RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (Full Version)

All Forums >> [New Releases from Matrix Games] >> World in Flames



Message

macgregor -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (11/28/2008 5:11:08 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe 98

This is a grand strategy game. Artilery usually comes under command at divisional level

1. If a counter represents a division, why are artillery units shown as separate units?

2. Are there separate counters for anti tank units?


True but as this game features optional builds it allows the player to invest in artillery divisions, which can be more effective at softening up well entrenched positions. Artillery divisions did and still do exist, though often extra batteries(II,III,X) are split among assaulting divisions. IMO the game handles this appropriately; either the same as it would concentrated air strikes or as so many more combat strength points.
Yes there are separate units for AT gun concentrations as well that notwithstanding attack/defend posture on certain units, are doubled against armor though cannot make strikes.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (11/28/2008 8:12:00 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe 98

This is a grand strategy game. Artilery usually comes under command at divisional level

1. If a counter represents a division, why are artillery units shown as separate units?

2. Are there separate counters for anti tank units?

-

Greg's answer is correct. You might want to look at the tutorial pages (one of the top threads has links to all the tutorials) which detail the different unit types. There are separate tutorials (10 tutorials, 100+ pages in all) for land, naval, and air units: the different types, their movement and combat abiltiies.



composer99 -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (11/28/2008 3:36:19 PM)

Also most of the land units are corps/army scale.



paulderynck -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (11/28/2008 11:38:43 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Joe 98

This is a grand strategy game. Artilery usually comes under command at divisional level

1. If a counter represents a division, why are artillery units shown as separate units?

2. Are there separate counters for anti tank units?

-


1. Its part of adding divisons to the game and can be WiFzened to represent abnormally large concentrations of artillery similar to how the Soviets operated. They are not really historical units IMO.

2. Yes and similar WiFzen for them applies IMO.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (2/28/2009 8:47:37 PM)

I have been doing some revisions to the presentation of information during land combat. One thing I feel compelled to do is to provide players all the stuff that is done internally regarding combat. Since not everyone wants to see this all the time, the land combat chart is only shown when the player clicks on a button on the land comabt resolution form (where there might be multiple land combats shown, awaiting resolution).

There are basically 3 places in the sequence of play where this form might be displayed:
1 - before the combat type has been chosen,
2 - after the combat type has been chosen but the die has not been rolled, and
3 - after the die has been rolled.

The screen shot shows the Land Combat Charts for the 3rd situation. The yellow strip is the range of possible die rolls. The red cell indicate what the die roll actualy was. If you call up this form before having chosen the combat type, then there are two yellow strips, one for assault and one for blitz.

What I like about this presentation is that it envokes memories for long time players of WIF, where you found the column and row for a combat result. But more importantly, for new players it clearly shows what the possible outcomes are for each of the combat tables.

The 2D10 table is similar.





[image]local://upfiles/16701/AD834596FDD04EC0BA9541642BCEFDAA.jpg[/image]



Orm -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (2/28/2009 10:12:50 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

I have been doing some revisions to the presentation of information during land combat. One thing I feel compelled to do is to provide players all the stuff that is done internally regarding combat. Since not everyone wants to see this all the time, the land combat chart is only shown when the player clicks on a button on the land comabt resolution form (where there might be multiple land combats shown, awaiting resolution).

There are basically 3 places in the sequence of play where this form might be displayed:
1 - before the combat type has been chosen,
2 - after the combat type has been chosen but the die has not been rolled, and
3 - after the die has been rolled.

The screen shot shows the Land Combat Charts for the 3rd situation. The yellow strip is the range of possible die rolls. The red cell indicate what the die roll actualy was. If you call up this form before having chosen the combat type, then there are two yellow strips, one for assault and one for blitz.

What I like about this presentation is that it envokes memories for long time players of WIF, where you found the column and row for a combat result. But more importantly, for new players it clearly shows what the possible outcomes are for each of the combat tables.

The 2D10 table is similar.





[image]local://upfiles/16701/AD834596FDD04EC0BA9541642BCEFDAA.jpg[/image]


Just awesome!

It does indeed bring back memories from old WIF games.

-Orm



paulderynck -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (3/2/2009 7:52:19 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

I have been doing some revisions to the presentation of information during land combat. One thing I feel compelled to do is to provide players all the stuff that is done internally regarding combat. Since not everyone wants to see this all the time, the land combat chart is only shown when the player clicks on a button on the land comabt resolution form (where there might be multiple land combats shown, awaiting resolution).

