Opinions on new M2 attack option?

[sasper]

anything that lets you control units closer to your intentions would be great. having to click quickly and accurately is the most tedious and boring part of the game. units should be "dumb"... players should have to tell them what to do, but the more efficiently you can control them the better.

don't know why someone would think it dumbs down the game... its just like with presets, they don't dumb it down, just lets you implement your tactics & strategy as you intend instead of spending all your time pointing&clicking. increases the quality of play...

[headhunter]

Like whoever said (i think gkg) - everyone appears to be half right.

So where is the middle?

[giantkillergeneral]

an example of dumbing down the game would be if everything was auto-hit and you didn't have to aim any of the ranged units at all. This is common in most other games. Or if there were no formations at all like a lot of other games. This is dumbed down because it removes options and decisions that the players have to make. It has nothing to do with clicking.

Removing clicks does not necessarily dumb down the game. It could just be taking the tediousness out of the game. This game shouldn't be about who can mindlessly click the fastest. It should be about who can smartly click the fastest. Clicking speed will always matter in a real-time game, no matter how many features that reduce clicking and make it easier to manage your units. If you don't want clicking speed to matter then make it a turn-based game (which obviously sucks)

Give players good tools (like formations). and you are still presenting the player with options to decide upon how they want to click, which leaves room for the players to decide upon the less optimal option and make mistakes. Which leaves room for players to climb the steep learning curve and really differentiate the good players from the bad players

[pogue]

This is the first thread ever where I have agreed with everything Adren and GKG have said, all the rest was tl;dr material.

[par73]

"We should dumb down the game so that mwc is more competitive"




"Would also make it easier for new players to pick up its [lack of] complexity"

[renwood]

There is currently the option in Fear, to have missle units target a group of the enemy when you click on them, instead of targeting 1 unit. I think it uses shift + Click to do this.
Sam or MM just mentioned they were making a map with archers that use this feature. One of the things that made less people buy/play myth was the steep learning curve. AS GKG stated, giving players more TOOLS and OPTIONS on how to control their units will make the game more playable. The important thing is to allways have new features be options. If people do not want to use them, they dont have to, games to me are about options and freedom.

As milkman said, in our TWA HD multiplayer plugin, we have a lot of the features people are taking about for archers allready included. It came out in january of 2010, so I am a bit surprised more people do not know of these options.

You can shoot fire arrows and make them land in the formation your archers are currently standing it by hitting T, they will shoot a predefined distance based on if they were standing on a zero plane.
That is to say, if the terrain is flat, they will just target where you aimed them and all shoot something like 200 feet in front of themselves. If your archers are in a circle formation, you could use this feature IF WELL TIMED AND AIMED to trap an enemy dwarf in a circle of fire. We also have the inventory to fire normal arrows with T wich ever way the archers are facing. This is pretty cool because you REALLY have to AIM your archers, with the direction they are facing. You can use the TFL style gesture click to aim the way the archers are facing.
There is also artillery style aiming for really long distance indirect fire of arrows, usefull of shooting over the walls on maps like creep, or just bearly aiming to hit a unit on the other side of some trees. It works like aiming the RPG in wwII, clicking 50% of the distance to target. The longer the arrows stay in the air, the less damage they do when they hit the target because its based on velocity of the arrow. The arrows are also less accurate as they fly long distances, so its not really something you can do to be cheap about it. All these features combine to make archer fights a lot more about being really good at aiming, and add a real sense of archery skill that myth is currently lacking.

Before anybody naysays these features, try them out and see just how hard they are to use effectively. They are in ooga's Udogs folder at:

It seems you cant post links on here? anyways, just highlight this full address and copy and paste it into your browser:
hl.udogs.net/files/Uploads/%20User%20Uploads/ooga%a7ooga's%20Uploads/


Get the Myth IV Multiplayer Demo 1.3.zip
Just plop the large over 200 meg icon in your plugins folder and try out the inventorys for archers and other units.

People can also play the multiplayer maps with HD units that are just myth 2 style if they put the gametype on normal, you only get Hero myth TWA style units on the maps if the difficulty is set to legendary.

