Auto Recall

[Iszh]

I think to get a good working system for Autorecall we should first establish a list of what is the target of autorecall. Here are my Opinions what is an autorecall what is it for and what should and should not be.

1. Autorecalls main task is to provide security to protect your maybe high rank char in an extreme situation (this can always happen outside your base as well. Limitations like only next to beacon or when enemy is in range does not work would kill acus to easy i think. Or make people sit in their base when higher level and hide behind reinforcements. But Acu>T3 unit that means privates would be the rank of the future for good players. Result would be that levelling is extremely difficult for noobs nearly impossible. So there would be a lag of high ranks and they would be always afraid to play not to lose char.)

2. Autorecalls should not work like all functions anyhow randomly, in GW nothing is random except player results we dont want to play lottery but supcom and losing a high level char by bad luck outside the game with a huge storage of reinforcements and you cannot influence it thats not useful. Will annoy people and make them raging in worst case.

3. There should be a limit of autorecall in a useful way which:
- limits the function without forcing the people to play turtle in ALL games (losing gamefun)
- kills acus to easy (to easy losing will prevent beginners completely from leveling)
- does not force the people to wait for something to play like credits when to expensive or timer( will simply remove players who could be active from playing in gw)
(A limit includes in its existance that it is limiting the lifetime of chars and therefore ranks. So it is limiting thepossibility to rank up)

This should be Autorecall
o-A safe working function to save you Acu in ANY CASE as long as it is active (no restrikted gameplay when you reached to afford it)
o-A defined System where you can be sure when you are save and when not, no random event
o-A not always available function limited somehow by player skill
o-Not replaceable with other players (No Buy for other function(could make people wait again if they dont manage themselve))


Thats why i offered my win counter solution because it fulfills the needs i mentioned. Zeps i dea i think will kill to many acus to easy and prevent "enjoyable" gameplay or people simply never would level up because you are punished wenn levelling. You always have to watch your acu with eagle eyes and not a single mistake allowed or "Acu Boom". All the other suggestions simply would make people angry or force them to wait for something. If somebody can add something with good reasons to "this should be autorecall" then i would enjoy to see other good suggestions.

p.s. with buying autorecalls for wins even not so good players can afford to level up when they are careful enough either with sucessful teams or when they are using normal recall effective. It is not limiting that only good players can reach high rank. This feature would bring you sometimes gameplay like usual and sometimes you have to take care or poker your avatar. But the enemy never knows if you have or dont have it. So far and with all other possibilities there is no benefit from using normal recall and so people sometimes do not do it. But this mechanik makes it more attractive to use normal recall to save wins like lifes for autorecall. So people will not blow up or waste autorecalls so often and feed the enemy with credits.

[Rogueleader89]

Laying out exactly the purpose we want auto-recall to serve probably is a great idea. I largely agree with your list, though we could probably argue over whether or not forcing people to wait or risk losing an acu is a good thing or not.

Though I don't see how your system is much different on that front Iszh, in your system a high ranked player still waits, they just wait for an opportunity for an easy battle (or a few), otherwise if they don't wait its the same as if they don't wait in hawkei's system or Ze_Pilot's where they take a risk of death, the only difference is that your wait time is based on skill and reinforcements which determine how easy or hard it is for the player to find an easy battle they can likely win without huge risk to themselves (sure there is some risk but it can be made fairly negligable). If anything this punishes lower ranked players more because they have a harder time finding that easy battle due to lower tier reinforcements (skill is likely lower too but possibly not), it definitely makes ranking up harder, which I do think it needs to be, but I don't think this is a good way to go about that (especially since it makes it easier to rank up the higher rank you get when it should make it harder..). I prefer both Ze_Pilot's and Hawkei's to yours because, while yours may force a tiny bit more risk on people, theirs have much more detrimental affects if a high ranking player is forced to auto-recall, these effects are clear, and it applies equally across all of the ranks (which makes it matter more to the high ranked player).

If you seriously insist on removing waiting from the equation entirely I think you'd have to tie autorecall to something other than its own availability, but I'm not sure what that would be or even if it would be desirable.

