Auto-attack/free-attack suggestion

Hear's a suggestion for auto-attack: if I hold down the left mouse button then auto-attack should temporarily pause and a free-attack should charge. Once I release the free-attack then auto-attack should resume until I use the left mouse button again.

 

I support it, but people seem very opposed to hybrid systems afaik.

 

It's fine as long as it only concerns the "auto attack side" (i.e. auto attack would never commence if turned off from the game options or the on/off (by default numpad '*') toggle.

 

For good reasons. I'm not against the idea but the more I think about it, the less sense it makes to me.

1. If you make one mode act "similar but different" from the other mode, then there's not enough distinction between the two and you might as well remove one and have a single mode that's clearly defined for everyone... so which one should we remove? K.I.S.S. is the best approach for a successful design.
2. I don't like auto-attacking and some of you probably don't like clicking to attack... so now we're stuck with the idea that both modes need to be very distinct from one another but that goes against the idea that was originally presented. The K.I.S.S. approach here is to easily identity/understand what's going on in each and how to tell them apart in actual game-play.

So I would be inclined to believe that, if we make the changes as suggested by the OP, then free-attack will need some adjustments to spice things up. And I'm not talking about numbers, here.

 

It's not a "mode". You either have auto-attack enabled or not.

 

So is fullscreen and window MODE... what you call it isn't important.

 

Your arguments against are pretty weak.

 

With no counter-argument provided? God, what an AMAZING conversation we're having!

 

As I said, you either have auto-attack enabled or not. There's no need to have distinct "modes". If I want a free-attack then I use the left mouse button. If I don't want a free-attack then I don't use the left mouse button. If I want auto attacks then I enable it. If I don't want auto attacks then I don't enable it. It really doesn't get much simpler than that.

 

I could be wrong (i usually am when trying to interpret Gix), but i think he does not like this system in that you effectively lose dps if you choose to use free attacks with auto attack turned off.

That is not to say you would always lose dps, but the odds are that auto attack turned on would be higher dps in any downtime between manual attacks. This would then leave players with auto attack turned off for preferential reasons feeling obligated to turn it on or be less effective than their peers.

Again, this is just my interpretation of his argument, so it could be way off or missing aspects he deems crucial

 

I understand that, but if you're on top of it then you will get higher DPS using all free attacks. I personally just forget to press the left mouse button sometimes.

 

Also, as it is, auto-attack is only initiated if I press the "Toggle Attack" hot-key, so the "Enable Auto Attack" option is actually unnecessary.

 

In UI design context, I'm not sure the K.I.S.S. principle is always the best approach: we are all different, we have different abilities and preferences, different physical makeup, different attention spans. Therefore a successful design would rather present the user with a variety of choices and room for individual adjustment, but also always come with sensible defaults.

The current design couldn't really become more K.I.S.S. than it already is. It already forces people to adapt to the UI, instead of UI adapting to people. For instance, many folks who want (or even physically need) to operate glyphs with the mouse are actually forced to use the auto attack mode, because the free attack is based on releasing a key or button - it's not clicking, but releasing that initiates the attack. This is an important distinction, because the design effectively ties the entire hand for one thing only. If that hand is your keyboard hand, say goodbye to your use of movement keys. If it's the mouse hand, say goodbye to efficient manipulation of glyphs.

Come to think of it, what I would actually see as ideal would be a yin-yang type configuration, where you'd be able to choose your preferred default from two basic modes (black or white, auto or free attack), but each mode would also contain the "seed" of the other mode:

• In free attack mode, free attack charging would be done passively, so that attacks could be performed by clicking, instead of releasing. This would also make it possible to map the attack key to the keyboard, next to the glyphs. But if you wanted to use the auto attack for a moment, you could hold down the attack button (the case of free attack containing the "seed" of auto attack).
• In auto attack mode, auto attack would be performed normally, but if you wanted to use a charged attack every now and then, you could hold down the attack button, just like described in the OP (the case of auto attack containing the "seed" of free attack).

 

I'm not sure pure manual attack user can mathematically ever outdps am equally skilled manual attack user with your hybrid system active.

It may turn out that the autoattack dps is inconsequentially larger... But i don't think it would be ever be smaller.

Anyway, i don't really have much to say now, i still like the system as described and don't know the next argument from opponents.

 

I like it.

Just a note: It's currently impossible to use free attack with cursor mode. Pressing both mouse buttons (hold down the right to aim, hold down the left to charge up the attack) causes you to start running forward. This is something that needs to be fixed ASAP.

 

You're not too far off. DPS aside, why would I use a system that requires me to manually input the attacks when there's an... "option"... that would not only be similar (that's a key word in my argument) and far more easier to manage?

At that point, you might as well make it a single option and make that the best system it can be instead of a hodgepodge of different available options.

The problem that I'm facing with is that I LIKE attacking manually. The best approach, then, would be to emphasize the differences in the options more drastically. That way, there's a reason to keep both options. And the K.I.S.S. mentality for that is that two distinct options are easier to read and understand.

When's the last time (with the old system) did you run towards an enemy and noticed that you were taking hits but weren't swinging back? "Oops! I forgot to turn on auto-attack" <- the problem isn't that it complicated (although the extra step is annoying) but that it was hard to read whenever or not you were in that mode.

If I can quote myself:

I'm talking about the principle of the thing. If it doesn't really matter how much DPS one option is vs another but if you're going to provide two options to do something, they might as well be different.

Something as simple as "opening a door". Right now we got that on the mouse: you double-click... It would be easier if it was just a single-click but whatever... Lets add another option...
Lets try out some ideas:

1. Dragging sideways with the mouse. Well, we would need to use a mouse-button also otherwise we'd be opening doors whenever we'd look around in a scene... so, okay: "click and drag". Theoretical problem is: both of the would-be options are related to the mouse... UI wise, that's confusing to the user; you're giving them two options to do something with the same input device. Why not make just one action with the mouse and make it a good one instead of confusing the user with multiple ways he can accidentally open doors?
2. Pressing a keyboard button. Okay, see, now we'd have a mouse command and a keyboard command. Two input devices. Yay!

My internal argument that I've been having in my mind (if you read my original comment, I'm not entirely against the idea you've proposed) is that you're making auto-attack input very similarly to the free-attack... on the same input device.

The simpler the design, the less you have to teach your user and the less confused he or she will be if he/she accidentally hits the other option. I'd argue that in UI design, simplicity is crucial.

I'd even argue that the simpler the design, the more appealing it is to a wider (diverse) audience.... like "pressing a button"; nothing is more simplistic and intuitive as pressing a button. I'm not suggesting that SotA should be a single button but I hope you understand what I mean.

You make a simple system AND/OR you make it easier to understand all the buttons on your swiss army knife... preferably both.

 

So, essentially you're arguing against it because it would be better than what we have now.

 

I personally love charged attack. I do not want my avatar keep swinging around in a madness. In the first place I'm a caster and I want to use a weapon attack at the time when I prepare the situation for it or when I decide, according current magic situation, a weapon attack would be suitable (for example while I'm preparing a magic attack). I do understand it as two distinct modes (letting system to fill the time window to use a weapon when it's possible OR letting a player to decide when use a weapon attack) and I'm very happy for the 'distinct' aspect as both modes have + and -. Even if I understand a certain desire of maximisation of a dps I'm not a supporter of mixing those two modes as it would break the balance between two different approaches of playing and a freedom of choice of an approach.
As for controlling of the charged attack: although I don't use [keyboard, mouse] but [joystick, mouse] as a control system of the game I'm not sure if I understand why not to use for example the free little finger or the thumb of keyboard controlling hand...