User interface

[jack]

Suggested user interface

You control 2+ marines on a hex grid, who each turn can move or fire. Proposed interface:

* One marine is selected
* A red highlight appears on the hex under the mouse; right click and the marine fires her weapon into that square. If the weapon would hit other squares as well (eg. plasma cannon would hit any line of hexes) those will also be highlighted. (Q. If the hex is behind a wall, should that be inoperable, rather than fire at the nearest possible hex?)
* A blue arrow appears from the marine to the adjacent hex in the direction of the mouse cursor. Left click and the marine moves into that hex.
* When a marine has moved/fired the next marine is then selected.

Also:

* You can left click on a marine to select her, or click and drag to move a non-selected marine
* If there are two alternative lines of fire (eg. along, along, up, along; or along, up, along, along) it chooses the more left or more right depending which side of the hex the mouse is nearer. (This should normally not matter.)

Does that make sense? I thought about several more complicated systems

* Those were often avoiding any assumptions about which marine you'd move first
* For instance, hover over a square, and press 1,2,3... to move there, or q,w,e... to fire there.
* Or, as Matt suggested, 1,2,3 to select and click/right-click to move/fire. (That would still be possible with my suggested idea.)

Notes:

* A mouse interface is a faff to code, but I think it has to be mouse based.
* That can be annoying if you're trying to control two different marines (maybe you ought to be able to move one marine along a corridor, and then another along a parallel corridor, and have it treat the turns as concurrent?) or move in one direction and fire in another.
* But keyboard based control of several marines is really convoluted.
* You could have a hex of keys (eg. 90 I P KL) that move the current marine, as a keyboard shortcut if you want to repeatedly retreat a marine.
* You need to be able to position marines finely in close combat. (This does that mostly -- one click per move)
* You need to be able to move several marines along a corridor quickly. (This does that mostly -- just clickclickclick and they will move)

Any other suggestions?

Comments

[chess]

If this is meant to be a puzzle game rather than a game where some of the challenge is defeating the user interface, it should have an 'active pause' mode where you can stop the action and queue up orders, so that your timing of clicking on things isn't so much of an issue. (Ideally this would come with a 'wait N amount of time at this waypoint' order, but that's probably pushing it in complexity, just a simple 'move through these waypoints and start firing here and stop firing here' would do fine.)

[cartesiandaemon.livejournal.com]

Oh, hm. I think this game has to be turn based. I forgot to specify that. (I forgot to specify that it would always be a puzzle game, so you always have to be able to control people with a one-hex precision, rather than to be able to react smoothly.)

When I wrote the winnie-the-pooh game, I instinctively wanted it to be like chip's challenge, and be a puzzle game, but in real time, where you typically wait somewhere safe to plan, and then smoothly execute a series of moves at once to move to the next safe place.

But no-one else I spoke to agreed, they preferred it to just be a pure puzzle game, ie. turn based; both you and the monsters advance one square when you press a key.

But I think this one has to be turn based, because controlling two marines just doesn't work in real time.

[hilarityallen.livejournal.com]

Is there some obvious reason not to have the interface be: click on marine to select her, use keyboard to issue commands to that marine about moving/firing.

[cartesiandaemon.livejournal.com]

I think aiming almost has to be mouse controlled, because I think it ought to work for hexes which aren't in a straight line from where you are, which is near-impossible with a keyboard.

That would be a reasonable option for moving though. Indeed, I'm thinking more about the keyboard controls being available at the same time, since they don't conflict, so you can use either for movement.

There were a couple of problems, though. Most people don't like the idea of keyboard movement on a hex grid at all. It seemed obvious to me -- keyboards actually ARE arranged in a hex grid. But I had to admit it took a little getting used to.

And click-to-select is a good way to introduce the game, but is bad as a normal-use mechanism, since it can involve _lots_ of clicking, having to keep re-centring the mouse.

But if when a marine moves, the next is selected, clicking is only needed occasionally when you want to move a different one first.

[rysmiel.livejournal.com]

I think aiming almost has to be mouse controlled, because I think it ought to work for hexes which aren't in a straight line from where you are, which is near-impossible with a keyboard.

I would think of the optimum way to do that as one key to toggle over from "moving to this hex" to "aiming at this hex", and then the same directional keys to move your aiming point as move your marines when in moving mode.

Indeed, I'm thinking more about the keyboard controls being available at the same time, since they don't conflict, so you can use either for movement.

I am probably coming from a rather extreme position in wanting to be able to avoid mouse usage as much as possible, because keyboard controls feel easier on my wrists.

