![[ch]](/mwf/flags/ch.png "Switzerland")
I wonder why the cool feature of being able to use both hands simultaneously was removed? Right now there also is the discussion about the right-click-throw and the left-click-use, which may sometimes be confusing.
It "feels" especially a bit weird that there is a sword and a shield, that cannot be used together. Evey kid knows, that sword and shield belongs together. This loss of a feature I find quite a pity. I know it was a bit complicated to switch items. I think that might have been the reason for giving this particular feature up. However other games solved that problem in fixing the right click item while only the left click item is switchable. That means, the right click slot stays stable, while you still can switch items from your inventory with mouse wheel for the left hand. Usually a shield, close combat weapon or things like lanterns/torchlights would be put on that right-click slot. But everything else is also possible. Throwing items could then be done by pressing a a keyboard button + right or left click (similar to how dropping items works currently).
That offers a lot more nice gameplay possibilities and makes the weird quick change thing obsolete, as it is not intuitive, eighter. It even needs quite some "training" or experience.
All in all: that idea would bring back cool two hand feature without loosing the comfort of simple and easy item switching. Additionally the quite newbie-unfriendly quickswitch and left-click use/right-click throw control could become more intuitive.
It "feels" especially a bit weird that there is a sword and a shield, that cannot be used together. Evey kid knows, that sword and shield belongs together. This loss of a feature I find quite a pity. I know it was a bit complicated to switch items. I think that might have been the reason for giving this particular feature up. However other games solved that problem in fixing the right click item while only the left click item is switchable. That means, the right click slot stays stable, while you still can switch items from your inventory with mouse wheel for the left hand. Usually a shield, close combat weapon or things like lanterns/torchlights would be put on that right-click slot. But everything else is also possible. Throwing items could then be done by pressing a a keyboard button + right or left click (similar to how dropping items works currently).
That offers a lot more nice gameplay possibilities and makes the weird quick change thing obsolete, as it is not intuitive, eighter. It even needs quite some "training" or experience.
All in all: that idea would bring back cool two hand feature without loosing the comfort of simple and easy item switching. Additionally the quite newbie-unfriendly quickswitch and left-click use/right-click throw control could become more intuitive.
I agree that switching items mid fight is awkward. Maybe I just didn't get accustomed to it yet..I'd make it look something like that:
To put an item on the right click slot, right click an item in the E-menu.
There should also be drag and drop support (when the E-menu is opened) to rearrange the inventory (and therefore also the right click slot)
>Right now there also is the discussion about the right-click-throw and the left-click-use, which may sometimes be confusing.
I actually think that "right click is always throw" and "left click is always use" is a lot less confusing than the previous system, where you had to manage two hands and your shovel could have been either on left click or right click.
>newbie-unfriendly quickswitch
Quick-switch on Q is a common feature in shooters, I think.
>left-click use/right-click throw control could become more intuitive
I'm not convinced that adding another key combination for throwing makes the controls more intuitive.
![[de]](/mwf/flags/de.png "Germany")
In chronological order:
Here is a blog posting that quickly summarizes the reasons for the change
http://blog.openclonk.org/2016/01/openclonk-7-0-spotlight-controls-and-ui/
Another summary of Clonkonaut about the changes
http://blog.openclonk.org/2015/12/openclonk-7-0-alpha-gameplay/comment-page-1/#comment-38426
Some feedback by Marky from 2014
http://forum.openclonk.org/topic_show.pl?pid=26307#pid26307
Some more short summary from me from 2013
http://forum.openclonk.org/topic_show.pl?pid=23513#pid23513
Here is a posting by Matthias from 2012 about why the two-hands-stuff sucks: (should read!)
http://forum.openclonk.org/topic_show.pl?pid=16956#pid16956
Here is some critique on the two-hand stuff from MastroLindo from 2009 (even though he arrives at a different conclusion, he does so for similar reasons)
http://forum.openclonk.org/topic_show.pl?pid=688#pid688
Some food for thoughts:
The old control system was pretty rad for the shield+sword situation. In which other situations did it have the same benefit? How frequent were those situations? (In which percentage of scenarios would you be able to take full benefit?). In which percentage of scenarios is the new control system beneficial (e.g. because you don't have a sword or a windbag).
For me the new system works much better and the benefit from the combo is very little, but nice to have, which is the reason to adapt the Q(uickswitch) a bit.
![[at]](/mwf/flags/at.png "Austria")
Although dual wielding tools/weapons or showing sword and shield together looked quite neat.
