Most newb commanders won't be using the hotkeys anyways -- they will be clicking on the UI buttons with their mouse. Once they are comfortable enough to learn the buttons, they can figure out the grid method intuitively.
ssjyodaJoin Date: 2002-03-05Member: 274Members, Squad Five Blue
I've always found the Grid system much easier to learn and work with. My left hand jumping all over the keyboard always for hotkeys always gave me problems... also, having "C" for the command chair, what key would you use for crag. When you have overlaps like that, it becomes a little more challenging.
<!--quoteo(post=1809354:date=Nov 23 2010, 08:23 PM:name=Lemming Jesus)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Lemming Jesus @ Nov 23 2010, 08:23 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1809354"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->If we can just rebind keys then I don't care either way.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> +1 for the ability to bind them yourself (even if we have to go config file editing)
I don't really care what is the default option is, but there is a point i have to make about the grid. If one wants to use the grid system, can they flip the bias in where the major buttons are located? the left side bias for the buttons mean that right handed people using the grid will primarily use their pinky finger for hot-keys, however I think that the buttons should be biased towards the dominant index fingers (for left hand hot key users, right hand hot-key users, who are most likely left handed, would of course prefer the left side bias). Of course one could always simply flip the grid assignments in the hot key assignments, but it would then be flipped from the actual GUI which would be confusing.
I think the grid is actually easier to learn, because there is a quick reference for the grid hot-keys in the hud at all times (the GUI itself serves as a easy to understand reference), no need to hover over buttons to reveal their hot key. Flipping the grid keys on the keyboard, to make a right side (left hand index finger) bias, but not doing so on the GUI would break this correlation. Perhaps you could make the button placement on the GUI grid itself a script-able element. That way you could have button layouts that are completely customizable. Maybe it could even allow buttons at a lower level in the click hierarchy to be unburied, or even a fully customizable click hierarchy for each building.
To demonstrate what I mean by bias I have attached an image. [attachment=35966:rtsbuttonbias.jpg]
A well thought out letter system, because spamming buttons on a grid system or bad letter system might turn into missclicks.
I.e. Imagine in SC2, if a Zerg unit had the build hotkey S. Select Larvae (s) -> Morph Hydralisk (s). So many hydralisks would be built unintentionally.
The same thing could happen in NS2, if you have a grid, where the build key would be at the bottom left, Z, while a building in the build submenu would be at the same location, Z. You'd have to back out off that selection almost each time, if you're spamming keys alot.
Of course, the best would be to all 3 options: *Default letter system *Grid *Customizable
But if I'd have to choose, it would, without a doubt, be the letter system, and I think every serious RTS gamer would agree.
<!--quoteo(post=1809364:date=Nov 23 2010, 11:29 AM:name=Corporal_Fortier)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Corporal_Fortier @ Nov 23 2010, 11:29 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1809364"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Would be nice though if both teams' resource building would be the same hotkey (like B->R for resource harvester/extractor).<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> This. Definitely this. Hotkeys for similar buildings (hive/comm chair, extractor, turret/whip?) should be the same for each side, and grid is better suited for this. Anyone learning to command will have to learn the keys anyway, may as well teach them the method that works best in the long run by default.
DOTA is an excellent example of where a grid is clearly better suited - the default (at least with earlier versions, not sure about now) was the letter system, and it was a pain both to learn what the hotkeys were for each hero and to reach the keys (frequently they were in awkward positions)
<!--quoteo(post=1809341:date=Nov 23 2010, 02:14 PM:name=WhiteZero)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (WhiteZero @ Nov 23 2010, 02:14 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1809341"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Letter for sure. But having an option to switch between the two would of course be preferable.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
^this
As a small offtopic, i'd like for queues to be added sometime.
Pros <ul><li>Faster</li><li>Easier* to learn, as you don't have to work out what key is for what building. Letter based system has never been intuative enough in a game I have played so far.</li><li>Legacy support to NS1.</li><li>Localization making things weird? meh..</li></ul> Cons <ul><li>People will complain. Not that they wouldn't if you went with the Letter system though : )</li><li>I got nothing...</li></ul>
Tbh, add re-mapping to either grid or letter then all is fine. It's more work and I would only do that if people REALLY complain though.
Grid system is faster to learn and faster to use. I have commanded thousands of competitive games with the grid system and I've played a lot of other games without such system. I would never go back to 1.0 times with the old letter system. I hate it when you've to change position of your left hand all the time. The learning curve is only lower for the first two minutes with the letter-system, as soon as you use grid for a while, grid is faster for learning new keys.
