RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (Full Version)

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



Message

Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (10/18/2005 5:16:10 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mlees
A "generic" setup will be needed for novices and casual players (like me) who have not yet grasped the full finer points of strategy.

It's like chess. I know how the pieces move, but I can't plan more than a turn ahead.

I dont know if this belongs here or in the AI thread, but if you have the game engine with an ability to save each move and so forth, you can record games for tutorial purposes by your beta team uber-players!


For a generic setup, it is easy enough to just provide a game that was saved immediately after units were scrapped (by an experienced player), randomly drawn for the force pool, pilots assigned to planes (by an experienced player), planes assigned to carriers (by ...), and all the units setup on the map (by ...). We could do this for the first two scenarios, Barbarossa and Guadalcanal, which are intended to be introductory scenarios to WIF. The player would start the game with Germany declaring war on the USSR in Barbarossa and in the midst of the USA - Japanese conflict in the Pacific in Guadcanal.

For recording games move by move, you should read post #138 in this thread, it describes the completed Game Record Log design.



mlees -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (10/18/2005 7:17:51 AM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

For a generic setup, it is easy enough to just provide a game that was saved immediately after units were scrapped (by an experienced player), randomly drawn for the force pool, pilots assigned to planes (by an experienced player), planes assigned to carriers (by ...), and all the units setup on the map (by ...). We could do this for the first two scenarios, Barbarossa and Guadalcanal, which are intended to be introductory scenarios to WIF. The player would start the game with Germany declaring war on the USSR in Barbarossa and in the midst of the USA - Japanese conflict in the Pacific in Guadcanal.

For recording games move by move, you should read post #138 in this thread, it describes the completed Game Record Log design.


Urmm, I understood the dialog portion, but I am not a programmer, so the "if/and/or" stuff below that looks Greek, German, Japanese, and Basque all rolled into one to me. I'll take your word that it will do what you want it to do.

Sorry I forgot that you had already addressed my previous post about the save game process. I had slept since then, and that info seems to have migrated to my pillow.

In most of the games I own, however, there are a finite number of "save slots", and the "auto-save" feature usually uses the same slot. To replay a game (especially for a tutorial where the noob player just watches a slide show type of game) you need a few slots. Lessee, Sept/Oct '39 to the end of '46 is what, 44 turns? And that is only using one save per turn for one player. If you save between major phases (for pbem), and/or you have email turnins from multiple opponents, there are there is going to be a requirement for a couple more slots... Just thinking out loud. Please, carry on!



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (10/18/2005 8:37:42 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mlees
quote:

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
For a generic setup, it is easy enough to just provide a game that was saved immediately after units were scrapped (by an experienced player), randomly drawn for the force pool, pilots assigned to planes (by an experienced player), planes assigned to carriers (by ...), and all the units setup on the map (by ...). We could do this for the first two scenarios, Barbarossa and Guadalcanal, which are intended to be introductory scenarios to WIF. The player would start the game with Germany declaring war on the USSR in Barbarossa and in the midst of the USA - Japanese conflict in the Pacific in Guadcanal.

For recording games move by move, you should read post #138 in this thread, it describes the completed Game Record Log design.


Urmm, I understood the dialog portion, but I am not a programmer, so the "if/and/or" stuff below that looks Greek, German, Japanese, and Basque all rolled into one to me. I'll take your word that it will do what you want it to do.

Sorry I forgot that you had already addressed my previous post about the save game process. I had slept since then, and that info seems to have migrated to my pillow.

In most of the games I own, however, there are a finite number of "save slots", and the "auto-save" feature usually uses the same slot. To replay a game (especially for a tutorial where the noob player just watches a slide show type of game) you need a few slots. Lessee, Sept/Oct '39 to the end of '46 is what, 44 turns? And that is only using one save per turn for one player. If you save between major phases (for pbem), and/or you have email turnins from multiple opponents, there are there is going to be a requirement for a couple more slots... Just thinking out loud. Please, carry on!


Save slots are not my style. I have literally thousands of saved games of CIV II on my disk. Every year or so I go through a process of deleting them and it takes me about a half hour.

