Interactions need a bit of work

(Hipolipolopigus) #1

My two cents, I suppose. Keeping it matter-of-fact-ly, with a few suggestions;

[ul]
[li]Trying to quick-revive someone who’s died on an objective will prioritize interaction with the objective. Small objectives which are being looked at should take priority over large-bounds objectives (C4 > Players > Gates, etc).[/li][li]Reviving a player while moving is unreliable. While the range seems to be by design - and with good reason - it’s slightly too short.[/li][li]Interactions involving carried objectives are far too finicky. Both delivering and returning them takes multiple attempts to start unless you’re perfectly still and the range, like reviving, is a bit short.[/li][/ul]
On the upside, however, interactions with deployables - mines, stations and turrets - are very good!

(Glottis-3D) #2

[QUOTE=Hipolipolopigus;518762]
[li]Trying to quick-revive someone who’s died on an objective will prioritize interaction with the objective. Aiming at a player should take interaction priority over an objective.
[/li][/QUOTE]

not agreed.
what if i need to last second disarm the c4, and the priority will lead me to lose that precious second for some stupid revive?

only right way here is:
selectable disarm tool.

(tokamak) #3

I thought I would grow over the annoyance of the ‘action’ buttons. But I don’t. It’s clumsy in both ways. The context-sensitive stuff prevents me from pre-selecting my intended action. At the same time, the Q and E buttons often require a hold which compromises my WASD movement (where as ordinarily they’d be used for leaning, precisely on the moments where you don’t need to move a lot).

It’s not intuitive and it’s not helping beginners learn the game faster. In ETQW and W:ET you could hold all your toys and use them even out of their context, you’d immediately figure out what works and what doesn’t. You could put deployables in pointless places, figure out that your tool doesn’t work on ammo crates and that the explosive charge really isn’t going to do anything unless you arm it.

All of these micro-lessons require a context in DB, usually a context that beginners won’t immediately encounter anyway.

So the only real motive for the Q and E that I can think of is that DB is eventually intended to be played on a console. On a console a scrollable inventory is complicated but hotkeys aren’t. I honestly don’t see any other justification for them.

(Glottis-3D) #4

a very good post there, toka!

(Hipolipolopigus) #5

[QUOTE=Glottis-3D;518769]not agreed.
what if i need to last second disarm the c4, and the priority will lead me to lose that precious second for some stupid revive?[/QUOTE]

I should clarify, this is for the objectives with a massive bounding box, like gates. Small objectives which are being looked at should take priority over large-bounds objectives (C4 > Players > Gates, etc). Editing OP to reflect this.

(tokamak) #6

Glottis is basically saying that it’s solving a problem that shouldn’t be existing in the first place. But otherwise yeah, smaller boxes should take prevalence over larger ones.

(Mustang) #7

What should take priority is what your crosshair is looking at, not just what’s in the 45degree (or whatever it is) range.

Agree revive range is slightly too small.

We were going to test a rapid decay on delivery progress so you didn’t have to start over everytime it stopped delivering, I’d still like to test this. As well as being slightly too short it also feels like if you’re too close it doesn’t work either.

(Violator) #8

Trainyard seems to be the worst offender jug-wise, requiring very precise positioning to pick up and deliver - Chapel doesn’t seem to suffer from this.

Separate keys for ability / objective would solve the first issue. Again all I can think of is consolification when I see a generic ‘Action’ key, which I thought wasn’t going to happen (as I am part of the PC Master Race ;)).

(Domipheus) #9

I problem I find is that i’m looking at to disarm C4 yet it constantly tries to revive a downed teammate laid across the c4. It’s incredibly pissing annoying when you actually have no way of disarming until they tap out or help them up.

(tokamak) #10

Right, though if you were able to grab a set of pliers way before you’re even near the objective then there would be no such confusion. You’d simply ply or PDA your way through the corpses. And please use the right definition of PDA for that last sentence.

Can’t blame SD for leaving that option on the table. Once DB is successful porting it to consoles would be an enormous boost in revenue. I just think it would be more appropriate to worry about that once it actually happens. You can always revert the game back to hotkeys for the gamepad.

(Domipheus) #11

++++++++1

tenchars

(xdc) #12

and this is how you mess up the thread

(xdc) #13

hopefully this will get it some attention, … ur welcome .
update HUD/UI please

(Silvanoshi) #14

Hey guys,

We appreciate that the current prioritisation can be more than a little frustrating. We’ll definitely be looking to improve that in future.