And like Garo said, a lot of keys have conflicts so you'd still have to check the key. And in the <i>long</i> run the, the key memory is in fingers (or rather in the brain part handling finger movement). So basically as far as fingers are concerned, the only difference is that with letter-system you're using much more keyboard and have to move the left hand all the time. Its as much as fun if you had WASD controls for movement for Rifle, but TFGH buttons for Pistol.
If you're familar with the system you use and don't know a button, you can just check the position with the grid system but with the letter-system you have to mousehover over it to find it out. The former is much faster. Once in Starcraft II beta, the grid system broke up for some builds and I had to learn the letter-system for a while. I quickly learnt the basic stuff (probes) but I had to constantly look up news to the point it was too late quite often. And that was quite annoying as SC2 has quite a few menus.
I don't see how letter-system is better for newcomers. If you both command <i>and</i> need hotkeys, you probably are an experienced and player and for reasons listed above I'd find grid is better.
But if a lot of people like the letter system, maybe having them as an option in the com chair would be a good idea.
<!--quoteo(post=1809398:date=Nov 24 2010, 06:05 AM:name=Pr0n)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Pr0n @ Nov 24 2010, 06:05 AM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1809398"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Can't we have Letter system default, and a grid system *option*?
Grid system *is* better but Letter system *is* more traditional. Do both.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> This :)
I just made a post about this in I&S a few days ago, but nobody seems to read that subforum. :( I suggested Gridkeys and explained why First Letter is the worse choice. <a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?showtopic=111535" target="_blank">Gridkey vs First Letter I&S topic</a>
Grid by far. Getting really irritated by having to hover over items to find out what hotkey I was supposed to have pressed instead of the one that got me something completely different that started with the same letter. Just having to glance at the images in the lower right is much faster.
I've never spent a lot of time using a grid system for RTS since I spend most of my time just clicking the buttons, mostly so I can read the overlay and learn what the structure does. I'll eventually learn the hotkeys, and grid is probably the easiest to grasp, rather than context sensitive letters.
I wonder how this will work with a rotational command panel like the Aliens. AQWERF?
In NS1 I wouldn't have it any other way than the grid. It suits NS1 absolutely perfect. NS1 commanding is probably as fluent as my keyboard use has ever been.
On SC2 on the other hand I'm still using the classic letter menu even though there's also a grid avaible. This is due to the nature of having so many things to select. With grid you're easily "misfiring" things while selecting a wrong kind of unit. For example zerg hatchery select larva overlaps with some larva morph, so you'll easily end up morphing units even if you were trying to select larva.
The more 'unit specifc' selection and hotkeys there are, the better letter setup is for me. Meanwhile on pure 1-menu all around style of NS1 the grid is superior as long as you can handle the few buildings with hotgroups (mostly arms, obs, proto and armory in NS' case).
Most of all I'd just like to avoid overlapping keys on whatever the method is. In NS1 you could accidentally recycle your buildings because 'cancel upgrade (/beacon)' and recycle occupied the same spot in the grid. Talk about being careful while trying to pull of beacon/cancel manouvres in a hectic spot.
I <i>really</i> want wasd to be movement keys for the commander, as it is highly uncomfortable to play with criss-crossed arms (like this: X). Other than that it doesnt matter much really, altough I usually prefer grid system as then my left hand wont have to move much, aswell as my right wont have to move much (its on mouse, I use high sensitivity ;D).
<!--quoteo(post=1809406:date=Nov 23 2010, 11:11 PM:name=Align)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Align @ Nov 23 2010, 11:11 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1809406"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Grid by far. Getting really irritated by having to hover over items to find out what hotkey I was supposed to have pressed instead of the one that got me something completely different that started with the same letter. Just having to glance at the images in the lower right is much faster.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> This. If you've got the same brain logic as the person who designed the buttons, you don't have that much trouble learning new keys, but most people tend to think differently what makes sense for conflicts and compound words. I still press M for medpack occasionally.
Although I don't really care what's the default as long as grid is available.
<!--quoteo(post=1809361:date=Nov 23 2010, 02:27 PM:name=Flayra)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Flayra @ Nov 23 2010, 02:27 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1809361"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Good point. But actually, we're changing the alien commander HUD to be more standard and like the marine HUD.
