Matrix Games Forums

 Forums  Register  Login  Photo Gallery  Member List  Search  Calendars  FAQ 

My Profile  Inbox  Address Book  My Subscription  My Forums  Log Out

WitP II Interface Discussion

 
View related threads: (in this forum | in all forums)

Logged in as: Guest
Users viewing this topic: none
  Printable Version
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> WitP II Interface Discussion Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Login
Message << Older Topic   Newer Topic >>
WitP II Interface Discussion - 3/19/2006 5:17:41 AM   
GaryChildress

 

Posts: 6830
Joined: 7/17/2005
From: The Divided Nations of Earth
Status: offline 		Following in TheElf's pioneering footsteps I'd like to start a discussion on the interface as there are some things which I think could be improved or added. Likewise I hope Matrix will consider some of these ideas and I hope this thread gives further incentive to eventually push along the production of a WitP II although I do consider a 1.8 patch to be the most expedient goal in the relative near term.

As with The A2A discussion thread I'd like to keep things civil and constructive. I promise to keep my big mouth shut and keep my comments constructive as well.

What sorts of screens/buttons/improvements do gamers think would improve your ability to command your forces more effectively.

I'll kick it off by saying that I would like to see added to the TF screen a button for manually plotting multiple course changes so that the player can plot the route of a TF from the very start. I find myself pretty consumed in micromanaging ship movement a lot. Although I welcome such micromanaging when it comes to combat TFs I would like to be able to plot the routes of my supply TFs and let them go from there, especially the ones going back and forth from the West Coast and Karachi to OZ. I think it would free up the player's time to attend to other details in the game and would help gamers feel a little less overwhelmed by all the beautiful detail of this game.

Gary
Post #: 1
RE: WitP II Interface Discussion - 3/19/2006 5:56:36 AM   
Nomad


Posts: 5905
Joined: 9/5/2001
From: West Yellowstone, Montana
Status: offline 		1. Something simular to Bohdi's utility built in.

2. A notebook built in.

3. Better options on leader selection display, need to be able to sort by commander type.

more later

_____________________________


(in reply to GaryChildress)
Post #: 2
RE: WitP II Interface Discussion - 3/19/2006 6:12:09 AM   
GaryChildress

 

Posts: 6830
Joined: 7/17/2005
From: The Divided Nations of Earth
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Nomad

1. Something simular to Bohdi's utility built in.

2. A notebook built in.

3. Better options on leader selection display, need to be able to sort by commander type.

more later


I've never used Bohdi's utility. What does it do?

I'll definitely go with sort by commander type. It gets tedious sometimes scrolling along trying to find a qualified commander for a specific TF or LCU type.

How about a filter along with the ability to sort by type? This could be similar to the filters in the airgroup and ship screens. You could choose to show all commander types or filter out just the ones you're interested in. Then in one click you can show only qualified carrier TF commanders and then sort by leadership or some other value.

(in reply to Nomad)
Post #: 3
RE: WitP II Interface Discussion - 3/19/2006 6:29:24 AM   
Nomad


Posts: 5905
Joined: 9/5/2001
From: West Yellowstone, Montana
Status: offline 		It saves all of the reports generated and collates them. It uses the map and shows the sightings, combats, etc. graphicly. A fantastic player aid.

While we are at it, I would like an option to dump to a file a very verbose turn detail.



_____________________________


(in reply to GaryChildress)
Post #: 4
RE: WitP II Interface Discussion - 3/19/2006 6:42:59 AM   
GaryChildress

 

Posts: 6830
Joined: 7/17/2005
From: The Divided Nations of Earth
Status: offline 		It would also be nice to be able to pull up a report on which units have arrived where. As it stands now a unit can arrive at some relatively unfrequented base and it might be a couple turns before a player discovers the unit. I've had units sitting in Vancouver for a few precious turns simply because I tend to ignore the base.

(in reply to Nomad)
Post #: 5
RE: WitP II Interface Discussion - 3/19/2006 8:26:33 AM   
GaryChildress

 

Posts: 6830
Joined: 7/17/2005
From: The Divided Nations of Earth
Status: offline 		Also another thing the game badly needs in my opinion is more information on industry or else make things more accessible.