We made some interesting AI inventorys for units in 2008. Including dorfs that can be told to hunt and gather satchles within 20 world units of themselves. Ghols that can be told to pick up puss or satchles.
J men that can be programmed to heal friendly units if the j man is idle and the friendly use has less then 50% health and gets within like 5 world units of the J man and taunts. Being able to tell melee units to protect a flag radius, where the units will not leave the flag, and can move freely and attack witin the flag radius without leaving it. Much better then only being able to put units on Guard "G" and having them lose every time in melees vs an eaqual number of units, because units in "Guard" suck and have less range then units that can move freely.

We also have the AI inventory to control your armys with telling them where to go on a map like trow. So you can tell groups to gaurd home base, go mid and hold it, go mid and patrol it, go to north or south and hold it or patrol it (they kinda run around and target enemies that get near the area they patrol) Have them flank north or south, or push mid.

Would be usefull for Single player games where you have NPC or non player characters on your team, like seen on Twice Born. Also be good for multiplayer where captains can set the locations that units need to go, and when the game starts people will not even need to ask the captain if they need to go mid, north, or south or defend base, because the captain has allready programmed them to deploy where he wants them to. Then the players that control these units and turn off the AI inventory if they want to control them fully as they wish.

BTW these AI inventorys are in sperate plugins and not currently in the TWA HD multiplayer tagset. If people want to test them out I can send them these AI inventory plugins.

-Renwood

[samthebutcher]

I'll address some people comments and also clear a few things up.

GKG
"I wouldn't mind it being implemented as long as it didn't interfere with the usual way I play."


The "selection boxes" to select enemy targets would be just another option. It wouldn't have any effect on you if you choose not to use it. It just adds an option it doesnt take away or substitute anything. It would have no effect on your game if you didnt want to use it.

The way I was thinking it would be used (but I wouldnt be the one coding it so I cant say it would be) would be to hold ctrl while dragging a "selection box" around the enemy units you wanted to target. There would have to be more than clicking the mouse and dragging.

I should have been more specific when I say "volley fire". I didnt mean that the Bowmen would launch arrows in a straight line out from them. I hadnt really thought about that. What I meant was that if you select a multiple of your Bowmen you could also with a "selection box" select multiple targets. How ever many you wanted. If its 5 vs 5 you could select all 5 of your Bowmen. Hold ctrl and drag a "selection box" around 2 (or however many) enemy Bowmen. Your 5 Bowmen would randomly select between them and target those 2 enemy Bowmen. Basically the same way melee works now. But if you only had 1 Bowmen left and your opponent had say 4 they couldnt surround your Bowmen with arrows. They would just all target your single Bowmen.

The reason that I thought of it being implemented this way is that I figured it would be easy to code in, because basically it would be just taking existing functions and just combining them in an additional way. Selection boxes are already used to select the players units. So just allow that for enemy units. Melee can already select multiple targets, allow Bowmen to also. Then combine that together. From what I hear it would be pretty easy to code in.


Adren:
"but in the fashion I suggested (ctrl-dbl click)."

The reason I think that a "selection box" would be better is because with the method you are suggesting. You would only be able to select 1 enemy Bowmen or all nearby enemy Bowmen. With a "selection box" you could have all your Bowmen target 1,2,3,4,5..... or all enemy Bowmen. But yes you would need to hold ctrl to tell the game you are targeting enemy units not just a normal selection box.

Sorry Milkman I didnt mean to ignore you. I was just focused on what Adren and I were talking about. I didnt have time to be on much longer and I type slow.

Renwood and Milkman I think those are a lot of cool ideas that you put in your plug. I am strongly of the belief that the more control and options players have the better. It just gives people more room and tools to work with allowing for more and more skillful play. I am definitely going to check out your Plug. Also you didnt email me the Plug you said were going to.

Mostly the discussion has been about Bowmen vs Bowmen. There would be other effects as well. You would also be able to select mixed groups of enemy units with your Bowmen. For example if you have a group of Bowmen you could draw a "selection box" around any group of enemy units. Maybe focusing your fire on a side of your opponents formation. That might be, you draw a "selection box" around 2 Bowmen 1 dwarf and 2 warrs or whatever enemy units. Those would be the targets your Bowmen would fire at. It would be like GKG said "My guess though is that this kind of feature would still be okay because you are increasing your chance of hitting something while decreasing the amount of damage you are likely to do". So yea it is a sort of trade off but it gives you the option depending on the situation. Maybe you would use it against a group of weak units. Or to soften a group of charging melee before your melee engage them. Instead of maybe killing a single unit. Its just more realistic, and gives you another option.

