LONE WOLF-RESPWAN Penalty

[AP514]

I know the Out of Formation cost your team a lot of tickets...BUT

The big thing is the guys going off on their own do not care about the team.....

I suggest a LONG RELOAD to the player that Dies out of formation. The RELOAD should get Longer and Longer for each consecutive death a player has Out of Formation.

This will take care of 2 things..I Hope

1) I will cut down on the FOOLS just running around wily-nilly by making their respawn times very long
2) Encourage players to stay in the line formation area (Promote realistic game play)

AP514

[Saris]

I know the Out of Formation cost your team a lot of tickets...BUT

The big thing is the guys going off on their own do not care about the team.....

I suggest a LONG RELOAD to the player that Dies out of formation. The RELOAD should get Longer and Longer for each consecutive death a player has Out of Formation.

This will take care of 2 things..I Hope

1) I will cut down on the FOOLS just running around wily-nilly by making their respawn times very long
2) Encourage players to stay in the line formation area (Promote realistic game play)

AP514

This would be a good idea yet there is no way to judge if the person who died out of formation due to being a rambo or losing their line in a charge or a fire fight.

[TrustyJam]

This would be a good idea yet there is no way to judge if the person who died out of formation due to being a rambo or losing their line in a charge or a fire fight.

Exactly. While tempting to turn up the heat for the out of liner's we have to consider edge case scenarios as well. :)

I'm sure most of you wouldn't like to be punished with a x2 or x3 as long spawn time only because you happened to be amongst the last in your line/charge remaining.

- Trusty

[Korvyr]

Would it be possible to have an area around an individual then, perhaps, that is much larger than the formation areas that counts against the "lone wolf" clause and sticks around a bit after death?

Say you have a group of 5 charging, 4 die from shots, the last dies to being stabbed, but he's good because he's still within the wide area blocking the lone-wolf punishment thanks to his nearby fallen friends.

This would wreck the rambos who choose to run far away on their own, near no one, and perish near no bodies who recently-ish fell.

[TrustyJam]

Would it be possible to have an area around an individual then, perhaps, that is much larger than the formation areas that counts against the "lone wolf" clause and sticks around a bit after death?

Say you have a group of 5 charging, 4 die from shots, the last dies to being stabbed, but he's good because he's still within the wide area blocking the lone-wolf punishment thanks to his nearby fallen friends.

This would wreck the rambos who choose to run far away on their own, near no one, and perish near no bodies who recently-ish fell.

We already have something similar - the formation buff changes are not instant currently - so if you happen to die the last in a charge for instance, you are likely to still be in formation.

The issue is when you survive for longer than the initial charge (like 10 or 20 seconds longer).

- Trusty

[Pootis]

Don't think that it would be wise/ technically possible to increase reload time... Though, I do like the idea of increasing respawn timers. The only issue is tracking down the people who actually warrant it. Are there tangential coding measure you can use to track people who are lone wolves? Say, finding out how long they've been out of line? So, for instance, if they've been out of line longer than 20 seconds, they get slapped with the respawn timer. That cuts right down the middle- folks who survive a charge have time to retreat to friendly lines, and lone wolves still get punished. I'm fairly certain it takes a lone wolf longer than 20 seconds from reload at spawn to get even to the battlefield on his own, so even if he just runs straight into death, he'll get whacked with the penalty, unless he's just throwing himself at the enemy without even a reload.

[AP514]

LET ME CLARIFY..............THIS IS A RESPAWN PENALTY

If you die Out of Formation..the 1st time no penalty...the second time a small 10-20 second Penalty. The Third a Large Penalty 1:00...the Fourth 2:00..ect.

This Penalty is for times IN A ROW. Not the whole GAME......

EXAMPLE....

LONE WOLF--- The Bad GUY

1st- You Die-Out of Formation.....:00 Penalty
2nd- You Die-Out of Formation.....:20 second Penalty
3rd- You Die-Out of Formation....1:00 third Penalty
4th- You Die-Out of Formation....2:00 fourth Penalty

TEAM PLAYER

1st- You Die-Out of Formation................:00
2nd- You Die-Out of Formation................:20 second Penalty
3rd- You Die-Skirmish/Line Formation......:00 NO Penalty---RESETS PENALTIES
4th- You Die-Skirmish/Line Formation......:00 NO PENALTY
5th- You Die-Out of Formation................:00
ECT.......ECT.

[Sox]

It's too easy, even with flag bearer spawning, to get killed trying to re-join your regiment for this to ever work.

[Korvyr]

That's why a separate, larger area "anti-lonewolf" buff would likely fit the bill, if it sticks around longer than the formation buffs.

Players that are sent to scout should be aware of the risks involved and be very careful. This will deter scouting a bit more, as it should, since it costs tickets to send a body to their death out of line.

And if you get shot next to the flag bearer, you won't get penalized, because obviously you're near the flag bearer.

[Poorlaggedman]

A better question is why are people charging and getting slaughtered to the last? How do you stop that? Charges are incessant. All anyone trying to run things seems to want to do is to pike it towards one flank or the other hoping to beat the enemy there first. You end up with a handful left from both teams. It's silly. It seems nobody knows how to move without charging from fence line to fence line. A series of changes in the way formations are rewarded with faster respawn times can help alleviate that so you can actually move and get replacements quickly depending on the strength of your formation without that disheveled craziness.

As for lone wolves, the suppression needs to be cranked up to where it was before it was toned down and the recovery needs to be longer, only speeding up significantly when you're back in formation. The grey screen stuff can go, left for the most extreme levels of suppression. Put the more subtle stuff first which really effects your combat abilities. You should be strongly compelled to disengage long before you're the last guy left. Let players know it's not okay to go John Rambo on the other team by making it useless in close quarters with out-of-lines being auto-surrendered whenever they are touched by an enemy or touch one themselves, possibly even before. Allow the surrendered player to exist in his player avatar stationary for up to a minute with a chance of liberation and then kicked to the spawn. Make it so when an enemy kills a surrendered player it drops the overall team likelihood of the opposing team surrendering in the first place. Add a variable in there and let the servers decide whether to set it to 0 or 1. No more guys laying in wait in a bush to shoot our officers or flag bearers in the back---that isn't scouting, it's ridiculous.

And we don't need players with a special skirmisher privilege.