Every time we try to make a "custom" commander UI, we end up going with the more traditional one! Lesson learned...again.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
<!--quoteo(post=1809415:date=Nov 23 2010, 09:20 PM:name=TaiSHi)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (TaiSHi @ Nov 23 2010, 09:20 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1809415"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->I agree, tho, that having options to switch back and forth is the best choice, but it's also more work<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
It's not that much work. For a start, there could just be a separat .lua file that contains nothing but the key definitions. One variable for every button in the game and every hotkey model is possible.
I think grid would be a better option, but there's a few things that I feel should be lettered, like "attack" really should be A for instance
it's the reason in starcraft I couldn't make the transition, I feel grid is more useful for buildings and upgrades since they tend to have forgettable names, especially upgrades
but things like castable abilities and (s)top, (a)ttack and (h)old position feel much more natural lettered
<!--quoteo(post=1809409:date=Nov 23 2010, 03:14 PM:name=Bacillus)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bacillus @ Nov 23 2010, 03:14 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1809409"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Most of all I'd just like to avoid overlapping keys on whatever the method is. In NS1 you could accidentally recycle your buildings because 'cancel upgrade (/beacon)' and recycle occupied the same spot in the grid. Talk about being careful while trying to pull of beacon/cancel manouvres in a hectic spot.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> I've done this a few times already in NS2 just clicking with the mouse. The back menu option is at the same position as recycle. Since we have 15 spaces available, recycle should really have its own position. Cancel too.
<!--quoteo(post=1809409:date=Nov 23 2010, 09:14 PM:name=Bacillus)--><div class='quotetop'>QUOTE (Bacillus @ Nov 23 2010, 09:14 PM) <a href="index.php?act=findpost&pid=1809409"><{POST_SNAPBACK}></a></div><div class='quotemain'><!--quotec-->Most of all I'd just like to avoid overlapping keys on whatever the method is. In NS1 you could accidentally recycle your buildings because 'cancel upgrade (/beacon)' and recycle occupied the same spot in the grid. Talk about being careful while trying to pull of beacon/cancel manouvres in a hectic spot.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd--> This is one example of why I don't want grid style hotkeys.
Comments
Otherwise i'd go for letters.
+1 for the ability to bind them yourself (even if we have to go config file editing)
If one wants to use the grid system, can they flip the bias in where the major buttons are located?
the left side bias for the buttons mean that right handed people using the grid will primarily use their pinky finger for hot-keys, however I think that the buttons should be biased towards the dominant index fingers (for left hand hot key users, right hand hot-key users, who are most likely left handed, would of course prefer the left side bias). Of course one could always simply flip the grid assignments in the hot key assignments, but it would then be flipped from the actual GUI which would be confusing.
I think the grid is actually easier to learn, because there is a quick reference for the grid hot-keys in the hud at all times (the GUI itself serves as a easy to understand reference), no need to hover over buttons to reveal their hot key. Flipping the grid keys on the keyboard, to make a right side (left hand index finger) bias, but not doing so on the GUI would break this correlation. Perhaps you could make the button placement on the GUI grid itself a script-able element. That way you could have button layouts that are completely customizable. Maybe it could even allow buttons at a lower level in the click hierarchy to be unburied, or even a fully customizable click hierarchy for each building.
To demonstrate what I mean by bias I have attached an image.
[attachment=35966:rtsbuttonbias.jpg]
I.e. Imagine in SC2, if a Zerg unit had the build hotkey S. Select Larvae (s) -> Morph Hydralisk (s). So many hydralisks would be built unintentionally.
The same thing could happen in NS2, if you have a grid, where the build key would be at the bottom left, Z, while a building in the build submenu would be at the same location, Z. You'd have to back out off that selection almost each time, if you're spamming keys alot.
Of course, the best would be to all 3 options:
*Default letter system
*Grid
*Customizable
But if I'd have to choose, it would, without a doubt, be the letter system, and I think every serious RTS gamer would agree.
This. Definitely this. Hotkeys for similar buildings (hive/comm chair, extractor, turret/whip?) should be the same for each side, and grid is better suited for this. Anyone learning to command will have to learn the keys anyway, may as well teach them the method that works best in the long run by default.
DOTA is an excellent example of where a grid is clearly better suited - the default (at least with earlier versions, not sure about now) was the letter system, and it was a pain both to learn what the hotkeys were for each hero and to reach the keys (frequently they were in awkward positions)
^this
As a small offtopic, i'd like for queues to be added sometime.