How much supplies were produced the last turn as opposed to how much were used? This can be "make or break" information for those trying to determine if they want to expand a particular factory or not.

How much supplies were chewed up by industry expansion for the last turn?

Suppose I want to find my factories producing Nates quickly so I can switch them to something else. Instead of going into the industry screen in the intel menu, sorting the list by item and then closing out so I can go click on the city which is actually producing them, how about a toolbar botton at the top dedicated to production alone which pulls up a screen with all production of every type where I can also manage every aspect of those factories, turning them on or off, expanding them or converting them?

In short, industry seems difficult to manage and understand to me as it exists now. I think a single screen dedicated to industry management alone with values clearly labeled would do wonders for relieving that overwhelmed feeling some get.

(in reply to GaryChildress)
Post #: 6
RE: WitP II Interface Discussion - 3/19/2006 10:42:44 AM   
Roger Neilson

 

Posts: 899
Joined: 10/27/2001
From: England
Status: offline 		1. Bodhi's utility is a must
2. Look at the number of clicks to get round things.... sometimes you have to step back two clicks to go forward two..... a pain.
3. Ability to group land units and issue a single order to them - 'land task forces' if you like.
4. Reports on arrivals of units
5. Direction plots for sea units - Bodhi was working on this before he lost motivation for completing the newest version of his utility.
6. Customisabe reports - I assume most of WITP is a database so any database should be able to allow a player to choose which fields he wants to see and in what format. Likewise some fields will be hidden. If I'm planning to use a unit or units for a specific activity I'd like to be able to ask what the state of that unit or units is/are. At present this means i have to look at each in turn and remember them.

There is a lot in the interface that is downright frustrating, and if, as it appears, its possible to use the database then it would be easy to 'allow' us to use it - and cut down on the design time for the team doing WITP2

Roger

(in reply to GaryChildress)
Post #: 7
RE: WitP II Interface Discussion - 3/19/2006 10:50:23 AM   
Roger Neilson

 

Posts: 899
Joined: 10/27/2001
From: England
Status: offline 		Purely eye candy but the range of backgrounds for the game displays has grown and I'd like a way of selecting a 'theme' when I'm playing. It would be nice to have, if nothing else, an allied set and a Jap set that would work for whichever side you were playing.

Roger

(in reply to GaryChildress)
Post #: 8
RE: WitP II Interface Discussion - 3/19/2006 10:51:47 AM   
1EyedJacks


Posts: 2244
Joined: 3/12/2006
From: The Eastern Sierras
Status: offline 		I think it would be cool if the game worked well in it's own window. It would be nice to jump back and forth between the game and e-mail w/o having to use the windows button.

I would also like access to the manual so I can look up rules, etc.

< Message edited by 1EyedJacks -- 3/19/2006 11:32:43 AM >

_____________________________

TTFN,

Mike

(in reply to Roger Neilson)
Post #: 9
RE: WitP II Interface Discussion - 3/19/2006 10:59:31 AM   
Roger Neilson

 

Posts: 899
Joined: 10/27/2001
From: England
Status: offline 		It can and does. I do this all the time. Simple addition to the command line. Right click on the icon to start up the game. Select properties/shortcut. Change target to read
"C:\Matrix Games\War in the Pacific\War in the Pacific.exe" -altFont -w
the -w is the windowed command. The -altfont is to change the font to the more readable one.
Ok the change and you are away with it. Make sure you get the spaces right between the swiches -w has a single space before it for example.

Roger

(in reply to 1EyedJacks)
Post #: 10
RE: WitP II Interface Discussion - 3/19/2006 11:04:11 AM   
steveh11Matrix


Posts: 944
Joined: 7/30/2004
Status: offline 		"Working in a window" - oh, yes please!

Actually, much more of the "Windows" conventions - Drag & Drop, Ctrl-C, Ctrl-V etc. I know how fashionably unpopular Windows is, but we're all familiar with it - why not make better use of that?

Going along with that, overall I think the fundamentally second best thing for the game, coming right after a review of player role, is attention to ergonomics. A fundamental redesign is needed here.

Steve.

