Easier grapple??

All about Chaos for Unreal... (UT3, UT2004, UT2003, UT)
-Atom-
Posts: 37
Joined: Fri May 17, 2002 7:43 am
Location: England, UK, Earth
Contact:

Post by -Atom- »

Knives wrote:I like the grapple just fine, except for one thing. I only use the one key, for the same space reason, and after grappling one has to hit the key again to stop mid way, then again to let go.
Is it possible to have a one press release? Most of my manuvers consist of me using the grapple to hook on something above, grappling halfway or more to the object, then letting go and having my momentum carry me to my destination. The problem I have with the current hook, is that I have to stop before I can let go, hence no momentum and no destination.
It's just a personal preferance.
I have already suggested this in the development forum in the past. See part of post below:
-Atom- wrote:2. It takes the grapple hook far far to long to disengage. When playing Q2 Chaos, I like to use the grapple to swing halfway across a room and then unhook and swing the rest of the way with momentum. It can get very frustrating as it is at the moment.
Nothing has come of it yet, but hopefully it may chage in the future. ;)
R.Flagg
Chaotic Dreams Team
Posts: 8460
Joined: Thu May 09, 2002 2:55 pm

Post by R.Flagg »

We've made it clear we won't be changing the main function key of the grapple. So to save time, I'm not gonna debate that again. (some other time would be fine though)

To swing and let go with momentum, you have to stop the cable, swing thru the arc, and then let go at the right time. So in theory, you can do the same thing with our hook that you just described with the other hook, and more.

However, I will concede what Atom has posted, that perhaps it could be a bit more smooth on the 'let go'. This would then make it easier to swing and let go and use your momentum to carry you farther. It can be done now, but it's tough, and you don't get real far.

So if there is any way these guys could tweak the release, that's fine, I'm all for it. But again, the function of the main key is set, has been for a very long time now, and is not going to be changing.

And so far, my vote is that if we change the 2nd key at all, it would be to remove it completely. IMO, the issue with not enough keys is becoming more important than sliding back up your cable. But as far as I know, it's still up for debate.
Swift Viper
Posts: 160
Joined: Sun Aug 25, 2002 12:17 am

Post by Swift Viper »

The only thing I would like to see changed as said before is to let go of the hook while swinging and keep your movement, because as of now the only way to do it is by letting go while the hook is hanging. Keep movement on the first swing should make it more fun to swing around "tarzan" style.
Mad Member with lots of ideas and questions and somewhat good fragging skills.
Shadowstar
Chaotic Dreams Team
Posts: 3290
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2003 6:22 am
Location: Arizona
Contact:

Post by Shadowstar »

Well, Flagg, if you remember, during the discussion we had on the dev forums about this, I did come up with a compromise that I felt favored everyone. I'll reiterate that here, so that the public can review it:

1. We keep the current function of the main grapple key the same.
2. We add up and down controls to the jump/duck key. Holding jump or duck will cause continuous movement up and down the cable.
3. We turn the current "grapple up" keybind into an optional grapple toggle key, which skips the grapple stop part of the first key. Basically, it engages and disengages the grapple, nothing more, nothing less. Now, obviously since both keys do basically the same thing, nobody will ever need to bind both of them at the same time, so it doesn't actually end up being an extra bind, since you'd only need to bind one of them to work, but it provides an option for those like me who want a slightly different grapple control mechanism.

For what it's worth, we don't have to remove jump capability while the grapple is in use for the jump key to function as a grapple up, just make that function act similar to jumping. So you could "jump" up the grapple cable in the air, and if you were on the cable but standing on the ground, you'd still jump like normal (with the possible addition of grapple-induced movement physics), and if you kept the jump held, you'd continue upward (or along the cable). You could also duck while on the grapple. If you were standing on the ground, obviously it would be impossible for you to move further down, but you should still be able to duck.
jb
Posts: 9825
Joined: Fri May 03, 2002 12:29 am
Location: Coral Springs, FL
Contact:

Post by jb »

Shadowstar,

maybe we can keep idea 1 & 2 and drop the other key all together...
Jb
Swift Viper
Posts: 160
Joined: Sun Aug 25, 2002 12:17 am

Post by Swift Viper »

But if the 2nd key was removed, then how would we use the other option to just let go of the grapple while swinging without entering the "hanging" mode? What if holding the jump button lets you jump from the grapple while swinging (not hanging) and skip hanging mode when you press the grapple button again?
Mad Member with lots of ideas and questions and somewhat good fragging skills.
R.Flagg
Chaotic Dreams Team
Posts: 8460
Joined: Thu May 09, 2002 2:55 pm