With flaming arrows you would be able to do the same thing. This would allow you to spread your flames out better. Which really is more to a realistic battle.

As far as melee units go. The effects would be similar to Bowmen. It is just another option to use. One that I think adds more realism to the game. You could still do everything you normally do but have additional options.

Melee and other units:
The additional control you would have would for example allow you to select a section or area of enemy units to engage, not just a single type or whole mass. In a melee vs melee scrimmage for example with mixed melee on both sides. Instead of having to select the whole mass of enemy units or one type you could send your units to attack a section of the enemy units. Maybe you have 10 vs 10 that are charging each other. You could send all your melee to attack the right side of the enemy formation instead of the whole group. Your opponent would have the same types of options. Or yo could split your group and have them do a pincher maneuver, half attack one end of the enemy formation the other half attacking the other end. You would have a ton of options on how and what part of the enemy formation you wanted to attack. This wouldnt take away micro managing, because once your units engaged you would still need to guide them individually for the best effect. It would also probably help with the "bug" of melee units when sent to attack another group of melee and some of the units instead of engaging the enemy closest to them (as they should) will sometimes target a unit in the back of the enemy group, and get beat to death trying to reach enemies they cant get to. It just adds more realism to the game. In real mid evil battle soldiers would often attack parts of an enemy line, not just types of soldiers (like all soldiers with red plumes) or always run straight into the whole mass of enemy. They would sometimes use tactical flanks, concentrate there attack on certain sections of the enemy line ect. Basically this feature would add realism and control allowing players to apply more tactics and strategy.

The example above was mostly with melee but it would also apply to any group or type of units. You could use a "selection box" to select a group of your units (like you currently can). It could be anything 3 Bowmen 4 melee a dwarf and 2 ghols. Then use a "selection box" to target a mixed group of enemy units. To maybe target 1 side of the enemy formation, unit type wouldnt matter. All units in that "selection box" would be targets. Your units would attack that side of the enemy formation no matter what units were there. Like a tactical flank. Your opponent would have the same options.

Over all it may or may not reduce some of the clicks that are necessary. It might just be the same number of clicks just more efficient use. But I think Myth should be a game about tactics, strategy and speed not just how fast you can click buttons. Because button clicking speed is always going to be a factor no matter what. You can have the best strats or tactics ever but be too slow to use them and you will lose. I think it should really take a fairly even mix to win. Strategy, tactics, clicking speed, quick reflexes, and a fast mind. It shouldnt be heavily weighted to whoever can click the fastest. But like I said I am not really even sure if this addition would have any effect on the current dynamic of those aspects of Myth anyway.

The main thing as far as if the Magma developers would not consider including this would be if there is a majority or at least a lot of players that flatly object to the addition. That is what would matter the most. If some players wanted it added and even more didnt care as they figured they wouldnt use it anyway and none or only a slight few didnt want it at all then they would maybe include it.

In other words if you liked the idea thats a check for having it added.

If you didnt care cause you wouldnt use it and it didnt effect your game (remember though you would have additional options in case you did and every now and then it might be useful) that would be a check for adding it. So just because you dont think it would be useful to you, but you dont mind it being an option. Should hopefully mean you dont mind it being added. Hopefully you dont object to the addition just because you wont use it.

It would just be the people that flatly objected to it. Not only would they not want the additional options but they dont want anyone else to either. That would be a check for not adding it. If there is more or a lot of people that feel that way then it wouldnt happen.

I will put a poll up after the debate is over all questions are answered and everyone is clear on the effect of this addition.

I really think that this would be a nice improvement. Plus there would be new tools and tactics to learn and make the game a little more realistic and fresher for everyone.

[giantkillergeneral]

no no no no NO

you completely missed my point about the way it was implemented. It could interfere with things if the control is sloppy which by the way you are talking is looking like that will exactly be the case. Of course I will try not to use it but misclicks do happen in this game, and if this is going to introduce one more way I could make a misclick then i don't want any part of it. Also there are plenty of other ways you could introduce a sloppy implementation of this that screws up the way I play along with a lot of other top players. We move and click very fast and unintentional control mistakes do happen.

