Online HS app: Feature Request and Change Log

[bobinchese]

Originally Posted by Tai-Pan

I think a nice feature would be to somehow make it to where the figures only fit in the hexes. I'm not sure exactly how to describe it, but some board games for PC have a feature where if you move something into the vicinity of where it should be, it snaps to the exact position. This would be cool for this app as you wouldn't have to spend so much time trying to get the figures centered manually on the hexes. Most especially, I would find it good for the figures on peanut bases. I have a hard time sometime spinning them around to the right position. It would make things go a little faster and look a little nicer.

Would it be possible instead to just make a rotate figure hotkey. So if you clicked say "[" you would spin counterclockwise and if you click "]" you would spin clockwise. They do that for some games I've played like Sims 3 and it works really well. I'm not sure if that would be easy to implement though.

[awesomeunleashed]

Originally Posted by bobinchese

Would it be possible instead to just make a rotate figure hotkey. So if you clicked say "[" you would spin counterclockwise and if you click "]" you would spin clockwise. They do that for some games I've played like Sims 3 and it works really well. I'm not sure if that would be easy to implement though.

It would be impossible to implement with the current interface, I'm pretty sure. We can't really make any changes to Google Drawings.

Changes like that will have to wait until we have an interface that we created entirely. We have various brainstorm-stage plans for such a thing, but don't expect to see them any time soon.

[Filthy the Clown]

App updates:

• If you add random characters to your OMs, you will continue to add random characters on your OMs until you uncheck the selection box. This will hopefully keep users from having to resubmit OMs when forgetting to re-check the 'random character' selection.
• Increased font size and tooltip for the 'Done with turn' functionality. Note that you should click on the Done with turn/action button when you have completed your turn. If it is not your turn, and you need to perform an out-of-turn action that does not involve rolling dice such as Scatter, click on this button to let your opponent know that you have completed the action. Out-of-turn actions that do involve rolling dice, such as Engagement Strike, do not require hitting the done button.

[kevindola]

I’m not sure if it’s feasible or worth the additional user input, but a nice feature would be to automate the glyph reveal functionality. Specifically for treasure glyphs (but could be applied to random power glyphs as well).

At the beginning of the game a prompt could be found somewhere asking if there are treasure glyphs in the game. If ‘yes’ then it asks how many. Based on the 'how many' answer it asks for what the trap/glyphs are to be entered. For example, if you click ‘3’. Then 4 boxes would appear with one labeled as ‘Trap’ You enter what the trap is, then enter what the 3 treasure glyphs are in the other 3 boxes.

Then you could have a dropdown option ‘Roll for treasure glyph’ where all the other drop down options are and it would automatically say either you have activated the trap or you have attained the X of Y treasure. (You may not even have to enter what the trap is, just have the drop down say 'You have activated the trap. Please blame Filthy')

Obviously there would be quite a bit of work behind that. It wouldn’t be an even split % to reveal the trap and get a treasure glyph (unless there were 3 glyphs). And you would have to account for a revealed treasure no longer being available with subsequent ‘Roll for treasure glyph’ rolls.

EDIT: glyph of Lodin, Warhulk and Ambershard trap rolls might make this too problematic

[Filthy the Clown]

Originally Posted by kevindola

I’m not sure if it’s feasible or worth the additional user input, but a nice feature would be to automate the glyph reveal functionality. Specifically for treasure glyphs (but could be applied to random power glyphs as well).

At the beginning of the game a prompt could be found somewhere asking if there are treasure glyphs in the game. If ‘yes’ then it asks how many. Based on the 'how many' answer it asks for what the trap/glyphs are to be entered. For example, if you click ‘3’. Then 4 boxes would appear with one labeled as ‘Trap’ You enter what the trap is, then enter what the 3 treasure glyphs are in the other 3 boxes.