Instead of slots I will use the CWIF convention of assigning a directory for saved games. Within that directory are subdirectories for each scenario. The names for a saved game has a group of letters chosen by the player (a base) to which the program adds the scenario, player/major power/country, turn, impulse, phase, and subphase. Each of these are reduced to a 2 character code so the file name won't be 173 characters long. The file name will be generated automatically by the program using the base and the current player and time of the game. You can override that name if you want. When you go to restore a saved game, you will be able to determine the most recent saved game easily. You will also be able to identify other saved games at a glance by their names. The only drawback to this design is that the disk can become cluttered with a ton of saved games. However, they are all in one directory and you can simply delete the directory if don't want any of them. This is less of a concern with 80 GB disk drives the norm these days.



Neilster -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (10/18/2005 1:48:28 PM)

I think avoiding tedium, especially for newbies, is an excellent idea. With CWIF, I fired up saved games where all the initial stuff had already been done to my satisfaction and I was about to jump into the game itself.

I'm not sure if this belongs here or in the AI thread but in the start-up screen thinking, has an AI vs AI mode been considered? What about if one wants to watch the AIs battle it out from the point reached in a saved game? I'm thinking of a situation where one comes home from a night out on the strong lemonades, a little worse for wear and tired [;)]. I'm often not up to playing but want to see some action.

As I've said before, a watchable AI vs AI mode would also be a big advantage for newbie learning.

Cheers, Neilster



c92nichj -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (10/18/2005 3:44:19 PM)

quote:

As I've said before, a watchable AI vs AI mode would also be a big advantage for newbie learning.


Even though the AIO team are doing their best to make the AI as good as possible I don't think that it will ever be as good as a player. So for newbies to learn it would be much more desirable to watch a saved game played by between two experienced players than watch two AI play against each others.



Froonp -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (10/18/2005 4:13:52 PM)

quote:

CWIF provided the ability to save setups which doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Part of the setup process is drawing units randomly from the force pools, assigning pilots to planes and then placing the units on the map. When loading in a saved setup, CWIF drew new units randomly and then assigned pilots and unit placements based on the saved setup. Since the quality of planes, especially the range, can change because of the random draw, this all seems likely to result in inferior decisions. And that could be true even given that units can be relocated after the program places them according to the saved setup.

I for one loved the possibility to save setups.
Even if the units randomly drawn next time are not the same, I already have the units set up at the right positions. I just have to review it and shifts some units & planes if I'm not happy. It is best than to start setup from scratch.



Neilster -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (10/18/2005 5:12:43 PM)


quote:

ORIGINAL: c92nichj

quote:

As I've said before, a watchable AI vs AI mode would also be a big advantage for newbie learning.


Even though the AIO team are doing their best to make the AI as good as possible I don't think that it will ever be as good as a player.

I know. I'm one of them.

quote:

So for newbies to learn it would be much more desirable to watch a saved game played by between two experienced players than watch two AI play against each others.

I agree. But having both can't hurt. I was the one who suggested the "replay saved game" feature.

Cheers, Neilster



mlees -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (10/18/2005 7:02:42 PM)

quote:

However, they are all in one directory and you can simply delete the directory if don't want any of them. This is less of a concern with 80 GB disk drives the norm these days.


Ok sir, thanks. I only "browse" these forums as a casual player. Thank you for indulging me.

I am very interested in the game (I own the table top version). Upon seeing the expertise that you and the other contributing fans on these boards has given me a feeling of confidence that the Matrix version of this game will be a keeper. I am glad to say that I dont need to babysit you guys![;)]



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (10/18/2005 7:48:18 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp
quote:

CWIF provided the ability to save setups which doesn't make a lot of sense to me. Part of the setup process is drawing units randomly from the force pools, assigning pilots to planes and then placing the units on the map. When loading in a saved setup, CWIF drew new units randomly and then assigned pilots and unit placements based on the saved setup. Since the quality of planes, especially the range, can change because of the random draw, this all seems likely to result in inferior decisions. And that could be true even given that units can be relocated after the program places them according to the saved setup.

I for one loved the possibility to save setups.
Even if the units randomly drawn next time are not the same, I already have the units set up at the right positions. I just have to review it and shifts some units & planes if I'm not happy. It is best than to start setup from scratch.


Do you realize that the planes you assign pilots to can be different? When going through the full setup there are usually several planes randomly drawn form an air unit type (say L4) and the player chooses which to include, (assign pilots to). Planes not chosen go back into the forcepool. These decisions are bypassed when using a saved setup. I can't believe anyone deciding to play a game of MWIF doesn't care which planes he gets during setup.

