[Resolved] Tactical Re-Positioning issues

[ushas]

(v15 linux build)

1. Graphical glitch: During re-positioning phase, if I press Esc button to go to the menu and then back:
          - it somehow makes the top re-positioning buttons 'Skip' and 'End' hard to interact with (only a tiny left top area of the button is responding).
          - a part of the normal turn interface materialize (though that is unresponsive).
          - it also puts and freezes on spot an enemy tooltip in front of the screen no matter where the mouse is.
   The issue goes away when the bypass turn ends.   

2. When characters proceed one by one through re-positioning phase it only removes the first one from the queue on the top re-pos. interface. The next one's portrait will not go away once the unit re-positioned. Though in game they actually proceed and the bypass turn properly ends, so this is just the top interface issue.

[Daithi]

Thanks Ushas. Will have a look at this soon.

[Daithi]

For 1) the menu can't be used in tactical reposition. For 2) the portraits will be removed correctly now.

[Daithi]

Note to self: The menu can still be used in tactical reposition - at least in build.

[ushas]

Uff. Is that provisional?

Status for v16: You turned off the menu access during tactical reposition turn but it can be accessed from the dialog before (the one which asks if make an attempt on tac-repo). Then coming back from the menu will again draw Sam's interface but without his portrait. You can access the inventory and character screen and if you do that when coming back it will be possible to change active weapon for Sam and crouch and so on (the game does remember that).

However, I don't recommend cutting off the menu access, at least not before the final build, for two reasons:
a) The bug isn't game breaking.
b) From testing perspective, if I won't have access to the menu at the time the battle freezes, without shutting down the game via said menu there won't be the last bunch of lines printed to the log. So potentially can miss out on an error output.


There is also more general question - if I would perceive this as some sort of tactical preparation for the battle - won't be having access to the inventory, changing on hand items and an active hand make sense from that point of view? I don't know how hard it's to allow that robustly for everybody though. Now it's just a glitch for Sam. From the same reason I was asking for being able to see enemy tooltips etc. But continuing would start to go again towards our disagreement over what to do with the tactical-repo interface. Sorry

[Daithi]

Take your point re testing. Menu is available in tactical repositioning, will lock it down later.

[ushas]

How to break this in v20:
1. When tactical repositioning yes/no dialog is on screen;
2. Escape to the menu;
3. Go back and observe Sam's interface on screen;
4. It stays and is interactive till normal turn. Then it all corrects itself.




Feedback:
1. Turn: Really liking this feature, but still think that compare to the current form it would be even better as a normal pre-first turn with AP based on bypass and forbidden all actions except move.   
2. Dialog: Think on Steam somebody mentioned that the yes/no dialog has no C&C aspect. That is untrue for linux, there is a HUGE consequence making you to click on 'no' even when having 100% - the wandering camera! However, as that will go away, there is indeed no reason in choosing. Suggestion: Either let the game roll for us in the background automatically (no dialog), or give it some drawback (for example, if we choose to re-position, then enemies will get +X to initiative on the first normal turn). In the latter you can scrap the chance rolling all together, let us simply decide if do it.
3. Balancing (expecting it's WIP, so just preliminary thoughts): Ray has Bypass around 60+ and can re-position by 2 tiles (others by 1), while the re-po chance is around 160%. The feeling is that the former could go way up (even 1 tile per 10 points?) while the latter perhaps way down.

[Daithi]

1) Will keep it in mind - if benefit / time is good, will pursue.
2) Leaning toward the idea of a risk reward, with either initiative or ap bonus to enemies if you fail
3) Will look at this now. The repo chance is currently static and that needs to change, depending on which gang/characters you are up against. Agree that the bypass per tile is too high, will look at that too.

[ushas]

Ad 1) Just for the record, my stance is not completely objective with the first turns matter thinking.


Ad 2) I see, yeah that is a third option. Plays differently.

a) Decision and repositioning without consequences: I thought this worked well even as a part of every battle. The only problem there was the nonsencical yes/no. With % chance that's similar to the roll for a map you get. However, as you can influence the chance it puts a strong incentive to specialise one character if want to use re-positioning. Perhaps the chance can be based on the party sum instead of the highest? (so the player can decide if specialize one or make more allies good)
b) Consequence of failed roll: So the encounter boils into one percentage number, and you just weight it against the consequence of failed roll. People enjoy low chance gambling esp. if immediate reward (eg. slot machines), but I personally still see only one real decision, the same strategical one as in (a) - whether invest or not into Bypass on Sam (to get close-to-100% more often). Btw. -1 to initiative is low, not having any impact on fast guys...
c) Re-positioning itself has consequences: Tactical in comparison to (a) & (b). Deciding if trying to undertake the action, resp. how much, is worth based on where units are. I've mentioned a drawback of 'yes' decision. But can easily be more refined than that. For example: each tile moved => -1 to initiative on the first turn for this unit. So how many steps you want to go depends on the base initiative. Can be combined: eg. with (a) roll happens in the background and you weight the steps, or with (b) the failed roll has different consequence than steps (eg. distracted status), etc.


Ad 3) Listened to the video, the correlation sounds great as such % estimation adds to the difficulty of the encounter. Btw.  Survivalists again? They are gradually becoming even more difficult than already were compare to others.

[Daithi]

1) Noted

B) You're probably right on -1 penalty - will test it a bit and scale from there - will look at the other character stats also, and push one of them closer to being a bypass expert

C) It's an interesting idea - will roll this out as is in V21, and keep it in mind for future enhancement

Yeah, it's a fair enough point re survivalists - from a logic POV it (seemed to) make sense as they best trained of the enemies - will spend some time getting equilibrium between gang difficulties

[Daithi]

Can no longer escape during/before reposition. It was time to close this up