Probably gonna stir up a hornets nest...

[Redmarkus5]

I have gotten used to most of the UI design issues in WiTE and I find it all workable. There are examples of other complex and detailed games out there though, that have addressed several of the points raised in this thread. Even WiTP AE, hardly perfect, has some advantages over WiTE in this regard.

I also love the game and look forward to future enhancements.

[Flaviusx]

Once you throw in keybindings and macros, the WoW interface becomes increasingly burdensome, actually. Particularly if you are into pvp in that game. I must have had 60ish keybindings before quitting that sucker for good, and would have more now in the new expansion.

That's not including addons, which are almost required to play the game at any kind of competitive level. Most of which are designed to overcome the limitations of the UI and simplify gameplay.

To me, WitE feels like a holiday from that kind of MMO hell. Mileage may vary.

[demyansk]

I have played a few times and also commented on a post and asked if HQ's could be switched to full computer control and then set objectives for them.  I would have liked that so I could play a full campaign and perhaps leave army group south and north to the computer and then control center.  In my mind this would be like real time historical and just making believe hitler was controlling the other two groups and I was Manstein or Guderian, lol.  If this game last a few years like the 50 bucks I spent on Battlefield 2 its well worth it.  maybe a few changes and tweaks will be made and lets see what happens.

I would like the HQ's to have the ability to be switched to computer control.

[bwheatley]

+1 having the option to automate certain top level hq's would be nice. I'd probably do the same and make AGS be AI controlled.

ORIGINAL: demjansk

I have played a few times and also commented on a post and asked if HQ's could be switched to full computer control and then set objectives for them.  I would have liked that so I could play a full campaign and perhaps leave army group south and north to the computer and then control center.  In my mind this would be like real time historical and just making believe hitler was controlling the other two groups and I was Manstein or Guderian, lol.  If this game last a few years like the 50 bucks I spent on Battlefield 2 its well worth it.  maybe a few changes and tweaks will be made and lets see what happens.

I would like the HQ's to have the ability to be switched to computer control.

[LiquidSky]

Clicking a stack of units should select NO units. Double clicking a stack should select ALL. That way everyone is happy. If you happen to know what unit the user wants, then select it for him (directed from CR perhaps?)

Any UI that requires a User response of somekind, like a button, or drop down menu, brings that item to attention some how. Drawing a raised box around it (like a button), or highlighting the text when it has focus. It allows the eye to quickly spot the target as you move your mouse towards it, and saves a bit of thought. You could make an exception in the CR I suppose, since practically all text is 'clickable' but highlighting it with focus is the norm.

Another thing a good UI should do is minimize the number of clicks to do anything. Clicking causes stress (or fatigue) on your wrist and finger, and people will always try to find the path of least clicks to accomplish something. Simple tasks in this game seem to require an awful lot of clicks to get them done.

[Redmarkus5]

I would rather see the air component and rail components become somewhat more abstracted before getting an automate option at Army Group level. The AI may not maintain the tempo of the attack at a rate that corresponds with a human player, even if it does 'get there in the end'. Also, what would happen when you opt to, say, send Guderian south to link up with AGS around Kiev?

At the most, the only automation I would ask for at AG level would be to set objectives, posture and doctrine (like COTA and the Talonsoft series) at various HQ levels.

[SgtKachalin]

ORIGINAL: Flaviusx

Once you throw in keybindings and macros, the WoW interface becomes increasingly burdensome, actually. Particularly if you are into pvp in that game.

[:D] My son is heavy into arena and other pvp in game and at events (Pax, Blizzcon, etc) and he and his mates spend *hours* debating configurations of half a dozen mouse buttons based on class, spec, equipment, team (3x3, 5x5, whatever...) and myriad other arcana. Then they move to the number keys... [:D][X(]

Re WitE the UI is different but only a few hours has made it completely second nature for me. The planning functions (supply, production, attachments etc) perhaps could be changed (the Overview of Support Units idea, with the ability to swap attachments from one interface all at once sounds nice), but as it is is not onerous IMO. The tactical functions are fine for me.

[vils]

I have but brushed the surface of this great game, but i too, find the GUI abit awkward.. for example, by clicking on a hex with stacked units, its centres there on screen and auto selects all units automatically, that is great. BUT the problem is to select just 1 unit... then i have to 'unselect' the other units by clicking on them, when i instead should just have to single click on the particulair unit i want selected... now holding shift in conjunction with this should add units but dont..

More over the graphics sometimes faulters here so you can't see what units are selected or not, thus, i have to re-click hex and unclick the units i don't wanna move again... this feels totally opposite from most all other games i have ever played...

This simple game function should be reversed completely, so i just have to single click a unit to get it selected, instead of unselect it... go away toggle function say hi to click and mark function hehe

[Redmarkus5]

1. Single click should select the top unit in a stack.

2. Next single click rotates the stack to the next unit.

3. Double click selects the whole stack.

This is quite a well tried UI mechanism in games of this type over many years (decades even), is it not?

[LiquidSky]

ORIGINAL: redmarkus4

1. Single click should select the top unit in a stack.

2. Next single click rotates the stack to the next unit.

3. Double click selects the whole stack.

This is quite a well tried UI mechanism in games of this type over many years (decades even), is it not?

This is a good example of how UI's are difficult to make. This sounds like a good idea but has several flaws.

One...while I may want the top unit in the hex, there will be times I dont. A possible time savings.
Two...What if I want to move two units out of three as a stack?
Three...If I want the bottom unit of three, it is actually more clicks, then to just click once to select the hex, and one click to select the unit to move.