I do believe that part of the reason you, and many others, use the saved setups from CWIF was because:
(1) you saved the time and effort needed to scrap units,
(2) you saved the time and effort needed to place named units (e.g., naval units and HQs), convoys, and other identical anonymous units on the map,
(3) the interface for scrapping units didn't readily provide the data you needed for those decisions, and
(4) the interface for selecting units and placing them on the map was tedious to use.

I intend to fix all those problems by:
(1) letting scrap lists be saved separate from setups,
(2) letting the player save the starting positions for units that are not randomly drawn from the forcepools [a different definition for a saved setup],
(3) redesigning the scrap window/form to provide more information, and
(4) making the placement of units on the map a drag and drop procedure from a list of placable units running down the left hand side of the screen.

If you use all these features of the redesign, the sequence of startup for you will be:
(1) load a saved scrap list and bypass the scrapping units task,
(2) load a saved setup and bypass having to place named units, convoys, forts, oil points and the like, on the map,
(3) assign pilots to planes and planes to carriers, and
(4) place randomly drawn units (most land units and all air units) on the map using drag and drop.

I expect to also have available the ability to change the view of the detailed map at the click of a button, so you can switch between the east and west coast of the USA, the European and Pacific fronts for the USSR, and the numerous locations that the Commonwealth uses during setup.

My goal here is to make setup as painless as possible without compromising on the player's ability to make decisions.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (10/18/2005 9:25:27 PM)

Just in case some of you have nothing better to read, here is the detailed program logic I am using to rewrite the start of game sequence of play for scrapping and setting up units.
===================
Changes to the Start a New Game call sequence (October 18, 2005)

Step 1: Scrap Units
Each scenario of MWIF starts with the program asking the player to choose which units to scrap. Importantly, this occurs before units are randomly drawn from the force pools. By letting the player remove obsolete units from the force pools before the game starts, the player can improve the average quality of the units remaining in the force pools. Alternatively, the player can load a list of scrapped units from a previously saved CSV file, and bypass the rest of this step.

Before the player selects units for scrapping, the program first determines which units are scrappable. It then counts the number of each setup type that will later be drawn randomly from the force pools by reading the setup data for the scenario. Those counts are scenario specific and need to be known when scrapping units so the program can check that the player doesn’t scrap units that are necessary to set up the scenario.

The player can then scrap units within the limitations that: (1) the unit is scrappable and (2) scrapping it doesn’t reduce its setup type below the number necessary for setup. After the player has scrapped units, the program lets the player save his list of scrapped units, as a CSV file, for use in future games.

Step 2: Reading Saved Placements for Non-random Setup Units
Second, the program lets the player choose whether to load a saved setup or not. A saved setup only has setup positions for units that are not selected randomly. These include all named units, identical anonymous units (like forts and oil points), and units such that all units of that type are needed for the setup (like when 2 territorials are required and there are only two territorials). If the player loads a saved setup, the setup positions for non-random units are read from a CSV file and set aside in memory (Start Positions).

Step 3: Selection of Units To Be Set Up
Third, the program reads the scenario setup data a second time and searches through all units in MWIF to find those needed for setting up the scenario. Some of these units are drawn at random from the force pools and others are created on the fly (e.g., convoy units). The program places all of the randomly selected units in the setup pool. It does this by assigning them the column number of Setup Value. If the player has loaded a saved setup, then the starting on map positions for the non-random units are taken from Start Positions and those column and row numbers assigned to those units. Otherwise, they too are placed in the setup pool with a column number of Setup Value. Non-random units with on map positions are placed in their assigned hexes or sea areas. Note that the player will be able to change their positions during the next step if he wants to.

Step 4: Placing Units on the Map
Regardless of the type of unit, every unit being set up will have a group ID which is associated with the setup location to which it is restricted. When the program proceeds to the setup form, the player is able to assign pilots to planes, assign planes to carriers, place units on the map, and reposition any and all units already on the map - so long as he doesn’t violate the setup location restrictions. Stacking limits and other setup restrictions are checked before the player can exit the setup routine. For instance, the USSR must place 10 corps sized units along both the Rumanian and Polish borders at the start of Barbarossa.

Step 5: Saving Setup Placements
Once all units have been placed on the map, the player is able to save the setup as a CSV file for use in future games. Only the setup positions of the non-random units are written to the CSV file.



Froonp -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (10/18/2005 10:18:05 PM)

About saved Setup.

I do realize that saved setup could have problems with planes and randomly chosen units being not place at the best places.