There would actually be quite a bit of work required to give Mercs the ability to run with tools out etc. We would rather get a similar level of functionality in place via better prioritisation, and use the additional dev time to look at other areas that’ll provide much more of a beneficial impact; rather than spending a great deal of dev time on functionality that has very little impact on gameplay.

(Glottis-3D) #15

[QUOTE=Silvanoshi;518855]Hey guys,

We appreciate that the current prioritisation can be more than a little frustrating. We’ll definitely be looking to improve that in future.

There would actually be quite a bit of work required to give Mercs the ability to run with tools out etc. We would rather get a similar level of functionality in place via better prioritisation, and use the additional dev time to look at other areas that’ll provide much more of a beneficial impact; rather than spending a great deal of dev time on functionality that has very little impact on gameplay.[/QUOTE]

  1. give the choice to the ppl

no priority should ever decide what to do - defuse, or revive or repair.
the player himself only knows what is better. maybe there is 5 seconds left, and he can tap-disarm it.
OR maybe he is reviving an engineer, so that engie will disarm and medic will cover - because he will not disarm in time.

  1. we do have a revive tool(defibs) selectable. so making a PDA selectable seems not entirely from scratch work.

  2. different tools are NOT very little impact. they infact are huge impact when in right hands. i am speaking about great tap-disarming / lemming repairing by parashuted GDF or stroggs with preselected disarm/repair tool.
    OR a rush plant from 2 icarus with preselected Bomb and second agressor with preselected arming devise.
    these were huge. these were winning real tactics. the real deal, that kept player playing ETQW even after there was no support.

(Wezelkrozum) #16

[QUOTE=Glottis-3D;518858]
3. different tools are NOT very little impact. they infact are huge impact when in right hands. i am speaking about great tap-disarming / lemming repairing by parashuted GDF or stroggs with preselected disarm/repair tool.
OR a rush plant from 2 icarus with preselected Bomb and second agressor with preselected arming devise.
these were huge. these were winning real tactics. the real deal, that kept player playing ETQW even after there was no support.[/QUOTE]

THIS +100

This can have a HUGE impact on e-sports where it’s all about the slightest moments.

(tokamak) #17

Not to mention that it’s simply just highly rewarding to players making concious decisions while playing. It allows you to gain an edge over players that play ad hoc.

I understand that this could take a backseat during beta development. However, keep in mind that this isn’t just about the objectives. It’s also about the merc abilities which take a much more integral role in the game.

As a long term game mechanic weapon banks are worth it. Even if that means that mercs require extra animations.

(V1s0r) #18

I also vote for running out with tools and for the grenades.

It feels awfull for me to throw something with a key on the keyboard. It’s even worse when you hold down the key and cannot use the finger.
Let me please select it myself and use it when I want to. If not needed I can switch it to something needed for the situation.

(Rex) #19

I already wanted to highlight this issue here: http://forums.warchest.com/showthread.php/42205-Proxy-the-medic

[QUOTE=Silvanoshi;518855]Hey guys,

We appreciate that the current prioritisation can be more than a little frustrating. We’ll definitely be looking to improve that in future.

There would actually be quite a bit of work required to give Mercs the ability to run with tools out etc. We would rather get a similar level of functionality in place via better prioritisation, and use the additional dev time to look at other areas that’ll provide much more of a beneficial impact; rather than spending a great deal of dev time on functionality that has very little impact on gameplay.[/QUOTE]

Sorry Silvanoshi, but that’s just nonsense what you said. There is no such a thing as “better prioritisation”, because how on earth could your system know what the player wants to do? In some situations you want to revive and in others you want to defuse.
To lose the obj or even worse the whole match, because your luck based automatic system ****ed it up is not what I would call “little impact”. Check my video out and you probably might agree that the impact on gameplay is HUGE instead.

Oh and all what Glottis said.

(titan) #20

[QUOTE=V1s0r;518877]I also vote for running out with tools and for the grenades.

It feels awfull for me to throw something with a key on the keyboard. It’s even worse when you hold down the key and cannot use the finger.
Let me please select it myself and use it when I want to. If not needed I can switch it to something needed for the situation.[/QUOTE]

Can’t you select grenades with 4 to carry them?