Then you could have a dropdown option ‘Roll for treasure glyph’ where all the other drop down options are and it would automatically say either you have activated the trap or you have attained the X of Y treasure. (You may not even have to enter what the trap is, just have the drop down say 'You have activated the trap. Please blame Filthy')

Obviously there would be quite a bit of work behind that. It wouldn’t be an even split % to reveal the trap and get a treasure glyph (unless there were 3 glyphs). And you would have to account for a revealed treasure no longer being available with subsequent ‘Roll for treasure glyph’ rolls.

It is now officially on the OP list.

[bobinchese]

Originally Posted by kevindola

I’m not sure if it’s feasible or worth the additional user input, but a nice feature would be to automate the glyph reveal functionality. Specifically for treasure glyphs (but could be applied to random power glyphs as well).

At the beginning of the game a prompt could be found somewhere asking if there are treasure glyphs in the game. If ‘yes’ then it asks how many. Based on the 'how many' answer it asks for what the trap/glyphs are to be entered. For example, if you click ‘3’. Then 4 boxes would appear with one labeled as ‘Trap’ You enter what the trap is, then enter what the 3 treasure glyphs are in the other 3 boxes.

Then you could have a dropdown option ‘Roll for treasure glyph’ where all the other drop down options are and it would automatically say either you have activated the trap or you have attained the X of Y treasure. (You may not even have to enter what the trap is, just have the drop down say 'You have activated the trap. Please blame Filthy')

Obviously there would be quite a bit of work behind that. It wouldn’t be an even split % to reveal the trap and get a treasure glyph (unless there were 3 glyphs). And you would have to account for a revealed treasure no longer being available with subsequent ‘Roll for treasure glyph’ rolls.

EDIT: glyph of Lodin, Warhulk and Ambershard trap rolls might make this too problematic

Or, what if you just had to make two rolls. The first roll would be to determine if you were hit by the trap, and the second roll would be used to determine what the treasure glyph was. Yes, it's a little more work, but really you only have to push two buttons and it solves the lodin, ambershard and other problems.

[awesomeunleashed]

Originally Posted by bobinchese

Or, what if you just had to make two rolls. The first roll would be to determine if you were hit by the trap, and the second roll would be used to determine what the treasure glyph was. Yes, it's a little more work, but really you only have to push two buttons and it solves the lodin, ambershard and other problems.

Right. The way it would work is you would roll for the trap, and then if you get past it, hit a "pick glyph" quick message that picked randomly from the available glyphs.

Good idea, kevindola.

[Kinseth]

Disengage

I think we should have a disengage button available for the opponent to roll so it does not get added into the attack dice roll.

[dok]

I don't see the point of that; it's still an attack die that inflicts wounds. You don't get to roll defense against it, but that's true of lots of other attack dice (MBS paralyzing stare, Zelrig/RedW, Cutter Mob Attack, Death Knight Soul Weapons, Deadeye Dan's Ullar Rifle).

On that note though, I've though about asking my opponent to roll for my lava damage (and doing the same for him) so it shows up in the "right" place in the stats.

[Kinseth]

Because Rolling attack dice is different than taking a disengage. Plus I think it is a stat that should be tracked more than it is.

Lava damage should be tracked the same way, separate from normal attack dice.

These #'s skew a games overall attack dice, and can be misrepresenting a game by adding them in.

This is purely just a statistical thing, and not anything that is really practical!

[dok]

To say that disengage dice skew the stats would imply that those stats, without context, would tell the story of the game accurately without the disengages in there. That's not really the case. I'm not sure they tell you anything extra without the disengage dice in there. This seems like a solution in search of a problem.

[Kinseth]

To put them in with the attack dice, they would make it seem like another story happened. One where one side attacked more than it actually did, and that one side is hotter or colder than they actually were.

We all look at the attack dice to see how close we are/where to 50%. Including those other dice like Disengage/Thunderstep/Lava would paint a different picture. I think it would be better that we do it, than not.