What I liked with this saved setup function was the ability to save a setup position.
That is, I could have the typical Italian Setup for action against France, the typical Italian Setup for action against Egypt, the typical Italian Setup for action against Tunisia / Algeria / Morroco, the typical Russian Setup for action against Persia, the typical Russian Setup for action against Rumania, and so on.

What you could do, to achieve this and still not setup randomly drawn units, would be to save the positions of the randomly drawn units as the positions of a generic LND2 bomber, the position of a generic LND3 bomber, the position of a generic INF, of a generic MOT, of an generic ARM, etc.... When the setup would be loaded, you'd have a placeholder for a generic INF where you set up an INF in the original setup, so you could know / remember that in such a setup you liked to plance an INF there.



mlees -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (10/18/2005 10:30:28 PM)

I like the idea, but how about territorials? They are gonna still need to be setup in the home territories.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (10/18/2005 11:06:19 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp
About saved Setup.

I do realize that saved setup could have problems with planes and randomly chosen units being not place at the best places.

What I liked with this saved setup function was the ability to save a setup position.
That is, I could have the typical Italian Setup for action against France, the typical Italian Setup for action against Egypt, the typical Italian Setup for action against Tunisia / Algeria / Morroco, the typical Russian Setup for action against Persia, the typical Russian Setup for action against Rumania, and so on.

What you could do, to achieve this and still not setup randomly drawn units, would be to save the positions of the randomly drawn units as the positions of a generic LND2 bomber, the position of a generic LND3 bomber, the position of a generic INF, of a generic MOT, of an generic ARM, etc.... When the setup would be loaded, you'd have a placeholder for a generic INF where you set up an INF in the original setup, so you could know / remember that in such a setup you liked to plance an INF there.


The implication of what you are proposing is to insert another step within the setup sequence. The new step would be: Select air units from those drawn randomly - by assigning them pilots.

The sequence would be:
(1) scrap units,
(2) read saved setup positions,
(3) find named/draw random/find or create identical anonymous units,
(4) assign pilots to randomly drawn air units,
(5) place all units on map, and
(6) save setup.

I guess I have no problem with this. It is an additional step, instead of having pilot assignments lumped together with placing units. On the other hand, it is a little crisper definition of what is being done. Experienced players shouldn't have a problem with it and it might make things easier for novices to understand what is happening.

I could also move the load saved setup from being the second step to being the fourth. That is:
(1) scrap units,
(2) find named/draw random/find or create identical anonymous units,
(3) assign pilots to randomly drawn air units,
(4) read saved setup positions,
(5) place all units on map, and
(6) save setup.

Or leave the option available at several places for the players to activate.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (10/18/2005 11:13:13 PM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mlees
I like the idea, but how about territorials? They are gonna still need to be setup in the home territories.


Most units, not just territorials, have restrictions on where they can set up. The program maintains the collection of units to be set up in separate pools - by location restriction. When a player goes to place a unit on the map, the cursor changes dynamically to indicate whether or not the hex/sea area is legal for the current unit.

One of the options that CWIF provided is "Free setup" where the player can place setup units anywhere within his controlled territory. I plan on keeping that option since it is effortless to do so. It lets players employ some of their own "house rules" about setting up the units.



Froonp -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (10/18/2005 11:22:31 PM)

quote:

One of the options that CWIF provided is "Free setup" where the player can place setup units anywhere within his controlled territory. I plan on keeping that option since it is effortless to do so. It lets players employ some of their own "house rules" about setting up the units.

Free setup is good especially to try variants on existing scenarios. We did it especially for the Barbarossa Scenario where the historical setup imposed in WiF is far from the actual setup you get on a typical 39-45 campaign with a 41 Barb.

About your proposals (Steve) in post 193, I'm not really sure to have understood if what you proposed allowed to save "positions" of "unit types" for randomly drawn units, but I'm confident it is [;)].



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (10/18/2005 11:36:25 PM)

Here is my revised program logic, which separates out the assignment of pilots and lets placement of generic unit types be saved.
==================================
Changes to the Start a New Game call sequence (October 18, 2005)

Step 1: Scrap Units (Player or MWIF)
Each scenario of MWIF starts with the program asking the player to choose which units to scrap. Importantly, this occurs before units are randomly drawn from the force pools. By letting the player remove obsolete units from the force pools before the game starts, the player can improve the average quality of the units remaining in the force pools. Alternatively, the player can load a list of scrapped units from a previously saved CSV file, and bypass the rest of this step.

