Why are there two keys for stair travel?

[XuaXua]

At the time of this posting, as far as I know, there is never a point where you will ever use both the '<' and the '>' keys in the exact same square for stair travel.

You either go up or down successfully because the stairs provide that direction, or you fail to do the opposite.

I'm sure there are others who are so keybound, it's understandable that changing keys would be a horrific travesty akin to removing a much beloved yet redundant race that's been in the game since day one, but are two keys necessary, or simply one to represent vertical travel?

[twelwe]

I macro G> to 6. I have a lot of small macros like that. We don't use 'c' unless it is over a corpse, but that doesn't mean we're going to bind it to something else.

[nicolae]

It's probably a holdover that just isn't enough of a big deal to bother changing.

[rchandra]

Having 2 keys has saved me from going the wrong way (hit < on the down staircase on vault: 7).

[inkydood]

The keys used correspond to their respective ASCII stair glyphs, for interface clarity and consistency. See ">", press ">". See "<", press "<".

Also changing it would be a horrific travesty

[dpeg]

Changing key commands is an option, but it shouldn't be undertaken light-heartedly. Basically, all veterans will be upset, so the gain has to be significant. Crawl had one major command key change, a long time ago (0.5 or so).

Combining < and > into one command seems not worth at all the trouble, in my opinion:
1. For console players, the commands are extremely natural, as mentioned already.
2. X<, X> and G<, G> make good use of the distinction.
3. Where the distinction was pointless, it has been removed (e.g. shops accept both < and >).

[twelwe]

Crawl had one major command key change, a long time ago (0.5 or so).

what was it?

[dpeg]

It's been even longer ago: from 0.3 to 0.4. Here's a verbatim paste of 034_changes.txt which was part of the documentation until very recently. We even had a pdf so players could read about the changes in nice layout, or even print the thing. I wonder how many players actually did that... probably zero

  Code:

Information for players of versions 0.3.4 or earlier
----------------------------------------------------

There have been many changes to the interface in the new version,
mostly in 0.4, some more in 0.5. Among them:

* Swapped some command keys around:
   z         cast spell         (was Z)
   Z         zap wand           (was z)
   o         auto-explore       (was Ctrl-O)
   Ctrl-O    dungeon overview   (was O)
   O         open door          (was o)
   C         close door         (was c)
   c         chop up            (was D, dissect)
   E         show experience    (was C)
   v         evoke              (was E)
   f, F      fire/throw         (was t)
   t         tell/yell          (was !)
   Ctrl-V    Tiles settings     (was Ctrl-Q)
   Ctrl-Q    quit               (was Q)

* Changed the commands for travel exclusions in the level map:
   e         set exclusion      (was Ctrl-X)
   E         cycle exclusions   (was x)

* Added some new commands:
   !         annotate dungeon level
             (If your annotation contains '!' you'll be prompted whenever
             you attempt to enter the level.)
   (, )      cycle the quiver to the next/previous appropriate item
   Q         quiver an item for firing
   `         repeat previous command
   0         repeat next command # of times
   V         verbose list of monsters and items in sight
   Ctrl-D    define macros (synonym to '~')
   Ctrl-T    change your allies' pickup behaviour
             (only available to some characters)

   There is a file called "key_changes.pdf" in the docs/ directory that
   lists all of these command changes on a printable reference sheet.

* Removed the 'v' command (view item in inventory). Its functionality is
  provided by pressing 'i' (showing the inventory) and the letter for the
  item, at the same number of key presses.

* The chop up (formerly dissect) interface is modified: there is no
  prompt anymore for single corpses. In case of several corpses on the
  square, you may use 'c' as a synonym for yes, and 'a' will answer yes
  to this and all further corpses. In particular, all corpses in a square
  can be sacrificed with 'pca'.

* When targeting, the functions of '!' and '.' have been swapped. Thus
  firing with '.' will now stop at the target, whereas '!' will shoot
  further if the target was missed. Enter etc. still behave as in 0.3.4.
  You can now target using the monster list; Cltr-L toggles this option.
  You can quiver an item, meaning that you will preferably fire this
  ammunition (and keep doing so even if you run out of it temporarily).
  Quivering is done via 'Q' (quiver the currently fired item) or 'fi'
  (choose an item for firing and quiver it) or also by using '(' which
  cycles appropriate ammunition. 'F' lets you select an item to be thrown
  without affecting the quiver.

