Spell queue

[ryukenden]

I know its a little early to criticizes, especially before the beta but....

 

I notice that in old IE games and in recent gamescom video,.. it benefit from modern technology, I'm talking about spell queue.

 

After a character cast a spell, the character just stops. Make it so you can queue some spells/action/abilties, that way the player don't have to wait until the animation finishes. Like for example; healing spell is a drag in old IE games. It would be nice for the priest to heal x character and then a different  character right after that one finishes. Imagine what you can do with offensive spell. I'm sure the hardcore gamer will find a way to time everything perfectly.

[Greensleeve]

I know its a little early to criticizes, especially before the beta but....

 

I notice that in old IE games and in recent gamescom video,.. it benefit from modern technology, I'm talking about spell queue.

 

After a character cast a spell, the character just stops. Make it so you can queue some spells/action/abilties, that way the player don't have to wait until the animation finishes. Like for example; healing spell is a drag in old IE games. It would be nice for the priest to heal x character and then a different  character right after that one finishes. Imagine what you can do with offensive spell. I'm sure the hardcore gamer will find a way to time everything perfectly.

 

There's no ability queue in the game as of now, but Josh said they would like to implement one if resources permit. Similarly, there's currently no party AI, or at least not in the streams we've been seeing. 

[Sensuki]

No action queues please. That would ruin the IE feel of the combat.

 

All that's needed is an auto-attack, currently party members have 0 AI.

 

And the fact that there's currently no AI for the party is going to make people cry about micromanagement.

 

NO ACTION QUEUES - DIS NOT A CONSOLE GAME.

Edited August 14, 2014 by Sensuki

[Karkarov]

I know its a little early to criticizes, especially before the beta but....

 

I notice that in old IE games and in recent gamescom video,.. it benefit from modern technology, I'm talking about spell queue.

 

After a character cast a spell, the character just stops. Make it so you can queue some spells/action/abilties, that way the player don't have to wait until the animation finishes. Like for example; healing spell is a drag in old IE games. It would be nice for the priest to heal x character and then a different  character right after that one finishes. Imagine what you can do with offensive spell. I'm sure the hardcore gamer will find a way to time everything perfectly.

I think part of this is the apparent lack of Party AI in the game right now.  Either it wasn't set up for the gamescom showing or it just isn't included in the beta yet.  I am not sure a literal spell queue will be needed unless all spells turn out to be basically instant cast, which many of them seem to be so far.

[Valorian]

An action queue would be neat, yes.

[Panteleimon]

 

I know its a little early to criticizes, especially before the beta but....

 

I notice that in old IE games and in recent gamescom video,.. it benefit from modern technology, I'm talking about spell queue.

 

After a character cast a spell, the character just stops. Make it so you can queue some spells/action/abilties, that way the player don't have to wait until the animation finishes. Like for example; healing spell is a drag in old IE games. It would be nice for the priest to heal x character and then a different  character right after that one finishes. Imagine what you can do with offensive spell. I'm sure the hardcore gamer will find a way to time everything perfectly.

I think part of this is the apparent lack of Party AI in the game right now.  Either it wasn't set up for the gamescom showing or it just isn't included in the beta yet.  I am not sure a literal spell queue will be needed unless all spells turn out to be basically instant cast, which many of them seem to be so far.

 

 

 

The low level ones essentially seem to be, but the higher level ones have a pretty lengthy casting time, like fireball in today's stream.

 

I'm sure there's IE-appropriate AI(auto attack) coming with the game, but either they believed it would interfere with the 'narrative' of the demo or it simply isn't ready, kind of how the pathfinding they're re-working is in a bit of a rough place.

 

And I agree that an action queue would detract from the IE tradition of the game in a negative way.

[Sensuki]

An action queue would be neat, yes.

An action queue is not necessary for this game. Action queues are generally for console games where you do heaps of repetitive actions over and over and generally know what actions you're going to do.

 

If the game is interesting tactically at all, you should be reacting to the battle, making your decisions upon what is happening in the moment, not having a pre-determined idea of what you're going to do. That is, I believe, one of the design goals - to try and engage the player in the combat mechanics and have slightly more active micro management of units than what the IE games had.

 

There should be no need to just go in and queue up the same spells and ****, or a chain of spells.

 

I really do not want the feel of the game compromised by what I see as a "consolized" feature.

 

Use the pause button and the slow function and micro manage your characters. All units have a recovery timer, and during their recovery period you can assign them their next action which will override their auto-attack.