Before the player selects units for scrapping, the program first determines which units are scrappable. It then counts the number of each setup type that will later be drawn randomly from the force pools by reading the setup data for the scenario. Those counts are scenario specific and need to be known when scrapping units so the program can check that the player doesn’t scrap units that are necessary to set up the scenario.

The player can then scrap units within the limitations that: (1) the unit is scrappable and (2) scrapping it doesn’t reduce its setup type below the number necessary for setup. After the player has scrapped units, the program lets the player save his list of scrapped units, as a CSV file, for use in future games.

Step 2: Selection of Units To Be Set Up (MWIF)
Second, the program reads the scenario setup data a second time and searches through all units in MWIF to find those needed for setting up the scenario. Some of these units are drawn at random from the force pools and others are created on the fly (e.g., convoy units and oil points).

Step 3: Assigning Pilots to Air Units (Player)
Third, the player assigns pilots to air units. Usually there are more air units drawn from the forcepool than the player is allowed to place on the map. For example, the setup instructions for the scenario may state that 3 bombers with a build cost of 4 are to be drawn from the forcepool and the player to choose 2 of those for placement. The third bomber is returned to the forcepool to be built later like all other units in the forcepool. During this step, the player decides which of the randomly drawn air units are best and assigns them pilots. If the option to use pilots has not been selected, then the player simply chooses 2 of the 3 bombers. This task is repeated for all the air unit types where the player gets to pick the best for placement on the map.

Step 4: Reading Saved Placements for Non-random Setup Units (MWIF)
Fourth, the program lets the player choose whether to load a saved setup or not. A saved setup has setup positions for all units. These include all named units, identical anonymous units (like forts and oil points), and units such that all units of that type are needed for the setup (like when 2 territorials are required and there are only two territorials). If the player loads a saved setup, the setup positions for non-random units are read from a CSV file and used to place units on the map. Randomly drawn units are assigned to saved positions for their specific unit type, but not to their specific unit (since it has been randomly drawn). Note that the player will be able to change the positions of all units during the next step.

If the player is not using a saved setup, then the program places all units in the setup pool.

Step 5: Placing Units on the Map (Player)
Regardless of the type of unit, every unit being set up will have a group ID which is associated with the setup location to which it is restricted. When the program proceeds to the setup form, the player is able to assign pilots to planes, assign planes to carriers, place units on the map, and reposition any and all units already on the map - so long as he doesn’t violate the setup location restrictions. Stacking limits and other setup restrictions are checked before the player can exit the setup routine. For instance, the USSR must place 10 corps sized units along both the Rumanian and Polish borders at the start of Barbarossa.

Step 6: Saving Setup Placements(Player)
Once all units have been placed on the map, the player is able to save the setup as a CSV file for use in future games.



Froonp -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (10/18/2005 11:44:48 PM)

From step 1 :
quote:

The player can then scrap units within the limitations that: (1) the unit is scrappable and (2) scrapping it doesn’t reduce its setup type below the number necessary for setup. After the player has scrapped units, the program lets the player save his list of scrapped units, as a CSV file, for use in future games.

The game allows the player scrapping units so that it reduces its setup type below the number necessary for setup. But when it is done, the rule tells you that if you have not enough units to setup because you scraped units of that type, you cannot setup units from next year's force pool (as you can normaly do when not enough units of a given type exist to be setup) to obtain the setup number indicated by the scenario chart.
CWiF did this too, and warned you that you were going too far in scrapping and that you would not be able to set up the right number of units.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (10/19/2005 12:10:09 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

From step 1 :
quote:

The player can then scrap units within the limitations that: (1) the unit is scrappable and (2) scrapping it doesn’t reduce its setup type below the number necessary for setup. After the player has scrapped units, the program lets the player save his list of scrapped units, as a CSV file, for use in future games.

The game allows the player scrapping units so that it reduces its setup type below the number necessary for setup. But when it is done, the rule tells you that if you have not enough units to setup because you scraped units of that type, you cannot setup units from next year's force pool (as you can normaly do when not enough units of a given type exist to be setup) to obtain the setup number indicated by the scenario chart.
CWiF did this too, and warned you that you were going too far in scrapping and that you would not be able to set up the right number of units.


Yeah, it generates a warning to the player rather than impose an absolute restriction. I prefer the latter actually.



mlees -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (10/19/2005 4:41:40 AM)


quote:

quote:

ORIGINAL: mlees
I like the idea, but how about territorials? They are gonna still need to be setup in the home territories.