[Sox]

This will deter scouting a bit more, as it should, since it costs tickets to send a body to their death out of line.

Nothing should deter scouting, in fact I think they should add a 'skirmisher' class so that it can be done better.

[Sox]

A better question is why are people charging and getting slaughtered to the last? How do you stop that? Charges are incessant. All anyone trying to run things seems to want to do is to pike it towards one flank or the other hoping to beat the enemy there first.

I agree that in the last week or so this has spiked, no question. I think one of the causes of this are single capture points, in order to create battles with more tactics involved you'd have to have lesser CP's that need to be taken before the main CP actually becomes active. As for lone wolves, I can't think of a better suggestion than you came up with, supressing them to the point where they have to return to their own lines.

[Dman979]

A better question is why are people charging and getting slaughtered to the last? How do you stop that? Charges are incessant. All anyone trying to run things seems to want to do is to pike it towards one flank or the other hoping to beat the enemy there first. You end up with a handful left from both teams. It's silly. It seems nobody knows how to move without charging from fence line to fence line. A series of changes in the way formations are rewarded with faster respawn times can help alleviate that so you can actually move and get replacements quickly depending on the strength of your formation without that disheveled craziness.

One thing I've noticed is that the keys I find myself using most often are Shift and B, followed by C to go double quick and X to Right Shoulder Shift (and move faster). Everyone is charging and jogging everywhere, which doesn't lend itself to fun game play for me- what's the point of having a long reload time when the enemy can get to you after one shot?

I feel like there should be a mechanic that further limits how long you can charge or jog. Just to throw some numbers out, say a full stamina bar lasts 10 seconds charging, 3 minutes at double quick, and unlimited at quicktime. It would seriously discourage charges and sprinting, and I think it would force more gunfights and slower pushes.

Best,
Dman979

[A. P. Hill]

A better question is why are people charging and getting slaughtered to the last? …

Because this is a game, there is no mortal fear factor. Players do not fear death in game as it does not affect them mortally in the real world.


... How do you stop that? ...

I don't know that you can ever stop it in game, because of the above reason.


You could attempt to simulate this fear, by instituting a "one life, one game," thing, where players enter the battle and if they get shot and killed their done with that skirmish. They can't play again until that scenario is finished, either by every player wiping each other out to a man, or the timer runs itself out after all players have killed themselves completely.

But the point will be … "Where's the 'fun' in that?" "What's the point of creating a game if you're going to limit the players to one game life per skirmish?"


This is why the 'lone wolf' thing works so steadily, there is no inherent fear of mortal loss of life, therefore players take risks, break "rules" that world have normally applied in real life etc.

[Poorlaggedman]

That's what the suppression effects are there to simulate, you just have to be willing to use them fully. In no war game ever made does your tactical AI units 'fear' either and yet they will run and they will panic if the game is remotely realistic and behave somewhat realistically. Sid Meier's Gburg, Ultimate General, Combat Mission, any game like that or any other genre. It's because the game is programmed that way. You can't program players but you can program realistic consequences for doing insane things. Is there a single documented account from the entire Civil War of a lone soldier trying to come around and bayonet some enemy in the back outnumbered five to one? People do this out of boredom and who does it benefit? If you're out of line and you go to bayonet someone in line then only one thing should happen, you should turn your damn rifle upside down and hear yourself surrendering. And if it's a momentary occurrence you should be able to snap out of it when recaptured. If it's not you should then de-spawn shortly and get added to the statistics. This is a game that kills officers out of line for desertion. I don't want to see people ever clamoring for every player to have to stay in line or face desertion as that would really be silly but I think frustration can lead to that natural extension of being a reality some day.

I know of one case at Shiloh where a wounded union soldier fired on a rebel line after it passed him with a pistol before being perforated himself. Many of these guys weren't even systemically disarmed right away when wounded on the field, it's wildly dishonorable behavior to do such a thing. Being alone and being shot at should be very unproductive very fast. Being alone and overran should be suicide as far as gameplay is concerned. Some level of autosurrender would move mountains to stop the madness as many lone wolves also are impatient and in love with meelee while theyre effect at range will be tepid at best once they are suppressed and unable to recover. They'd be wise to stay out of a short sprint away from the enemy lest a few come out and take him without even having to bayonet him and half of each other first.

[Korvyr]

I like the thought of a "surrendering" mechanic, but there's too much of a chance for it to go wrong in the wrong situations.

Say a charge kicks off across a field, and the body at the front of the charge happens to get a bit too far ahead of his group. Suddenly he's surrendering, because the others behind him couldn't catch up, and now there's another obstacle and a lost man for the charging force.

But then the practical side is, say two opposing soldiers meet on the battlefield? Who surrenders to who? Is the opposing strength a factor? Because then you could have massive groups causing smaller ones to outright surrender, even if they happen to have a tactical advantage and know what they're doing. Or, restrict it to lone wolves who surrender, then again, you may force a lone survivor to surrender when he knows he has the jump on the remain 5 or so enemy soldiers and is determined to take a few out with him for what they did to his buddies.

A surrender mechanic takes control 100% away from the player in that regard. Is that what we want? I enjoy having the ability to choose if I press through the suppression and the overbearing numbers, and if with that I get a longer spawn time, that too is my choice.

You may say avoiding a situation where they may get auto-surrendered is also their choice, but not everyone can know exactly what is happening around them. I can't count the number of times I've ran into a much larger force by accident. My first thought was to either flee, or if I had a few buddies and was in skirmish mode, to try and take out enough of theirs to make it worth it. If that was turned into suddenly, out of nowhere, being auto-surrendered before I had even sprung through the bushes to see the enemies on the other side, I'd be pissed.

Also the thought of a skirmisher class only invites poor behavior. You'd have every CoD player on the block fighting for it, so they can go running into the distance. No, the penalties for playing as a skirmisher and a scout need to be heavy, otherwise you devolve back to the same issue. That's partly why scouting is important, because not everyone can do it effectively and stay alive, and it's super risky regardless of how good you are, so knowledge about enemy movements is tough to get until they're right on your face.

[Sox]

Here's the thing, this isn't a 'simulator', it's a game. The one and only reason that it's possible for people to sprint around the maps is the complete & utter lack of something to slow them down, which is exactly the role skirmishers performed. One thing I do agree with is that something needs to be done about stamina, the way it's possible to sprint around the field is a tad insane. Since the start of phase 2 there has definately been a surge with melee, and evey day games we play seems to get more and more like Mount & Blade/Holdfast, where the bayonet rules the day.

