|
|
Post by johndramey on Nov 3, 2013 16:45:22 GMT -5
The timer works for me. Though, to be honest, I mostly just double-tap to move. -abs I think that's what save me too. It means combat is not slower, cause I double-tap (or tap twice, quickly) if I intend to move, and single tap if I intend to attack. Mistakes gone, speed same  Glad the timing is working! Exactly, that's what I find myself doing. Once I started thinking of the tap-to-confirm as less of a "tap, check, confirm" and more of a "double-tap to move" system, it clicked. The system works well, in my opinion. Just took a little getting used to |
|
|
|
Post by slayernz on Nov 3, 2013 17:02:10 GMT -5
After using the tap-twice to move thing, I've gotten used to it. Two comments though
1) Do you actually need a time-out on the second tap? What do you guys think of the idea that you tap once on a square, and the marker symbol appears indicating that is where you will go. If you tap any other square, the marker symbol appears there instead (or if you tap an enemy, the normal enemy UX occurs). If you tap a second time on the same square, you initiate movement. That means, you can select a square, then tapping that same square again any time after that results in the movement. No need to have to double-tap, although double-tapping obviously would work. In the end though, your movement is still deliberate, but you're not racing to beat the 1.24 seconds to the second tap.
2) Out of combat, you still have the double-tap to move ... but if you glom the party to a single icon, you DON'T double-tap to move. It would be useful to make it so that glommed movement is consistent with the individual party member movement.
|
|
|
|
Post by beuns on Nov 4, 2013 0:18:02 GMT -5
I've just started an easy run this morning to get use to the new way of things (sorry to have been silenced this weekend but I had 3 days off and my son at home...). I had some difficulties to understand the confirm tap system because I naturally was checking where it was and then tap a second time to confirm. It's great to have a visual aid to indicate where I would land but in higher difficulties (brutal/nightmare) when a combat occur I need to carefully think every move I make and being pressed by the game is somewhat weird. That's why I agree with slayernz about having no timer to confirm (just leaving the blue circle glowing is fine by me). |
|
|
|
Post by johndramey on Nov 4, 2013 8:24:18 GMT -5
After using the tap-twice to move thing, I've gotten used to it. Two comments though 1) Do you actually need a time-out on the second tap? What do you guys think of the idea that you tap once on a square, and the marker symbol appears indicating that is where you will go. If you tap any other square, the marker symbol appears there instead (or if you tap an enemy, the normal enemy UX occurs). If you tap a second time on the same square, you initiate movement. That means, you can select a square, then tapping that same square again any time after that results in the movement. No need to have to double-tap, although double-tapping obviously would work. In the end though, your movement is still deliberate, but you're not racing to beat the 1.24 seconds to the second tap. I think the delay is more of a system avoiding false inputs, not so much a system of checking where you are going. I actually like the system as is, but admit that I could be in the minority. 2) Out of combat, you still have the double-tap to move ... but if you glom the party to a single icon, you DON'T double-tap to move. It would be useful to make it so that glommed movement is consistent with the individual party member movement. I like the system as it is now; Glommed we have freedom and are able to easily move around but Single is more tactical. Again, I could be in the minority though  |
|
|
|
Post by John Robinson on Nov 7, 2013 1:36:21 GMT -5
After using the tap-twice to move thing, I've gotten used to it. Two comments though 1) Do you actually need a time-out on the second tap? What do you guys think of the idea that you tap once on a square, and the marker symbol appears indicating that is where you will go. If you tap any other square, the marker symbol appears there instead (or if you tap an enemy, the normal enemy UX occurs). If you tap a second time on the same square, you initiate movement. That means, you can select a square, then tapping that same square again any time after that results in the movement. No need to have to double-tap, although double-tapping obviously would work. In the end though, your movement is still deliberate, but you're not racing to beat the 1.24 seconds to the second tap. I agree. Would very much like to remove the 1.24 second timeout. As a player, I see where the blue circle landed, beating the clock has been a problem for me. |
|
|
|
Post by fallen on Nov 7, 2013 11:16:48 GMT -5
So there are a few votes to extend the timeout, and a few saying its just on. We appreciate the feedback all!
|
|
|
|
Post by hosh on Nov 7, 2013 15:13:03 GMT -5
So, adding the move confirmation is relatively nice and I like how it was implemented so far, the only thing I'm finding a little awkward is the "time-out" on the tap. I actually think it's a really good idea and think that I can easily get used to it, but I'm curious as to others' reaction. I found it a little disconcerting when I first booted the game and ran into combat, I was expecting a more traditional tap->check->tap to confirm system, instead we have a system that times out if you don't tap relatively quickly. The effect you guys put on it looks very nice, too. However, it might take a little getting used to. What do others think? I didn't like it as much. I was hoping for a highlight of the pathing, and then a click-to-confirm, with unlimited timeout. Similar to the Hoshigami -> Tactics Ogre -> FFT engine lineage. Or at least, have the movement beacon kinda flash in and out, but with no timeout. I think though, I got used to playing Go asynchronously a lot on my phone. I'd place a stone, but don't hit "confirm". And sit there looking at the move in relation to everything else. I'm not in a hurry to "finish" the game (I've certainly learned not to play Go like you would a twitch game). I'm not sure why you guys don't want to make this an optional thing either. I really think there are two types of players on this game, the ones that want to play this more like Diablo and the ones who want to make slower, thoughtful moves. As I mentioned, in my random comment, my favorite thing about this game is that I can put it away any time, so I play in small, short bursts. I don't really understand what making this an atmosphere of a medieval game have anything to do with the UX or movement confirmation options (other than adding branching code and more unit testing). |
|
|
|
Post by hosh on Nov 7, 2013 15:14:27 GMT -5
It's great to have a visual aid to indicate where I would land but in higher difficulties (brutal/nightmare) when a combat occur I need to carefully think every move I make and being pressed by the game is somewhat weird. Exactly! I'm not playing Heroes of Steel because it is an arcade game. |
|
|
|
Post by fierygod on Nov 7, 2013 15:42:43 GMT -5
I feel that maybe there should be two options added to the UX (once we get to that stage, of course) for the move cursor. First would be to enable or disable the move cursor altogether, for those who want the faster Diablo playstyle, and the second would be to have the cursor timeout or remain on. And maybe have it so that the second option would remain grayed out in the options menu until the first option is checked. This is all of course assuming that the engine is capable of handling the coding for that (I don't know anything about coding personally, so forgive me if this is too out there  ) Sent from my SCH-I605 using proboards |
|
)