Most units, not just territorials, have restrictions on where they can set up. The program maintains the collection of units to be set up in separate pools - by location restriction. When a player goes to place a unit on the map, the cursor changes dynamically to indicate whether or not the hex/sea area is legal for the current unit.

One of the options that CWIF provided is "Free setup" where the player can place setup units anywhere within his controlled territory. I plan on keeping that option since it is effortless to do so. It lets players employ some of their own "house rules" about setting up the units.


Sorry. I was directing my question towards Froonp, and his idea of a setup system that specified unit type only, versus a specific unit.

In the "Barbarossa" scenerio, for example, the USSR player can specify:

Of the 3 Mech units I get for the European map, place random mech unit #1 into hex 2346 (on the border of Estonia), random mech unit #2 into hex 2238 (Minsk), and random mech unit #3 in hex 1829 (on the border of Rumania).

This could be programed, I assume, but in real life, the USSR player might want the strongest mech in Minsk, and the weakest facing Estonia.

This same problem would exist for fighter planes. On the setup of the Grand Campaign game, the German player might draw a 2 factor fighter, and with Froonp's system, that plane might get assigned to the front line facing Poland, vice where it should be, protecting Germany from Western nuisance raids.

Also, his system would not accommodate territorials. For example, in one game, the CW player might get the "Rhodesian" unit, but the next game, he might get the "Kenyan" unit.

The "free setup" option was available with the old CWiF version as well, if I recall correctly.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (10/19/2005 6:11:12 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: mlees
In the "Barbarossa" scenerio, for example, the USSR player can specify:

Of the 3 Mech units I get for the European map, place random mech unit #1 into hex 2346 (on the border of Estonia), random mech unit #2 into hex 2238 (Minsk), and random mech unit #3 in hex 1829 (on the border of Rumania).

This could be programed, I assume, but in real life, the USSR player might want the strongest mech in Minsk, and the weakest facing Estonia.

This same problem would exist for fighter planes. On the setup of the Grand Campaign game, the German player might draw a 2 factor fighter, and with Froonp's system, that plane might get assigned to the front line facing Poland, vice where it should be, protecting Germany from Western nuisance raids.

Also, his system would not accommodate territorials. For example, in one game, the CW player might get the "Rhodesian" unit, but the next game, he might get the "Kenyan" unit.


The placement of the mech units could be rearranged by the player after the saved setup is loaded. So could all the other unit placements.

Your point about the territorials is a good one that I hadn't thought of it.

I had planned on letting players remove units from the map (temporarily) putting them back in the setup pool. They could then be taken from the setup pool and placed on the map again later during setup. My thought here was you might start by placing all your bombers on the map and then decide that you want to decide where to place them last. Rather than shoving them all off to one side, you will be able to simply return them to the setup pool. I mention this because that is what I will do with the territorials. If any unit can not be legally placed on the map using the saved setup, then I will just put it in the setup pool and let the player decide where it goes. No muss, no fuss.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (1/6/2006 11:25:07 PM)

Well, after a 3 month hiatus, I have gotten back to the Scrap unit form.

My previous design for this form was way too ambitious and ended up being too complicated. This is somewhat less of both.

As a player I always want to know the current situation before I scrap a unit. That means knowing what other units of that type are on map, in production, in the force pool, etc.. Therefore this form now includes 5 additional lists. The CWIF version of this form had just the top two.

The way you use this form is to click on one of the units in the top list (Can Be Scrapped) and then click on the Scrap button. That moves the unit to the second list (Scrapped). You can undo this transaction and move the unit back using the Undo button.

Units on the 5 lower lists can not be selected or manipulated in any way. However, when you pass the cursor over a unit on any of the 7 lists, the unit description panel fills with details on the unit. You can also scroll all the lists (the In Force Pool list is wquite long for the USSR in this example).

There are three separate views for this panel: air units, naval units, and land units. The three buttons let you control which one you want to examine and choose units from to scrap. The Needed, Reserve, and In force pool numbers provide information on the unit the cursor is currently over.

So, let me interpret this screen shot for you. The USSR is choosing which units to scrap during setup. The list at the top is of air units of older vintage. There were 4 F2 fighters that could be scrapped and one of them has already been. A second one is under consideration in the top panel. That unit is described in detail in the unit description box (I-15bis). The USSR will need 8 F2 type fighters for set up and there are 16 available in the force pool. 4 of those can be scrapped, and the other 12 are listed in the In Force Pool list below.

