MWIF Game Interface Design

[Skanvak]

I feel the hexes are overly cluttered already

This is irrelevant.

I need a tool to see the all the invadable hex at the same time. I hate to have to scroll all over a map reading text. It is useful, but not enough. When I look at such thing, I don't need to see clearly the other things in the hexes. So the graphics can be invasive (like blue strip on the hex over everything else in the hex). It might not fit your taste but it fits my way of processing information to make decision.

I will try to make a graphic example tomorrow.

Though I am happy that one of my other idea seem to have reach you [;)] I need to earn my name on the "thank you" list. And it is really a good way to scroll the map (when not holding any unit in the cursor).

[JonBrave]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

ORIGINAL: JonBrave

Might I just ask: I trust the mousewheel can be used to zoom in & out?

That has been asked for. Currently the mouse wheel enables scrolling up and down and, while the shift key is pressed, scrolling left and right. Scrolling is a much more common activity than zooming, so the most I offer about this is that I 'might' make it a Player Interface Setting (the player decides which he prefers). But that is not scheduled for the initial release.
---

Umm, I'm surprised.

It seems to me that for what seems like 10 years most games like this use "scroll when mouse gets to edge of playing area". And wheel to zoom. Dead simple, dead popular. I don't care about wheel, so much, if you say maybe we don't zoom much. But your way means I have to hold down a key to scroll in one plane, and not in another. To me it's non-standard, non-intuitive, the user can't just use the mouse, and it's quite unnecessary. I don't even understand why you would do it that way.

I know you have other pressing things to do, and I wouldn't want to distract you from the AI, but a detail like this can make a real difference to how the product goes down broadly, perhaps outside the captive testers. Would it not be simple to just allow that as an input option?

All IMHO. But seems pretty significant, for little work to correct.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: JonBrave

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets

ORIGINAL: JonBrave

Might I just ask: I trust the mousewheel can be used to zoom in & out?

That has been asked for. Currently the mouse wheel enables scrolling up and down and, while the shift key is pressed, scrolling left and right. Scrolling is a much more common activity than zooming, so the most I offer about this is that I 'might' make it a Player Interface Setting (the player decides which he prefers). But that is not scheduled for the initial release.
---

Umm, I'm surprised.

It seems to me that for what seems like 10 years most games like this use "scroll when mouse gets to edge of playing area". And wheel to zoom. Dead simple, dead popular. I don't care about wheel, so much, if you say maybe we don't zoom much. But your way means I have to hold down a key to scroll in one plane, and not in another. To me it's non-standard, non-intuitive, the user can't just use the mouse, and it's quite unnecessary. I don't even understand why you would do it that way.

I know you have other pressing things to do, and I wouldn't want to distract you from the AI, but a detail like this can make a real difference to how the product goes down broadly, perhaps outside the captive testers. Would it not be simple to just allow that as an input option?

All IMHO. But seems pretty significant, for little work to correct.

There is a 'hot' region around the border of the maps. When the mouse is placed over that region, the map scrolls in that direction. These regions are fairly small, but some players prefer to disable that function so more of the map is visible.

One of the reasons I have little interest in additional ways to scroll the map is that there are already many available.

Below is a section taken from the Players Manual:

[Skanvak]

The example 1 show how I see the tool working. North sea is selected, and tool is on. So the invadable hex are highlighted.

[Skanvak]

The example 2 is the same but with another kind a graphic to just show Steve that this tool is not designed in my mind to allow to see every thing. Only to see the invadable hexes.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Skanvak

The example 2 is the same but with another kind a graphic to just show Steve that this tool is not designed in my mind to allow to see every thing. Only to see the invadable hexes.

Thanks for the effort, but I am unconvinced.

The 'need' for this feature is marginal, in my opinion. And, as I noted before, to communicate this addiitonal information visually requires a dramatic effect graphically. Basically, other information is very difficult to read or obscured completely.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

But you did give me an idea.

I might be able to use the invasion symbol, which is small, discrete, and already designed to be in keeping with the other icons that are displayed. While the addition of a single invasion icon to a hex would be difficult to notice, when there is one in every invadable hex, the pattern should be noticable. The other benefit of this approach is that the same symbol would be used twice, alleviating the need for the players to 'learn' multiple icons/symbols. When I get a chance, I'll test this out.

[Skanvak]

Thanks; I think it should be a good enough compromise. What does the invasion icon look like?

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: Skanvak

Thanks; I think it should be a good enough compromise. What does the invasion icon look like?

See post 1775 in this thread. It's a small anchor.

[Skanvak]

Ok, the anchor is fine (may be make it hex sized, a big one :p )

I wonder if they are other topic on which I might like a similar tool...

By the way, I like the spherical earth for the sea lane gestion. I hope it will give you idea to make the full map like this [8D]

[Sewerlobster]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
There is a 'hot' region around the border of the maps. When the mouse is placed over that region, the map scrolls in that direction. These regions are fairly small, but some players prefer to disable that function so more of the map is visible.
One of the reasons I have little interest in additional ways to scroll the map is that there are already many available.

This brings to mind a question I'm sure that been asked before. Are you using only one monitor when designing the game? How many playtesters are using two monitors? While I certainly don't have two hooked up to my computer, I can see how having more than one could allow for quite a few charts and other screens to be left open. As convenient as that sounds, the game's interface should feel comfortable with just one monitor.

