Lobby for (or against) Piece Description Corrections

in hive-135459 •  4 years ago  (edited)

I believe there are a few pieces in CEO that could use better wording, so that anyone new to CEO (but familiar with Chess-type games) can understand exactly what they do (or as close as possible) just by reading the card independent of any other unit in the game.

Feel free to argue for/against any requested corrections put forth here or suggest your own.

I'm going to start by listing two:
Comet

Coming into CEO with fresh eyes and reading Comet's description card, it looks (to me, anyway) like Freeze-Strike is a separate ability from the suicide ability. It's such a simple fix, too: just move the suicide ability text down into the Augment section.

(my quote from a different thread)

GravityMage

GravityMage's "Move target unit toward Ability Target" is ambiguous, though. [...] "Move target unit to Ability Target or as close as possible" is a bit more wordy, but removes the ambiguity (I think).

(also my quote from a different thread)

There is still a bit of ambiguity here, though, I think (but one that is perhaps acceptable?): if there is a blocker between the Ability Target and the target unit (but the Ability Target space is free), if the reader is not thinking in terms of "move-only" (as opposed to "teleport"), but rather just as repositioning the piece, the ability description can still be misunderstood.

I say it is "perhaps acceptable" only because there may not be a better, viable (and succinct) way to phrase it, but the goal is to eliminate as best we can possible ambiguities.

Authors get paid when people like you upvote their post.
If you enjoyed what you read here, create your account today and start earning FREE STEEM!
Sort Order:  

I'll chip one in: "Destroy target" is a terrible description for destroy. First thought I had when I first played was "oh, it can target allies or enemies". No it can't. Terrible.

-main_gi

Negated sentences confuse me, here are my suggestions:
Temperance: "Cannot attack enemies of lesser value than itself" => "Can only attack enemies with value greater or equal to itself"
Chastity: "Cannot attack enemy units on the opponent side of the field" => "Can only attack enemy units on your side of the field"
Patience: "Cannot attack enemy units before move x" => "Can only attack enemy units after move x-1"

Temperance is the most confusing of these 3

Patience would probably be "Can only attack enemy units starting move x" so the move numbers are more round

understand just by reading the card independent of any other unit in the game.

Worst offenders here are probably dove/angel or anything involving promote. It's a known problem but keeps getting shoved back in favor of more exciting things.


In terms of things that are a little confusing, a lot of these I view as double-edged where version A may confuse one group of people, while version B confuses the group that understood version A. There is also some hidden weirdness in the way that these descriptions are made, because some value is given to their ability to fit onto a certain number of lines of text, or avoid a single word taking an extra line, so things are rephrased multiple times in certain scenarios simply for that reason alone.

On note of augments, the reason the move type itself shows in the unit card is the same color/icon is shown when actually picking up and moving the unit, such as moving a royalguard and seeing purple squares everywhere, you can look to the side to see what that does without deviating into the augmentation description. Whether or not this is the most understandable way of doing things I'm not entirely sure, but that was the reasoning behind it, at the very least.

Not completely related to the description but I always found the different types of ability squares of summoner to have too similar coloured sprites especially when selecting the actual piece on a board, why can't "Teleport unit to ability target" be blue smh, when I first started playing I literally had to squint at the description and try to figure out whatever the hell this piece did

I agree with this.