All 4 of these old fighters should be scrapped. There will be plenty remaining in the force to fulfill setup requirements and scrapping these old planes will improve your chances of getting some of the better ones listed below (5 factor air-to-air rating).

This form is incomplete: the Entering Force Pool Next Year list hasn't been filled in. The other parts are correct though. No units are on map, in production, or in air reserve because it is the start of the game.

I also need to add a save and restore capability to ths form, so players can simply use the same scrap lists that they had created in previous games.

[image]local://upfiles/16701/C11ED9EEDC5B4542B8F974098C601E5F.jpg[/image]



Froonp -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (1/7/2006 12:43:41 AM)

This is the setup of which Scenario ? Obviously it is not the one from the global campagin, there are no FTR3 in 1939 or before.
Beside this, why is the "In force pool" box showing FTR3, CVP, LND, NAV, etc... ? Those are not in the same force pool as the FTR2 you are scrapping.
Shouldn't this row only show the units of the relevant force pool of the unit you are wondering if you will scrap or not (the one clicked in the first box) ?
Should it ?

Anyway, what types of comments do you want ? About the layout, the colors, the usefulness ?

Regards

Patrice



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (1/7/2006 1:12:11 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

This is the setup of which Scenario ? Obviously it is not the one from the global campagin, there are no FTR3 in 1939 or before.
Beside this, why is the "In force pool" box showing FTR3, CVP, LND, NAV, etc... ? Those are not in the same force pool as the FTR2 you are scrapping.
Shouldn't this row only show the units of the relevant force pool of the unit you are wondering if you will scrap or not (the one clicked in the first box) ?
Should it ?

Anyway, what types of comments do you want ? About the layout, the colors, the usefulness ?

Regards

Patrice


Barbarossa

I decided to keep all the air units in one list. Previously, I was looking at a separate list for each type of air unit but that would have required a very complex layout which would have had a lot of empty cells. The air units are sorted by type so it isn't too hard to find all the F2s, N2s, etc.

The naval units are shown separately, as are the land units - just click on the button for whichever one you want to examine. I thought about making separate buttons for each group (F2, F3, L2, L3, ...) but there are so many that it would take the player a lot longer to go through them all. This way you can decide on which air units to scrap from one form. There was also the consideration of wanting to know about F3 availability when scrapping F2s.

The colors will all be redone. I am looking for the artist to tell me which are best. There are 3 choices for colors:
(1) a single color that is used all the time.
(2) a different color for each side (Axis and Allied).
(3) a different color for ech major power.

I am leaning towards choice #3. Only the colors would change. All the fields, boxes, and text would be the same.

I am looking for feedback on functionality of form and layout. And other aspects of the user interface (excluding color choices).



Froonp -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (1/7/2006 1:24:48 AM)

quote:

I decided to keep all the air units in one list. Previously, I was looking at a separate list for each type of air unit but that would have required a very complex layout which would have had a lot of empty cells. The air units are sorted by type so it isn't too hard to find all the F2s, N2s, etc.

The naval units are shown separately, as are the land units - just click on the button for whichever one you want to examine. I thought about making separate buttons for each group (F2, F3, L2, L3, ...) but there are so many that it would take the player a lot longer to go through them all. This way you can decide on which air units to scrap from one form. There was also the consideration of wanting to know about F3 availability when scrapping F2s.

Indeed you're right about the latest consideration, and it shouldn't be too hard to find the FTR2 amongst the other planes.
I like it [:)]



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (1/7/2006 2:12:52 AM)

Here is another screen shot - taken from the CW during setup for Guadalcanal.

I have already scrapped some air and naval units, plus an Ethiopian infantry. I am thinking about scrapping the 2-4 artillery (the cursor must have slipped when I took the screen shot because the unit info is for the armor unit next to the 2 pdr artillery; the Needed, Reserve, and In force pool info is also for the armor).

I have fixed the Entering Force Pool list so that is now correct.

What I hope you like about this display is that you can see all the units in the artillery type force pool (AA, AT, and Artillery). Scrapping the 2-4 increases the chance of getting the 4-3, 5-3, or 3-5 when you next build artillery. You can also see that even juicier units are coming in in 1943. It's probably best to scrap the 3-4 artillery too.

Note that the country abbreviations are ok at this resolution. The CAN, IND, ETH, AUS would be hard to read if they were smaller (they are not that easy to read at their present size).