_____________________________

"Nature always obeys Her own laws" - Leonardo da Vinci

(in reply to 1EyedJacks)
Post #: 11
RE: WitP II Interface Discussion - 3/19/2006 11:16:58 AM   
Roger Neilson

 

Posts: 899
Joined: 10/27/2001
From: England
Status: offline 		Totaly agree with the ergonomics. Before altfont came along I really struggled with reading the text on some displays and that was on a good 17" monitor. I think any testing of the new version should have a 'ergonomics' testing group to do this alongside any other beta testers.

Roger

(in reply to steveh11Matrix)
Post #: 12
RE: WitP II Interface Discussion - 3/19/2006 2:13:51 PM   
Rob Brennan UK


Posts: 3685
Joined: 8/24/2002
From: London UK
Status: offline 		1)Being able to find fragments easily. or even better no damn fragments at all.

2) Land TF idea is a good one.

3) an understandable industry screen. showing the amount needed/used and whats actually made on a day/week/monthly summary.

4)Waypoints for Tf's.

5) An understandable combat resolution screen/summary. Who/what affects the combat and odds.

I'll probably think up more, but thats off the top of my head

_____________________________

sorry for the spelling . English is my main language , I just can't type . and i'm too lazy to edit :)

(in reply to Roger Neilson)
Post #: 13
RE: WitP II Interface Discussion - 3/19/2006 2:24:58 PM   
Roger Neilson

 

Posts: 899
Joined: 10/27/2001
From: England
Status: offline 		having just doen a set of orders I echo the being able to find fragments that Rob said. Also can we not have some way of disbanding air units where there's basiccally just some pilots sitting around a base and no planes.....

And a big please... draggable information windows so they don't go over exactly where on the map display you want to see!

Roger

(in reply to Rob Brennan UK)
Post #: 14
RE: WitP II Interface Discussion - 3/19/2006 6:25:25 PM   
Sonny

 

Posts: 2008
Joined: 4/3/2002
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Roger Neilson

.............................

And a big please... draggable information windows so they don't go over exactly where on the map display you want to see!

Roger


Yes! I hate having to try to scroll the screen to see if my TF is taking the path I want it to take. Just allow us to dock the info to wherever we want. Having waypoints would help in this instance but in general moveable screens would be nice.

More info on production and combat. Not sure if you should be able to see to much of the information on the enemy in the detailed combat reports. There really needs to be two sets of messages - one for each side to help with the fog of war.

And when my recon plane flies over a base I would like to see the number of aircraft which come up to meet it listed in the op report not just flashing by on the screen.



_____________________________

Quote from Snigbert -

"If you mess with the historical accuracy, you're going to have ahistorical outcomes."

"I'll say it again for Sonny's sake: If you mess with historical accuracy, you're going to have
ahistorical outcomes. "

(in reply to Roger Neilson)
Post #: 15
RE: WitP II Interface Discussion - 3/19/2006 6:36:38 PM   
BaitBoy

 

Posts: 227
Joined: 8/6/2004
Status: offline 		Here is what I would like to see

Bodhi's utility is a must!

Being able to add a note to a unit (i.e. this unit is prepping for in invasion of lunga.)

Being able to link ground combat units sort of the way ships are linked in task forces. This would make it easier to move units together and not have them arrive at the target hex piecemeal.

I realize that this is probably pushing the limits of the game, but I would love to have more control over what is in a LCU. Perhapse some sort of user defined upgrade for LCUs.


_____________________________

"You go over there and attract their attention while I . . . "

Member Henchmen and Sidekicks Local 272

(in reply to GaryChildress)
Post #: 16
RE: WitP II Interface Discussion - 3/19/2006 7:02:35 PM   
mogami


