Adjust Recall

@penguin_ I Agree 100% I can't stand the recall function. People just give up way more often. the host should be able to set this function to on or off. I was just in a seton game that was still winnable but someone asked for a vote and 2 of 3 said recall so it was insta gg. REALLY annoying and ruins the fun of trying to win from your backfoot.

@redfox Yes, people chicken out too easily.

Just played a match, and, similar to the OP, I was forced to recall against my will in 3v3 TMM.
Though we were on the backfoot, the game wasn't nearly over - at least in my eyes, that is.

I saw the recall notification pop up, then bam, two votes agreed.
No point in my vote.

I get the feeling that Team Match Maker should have all players make a unanimous vote to make it fairer for those who wish to stay.

Other than that, the game is already fullshare, so if they don't want to stay after the vote, they can always leave.
At the very least, I believe 3v3 TMM should have all players vote and 4v4 should have all or 75% of your team vote since it is a larger group.

~ Stryker

Making the vote unanimous would negate the main point of the recall feature

The tiny amount of times it can be misused leaving one person unsatisfied are entirely outweighed by all the other times it makes things better.

i vote to keep it like it is rn

Taken on its own, it does feel very strange that other teammates can force you to leave a game.

I like the recall feature, I think it's a nice and clean way of quitting a game that's lost. But I play most often with people I am in a discord with, and so we usually agree with each other before the vote is called.

I don't really understand this mentality:

The whole point of this being implemented was that high level dudes get stuck in a game because 1 guy thinks he’s God’s gift to strategy and will solo humanity.

Is this from the perspective of the losing team? If so, why not just leave? If it is from the perspective of the winning team, does that mean you want the enemy to give up when you think the game has been decided?

The tiny amount of times it can be misused leaving one person unsatisfied are entirely outweighed by all the other times it makes things better.

@Exselsior Maybe you can help me understand; what does the recall function make better?

@indexlibrorum said in Adjust Recall:

I don't really understand this mentality:

The whole point of this being implemented was that high level dudes get stuck in a game because 1 guy thinks he’s God’s gift to strategy and will solo humanity.

Is this from the perspective of the losing team? If so, why not just leave? If it is from the perspective of the winning team, does that mean you want the enemy to give up when you think the game has been decided?

Let's assume you play a 6v6 on a 20x20 map. Game is totally won for you, you got map control, more eco, more units. However it's min 12 only for now, but let's say you insta-won because you killed the transports of your opponents.
5 of the opponents' team left and already hosted a lobby because there's no point in playing. However the last dude just doesn't want to give up.
What you're saying is that his m8s could leave, which was the case. But what about your team - the winning one? You're forced to stick around for 10+ more min simply because one dude doesn't want to give up, effectively wasting your time. Snipes are not always the solution because there is a chance a reclaim-boost might give him a chance -> Sometimes you simply need to play rather carefully, making it even worse

That was the case on maps and not only with 10+min until you finally won, but for 20-30min which is just annoying af and a waste of time for everyone.

@sladow-noob Okay, but then you deny the remaining player the chance for a comeback, yes?

Snipes are not always the solution because there is a chance a reclaim-boost might give him a chance -> Sometimes you simply need to play rather carefully, making it even worse

Because this basically boils down to "he still has a chance if we don't play optimally", and I'm not sure if it's right to forcefully deny that to anyone either. Surprise comebacks can be a lot of fun after all.

I understand that that can be frustrating for the other team, but I'm not convinced that weighs up to forcefully removing someone from their game.

I find it okay that you have to make compromises sometimes when playing with other people. If you want to be solely in change of how the game develops then you have to play 1v1 or with bots. Whenever people meet they have to find arrangements on how to spend the time together.
And if more than one guy wants to play for the epic comeback they still can, because then the recall vote fails.

@indexlibrorum said in Adjust Recall:

@sladow-noob Okay, but then you deny the remaining player the chance for a comeback, yes?

Snipes are not always the solution because there is a chance a reclaim-boost might give him a chance -> Sometimes you simply need to play rather carefully, making it even worse

Because this basically boils down to "he still has a chance if we don't play optimally", and I'm not sure if it's right to forcefully deny that to anyone either. Surprise comebacks can be a lot of fun after all.

I understand that that can be frustrating for the other team, but I'm not convinced that weighs up to forcefully removing someone from their game.

