Purplegoo
Joined: Mar 23, 2006
|
 Posted:
Dec 19, 2010 - 17:17 |
 
|
| Kalimar wrote: | I don't want any real-time components in the game (he who clicks the fastest wins).
In fact I am thinking of adding all those popups into a single block dialog. When deciding which block die to use the attacker can also choose which of his skills to use (a checkbox per skill, activated by default). This results in a block dialog on the defenders side with all his skillchoices (depending on the block result). So u may deselect dodge and sidestep at the same time. Still a popup, but only a single one. |
Sorry, I've read the thread a couple of times, and I can't see a 'he who clicks first wins' option put forward? Am I missing things?
An all in blocking thing would be fine I guess. |
|
|
uuni
Joined: Mar 12, 2010
|
| Posted:
Dec 19, 2010 - 17:31 |
|
|
Wreckage
Joined: Aug 15, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 19, 2010 - 17:31 |
|
| Purplegoo wrote: | | Kalimar wrote: | I don't want any real-time components in the game (he who clicks the fastest wins).
In fact I am thinking of adding all those popups into a single block dialog. When deciding which block die to use the attacker can also choose which of his skills to use (a checkbox per skill, activated by default). This results in a block dialog on the defenders side with all his skillchoices (depending on the block result). So u may deselect dodge and sidestep at the same time. Still a popup, but only a single one. |
Sorry, I've read the thread a couple of times, and I can't see a 'he who clicks first wins' option put forward? Am I missing things?
An all in blocking thing would be fine I guess. |
I like that suggestion aswell. it's not so volunarable to mistakes.
Some of my original critcs remain tho and I think you're wrong in believing that everything has to be 1:1 accroding to the rules even if it may really make a difference. As long as everybody suffers from the same advantages and dfsadvantages it doesn't really make a difference because we all follow the same rules. Especially if it interferes with the flow of the game wich is simply different in a tabletop game. |
|
|
Purplegoo
Joined: Mar 23, 2006
|
| Posted:
Dec 19, 2010 - 17:39 |
|
| Wreckage wrote: | | Purplegoo wrote: | | Kalimar wrote: | I don't want any real-time components in the game (he who clicks the fastest wins).
In fact I am thinking of adding all those popups into a single block dialog. When deciding which block die to use the attacker can also choose which of his skills to use (a checkbox per skill, activated by default). This results in a block dialog on the defenders side with all his skillchoices (depending on the block result). So u may deselect dodge and sidestep at the same time. Still a popup, but only a single one. |
Sorry, I've read the thread a couple of times, and I can't see a 'he who clicks first wins' option put forward? Am I missing things?
An all in blocking thing would be fine I guess. |
I like that suggestion aswell. it's not so volunarable to mistakes.
Some of my original critcs remain tho and I think you're wrong in believing that everything has to be 1:1 accroding to the rules even if it may really make a difference. As long as everybody suffers from the same advantages and dfsadvantages it doesn't really make a difference because we all follow the same rules. Especially if it interferes with the flow of the game wich is simply different in a tabletop game. |
I don't wish to get into a protracted argument over this (not least because it's Christmas!  ), but I believe that argument to be short-sighted.
If there is a difference to the rules that we can't code, fine, totally agree, the same for everyone. As with all of those in Ski's client. Couldn't give a stuff; it's online BB, not BB, let's all have fun.
If there is a difference that we can code, it's important, in my view, that we find the best way to do it, and do it. Otherwise, where would it end? DP back a 2+? Why is that different to not putting this in? It's a rule that makes the game better, we're playing the game, we should play by the rules!
Again, as in my previous post, if it gets dropped, it gets dropped. But I can't believe that we can't find a solution that keeps everyone happy here. Infact, I'd be amazed if we couldn't.
And again, I rather hope forum threads are seen as a resource and not the final word on what should be done. Democracy of the internet forum is always made of fail.... |
|
|
Wreckage
Joined: Aug 15, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 19, 2010 - 18:02 |
|
| Purplegoo wrote: | | Wreckage wrote: | | Purplegoo wrote: | | Kalimar wrote: | I don't want any real-time components in the game (he who clicks the fastest wins).
In fact I am thinking of adding all those popups into a single block dialog. When deciding which block die to use the attacker can also choose which of his skills to use (a checkbox per skill, activated by default). This results in a block dialog on the defenders side with all his skillchoices (depending on the block result). So u may deselect dodge and sidestep at the same time. Still a popup, but only a single one. |
Sorry, I've read the thread a couple of times, and I can't see a 'he who clicks first wins' option put forward? Am I missing things?
An all in blocking thing would be fine I guess. |
I like that suggestion aswell. it's not so volunarable to mistakes.
Some of my original critcs remain tho and I think you're wrong in believing that everything has to be 1:1 accroding to the rules even if it may really make a difference. As long as everybody suffers from the same advantages and dfsadvantages it doesn't really make a difference because we all follow the same rules. Especially if it interferes with the flow of the game wich is simply different in a tabletop game. |
If there is a difference that we can code, it's important, in my view, that we find the best way to do it, and do it. Otherwise, where would it end? DP back a 2+? Why is that different to not putting this in? It's a rule that makes the game better, we're playing the game, we should play by the rules!. |
For 1 I already told in the conclusion of my original thread that I believe making it optional to hurt oneself is stretching the rules we have on fumbbl to assure fair games is being pushed to it's limit. To explain this I used the example of the Kick-the-ball-in-a-corner thread.
