For a tactical game, the movement options seem very limited. If you want to move to this particular square, then you're going to end up with this exact facing. Sure, you can easily see two other ways to get to that square with a different (and better!) facing, but those options just aren't there. As-is, the dwarf extra HP is usually a much better benefit than the elf extra movement. The problem here seems to be that movement is just a little weaker than it should be. So, how to improve movement? One idea would be to make clicking on a light-blue square lead to a follow-up'select square to move to' where you move the rest of your movement. You could move one square at a time, and get to your destination with whatever facing you've earned yourself. This seems better, but also kind of tedious. My suggestion would be that if you click on a light-blue square, you get a follow-up 'select your facing'. So with a Move 2 you can move 1 and set your facing. With a Move 3 you can move 1 or 2 and then set your facing. And an elf can run almost anywhere and then still set their facing. Point being: you've got the extra movement points, they should be made to be useful instead of being frittered away into nothingness like they are currently.
If it has one or both of the first two, it might be one of mine. I like this idea, but it might be a whole lot of work to implement at this stage. Where were you during beta?
Nah, they've already got the "you could move farther" detection (currently being used to colourize move squares correctly), and they've already got the "set your facing" (used when you move zero squares, among other times), so it's a re-use of existing code. Relatively simple change, really. Kinda surprised nobody thought of it already. Can you believe it, but nobody told me! I didn't find out until the Kongregate release. You'd think someone would've told me, but no, didn't happen.
Interesting suggestion. Even if it's simple, it could have a big impact on the game. Something worth considering but definitely not an auto-add to the to-do list
They thought of it, implemented it, and decided they didn't like it. http://www.pcinvasion.com/jon-chey-talks-card-hunter-part-one/2
That actually makes a lot of sense. He's not at all kidding about reducing the number of clicks being important. As-is, I think I actually have to do that "set your facing" thing WAY too often! So many times, I play a Step card, and I don't want to move, and I'm going to be attacking, so changing my facing is a TOTAL waste of time, and it bugs me! Of course, if I had Clumsy going or if all I wanted was to change my facing, then I really want the option, but so far it's just been another unnecessary click. So yeah, I completely understand that design decision. I'll even say it's a good call. Still, facing is important and movement isn't strong enough. I think my favourite implementation might be an Alt-click. Normally, you don't get to set your facing at all, it's the current implementation but with even less "now choose your facing!". As in, you only get that option if you play a move card and don't move. BUT! If you Alt-click it, THEN you get all the facing options available! So, normally, you can just speed along. But, when it's important, you can Alt-click and set your facing. I think that would be best. Not sure if it's easily feasible, because Alt-click isn't something I've ever had to do in Flash. Alternatively, how about a halfway solution? The light blue squares show up when you're not using all your move points. What if some green squares showed up when you weren't using 2+ move points? Moving onto one of those squares could give you the "set your facing" option. That kind of gives a bit more power to the 3+ move without regularly requiring an additional click. I also like the idea of seeing a green square as a move option with a four-pointed arrow in it. It makes sense that they tried it out, and it makes sense that they pulled it, but I don't see this as being a simple "do it this way or don't do it at all" kind of thing. There's room here for some improvement, and there's a couple different directions to go in. Well, IMO anyway. 8 )
You wouldn't need any additional clicks or keys if you subdivide each tile so that there's a zone near the center of each of the four boundaries. Click the center of the tile or near it to use default facing, click the tile near the center of an edge to end up facing that edge. But the impact on balance would need to be considered for sure.
I actually like the current system more, as it makes it so that you cant simply flank opponents regardless of the angle you're starting your move from, just because you got some unused movement points. You could still attempt to move behind your target from an unfavorable angle, and the fact you're exposing yourself to enemy attacks make for interesting risk/reward scenarios, leading to meaningful decision making. If that was not the case, having a block in your hand + being able to pick your facing at the end of any kind of move would simply be way too convenient, actually detracting from the positioning game, rather than making it more interesting. That being said, I do appreciate the spirit of the suggestion. But I'd also like to point out we do already have cards allowing for that kind of more advanced maneuverability: You can use cantrip moves to achieve the same suggested end result. You can, say, Quick Run (or Flanking Move even, when using range-2, steps or other ranged attacks) to move behind your opponent and immediately attack him, which obviously makes you change your facing accordingly. You generally don't want to move behind an opponent unless you have an attack readily available. But, whatever your intentions might be, you could even cantrip move and then use a regular move card to change your facing in place. It's worth pointing out that Elves do have Quick Run available on their racial skill slot. We also have move cards allowing you to pick your facing in the form of Leap. I know I know, Leap gets hardly played outside of very specific maps, but you could theoretically have more movement cards with the "You may set your facing at the end of this Move" effect. In fact, you very rarely find yourself using Boots or other items offering an additional Run or Sprint, as you generally want more interesting kinds of movement options coming from items. I think there's enough room for new movement cards, like a Move-3 + "Pick facing" card, or something like that. If a card like that wouldn't be way too overvalued, I think that'd be a nice and viable option. In general, I do like when specific sub-sets of cards can be used to perform some special action/tactic, rather than applying this kind of non-trivial changes to all movement cards across the board. The former approach offers more varied deck-building possibilities, but in a way that the risk of potentially unwanted consequences gets minimized. Imagine, for instance, War Monkeys being able to Scamper past your guys while at the same time changing their facing in order to maximize the effectiveness of Simian Reflexes and Acrobatic Flip. I don't think that's something we would really want happening. Ofc, many more examples could be brought up.
This part is really the thing that keeps my attention: There've been plenty of times I've hovered over or played a Move card, knowing my char could reach a square by a pretty direct route for an obvious facing, yet for some reason the square would show some horribly disadvantageous facing instead -- and if I played the Move card due to short time and expecting what seemed obvious to me, then the thing makes me once again yearn for a Move-Cancel button. $F^ b Even if we don't get an option to somehow fix this particular annoyance, could it be officially documented -- like how Melvin explains terrain attachments -- just what (likely somewhat arbitrary) order the Move facing squares get? Or would that algorithm be too annoying to publish due to all the terrain and zone of control factors?
What if our movement was like in that one game? It would also solve the problem of not being able to cancel a move - accepting the move when you press the tile you want.
Thanks for linking that interview Kalin, it was an interesting read. There are merits to both sides of this argument. Sentient_Toaster's idea is a good one to compensate for lost time, but I think adding more options on squares makes the game more finicky to play. The alt-click might be a better implementation, and might be a good idea to include for movement as is, (i.e. step attacks) (regardless of this picking your facing with any move suggestion) though it is less intuitive if speedier, and newer players might not know about it unless it were clearly shown. However, I agree with Bandreus, as it stands, you need to make a tactical decision whether or not the move is worth the risk, instead of it being a trivial decision since you know your character has blocks to keep it safe. Variety for movement options would be cool as well, Leap would probably be used if it had enough movement. Also, as movement currently works, it's simpler, and simpler is nearly always better.