Pros
<ul><li>Faster</li><li>Easier* to learn, as you don't have to work out what key is for what building. Letter based system has never been intuative enough in a game I have played so far.</li><li>Legacy support to NS1.</li><li>Localization making things weird? meh..</li></ul>
Cons
<ul><li>People will complain. Not that they wouldn't if you went with the Letter system though : )</li><li>I got nothing...</li></ul>
Tbh, add re-mapping to either grid or letter then all is fine. It's more work and I would only do that if people REALLY complain though.
* IMO
And like Garo said, a lot of keys have conflicts so you'd still have to check the key. And in the <i>long</i> run the, the key memory is in fingers (or rather in the brain part handling finger movement). So basically as far as fingers are concerned, the only difference is that with letter-system you're using much more keyboard and have to move the left hand all the time. Its as much as fun if you had WASD controls for movement for Rifle, but TFGH buttons for Pistol.
If you're familar with the system you use and don't know a button, you can just check the position with the grid system but with the letter-system you have to mousehover over it to find it out. The former is much faster. Once in Starcraft II beta, the grid system broke up for some builds and I had to learn the letter-system for a while. I quickly learnt the basic stuff (probes) but I had to constantly look up news to the point it was too late quite often. And that was quite annoying as SC2 has quite a few menus.
I don't see how letter-system is better for newcomers. If you both command <i>and</i> need hotkeys, you probably are an experienced and player and for reasons listed above I'd find grid is better.
But if a lot of people like the letter system, maybe having them as an option in the com chair would be a good idea.
Grid system *is* better but Letter system *is* more traditional. Do both.
Grid system *is* better but Letter system *is* more traditional. Do both.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This :)
I suggested Gridkeys and explained why First Letter is the worse choice.
<a href="http://www.unknownworlds.com/ns2/forums/index.php?showtopic=111535" target="_blank">Gridkey vs First Letter I&S topic</a>
Getting really irritated by having to hover over items to find out what hotkey I was supposed to have pressed instead of the one that got me something completely different that started with the same letter. Just having to glance at the images in the lower right is much faster.
I wonder how this will work with a rotational command panel like the Aliens. AQWERF?
In NS1 I wouldn't have it any other way than the grid. It suits NS1 absolutely perfect. NS1 commanding is probably as fluent as my keyboard use has ever been.
On SC2 on the other hand I'm still using the classic letter menu even though there's also a grid avaible. This is due to the nature of having so many things to select. With grid you're easily "misfiring" things while selecting a wrong kind of unit. For example zerg hatchery select larva overlaps with some larva morph, so you'll easily end up morphing units even if you were trying to select larva.
The more 'unit specifc' selection and hotkeys there are, the better letter setup is for me. Meanwhile on pure 1-menu all around style of NS1 the grid is superior as long as you can handle the few buildings with hotgroups (mostly arms, obs, proto and armory in NS' case).
Most of all I'd just like to avoid overlapping keys on whatever the method is. In NS1 you could accidentally recycle your buildings because 'cancel upgrade (/beacon)' and recycle occupied the same spot in the grid. Talk about being careful while trying to pull of beacon/cancel manouvres in a hectic spot.
Other than that it doesnt matter much really, altough I usually prefer grid system as then my left hand wont have to move much, aswell as my right wont have to move much (its on mouse, I use high sensitivity ;D).
Getting really irritated by having to hover over items to find out what hotkey I was supposed to have pressed instead of the one that got me something completely different that started with the same letter. Just having to glance at the images in the lower right is much faster.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
This. If you've got the same brain logic as the person who designed the buttons, you don't have that much trouble learning new keys, but most people tend to think differently what makes sense for conflicts and compound words. I still press M for medpack occasionally.
Although I don't really care what's the default as long as grid is available.
I agree, tho, that having options to switch back and forth is the best choice, but it's also more work
Every time we try to make a "custom" commander UI, we end up going with the more traditional one! Lesson learned...again.<!--QuoteEnd--></div><!--QuoteEEnd-->
uniformity - faster, better. greater APM
btw, arent you supposed to be taking a break ?
It's not that much work.
For a start, there could just be a separat .lua file that contains nothing but the key definitions.
One variable for every button in the game and every hotkey model is possible.
it's the reason in starcraft I couldn't make the transition, I feel grid is more useful for buildings and upgrades since they tend to have forgettable names, especially upgrades
but things like castable abilities and (s)top, (a)ttack and (h)old position feel much more natural lettered
I've done this a few times already in NS2 just clicking with the mouse. The back menu option is at the same position as recycle. Since we have 15 spaces available, recycle should really have its own position. Cancel too.
This is one example of why I don't want grid style hotkeys.