Edited August 14, 2014 by Sensuki

[Caerdon]

No action queues please. That would ruin the IE feel of the combat.

 

All that's needed is an auto-attack, currently party members have 0 AI.

 

And the fact that there's currently no AI for the party is going to make people cry about micromanagement.

 

NO ACTION QUEUES - DIS NOT A CONSOLE GAME.

 

Don't like it - don't use it. Simple as that.

[Panteleimon]

 

No action queues please. That would ruin the IE feel of the combat.

 

All that's needed is an auto-attack, currently party members have 0 AI.

 

And the fact that there's currently no AI for the party is going to make people cry about micromanagement.

 

NO ACTION QUEUES - DIS NOT A CONSOLE GAME.

 

Don't like it - don't use it. Simple as that.

 

 

That's not the mindset that this game sprouts from. They're determined to keep a tight grip on any mechanics that could be 'switched off' to make the game less challenging. The same seems to be true of mechanics they feel conflict with the spirit in which the game is being made.

 

I believe the action queue would encourage an RTS, WoW-esque type of gameplay that is simply not how the game is meant to be played. And there is no way that a system like that could be added and NOT affect how the game plays and is meant to be played. It has to be balanced for, and on and on. It's up to the developers to decide how they feel about it. But the reality is that this game is not made to make compromises to any serious degree, so it REALLY is their call.

Edited August 14, 2014 by Panteleimon

[Sensuki]

Don't like it - don't use it. Simple as that.

One problem with that view buddy is that adding an action queue into the game will most likely change the fundamental nature of how you give commands to your party.

 

In KotOR for instance, in order to get your queued action in as the next action you had to cancel the actions in the queue. For automation purposes the game would queue up an auto attack for you every so often, and in order to get your critical strike in, you'd have to cancel them.

 

Also if you wanted to change what you wanted to do, you'd also have to cancel the actions in the queue.

 

VERY_FKN_ANNOYING.COM

 

It's not something you can opt out of.

Edited August 14, 2014 by Sensuki

[Valorian]

 

An action queue would be neat, yes.

An action queue is not necessary for this game. Action queues are generally for console games where you do heaps of repetitive actions over and over and generally know what actions you're going to do.

 

If the game is interesting tactically at all, you should be reacting to the battle, making your decisions upon what is happening in the moment, not having a pre-determined idea of what you're going to do. That is, I believe, one of the design goals - to try and engage the player in the combat mechanics and have slightly more active micro management of units than what the IE games had.

 

There should be no need to just go in and queue up the same spells and ****, or a chain of spells.

 

I really do not want the feel of the game compromised by what I see as a "consolized" feature.

 

Use the pause button and the slow function and micro manage your characters. All units have a recovery timer, and during their recovery period you can assign them their next action which will override their auto-attack.

 

 

An action queue is perfect for this game. 

This is a game with 6 people you control, where everyone (not just casters) has lots of active abilities to use. Constant micromanaging can be fun, to a point. If I find that a particular combination of abilities and spells is very effective if executed in a particular order against certain enemies, I want to be able to queue these actions. You don't have to, if you're concerned it will feel like you're playing a console game.

[Billy O]

I'd like an action queue but perhaps limit it to only two actions. I really can't imagine needing to plan further ahead than that anyway.

[Sensuki]

You just ignored my above post. Adding an action queue to the game will change the way that everyone gives orders to their party.

 

Example:

 

No Action Queue

 

AI auto-attacks, and you override those actions with actions of your choice, and you are free to override your choices if you change your mind

 

Action Queue

 

AI auto-attacks and queues up an attack action in the queue every X often, you add an action to the queue, however if an auto attack has already queued before you want to do an action, you have to cancel the auto attack before your character can perform the action (annoying) or you just let it run through and be late (not great for harder difficulties). If you change your mind about what you want to do you have to manually fkn cancel everything in the queue and then queue them up again.

 

It is literally the most aids thing ever.

 

There is no way that I will support an action queue for this game. The IE games didn't need them and neither does this.

Edited August 14, 2014 by Sensuki

[Caerdon]

How on earth would an action queue affect game balance at all? With pause (including autopause) you can already chain actions as much as you want. It's a convenience feature, nothing more. And this game already has numerous optional convenience features, so I really don't see how that's "not the mindset that this game sprouts from".