>>In which other situations did it have the same benefit?
in melees: two weapons sword + javelin (would probably work with Q too), sword+sword, sword+shield, two muskets, sword and club (club to throw back incoming items in case no shield is available)), club + any other item as baseball (apparently works with Q as well)
in settlement situations: as mentioned: the lanterin (or in the future maybe torchlight) + shovel when searching for a certain thing in the underground (However that is a special case, as the shovel/pickaxe use two hands already)
So by checking the played rounds (League), you find Brunnen(Well?), Schmelzendes Schloss (melting castle?), aerobatics, magma moles and very popular Heißes Eis (hot ice?). All scenarios that have eigher the windbag available, or the shield. In magma moles and dark mine (even though dark mine not so popular) would even make the light-source combo potentially becoming very sensible even in melee scenarios.
I am pretty sure right now also "knueppeln" is very very popular right now, which would not benefit from that feature, aproximately 80% of the scenarios at least offer items for which this feature would come in handy.
about the situations, that is of course much harder to determine. As far as I can recall, in Heißes Eis, any airbag combos are quite popular to shoot arount items or yourself, as well as club combos. In Schmelzendes Schloss, the Windbag is the most popular item for movement at least. furthermore there is a large quantity of these ice bridges(a mod for the metal bridge pack) available, which commonly are used while jumping (however I am to un-skilled to do that in a combo with that windbag thingy). And Brunnen everything is very chaotic, so 2 guns/ two swords would fit very well into that mess and the shield combo may become a popular counter agains that chaos.
So All in all, the most popular scenarios (not counting the knueppeln stuff) offer the requirements( the sensible items) and quite some situations.
Plus the benefit as mentioned, that it looks pretty neat, adds to the coolness factors.
Plus the impression (just my personal impression) that in games where it is not possible to wield two items are somewhat lost in past times and I usually missed that feature vs dual wielding became the standard. Most of RPGs seem to have implemented that feature now (started with Diablo 2 maybe, more than a decade ago). Another example was an online game called Biosfear, where they implemented that feature quite late, because a well supported request by the customers.
And as also already mentioned, we may like it or not, but we usually are compared to Terraria, Starbound&Co, which also includes that feature (I am not sure about Terraria, but at least there is a mod that implemented that).
Seeing Openclonk does not have it, is quite a lack.
It may be true that it does not feel more or less intuitive than the right-click throw & left-click use and Q, but according to my feeling playing Starbound, the controls there felt much more natural/intuitve, than this right-click left-click thing, which often happens in the worst situations, usually with the consqeuence of being killed, as it is quite a loss to throw away the sword to the enemy, leaving myself unarmed, instead of hitting him. this accident would not happen by chance when throwing would need a button pressed.
Then your nice short review of the linked threads shows that in 2009, MastroLindo actually wants to keep the two hand system at least for the popular combat items. The problem with quickly switching items would be solved in my approach, because you still would be able to switch arround quickly with your main item (while you still keep the shiled e.g. on your second slot).
The problem about the lack of two potential usage-buttons for things like magic staffs is also not possible to implement right now, as right click is reserved to throw an item away. So bringing up the argumentation of MastoLindo actually shows, that the current situation was not an improvement regarding his demands and wishes, but removed the posibillity of dual wield without bringing what he intended.
likewise Matthis argumentation about the advantages and disadvantages: he also brings up the shield situation as a benefit of dual wield (apparently really something quite striking!). Disadvantages are mainly referred to the very confusing hand situation (which is not the case with my proposal). Additionally the most striking argument to me is also the idea of having two potential buttons left for one item, also proposed by MastroLindo before. As said before, this feature is blocked by the right-click throwing. As the new controls offer many many more buttons now, I do not even see the need for that anymore. Multi-Use Items could simply be controlled by a somehow similar system used in knueppeln (different keyboard buttons for different functions).
I just scanned through the other links now shortly, but it appears to me, the most strinking reason of changing was the massive complexity and the confusion caused, by the two hands solution, where you could adjust the two hands freely. In my approach, right click would also be just a handy and nice minor feature. Just that I think the potential of wielding two items at the same time brings more opportunities than the idea of throwing away an item on right click. that it is not at all confusing when one item is "fixed" to right click, can be tested in Starbound very nicely. That right click throwing is confusing instead, can be seen by quite some awkward situations, when players throw there javelins and swords arround (which is not just me).
> in melees: two weapons sword + javelin (would probably work with Q too)
It does. It even works with selecting the javelins directly. I agree that in many situations a certain combination of weapons is better than another. I disagree that one would always perfectly plan ahead and always select the weapon set that is best. It is easy to say, after you died, that the combination of x and y would have saved you and it is just the fault of the controls which did not let you select y quickly enough. But it is not easy to prove that you actually would have had y on quick select at the time.
