RE: MWIF Game Interface Design

Matrix Games Forums

Forums Register Login Photo Gallery Member List Search Calendars FAQ

My Profile Inbox Address Book My Subscription My Forums Log Out

RE: MWIF Game Interface Design

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

Logged in as: Guest

Users viewing this topic: none

Printable Version

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames >> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design

Page: << < prev 18 19 [20] 21 22 next > >>

Message

<< Older Topic Newer Topic >>

RE: MWIF Game Interface Design - 9/26/2006 6:01:18 PM

Anendrue

Posts: 817
Joined: 7/8/2005
Status: offline

IMHO Guadacanal color is fine by me.

_____________________________

Integrity is what you do when nobody is watching.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 571

RE: MWIF Game Interface Design - 9/27/2006 3:57:40 PM

ppglaf

Posts: 5
Joined: 9/27/2006
Status: offline

Humm, it looks like that Barbarossa didn't start in september/october of 1941

Bad cut&paste, isn't?

BTW, I'm waiting for a long time to enjoy this game in my PC..., go ahead with it!

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 572

RE: MWIF Game Interface Design - 9/27/2006 6:49:12 PM

terje439

Posts: 6813
Joined: 3/28/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp
Nit pickers would ask for figure units to be uniformous through the naval units writups, for comparisons purposes. I suggest using millimeters instead of inches for armor and gun caliber (if I'm right that most of the world people uses mm instead of inches). Also use the right thousands separator, probably comma though the writups.

Also, why is the shadowing effect not showing on units in this dialog ?

Also, these writeups are real cool and real good reading, even for me who is kind of a WWII geek !!! Congrats to Terje !
and while I'm at congrats, congrats to Greyshaft for the Planes writups, and to Steve for the whole packaging !

Keep the faith dudes !!!

I guess I am the best one to answer about this at the moment. The reason I use xxx.xxx instead of xxx,xxx is simply that my word-version will underline the latter in green, and as there tend to be quite some text present I prefer to keep the colors away

About using inch/mm this is presently being done to complete a unit, most descriptions will state armor and gun size in inches not mm. Instead of spending 5 mins on each unit that comes with mm instead of inches to convert them, this is something I will do later on, as I have been told by Steve that it will be ok for me to submit a "changed"-naval unit file later on (which is also were I put the info I get from you guys in my thread).

About the empty spaces Steve, it is not that much work for me to remove them if you want, it is just something I use when I work on the descriptions as it makes the file more easy to work with for my "system" (or is it a lack thereof?!

).

Oh and as Steve mentioned, sometimes events I write about might be bypassed rather quickly, this is due to the fact that if I decide to go into too much detail some of the ships would benefit a book (Bismarck, Tirpitz, Hood, Yorktown etc etc). So I have to try to be quick, and to limit most of the facts I chose to add to the ones actually conserning this game, aka WWII. But if people want me to add more, that will be no problem really.

Oh and shame on you Steve! I am sure I told you that these descriptions needed PROOFREADING!

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 573

RE: MWIF Game Interface Design - 9/27/2006 8:33:53 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: terje439

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp
Nit pickers would ask for figure units to be uniformous through the naval units writups, for comparisons purposes. I suggest using millimeters instead of inches for armor and gun caliber (if I'm right that most of the world people uses mm instead of inches). Also use the right thousands separator, probably comma though the writups.

Also, why is the shadowing effect not showing on units in this dialog ?

Also, these writeups are real cool and real good reading, even for me who is kind of a WWII geek !!! Congrats to Terje !
and while I'm at congrats, congrats to Greyshaft for the Planes writups, and to Steve for the whole packaging !

Keep the faith dudes !!!

I guess I am the best one to answer about this at the moment. The reason I use xxx.xxx instead of xxx,xxx is simply that my word-version will underline the latter in green, and as there tend to be quite some text present I prefer to keep the colors away
About using inch/mm this is presently being done to complete a unit, most descriptions will state armor and gun size in inches not mm. Instead of spending 5 mins on each unit that comes with mm instead of inches to convert them, this is something I will do later on, as I have been told by Steve that it will be ok for me to submit a "changed"-naval unit file later on (which is also were I put the info I get from you guys in my thread).

About the empty spaces Steve, it is not that much work for me to remove them if you want, it is just something I use when I work on the descriptions as it makes the file more easy to work with for my "system" (or is it a lack thereof?! ).