Besides that it is two different things to implement something different because one doesn't like the rules and feels uncomfortable about them or if it is done different because a computer can't handle it well and the joy of the game gets lost for exactly that reason. I can cherish and appreciate freedom but these rules are simply made to ease the tabletop play and the fact that coaches sometimes forget to use their skills. It's a what's done is done rule. It's designed to make the game easier but since the client is automated already it makes the things just more complicated. Whatever advantage it may give besides that.
Skijunkie didn't make a lot of skills optional for exactly that reason.
Uh however... i think we already found something we can agree on  |
|
|
On1
Joined: Jul 12, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 19, 2010 - 18:06 |
|
| Kalimar wrote: | I don't want any real-time components in the game (he who clicks the fastest wins).
In fact I am thinking of adding all those popups into a single block dialog. When deciding which block die to use the attacker can also choose which of his skills to use (a checkbox per skill, activated by default). This results in a block dialog on the defenders side with all his skillchoices (depending on the block result). So u may deselect dodge and sidestep at the same time. Still a popup, but only a single one. |
Kalimar that sounds like a good idea. I suggested something similar long time ago. But putting them in the block-thing is way better. However i suggest some of the skills are off per default, like piling on. Dunno if there are others.. wrestle perhaps?
edit: You could even take it to the next level, and replace the skill-text with icons, So that it takes up less space in the block dialog. (you would just have to add the icons next to the skills on the players also, as cross reference) |
Last edited by On1 on %b %19, %2010 - %18:%Dec; edited 2 times in total |
|
Kalimar
Joined: Sep 22, 2006
|
| Posted:
Dec 19, 2010 - 18:06 |
|
| Purplegoo wrote: | | Sorry, I've read the thread a couple of times, and I can't see a 'he who clicks first wins' option put forward? Am I missing things? |
That was in response to RamonSalazar's suggestion how to handle optional skills. In the bold part he says "... you have to be fast to make Dodge optional". |
|
|
Purplegoo
Joined: Mar 23, 2006
|
| Posted:
Dec 19, 2010 - 18:12 |
|
|
uuni
Joined: Mar 12, 2010
|
| Posted:
Dec 19, 2010 - 18:36 |
|
@On1: Those skill icons sound like a nice idea. Is there any comprehensive collection of such for BB? I have been missing such for my TT - skill name tags get awfully big when you get to level 3 on every player.  It would be much nicer to print, attach or draw some icons to the figure. |
|
|
SzieberthAdam
Joined: Aug 31, 2008
|
| Posted:
Dec 19, 2010 - 18:40 |
|
- Hard to learn the meanings of 75 icons.
- About real-time: Deactivating a skill during opponents turn doesnt make it a Starcraft. However, you know what to do Kalimar, do as you think is the best. |
Last edited by SzieberthAdam on %b %19, %2010 - %18:%Dec; edited 1 time in total |
|
DukeTyrion
Joined: Feb 18, 2004
|
| Posted:
Dec 19, 2010 - 18:41 |
|
Can I have a set of options for my account, so that I can set-up;
Dodge - Always Use (Instead of Pop-up)
Side Step - Always Use (Instead of Pop-up)
Stand Firm - Use Pop-up (Instead of Always On)
If people had these choices on their account (or team) it would mean I could carry on playing the way i prefer, but other could carry on with the way they prefer. |
|
|
Purplegoo
Joined: Mar 23, 2006
|
| Posted:
Dec 19, 2010 - 18:48 |
|
| DukeTyrion wrote: | Can I have a set of options for my account, so that I can set-up;
Dodge - Always Use (Instead of Pop-up)
Side Step - Always Use (Instead of Pop-up)
Stand Firm - Use Pop-up (Instead of Always On)
If people had these choices on their account (or team) it would mean I could carry on playing the way i prefer, but other could carry on with the way they prefer. |
Obviously, that's the ideal.
Since it's not been done, my assumption is that it can't be?
If it can be, seems too easy to have not have done it!
Edit: Whisper it, but isn't this the Cyanide solution? |
Last edited by Purplegoo on %b %19, %2010 - %18:%Dec; edited 1 time in total |
|
SzieberthAdam
Joined: Aug 31, 2008
|
| Posted:
Dec 19, 2010 - 18:53 |
|
| DukeTyrion wrote: | | Can I have a set of options for my account, so that I can set-up;... |
Nice idea. |
|
|
Kalimar
Joined: Sep 22, 2006
|
| Posted:
Dec 19, 2010 - 19:07 |
|
This has been argued before. If a coach with "never ask" plays a coach with "always ask" gameplay will slow down for the "never ask" coach regardless. And having 50+ configuration options is not my idea of a good solution to the problem. |
|
|
asharak
Joined: Nov 27, 2007
|
| Posted:
Dec 19, 2010 - 19:26 |
|
Blergh. Sidestep I have no problem with - as if you made it 'always on' it would still require other player input and indeed the popup helps alert me to it when its not my go. Dodge would just get very, very tedious. Why people can't plan for avoiding dodge being an issue I don't know. Beware frenzy guys etc. Worked fine in the LRB4 client didn't it? The more thing the guy who isn't playing has to do the worse as far as I'm concerned. |
_________________
Give a man a fire and he will be warm for the rest of the day.
Set a man on fire and he will be warm for the rest of his life. |
|
|
|
| |
Secret League Americ...
Search