> sword+sword
That never was an advantage (and why should it?).
> the lanterin (or in the future maybe torchlight) + shovel
There is no reason why a lantern should not work by not having it in the inventory. Adding the need to have it selected really is just something you might want to do simply to accommodate an otherwise not so great control style.
> sword+shield
Yes, that is really a sacrifice we made. I agree. Oh, well. I did not actually came here to nit-pick on your examples. Just bear in mind that we had the two-hand system for a long time and had plenty of time to discuss and test it. The points you are bringing up are not new and neither did we really overlook those when deciding to switch controls. You yourself say that even MastroLindo (whatever authority he is) drew the same conclusions.
First of all, sorry for being so frank, but I do not see an actual 'approach' presented by you. After years(!) of discussion, play-testing and decision-making I feel not obliged to take a suggestion on control styles serious without it including actual control assignments. So in fact an explanation of how this new approach will work in practice. What buttons do I need to press / what actions do I need to take in order to select things into my 'right-handed' slot. You say the main reason to abandon it was because it was difficult to select stuff for right click use (and that was one of the main reasons but not the sole one). You had to stop and move your mouse to your inventory overlay, select stuff with right click and so on. That was very awkward to do in arena games. You had to run to a save position and carefully take your time to set everything up. You fail to mention how that situation is improved simply because after having read your post, I still do not know how that process of selection would work, button-wise. Therefore, there is no telling if it really is advantageous. Take Maikel's suggestion (which I really like) for an example.
Now, the other thing, another main reason why control were changed, is that throwing stuff was very weird to do. Throwing things was done by holding shift and pressing the mouse button. While it does sound good, it was not. Throwing became a move you would have to stop for. Again, take your time to do it. It was very impractical to apply in an arena situations (and seldom done). In settlements, you sometimes wanted to throw things upwards and that was horrible to do. Because pressing up, maybe a directional key and shift and mouse left on the same perfect time is hard to do. Throwing things, something many would call a key feature in Clonk, was not easy anymore! Your comparison with other games is flawed in this respect because these other games do not implement throwing as an actual gameplay feature.
When your key point is that having two items shown on the clonk looks good, I agree! I actually would like it if the 'Q' item (following Maikel's approach) was shown on the clonk.
I really do not understand why to be quite hostile and as you self said so: "frank". We all agree, even if my idea might be stupid, I still invested some time in writing that stuff and I do that of course not becaause I try to make OC worse. Anyway, lets just get back to "neutral"
You acutally argue again, dual wielding system would be more complicated than the current system. Which I say it does not have to.
So my idea (~approach) i imagine as follows:
Inventory consists 5 items. however the fifth item might become the second hand slot. You still should be able to switch between the items by mousewheel or numbers. Furthermore you get an additional slot number 6, which becomes the righthand slot. assigning an item could simply by drag and drop, or some combination like ctrl+6, that swiches the selected item to that passive right-hand- slot. The Item in this slot is used by rightclick. This 6 item cannot accessed by mousewheel anymore (which is of course not needed because it is allways right-click selected)
As rightclick is reserved than for that right-hand slot (which is rather unflexible in terms of Item chance, compared to the left-click item), throwing an item has to work differently now. Lets get back to the roots. In CR thowing items was done by pressing the "throw"-key. As that is, as also ala and you mentioned in clonk rather important, that could be the easily accessible Q button. This kind of way of control is actually currently used in the Knueppeln-game play, where shooting the main attack is done by Q, instead by klicking arround, and still feels very natural. So that could just be adapted to throwing items now, which would reduce the confusion with right-click throw and left-click use.(of which i find really weird [but that really is very subjective])
I argue that this system is as simple as the current system, with no chance of mistakenly forget about which hand has which. The confusion is avoided because the right-hand item is rather fixed and set usually to shield or whatever. (however it still can be changed rather quickly, if neccessary). You usually actively use still only the left-hand item. Well and eventually one standard item slot should be blocked if something is put into the right-hand slot (otherwise you end up with an inventory that can hold up to 6 items)
That approach would:
-bring back the coolness of wielding sword and shield, or any other items simultaneously.
-would avoid confusion with right and left click use and throw (which does not only appear to me)
-would still allow simple and quick item throwing just by a the Q key instead of right click (which is not different to CR, or casting the standard spell in knüppeln)
-would get rid of that funny quickchange, which may be handy, but needs some experience to efficiently use.
-keep the item switching and using as comfortable, simple and easy as it is now.