You won't see that in high ranked games. Well obviously if you just rush 30 corsairs at min 15 to finally end it and they end up dying, then surprise - that dude has a chance, who would've thought? "Optimally" in that case simply means "don't suicide 15k mass in front of his base".
You're not arguing that it's denying a chance of comeback, you say if one team wants to end it quickly because another lobby is open already, then they should get punished for wanting to end it quick due to being a waste of time.

I never quit a game because it's fun to play short stacked to see how much you can do and the bigger reason is you learn a ton build a lot of skills.

So I never recall. Just make a key bind to recall so it's instant and doesn't have the effects of ctr k

If you want out of a game and others don't, just com bomb

@indexlibrorum said in Adjust Recall:

Because this basically boils down to "he still has a chance if we don't play optimally", and I'm not sure if it's right to forcefully deny that to anyone either. Surprise comebacks can be a lot of fun after all.

And why in your mind is the right of one dude to have fun worth more than wasting the time of 11 other people waiting for next game, particularly when that one dude can still have some level of fun in the next host?

@ftxcommando Because you agreed to play a game when you entered the lobby, and a game is ended when the enemy gives up or is destroyed, not when the other team thinks the game is over.

Imagine that, lol. "Yea mate we'll win in 15 minutes so we want you to leave right now so we can play a different game."

Me, looking as the last player alive wastes every ones time as 11 others are waiting for next game.

Yeah, imma go play something with normal people not some f'ed dudes willing to waste 10-20 minutes of other people lives due to their Gyle syndrome.

Oh and me nor my team can't even quit the game for we will be banned for either ctrl+k or RaTInG MAnIPulaTiON.

@indexlibrorum said in Adjust Recall:

@ftxcommando Because you agreed to play a game when you entered the lobby, and a game is ended when the enemy gives up or is destroyed, not when the other team thinks the game is over.

Imagine that, lol. "Yea mate we'll win in 15 minutes so we want you to leave right now so we can play a different game."

Yes, we agreed to play a game. Game is now over as mandated by the majority vote of the team and it has now crossed into malicious timewasting.

I agree that it doesn’t matter what enemy team thinks, that’s why they aren’t part of the recall vote. But if recall vote required universal or some insane supermajority for consent I’d just go back to base ctrl+k to stop dudes wasting my and others time.

I understand the whole argument against recall being as it is because it does suck being forced to give up. But it sucks more being stuck in a game because someone wants to waste your time. And honestly it happened fairly often before recall was implemented, far more often than someone being upset about being forced to give up a lost game early.

It's obviously not the perfect solution, but I do think it's the best we have right now.

Why does it have to be a blanket rule? The people who complain about having their time wasted on average seem to be higher ranked players. It's also a valid criticism that in a 3v3 2 players can force a defeat from what is a potentially winnable position. At lower ranks of play the game is far more likely to be winnable from a seemingly poor position due to the greater potential for mistakes from the enemy team (since they're lower ranked for a reason).

It therefore seems ripe for a compromise approach that pleases more people than the current system. For example, in 4+ team games it works as is currently the case, and in <=2 team games it needs 100% agreement and/or just isn't an option.

Then, for 3v3s, it's only possible for 2 players to force the third to lose if any of the following is the case:

• It's a custom match (given it is likely to take longer to organise than a TMM match); or
• The average rating of the players is > x (e.g. >=1.4k? 1.5? As a lower ranked player I dont know the point at which games take forever to find); or
• The team that wants to recall has in total 75% or less of the mass income of the enemy team

To make things even simpler, it could just be a single rule - in a 3v3, you can only have 2 players force a recall if the team has 75% or less mass income vs the enemy.

While there will be plenty of cases where you can have equal eco vs the enemy team but clearly have lost, I'd have thought it very rare for it to take long at all for the clearly winning team to be able to translate their presumably dominant map position into an eco lead. So, it's not possible for one person to delay the team from a clearly lost position, but it's also not possible for 2 people to force someone to concede a winnable position.

In terms of implementation it'd need to only say 'recall vote successful' or 'recall vote unsuccessful' and not say why/how many people voted for it, to avoid being able to use the voting system to get information on how good your team's eco is vs the enemy.

I understand the argument for recall being it sucks to waste a long time on a foregone conclusion, but it sucks far more being forced to concede a game that could have been won (meaning all the time up until that point arguably was wasted as well). Especially since at lower ranks the players who want to recall are more likely to be able to find a new game if they leave the current one and rejoin the queue (TMM).

This is why high ranks should be allowed to base ctrl k