Oh and as Steve mentioned, sometimes events I write about might be bypassed rather quickly, this is due to the fact that if I decide to go into too much detail some of the ships would benefit a book (Bismarck, Tirpitz, Hood, Yorktown etc etc). So I have to try to be quick, and to limit most of the facts I chose to add to the ones actually conserning this game, aka WWII. But if people want me to add more, that will be no problem really.

Oh and shame on you Steve! I am sure I told you that these descriptions needed PROOFREADING!

I have several places where I want to have a program/routine go through text files and replace tabs and multiple blanks with a single blank. At the same time I want to have symbols (unusual letter combinations) that denote formattnig. I could just use HTML but at the present I am reluctant to commit to something so elaborate when all I am trying to do is put in some new lines (.N) and paragraphs (.P). This would be applied to all the writeups: naval, air, and HQ.

It also would be used for the Optional Rules descriptions and the tutorials. One of the reasons I have been getting those done (all Optional Rules and some of the tutorial text) is so I understand what the dimensions of the problem are that I want the formatting program to address. Another part of this proccess is having the text wrap around automatically to fit within the text boxes that appear on the screen. That would be dynamic depending on the font characteristics. I am fairly certain I have finalized on the font (Verdana 10 point). All of these pieces work in combination to display text on the screen, even including the definitions for the components used to draw the boxes within which the text appears. You might have noticed that this has been one of the tasks on which I have focused this past month. I have pretty much nailed down every aspect from component, to font, to various textual content. This puts me in the position of defining the formatting 'language' and writing the little routine that formats all the text before it is shown.

So, Terje, don't worrry about how the text appears. Once I get the program written, it will be much easier to proofread your writeups (and all the other text).

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to terje439)

Post #: 574

RE: MWIF Game Interface Design - 10/2/2006 6:22:30 AM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

Here is what setting up lookos like. The carrier air unit under the cursor has been loaded onto the carrier. Both of these units have status boxes on their lower left that indicate this. At this zoom level it is probably hard to see but the carrier's is green and the air unit's is gray.

I have revamped the top line of the main form, changing all the buttons to the metallic theme. The grayed out button on the far right has a green circle in the center when ending the phase is permitted. Right now only the USA flag is shown, but once setup is completed, all 5 of the Allied flags will be visible and clicking on any one of them will let you make decisions for that major power. The theme colors will update when you change major powers (e.g. by clicking on a flag). When the Axis player is making decisions, 3 or 4 flags will be shown (the 4th being for Vichy France).

I just redid the zoom slide bar so if matches everything else.

What remains to be done here are the bottom two lines of the main form. They are still in the old style (CWIF). One thing that will happen there is that the USA flag will disappear. I think there are enough other visual clues as to who is on move, without showing that flag.

I also want to revisit the size and shape of these 3 panels. Some players want the Hex and Game Status information lines (the 2 bottom ones) to be at the bottom of the screen. The # of units displayed during setup should be flexible. And I would like to have an alternative to the Units Under Cursor panel that is a very austere "fly out panel".

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 575

RE: MWIF Game Interface Design - 10/6/2006 7:55:55 AM

Missouri_Rebel

Posts: 3065
Joined: 6/19/2006
From: Southern Missouri
Status: offline

Not to derail everyone from the screenies but, I wonder if it might be possible to include in the interface a little information displaying why an action is not allowed. Please bare with me as I have never played WiF before so my examples could be flawed;

Lets say for instance the UK wants to DoW Japan and tries clicking on whatever it might be that normally does this. Instead of just not being able to allow such a command, a pop-up with a little info pertaining to why it cannot perform task and what might be required to do so.

or

A move by a unit. Why can't it move? Too far? ZoC? etc.

or

A rail move. The unit is face down. In ZoC and not a friendly unit allowing it to move.

Maybe this is in and I just missed it or it hasn't come up yet but, it would be a nice addition to the interface IMO. The tips, for lack of better word, would help out all players, new and pro's alike, and would be especially helpful with the 'grey areas'. Used in conjunction with the tutorials, it might just be a powerful tool that ends a lot of confusion and down time searching through the manual for the info. The possibilities are endless and the info really only needs to be a few lines at most.

What say ye? Is it worth the trouble. I think it is but then again, I'm a lonely newb.

mo reb

< Message edited by Missouri_Rebel -- 10/6/2006 7:58:55 AM >

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 576

RE: MWIF Game Interface Design - 10/6/2006 8:05:28 AM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

quote:

What say ye? Is it worth the trouble. I think it is but then again, I'm a lonely newb.