* The colours of many monsters have been changed. Most notably, there are
  no darkgrey monsters anymore. In case darkgrey is actually better
  visible than blue on your system, you can swap these colours using
     colour.blue = darkgrey
  in init.txt.
  Apart from that, more dangerous monsters are now generally displayed in
  lighter colours.

We are content that all of these changes are genuine improvements. Should
your brain be hardwired to the old settings, you can effectively enforce
the 0.3.4 state by using the following options:
   include                 = 034_monster_glyphs.txt
   include                 = 034_command_keys.txt
   always_confirm_butcher  = true

Note that the header of init.txt contains these lines. (It contains some
more options for using other old settings.) The options are commented out,
so you just need to remove the # in front in order to activate them. You
can choose to use only part of these options. In case you decide to use
the old keyset, be aware that D is also a synonym for 'yes' in the
butcher interface.

If you choose to go with the new keyset or the new butcher interface and
you intend to use your old macros, you'll need to look through your
macro.txt file.

There are a number of new options, some of them outsourced into various
files in the settings/ folder, so if you intend to use your old init file,
you may still want to at least look through the new one.
(END)


[XuaXua]

It's been even longer ago: from 0.3 to 0.4.

That was back when the 3 other people who played Crawl got on IRC and filled it with such bile and hatred, the bots wept.

[BlackSheep]

3. Where the distinction was pointless, it has been removed (e.g. shops accept both < and >).

The distinction is pointless when standing on stairs that only go one way. Being able to go up by pressing > and down by pressing < doesn't impact the people who want to do the opposite.

By the same token, how hard is it to use the existing keys? I like being able to enter shops and portals by pressing either key, but I don't hate having to press one key use up stairs and a different one for down stairs.

[Tiber]

3. Where the distinction was pointless, it has been removed (e.g. shops accept both < and >).

So how about we compromise, and make it so you can use any stairs with < or > ? The distinction is pointless everywhere, but this way the people who just have to have it stay the same can continue to use the buttons they want to use.

By the same token, how hard is it to use the existing keys? I like being able to enter shops and portals by pressing either key, but I don't hate having to press one key use up stairs and a different one for down stairs.

It's not that it's hard; it's just that one of the biggest barriers to entry for roguelikes is a horrible user interface, including key bloat. In fact, one of the things I like most about crawl is that I can use the mouse half the time and don't have to care about remembering a lot of keys.

[dpeg]

Tiber: I am not convinced. If < and > were synonymous (you can achieve that with a macro, by the way), then a new player has a one key less to learn -- at the expense of being unable to use G<, G>, X<, X> properly later on. Brogue goes a long way towards a slim interface: it has no stair commands at all (if you move onto a stair, you take it). But I don't believe that this is a serious concern for Crawl: our players expect a bigger game, and the tutorial will tell them very early about the relevant commands.

Also, I support tiles very much but I'd be quite upset if reducing key bloat for tilists makes my console game more annoying to play. Mouse support is good and will be strengthened all the way.

[BlackSheep]

Also, I support tiles very much but I'd be quite upset if reducing key bloat for tilists makes my console game more annoying to play.

How would allowing < and > to traverse any type of stair make your console game more annoying? Making the keys work the same in one context does not prohibit G> or X< from being different in their own contexts.

[dpeg]

It's not just my game, I am also thinking about new console players. You see, in console, stairs are shown as > or < glyphs, and it's extremely obvious what to press. I agree that in tiles these commands are not as natural, and it would be better to have a "go up"/"go down" button appear as soon as you stand on a stair.

[galehar]

The distinction is good to avoid stupid mistakes. Merging the 2 keys would achieve absolutely nothing. If you can't remember which is which, just click the dude in the middle of the screen.

