Rengo: it is time for the default to be "casual"?

OGS Development
23

… but come to think of it, I probably should make that one of those dismissable popup help things, so you don’t have to see that message all the time…

I’ll look at that, along with any other problems y’all come up with…

24

image
image500×649 90.2 KB

image
image1280×720 63 KB

8 Likes
25

Touche’

(But I’ve always pictured Conrad looking older than that :wink: )

1 Like
26

Ah ok. I didn’t get that you can uncheck a tick. I mean that i expected that a choice will cancel automatically another.

The link by the question mark is far too near the tick, i selected it inadvertently many times. (On a mobile)

What is the meaning of auto start (and the number) exactly?

27

Ah - easy fix.

I think if you click on the help link, it should tell you the answer to that? :slight_smile:

(It hasn’t changed)

28

Well in fact yes. Nice detailed presentation.

But… By the design of the layout you are not supposed to find the info there as the question mark is for strict rengo.

29

Yes, that is a pain - I had noticed it already …

… suggestions welcome…

1 Like
30

Repeat the question mark seems easiest, no way to lose the way :blush:

31

Bleugh… it was so much better when there was one row for “Rengo” yes/no and help :stuck_out_tongue:

32

Maybe it s more complicated to program as said but to come back on default settings, can they be linked to the choices in the next box live/correspondance?

33

Probably. But … given no-one really noticed before what the defaults were (so I got requested to change them to be how they actually are) it’s hard to get excited about that as a proposed improvement.

I am kinda-liking the no-default layout we’re playing with, if these fiddly things can get sorted…

1 Like
34

Well i am fine with too.
Just thinking of others and their limited understanding of what OGS offer.

1 Like
35

I think some standard ways are either changing the text colour of the problems, or adding some kind of red mark beside the problems?

36

Right, I was meaning something different - I think that you are picturing how to show that a form is not completed properly.

The different “problem” that the current design has is that it is hard to see why the Rengo check box(es) are greyed out … when it is because “ranked” is selected.

I’m actually experimenting with reverting to “which you click rengo it unclicks ranked” (which has its own problems, but maybe less severe).

1 Like
37

You could add an info (:grey_question:, :grey_exclamation:, … ) to the grayed out options, with mouse over/click telling why they are not selectable.

1 Like
38

My suggestion would be to avoid deactivating controls or automatically changing things - it’s annoying to not be able to click things or to have to click them in a certain order, and it’s not such a big deal if people who are somehow hoping for a ranked 7x7 zero-komi rengo game don’t get exactly what they want.

Also, checked checkboxes should represent the non-default choices explicitly made by the player, like the paper-form equivalent they represent.

So: have a checkbox way down at the bottom called “Unranked” that’s unchecked by default. If the selected options above don’t allow a ranked game, display an appropriate message right below that checkbox. Something like this:

                   [ ] Unranked*
       * This game will not be ranked because:
         - Rengo games must be unranked
         - Komi is not "Automatic"
         - Board size is non-standard

[Close]                                    [Create Challenge]

(I kind of think “Private” and “Invite-only” are similar and all of those should go into the same general area.)

5 Likes
39

It looks like Ranked, Unranked, Strict rengo and Casual rengo are four mutually-exclusive options.

Tickboxes are not really meant for mutually-exclusive options.

A possibility would be to have a drop-down list with the four options, and defaulting to Ranked.

If the interface for Demos was unified with the interface for new games, then Demo could be a fifth possibility in that drop-down list.

5 Likes
40

is this an improvement?

I preferred the original (:ballot_box_with_check: Rengo :ballot_box_with_check: Casual), but I do like seeing the reasoning behind the disabled buttons (AKA “Rengo must be unranked”).

Edit: Oh I actually do have concrete reasoning behind not liking the new thing - check boxes make it look like you could potentially choose both Strict Rengo and Casual Rengo. It’s clearly absurd, but creates some cognitive dissonance for the user

4 Likes
41

Actually, they aren’t. Both rengo variants are unranked.

What about a radio button list:

  (*)  Ranked
  ( )  Private
  ( )  Casual Rengo
  ( )  Strict Rengo

This can only work because all three variants are indeed unranked, and (I think?) you can’t have Private Rengo…

42

I think you missed one

  • Ranked
  • Unranked
    • Two Player (standard)
      • Public
      • Private
    • Rengo
      • Casual
      • Strict

Personally, I feel putting these all together in one radio button list feels a little strange - all these options (ranked/unranked, rengo/non-rengo, public/private, casual/strict) feel orthogonal even though they do influence each other. But it does work, I can’t argue that.

Edit: apparently there’s an “expose within” pattern, which I think captures this hierarchy well, but it’s sort of what we’re already doing - hiding options until they become relevant.

Edit 2: here’s a good read: Selection-Dependent Inputs :: UXmatters . Nothing that hasn’t already been proposed, but at least gives a name to a lot of these UX concepts.

3 Likes