Post by R.Flagg »

Swift Viper wrote:What if holding the jump button lets you jump from the grapple while swinging (not hanging) and skip hanging mode when you press the grapple button again?
Not sure I understand your idea, but it sounds like changing the main grapple function, which we do not plan on doing.
Shadowstar aka 'Mr. Sound' wrote:Well, Flagg, if you remember, during the discussion we had on the dev forums about this, I did come up with a compromise that I felt favored everyone. I'll reiterate that here, so that the public can review it:

1. We keep the current function of the main grapple key the same.
I dig the fact that you are determined, and working your case well. And that we've got #1 established, and can move on.

2. We add up and down controls to the jump/duck key. Holding jump or duck will cause continuous movement up and down the cable.
I have no problem with this. If the rest of the guys like it, and can code it, then I'm Ok with this too.

I read your ideas on the 2nd key, toggling between two grapples, and while there is a certain logic to it, there are also reasonable arguments against going this way. It is nice to provide options, but you can go overboard as well. Too many becomes clutter.

But that's not all. I prefer options that let people turn something on or off, options to pick one weapon/item for a map, or leave one out. But I do not favor options that change the way something functions. I still prefer having folks use only the Chaos grapple as it is now (2nd key excluded), and live or die on the results.

I think it will do well out there. I have faith in this design.
Zachariah
Chaotic Dreams Team
Posts: 2331
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2003 5:25 pm
Location: Wherever Dreams Go Stale.

Post by Zachariah »

WOW this is carrying on.
for what its worth I'd like to say that even tho i started this thread , I understand and respect what you chaos guys are saying and why you're saying it .

just give the grapple more time , thats all you need to master it.
Shadowstar
Chaotic Dreams Team
Posts: 3290
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2003 6:22 am
Location: Arizona
Contact:

Post by Shadowstar »

I really don't think it will make any difference if one player's grapple stops first before releasing and another's doesnt. What matters is that the player who's using it likes it that way. If you're better with one than the other, there's no reason to force you to use the one you're not as good with. And I think it's pretty obvious by now that there are enough people on both sides of this issue to warrant the second key.

Chaos isn't cluttered now, and we wouldn't be adding a key, just changing the function of a key that's already in.

I mean, I could just make the argument that the original grapple key should be removed in favor of the one that just toggles it, without stopping before releasing, and it would be just as valid as the argument vice-versa.
Oaf{WoD}
Posts: 20
Joined: Thu Jul 17, 2003 5:23 am
Location: New Hampshire, USA
Contact:

Post by Oaf{WoD} »

I'm sorry, RFlagg... I have to agree with these guys on this one. Simply giving the option to have the hook the way it is now or toggle (press to hook, depress to release) will only add to the universal enjoyment of the game by all hook lovers. Both hooks are extremely useful in their own right in different combat situations. In WoD 8.0 we offered clients this option and I have to say that most players preferred the toggle (I use both, depending on the situation). If those players are still alive today <grin> I would bet they still prefer the toggle. If it's easy to code a simple toggle, why would one NOT opt to please the clients if the original configuration remained intact as the first option? Actually, the best idea, IMHO, is to make it so you can use both hooks at will at any time, going from one configuration to the next "on the fly". I've spoken my piece. Take care.
DemonHunter
Posts: 563
Joined: Sun Aug 03, 2003 11:34 am
Location: Canadia
Contact:

Post by DemonHunter »

The Grapple is PERFECT as is. it should be left alone :D
although it would be cool if the rope didn't go through objects 8)
Image
[23:21] <DH> everybody knows coders are robots
[23:21] <DH> and should be treated as such
[23:21] <JimMarlowe> shhh
Kirin
Chaotic Wild Child
Posts: 238
Joined: Sun May 05, 2002 7:52 pm
Location: ECU, Greenville, NC
Contact:

Post by Kirin »

:D

I think the grapple control should be customized in whatever way fits the player. Some prefer additional buttons to use while moving along the grapple while others prefer using existing binds while others ... well ... the ol' one button uncontrolled gig: you shoot, it fires, you moved through it automatically ... a bit like how the grapple item works in Zelda. 8O

Personally, I'd go for the jump/duck thing but I can get used to using other keys or if I'm desperate and my hands hurt, then I'll edit the ini file so I could bind two commands in one key. :lol:
Post Reply