26 Reply by Jeremey (edited by Jeremey 2011-04-19 22:58:25)

  • ASI-MA
  • Agent
  • Offline

Re: Perpetuum usability fixes and necessary balance changes

Campana wrote:

Just because we disagreed with some of your suggestions doesn't mean we are elitist

I didn't mean that. I mean that commonly in response to critique of targeting mechanic many players here (and in general chat ingame) stick to elitism with phrases are "play more, you will understand it better then".

Ok, back to the topic.

Campana wrote:

Some of the controls can be improved, yes, but the targeting priority is not one of them. I've given you reasons why it works better this way.

Ok, let's see basic use-cases (you can add yours):

1. Killing NPCs.
Player locks maximum possible NPCs and starts shooting them one at time.

Currently he cannot lock them with the same button or keybind, because if he presses "primary target" UI button or "R" on each of them, the last locked NPC will become primary.
If he just locks them (or presses "F"), he cannot shoot any of them when it is locked - he must press additional button before or after it.

Additionally, when NPC dies, the player cannot shoot the next one (even if it suitable by distance, etc.) - he must additionally mark it as primary!

Why is it needed? Why can't player just lock NPCs in desired order and shoot first as long it is locked (because it will be marked as primary automatically)? What's the reason behind it? Why he can't also continue shooting (by pressing "space") at next one, when first dies?
No reason at all.

2. Shooting players
FC tells in teamspeak: "intakt John Doe is primary, kain Vasya is secondary".
What player must do?
He must specifically start to lock the John with one button/keybind and then start to lock Vasya with very different button/keybind.

If John dies in the process of locking (or becomes out of locking range), the player cannot just start shooting at Vasya - oh no! - he must additionally mark it as primary.

If Vasya is locked way before John (which is impossible in current system - but maybe player pressed "lock" on Vasya before "primary target" on John?) - oh no, he cannot just shoot at Vasya, he must press yet another button despite "space" (shoot) button.

Why is it so? Why we need another button for "shooting at target", when we already have button that does exactly the same - "space" (which shoots at target)?

27 Reply by Jeremey (edited by Jeremey 2011-04-19 23:07:55)

  • ASI-MA
  • Agent
  • Offline

Re: Perpetuum usability fixes and necessary balance changes

Alexadar wrote:
Jeremey wrote:

And if previous target is dead, you must not press anything to have some primary target - just because it's so common situation in PVE and PVP.


Not in PvP mate. In PvP only you must choose next target, not system. Else-you will fail. When you will work on 4-5 targets, you will understand. Server dont know sort order, server dont know what target you need to kill first because situation can change each second.

You're telling obvious thing. But I don't understand how auto making next locked target primary (if previous was unlocked for some reason) will interfere with what you're saying. Player will still have the very same choice in primary targets.

Instead, current system strips player of the ability to shoot by just pressing "shoot button" in many situations. Imagine there are only two enemies (or only two locked - primary and secondary) - you killed first and cannot just shoot at next one - you must additionally mark it.

Alexadar wrote:
Jeremey wrote:

What is one of most common questions in perpetuum beta times from new people in help channel? "I have locked drone, but my guns won't shoot. What's wrong?"


They have to learn. Adapt, or die. This game allows you to do numerous kinds of warstyle, but it is not short way to learn them all. Im sure many of vets still learning how to play in different situations. Thats why PO is awesome.

They have to learn and adapt to harsh environment and sandbox world, not to bad UI or player expirience.
Instead, currently they're adapting to unobvious UI and absurd NPC/mission/travel balance - not to harsh environment, which is perfectly safe on alpha islands.

Hardcorness does not equals non-usability. Game can be rewarding and pleasant, but risky and challenging at the same time. CCP required 5 years to understand that - now I see the same misunderstanding in Perpetuum. smile

Alexadar wrote:

This is not a spaceship game. Anonymity allows market to be alive and fluent.

How? Anonymity strips any possibility of open, targeted competition between human organizations and individuals in market - only competition of prices remain.

Alexadar wrote:

They can control trade traffic, so they will know who using market.

I'm talking about alpha islands market now.

  • ASI-MA
  • Agent
  • Offline

Re: Perpetuum usability fixes and necessary balance changes

Alexadar wrote:
Jeremey wrote:

... overcomplicated non-obvious controls, they will have that same constant only 140 people...


140 was adapted. I proud to play with them.


That's what I call harmful elitism. smile

  • CIR
  • Agent
  • Offline

Re: Perpetuum usability fixes and necessary balance changes

Oh oh me! me!

I don't want to start shooting right away after the target is locked.

I have my bot set up for a long range, both targeting and weapon range. But I don't want my opponent to know what my firing range is, so I want to choose when I start to fire. Also, I want to time my alpha strike with LOS, not have to try to get LOS just as it locks. Another point that is different to Eve is that you can't multi-target in Perp... at least not yet.

What your describing with the targeting is 100% a good idea, for PVE only.

As with your other suggestions, the best solution would be to allow these things to be set with options, so that PVE players can have the advantage of auto-targeting while PVP players can set it how they want it.

30 Reply by Jeremey (edited by Jeremey 2011-04-19 23:05:47)

  • ASI-MA
  • Agent
  • Offline

Re: Perpetuum usability fixes and necessary balance changes

Arga wrote:

I don't want to start shooting right away after the target is locked.

Read the posts - it's not about automatically shooting after target is locked.
It's about pressing only one button for it ("shoot" button), not several.