Comments?

[image]local://upfiles/16701/B1FFF0812C864D72A77F0AD6808B9768.jpg[/image]



Froonp -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (1/7/2006 3:24:58 AM)

Comments :
Would it be possible to have a toggle to see next year in the last box, or the year after, or the year after the year after, etc...
You could choose a number 1, 2, 3, etc.. and it would show you the year +1, +2, etc...

Also
Maybe he "on map" box should be 2 rows high, and the in force pool should also be.

Also

There is a 6th category of units in WiF : Those who were took out of the game by conquer or vichyfication.
Could be good to see them too, not necessarily in this dialog, but as I'm thinking of them now, I remind you.
In the "Units" dialog it would be good.

Otherwise, it is good.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (1/7/2006 4:23:16 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Froonp

Comments :
Would it be possible to have a toggle to see next year in the last box, or the year after, or the year after the year after, etc...
You could choose a number 1, 2, 3, etc.. and it would show you the year +1, +2, etc...

Also
Maybe he "on map" box should be 2 rows high, and the in force pool should also be.

Also

There is a 6th category of units in WiF : Those who were took out of the game by conquer or vichyfication.
Could be good to see them too, not necessarily in this dialog, but as I'm thinking of them now, I remind you.
In the "Units" dialog it would be good.

Otherwise, it is good.


I'll try for two rows where you suggested. Why do you want the future years? I do not want this form to do anything other than let a player scrap units.

This form will appear (1) when you start a scenario, before randomly selecting units from the force pool. The only other times it appears are
(2) during production, and
(3) when a unit is destroyed in combat.

During production you have the option of scrapping units, just as you do during setup. You just click on a button to transfer to this scrap units form.

When a unit is destroyed in combat, most of the time you have the option of either scrapping the unit or placing it back in the force pool where it might be drawn again when you build the unit type. I am planning on having choices/buttons when a unit is destroyed; (a) return unit to force pool, (b) scrap unit, and (c) go to scrap unit form where the player can review data before deciding.

I know you know all this Patrice, but other people read these posts, so I am explaining a lot of stuff.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (1/7/2006 5:32:17 AM)

Here's another pass at the scrap unit form. I had to add the horizontal lines or else the different lists were confusing.

[image]local://upfiles/16701/5494CC4D66554DADB8FC4B1A6FE53C7A.jpg[/image]



Glen Felzien -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (1/7/2006 6:24:21 AM)

This is a very functional display. I like the two row hieght for on map and in force pool. Good to have more in a single view than needing to scroll.

The OK(Done) botton, maybe Exit? Complete? bah just being picky.

Can a player filter the order in which units appear within each field? This would reduce scrolling to the right if a player could filter for tac values or strat values or surface combat values etc, ascending/descending.

Otherwise I like the the basic appearance. Colouring the form by major power would indeed be nice. Maybe rounding the corners, adding a lighting effect and a general polishing might add to a nice complete look too. Maybe include the controlling power flag to the right of the unit stat display.



Shannon V. OKeets -> RE: MWIF Game Interface Design (1/7/2006 10:14:35 AM)

quote:

ORIGINAL: Glen Felzien

This is a very functional display. I like the two row hieght for on map and in force pool. Good to have more in a single view than needing to scroll.

The OK(Done) botton, maybe Exit? Complete? bah just being picky.

(1) Can a player filter the order in which units appear within each field? This would reduce scrolling to the right if a player could filter for tac values or strat values or surface combat values etc, ascending/descending.

(2) Otherwise I like the the basic appearance. Colouring the form by major power would indeed be nice. Maybe rounding the corners, adding a lighting effect and a general polishing might add to a nice complete look too. Maybe include the controlling power flag to the right of the unit stat display.


(2) Yep. I agree. I am going to work with the graphics guy to design an overall theme for the numerous forms. I like your suggestion of the flag - here we could use the 256 by 128 pixel flag image instead of the 48 by 24 one (maybe). I won't work on polishing a single form like this until the overall theme has been done.

(1) The 2 row high lists let you view 38 units at once. They are already sorted by unit type, cost, and nationality (and some 4th criterion I forget at the moment). That seems enough. We are only trying to scrap units after all.



Page: <<   < prev  5 6 [7] 8 9   next >   >>

Valid CSS!




Forum Software © ASPPlayground.NET Advanced Edition 2.4.5 ANSI
2.890625