 

Of course the default would be that whatever command you give to a character, it replaces the current action or action queue. But you could, for example, add it to the end of the que (or the current action), say, by holding down the shift key (just like queuing up movement commands functioned in IE games).

 

If the game is interesting tactically at all, you should be reacting to the battle, making your decisions upon what is happening in the moment, not having a pre-determined idea of what you're going to do.

 

Sure, but if you're only reacting, you're not playing very tactically at all. You must also be proactive and have a plan. There's nothing wrong with being able to queue up a couple of spells or other actions when you have a good understanding of how the battle is going to proceed. You can always react and change your plan if things don't go the way you thought they would.

 

Seriously, the number of times I've executed a preplanned sequence of spells in BG is downright incalculable.

[Sensuki]

Strategy is where you perform prescience about a situation. Reacting to the current situation is the essence of tactics.

I didn't say anything about game balance. I am talking about the way that you issue orders to the party. I outlined it pretty damn clear in my above posts how adding in an action queue will alter how you command your units.

Have you guys never played an RTS in your life or something ? Where does this fear of micromanagement come from?

Edited August 14, 2014 by Sensuki

[Infinitron]

Action queues are more suitable for games where:

 

1) Most abilities are single target as opposed to area effect

2) Character movement is generally unimportant

 

In a tactical RPG where characters are moving around and throwing area effects at each other, queues might be more likely to cause a mess than help anybody. That queued up fireball you had ready? The character you were aiming for is long gone.

Edited August 14, 2014 by Infinitron

[drake heath]

I don't care for spell queues, unless I'm spamming because I'm bored with the combat or in a rush or it's really easy.

 

I'd rather pause and issue commands per turn.

Edited August 14, 2014 by drake heath

[Sensuki]

Seriously, the number of times I've executed a preplanned sequence of spells in BG is downright incalculable.

Baldur's Gate 1 is not a very good example of tactical combat. There's really not much to it. Baldur's Gate 2, however is a much better example.

 

Sure there are ways to cheese the crap out of encounters, but you would not have known those cheese combos, you would have had to either learn them through lots of play or (most likely) read a DSimpson walkthrough or some other online information that says how to beat encounters easily.

 

This is because there is a lot of OP spells and **** in the IE games. PE is being designed with much more balanced gameplay so that hopefully there will not be one solution to everything. If you do the same **** over and over again in that situation, that's your choice.

[Valorian]

You just ignored my above post. Adding an action queue to the game will change the way that everyone gives orders to their party.

 

Example:

 

No Action Queue

 

AI auto-attacks, and you override those actions with actions of your choice, and you are free to override your choices if you change your mind

 

Action Queue

 

AI auto-attacks and queues up an attack action in the queue every X often, you add an action to the queue, however if an auto attack has already queued before you want to do an action, you have to cancel the auto attack before your character can perform the action (annoying) or you just let it run through and be late (not great for harder difficulties). If you change your mind about what you want to do you have to manually fkn cancel everything in the queue and then queue them up again.

 

It is literally the most aids thing ever.

 

There is no way that I will support an action queue for this game. The IE games didn't need them and neither does this.

 

I largely ignored your concerns because I've noticed that often, as of late, your concerns are irrational fears (of losing the "IE feels", whatever that means to you). Like, the magic missile is not red, it is purple instead. The selection circle is too thick, the color is wrong. The woman plate isn't different enough. Make it like IE.

 

In this vein, you think that an action queue will somehow disrupt.. something in combat. It will not.

[Sensuki]

I largely ignored your concerns because I've noticed that often, as of late, your concerns are irrational fears (of losing the "IE feels", whatever that means to you). Like, the magic missile is not red, it is purple instead. The selection circle is too thick, the color is wrong. The woman plate isn't different enough. Make it like IE.

 

In this vein, you think that an action queue will somehow disrupt.. something in combat. It will not.

Pure laziness on your account. I've made hundreds of critiques about absolutely everything I've seen in the game since we saw the trailer, from Spell FX design, attributes, amount of attribute points, character stances in combat. My post about splitting the steam beta from the final game months ago likely attributed to the fact that they've avoided the same mess that WL2 and D:OS had with theirs and yes I make critiques of things that some people think are very minor, irrelevant things. Anyone other than me find any combat log bugs just from watching the videos?

 

And I'm going to continue to do that all the way up until release.

 

If you ever go back and read what I said you might pick up on the fact that there is - actually - a difference between the way you give orders and cancel orders in games where there is an action queue and games where there isn't.