As well...the difference between a single click and a double click is can be very annoying. Instead of cycling, you end up selecting the whole stack.

Simplicity is best. But you also have to keep the click count down.

[aknaton]

ORIGINAL: Templer

When I saw first screens a few months ago of Gary Grigsby's War in the East I was immediately in love. Especially with the UI!
For me, the UI is clear, concise and visually structured. Perhaps a bit cold and impersonal - but I like it that way (so I also like the UI of Command Ops: Battles from the Bulge).

I must agree with Templer on this one. This is the first computer wargame *ever* that I played where the UI felt intuitive and easy to use. I could start palying right away and have fun. The details and the nifty stuff I can delve into as I go along (and read the manual).

What I would have liked though, is that the pdf-manual was more layouted for A4 or letter format of paper and not the "game manual size". I would have been much simplier to print then.

/h

[henri51]

Agree and ComradeP mentioned this is being worked on, but for benefit of devs if they read this I want to describe what I find the current process to be and why it's cumbersome. One of the frustrating things I think is the delay in the CR screen functionality. So let's say I want to clear support units out of all rear area Army HQ. Assume I have CR set to show armies on the HQ page.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but my understanding is that a unit can use ANY support unit in ANY of its superior HQs, so I don't see why you would have to clear all support units from HQs in the rear because supposedly they cannot be used - they CAN be used.

As for having to click back and forth between the CR screen and the map to find out where a unit is, hey, they coordinates of the unit are indicated in the column right next to the unit name, so just looking at the coordinates tells you exactly where the unit is, or if you are not very good at visualizing coordinates ("...lemme see, is 150 bigger than 100 and by how much?...")the numbers gives a pretty good idea.

I agree that some parts of the UI could be improved and that some spects take some degree of getting used to, but hey, where were you guys when HOI3 came out with a plethora of bugs that made the game totally unplayable, and complainers were shot down by the fanboys who claimed that the game would be playable in a few years when the player community had modded it enough to make it playable?

I also agree that part of the problem is the manual, where critical information is sometimes dispersed and hard to find.

Henri

[Redmarkus5]

There's no perfect system, I agree, but the current default is more annoying than the alternatives, IMO. The approach above is pretty standard.

[ComradeP]

so I don't see why you would have to clear all support units from HQs in the rear because supposedly they cannot be used - they CAN be used.

Having support units in rear area HQ's is in many cases essentially a waste of support units, as they won't contribute much to the war effort when they're hundreds of miles away from the front.

[DBeves]

I agree with everything the op said - but I am inclined to think its not the end of the world and the UI can be got around.

One thing I am a long way from falling in love with at this stage is the air system.

Two things REALLY bother me about this -
1. no control over ground support ... Why? Why ? Why ? you can control every other mission - but we have to rely on a somewhat eccentric AI for this. I just dont understand that decision and its really affacting my enjoyment of the game when there is so much to like I sincereley hope this can change.
2. the simple fact that one mispalced right click wihtout the shift button pressed can result in half your air force not being able to fly ground attack missions. Again - I am baffled by this - you would have to work hard to make it this difficult in my opinion.

Last but not a showstopper is yes - why are all units automatically selected when you click a hex - not a single wargame I have played ever did this and I cant think of a single good reason for this being the default.

I love this game and accept its a monster and a UI might be difficult - but some of these decisions around the air war just leave me completelry non plussed

[Wild]

I absolutely love this game.
I have to say i agree with the OP's comments concerning the UI and the Airwar though.

[Adam Parker]

Just my quick .02. I'm in the Middle of the Minsk scenario right now and easily winning on Normal setting, without yet reading 1 page of rules or tutorial. The best tip re doing things came here in the form of one sentence: "Shift + click to create multi-hex attacks".

Once known, I've just been Shift-clicking, moving and encircling pockets and watching the Soviet AI self-destruct.

What I would benefit from though, is a 3-4 page how to guide: "How do I do this? You do that", type of thing. If they could summarise what needs to be done each turn and what can be done each turn and then quickly show me what to click, then this game will be a real winner on my PC. At the end of that, refer me to another guide for a "how to delve deeper" experience.

[henri51]

ORIGINAL: ComradeP

so I don't see why you would have to clear all support units from HQs in the rear because supposedly they cannot be used - they CAN be used.

Having support units in rear area HQ's is in many cases essentially a waste of support units, as they won't contribute much to the war effort when they're hundreds of miles away from the front.

I thought I had read that a combat unit can get support from support units in ANY of the HQs in its superior HQ chain independently of distance (assuming that all HQs in the chain satisfies normal distance requirements). Am I wrong? If so, does it mean that a combat unit can get (automatic) support unit help from units already in its Corps HQ before the attack?

Henri

[ComradeP]

There's a 5 hex limit:

Construction and labor support units are used to assist in the building of hex fortification levels and the repair of rail lines. All other support units are used to assist combat units in battle, either from an eligible headquarters unit not more than five hexes away from the battle, or from being directly attached to a combat unit participating in the battle (15.4).

[jjdenver]

ComradeP. Does this mean it's almost never worthwhile to leave any combat support units in Front/Army Group or High Command HQ's since they are rarely (I assume) within 5 hexes of any battle?

Also a completely unrelated followup question from another thread entirely: Do you normally disband AA battalions or just sapper battalions as SU?

And last another unrelated question that I know this is somewhere in rules but I can't seem to find it. If you have damaged planes in an air base unit and that air base unit moves several hexes voluntarily using movement points, are the damaged planes destroyed?