You're not a lonely newb

, I think that we all agree you're right.
I remember that this feature was existing in CWiF, but I'm not sure it was so complete as explaining you everytime why something was not possible.

(in reply to Missouri_Rebel)

Post #: 577

RE: MWIF Game Interface Design - 10/6/2006 9:03:07 AM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

What say ye? Is it worth the trouble. I think it is but then again, I'm a lonely newb.

You're not a lonely newb , I think that we all agree you're right.
I remember that this feature was existing in CWiF, but I'm not sure it was so complete as explaining you everytime why something was not possible.

It is pretty comprehensive. There are a hundred or more individual error messages explaining why you can't set a unit in a certain place or move a unit to a given hex.

I'll try to add more, and I hope to include contextual help messages for each of the various forms (e.g., declaration of war, aligning minors, trade agreements, etc.).

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 578

RE: MWIF Game Interface Design - 10/6/2006 9:39:36 AM

Froonp

Posts: 7995
Joined: 10/21/2003
From: Marseilles, France
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

What say ye? Is it worth the trouble. I think it is but then again, I'm a lonely newb.

You're not a lonely newb , I think that we all agree you're right.
I remember that this feature was existing in CWiF, but I'm not sure it was so complete as explaining you everytime why something was not possible.

It is pretty comprehensive. There are a hundred or more individual error messages explaining why you can't set a unit in a certain place or move a unit to a given hex.

I'll try to add more, and I hope to include contextual help messages for each of the various forms (e.g., declaration of war, aligning minors, trade agreements, etc.).

And we will help him adding more through playtest games, pointing him places where it is not "enough"

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 579

RE: MWIF Game Interface Design - 11/2/2006 7:51:28 AM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

A long time ago I started work on displaying the Sequence of Play on the screen.

Here is what I have so far.

During a game, the current phase will be highlighted (reverse colors - green font on white background)

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Froonp)

Post #: 580

RE: MWIF Game Interface Design - 11/2/2006 7:53:46 AM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

I have chosen examples of different expansions. There are more possible. For example, the naval combat sequence is shown for Stop of Fight during naval movement. it is the same for Phasing and Non-phasing combat.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 581

RE: MWIF Game Interface Design - 11/2/2006 7:54:48 AM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

The anti-aircraft sequence was shown on the previous page.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 582

RE: MWIF Game Interface Design - 11/2/2006 7:56:40 AM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

There are a lot of places where the air combat sequence can appear: air transport, paradrops, and ground support, for instance.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 583

RE: MWIF Game Interface Design - 11/2/2006 8:00:28 AM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

5th and last in series.

As part of game play, I will tighten the spacing and not show connections. The highlighted colors will be enough. The green/USA background shown will disappear entirely - maybe.

The colors will change depending on the major power "on move".

What I have shown in these 5 posts will evolve into the bitmaps for the tutorial on Sequence of Play.

Comments?

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 584

RE: MWIF Game Interface Design - 11/2/2006 8:00:38 AM

Zorachus99

Posts: 1066
Joined: 9/15/2000
From: Palo Alto, CA
Status: offline

En-route air interception seems to be missing. Is the optional rule not available, changed, etc?

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 585

RE: MWIF Game Interface Design - 11/2/2006 8:06:58 AM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99

En-route air interception seems to be missing.� Is the optional rule not available, changed, etc?

It is an optional rule.

I expect to gloss over some of the numerous variations as far as displaying the sequence of play on the screen during a game. For example, I would expect enroute interception to be part of bombers & escort movement.

The reason I am not being anal about what is shown is that most of the time the fine details are more clutter than informative. The whole purpose here is to enable the players (especially those new to WIF) to stay apprised of where they are in the sequence of play.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Zorachus99)

Post #: 586

RE: MWIF Game Interface Design - 11/2/2006 9:18:55 AM

christo

Posts: 99
Joined: 11/24/2005
From: adelaide, australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99

En-route air interception seems to be missing.� Is the optional rule not available, changed, etc?

It is an optional rule.

I expect to gloss over some of the numerous variations as far as displaying the sequence of play on the screen during a game. For example, I would expect enroute interception to be part of bombers & escort movement.

The reason I am not being anal about what is shown is that most of the time the fine details are more clutter than informative. The whole purpose here is to enable the players (especially those new to WIF) to stay apprised of where they are in the sequence of play.

I may have missed the original introduction to this topic but how exactly is the sequence of play flow chart supposed to work? Is it solely in the introduction tutorials or can the players access this during the course of play? Is it a time machine to allow players to execute the attack that all the counters were moved for but forgot to push the correct button to attack?
They are great in that they make very clear the sequence of play though.