Edited August 14, 2014 by Sensuki

[Trodat]

I'd rather see them focusing on polishing and bug fixing, rather than implementing additional features. In BG or IWD combat was very good 'this' way so I don't really see any benefit for making it more 'hassle free'.

[Ragg]

You just ignored my above post. Adding an action queue to the game will change the way that everyone gives orders to their party.

 

Example:

 

No Action Queue

 

AI auto-attacks, and you override those actions with actions of your choice, and you are free to override your choices if you change your mind

 

Action Queue

 

AI auto-attacks and queues up an attack action in the queue every X often, you add an action to the queue, however if an auto attack has already queued before you want to do an action, you have to cancel the auto attack before your character can perform the action (annoying) or you just let it run through and be late (not great for harder difficulties). If you change your mind about what you want to do you have to manually fkn cancel everything in the queue and then queue them up again.

 

It is literally the most aids thing ever.

 

There is no way that I will support an action queue for this game. The IE games didn't need them and neither does this.

 

Your idea of what an action queue has to be like is really bizarre. First of all, there's no reason why the AI has to add actions to the queue, second the problem of being unable to override actions is easily solved: make the default to clear the queue and put in a new action, and if you hold down shift it adds actions onto the queue. Simple and you can still play without using the queue at all.

[GreyFox]

No to action queue it was god awful in NWN which is where Sensuki is probably coming from(and also where the people who want it are coming from).

 

This is not NWN.

[Caerdon]

You just ignored my above post. Adding an action queue to the game will change the way that everyone gives orders to their party.

 

Example:

 

No Action Queue

 

AI auto-attacks, and you override those actions with actions of your choice, and you are free to override your choices if you change your mind

 

Action Queue

 

AI auto-attacks and queues up an attack action in the queue every X often, you add an action to the queue, however if an auto attack has already queued before you want to do an action, you have to cancel the auto attack before your character can perform the action (annoying) or you just let it run through and be late (not great for harder difficulties). If you change your mind about what you want to do you have to manually fkn cancel everything in the queue and then queue them up again.

 

It is literally the most aids thing ever.

 

There is no way that I will support an action queue for this game. The IE games didn't need them and neither does this.

 

Of course it's the "most aids thing ever" - that's gotta be the worst possible way to implement an action queue. I'm not talking about the party AI queuing up actions while I'm not looking, I'm talking about the player being able to queue commands. Which would enable you to play exactly as you dictate under "No Action Queue" above.

 

Strategy is where you perform prescience about a situation. Reacting to the current situation is the essence of tactics.

 

I didn't say anything about game balance. I am talking about the way that you issue orders to the party. I outlined it pretty damn clear in my above posts how adding in an action queue will alter how you command your units.

 

Have you guys never played an RTS in your life or something ? Where does this fear of micromanagement come from?

 

Now you're insisting on your own definitions of strategy and tactics. You could just as well say that this game only operates on tactical level. But enough with semantics; being able to plan ahead is just as important as being able to react to a changing situation, and that's what matters.

 

And please tell me how would my implementation of an action queue change the way you issue orders to your party, assuming you refuse to utilize that completely optional feature?

 

Hint: it wouldn't. (And it's quite funny how "altering how you command your units" is somehow inherently evil in your eyes...)

 

 

Seriously, the number of times I've executed a preplanned sequence of spells in BG is downright incalculable.

Baldur's Gate 1 is not a very good example of tactical combat. There's really not much to it. Baldur's Gate 2, however is a much better example.

 

Sure there are ways to cheese the crap out of encounters, but you would not have known those cheese combos, you would have had to either learn them through lots of play or (most likely) read a DSimpson walkthrough or some other online information that says how to beat encounters easily.

 

This is because there is a lot of OP spells and **** in the IE games. PE is being designed with much more balanced gameplay so that hopefully there will not be one solution to everything. If you do the same **** over and over again in that situation, that's your choice.

 

 

Well, with BG I was really referring to BG series as a whole. My bad. While BG1 will always have a special place in my heart, I've definitely logged a lot more hourse in BG2. And just so you know, I loathe cheese in all its forms.

 

You seem to assume that just because I want an action queue and because I commonly plan my actions a few "rounds" ahead - often quite successfully, I might add - I'm somehow "doing the same **** over and over again".

[Sensuki]

No, I assume that after you've played the game a few times you have a certain way you beat each encounter. That's normal, but I don't think that's a good reason for an action queue.