Oh and I almost forgot: the funny argumentation of that youtube guy is somewhat not applyable to OC or other games because:
he mainly argues a shield is much more sensible than a second weapon, which i definitly agree in real life. One arrow or one sword strike may mean: you are dead. In OC (and any other games it just means not having a shield makes you more vulnerable, but you still will not die immediatly).
The more striking argument for game situation is the attack-speed one. He claims, you can eigher use your whole body and increase the strenght of one strike (which leaves the other wielded hand in a position where you anyway cannot usefully attack with it) or you can just swing your weapon as quickly with one hand as you can do with both. But that is not entirely true. You can simply not do both with just one weapon: you cannot use your whole body and make quick full power stikes. Especially having some weights in your hand (which that bloke does not). Just try it out with holding a filled two liter bottle and try to swing it quickly. That is not easily possible. You can however use your whole body striking powerfully and while wielding two weapons ohne arm charges while the other one strikes. So effectivle you are almost as twice as quick in striking that just with charge and strike with only one hand. Anyway, it surely leaves you without any protection or possibility of parade.
But acutally that kind of dual wielded movement is what kids do when they are in rage and try to box you with two fists. And also boxers do likewise sometimes (you can definitly not box with one hand as quick as with two, because that allways needs some body turning for charging). Here the same argument applies, boxers do not die immediatly loose if they use both hands for attack, however it may leave them more vulnerable)
You acutally argue again, dual wielding system would be more complicated than the current system. Which I say it does not have to.
So my idea (~approach) i imagine as follows:
Inventory consists 5 items. however the fifth item might become the second hand slot. You still should be able to switch between the items by mousewheel or numbers. Furthermore you get an additional slot number 6, which becomes the righthand slot. assigning an item could simply by drag and drop, or some combination like ctrl+6, that swiches the selected item to that passive right-hand- slot. The Item in this slot is used by rightclick. This 6 item cannot accessed by mousewheel anymore (which is of course not needed because it is allways right-click selected)
As rightclick is reserved than for that right-hand slot (which is rather unflexible in terms of Item chance, compared to the left-click item), throwing an item has to work differently now. Lets get back to the roots. In CR thowing items was done by pressing the "throw"-key. As that is, as also ala and you mentioned in clonk rather important, that could be the easily accessible Q button. This kind of way of control is actually currently used in the Knueppeln-game play, where shooting the main attack is done by Q, instead by klicking arround, and still feels very natural. So that could just be adapted to throwing items now, which would reduce the confusion with right-click throw and left-click use.(of which i find really weird [but that really is very subjective])
I argue that this system is as simple as the current system, with no chance of mistakenly forget about which hand has which. The confusion is avoided because the right-hand item is rather fixed and set usually to shield or whatever. (however it still can be changed rather quickly, if neccessary). You usually actively use still only the left-hand item. Well and eventually one standard item slot should be blocked if something is put into the right-hand slot (otherwise you end up with an inventory that can hold up to 6 items)
That approach would:
-bring back the coolness of wielding sword and shield, or any other items simultaneously.
-would avoid confusion with right and left click use and throw (which does not only appear to me)
-would still allow simple and quick item throwing just by a the Q key instead of right click (which is not different to CR, or casting the standard spell in knüppeln)
-would get rid of that funny quickchange, which may be handy, but needs some experience to efficiently use.
-keep the item switching and using as comfortable, simple and easy as it is now.
Oh and I almost forgot: the funny argumentation of that youtube guy is somewhat not applyable to OC or other games because:
he mainly argues a shield is much more sensible than a second weapon, which i definitly agree in real life. One arrow or one sword strike may mean: you are dead. In OC (and any other games it just means not having a shield makes you more vulnerable, but you still will not die immediatly).
The more striking argument for game situation is the attack-speed one. He claims, you can eigher use your whole body and increase the strenght of one strike (which leaves the other wielded hand in a position where you anyway cannot usefully attack with it) or you can just swing your weapon as quickly with one hand as you can do with both. But that is not entirely true. You can simply not do both with just one weapon: you cannot use your whole body and make quick full power stikes. Especially having some weights in your hand (which that bloke does not). Just try it out with holding a filled two liter bottle and try to swing it quickly. That is not easily possible. You can however use your whole body striking powerfully and while wielding two weapons ohne arm charges while the other one strikes. So effectivle you are almost as twice as quick in striking that just with charge and strike with only one hand. Anyway, it surely leaves you without any protection or possibility of parade.