Christo

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 587

RE: MWIF Game Interface Design - 11/2/2006 9:39:54 AM

Neilster

Posts: 2890
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Status: offline

Nice. Maybe a cream background? The green is a bit garish.

Cheers, Neilster

(in reply to christo)

Post #: 588

RE: MWIF Game Interface Design - 11/2/2006 10:34:47 AM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Neilster

Nice. Maybe a cream background? The green is a bit garish.

Cheers, Neilster

Colors change with the player on move.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Neilster)

Post #: 589

RE: MWIF Game Interface Design - 11/2/2006 10:47:31 AM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: christo

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99
En-route air interception seems to be missing.� Is the optional rule not available, changed, etc?

It is an optional rule.

I expect to gloss over some of the numerous variations as far as displaying the sequence of play on the screen during a game. For example, I would expect enroute interception to be part of bombers & escort movement.

The reason I am not being anal about what is shown is that most of the time the fine details are more clutter than informative. The whole purpose here is to enable the players (especially those new to WIF) to stay apprised of where they are in the sequence of play.

I may have missed the original introduction to this topic but how exactly is the sequence of play flow chart supposed to work? Is it solely in the introduction tutorials or can the players access this during the course of play? Is it a time machine to allow players to execute the attack that all the counters were moved for but forgot to push the correct button to attack?
They are great in that they make very clear the sequence of play though.

Christo

The tutorials will have structured/fixed presentation with accompanying text, like the other Introductory Tutorials.

When playing the Seq. Of Play will be a small form that can be toggled on/off and rolled up/down with different degrees of expansion. For example, a minimized version might show:
Land/Land Movement/Air Transport, or
Land/Land Combat/Resolve Attacks/Advances

A full (comparable to the above screen shots) but compressed version would use highlighting to identify which stage/phase/subphase is active but there would be no space between columns and the top items in each column would all be aligned (at the top) to reduce the footprint on the screen. The details still have to be worked out. I like to do visuals first and then ponder how they can best be used to accomplish various goals (information presentation/communication is pretty much the only objective here).

Each item on the Seq. Of Play would be clickable to pull up context sensitive help.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to christo)

Post #: 590

RE: MWIF Game Interface Design - 11/2/2006 10:15:14 PM

Zorachus99

Posts: 1066
Joined: 9/15/2000
From: Palo Alto, CA
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
Each item on the Seq. Of Play would be clickable to pull up context sensitive help.

Excellent

It would be more intuitive for me to have (if possible) a +/- sign next to the items in the sequence of play so I could expand or collapse a part of the sequence of play.

Category: Nice to have

_____________________________

Most men can survive adversity, the true test of a man's character is power. -Abraham Lincoln

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 591

RE: MWIF Game Interface Design - 11/2/2006 11:17:07 PM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
Each item on the Seq. Of Play would be clickable to pull up context sensitive help.

Excellent

It would be more intuitive for me to have (if possible) a +/- sign next to the items in the sequence of play so I could expand or collapse a part of the sequence of play.

Category: Nice to have

+/- is a possibility I hadn't thought of, thanks. Of course it has pluses and minuses.

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Zorachus99)

Post #: 592

RE: MWIF Game Interface Design - 11/3/2006 6:05:39 AM

Neilster

Posts: 2890
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Hobart, Tasmania, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

quote:

ORIGINAL: Zorachus99

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
Each item on the Seq. Of Play would be clickable to pull up context sensitive help.

Excellent

It would be more intuitive for me to have (if possible) a +/- sign next to the items in the sequence of play so I could expand or collapse a part of the sequence of play.

Category: Nice to have

+/- is a possibility I hadn't thought of, thanks. Of course it has pluses and minuses.

A nice addition but we don't want to subtract from the game's simplicity or we'll multiply problems and divide the target audience.

Cheers, Neilster

< Message edited by Neilster -- 11/3/2006 6:09:28 AM >

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 593

RE: MWIF Game Interface Design - 11/7/2006 6:39:11 AM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

I recoded how the Unit Data panel displays information on air units. This meant making the panel slightly wider (410 pixels, up from 389).

Those shown here stress the design by requiring space for double digits following Defense, the different values for Special, and Beaufighter Mk.21 is one of the longer names for air units.

