|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 88 post(s) |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
913
|
Posted - 2012.10.10 22:34:00 -
[1] - Quote
The square to circles looks very cool!
My main issue is, looking at it from a glance, i have no clue which one is the shields, armor, structure. I think you need to address how we can identify them better... please. Thank you.
I think the idea of showing the pulsing damage is excellent. Can we maybe get ewar icons or an ewar thing going on near there as well? Where I am. |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
913
|
Posted - 2012.10.10 22:42:00 -
[2] - Quote
I don't like the loss of the "timer" to lock indicator. Although the completion circle communicates well, I want to know if I have another 10 seconds to lock or another 2 seconds to lock the target.
To resolve the "which is shield" - I really like the symmetry of the bars. I think the real issue is just adding a little icon in between the shield and structure that indicates this is where everything "Starts and ends".
So at the top of the circle, put a >< image between the 2 bars, or a Shield Image, or a Little Dot or something to indicate the start and end. Where I am. |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
913
|
Posted - 2012.10.10 22:46:00 -
[3] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Kethry Avenger wrote:Make the health bars colored.
Shield = Blue
Armor = Green
Structure = Yellow I'm not sureGǪ If you make the colour strong, it'll just make for a technicolour jumble where it becomes difficult to make out the damage, and if you make it subtle, there's the question of why use it at all since they will be fairly similar. Compare this non-coloured version, but with a gap to provide a hint about the beginning and end of the gauge (and a gentle arrow effect to show the direction), and the coloured version of the same display. I don't feel like those colours add much except make it look more cluttered and messy.
I dont know if the arrows are necessary, but I think adding a gap with an image is a good idea, same thing I proposed before I read yours (Although I posted after) Where I am. |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
913
|
Posted - 2012.10.10 22:54:00 -
[4] - Quote
CCP karkur wrote:Ugleb wrote:Andski wrote:Brackets should flash distinctly when the other ship is using an assistance module on you. This would be pretty useful in situations i.e. cap chaining where the only indications that they're transferring capacitor to you are the effect (which is usually turned off) and the fact that your capacitor is increasing. Maybe something similar to the 'hit icon sequence' pulsing animation but in green or blue? It could become more intense as you receive a larger rep amount per cycle. This is something that has come up in our meetings (except we were thinking blue) ... but we haven't made any decision on it yet.
Do eeet!
Where I am. |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
913
|
Posted - 2012.10.10 23:02:00 -
[5] - Quote
CCP karkur wrote:mkint wrote:I like how the typical dev response so far has been 'I'm right you're wrong, suck it.' I'm getting that bad feeling that comes before things like before the inventory changes, and every other unpopular failure that I've seen added to the game. wow, really?
Don't feed the trolls!
Let me ask this, are you adding anything more to the tooltip in the future or what ideas do you have?
On the retribution art, it shows Criminal Flags and such on the targeting reticles, is that part of your plan as well? What other tid bits can we hope to see?
Here's a couple dream ideas ::
-- Draw a line between my ship and the enemy target (This already happens in Tactical Overview mode I believe), put "ticks" on the line that represent my various weapon ranges along that line. (So optimal will be green, falloff will be yellow, red will be out of range.
-- Show what EWAR affects are being applied to the target ship already (from friendlies or otherwise) - so I can see if he's being tracking disrupted so I know I can tracking disrupt other targets out there. I know this information is already sent to my client because the VISUAL effects from friendlies are projected to targets, so it's just a matter of showing me in a clear visual format that they're being applied.
Where I am. |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
914
|
Posted - 2012.10.10 23:12:00 -
[6] - Quote
I like the idea of standings in space being more integrated, but I like it the way it is also, so don't think there's a big deal to be made there.
Where I am. |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
914
|
Posted - 2012.10.10 23:21:00 -
[7] - Quote
CCP karkur wrote:Bloodpetal wrote:Let me ask this, are you adding anything more to the tooltip in the future or what ideas do you have?
On the retribution art, it shows Criminal Flags and such on the targeting reticles, is that part of your plan as well? What other tid bits can we hope to see?