  • BKK
  • Agent
  • Offline

Re: Perpetuum usability fixes and necessary balance changes

Jeremey wrote:

1. Killing NPCs.
Player locks maximum possible NPCs and starts shooting them one at time.

Currently he cannot lock them with the same button or keybind, because if he presses "primary target" UI button or "R" on each of them, the last locked NPC will become primary.
If he just locks them (or presses "F"), he cannot shoot any of them when it is locked - he must press additional button before or after it.

hmm, why dont you lock your first one with R and the others with F?
the keys are about... 0.5 mm away from each other...

*Disclaimer: This post can contain strong sarcasm or cynical remarks. keep that in mind!
Whining - It's amazing how fast your trivial concerns will disappear
  • M2S
  • Agent
  • Offline

Re: Perpetuum usability fixes and necessary balance changes

Jeremey wrote:

Ok, let's see basic use-cases (you can add yours):

1. Killing NPCs.
Player locks maximum possible NPCs and starts shooting them one at time.

Currently he cannot lock them with the same button or keybind, because if he presses "primary target" UI button or "R" on each of them, the last locked NPC will become primary.

When you're killing NPCs, you're locking them in a sort of queue. So you're firing at one, you have two locked, and at the same time a fourth one spawns and you start locking that one. You finish killing the first, decide which of the second or third you will primary, and start killing that. When the fifth NPC spawns/comes into range you start locking that.

What you seem to want is to be able to continously cycle through and kill NPCs without your weapons actually stopping.

I think the disadvantages of this outweigh the advantages, see below...

Jeremey wrote:

2. Shooting players
FC tells in teamspeak: "intakt John Doe is primary, kain Vasya is secondary".
What player must do?
He must specifically start to lock the John with one button/keybind and then start to lock Vasya with very different button/keybind.

Yes. And so he should. You have two targeting options, two keybinds. Easy, simple. Not remotely complicated.

Jeremey wrote:

If John dies in the process of locking (or becomes out of locking range), the player cannot just start shooting at Vasya - oh no! - he must additionally mark it as primary.

Exactly. This is a good thing, and how it should work. The targeting computer should not decide Vasya is primary. The player should as and when he decides it is necessary.

Suppose your FC asked you to secondary lock Vasya, but not to primary him? In your scenario Vasya would be primary locked incorrectly and against your FC's orders, by the targeting computer once John was dead/out of range.

I also think you are trying to make it too complicated. You see multiple targets. You start to secondary lock them. You decide which you will fire on first, so you click on that target and primary lock it. If you need to primary lock another one you simply switch to that one.

These actions are simple and logical. I prefer that extra button click because it adds to the usability.

In fact the Perpetuum pvp interface is so simple it's actually possible to point and click everything...! In any other MMOs mouse clickers are looked down upon, because they simply can't respond as fast as people who have everything keybound. When you think about the horrible amount of skills you have access to in games like WoW or Warhammer or Age of Conan, where I ended up having to drop less used skills off my bar simply because I ran out of keybinds and fingers...and then compare this system. Here your skill is not based on your ability to mash keys at high speed.

Now in fact a much worse issue about the targeting computer is the weird and annoying way it resorts itself all the time. It would be much better for them to fix that than implement automated primarying.

Anyway, I think we've spent too much time discussing this tongue (which has kept me entertained for a few hours) but I'm not going to reply again.

"...playing a game is the voluntary attempt to overcome unnecessary obstacles."
Bernard Suits, 1978

33 Reply by Jeremey (edited by Jeremey 2011-04-20 01:32:43)

  • ASI-MA
  • Agent
  • Offline

Re: Perpetuum usability fixes and necessary balance changes

Campana wrote:

Anyway, I think we've spent too much time discussing this  (which has kept me entertained for a few hours) but I'm not going to reply again.

Yes, I was entertained too (in good sense of that word). Thanks for your replies and thoughts, I understood your point of view. I will not reply again on the matter of targeting too.

34 Reply by Alexadar (edited by Alexadar 2011-04-20 09:07:32)

  • JOKE
  • Champion
  • Offline

Re: Perpetuum usability fixes and necessary balance changes

Jeremey wrote:

You're telling obvious thing. But I don't understand how auto making next locked target primary (if previous was unlocked for some reason) will interfere with what you're saying.

If devs will implement your request, system will shoot the next primary automaticly, like it doing now when you choosing next primary before previous was killed. It is really unsuitable:

For example you driving tyranos. You targeting intakt, tyranos and kain. You have next target sequence: tyranos, kain, intakt. In a targeting moment intakt have 5 HP. He have no rep. You done tyranos, but between you and intakt there left 300m, you want to run from intakt because kain have enough DPS to kill you. After tyranos death, your system focusing kain, you need to change primary manually, but you lost 5 seconds because of cycle time and you died because intakt had 4 seconds to demob you for kain. But unfortuanly for you now players can avoid such situations.

If devs will implement you request without autofire: players will be confused about who choosed primary - you or system? They will loose control on combat. Especialy when player shooting 1 enemy with laser and 3 friends with RR.

We also can have this as option in settings, but for beta players it will be turned off.

Jeremey wrote:

Instead, currently they're adapting to unobvious UI and absurd NPC/mission/travel balance - not to harsh environment, which is perfectly safe on alpha islands.

Thats your point of view. My point of view is next: PO have unobvious, complicated but very functional UI, and you need time to adapt. My requests for the UI was to have separate filter for tactical interface and overview, and to have keybindings to select next or previous record in overview window. Else is fine for me, but this is IMO.

About market:
When you playing on a forex for example, you dont see the names, but system works perfectly now.

One man army
http://www.perp-kill.net/related/239910