I changed the abbreviations Nt, Tw, Rrg, Cst, and Trns to Night, Twin-E, Reorg, Cost, and Turns. Though Tw Nt only improved to Tw Night.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Neilster)

Post #: 594

RE: MWIF Game Interface Design - 11/7/2006 6:44:32 AM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

Here is what the Unit Data panel for carrier air units, naval air, and bomber look like.

The Cost/Turns/Class (previously Cst/Trns/Clss/Rrg) I kept together, but I separated Reorg from the group, placing it under Oil.

I like the attack, defense, tactical, and strategic on the left-hand side. Those are the important #s for me when playing. Range, ASW, and Air-Sea grouped in the second column reflects their near-equal importance.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 595

RE: MWIF Game Interface Design - 11/7/2006 6:51:57 AM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

I forgot to mention on the last post that the extended range for the bomber is shown as 23/46, which also stressed the design.

Here are some unusual values for fields: Cannot Intercept, No Attack, and Lrg T + P.

The Spanish Republic unit stressed the available room for the country name and the year value as well (NB means that the unit is not built/"placed on the map" if the minor country is attacked; instead it goes into the force pool.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 596

RE: MWIF Game Interface Design - 11/7/2006 8:41:15 AM

amwild

Posts: 105
Joined: 2/9/2004
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

I noticed a few problems with the A-Bomb text:

Spelling Error: ... the resulting Manhattan Project... (A not E)

Capitalisation - All element names should becapitalised: Uranium-235, Plutonium

Terminology error: The third atomic device, nicknamed 'Fat Man', reverted to the Plutonium fission model...

No atomic weapons developed used fusion reactions until the early 1950s (1952 for the USA, 1953 for the Russians). Little Boy had an approximately 15 kT yield, Fat Man had a 21 kT yield, and the first fusion test device, 'Mike' had a 10.4 MT yield. Mike weighed in at 64 tons, and so was not a deliverable weapon. The first deliverable fusion weapon, 'Shrimp' was tested in 1954, and had a yield of 15 MT, far in excess of the expected 4-8 MT.

(in reply to Shannon V. OKeets)

Post #: 597

RE: MWIF Game Interface Design - 11/7/2006 1:22:22 PM

Greyshaft

Posts: 2252
Joined: 10/27/2003
From: Sydney, Australia
Status: offline

quote:

ORIGINAL: amwild
I noticed a few problems with the A-Bomb text:

Spelling Error: ... the resulting Manhattan Project... (A not E)

Capitalisation - All element names should becapitalised: Uranium-235, Plutonium

Terminology error: The third atomic device, nicknamed 'Fat Man', reverted to the Plutonium fission model...

No atomic weapons developed used fusion reactions until the early 1950s (1952 for the USA, 1953 for the Russians). Little Boy had an approximately 15 kT yield, Fat Man had a 21 kT yield, and the first fusion test device, 'Mike' had a 10.4 MT yield. Mike weighed in at 64 tons, and so was not a deliverable weapon. The first deliverable fusion weapon, 'Shrimp' was tested in 1954, and had a yield of 15 MT, far in excess of the expected 4-8 MT.

All suggestions and corrections gratefully received. I will recheck my data on this one...

_____________________________

/Greyshaft

(in reply to amwild)

Post #: 598

RE: MWIF Game Interface Design - 11/8/2006 4:19:21 AM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

Here is the revised layout for the Unit Data panel for naval units.

Fitting in the Sunk date was a problem. I wanted to put it after the Year, but the year sometimes has extra information. For example, 1943 (Rpl) means that the ship is a replacement that becomes available in 1943.

The Saratoga was a problem too because it showed the room required for displaying numbers for damaged ships.

Note that Capacity is the same as the carrier's class. I like using the word capacity when talking about the carriers and class when talking about carrier air units. I would prefer using the word size for the carrier air units - then the documentation could refer to the size of the carrier air units that fit within the capactiy of the carrier - but I do not want to have to withstand the firestorm of criticism from Wiffers.

Attachment (1)

_____________________________

Steve

Perfection is an elusive goal.

(in reply to Greyshaft)

Post #: 599

RE: MWIF Game Interface Design - 11/8/2006 4:23:00 AM

Shannon V. OKeets

Posts: 22095
Joined: 5/19/2005
From: Honolulu, Hawaii
Status: offline

2nd and last in the series. Here's what battleships and convoys look like. All the other unit types are similar.

I still have to refine this form for new unit types from Convoys in Flames (e.g., ASW escorts and carriers, different sub types).

Note that Bombard replaces Capacity for non-carrier naval units.