Posts: 12789
Joined: 8/23/2000
From: You can't get here from there
Status: offline 		Hi, Just having colors to tell things about the status of units would help a lot. Have a color for units low on supply or fuel. Have a color for units that have finished prepping for their objective. experiance levels for airgroups. Of course we would have to have a set of generic symbols for use by the other player after he has spotted or made contact. I think units should not be seen by enemy unless they have recon or patrol or units in contact. (coast watchers too)
when I do a turn I focus on where I am conducting operations and unless something caught my eye during the turn or replay I might ignore bases. I check the base supply levels but not as often as I should and if a base "radioed" me by having a flag or a color change I could manage that better. Perhaps we just need a routine that checks everybase and unit and if any fall below player defined specs they radio HQ (generate a text file like OP's)
Example
21st Daitai requests replacements ( I set unit to request if ready+damaged+reserve ac fell below 20 total)
Truk requests supply (I set base to request supply if total fell below 50k)
Palembang requests pick up of resource/oil (I set base to request pickup if total exceeds 50k)
Be even better if the list could be used during turn to where
I send replacement AC to 21st daitai and click "done"
I send TF with 50k supply to Truk and click "done"
I send TF to pick up resource and oil at Palembang and click done
now Palembang knows to stop telling me to pick up. If i don't click done it will continue to radio me every turn.

Whenever a new ship of LCU or airgroup arrives on map it Radios in
'170th SNLF arrives Tokyo"
I have to click "OK" to acknowledge the unit or it sends message the following turn.
when a TF arrives at destination
"TF 21 Cargo" arrives Saipan"
I click "ok" or it send next turn.


< Message edited by Mogami -- 3/19/2006 7:09:42 PM >

_____________________________






I'm not retreating, I'm attacking in a different direction!

(in reply to BaitBoy)
Post #: 17
RE: WitP II Interface Discussion - 3/19/2006 7:12:44 PM   
gottagofish


Posts: 107
Joined: 1/17/2005
Status: offline 		I would like to see a screen that groups "future objective" status. For a LCU once you set up an objective it takes many turns to reach 100. Some are scattered about many bases. I would like to be able to see the status for all LCUs assigned the same objective. For one, to know they are ready, and two to know where they are are located. I keep losing which LCUs I've set up for which objective and either forget the mission or assign multiple LUCs because I can't remember all that have already been set up.

(in reply to BaitBoy)
Post #: 18
RE: WitP II Interface Discussion - 3/19/2006 7:20:31 PM   
scout1


Posts: 2899
Joined: 8/24/2004
From: South Bend, In
Status: offline 		Bodhi's tool, or at least his approach is a must. But why not expand it. He was limited by only waht the *.txt files presented. If your starting from within the game engine, hell, youcan graphically display damn near everything. An Industry filter showing production/need/status, an HQ filter displaying all units from a given HQ.....
Damn near anything is possible. His tool was handicapped by what he had available to work with. Use it, but take it to the next level .....

(in reply to gottagofish)
Post #: 19
RE: WitP II Interface Discussion - 3/19/2006 10:21:32 PM   
dtravel


Posts: 4533
Joined: 7/7/2004
Status: offline 		No hidden unit/leader stats!

Be consistent with how buttons/clicks work. I.E., all orders/functions say what the unit is currently set to or all say what clicking will set the unit to. (Preferably the first, where clicking on the current setting pulls up a list of settings so the player can select what he wants instead of click-click-click to rotate thru them.)

No hidden unit/leader stats!

Get rid of the tiny little buttons. Or at least make clicking on the text line have the same function as clicking on the button. (Like every other freaking program written in the last five years!)

No hidden unit/leader stats!

Combat reports must include all the information given in the animations. For air combat this means what units engaged, what units bombed/attack what (port, airfield, Oil, ship "XXXXX"). For land combat this means what units, start/end AV strengths by unit and total, which units bombarded & which attacked & which shocked, etc.

No hidden unit/leader stats!

More sorting options.

And did I say, NO HIDDEN UNIT/LEADER STATS!!!!

An accurate, useful manual that covers all the program/game mechanics. None of this not mentioning things like Ground Attack missions have a max range of 8 or 10 and have to make extra checks before they will fly. And putting the information in a scenario editor or its separate manual is not an acceptable alternative. (I.E., no hidden game mechanics either!)


_____________________________

This game does not have a learning curve. It has a learning cliff.

"Bomb early, bomb often, bomb everything." - Niceguy

Any bugs I report are always straight stock games.


(in reply to scout1)
Post #: 20
RE: WitP II Interface Discussion - 3/20/2006 4:15:50 AM   
Mike Scholl

 

Posts: 9349
Joined: 1/1/2003
From: Kansas City, MO
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: Roger Neilson
And a big please... draggable information windows so they don't go over exactly where on the map display you want to see!
Roger


AMEN! This is really annoying..., and totally unnecessary in this day and age.