And click-to-select is a good way to introduce the game, but is bad as a normal-use mechanism, since it can involve _lots_ of clicking, having to keep re-centring the mouse.

Cycle through the marines in order and have a key to move on to the next or the previous ones ?

But if when a marine moves, the next is selected, clicking is only needed occasionally when you want to move a different one first.

That seems a reasonable default that works equally well with next/previous keys.

[cartesiandaemon.livejournal.com]

I am probably coming from a rather extreme position in wanting to be able to avoid mouse usage as much as possible, because keyboard controls feel easier on my wrists.

Yeah, I understand. (And thanks for the analysis!) There's probably also many people who'd like a keyboard interface if possible, even if they can use a mouse. (I think for most things other than positioning it is quicker once you get used to it.) It's probably not much more work to add a keyboard interface as well, compared to implementing a mouse interface.

one key to toggle over from "moving to this hex" to "aiming at this hex", and then the same directional keys to move your aiming point as move your marines when in moving mode.

That sounds good. Do you mean, an aim point which remembers its location independent of the marines, rather than starting from the marine each time? That's probably a good thing, though more complicated, because you don't have to keep scrolling back and forth if you want to aim somewhere different to the marines. (Perhaps with a "tab" to move the aim point to likely targets, such as enemies.)

Cycle through the marines in order and have a key to move on to the next or the previous ones ?

That's what I was assuming. I'd thought of hotkeys and perhaps one "next", but either way, if the paradigm is "move selected marine, then next marine selected", there should be some keyboard shortcut for switching, whatever it is.

[rysmiel.livejournal.com]

one key to toggle over from "moving to this hex" to "aiming at this hex", and then the same directional keys to move your aiming point as move your marines when in moving mode.

That sounds good. Do you mean, an aim point which remembers its location independent of the marines, rather than starting from the marine each time?

I'm unclear on precisely what you're asking here, and thinking about it, I see three different options;
1) when you go into "aim mode", you start on the hex the marine is on, which seems a bit frustrating to me;
2) when you go into "aim mode" you start on the same hex you aimed at last;
3) when you go into "aim mode" you start aiming at the same position relative to that marine - say two hexes south and one north-west - that you were aiming at last time.

No, come to think of it, there's a fourth, which is a different value of intuitive, which is that when you go into "aim mode" you start aiming at the same position relative to which way the marine is facing, as determined presumably by the direction the marine last moved, that you did last time; something like "two hexes forward and one right of forward from where I am now standing".

I can see 2), 3), or 4) working depending on other factors in the game; if the puzzles in question are liable to involve repeatedly firing at the same space or set of spaces in combinatorial fashion, frex, while having to move to avoid other factors, that would seem to me to support 2).

Cycle through the marines in order and have a key to move on to the next or the previous ones ?

That's what I was assuming. I'd thought of hotkeys and perhaps one "next", but either way, if the paradigm is "move selected marine, then next marine selected", there should be some keyboard shortcut for switching, whatever it is.

I think this depends to some extent on how many marines you are envisioning; a one-directional "next" key would to my mind work with three or four, but if one had six I think either a reversal of direction or a hotkey each would be more fluid.

Incidentally, are you familiar with Orwell chess ? Thinking about spaces this way is for some reason reminding me of it.

[saraphale.livejournal.com]

How about the use of the tab key to cycle between available targets in a frontal cone, regardless of mode?

Would you allow the player to see the potential target hexes at their destination before moving, or will they have to estimate that?

[cartesiandaemon.livejournal.com]

How about the use of the tab key to cycle between available targets in a frontal cone, regardless of mode?

I don't think there will be a front, but yes, that would definitely help, since most of the time you want to aim at an enemy. (Indeed, if you're using keyboard-only, you might want finer control, eg. direction keys step the cross-hairs to an enemy in that direction.) (But I think I failed to describe the weapons before thinking about the controls; because you may get splash, you may aim at a square that doesn't have an enemy in.)

[cartesiandaemon.livejournal.com]

thinking about it, I see three different options;

Thank you; yes that's roughly what I was wondering, but I hadn't thought it through. Indeed, #1 put me off, I was thinking of any alternative.

In this game, I think you're right, #2 is likely to be the most appropriate, but I agree any of #2, #3, or #4 being appropriate depending. #2 also has the plus that I think the interface might be clearer if you leave the aim point on, but not active, when you're not aiming.