There are basically 3 places in the sequence of play where this form might be displayed:
1 - before the combat type has been chosen,
2 - after the combat type has been chosen but the die has not been rolled, and
3 - after the die has been rolled.

The screen shot shows the Land Combat Charts for the 3rd situation. The yellow strip is the range of possible die rolls. The red cell indicate what the die roll actualy was. If you call up this form before having chosen the combat type, then there are two yellow strips, one for assault and one for blitz.

What I like about this presentation is that it envokes memories for long time players of WIF, where you found the column and row for a combat result. But more importantly, for new players it clearly shows what the possible outcomes are for each of the combat tables.

The 2D10 table is similar.





[image]local://upfiles/16701/AD834596FDD04EC0BA9541642BCEFDAA.jpg[/image]

When are fractional odds resolved? In WiFFE it is after the combat table is chosen. So when showing the form before having chosen the combat type, would there not have to be four columns highlighted when playing with fractional odds?



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (3/2/2009 8:54:10 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: paulderynck


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

I have been doing some revisions to the presentation of information during land combat. One thing I feel compelled to do is to provide players all the stuff that is done internally regarding combat. Since not everyone wants to see this all the time, the land combat chart is only shown when the player clicks on a button on the land comabt resolution form (where there might be multiple land combats shown, awaiting resolution).

There are basically 3 places in the sequence of play where this form might be displayed:
1 - before the combat type has been chosen,
2 - after the combat type has been chosen but the die has not been rolled, and
3 - after the die has been rolled.

The screen shot shows the Land Combat Charts for the 3rd situation. The yellow strip is the range of possible die rolls. The red cell indicate what the die roll actualy was. If you call up this form before having chosen the combat type, then there are two yellow strips, one for assault and one for blitz.

What I like about this presentation is that it envokes memories for long time players of WIF, where you found the column and row for a combat result. But more importantly, for new players it clearly shows what the possible outcomes are for each of the combat tables.

The 2D10 table is similar.





[image]local://upfiles/16701/AD834596FDD04EC0BA9541642BCEFDAA.jpg[/image]

When are fractional odds resolved? In WiFFE it is after the combat table is chosen. So when showing the form before having chosen the combat type, would there not have to be four columns highlighted when playing with fractional odds?

I have taken the simpler path of showing the tables assuming the fractional odds roll does not exist or fails. It is easy enough for a player to visualize them shifted one to the right if they're using fractional odds.



micheljq -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (3/2/2009 3:44:22 PM)

I thought that the 1D10 table was dropped in MWiF. What table is used by default? Is the 3D10 table an option, just curious as for me I use 2D10, I do not consider using 3D10 now.

[:)]



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (3/2/2009 4:59:11 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: micheljq

I thought that the 1D10 table was dropped in MWiF. What table is used by default? Is the 3D10 table an option, just curious as for me I use 2D10, I do not consider using 3D10 now.

[:)]

1D10 or 2D10, it's up to the players. For presenation on the screen the 1D10 requires more programming. One of the beta testers can post what the 2D10 looks like with these new revisions after I upload version 12.05 for them today.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/10/2009 9:31:07 AM)

I have a design decision to make - and it doesn't seem to have an easy answer. Perhaps you can help.

The task is to visually change the appearance of the fighter bomber counters so it is clear whether they are flying as fighters or bombers.

For the temporary carrier air units, which are created by the program when a carrier flies air units into combat, I am using a simple silhouette, which leaves plenty of room for the addition of the word Fighter, or Bomber, underneath the air-to-air combat factor in the upper left corner. Two examples of this are the Akagi and Lexington units shown here.

But I do not know how to do anything comparable for land based fighter-bombers. The screen shots show 28 variations on names, numbers, and the use of color for both the air-to-air and tactical (lower left corner) factors. Note that sometimes fighter-bombers will be using their strategic value (lower right corner).

I thought about just trying to squeeze the letter F or B in somewhere, but I don't see where. Another possibility is to just try to indicate when these units are flying as bombers - with the default being that they are flying as fighters. That simplifies the task to just squeezing in a B somewhere.

Ideas?



[image]local://upfiles/16701/AE43A96B75254DBFBDD21FE7664B333D.jpg[/image]



Taxman66 -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/10/2009 2:45:35 PM)

How about putting the B next the yellow range?  If I recall correctly a fighter's ranged is halved when flying as a bomber.  If it's possible to actually show the reduced range (which I doubt at this point) that would be extra great.



Orm -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/10/2009 3:58:07 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Taxman66

How about putting the B next the yellow range?  If I recall correctly a fighter's ranged is halved when flying as a bomber.  If it's possible to actually show the reduced range (which I doubt at this point) that would be extra great.