_____________________________


(in reply to Roger Neilson)
Post #: 21
RE: WitP II Interface Discussion - 3/20/2006 4:33:08 AM   
Iridium


Posts: 932
Joined: 4/1/2005
From: Jersey
Status: offline 		Well the window problem would be solved if we took WitP into windows finally. I'd like to see alot of the interface made much more intuitive. As it stands the game is playable but seems more like accounting.

Fix the industry model from that horridly overcomplicated, informationless, decentralized system. We need graphs, tables, etc on pretty much everything you can think of; resources, casualties, production...everything.

_____________________________

Yamato, IMO the best looking Battleship.

"Hey, a packet of googly eyes! I'm so taking these." Hank Venture

(in reply to Mike Scholl)
Post #: 22
RE: WitP II Interface Discussion - 3/20/2006 6:51:38 AM   
GaryChildress

 

Posts: 6830
Joined: 7/17/2005
From: The Divided Nations of Earth
Status: offline 		One more addition I'd like to see on the screen for adding ships to a new TF. Beside each ship available to add to the TF I'd like to see ASW and AA stats for the ship. That way when adding ships to a TF I know which ships would be optimal for an ASW TF being created or which ships would be optimal as CV escorts. Also gun values would be nice for surface combat and bombardment TFs. I would also like to be able to sort ships by these values on screen for adding ships to a TF.



< Message edited by Gary Childress -- 3/20/2006 6:53:40 AM >

(in reply to Iridium)
Post #: 23
RE: WitP II Interface Discussion - 3/20/2006 7:00:56 AM   
von Beanie


Posts: 295
Joined: 6/3/2002
From: Oak Hills, S. California
Status: offline 		There are some game routines that drive me crazy. One is troop loading. Simply indicate how many ships of a given type are needed for each unit to load, and if they are present, the ships are assigned to the embarking unit and they load up in the proper number of turns.

Each regiment in a division had a regiment name/number. If a division breaks down, give each unit the appropriate regimental name. Any time any of those regiments are reassembled somewhere (and the division components could be individually colored as in HPS Panzer Campaigns), any portion of the division should be able to reform, no matter what the equipment the component units have. The senior ranked commander among the reassembling units would assume command. I can't understand why all component units must be present for a larger unit to reform. Using the component regiments, and then allowing for the increased effectiveness of a combined unit, would eliminate fragments.

Supply convoys could all be assigned on a single screen that shows what's needed where. Options for convoy paths could be divided into extremely safe, safe or risky, and changed on the control screen as needed. The safety of the route would be based on a computer chosen path staying a set number of hexes away from the nearest enemy base along the route.

And whatever you do, please make it possible to quit the replay at any point by simply hitting the escape key!!!!!


(in reply to Iridium)
Post #: 24
RE: WitP II Interface Discussion - 3/20/2006 7:12:32 AM   
GaryChildress

 

Posts: 6830
Joined: 7/17/2005
From: The Divided Nations of Earth
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: von Beanie

There are some game routines that drive me crazy. One is troop loading. Simply indicate how many ships of a given type are needed for each unit to load, and if they are present, the ships are assigned to the embarking unit and they load up in the proper number of turns.




It would be nice if, especially with TFs containing a mix of APs and AKs, to be able to determine exactly what mix of APs and AKs would be necessary to fully transport a particular unit. As it stands now, you know either exactly how many AKs alone or how many APs alone a unit needs but in a mixed TF once you fill up an AP or two, then you have to start doing the math to figure out how many AKs you need to finish the job.

(in reply to von Beanie)
Post #: 25
RE: WitP II Interface Discussion - 3/20/2006 3:53:01 PM   
tsimmonds


Posts: 5498
Joined: 2/6/2004
From: astride Mason and Dixon's Line
Status: offline
quote:

Simply indicate how many ships of a given type are needed for each unit to load, and if they are present, the ships are assigned to the embarking unit and they load up in the proper number of turns.