[Hawkei]

This should be Autorecall
o-A safe working function to save you Acu in ANY CASE as long as it is active (no restrikted gameplay when you reached to afford it)
o-A defined System where you can be sure when you are save and when not, no random event
o-A not always available function limited somehow by player skill
o-Not replaceable with other players (No Buy for other function(could make people wait again if they dont manage themselve))

This list is a good starting point. However, the modifications to it I would make as follows:

"A safe working function to save you Acu in ANY CASE"
With my initial suggestions I put forward the idea that there could be two tiers of Auto-recall. The higher tier being the system we currently have, and the lower tier being a less effective version. The lower level of auto-recall would have something like a 2 second cycle time with 1000HP activation threshold. So it would protect against some threat types (T1 spam) but not others (TML snipe).


"A not always available function"
At this point. I would defend my cool-down idea as being the perfect embodiment of such a concept. Moreover, cool-down doesn't place limitations on the player. It doesn't say they must wait. It just means there will be consequences for not doing so.

I would also emphasise RogueLeader89's observations. If you base that non-available period on victories or credits. Time is always a limited resource. But, victories and credits are not limited resources for highly skilled players. To base unavailable time on either of these would only encourage noob-bashing.

... "limited somehow by player skill"
To say this is based (or should be based) on skill is inaccurate. It should be based on how successful the player is at protecting their ACU. A lower skilled player may not have the same combat effectiveness. But if they are more cautious, they can still maintain a high kill ratio by picking their battles carefully... Not to disagree with what you say. My point here is semantics.


Just as another point on the cool-down idea. I don't think it will reduce the number of people playing in GW. It will actually increase them! Because, auto-recall is not an issue for lower ranks. But it is only an issue for higher ranks. Having an enemy tier 5 be forced to retire from combat means that 20 tier 2's will be online!!!! They will go online, because the cool-down gives them a window of opportunity to do damage... Should that player continue to fight during cool-down his enemies will be out for blood... This is very important. Because it will give people hope. It means that under the right conditions, the Pawn can kill the King.

Lower tiers will WANT to engage high tiers when they are on cool down... I see only positives here.

[theManfet]

We just defined what people think Autorecall should be.

Here is my opinion on what it should not be.
Autorecall should not give an option where one can play in a way without ever having the risk of loosing one's avatar.
It just screws up the definition of rank and skill. People will say I am rank 7 and have 80 victories but not tell you that they needed 4 months to reach that because they had to wait for a cool down every second day or something else. Like I already pointed out this doesn't even go far enough for me. Imho there should be no total Avatar security in even one game.

Then I propose a change to the cool down and I will call it "Cool Down hours + games".
The proposed system can be avoided by just waiting out the cool down phase and then going again.
Imho this should be changed to like 4 hours and at least the next 3 games. People can't avoid the playing without autorecall then and have to play these games.
Why still have the 4 hours time frame you will ask yourself. Well they could just take 3 games against known noobs and kill them and have only a very low chance of getting killed especially since they can go for only 1vs1 maps. Because of that they are punished and can't use autorecall for the next 4 hours.

[Hawkei]

We should begin by saying that Credits, Victory count and Time are all valid metrics for imposing limitations on Auto-recall. Your suggestion that there should be no situation where there is, "no total Avatar security in even one game", is a valid one. Although I don't agree with it.

To give a holistic consideration to the issue we must consider how this effects the player. How it effects their team. How it effects their opponents. We have now seen two complete opposite ends of the spectrum - with their resulting differences in meta-game, during the alpha and beta testing. The no auto-recall scenario, with no avatar security, as you are suggesting, resulted in high ranking avatars participating in no games whatsoever. They were simply "milk cows" who would offload their credits in T3 reinforcements (RF) for level 2 players. This meta-game was undesirable.

At the other end of the spectrum, we now have absolute invincibility. With the result that everyone is a General and no one ever dies. This is also a little bit pointless - and broken.

This is my opinion on what Auto-recall should be.
Auto-recall should be a device which sees less frequent usage and is used solely for the protection of high level avatars. It should allow an avatar to enter a particular game with absolute security. But it should be unable to sustain when relied upon. Its use should result in predictable periods of vulnerability which an opponent can exploit.