[TrustyJam]

Here's the thing, this isn't a 'simulator', it's a game. The one and only reason that it's possible for people to sprint around the maps is the complete & utter lack of something to slow them down, which is exactly the role skirmishers performed. One thing I do agree with is that something needs to be done about stamina, the way it's possible to sprint around the field is a tad insane. Since the start of phase 2 there has definately been a surge with melee, and evey day games we play seems to get more and more like Mount & Blade/Holdfast, where the bayonet rules the day.

Bayonets can work, yes - but they are highly dependant on the circumstances of the map. A head on bayonet charge is rarely a good idea against an organized enemy (few possible exceptions on the denser maps such as Miller's Cornfield and the forest maps).

If I were to label WoR I'd say it is a bit of both a simulator and a game. We do have a stamina system and it is possible to run out of said stamina. Being low on stamina will not allow you to charge anymore and it will increase the rifle sway when aiming dramatically - charging around the map is an excellent way of making sure you'll miss with your one shot when you do happen to come by some enemies.

I have not witnessed an increase in the effectiveness nor the use of the bayonets since Phase II launched personally.

- Trusty

[Pronewb]

I don't agree with respawn penalty for lone wolfs. yes they are annoying. No matter what you do, lone wolfs will always be around

[Bivoj]

I love when it comes to the cliché "this isn't a 'simulator', it's a game" :) It is the same since the Day of Defeat times and yet it is proven, that games can be more and more "simulation" and still fun.

I agree with respawn time punishment for out-of-formation players - it is not only making lonewolf's life more difficult, it also encourages players not to stand in the fight when the formation breaks - they should retreat instead. When outgunned by firepower or when loosing melee - the out-of-formation players should retreat and reform OR be punished by longer respawn time.

Regarding the fear of the death:
try Escape from Tarkov - this game is quite successful in providing the "kind of" fear of the death (unless you do simple knife-run). It is possible to implement it in game.

[Saris]

This is primarily why the Union burns through its tickets during the 8pm EST games on the weekends. Some Union commanders incessantly order bayonet charges and directly assault the enemy rather than engage in tactical maneuvering. In contrast, certain Confederate commanders in our War of Rights community exhibit more restraint. They realize that endless bayonet charges are a sure-fire way to lose.

I have noticed that newbie officers' recurrent fantasy is to gruffly yell "BAYONETS!!!" (imitating Jeff Daniels in Gettysburg) and then promptly lead their team to defeat.

I doubt there are any viable game mechanics that could be implemented to deter this. Newbies will be newbies.

Usually bayonet charges are necessary to take a good forward position from the defenders like on Skirmish in the East Woods and the Bloody Lane or in the defenders case, forcing the said attacker from a good forward position like Piper farm or Hagerstown. The current game does encourage bayonet charges because nobody can block, it was extremely bad months ago when there was 1 stab kills. The only deterrent I usually see right now are fixed barriers like fences, stonewalls, or open landscapes since the defender has an easier time defending a wall than an open line, it discourages people from making those attacks unless the defenders are unprepared. Until we can block effectively, we'll continue to see lots of charges. I'm not saying that blocks will deter bayonet charges from happening, but people will realize that whoever they are attacking can block their stabs which will be a far cry from today where you can get free hits on anybody.

[Lightfoot]

This would be a good idea yet there is no way to judge if the person who died out of formation due to being a rambo or losing their line in a charge or a fire fight.

Could be done but developers would have to add some extra tracking. For example, any player killed who has been out of formation (or skirmish) for more than 2-3 minutes would be considered a "Lone Wolf" and penalized. Best penalty in my opinion to discourage this would be adding five minutes to their respawn time. Could also surrender them as well if they failed to die but spent more than five minutes our of any formation or skirmish.

This would allow regular players who got isolated due to everyone shot around them or being part of a charge from being caught by the penalty. Do need to add some kind of flag or message so player knows that he needs to do something.

[Korvyr]

Here's the thing, this isn't a 'simulator', it's a game.

Who says simulators can't be games? I don't understand that sentence, my friend.

Regardless, mechanics and caring about game play do not constitute a simulator. Just because people enjoy aspects of realism does not mean they demand everything be exact to life, otherwise we'd all demand super powers if realism was not something we strove for.


I don't agree with respawn penalty for lone wolfs. yes they are annoying. No matter what you do, lone wolfs will always be around

Why?

We know they'll always be around, hence the idea of a re-spawn penalty to force them to not be around as much and maybe change their ways. I've seen more rounds lost to lone wolves than I care to count in just a week's time.

[Sox]

Who says simulators can't be games? I don't understand that sentence, my friend.

Regardless, mechanics and caring about game play do not constitute a simulator. Just because people enjoy aspects of realism does not mean they demand everything be exact to life, otherwise we'd all demand super powers.

'Realism' in a game comes via the level of immersion, which on a good day War of Rights is very good at. A simulator allows a player choices but puts the consequences on automatic (like auto surrender in melee for example). Someone posted a Holdfast video on here today somewhere, and the amount of 'lone wolves' in that video is what it's been like in WoR this week, and it's not for lack of regiments trying to recruit them either. Like it or not, Skirmishing was a part of the Civil War, and it shouldn't be discouraged, but at the same time it must be stressed that skirimishing is not lone wolfing.

[Korvyr]

'Realism' in a game comes via the level of immersion, which on a good day War of Rights is very good at. A simulator allows a player choices but puts the consequences on automatic (like auto surrender in melee for example). Someone posted a Holdfast video on here today somewhere, and the amount of 'lone wolves' in that video is what it's been like in WoR this week, and it's not for lack of regiments trying to recruit them either. Like it or not, Skirmishing was a part of the Civil War, and it shouldn't be discouraged, but at the same time it must be stressed that skirimishing is not lone wolfing.

How are you defining a split of a simulation (an imitation of a real world process) and realism (real world processes), and stating realism, the actual real world aspect, is less forcing than simulations, which is the imitation of realism?

I can leave it with realism/simulation aspects in games are not bad, but how does that apply to automation? Automation is the opposite of simulations/realism (such as watching a movie), as things then become controlled by a computer rather than the individual driving the simulation and experiencing the realism.