I feel very strongly that if included such a feature should be capable of easily being overriden by the user (e.i. if desired, LCUs may be loaded just like they are loaded now). Success or failure of amphibious assaults depends very heavily on which LCUs you load on which ships, what types of ship, how many ships. I don't want some drooling AI assistant making these decisions for me, thanks very much.

< Message edited by irrelevant -- 3/20/2006 3:54:18 PM >

_____________________________

Fear the kitten!

(in reply to von Beanie)
Post #: 26
RE: WitP II Interface Discussion - 3/20/2006 5:14:55 PM   
Cap Mandrake


Posts: 23184
Joined: 11/15/2002
From: Southern California
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: irrelevant

quote:

Simply indicate how many ships of a given type are needed for each unit to load, and if they are present, the ships are assigned to the embarking unit and they load up in the proper number of turns.


I feel very strongly that if included such a feature should be capable of easily being overriden by the user (e.i. if desired, LCUs may be loaded just like they are loaded now). Success or failure of amphibious assaults depends very heavily on which LCUs you load on which ships, what types of ship, how many ships. I don't want some drooling AI assistant making these decisions for me, thanks very much.



(in reply to tsimmonds)
Post #: 27
RE: WitP II Interface Discussion - 3/20/2006 5:53:28 PM   
Mike Scholl

 

Posts: 9349
Joined: 1/1/2003
From: Kansas City, MO
Status: offline
quote:

ORIGINAL: irrelevant

quote:

Simply indicate how many ships of a given type are needed for each unit to load, and if they are present, the ships are assigned to the embarking unit and they load up in the proper number of turns.


I feel very strongly that if included such a feature should be capable of easily being overriden by the user (e.i. if desired, LCUs may be loaded just like they are loaded now). Success or failure of amphibious assaults depends very heavily on which LCUs you load on which ships, what types of ship, how many ships. I don't want some drooling AI assistant making these decisions for me, thanks very much.


I wouldn't mind a sub-routine that allowed the player to choose between "combat loading" for assults and just loading for shipment. Combat Loading took about 3 times as much shipping tonnage, but allowed the embarked units to land quickly and effectively.

(in reply to tsimmonds)
Post #: 28
RE: WitP II Interface Discussion - 3/20/2006 6:09:55 PM   
tsimmonds


Posts: 5498
Joined: 2/6/2004
From: astride Mason and Dixon's Line
Status: offline
quote:

I wouldn't mind a sub-routine that allowed the player to choose between "combat loading" for assults and just loading for shipment. Combat Loading took about 3 times as much shipping tonnage, but allowed the embarked units to land quickly and effectively.

You'd still be relying on some AI to select the right ships. Not for me thanks. By all means, include it for those who trust AIs.

_____________________________

Fear the kitten!

(in reply to Mike Scholl)
Post #: 29
RE: WitP II Interface Discussion - 3/21/2006 9:15:01 PM   
The Gnome


Posts: 1233
Joined: 5/17/2002
From: Philadelphia, PA
Status: offline 		Wow so much here that I'd like changed. First I'd like the UI to have a "snappier" response. I have a high end machine and there always seems to be a lag when I click buttons, or toggle a setting, or what have you.

Second, I'd like to see the UI definable by the users (skinable, window positions, graphics etc), I've seen so many talented people here tinker with the graphics in this game (the map, the units) and I'd love to see them play with the UI as well. Maybe change the look and feel of the buttons and windows completely. Lots of games lately have controlled this through an XML file.

Lastly, use as much of the standard windows UI behavior as possible. Let me lasso ships and drag them into a TF, or ctrl-click them, or shift click them.... you get the idea.

(in reply to tsimmonds)
Post #: 30
Page:   [1] 2   next >   >>
All Forums >> [Current Games From Matrix.] >> [World War II] >> War In The Pacific - Struggle Against Japan 1941 - 1945 >> WitP II Interface Discussion Page: [1] 2   next >   >>
Jump to:





New Messages No New Messages
Hot Topic w/ New Messages Hot Topic w/o New Messages
Locked w/ New Messages Locked w/o New Messages
 Post New Thread
 Reply to Message
 Post New Poll
 Submit Vote
 Delete My Own Post
 Delete My Own Thread
 Rate Posts


Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI

1.016