Screen centering/cycling around map UI idea
-
-
@Cernel About the edit feature, it is particularly common to edit moves that you anticipated (illegally) during Combat Move, then changed your mind (or the dice made you!), or editing units in and out during Place Units (substantially doing or un-doing movements during placement). For the games having Purchase Units before Combat Move, it is also common telling, during the latter, than you changed your mind about your buy, then editing what you said during Place Units.
Pretty much, it will take very little time for the common TripleA player to start using the edit function quite often, I'd say. About the next step after starting playing the game at all, with other persons, at least. There are some people around that prefer playing with no edits, as a matter of personal preference, but they are definitely a small minority, I tell you.
-
Good discussion, but a bit difficult as we're bring up many topics.
For minimap move, I opened this thread:I still really like the last mockup posted by @Frostion :
https://forums.triplea-game.org/post/29322- looks good
- has more space for more units
- unit images are not scrunched up
- we could have multiple rows of images, which would be cool to convey large armies
- we gain space to give counts for each unit type
To get there:
- flags button: flags used to be a combination of two settings in the menu. That means we could not really have a hotkey for it, the hotkey that was added turned it on/off. As a menu item, there is no problem with having the hotkey displayed in the menu and removing the UI button.
- Unit highlight, this is a heavily used feature at times, for others at other times not at all. I would prefer for this to be a UI button. We could though create a menu setting for this. For it to make more sense, I think we'd want it to be toggle on and toggle off, rather than activated for the 2 or 3 seconds and then auto-turns off.
- Unit center, we could make the unit images clickable, give them a roll-over effect maybe to make it clickable, or just not have a unit center button at all.
The above gets rid of a row of buttons, then it's a matter of rendering the avatar images differently, and we can perhaps get to the nicer UI treatment.
Some questions:
- any thoughts if the unit scroller should be similar to the place panel? IE: always visible with a button to collapse/expand the view
- if we have minimap rendered on the bottom of the action panel, should unit scroller be above the minimap, or should it be located at the top of the action panel (ie: top-right)?
-
I added a few new icons to the collection:
History On/Off
Sound On/Off
Edit On/Off
AI Play Pause (Yes, I know this feature does not exist … yet
)
AI Play Continue
And here are the 37x37 territory scroller icons .... I hope they get used in the pre-releases
v5-icons-37x37-newskip.zip -
@Frostion said in Screen centering/cycling around map UI idea:
Also…
The icon for “skip” is OK, but I do not see that the piktogram really represents of the concept of “skipping” something. I have tried to make a new icon looking more like a skip (w. check mark). Here is a new version of the icon set. Is this skip looking better?
V5-Icons-37x37-NewSkip.zip
The light-bulb actually makes me think to something related to technology, as I think it is usually the symbol of having an idea.
I was thinking maybe going back to the sun, but without the sun, only the rays, to mean light emission without meaning sunshine.
Practically this or something like this (this one is not that good, as I just cut out the inner part):
-
The credits you can access via Help/About still mention the "Noun Project" for the Lantern and Flag buttons, as of 2.0.17017.
Regardless, I would avoid using images requiring crediting, as it feels strange that such a minor part of TripleA gets credited, so better limit all to public domain images. Just my suggestion, as I can see TripleA, by now, having an enormous credit list, if going that way in the past, and it is a liability having to update credits every time something is changed that might be referenced in them (easy missing it, keeping crediting inexistent items or wrongly crediting existent ones).
While I'm sure @Frostion intended the images he provided to be free from crediting, he didn't clearly did so, so maybe the forum itself would benefit from a declared policy that at least if you don't say otherwise whatever you post becomes public domain or something.
-
I think the best would be having the unmoved units scroller absent by default except a good sized, spacebar-like, button that allows you to have it appear, so that you would click on that when you want to use the scroller, and have more action bar space until them (or for all the phase, if you never use the scroller). Likely the scroller is just going to be used towards the end of your phase, mostly to double check you haven't missed anything. Of course, this would require @Frostion making yet another image for this button to show the scroller.
