Gem Target Prority considerations

[Ri Veroe]

So, there's a set of gem target priorities that you can access by right clicking a gem and dragging in one of eight directions. Structure, nearest to orb, giants, swarmlings, so on.

This is an idea thread; basically, it'd be really nice if we could hold shift on a few of these options. "Structure" would ideally have a modifier called "Structures Only" intended to target structures and only structures, even if an enemy/monster enters its kill radius. "Random" may have a modifier called "Specific Targets" and will only react when a target is selected.

The truth of the matter is I only want one particular feature (and that's Structures Only; it's better than filling the map with empty towers) but the chance to add a little extra function to other aspects of priority targets in the game might improve some of the metagame aspects. Nearest to Orb can modify to Furthest From Orb, The giants and swarmlings could be modified to SOMETHING, exactly what I do not know. Giants/Swarmlings ONLY doesn't seem reasonable, because that's wasted DPS. Structures Only makes more sense because the metagame of SuperGems of rank forty or greater depends on traps, and enemies not travelling means wasted mana. That's pretty important stuff if you wanna be grinding mana.

tl:dr
"hold shift when setting target priority" should add some more options to make towers more versatile. suggestions above.

edit:
I should probably clarify that I'm not demanding anything. I know how it can be a bit of a pain to add entirely new features to an already very detailed game, and a solution to my particular problem sure does exist - that is, tower-blocking - but it never hurts to share. We could get lucky!

edit2:
I should probably list the actual thought process.
Structure > Structures only
Nearest to Orb > Furthest from Orb
Giants > Nearest to tower
Swarmlings > Furthest from tower
Random > Specific Targets
Special Targets > Special Targets Only
Highest Armor > Most Banished
Least Health > Most Health

Some others: Specific Region (Probably the hardest to implement, requiring some way to place a smaller circle INSIDE the maximum range of a tower that is the only active area). Lowest armor (Pretty obvious.)

I can see Most Banished being really useful for late-game endurance when you REALLY need to get rid of "THAT ONE GIANT." Special Targets Only could be pretty useful for nailing spectres to the ground in a hurry.

(Hoo boy, this got big quickly.)

[darthmohawk1]

"Special Targets" used to include "highest banishment cost" as one of the criteria for choice of target, but that was changed due to the feature causing more lag than it was worth (I think).

How is "Structures Only" different from the current functionality of "Structures"? Under the current implementation, the gem will only target structures, and will not target monsters unless there are no structures within range.

You can change the range of a tower by using the mouse wheel or the Up and Down arrow keys while your mouse is hovering over that gem.

Some of the other targeting options you listed would definitely be useful, though!

[Sebastian]

Originally posted by darthmohawk1:

How is "Structures Only" different from the current functionality of "Structures"? Under the current implementation, the gem will only target structures, and will not target monsters unless there are no structures within range.

the last part is where the difference is at.
structures only would not target monsters, no matter what.

on the topic of improved targeting, why not add some sort of priority list? for example, if I set a tower to structures, I might not want it to target nearest to orb when structures are gone, I might want it to look for shadows.
you could even go so far as to take the structures only and break it into structures and none. if you were to put structures as 1. priority and none as 2., you would only target structures. you could also use this to for example change it to only target structures and shadows by saying 1.structures, 2. shadows and 3. none.

[Ri Veroe]

Originally posted by darthmohawk1:

"Special Targets" used to include "highest banishment cost" as one of the criteria for choice of target, but that was changed due to the feature causing more lag than it was worth (I think).

How is "Structures Only" different from the current functionality of "Structures"? Under the current implementation, the gem will only target structures, and will not target monsters unless there are no structures within range.

You can change the range of a tower by using the mouse wheel or the Up and Down arrow keys while your mouse is hovering over that gem.

Some of the other targeting options you listed would definitely be useful, though!

Sorry if I didn't make this clear in the original post! Uh, the primary difference as Sebastian rightly says is that it ignores monsters if there are no structures in range, entirely. This sort of gem would scrub Beacons off the battlefield without disturbing the horde of gem-summoned monsters on screen, letting your mana farm do all the harvesting it's capable of doing.

