when the income changes, I’d say it’s not a big deal to set it back to 0 as the player would be losing at max 0.8 Coins.
Along with that, it would be more complicated to keep track of a fraction from a previous income and combine it with a new income.
For example, if the teams went from 5v6 to 4v6, and you had 1/5 fractional Coins, your new fractional Coins would have a denominator of 10, but the numerator would increase by 5 per second.

2 Likes