-
Also, once you have skipped or stationed all you can, the scroller should completely disappear, except only the activate button (I would call it "reactivate", rather). Or anyways, I don't think the current behaviour of keeping showing the last unit you skipped or stationed is good, as it doesn't clearly inform you have finished them all and it is inconsistent with the behaviour at any time beforehand.
-
Absent by default really implies it's a verification and not a 'main' way to work through units to be moved. I don't think that is as efficient or even that useful, as you would maybe pull it up before ending your turn to then check you have zero units left, and/or confirm that the units that have movement left are to be stationary. I suspect it may as well not exist in that case as most will probably not bring it up in favor of ending their turn, or if it's just a double check then it could add time to your turn by needlessly double checking units that should not move. The hope is that players will either use it initially to scroll through units, or players will make their main moves and then use 'n' to start scrolling through units, either skipping or moving them.
Having a component appear/disappear could be viewed as really inconsistent.
-
@LaFayette Clicking to show the scroller may be not merely an additional step. It may also apply the same effect as when you click on the centre button on the first showing territory given by the scroller. That would make actually more sense than starting using the arrows, as this way you don't centre on the first one initially. If the normal procedure would be to first click on the centre button once, then click on the right arrow or the skip, having the show button also centring would imply no additional clicks.
-
What is the order in which the zones are presented in the scroller. I cannot find a pattern. Is it just the territory list in the xml?
It would be good to know, and document, so that mapmakers may order their territory list (or whatever), to have the scroller order better taylored to what they believe are the charateristics of the map.
Or maybe the scroller itself should attempt to do that. In this case, here are my suggestions:
- If the power has units in capital land territories that belongs to it and it currently owns (both need to be true), start with the one having the lowest X centre coordinates, or the lowest Y ones, if the same X ones, an so on.
- Then centre on own units in land territories that it currently owns, start with the one having the lowest X centre coordinates, or the lowest Y ones, if the same X ones, an so on.
- Then centre on own units in land territories that are owned by powers not at war (archetype allied or neutral) with it, start with the one having the lowest X centre coordinates, or the lowest Y ones, if the same X ones, an so on.
- Then centre on own units in land territories that are owned by powers at war with it, start with the one having the lowest X centre coordinates, or the lowest Y ones, if the same X ones, an so on (this can happen with politics or limited combat rounds or stalemates between power 0 units or triggers).
- Then centre on own units in capital sea territories that belongs to it and it currently owns (both need to be true), start with the one having the lowest X centre coordinates, or the lowest Y ones, if the same X ones, an so on.
- Then centre on own units in sea territories that it currently owns, start with the one having the lowest X centre coordinates, or the lowest Y ones, if the same X ones, an so on.
- Then centre on own units in sea territories that are owned by powers not at war (archetype allied or neutral) with it, start with the one having the lowest X centre coordinates, or the lowest Y ones, if the same X ones, an so on (this is usually the case of an ex enemy owning your sea zone).
- Then centre on own units in sea territories that are owned by powers at war with it, start with the one having the lowest X centre coordinates, or the lowest Y ones, if the same X ones, an so on (very uncommon case).
- Then centre on own units (comprising any cargo) in any sea zones that are not territories, start with the one having the lowest X centre coordinates, or the lowest Y ones, if the same X ones, an so on.
I'm not sure if the case of capitals in sea territories should be considered, and I don't believe I've ever seen a map having sea capitals, nor I remember having tested this possibility, but I'd certainly add it anyways, so that the scroller won't become behaviourally obsolete if we would see sea capitals, at any point (until then, it will just be skipped).
This system is taylored for maps that do not wrap around (as that is the default (false) behaviour), but it should be good enough for maps that wrap on X, Y or both axis.