Yes, we've now added more info in the tooltips for about 20 other module groups And yes, we will need to work with Team Five 0 on the Criminal flags and that stuff.
Cool on the module tooltips! One thing I've noticed about module tooltips is it's hard to see what ammo i have loaded in there (if it's t2 or faction) because that top left edge of the ammo icon is cut off. Perhaps you can look into some ideas for that?
So what about in-space tooltips? I noticed the images you have aren't showing corporation tickers and player names on there
i.e. Bloodpetal -MMDRS- (Minmatar Frigate) @ 208 km (that's what my customized one looks like at least)
How about moving the range finder to somewhere a bit more cozy on the circle? with a vertical format next to the circle ::
i.e. Bloodpetal MMDRS - Alliance Rifter 200km
Where I am. |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
916
|
Posted - 2012.10.11 14:18:00 -
[8] - Quote
CCP Prism X wrote:
I'm probably being a rear-end-hat but it's very annoying to get the same feedback over and over again when you've already acknowledged it. It gives you the feeling that people are not reading the discussion. If they are not reading the discussion, then it's not a discussion but a shouting match.
Ask CCP Community to give you a day moderating the forums and you'll forget about this sensation of "annoying" and it will be replaced by a sensation of Compassion for the Community team and volunteers.
Where I am. |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
916
|
Posted - 2012.10.11 14:41:00 -
[9] - Quote
Tippia wrote:GeeShizzle MacCloud wrote:well also allow me to help re-rail the discussion by offering an idea with a few mock up pictures.... http://i.imgur.com/8h0e9.jpg - red http://i.imgur.com/CoehQ.jpg - orange http://i.imgur.com/oTOEx.gif - green Introduce a traffic light system for giving pilots indications of gun/ missile range and tracking. How it would work is as follows:
- Red: out of falloff range and/or out of tracking speed
- Orange: In falloff range and/or within +/- 10% of tracking speed
- Green: In optimal range and/or within tracking speed
This traffic light system would only appear on the selected object and only when either a pilot has moused over a weapon group or has a weapon group activated on a target. Nice. The colours might need some tweaking for all the usual accessibility and stand-out-against-the-Amarr-nebula reasons, but it's simple and direct. As you point out, though, the actual GÇ£correctGÇ¥ combination might vary with the weapon system so it's important to teach what you want for different weapons GÇö being within optimal with ACs is often, ironically enough, suboptimal. Perhaps some of that could be solved by having two of them GÇö one for range and one for tracking GÇö but ugh, clutter. It would certainly be much neater if it could be done like you showed it.
Although this is a neat idea, I think it can be better represented in other ways.
I recommended a few pages back that simply drawing a line between your locked/selected target could put tickers along that line with colors perhaps to indicate weapons ranges (this line exists in tactical overview mode, so practically already implemented).
I think any tacked on info on the weapons systems can be more useful than that. Most of that information is easy to remember and really. I'd be more interested in having visual representations for radial velocity (coming/going) and vector in general. Where I am. |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
916
|
Posted - 2012.10.11 14:43:00 -
[10] - Quote
Rommiee wrote:So, all the information for these new icons is already in the Client. Therefore, it follows that the Client will have to do some extra work to present all this additional information on screen in new fancy graphic format.
Fast forward to a 2000 ship fleet fight with all the new fancy brackets. Are you seriously saying that you expect minimal impact on client performance ? CanGÇÖt see it to be honest, so donGÇÖt forget to include the option to turn it off.
People still like to have brackets on in these fights to make it easier to orientate themselves, turning brackets off isnGÇÖt the answer.
You just presumed a whole bunch of stuff that you have no basis for information.
Just because it's more graphically "fancy" doesn't mean it uses more CPU.
Where I am. |
|
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
916
|
Posted - 2012.10.11 14:47:00 -
[11] - Quote
CCP karkur wrote:John Nucleus wrote:Thought I would throw this out there, might generate some ideas for the new damage indicator. The idea was to have a simple indicator that shows hit quality, damage and damage type. http://i.imgur.com/RZq0p.png Interesting idea
I like this. It might be hard to see in some cases, but I like it. Where I am. |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
917
|
Posted - 2012.10.11 14:56:00 -
[12] - Quote
CCP karkur wrote: - Yes, the graphics are a bit wider now, but the old one had the module icons on the side so that should also count as the width of the targets. .
