Gameplay Logistical Improvements

timcoffman · (This post was last modified: 07-09-2012 02:29 AM by timcoffman.)

(07-09-2012 02:15 AM)projectantares Wrote:
(07-09-2012 02:00 AM)timcoffman Wrote: Throughout this conversation I have consistently tried to make the point that I advocate (a) unlimited undo/redo of actions that (b) do not affect gameplay by revealing information.

Regardless of whether new information is revealed you should be penalized for any movement made. If a scouting party were deployed during the Battle of Gettysburg, even with no gained information, a decision was made. The Commander must make an informed and appropriate decision BEFORE giving orders, based on current / relevant intel. So to say, troops aren't sent out, find nothing (or their Superior decides they really ought to have gone somewhere else), and re-deploy without taking time. In this case, time = wits.

This feature would also serve to drag games on even further than some people allow. It would be equivalent to moving every piece on your chess board to every possible location, without moving your hand from the pieces, to see what pattern "feels best" - considering no intel is to be gained from these actions. Someone who understands the mechanics of the game shouldn't need this "tool."

I'd have been on your side, years and years ago, when I was a bit too young to grasp Final Fantasy Tactics...

Learning that a ex does not contain your opponent IS gaining information.

Due to its asynchronous nature, I don't think the interval between turns would be affected by adding tools to help decision-making. I always have to wait for my opponents for like 1/2 hour now anyway. An extra 5 minute't make a difference to that.

(07-09-2012 02:23 AM)Kamikaze28 Wrote:
(07-09-2012 02:15 AM)projectantares Wrote:
(07-09-2012 02:00 AM)timcoffman Wrote: Throughout this conversation I have consistently tried to make the point that I advocate (a) unlimited undo/redo of actions that (b) do not affect gameplay by revealing information.

Regardless of whether new information is revealed you should be penalized for any movement made. If a scouting party were deployed during the Battle of Gettysburg, even with no gained information, a decision was made. The Commander must make an informed and appropriate decision BEFORE giving orders, based on current / relevant intel. So to say, troops aren't sent out, find nothing (or their Superior decides they really ought to have gone somewhere else), and re-deploy without taking time. In this case, time = wits.

This feature would also serve to drag games on even further than some people allow. It would be equivalent to moving every piece on your chess board to every possible location, without moving your hand from the pieces, to see what pattern "feels best" - considering no intel is to be gained from these actions. Someone who understands the mechanics of the game shouldn't need this "tool."

I'd have been on your side, years and years ago, when I was a bit too young to grasp Final Fantasy Tactics...

I think this comparison does not help this discussion.

As I understand timcoffman, he wants to be able to rectify input errors whose rectification has no consequence whatsoever. Accidentally un-shelling and re-shelling a Bombshell without moving it is a prime example, as has been mentioned already. Spawning the wrong unit (without changing the Fog of War) due to a bump in the road or something like that is another example.

I don't disagree with his points, but I doubt a clean implementation is possible and even harder to communicate to the average user which will go bananas because he could undo this move but not that move.
Here's another problem - consider the following order of moves:

inconsequential action (e. g. un-shell your Bombshell)

consequential action (e. g. move a Runner)

inconsequential action (e. g. re-shell your Bombshell)

undo

Where would you land? after 2? could you undo your first, incosequential action? This gives me headaches to imagine implementing something like this.

Thanks for the detailed explanation. You've hit it exactly!

I agree it's not a straightforward implementation problem to solve- if it were, they'd have done it from the start.

projectantares · 07-09-2012, 02:55 AM

A mortar cannon does not arrive upon the field ready to fire, nor is it ready to leave without time-consuming deconstruction.

Given that I'm alone in preferring realism to "video game," I'll bow out of this one.

If this game is going to slide to 30+ min between moves... Well 7 days is far too long for someone to be given to make 3 minutes worth of observation and decision making. (And properly manipulate their units w/o 'mis-clicks'.)

metalsquid · (This post was last modified: 07-09-2012 03:19 AM by metalsquid.)

(07-06-2012 12:37 AM)timcoffman Wrote:

spawning a new unit next to my base: inconsequential, because I have not penetrated the fog of war. I should be able to undo this, in case I mis-tapped

There exists situations where this is not true eg. you only have heavy units near base. You may only see 3 hexes out from base but enemies might be on the 4th or 5th hex away, hidden by the fog. If you spawn a scout the fog would retreat and subsequently reveal those enemy units. To be allowed to undo that, as you are suggesting, would be an unfair advantage. To then have to create exception cases based on this just to accommodate your 'feature' would just complicate the gameplay further.

As far as the comparison to chess goes, once you take your hand off a chess piece after a move, you have 'committed' to the move and can't take it back. Keeping your hand on the piece lets you take it back and 'try out' another move, but imho, the more skilled chess player can visualize the scenarios in his mind without having to physically move the pieces. You have to think 2 or 3 moves ahead of your opponent in chess, and the only way to do that is in your head. Outwitters requires this same ability. Just because you can add an undo feature easily in software, doesn't mean it's warranted in every game. It was deliberately left out by the creators as a design choice and increases the skill level required to be a top player. It's just as valid a choice as your idea to include an undo feature. Personally I'm glad they went with that decision. Can a basketball or football coach 'try out' different plays before committing? No, he has to call a play and go with the consequences.

I understand your frustration with mistakenly clicking on units and wrong actions. I've done it myself with the Bombshell. IMO, the problem is not with the lack of Undo or Commit feature, it's with the fact that that unit very rarely gets the chance to enter the field due the high cost. Therefore, even though I had figured out how it worked, sufficient time had passed since I last got the chance to play the unit that I briefly 'forgot' the mechanics of it and mistakenly shelled up at the wrong moment and lost the match as a result. It's all about learning how your units work and getting familiar with them. Reducing the cost of the unit, allowing more frequent practice with it is the way to get better at it, not preventing mistakes with undos. You can improve your skill to the point where you stop making erroneous taps. On the other hand, introducing these undo/commit actions to accommodate inexperienced players' lack of skill merely obfuscates gameplay unnecessarily. It may even drive away as many new players as the frustration of wrong taps does.

tl;dr - Think with your brain, not your eyes and fingers.

timcoffman · (This post was last modified: 07-09-2012 03:56 AM by timcoffman.)

(07-09-2012 02:55 AM)projectantares Wrote: If this game is going to slide to 30+ min between moves... Well 7 days is far too long for someone to be given to make 3 minutes worth of observation and decision making. (And properly manipulate their units w/o 'mis-clicks'.)

I suspect that if you and I ever end up randomly matched, you will be greatly disappointed with my rate of play. Feel free to complain in chat. Wink

I think I can wrap up this discussion pretty succinctly:

The map is not the territory; the plan is not the action.

My perspective is that the interface to this game currently represents the territory/action and it would be an improvement if it were the map/plan.

metalsquid · 07-09-2012, 01:09 PM

The map/plan happens in your head. The interface implements your plan. Is that too old-school a concept for 2012 game design? If there was no ranking system, I'd agree with you. Let everyone have a level playing field by letting them map out their plays in the UI. Otherwise, I think it's fine that mistaken taps DO have consequences as the most skilled players will make less of them and that's what should be reflected in the rankings - superior strategy & clarity in execution. Not skill in using a UI.