-
@Cernel @LaFayette I do also favour an order system when scrolling through territories. But I would be satisfied with a much simpler number/alphabetical system. -deleted-.
@all I sense a lack of feedback concerning playing experience with the scroller? Are people not playing with the pre-releases or is feedback just delivered at another place? I feel this feature is very useful, even though i see potential for improvement and have posted feedback.
-
@Frostion Virtually nobody uses the prerelease. I've been in the prerelease lobby for several tens of hours, maybe one hundred in total, in the last few weeks, never meeting anyone (beside the people with which I was playtesting on purpose), not even any developers.
I don't get your sea-then-land concept. I'm not really against it, but I wonder if you also mean not centring on the capital (likely land) initially? Because I don't think it would make sense centring on the capital (or capitals), then going with the sea, then coming back to non-capital lands.
-
@Cernel I guess you are right about starting at capital/land territory first, then sea. Makes sense. (But personally, the units I move first is the ones that go out to a boat and then go amphibious. But that would ofcours still make it a land territory start)
-
@Frostion I would actually suggest starting where the capitals are, land if the capitals are on land and sea if the capitals are on sea (I've never tested that though). It can go either ways if capitals are both in land and sea territories.
-
@Frostion said in Screen centering/cycling around map UI idea:
But personally, the units I move first is the ones that go out to a boat and then go amphibious. But that would ofcours still make it a land territory start)
That is just how the user interface works. I tend to think that sea borne operations always start in sea zones, also when the units are not already loaded, as I think it is the transport that loads the units into itself, rather than the units moving into it, except for the case of loading into allied (that I think it is not represented the right way in the rules themselves, but that would be a feature request). Of course, that would necessitate a user interface change that, for example, when you select a transport, offers you the possibility of loading units from nearby territories, so that you actually start the whole sea borne operation by clicking on the transport first (as I tend to believe would make more sense, especially now with the scroller centring).
-
The start is capitol to avoid changing behavior too much. When a new player's turn starts, the game focuses on their capitol. My thoughts have been it would be best to make the 'next' territory to be an adjacent one to the last one that was previously selected. This way a 'theatre' operations can be the focus before moving to territories further away. I'll have to check if it's very feasible to get this any type of ordering without making things overly complex.
-
@LaFayette Yes. Keep it simple so that a player has a chance to anticipate what the order is. based on unit quantities waiting to be moved/big to small? Alphabetical? Scan/pan from left to right/top to down on the map? Anyway, I like that it starts in capital as it is the most important and most certainly always has a factory, even if it foes not always have unmoved units.
-
@Frostion said in Screen centering/cycling around map UI idea:
Anyway, I like that it starts in capital as it is the most important and most certainly always has a factory
No; for example, talking about maps in High Quality only, Americans in New World Order and Numidia in 270BC have no factory-like units in their capitals. And, of course, the games having capitals in impassable or unreachable territories, to hack a no capital behavior or work around AI limits (in these cases, the capital usually has also 0 production); for example Chinese in the two World War II v3 games (though being impassable doesn't exclude being able to use a factory; for example Tithonian in Jurassic). Remaining in High Quality only, the other map having capitals with no factory-like units in them was World At War before version 2.0, for Russians, British and Americans (this one an example of the unreachable capital territories hack).
Leaving High Quality, differently from the purely hacky World War II v3 example, there are even examples of capitals being in territories that are impassable, without production and without units at all (!), yet these territories are not just hacks, but actual part of the game; for example Others in A Song of Ice and Fire (triggers based). And there are capitals that have no other purpose than to make you jump about where you need to be, at start turn, War of the Relics comes to mind (at least I guess that's the reason, but that game is not the simplest, on the technical part). -
@Cernel The player's turn should keep starting out at the players capital (as it is now), as a way to let the player and everyone watching their screen know that this specific player has turn. I can't think of a good argument to stop this practice, no matter if a specific map has factories or unmoved units at capital or not. If there is indeed no capital, then it is ofcours another another story.
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login