Perhaps one of us simply has a bad dictionary. Either way, I 100% agree that automation is bad.

Back to skirmishers, if your idea of skirmishing is a single body on their own running a solo mission, how is that different than a lone wolf?

If you say number of skirmishers applies, then they'd be safe with every person around them (or dead allies nearby) would cancel the lone wolf penalty. If you say a skirmisher is someone sent on a mission by an officer, then have it so officers can place a "scouting" order, or perhaps each officer can place a "scout" buff on a single soldier to negate the lone wolf penalty on that individual or (with the scout order) in that area.

That would feed the need for intel, but still punish individuals acting on their own.

[Alexander Sloan Townes]

If I die with the men in my line, and have to make my way back to the group from spawn - I do not want to be penalized simply because I was out there alone.

As much as we all might hate it, there is also the issue of historical accuracy. The lone wolf types did occur back in that day, but they were generally called deserters.

[Korvyr]

If I die with the men in my line, and have to make my way back to the group from spawn - I do not want to be penalized simply because I was out there alone.

As much as we all might hate it, there is also the issue of historical accuracy. The lone wolf types did occur back in that day, but they were generally called deserters.

I cannot argue with any of this, as much as I may want to based simply on what damages I could imagine the incoming Steam Early Access will bring from lone wolves.

Perhaps then there needs to be a repeat offenders way of handling it? Dying with a lone wolf penalty after X amount of times incurs a longer spawn in? You can always wait for a few moments in spawn for another body or two to spawn in to join you in your run.

Or perhaps it'll simply need to be the way it is... After all, if both sides suffer lone wolves, it's not an imbalanced issue...

[Poorlaggedman]

I like the thought of a "surrendering" mechanic, but there's too much of a chance for it to go wrong in the wrong situations.

Say a charge kicks off across a field, and the body at the front of the charge happens to get a bit too far ahead of his group. Suddenly he's surrendering, because the others behind him couldn't catch up, and now there's another obstacle and a lost man for the charging force.

But then the practical side is, say two opposing soldiers meet on the battlefield? Who surrenders to who? Is the opposing strength a factor? Because then you could have massive groups causing smaller ones to outright surrender, even if they happen to have a tactical advantage and know what they're doing. Or, restrict it to lone wolves who surrender, then again, you may force a lone survivor to surrender when he knows he has the jump on the remain 5 or so enemy soldiers and is determined to take a few out with him for what they did to his buddies.

A surrender mechanic takes control 100% away from the player in that regard. Is that what we want? I enjoy having the ability to choose if I press through the suppression and the overbearing numbers, and if with that I get a longer spawn time, that too is my choice.

You may say avoiding a situation where they may get auto-surrendered is also their choice, but not everyone can know exactly what is happening around them. I can't count the number of times I've ran into a much larger force by accident. My first thought was to either flee, or if I had a few buddies and was in skirmish mode, to try and take out enough of theirs to make it worth it. If that was turned into suddenly, out of nowhere, being auto-surrendered before I had even sprung through the bushes to see the enemies on the other side, I'd be pissed.
I'll explain this elsewhere I don't want to hi-jack the thread. Give me a couple weeks I'll start spamming my ideas again. Charges are an utter and total freaking mess right now in addition to way over used like others mention. They need to be made futile in most situations (my goodness, I'd settle for HALF of what it is now) and the game either needs to start pushing further to reciprocate reality (what actually happens in a charge) or you're going to have find gamey ways to try and stop them from being the go-to tactic. I rarely bayonet but this weekend I've bayoneted a lot and I found it incredibly successful when I was basically alone. Sooner or later you have to take the training wheels off of players who love to charge so much or get used to the way things are.

[Korvyr]

I'll explain this elsewhere I don't want to hi-jack the thread. Give me a couple weeks I'll start spamming my ideas again. Charges are an utter and total freaking mess right now in addition to way over used like others mention. They need to be made futile in most situations (my goodness, I'd settle for HALF of what it is now) and the game either needs to start pushing further to reciprocate reality (what actually happens in a charge) or you're going to have find gamey ways to try and stop them from being the go-to tactic. I rarely bayonet but this weekend I've bayoneted a lot and I found it incredibly successful when I was basically alone. Sooner or later you have to take the training wheels off of players who love to charge so much or get used to the way things are.

I've seen charges utterly destroyed by well-set lines. Moments ago, I witnessed just that during the community event. The Union troops had decided to do nothing but charge through the woods, so we mowed 'em down.

Solo, even if you manage to stab one, two, or even five guys, you're still only status quo for tickets. Five being the crazy side of that as I've never managed more than one or two when I stumble upon an enemy line trying to return to battle.

I must have missed something tremendous in the melee, as it's nowhere near as effective as you're describing. I'd welcome advice on how to leverage it more than I am, although yes, in another thread.

[Sox]

Back to skirmishers, if your idea of skirmishing is a single body on their own running a solo mission, how is that different than a lone wolf?

Under the current system six men, acting in pairs, in skirmish formation, will incur a higher ticket loss than those 'in formation' if they die. In effect, we get punished for using a totally valid Civil War tactic. In the war skirmishers were often used as a blocking force to slow down an enemy advance, something we are loathe to do because of the higher ticket loss, hence everyone being able to run around the battlefields unchecked. Hence the need for a skirmisher class....with a big BUT. Things like that will only work if the Company tool is tied to the game, and Skirmishers are restricted to Companies.

You suggest an automated system which would punish genuine cases of people being killed out of formation, it happens during melee all the time, we get gunned down coming from spawn, hell we get killed IN the spawn at times.

As for melee, well we kinda get punished for stupid gameplay. Once you get stabbed once in melee the correct thing to do would be to retreat, but of course we dont. We get stabbed once and it all goes black and white, everyone looks the same, and even though pressing T will put a name over the head of a friend, it's still too chaotic to really be able to tell. So we blunder on when we should fall back, team killing goes mental, melee ends. It's been suggested before that if you get stabbed once, then you're classed as wounded, and melee gets disabled for you and you have to retreat, but CG won't do that. If they ever implement the 'killing blow' then the amount of charges will fall I think because melee will be much harder to win.