[Deimos]

I'm way too used to using > and < in rougelikes. If it was made so either key worked on either stair, then there'd be no noticeable difference other then people dying because they thought they were on another pair of stairs. If it was made into just one key for both sets of stairs, it'd feel extremely unnatural for most players.

[varsovie]

The distinction is good to avoid stupid mistakes.

Yeah, sometime I try to go the wrong way and the distinction stops me. But the worse is that I have a tendency to double tap on my keyboard (has leaded to multiple YASD...), and since stairs are such a big chokepoint in the game, it helps me that you cannot "stairdance" with one key.

[TwilightPhoenix]

Tiber: I am not convinced. If < and > were synonymous (you can achieve that with a macro, by the way), then a new player has a one key less to learn -- at the expense of being unable to use G<, G>, X<, X> properly later on.

Considering I have seven wins and don't even know what those commands do, I'm pretty certain removing a key or making them the same wouldn't seriously impact someone's ability to use those commands.

[crate]

Um, maybe you should try the commands before you say that....

[danr]

Yes, I use X< and X> for when I quickly want to find an alternate staircase. G> and G< not as much but those too can save interface time.

I don't see what this would really gain. It is not hard to learn both keys, they are the opposites of each other and once you know one you know the other. Anyone who finds learning the second key too mentally taxing is should probably be doing their gaming at pbskids.org. And the key is not needed for anything else.

For that questionable gain, you have:
- The loss of useful shortcuts e.g. X<X>G<G>
- The risk of accidentally going the wrong direction if you mistake the type of stairs / trapdoor you are standing on
- Also the risk of going right back down the stairs that you just escaped up if you accidentally double tap.

The first consideration is by far the largest, but any of these alone would offset the small potential gain of being more efficient with key allocations.

[dd]

I only started using X< X> recently, I still don't use G< G> - I'm way too used to just doing G(dungeon letter)(level number).

Anyway I think it's good to have distinct buttons for up/down travel. It gives consistency to the interface. To me it's not a big deal anyway since both keys are on the same key on my keyboard.

[ebarrett]

Considering I have seven wins and don't even know what those commands do, I'm pretty certain removing a key or making them the same wouldn't seriously impact someone's ability to use those commands.

Spoilers, seven wins, or seventy, or seven hundred, don't necessarily mean you are a good player, or that you have a good understanding of game design, or that you know how other people play the game and how they should play it. Your comments, on the other hand, do give us a glimpse on some of these things.

For the record: < and > are actually anti-keybloat (every upstairs-related command is < and every downstairs-related command is >, it doesn't get more practical than that - merging the "go upstairs" and "go downstairs" keys would require either adding another key or severely reducing travel/map functionality), and XuaXua is what we call "someone who looks for hair in eggs" in my country.

[Grimm]

XuaXua is what we call "someone who looks for hair in eggs" in my country.

[Tiber]

Anyone who finds learning the second key too mentally taxing is should probably be doing their gaming at pbskids.org. And the key is not needed for anything else.

It's not that it's hard; it's just that one of the biggest barriers to entry for roguelikes is a horrible user interface, including key bloat.

Please don't jump to the whole, "Anyone who can't figure this out is an idiot" argument, especially when it's already been addressed.

Anyway, add me to the list of people who never knew about G<> or X<>. That's sort of what I mean by key bloat. I have hundreds of hours in this game and a few wins, and there are many commands I've never used, and had no idea existed. Yes, these exist solely for convenience, but, as already said, you could still use G<> or X<> even if you could go down stairs by using the < key.

Spoilers, seven wins, or seventy, or seven hundred, don't necessarily mean you are a good player, or that you have a good understanding of game design, or that you know how other people play the game and how they should play it. Your comments, on the other hand, do give us a glimpse on some of these things.

For the record: < and > are actually anti-keybloat (every upstairs-related command is < and every downstairs-related command is >, it doesn't get more practical than that - merging the "go upstairs" and "go downstairs" keys would require either adding another key or severely reducing travel/map functionality), and XuaXua is what we call "someone who looks for hair in eggs" in my country.