[paulderynck]

It workes fine with one monitor. Two is even better, and three is possible too. (I'm a beta tester.)

[Anendrue]

ORIGINAL: SewerStarFish

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
There is a 'hot' region around the border of the maps. When the mouse is placed over that region, the map scrolls in that direction. These regions are fairly small, but some players prefer to disable that function so more of the map is visible.
One of the reasons I have little interest in additional ways to scroll the map is that there are already many available.

This brings to mind a question I'm sure that been asked before. Are you using only one monitor when designing the game? How many playtesters are using two monitors? While I certainly don't have two hooked up to my computer, I can see how having more than one could allow for quite a few charts and other screens to be left open. As convenient as that sounds, the game's interface should feel comfortable with just one monitor.

I cannot get specific about the game. However, I use three monitors and yes the extra monitors are extremly useful. I have the main map on my 32" and the other two 21" monitors are turned 90 degrees. They side monitors hold the various forms the game uses. I can clearly see and read units across all of Western Europe and well into Russia past Moscow.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

ORIGINAL: SewerStarFish

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
There is a 'hot' region around the border of the maps. When the mouse is placed over that region, the map scrolls in that direction. These regions are fairly small, but some players prefer to disable that function so more of the map is visible.
One of the reasons I have little interest in additional ways to scroll the map is that there are already many available.

This brings to mind a question I'm sure that been asked before. Are you using only one monitor when designing the game? How many playtesters are using two monitors? While I certainly don't have two hooked up to my computer, I can see how having more than one could allow for quite a few charts and other screens to be left open. As convenient as that sounds, the game's interface should feel comfortable with just one monitor.

I did most of the development using two monitors (1280 by 1024) but the second monitor was only used for looking at the code while debugging. All the forms are designed to fit on a single 1024 by 768 monitor.

These days I am working with two 1900 by 1080monitors and it is lovely. But setting that fact aside, playing on a single monitor should be fine.

As you are obviously aware, and I state here only for clarity to others, multiple monitors let you keep helpful screens visible rather than having to bring them up when you need them. For example, when first learning the game having the various help forms visible to translate terrain types/movement costs, hex icons, explain numbers and symbols on units, display status indicators, and display the various combat tables would obviously be nice (though you could print those out individually if you didn't want to keep looking them up in the Players Manual.

Later on, as you become facile with the images and rules, having the global map and multiple datiled maps visible can be very useful.

[Sewerlobster]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
I did most of the development using two monitors (1280 by 1024) but the second monitor was only used for looking at the code while debugging. All the forms are designed to fit on a single 1024 by 768 monitor.

Thanks, it's good to know that just one monitor will allow easy play. I just don't have the room for a multiple monitor set-up.

[micheljq]

I am still using an old 19" CRT monitor, quite heavy to move, the monitor is near 10 years old. It's a NEC the image is still so sharp and nice. It's an unkilleable monitor. [:D]

[Anendrue]

ORIGINAL: micheljq

I am still using an old 19" CRT monitor, quite heavy to move, the monitor is near 10 years old. It's a NEC the image is still so sharp and nice. It's an unkilleable monitor. [:D]

I really liked my old NEC's. They had better color than any LCD I have ever used. I miss them [:(].

[Shannon V. OKeets]

Here is a change I made at the suggestion of Nils.

The first difference is that all the units in the sea area are now shown (not just those included in the current round of naval combat). This is useful in making the decision about whether to avoid combat or not. There are other considerations too, where seeing all the units will be helpful when spending surprise points.

The second difference is that I changed the status indicators so they identify which units are included in the current naval combat round.

Status indicators shown here are:

1 - Topside, far left: unit movement's status. Here the two air units have flown into the sea area to provide air support and the three convoy units have sentry status (they will remain at sea automatically during the return to base phase).

2 - Topside, 2nd position from the left: Disorganized. The Japanese CL is disorganized beacuse it was used to initiate the combat.

3 - Leftside, top position: Engaged in combat. All the Japanese units are in the current naval combat round, but only the US units in the 0 + 1 + 2 sea box sections.

4 - Leftside, 2nd position from the top: initiated combat. The Japanese CL has a separate flag specifically to show that it initiated the combat.

I need to fix the US side so the naval air isn't included in the summary statistics (in the Unit Data panel below the unit list). Other that that glitch, the summary statistics are for the units included in the combat.

[Shannon V. OKeets]

Here is another change to an existing form. This addresses the strangeness of the rules for the activity limits imposed on the Communist Chinese. The second column is new; and I have moved the USSR column so the Communist Chinese sit between China and the USSR.



EDIT: The Communist Chinese have neither air nor naval units, so I set their activity limits for those unit types to zero for clarity.

EDIT 2: I have changed the annotation to:"** Commnist Chinese actions count against the action limits of the USSR."

[Froonp]

ORIGINAL: Shannon V. OKeets
EDIT: The Communist Chinese have neither air nor naval units, so I set their activity limits for those unit types to zero for clarity.

As soon as the PatiF counters are added to the WiF FE countermix (which is what is done when you own PatiF and are willing to use those counters in normal WiF FE games), then what you wrote above is wrong.
They have planes, and they have ships. Mostly SUBs and TRS though.