If you designate a fighter to fly as a bomber its range is indeed halved. The reduced range is then shown in the yellow circle.



sajbalk -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/10/2009 3:58:28 PM)

The fighters may also fly as naval bombers at sea. This does not reduce their range.

One idea would be to highlight the bombing factor in use, i.e. have it look like the red factor German TAC.

Another would be to place a "B" next to the range.




Orm -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/10/2009 4:11:40 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: sajbalk

The fighters may also fly as naval bombers at sea. This does not reduce their range.

One idea would be to highlight the bombing factor in use, i.e. have it look like the red factor German TAC.

Another would be to place a "B" next to the range.




You do not decide if a fighter in a sea area is a fighter or a bomber untill the start of each naval combat round. And you can change its role at the start of each new naval combat round as long as it remains in the sea box.



brian brian -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/10/2009 4:26:20 PM)

with the cardboard, you can just tell by what column the counter is placed in....could the bomber and fighter column just be separated visually and labelled, quite simply, without needing a change to the actual counter?

note that defining fighter or bomber at the start of each round introduces yet another dreaded player decision point. one way to speed up email games would be to make that designation stick for a whole combat, as a pre-game preference chosen by the players. sorry to stray off-topic here I guess.



Ullern -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/10/2009 5:42:02 PM)

B down below only suggestion so far... It would have been better higher on the counter.

What about simply to put a "Fighter" or "Bomber" string where you put it on those generic counters and let the text string have a background color equal counter color and just not care if other text or graphics gets hidden?

What about doing something with the fonts?
Do we need to see those numbers that are not relevant for this combat? So that no bombing factor seen means it's a fighter? Or opposite: Can you bold the bombing factor if it is used?



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/10/2009 6:24:44 PM)

Several good ideas.

The addition to the range of the letter B is a possibility. The only place where I see that as maybe not working is for the Twin Mustang (see the unit pictures above), where drawing a circle around 18B might make it so large that is overlaps the word Mustang.

I thought of adding a silhouette of a falling bomb somewhere (instead of a B). Placement next to the bombing factor in use would be best, but there might not always be enough room to the left of the air-to-sea factor (e.g., I-16 (SPB)).

Another idea I had this morning is to change the color of the range to gray to indicate that it is bombing. That is the color used for field artillery (e.g., see the screen shot).

[image]local://upfiles/16701/AA6312F8C40E4E1197A5E7D93B5926CC.jpg[/image]
EDIT: Sorry the cursor drifted when I took the screen shot so the unit "in focus" is the Hummel instead of the 150mm.



Froonp -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/10/2009 9:55:39 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
I thought about just trying to squeeze the letter F or B in somewhere, but I don't see where. Another possibility is to just try to indicate when these units are flying as bombers - with the default being that they are flying as fighters. That simplifies the task to just squeezing in a B somewhere.

My suggestion would be to put the B to the right of the Air ot Air factor. This intuitively means that the air to air factor has been forfeteid for bombing capacities, shown by the B next to the A2A factor.

Another solution would be to draw a black square around the FTR Tactical factor, to stress the fact that this factor will be used.

CWiF drew a square around the A2A factor IIRC.

CWiF also shown the reduced range, and reduced A2A factor of FTR flying as bombers. I suppose that MWiF will do too.

quote:

[image]local://upfiles/16701/AE43A96B75254DBFBDD21FE7664B333D.jpg[/image]

Did someone told you already that these counters were splendid ? [:D]



Froonp -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/10/2009 9:59:25 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
I thought of adding a silhouette of a falling bomb somewhere (instead of a B). Placement next to the bombing factor in use would be best, but there might not always be enough room to the left of the air-to-sea factor (e.g., I-16 (SPB)).

Good idea, but isn't it a lot of extra work ?

quote:

Another idea I had this morning is to change the color of the range to gray to indicate that it is bombing.

Good idea. Simpler than the one before.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/10/2009 10:56:15 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
I thought of adding a silhouette of a falling bomb somewhere (instead of a B). Placement next to the bombing factor in use would be best, but there might not always be enough room to the left of the air-to-sea factor (e.g., I-16 (SPB)).

Good idea, but isn't it a lot of extra work ?

quote:

Another idea I had this morning is to change the color of the range to gray to indicate that it is bombing.

Good idea. Simpler than the one before.