You left my suggestion for improved implementation completely unaddressed.

I have no idea what you are talking about with your example of volley fire, I am pretty sure adren was talking about that not me. I have no interest in trying to illustrate some convoluted myth tactical scenario in lengthy paragraphs.

You are still stuck on this box-select attack feature which is absolutely horrible. If you hold ctrl then do the select box then how is it going to know that you are trying to do a select box attack instead of a ctrl click attack? You would probably have to introduce some time delay which would be HORRIBLE. If you say that you have to do the box select before hitting ctrl well then this is still slow, tedious, and sloppy.

This is why I, along with many others, do not like Magma. There is this HUGE disconnect between the competitive myth community who have the best knowledge for how this game should be played, and Magma development. Magma has no competitive players on it. When it comes to features effecting the combat of this game, you need to take the top players, pick their brains about it, and LISTEN TO THEM. You have hardly any idea what makes for good game play when talking about the combat of this game. All the bells and whistles of the game outside of the combat is all fine and dandy, you should just stick with that if you aren't going to listen to the people who are the actual experts on this stuff.

If you are going to do anything, do my suggestion. Not sure what key to use, so i think it will be awkward no matter what.

Quite honestly, I don't think this feature adds much value to the game play, and is hardly worth the effort. I know you think you have some genius idea or something but it really isn't all that great one way or another. Even my suggestion has flaws as it is going to have archer arrows falling short of the target which might make it pretty ineffective. Ultimately only testing and getting the size of that area balanced correctly would tell. Would have to test how often misclicks may happen with it as well. Again, I think this is all a not-worth-while effort though.

[giantkillergeneral]

Also Adren, I have no idea what you are talking about with the heron heal-all. Having to use the middle heron, wtf are you talking about?

The herons have to be close enough to another heron for it to work, yes. Which one you select doesn't matter, it chains the herons together whichever one you select. You could have a huge line of herons at a fixed interval spread and shift click one end of the line and it will still do the whole line simultaneously. If the interval is too large it will break the chain and the herons that are too far will try to run to heal the heron you selected.

[adrenaline]

Aug 8, 2012 16:20:06 GMT 2 samthebutcher said:

Adren:
"but in the fashion I suggested (ctrl-dbl click)."

The reason I think that a "selection box" would be better is because with the method you are suggesting. You would only be able to select 1 enemy Bowmen or all nearby enemy Bowmen.

....what? you realize that ctrl click is a ground attack... right? i said ctrl-dbl click, not shift-dbl click.


GKG: test it. what i said is most easily demonstrated with a larger group of herons. the final click needs to be near the center of the group. i do this after nearly every game if i have herons alive still... so i have tested it thoroughly.

[giantkillergeneral]

tested it on great divide with 30 herons in a single long line. I can shift-t and click the end of the line and it still commands all herons to heal. you are incorrect sir.

[adrenaline]

bleh i'll test more when i get home tonight... but i know i've tested it exhaustively before coming to this conclusion. maybe we have different configs or my shift button is completely worn out lol...

on KG, I've done it without clicking the heron closest to center and had 2 hg heal themselves, while the 3rd healed one of the others. test it over and over on KG and see if you notice something like this.

[giantkillergeneral]

Yes, that is happening because of exactly what i described. The 3rd heron is too far away from a selected heron so it breaks the chain and doesn't heal. That is all.

If you think about it, the only way what you are suggesting would work is if they implemented it such that only selected herons in a certain radius around the clicked heron will heal themselves. This wouldn't make sense as many times herons are in a long line formation.

A better way they should have implemented it is that the distance doesn't matter, just any selected herons when you hit shift t and click any of them just heal themselves without any trouble. Probably would have been simpler to implement too, not sure why they did it the way they did.

[adrenaline]

ya that would make more sense

[myrk]

I don't see anyone having the time in a fight to make a selection box around enemy units when you have to dodge with archers after every shot and control other units during the cooldown. A feature where you can get archers to attack groups like melee units do would be useful in some situations but magma gameplay patches have already dumbed down this game enough.