I currently do use the aforementioned technique of reducing the range of the tower, though, until I reach some sort of "Beacon critical mass." At which point as a player I'm forced to increase the range of the tower until it starts attacking beacons. This is fine, normally, but a grade 40 gem can clear out all the structures very quickly... and once it does that, it almost immediately wipes 100 or so monsters per second and maybe a lot more. It's almost impossible to tell the gem to stop without losing ~some~ monsters, simply because gems appear to target the next available damageable entity before the last hit on the previous target has landed. I have not tested that hypothesis, but that is how it looks at face value.

Originally posted by Sebastian:

Originally posted by darthmohawk1:

How is "Structures Only" different from the current functionality of "Structures"? Under the current implementation, the gem will only target structures, and will not target monsters unless there are no structures within range.

the last part is where the difference is at.
structures only would not target monsters, no matter what.

on the topic of improved targeting, why not add some sort of priority list? for example, if I set a tower to structures, I might not want it to target nearest to orb when structures are gone, I might want it to look for shadows.
you could even go so far as to take the structures only and break it into structures and none. if you were to put structures as 1. priority and none as 2., you would only target structures. you could also use this to for example change it to only target structures and shadows by saying 1.structures, 2. shadows and 3. none.

I recognized the desire for a priority list during the writing of this post, actually! I was concerned that the original implementation of the priority "circle" was an aesthetic choice, and I wanted to respect the developer's position on this matter as much as possible. Short of using Shift to change one set, Control to change another and Alt for a final set, I can't see too many ways of adding ALL possible extra features without it being overly complex or user-unfriendly. With three modifier keys, not including combinations, that's 32 different targetting priorities... Which, while temptingly detailed, would be really nasty stuff to keep track of if you've remembered where the target priorities are so that you don't have to pause all the time.

I /might/ be misunderstanding your intention, though, Sebastian. It seems as though you're referring to choosing multiple priorities for the same tower. I figure it could be something that would work, but again, I'm unsure of the implementation of the system. Though, if I understand what you're saying properly, the ability to target "Structures / At random / Without Monsters" would be incredible. The random distribution of shots would destroy all towers at virtually the same time, keeping the field well suppressed.

I was anxious to see the reaction to this suggestion; I'm glad it's for the most part positive right now.

[Sebastian]

Originally posted by /ri: vɛroʊ/:

I /might/ be misunderstanding your intention, though, Sebastian. It seems as though you're referring to choosing multiple priorities for the same tower. I figure it could be something that would work, but again, I'm unsure of the implementation of the system.

you actually did misunderstand me. what I was trying to say is that one can freely choose the order of importance of targets. things high on the list would be targeted first, while things low on the list would be targeted last.
this would remove a lot of micromanagement especially earlygame.

Originally posted by /ri: vɛroʊ/:

Though, if I understand what you're saying properly, the ability to target "Structures / At random / Without Monsters" would be incredible. The random distribution of shots would destroy all towers at virtually the same time, keeping the field well suppressed.

that would be even better, though possibly harder to implement.
maybe one could customise a certain set of tower behavious out of combat, allowing you to generate whichever behaviours you might need. imagine replacing the default set of priorities with more complex custom ones.

[Ri Veroe]

Originally posted by Sebastian:

Originally posted by /ri: vɛroʊ/:

I /might/ be misunderstanding your intention, though, Sebastian. It seems as though you're referring to choosing multiple priorities for the same tower. I figure it could be something that would work, but again, I'm unsure of the implementation of the system.

you actually did misunderstand me. what I was trying to say is that one can freely choose the order of importance of targets. things high on the list would be targeted first, while things low on the list would be targeted last.
this would remove a lot of micromanagement especially earlygame.

Originally posted by /ri: vɛroʊ/:

Though, if I understand what you're saying properly, the ability to target "Structures / At random / Without Monsters" would be incredible. The random distribution of shots would destroy all towers at virtually the same time, keeping the field well suppressed.

that would be even better, though possibly harder to implement.
maybe one could customise a certain set of tower behavious out of combat, allowing you to generate whichever behaviours you might need. imagine replacing the default set of priorities with more complex custom ones.

Ah, I see, I think I understand now. Both ideas seem pretty solid; like I said, my motivation for making this post at all was for a singular feature, but the opportunity it opens up is absolutely worth exploring. Any and all input is great to see, even if it doesn't see the light of day.