The advantage of forcing the player to win games to get their auto-recall back is that it forces them into a vulnerable situation. The disadvantage, however, is that it destroys the enemies knowledge that the player is on cool-down. With a minimum time based cool-down I can know from my team-mate that player X was auto-recalled at time Y. I can readily determine that player X does not have auto-recall.

It is also easier to reconcile with lore. Auto-recall is a piece of equipment fitted to the ACU. Which needs to be repaired and reinstalled after use. IRL this is a process which would take time. Consider the modern aircraft. You don't repair the engines by going out and flying additional sorties. You repair the engines by taking it out of service and fixing it! With time alone cool-down. We are essentially saying that your auto-recall is broken. The tech's have removed it from your ACU and they are fixing it (and you can't buy another one). So if you send your ACU back into battle, before it is fixed, you wont have auto-recall.

[theManfet]

The no auto-recall scenario, with no avatar security, as you are suggesting, resulted in high ranking avatars participating in no games whatsoever. They were simply "milk cows" who would offload their credits in T3 reinforcements (RF) for level 2 players. This meta-game was undesirable.

With time alone cool-down. We are essentially saying that your auto-recall is broken. The tech's have removed it from your ACU and they are fixing it (and you can't buy another one). So if you send your ACU back into battle, before it is fixed, you wont have auto-recall.

Its use should result in predictable periods of vulnerability which an opponent can exploit.

These above are three quotes from your last post:
Here is my translation:
1. Players always are crazy fearful about loosing their high ranked Avatar and won't play if they risk loosing it.
2. Autorecall won't work for some time and then it will again - one can wait it out.
3. Avatars should be exposed in at least some games.

Those three things are clearly a contradiction in themselves. You can only get 2 out of those three.

The advantage of forcing the player to win games to get their auto-recall back is that it forces them into a vulnerable situation. The disadvantage, however, is that it destroys the enemies knowledge that the player is on cool-down. With a minimum time based cool-down I can know from my team-mate that player X was auto-recalled at time Y. I can readily determine that player X does not have auto-recall.

well with the minum number of games you can have a certainty too. It is not 100% that is true but I can not be avoided. Imho the people will be quite able to tell each other that somebody got autorecalled. the only problem is that the guy who got autorecalled can avoid that by going to the other factions and playing against them. But imho this is no big problem. People focuse about getting people autorecalled anyway because they gain more credits for them. They would just see an unexpected nuke...

I even have another idea.
first autorecall is only credits after rank 2 or 3. then after you get autorecalled. you can only get the next one after one game without autorecall... then after the next autorecall you have to play 2 games without autorecall... maybe make it logarithmic if you are scared too lose your avatar.

edit: it is called Galactic War not Galacitc Simulated War

[Iszh]

The one side extreme that people are invulnerable should be removed. So they should be afraid in a few games to lose their Avatar otherwise it would never happen. They have to be prepared to use normal recall or to explode. People cannot wait over this limit thats another wish either play and try to get it back or stop completely. With offered situation of a win counter they would have no problems if they stay low or medium rank.

To make autorecall work only in different situation and not worken when enemy acu is close would mean a mass death of high level acus. When 2 good people have a battle on a small map 1 will die 90% chance. I think that this would lead to kamikaze actions of Privates and prevent higher ranks. It makes killing of acus either to easy or if you make the range limit to small will be useless and people will mostly escape. There is hardly a way in the middle. None of those possibilities we want to see.

About knowledge of enemy if you have autorecall or not i would say IT IS A MUST THE ENEMY DOES NOT KNOW if you are vulnerable or not. This is a poker game and when enemy knows you have to take care about acu he will simply have an easy game and it will be no fun for nobody. The player without autorecall has no possibility for a poker and will simply play extremey defensive for a few games. Small maps could be unplayable in this situation without active acu.

[Hawkei]

I understand you are saying that this vulnerability should be like a game of poker. But I disagree, having play conform to a series of knowable rules deepens the meta-game. Having things which are knowable is one of the elements which sets Supcom apart from other strategy games - which rely upon luck and random chance. Rather than a game of poker, I think this should be more like lay down misere.