[Korvyr]

Things like that will only work if the Company tool is tied to the game, and Skirmishers are restricted to Companies.

You suggest an automated system which would punish genuine cases of people being killed out of formation, it happens during melee all the time, we get gunned down coming from spawn, hell we get killed IN the spawn at times.

Little Johnny will simply make a company for his skirmishing buddies and himself so he can go skirmishing all day and we'll be back to square zero.

I suggested a punishment system, yes, but you didn't read it. It would have to have a much, much larger range than any current buffs, and even one individual or recently dead ally within that larger range would negate the lone wolf punishment. That would save our out of line charger.

I also ceded the point a few posts ago stating it may simply need to stay as it is due to things such as deaths at spawn and other legitimate circumstances. It's an issue suffered on both sides, after all.

[Jason99vmi]

I don't agree with the lone wolf penalty. While yes those who decide to do things their own way and not follow orders are annoying, the game can't decifer one from another circumstance. And by this i mean say you respawn and are heading back to get in formation. And the enemy ends up charging the formation or ends up between you and your team. You get killed and are considered Out of Line. Player was trying to do the right thing so shouldn't be penalized. Or another situation, Team decides to fall back. While your the tail end of the guys falling back. You get killed and considered Out of Line. Not exactly fair since again you are following orders. These two situations happened to me and i'm sure others.

The same with Charges, as was mentioned, you charge with a whole group but get out in front because the others became engaged on either side. You get killed and considered Out of Line even though again followed orders correctly.

I think the suppression does a good job of making lone wolfing a less than desirable result.

[TrustyJam]

I think the focus should be less on punishing individuals and more on rewarding formations.

that's a bit of a moot point - as rewarding formations will naturally make the individuals worse off. It just becomes wording at that point. :)

- Trusty

[Korvyr]

I don't agree with the lone wolf penalty. While yes those who decide to do things their own way and not follow orders are annoying, the game can't decifer one from another circumstance. And by this i mean say you respawn and are heading back to get in formation. And the enemy ends up charging the formation or ends up between you and your team. You get killed and are considered Out of Line. Player was trying to do the right thing so shouldn't be penalized. Or another situation, Team decides to fall back. While your the tail end of the guys falling back. You get killed and considered Out of Line. Not exactly fair since again you are following orders. These two situations happened to me and i'm sure others.

The same with Charges, as was mentioned, you charge with a whole group but get out in front because the others became engaged on either side. You get killed and considered Out of Line even though again followed orders correctly.

I think the suppression does a good job of making lone wolfing a less than desirable result.

The only example you gave that would be affected by my example of a large (say 35-50 yards) anti-penalty field around allies and recently dead allies (say within a minute) would be the running across the battlefield to rejoin a line, in which case you can just wait for a buddy or two to re-spawn and run with you. So long as you're in the general vicinity of your allies, you'd be good.

You could even soften it further by making it a stacking penalty that decreases over a certain amount of time. First lone wolf case? Just a warning. Second? A warning and a chat post about you dying lone wolf. Third and beyond? You could simply leave it at a 30 second additional respawn wait and a message in chat.

You don't even need a massive additional respawn penalty to deter the worst offenders, as having to wait any additional amount of time and/or public defacing would likely set them straight.

I don't disagree there are edge cases, though, which I believe TrustyJam previously stated was the reason more hasn't already been done.

[Jason99vmi]

The only example you gave that would be affected by my example of a large (say 35-50 yards) anti-penalty field around allies and recently dead allies (say within a minute) would be the running across the battlefield to rejoin a line, in which case you can just wait for a buddy or two to re-spawn and run with you. So long as you're in the general vicinity of your allies, you'd be good.

You could even soften it further by making it a stacking penalty that decreases over a certain amount of time. First lone wolf case? Just a warning. Second? A warning and a chat post about you dying lone wolf. Third and beyond? You could simply leave it at a 30 second additional respawn wait and a message in chat.

You don't even need a massive additional respawn penalty to deter the worst offenders, as having to wait any additional amount of time and/or public defacing would likely set them straight.

I don't disagree there are edge cases, though, which I believe TrustyJam previously stated was the reason more hasn't already been done.

Agreed but there are just a lot variables that are a tad unfair if you penalize. As Trusty and others said its more rewarding teamwork than punishing. But maybe you're right pushing the distance parameter.

There are plenty more situations. Harpers Ferry is a big one. where street fighting tends to separate the men. Played Saturday morning where the officer told the men to take cover on either side of road in alleyways and behind buildings. Good chance a player can end up outside the current zone. Or the orchard map for antietam where when holding the point means taking cover behind trees and artillery pieces possibly too far from others. Or what happened to me once was charging across Burnsides bridge with about 20 guys only to be one of two guys who made it, only to be killed Out of Line.

Or they can just do what CRUM did last night and shot a dude in the head for not listening to orders. lol.

[Korvyr]

Agreed but there are just a lot variables that are a tad unfair if you penalize. As Trusty and others said its more rewarding teamwork than punishing. But maybe you're right pushing the distance parameter.

There are plenty more situations. Harpers Ferry is a big one. where street fighting tends to separate the men. Played Saturday morning where the officer told the men to take cover on either side of road in alleyways and behind buildings. Good chance a player can end up outside the current zone. Or the orchard map for antietam where when holding the point means taking cover behind trees and artillery pieces possibly too far from others. Or what happened to me once was charging across Burnsides bridge with about 20 guys only to be one of two guys who made it, only to be killed Out of Line.

Or they can just do what CRUM did last night and shot a dude in the head for not listening to orders. lol.

Those street-fight maps, you're always going to be easily within 35 yards of an ally or a recently dead ally. Those combat zones are no more than about 50 yards across themselves. You'd be within the combat zone and clear of the penalty the entire time no matter what you do in those streets.

The two guys who made it across the map only to be killed would sill be within 35 yards of all their dead friends, not to mention within range of each other for the anti-penalty. Even if only one of them got shot, so long as the other also ended up dead within a minute, he'd be within range of his recently dead buddy. If he's left out there for more than a minute after his buddy dies (meaning the anti-penalty field on his dead ally will be gone) then he's had every opportunity to retreat or run for another line.

My example field is 100% disconnected from the "formation" or "out of line" mechanic. It's a separate 35-50 yard (by radius) circle around each and every ally (or allied corpses that died less than a minute ago) that would negate the lone wolf penalty.