I think I'll go with making the range gray. I already have code that does that for the artillery. And this solution is the least intrusive on an already heavily congested counter.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/12/2009 6:23:08 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets


quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
I thought of adding a silhouette of a falling bomb somewhere (instead of a B). Placement next to the bombing factor in use would be best, but there might not always be enough room to the left of the air-to-sea factor (e.g., I-16 (SPB)).

Good idea, but isn't it a lot of extra work ?

quote:

Another idea I had this morning is to change the color of the range to gray to indicate that it is bombing.

Good idea. Simpler than the one before.


I think I'll go with making the range gray. I already have code that does that for the artillery. And this solution is the least intrusive on an already heavily congested counter.

Here is what it looks like using the range colored gray. I think it is easy to see which are bombers & fighters, without having to read the text (though that can be a help if you don't remember what the colors indicate). Notice the US units at the bottom.

[image]local://upfiles/16701/C8895B09146A4866B35D8182CF5E5F43.jpg[/image]



Mad Russian -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/12/2009 6:27:46 AM)

One thing we did was to allow the creation of 3 airbases per nationality.

That allowed places, like Malta, which wasn't a city or a port, to then base air units as was done historically. You had to buy them and it took a turn to build them. That might be something to consider in the game as well.

This is probably not the place to put this. Sorry for not posting in the right spot.

Good Hunting.

MR



bredsjomagnus -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/12/2009 11:02:57 AM)

This is mayby a stupid question but what does the 2(-1), 1(-2) etc mean under the units?



Froonp -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/12/2009 2:05:02 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: bredsjomagnus

This is mayby a stupid question but what does the 2(-1), 1(-2) etc mean under the units?

Look like : Sea Box section (Shore bombardment penalty)

Sea Box section : from 0 to 4
Shore bombardment penalty : from 0 to NA, passing by -1 & -2.

Sea box section 4 / shore bombardment 0
Sea box section 3 / shore bombardment 0
Sea box section 2 / shore bombardment -1
Sea box section 1 / shore bombardment -2
Sea box section 0 / shore bombardment NA



bredsjomagnus -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/12/2009 3:01:58 PM)

Ok. Thanks.



chacal83000 -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/12/2009 6:10:44 PM)

Steve,
For me your solution seems perfectly clear and easy. The grey cicles arent' used elsewhere for air units if i remember well WiF so it's a good idea. The small text will just remember it at the beggining for those not yet used with the game. IMO it's good this way.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/12/2009 6:53:42 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

quote:

ORIGINAL: bredsjomagnus

This is mayby a stupid question but what does the 2(-1), 1(-2) etc mean under the units?

Look like : Sea Box section (Shore bombardment penalty)

Sea Box section : from 0 to 4
Shore bombardment penalty : from 0 to NA, passing by -1 & -2.

Sea box section 4 / shore bombardment 0
Sea box section 3 / shore bombardment 0
Sea box section 2 / shore bombardment -1
Sea box section 1 / shore bombardment -2
Sea box section 0 / shore bombardment NA

Yes.

Perhaps only the 0 through 4 are essentail, (if I made that change I could add the word Sect in front of the number), but I think players will quickly learn that these are section box numbers and bombardment 'penalties'. If you loook at all the surface ships shown in the screen shot, you'll see that knowing the effect on the bombardment number is useful information: it isn't too hard to add up the total bombardment factors (lower right corner). Japan has 6 bombardment points available (before the air-to-air combat and naval air attack). The US has 7.




macgregor -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/13/2009 1:58:14 AM)

I just want to say thank you Steve. It's obvious that this game is going to be to PC games what the boardgame was to boardgames -only much better because now married guys can play too. If I've insinuated that I thought it was an embellished version of CWiF, the stunning screenshots I've seen have shattered that notion. This is your baby now. I've been impatient and perhaps even a bit impetuous (moi?)but I'm as exited as anyone now. The non-perils and cashews are a bit stale but I can always get some more. Our man in Philly is pumped as well.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (4/13/2009 3:59:50 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: macgregor

I just want to say thank you Steve. It's obvious that this game is going to be to PC games what the boardgame was to boardgames -only much better because now married guys can play too. If I've insinuated that I thought it was an embellished version of CWiF, the stunning screenshots I've seen have shattered that notion. This is your baby now. I've been impatient and perhaps even a bit impetuous (moi?)but I'm as exited as anyone now. The non-perils and cashews are a bit stale but I can always get some more. Our man in Philly is pumped as well.

Our man in Philly? The guitarist?[&:] Sadly I can not recall his name.[:(] You are still in contact?



Page: <<   < prev  50 51 [52] 53 54   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
0.8125