I think this depends to some extent on how many marines you are envisioning

I'm thinking of 2-4, but you might occasionally have more. (I don't really know yet, it depends what happens when I start experimenting.) There's probably no harm in having both options available.

Incidentally, are you familiar with Orwell chess ?

Oh! No, that's amazing/horrible :)

[rochvelleth.livejournal.com]

Can you make it so that you can group the marines and have them move and fire together sometimes? I think that's quite common in hex-based battle games, at least ones I've played.

And definitely what Chess said about the timing.

By the way, are the marines all girls? Just curious :)

[cartesiandaemon.livejournal.com]

Can you make it so that you can group the marines and have them move and fire together sometimes?

There should definitely be a shortcut way to "move everyone over here". The current interface might have that as an emergent property rather than a special key though.

And see above, I forgot to specify it's supposed to be puzzle (turn based) rather than tactical, so firing-in-unison shouldn't normally be necessary or correct, and controlling in combination should be there to make things easier, but dying-because-you-can't-direct-two-things-at-once shouldn't be part of the game.

[rochvelleth.livejournal.com]

Ah, I see. That sounds good then. I don't think I've played many puzzle-based games like that... but I'll think about it and see if I come up with any that give me ideas that might be helpful :) Most of my games are either city/empire-building or role-play.

[cartesiandaemon.livejournal.com]

Did you play my winnie-the-pooh game?

Experience from controls in other games may well be relevant; obviously anything that makes it possible to manoeuvre a group of units in real time makes it easier to do so in less than real time.

or role-play.

Work just sent an email "HOW TO SHIP TRAINING". Alas, it wasn't as interesting as my first thought had it, nor even as much as my second had :)

[cartesiandaemon.livejournal.com]

By the way, are the marines all girls? Just curious :)

Yeah. I don't know why, it just felt right. (And now I've a few characters in my head as showed up briefly in snippet-fic.) I've been doing it a lot in fic lately.

Anthea "Judd" Lakowski. The original leader, and the tough one. Think Arnie "Dutch" Schaefer from Predator.

Red "Red" Caroline. The joint-leader, wiry, grandiose and reckless one. Think President Harrison Ford from Air Force One, but somewhere between Nixon and JFK.

Etc.

[rochvelleth.livejournal.com]

ISWYM :) I suppose I never think up characters like that... but then if I were going to write about marines they'd all be men (see icon, *lol*) ;)

It sounds really interesting. I like a good story behind a game :)

[cartesiandaemon.livejournal.com]

if I were going to write about marines they'd all be men (see icon, *lol*) ;)

:) I did think that. But I also wondered if you'd like these characters too :)

[cartesiandaemon.livejournal.com]

It sounds really interesting. I like a good story behind a game :)

*hugs* Thank you. I always invent too much backstory, but it's always very fun :)

[rysmiel.livejournal.com]

Do you have any female characters who would be reminiscent of female people rather than male one ?

[cartesiandaemon.livejournal.com]

:) No, not really. They're not necessarily based on those ideas, but (a) the "Like X and Y" is not the only way of describing an idea, but often a useful one, especially to convey a brief headline; however, essentially no female action heroes spring to my mind, so they'd all end being described as "Like Ripley, but..." :) And (b) I enjoy writing, but am not necessarily any good at it, so to the extent the characters have character, it's likely to owe a lot more to me than my observations of anyone else :)

[rysmiel.livejournal.com]

however, essentially no female action heroes spring to my mind, so they'd all end being described as "Like Ripley, but..."

Like Sarah Connor in Terminator 2.

Like Vasquez in Aliens.

Like the Jamie Lee Curtis character in Blue Steel whose name annoyingly escapes me.

Like Thelma and/or Louise.

Like Lara Croft.

Like Barbarella.

Some day I will learn how to switch off the bit at the back of my brain that takes things as challenges.

[cartesiandaemon.livejournal.com]

Some day I will learn how to switch off the bit at the back of my brain that takes things as challenges.

I resemble this remark :) (And, indeed, thank you, that could in fact be helpful.)

Though I think that's still essentially none, as compared to the number of male action heroes. There are certainly good exceptions, but in at least my experience, men are definitely way more represented in the action hero role. (It may depend if you count the same character with a different name by the same actor as twenty or one, possibly.) None seem (afaik, maybe vasquez? I don't really remember any of the characters from aliens) a good description for Judd or Red :)

(In the original post I was going to say "Apart from Riply. (Angelina Jolie doesn't count.)" But only because it seemed funny, not because it was especially accurate.)