The only time you're going to run into this penalty is if you're 35+ yards from any allies (or again, recently dead allies), and the only time that would be the case is if you are very much a lone wolf way on the sidelines completely doing your own thing without even a single other ally nearby.

(Granted, I've already ceded the point, just continuing the discussion.)

[Jason99vmi]

Those street-fight maps, you're always going to be easily within 35 yards of an ally or a recently dead ally. Those combat zones are no more than about 50 yards across themselves. You'd be within the combat zone and clear of the penalty the entire time no matter what you do in those streets.

The two guys who made it across the map only to be killed would sill be within 35 yards of all their dead friends, not to mention within range of each other for the anti-penalty. Even if only one of them got shot, so long as the other also ended up dead within a minute, he'd be within range of his recently dead buddy. If he's left out there for more than a minute after his buddy dies (meaning the anti-penalty field on his dead ally will be gone) then he's had every opportunity to retreat or run for another line.

My example field is 100% disconnected from the "formation" or "out of line" mechanic. It's a separate 35-50 yard (by radius) circle around each and every ally (or allied corpses that died less than a minute ago) that would negate the lone wolf penalty.

The only time you're going to run into this penalty is if you're 35+ yards from any allies (or again, recently dead allies), and the only time that would be the case is if you are very much a lone wolf way on the sidelines completely doing your own thing without even a single other ally nearby.

(Granted, I've already ceded the point, just continuing the discussion.)

I like it. Not sure how much extra work that would put on the devs or game mechanics. Squad and Post Scriptum have something like this but its a friendly fire/suicide penalty. Instead of a 30 sec respawn its 100 sec respawn.

[Korvyr]

I like it. Not sure how much extra work that would put on the devs or game mechanics. Squad and Post Scriptum have something like this but its a friendly fire/suicide penalty. Instead of a 30 sec respawn its 100 sec respawn.

I honestly don't know. I imagine the framework is already in the code perhaps due to the formation/line system already in place. Maybe they could copy/paste that code and modify it for this purpose?

That's honestly why I've begun tinkering with CryEngine lately. Unity? Somewhat familiar. UE4? Very familiar. CryEngine? I have no clue.

Give me a month or two and I'll know what I'm talking about. Only thing I currently know is it uses C++, like UE4, which will make the learning easy. Just have to familiarize myself with the API.

[Sox]

that's a bit of a moot point - as rewarding formations will naturally make the individuals worse off. It just becomes wording at that point. :)

- Trusty

Which is exactly why penalties are not the answer.

[Korvyr]

Which is exactly why penalties are not the answer.

How does a penalty for one side being the same as a reward for the other mean it's not the answer? Genuinely curious here.

[Poorlaggedman]

I don't get the kid gloves for people out of line. It happens, there's consequences-deal with it. Act like you don't want to freakin' die when you're alone and don't. Do stupid stuff, win stupid prizes. I'm all about players pushing the limits but you should have to earn success and have risks involved. It's not the end of the world if you have to spawn in the rear. Congrats, you're now representing a straggler. Return cautiously. We don't need people 35 yards away doing their own thing spawning on the colors and going right back off on their own. Imagine that skirmish line, guys 35 yards apart, where is that in the manual?

Everyone wants to imagine consequences for their utterly shattered formations and think how awful it is, how about keeping a formation together in the first place? How about not going down to the last guy?




My example field is 100% disconnected from the "formation" or "out of line" mechanic. It's a separate 35-50 yard (by radius) circle around each and every ally (or allied corpses that died less than a minute ago) that would negate the lone wolf penalty.

The only time you're going to run into this penalty is if you're 35+ yards from any allies (or again, recently dead allies), and the only time that would be the case is if you are very much a lone wolf way on the sidelines completely doing your own thing without even a single other ally nearby.
35 yards is a long distance in this game. That's from one side of Burnside Bridge to the other. Though I'm all about a radius rather than a proximity mechanic completely replacing the linear requirement. The linear formation would be the natural balance. TBH even the line feature was totally altered to a radius, I'm not entirely sure how the lines are determined other than what I saw on the forums a year ago. It does seem that a line is the natural requirement to get people spawning on the field in the wrong place, a gaggle of people would result in some people spawning in front.

[Korvyr]

35 yards is a long distance in this game. That's from one side of Burnside Bridge to the other. Though I'm all about a radius rather than a proximity mechanic completely replacing the linear requirement. The linear formation would be the natural balance. TBH even the line feature was totally altered to a radius, I'm not entirely sure how the lines are determined other than what I saw on the forums a year ago. It does seem that a line is the natural requirement to get people spawning on the field in the wrong place, a gaggle of people would result in some people spawning in front.

That distance could be longer or shorter. It's just to give some clearance for your unique cases that are still legitimately part of the group effort, such as city/street battles.

Just trying to catch those mad men who undoubtedly are way out there on their own, give them a bit of a scare notice when they die, and bring them back into the fight rather than wasting tickets.

[Pronewb]

I scout a lot in this game. To punish me for being out of line when in fact I was being a team player. Will not be fair to players like me. As I have said before, we will always have those out of line guys, nothing we can do about it. Anything we do to try to punish those players will also punish the players scouting. We all paid for this game, people will play as they please. Having no buffs as an out of liner I think is enough punishment. This is just something each team will have to deal with. The devs cannot fix every single little problem, or dis like that everyone brings up. It is part of this game, and will always be.

[Bivoj]

Act like you don't want to freakin' die when you're alone and don't. Do stupid stuff, win stupid prizes.

(...)

Everyone wants to imagine consequences for their utterly shattered formations and think how awful it is, how about keeping a formation together in the first place? How about not going down to the last guy?


Exactly! It is even more reasonable to implement the respawn time penalty, because of players in formation: are you the last one in formation during melee? Too bad, you should have retreated - hereby the penalty. Is your formation shrinking in the volley exchange? You should consider retreat&regroup or suffer consequences! Are you too ahead of your unit during charge? Your bad, you should stick to your unit next time.

In one hand, people here are crying, that "proper feel of death" cannot be implemented in game, ergo we are seeing unrealistic last-man-standing melees and firefights. On the other hand, people are crying "I do not want to be punished for being the last man in melee or firefight". In fact, the second cry is exactly what can help to bring the feel of dying alone and forcing players to avoid it.