Spoilers, this is a borderline ad hominem. Whether or not he is a good player has nothing to do with whether or not two keys are necessary. And the phrase, "game design" is thrown around meaninglessly these days, when a lot of it is just opinion. I wouldn't consider it "severely" reducing map functionality when several people have just posted that they've never once used some of these commands, but we're not even trying to get rid of them. And not every issue has to be of game-changing importance either.

[crate]

Ok in case this wasn't clear, G< and G> are 100% broken if you merge < and >. You would at the least need to add a third keypress to differentiate between up and down (annoying when the point is to quickly move you to the floor above/below), and then < and > are not really merged there. X< and X> are not completely broken but become either tedious (if it always cycles through one type of stair first, then getting to the other type is annoying on levels with only the regular 3 stairs, and awful on floors with hatches) or confusing (if it chooses the nearest stair of any type).

I can see arguments for merging other commands that are not merged (q and r, or some combination of PRWTw, and some more possible changes) but merging < and > makes no sense to me, especially in console.

[inkydood]

I wouldn't consider it "severely" reducing map functionality when several people have just posted that they've never once used some of these commands, but we're not even trying to get rid of them.

Why should functionality be reduced because some people can't be arsed to learn the commands? If you're going to spend dozens, possibly hundreds of hours with a game, you'll save time in the long run just learning the commands and using the ones that make the game easier for you. Crawl's interface could be more consistent in some instances but here it's already consistent.

In theory the most "simplified interface" would be mouse/touch only, but in my experience the mouse was a crutch to ease me in as a new player. Simplifying the interface to that extreme would perhaps have been easier to learn, but now would only slow me down. It's the same here: you'd slow veteran players down so new players don't have to spend 10 seconds learning the difference between < and >

[Grimm]

simple ≠ efficient

[TwilightPhoenix]

Mind, I'm not pushing my opinion in favor in either direction for or against merging the key, I'm just pointing out that the argument that "the current norm is necessary in order for the proper usage of these commands" when it's fully possible to play the game long enough to get multiple wins without even being aware they exist isn't a very good one. You need to know how to use stairs to win, yes, but you don't need to know how to use those convenience commands, one of which is easily replicated with the more flexible "Go to this level in this branch" command at the cost of one additional keystroke. And if you're going to complain about the cost of one more key stroke for a command, you're either a hardcore speedrunner or just being silly. (Really, it's like complaining about abolishing the word "k" because "ok" is too long. Also, mind, I'm not advocating the removal of the X<> or G<> commands either, although I do feel the latter is a bit redundant).

Personally, I would be in favor of a merge, but it's really too small of a thing to do on it's own. It'd need to come with a larger overhaul, such as remapping the X<> and G<> commands to something more appropriate for a merged <> command while fixing other redundant or bad keymappings, not something to do by itself. So the status quo can remain for now.

[Tiber]

I wouldn't consider it "severely" reducing map functionality when several people have just posted that they've never once used some of these commands, but we're not even trying to get rid of them.

Why should functionality be reduced because some people can't be arsed to learn the commands? If you're going to spend dozens, possibly hundreds of hours with a game, you'll save time in the long run just learning the commands and using the ones that make the game easier for you. Crawl's interface could be more consistent in some instances but here it's already consistent.

In theory the most "simplified interface" would be mouse/touch only, but in my experience the mouse was a crutch to ease me in as a new player. Simplifying the interface to that extreme would perhaps have been easier to learn, but now would only slow me down. It's the same here: you'd slow veteran players down so new players don't have to spend 10 seconds learning the difference between < and >

Why jump to the conclusion that it's just a lack of effort? There are easily at least 100 different commands in the game; it's easy to miss a few. And to review, < or > uses stairs. G< still goes to the nearest up stairs, and G> goes to the nearest down (at least for my suggestion). Absolutely no loss of functionality.

For the record, I'd also support combining P and R/W and T, as mentioned above.

Edit: That said, I think I'll drop it. It's just not a big issue, and the discussion has just sort of gone around in circles.

[galehar]

Come one, are we really having a 30 post thread over this idea? It's a terrible idea and many people have explained why already. Case closed, thread locked.