I am not in favour of that player simply buying another auto-recall. I'm also not in favour of it being replenished with victory count - because that encourages this player to make cowardly defences and counter-attacks against identifiable noobs to inflate their victory count. It effectively means that newer players will get unfairly harassed and discouraged from playing GW. If you make it (for example) a 3 victory criteria. It is kind of like a "Vampire Rule"... Go kill 3 noobs and become invincible again. So beginners will naturally get sick and tired of being the "punching bags" which the pro's use to get their auto-recall's back. Is that really the gameplay you want?

I might be in favour of a victory count but only if it is combined with a minimum time criteria. My preference is for a combination of time and cost penalty. The problem I have with victory count is that it is no penalty at all for an experienced player - and it wont make them fearful... Having a time penalty - something which they cannot avoid. That would make them fearful.

But then you say that they would simply not play for 24hrs. That what I propose is no penalty at all. But here you are wrong. Effectively their enemies have "killed the player for one day". That is one day in which they can expect little or no resistance from that player. It is one day when his team will have more difficulty finding squad mates. It is one day in which this player cannot participate in battles and win credits. It will also mean that any invasion they were leading would IMMEDIATELY stop... They would see all their work un-done and be helpless to stop it.

There is also another problem which I am trying to address with this change. High level players never get games - because no one wants to face them. But if low level players KNOW that a certain player doesn't have auto-recall (and he is compelled to re-engage). They will be lining up for the chance to kill him - which I see as a nice piece of balance. But this goes back to my original point. For such a meta-game to exist the lack of auto-recall must be knowable.


Players will maintain the option to be perpetually invincible. But this is balanced by the reduced credits they should expect to receive. You will also avoid the situation where a high level low skilled player counters their poor win rate by buying auto-recalls.

After considering the issue, this is what I think auto-recall should be:
- Purchase cost = 2400cr (multiple use item)
- Activation cost = 600cr (deducted from your credit balance on activation)
- Cool Down time = 24hrs.

[Iszh]

Ok i thought we agree that a cooldown will decrease player activity and therefore is not good so i see there are different conflicts in this discussion already:

Enemy should know if you have autorecall --- Enemy should not know if you have autorecall
(Enemey can see if he has easy game and can easily push with acu --- Pokergame risk your acu or dont enemy cannot estimate)

Time limited cooldown on AR --- No timelimit on AR only limits with credits or things alike credits
(people could stop playing not to risk avatar, maybe decreasing activity --- people are forced to earn AR not with waiting time but with doing something)

Mechanics in the game which can kill an Acu in any case when unlucky --- Absolute security meanwhile Autorecall is active
(Could kill to easy high rank acus with kamikaze privates --- will lead to easy playiny with acu like in rank in some games, all or nothing)

Another short personal opinion from my side is: You are describing that when you make a victory count it will leave to slaughtering noobs or to get other easy wins to gain autorecall back. Whats the difference from now situation, I also slaughter victims to get easy credits, that seems to be a general problem which can be only solved by regulating ranks somehow according to player skill. So Rank 1 will hardly give any credits and it will be worth to kill/defeat the higher levels.

Do we have more big conflicts i have not seen from the discussion so far? Those conflicts should be solved. We should point out the conflicts and then either let Zep decide or for supporting the decision of him make a poll.

[Hawkei]

i thought we agree that a cooldown will decrease player activity

I'm not convinced here. I think it will decrease player activity for the person on cool-down. But, it will increase it for everyone else.

As for the pairing of different skilled players. I think we can all agree that the secret to an active GW is having all skill levels able to participate. Which means that there needs to be some dynamic which inhibits to pairing of high and low skilled players.

The first balancing factor is economy of effort. If I can determine that an 800 rank player is attacking, and I am a 1400 player. I will seek to make the best use of my time in GW. Which means I will delegate the defence to a 1100 rank player - which leaves me free to engage higher level targets.

The second balancing factor is economic. If I have a level 5 or 6 avatar, and I need credits to stop the player. My attack cost is so high that defeating a level 1 or 2 avatar will not pay for the expense of launching my attack. By altering the amount of credits one wins for defeating certain levels it is easy to create disincentives for the mismatch. These mechanisms are already in place in the current Beta. All we need is to balance the credits for attack, defence, wins and losses.