The more I am thinking about individual penalty for out-of-formation death, the more I like the idea. I would even exchange the respawn time malus for ticket loss penalty. While selfish players won't be harmed in any way by losing tickets for their team, the longer respond time is something everyone feels and implicitly wants to avoid.


I scout a lot in this game. To punish me for being out of line when in fact I was being a team player. Will not be fair to players like me.
No, it would be more than fair! You are already penalised by dying alone - you cause ticket loss for your team! The respawn time penalty would only make you feel the consequence.
So, either do not die while scouting and be not punished or stick to the formation. If your "scouting" is too hazardous, feel the consequence...

[sal_tuskin]

pronewb then take 3 people with you so u have 4 so if one dies you still in skirmish formation, you should never be out alone in this game period scouting is very misunderstood you can scout from far back to see other people coming you dont need be out alone
i am an original scout for 6th la over 15 months ago and trust me you very really need to be out alone all you will do is die and cost the team tickets we can scout from further back and not die and see everything a single person sees ahead so please stay with 3 other people to scout so stay in line

[Korvyr]

I scout a lot in this game. To punish me for being out of line when in fact I was being a team player. Will not be fair to players like me.

You're not being a team player, because your tactic of choice is causing the team to lose 5 tickets every time you die playing the way you want to. If you want to say you don't die, then how would a re-spawn penalty hurt you? You're just as capable as the next to play the game as a team player, so how in any way does it single you out and take away your ability to play the game? How is you playing the way you want while crippling your team fair to them?


As I have said before, we will always have those out of line guys, nothing we can do about it.

Sure we can. That's exactly what we're talking about.


Anything we do to try to punish those players will also punish the players scouting.

That's the point. Mainly because it doesn't matter what you're doing, if you die out there ramboing or scouting, that's 5 tickets each and every time. If you take my idea, however, just keep a friendly fellow scout nearby and you'll still be good.


We all paid for this game, people will play as they please.

Sure, but that doesn't mean not being cautious while you scout, and thus causing the team 5 tickets every time you get shot, is acceptable. That becomes extremely unfair to the rest of your teammates who are following the rules of formations and not putting their selves unduly in harms way. Why should their chances of winning the round suffer because people want to rambo and scout unsafely? How is that fair? And if you say you're staying safe, then again, how does a re-spawn penalty affect you?


Having no buffs as an out of liner I think is enough punishment. This is just something each team will have to deal with.

Obviously it's not punishment enough if people still charge non-stop to their deaths, or run around doing their own thing, burning 5 tickets each time they die.


The devs cannot fix every single little problem, or dis like that everyone brings up. It is part of this game, and will always be.

Who says? The game is in development. It's constantly being changed. That's the entire point of development. Changes, improvements, making the game into a beautiful creation. They very much can make a big dent in it by utilizing something like I suggested.

They can destroy the issue entirely by putting such a penalty on all out of line deaths, but that might be far too cruel and not take into account edge cases where (as you say) people are genuinely playing with their team, hence my suggestion and having it be a stacking penalty that doesn't even affect you the first two deaths as a lone wolf, and after those two first deaths, just sticks at a 30 second penalty for every additional death while notifying the server at large.

If you've died 3+ times in a round way out in the boonies, you absolutely deserve a penalty, because you've put a penalty on your teammates by not being cautious with your lone wolf missions.

Hell, you could even remove any thought of a penalty, and just have it so the server gets notified when people have died going lone wolf 3+ times in a round. Let us know who is causing us to lose tickets, and let us deal with it.

Just define lone wolf using the field I specified before, 30+ yards away from any allies or recently dead allies (within a minute of death).

[Pronewb]

In a perfect world yes having 3 players with me would be great, but that is not always the case.

[Pronewb]

You're not being a team player, because your tactic of choice is causing the team to lose 5 tickets every time you die playing the way you want to. If you want to say you don't die, then how would a re-spawn penalty hurt you? You're just as capable as the next to play the game as a team player, so how in any way does it single you out and take away your ability to play the game? How is you playing the way you want while crippling your team fair to them?



I have played many battles, where I was deep behind enemy lines scouting. Ive sat in those hiding places all game, giving constant enemy movements. I died once in each of those battles with 2 minutes left in game. In those battles my intel game my team a victory. If that is not a team player then I don't know what to tell you.

[Poorlaggedman]

Just a thought.... How about you can't chat to teammates or there is a delay in team chat based off a server-side variable (in seconds) if you are isolated? I've came across numerous 'scouts' (not to mention spectators doing it) who lurk in a bush and try to watch the team pass by. They have the advantage of instant commo presently by team chat. Of course certain voice programs that go against the spirit of the game circumnavigate this but a delay I think would be helpful. Of course a player should still be able to speak in all-chat (if there ever is an all chat).

[Korvyr]

I have played many battles, where I was deep behind enemy lines scouting. Ive sat in those hiding places all game, giving constant enemy movements. I died once in each of those battles with 2 minutes left in game. In those battles my intel game my team a victory. If that is not a team player then I don't know what to tell you.

Then how would a re-spawn penalty hurt you? I asked that in what you quoted from my previous post. Especially one that stacks where, unless you're actually being incautious and wasting tickets, doesn't affect you?

[PikeStance]

This is actually a good idea if it can be implemented. if you are caught out charging, then you are doing it wrong. Yes, I noticed a lot of charges on youtube that is just a bunch of guys running piecemeal at a line. Charges are supposed to be a hammer, not raindrops.

[Korvyr]

Just a thought.... How about you can't chat to teammates or there is a delay in team chat based off a server-side variable (in seconds) if you are isolated? I've came across numerous 'scouts' (not to mention spectators doing it) who lurk in a bush and try to watch the team pass by. They have the advantage of instant commo presently by team chat. Of course certain voice programs that go against the spirit of the game circumnavigate this but a delay I think would be helpful. Of course a player should still be able to speak in all-chat (if there ever is an all chat).

That might be worth posting in a different idea thread, my friend.

[AP514]

I have played many battles, where I was deep behind enemy lines scouting. Ive sat in those hiding places all game, giving constant enemy movements . I died once in each of those battles with 2 minutes left in game. In those battles my intel game my team a victory. If that is not a team player then I don't know what to tell you.