But acutally that kind of dual wielded movement is what kids do when they are in rage and try to box you with two fists. And also boxers do likewise sometimes (you can definitly not box with one hand as quick as with two, because that allways needs some body turning for charging). Here the same argument applies, boxers do not die immediatly loose if they use both hands for attack, however it may leave them more vulnerable)
I am trying to follow your plan, and from what I can see is that all the advantages you listed would also still exist when some/one of the suggestions from the "Quickshift alternative thread" would be implemented, which suggest basically exactly what you said, just with your Q and right-click switched and without a weird additional inventory slot in the UI (which you suggest to block some of the "normal" item slots when filled...?)>assigning an item could simply by drag and drop
By the way, I am currently against allowing drag & drop for the inventory bar (unless the E menu is opened) just because of how error-prone it is (to missclicks)
No, because the quickswitch, switches items (quickly) but does not make it possible to use them simultaneously or rather quickly "together" (keeping the shield up and wait for the right moment for a strike, would require a funny mixture of timing Q and mouse click whenever you switch back to the shield which should be kept up.
Plus any other potential and future additional nice item combo which we keep us open. (maybe a lance + shield, or whatever)
Plus the removal of that weird right-click left-click confusement of using and throwing an item. (which some people apart from me also brought up!) It rather keeps it clear, click means use; key (such as Q ,without any additional click) means throw (the item away)
Plus any other potential and future additional nice item combo which we keep us open. (maybe a lance + shield, or whatever)
Plus the removal of that weird right-click left-click confusement of using and throwing an item. (which some people apart from me also brought up!) It rather keeps it clear, click means use; key (such as Q ,without any additional click) means throw (the item away)
Sorry, it was not my intention to be rude. So, I apologise. Control discussions like these have become tiresome. As I said, it is going for years now. It also feels like one step forward, two steps back. Because regardless of what we change, someone will argue that the old way was better because of reasons. Apparently, satisfying everyone is impossible.Also, I do not think new arguments will emerge from this discussion. You say having two items ready to use is good. Others say (including me) that having throw ready is good. Throwing with modifier (shift) was something we had and is was not great for throw controls. I agree with Zapper that many of your advantages can be achieved with Maikel's suggestion.
I do not want to get into a dual-wielding argument but just this: He does reenactment and HEMA longsword, so I think he knows how some weight in your hands feel. Also, even in duel situations in the past, two offensively used weapons (or two similar) were almost never applied. Your boxing argument misses the weight argument again. ;)
>>It also feels like one step forward, two steps back. Because regardless of what we change, someone will argue that the old way was better because of reasons. Apparently, satisfying everyone is impossible.
I am not at all trying to say the old system was better. That you are making up yourself, because it is definetly not the case. But just because the current system is better that before does not neccessarily mean it now reached its absolute unchangeble final status. And apparently you dev-guys agree on that in terms that Maikels propsal is maybe going to be implemented. And I just proposed a similar (but slightly different idea, which appears to me being quite a nice compromise of getting all the cool stuff with almost no losses apart frol changing right-click throw to Q-key throw (which I even see as an improvement rather than a disadvantage[But I agree that this might be also very subjective; But as I am telling you from the beginning, I am not the only one who gets confused with trowing and using])
>>Throwing with modifier (shift) was something we had and is was not great for throw controls. I agree with Zapper that many of your advantages can be achieved with Maikel's suggestion.
I want throwing not with a modifier, but with a button only (without any clicking involved).
Simple solution would for solving that never everybody seems to be happy, to offer more control options, of which the player can choose from? That was also the case with combo and quickmenu spell system in CR. Why not doing it likewise with eigher the Q(uickswicht) or the passive dual wield?! according to Zapper, it is quite similar (in terms of functionality).
If all you want is indeed just throwing on Q and using a different item on right click, it seems that you can effectively get the same result with Maikel's suggestion and switching the assignments of Q and right click. That's the nice thing about OC: you can modiy keys to your liking and are not dependent on any predefined control sets.
If the shield was a passive item, there would be no need to quickswitch so often.
Throwing is just such an elemental part of Clonk, it really should get the easiest access in my book. Having played the old controls I can tell you that the accidents were you threw away the wrong items far succeeded the ones where I want to use my shield/tool and throw it away now instead.
I also do not like quickswitch too much, but I also haven't tried too much either. Mainly I just go without it.
>That offers a lot more nice gameplay possibilities and makes the weird quick change thing obsolete, as it is not intuitive, eighter. It even needs quite some "training" or experience.
I also do not like quickswitch too much, but I also haven't tried too much either. Mainly I just go without it.
Powered by mwForum 2.29.7 © 1999-2015 Markus Wichitill