Are you saying you're removing the activated module icons from the side of the locked targets section?
How am I going to know which modules I have applied to which target? This is actually a very important part of the current.
And doing the whole "hover over my modules" thing does NOT cut it for me.
I did read a comment above that you are going to "connect" modules by highlighting over them, but I'm sorry, but this will NOT be sufficient - we should have a clear visual indication without more "hovering" over stuff for information that should be immediately visible. I go full shortcuts, and I don't have time to hover over my targets to figure out what module is going where and how because I'm manual piloting or reading other information, or telling 40 people what to do in a fleet fight, and so on and so forth.
Especially if you have friendlies locked, they won't be on your overview for PVP. And in situations where you may be repping one friendly and shooting an enemy, it's going to be impossible to know you have screwed up at a glance, and now you have to double check all your targets to see where you screwed up. I hope this is an oversight to be fixed. There is no reason to remove functionality as well, clicking on those active module icons on the side of a target deactivates them, which is a very useful way to turn modules off when you have, let's say, 3 webs on 3 different targets and you don't remember which one you activated, and it's a quick "click" the module to turn it off.
Please, make sure you keep the activated modules on the targeting layer. Where I am. |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
933
|
Posted - 2012.10.11 17:39:00 -
[13] - Quote
CCP karkur wrote:Bloodpetal wrote:CCP karkur wrote: - Yes, the graphics are a bit wider now, but the old one had the module icons on the side so that should also count as the width of the targets. .
Are you saying you're removing the activated module icons from the side of the locked targets section? How am I going to know which modules I have applied to which target? This is actually a very important part of the current. And doing the whole "hover over my modules" thing does NOT cut it for me. . No, we are not this is what I wrote... I've highlighted the part you might be interested in Quote:- Yes, the graphics are a bit wider now, but the old one had the module icons on the side so that should also count as the width of the targets. - the height of the old ones is greater, but then I have to add a little bit to the bottom of the new ones because that's where the active modules appear.
Ya, sorry. I read thoroughly typically, but I was going back through the posts and I glanced over that and I missed the second part.
Where I am. |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
950
|
Posted - 2012.10.13 17:30:00 -
[14] - Quote
CCP karkur wrote:
On a more personal note it just makes me sad when people act like this. Fozzie is indeed doing a great job, but so is a whole lot of other people I work with. We come here to talk to you guys but it's like your damned if you do and damned if you don't.... and the more people that act like that, the more likely is that we will just not bother and just go watch TV or something.
Well. This is the work of a lot of people in "public" office. They take a lot of different opinions on what they are doing, and some can be very nasty. You should be proud of what you do for doing it, and not let one person discourage the valuable work of others.
Don't let 2 bad notes in a song ruin the whole song. :)
Where I am. |
Bloodpetal
Mimidae Risk Solutions
950
|
Posted - 2012.10.13 17:32:00 -
[15] - Quote
mkint wrote:CCP Sisyphus wrote:As Karkur said - we're taking this stuff in, but that doesn't mean we're actually going to do it all.. (that would be very confusing.)
Please be nice, as unhappy Karkur makes everyone unhappy :(
But on the plus side, there are some real gold nuggets of feedback here! Which makes me feel like coming to you more often at the concept stage :) I think mostly, especially early in the thread, the dev response to things players don't like is to defend it. It feels dismissive. Granted there has been a change in tone, but we still have no idea if any of the devs are 'on our side,' which is what we want.. Someone on the team who not only understands but agrees with us, and will argue in favor of what we view as the logical issues.
I agree with this sentiment.
You are having a dialogue with a "large" group of people "throwing" things at you.
When you move immediately into a "Defensive" position, that's a "Weak" position to take. Your initial interaction is important to make it sound "interactive" and not "Defensive".
Ask questions about why we experience things, and then we have a dialogue and we can settle into the communication, and then you can defend your position rather than immediately feeling like you have to counter what we are saying. Where I am. |
|
|
|