So, was your Intel relayed by TEAMSPEAK or some other VOIP.....If so then that is not in the spirit of the game and all the more reason to have LONE WOLF/moral penalties for players off on their own for long periods.

The lone wolf penalty and or a MORAL penalty should be just that..to keep players from doing just what you just said you did.

[Quaker]

It’s going to be paradoxical for a lot of non-re-enactors when the game goes public.

Fundamentally you’re asking them to act counter-intuitively and bunch-up and make an easier target of themselves when their natural instinct will be to spread out behind cover and shoot the other guys.

Will be interesting to see how this plays out. It may end up as a community comprised of Historical servers (re-enactors) and game servers (fight as you want).

[Bivoj]

It’s going to be paradoxical for a lot of non-re-enactors when the game goes public.

Fundamentally you’re asking them to act counter-intuitively and bunch-up and make an easier target of themselves when their natural instinct will be to spread out behind cover and shoot the other guys.

Will be interesting to see how this plays out. It may end up as a community comprised of Historical servers (re-enactors) and game servers (fight as you want).

People are smart and can learn. People buying this game want “play the period”, so they should expect some game rules forcing period tactics. Realistic shooters are like that.
But they must have individual penalty (or reward) or they will ignore the formations - the ticket penalty is so abstract, that it is not sufficient to motivate regular public players.

[Quaker]

Just wanted to say I’ve read this fantastic individual morale thread:

https://www.warofrightsforum.com/showthread.php?4397-Morale-and-how-to-harness-it&highlight=Morale

and I know Trusty says in it that it’s not feasible in the near future but something like this would go a long way towards solving some gameplay issues including lonewolfing (ie. the further away from friendlies you are the more terrified you would be and your battle effectiveness should suffer accordingly).

So implementing something like this - give players about 2 minutes after spawning to 1) reload and 2) join their units and after that if they’re more than ‘x’ distance away from ‘y’ amount of friendlies then they start to suffer from bad morale which gradually impedes their aim, reload, movement etc.

[Poorlaggedman]

People are smart and can learn. People buying this game want “play the period”, so they should expect some game rules forcing period tactics. Realistic shooters are like that.
But they must have individual penalty (or reward) or they will ignore the formations - the ticket penalty is so abstract, that it is not sufficient to motivate regular public players.
Yes, game rules not server rules. It's indeed a great paradox trying to make players play counter-intuitively. That's what concerns me more than anything because it's so standard in games like this and we already have the same culture imported from every other interchangeable player behavior-dependent game. And team morale definitely works only when each player is committed to the team experience which is as laughable a proposition as always in gaming. As I pointed out elsewhere I don't even think respawn penalties are enough. Then you're just asking players to weigh whether a quick death in formation is better than a more drawn-out death on your own terms. The pure functionality of operating effectively should be dependent on being in close proximity to players and not just up to minimal standards of receiving one of two formation statuses either.

[Quaker]

Just curious, would the above “proximity morale” suggestion I made be viable?

Referring to: - give players about 2 minutes (or whatever time devs judge reasonable) after spawning to 1) reload and 2) join their units and after that if they’re ever more than ‘x’ distance away from ‘y’ amount of friendlies for a prolonged period then they start to suffer from bad morale which gradually impedes their aim, reload, movement etc.

In other words lone wolf and you eventually become dysfunctional and cannot fight.

(I see lone-wolfism as potentially the greatest scourge this game might face when it is released on Steam because it will lead to chaos and potentially turn many players away, including dedicated re-enactors who form the backbone of this community.)

[Korvyr]

Just curious, would the above “proximity morale” suggestion I made be viable?

Referring to: - give players about 2 minutes (or whatever time devs judge reasonable) after spawning to 1) reload and 2) join their units and after that if they’re ever more than ‘x’ distance away from ‘y’ amount of friendlies for a prolonged period then they start to suffer from bad morale which gradually impedes their aim, reload, movement etc.

In other words lone wolf and you eventually become dysfunctional and cannot fight.

(I see lone-wolfism as potentially the greatest scourge this game might face when it is released on Steam because it will lead to chaos and potentially turn many players away, including dedicated re-enactors who form the backbone of this community.)

I really like the direction you're taking, but sadly the vast majority of the issue is due to players spawning and then immediately charging to their death. Debuffs wouldn't hinder them in the slightest as their only inclination is to run in, fire once, then go for some stabs. On the best of runs they might kill 3 people in enemy lines, but they burned 5 tickets on their own out of line death.

The only people your idea is likely to hinder are scouts and individuals sent on legitimate skirmisher missions, the ones who make an effort to survive away from other people long enough for your debuffs to kick in. Those are the players we need to actually try to not penalize.

Sadly the only way to stop this particular madness is to either call them out on it or to actually stop them, say with a respawn penalty if they do it 3+ times. Using a large additional anti-penalty field as I described that is applied by every single nearby (<30 yards) ally or recently dead ally is the only feasible way I can think of, with a penalty that stacks within a certain period of time. First penalty, get a warning. Second, the server gets notified. Third and beyond, server gets notified, and you get a 30 second respawn debuff.

The penalties don't have to be harsh or overly game-changing. Just enough to shock the lone wolves back into playing properly, either as a more cautious scout/skirmisher, or as a part of an actual team.

[Poorlaggedman]

/\ Scouts don't need to be able to fight though. There should always be pros/cons to the ways of going in.


Just curious, would the above “proximity morale” suggestion I made be viable?

Referring to: - give players about 2 minutes (or whatever time devs judge reasonable) after spawning to 1) reload and 2) join their units and after that if they’re ever more than ‘x’ distance away from ‘y’ amount of friendlies for a prolonged period then they start to suffer from bad morale which gradually impedes their aim, reload, movement etc.

No, nothing changes until you come under fire. Then you're highly vulnerable to suppression and it's much harder to recover. It's already this way BTW. I'd like several changes however to seal the deal better - slower recovery once suppressed - autosurrender - many more line statuses (around 10) from 'isolated' to the very difficult to achieve 'Kaiser's Daydream' (or something :p) which all effect your ability to resist morale hits, recover from morale hits, and respawn in faster or slower. That's my thinking now. Check out the thread I started a while ago called 'the great trap' in Alpha suggestions and the three part video I made also linked there https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=RIkNv_gmKOM&feature=youtu.be