Matrix Games Forums

This is for interface and gameplay suggestions only.


Bugs go to the Patch 07 Unofficial Public Beta thread: --> Patch 07 - Unofficial Public Beta - 1126b updated 17 Sept 2016 CLICK HERE

I have to say something that bugs me constantly is a simple misspelling of Observor instead of Observer ion all the TOE displays....

Roger

Conversion Panel adjustment recommendation:

Slide the text over, align the text from the right, move the button to the right side of the button.

The "Back" button could go over to the now vacant lower left corner.

The reason for the change is that it saves having to go from one side of the first panel to the other side of the next panel.




Panel image for single conversion option:

I am running the game at highest resolution I can so as to get as much of the map as possible on screen.
The unfortunate consequence is small text, which I can see adequately but have some trouble accurately clicking with the mouse when I am going a little fast. The specific annoyance is that about 5% of the time when I go to transfer ships to/from the TF, I go a little high and hit the disband text instead - blame it on old age! When you are trying to build an Amphib TF of many ships before loading, this can be really annoying to redo!
Is it possible to move the disband command somewhere safer?

Add "Add All" button when creating a TF in a base. When I create a i.e PT TF I can narrow the selection of ships by choosing "Patrol" class but later on I have to add every PT manually to the new TF. Tiring.

Leader Change Info Panel:

Move Political Points Cost-

ORIGINAL: Roger Neilson 3

I have to say something that bugs me constantly is a simple misspelling of Observor instead of Observer ion all the TOE displays....

Roger

I'm pretty sure that's a database typo.

ORIGINAL: wdolson

ORIGINAL: Roger Neilson 3

I have to say something that bugs me constantly is a simple misspelling of Observor instead of Observer ion all the TOE displays....

Roger

I'm pretty sure that's a database typo.

Yep. Device slots 715, 1049, and 1193

Don't know whether to call this a technical issue or an interface one, so here goes:

Speaking of leader changes, I hate the messages in the Op Report that tell you "Major Jones is now available for reassignment" without telling you which unit he is leaving and the location.
If you have just lost a good leader it is critical to check and see if he has been replaced with a real dog!
Also annoying if you just spent PP to get the good leader into the unit.
If it is possible to add the losing unit name to the message and the unit location that would help tremendously.

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy


Don't know whether to call this a technical issue or an interface one, so here goes:

Speaking of leader changes, I hate the messages in the Op Report that tell you "Major Jones is now available for reassignment" without telling you which unit he is leaving and the location.
If you have just lost a good leader it is critical to check and see if he has been replaced with a real dog!
Also annoying if you just spent PP to get the good leader into the unit.
If it is possible to add the losing unit name to the message and the unit location that would help tremendously.

I think what that actually means is that the leader has arrived, much like a ship, lcu, or a/g.

ORIGINAL: Admiral DadMan

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy


Don't know whether to call this a technical issue or an interface one, so here goes:

Speaking of leader changes, I hate the messages in the Op Report that tell you "Major Jones is now available for reassignment" without telling you which unit he is leaving and the location.
If you have just lost a good leader it is critical to check and see if he has been replaced with a real dog!
Also annoying if you just spent PP to get the good leader into the unit.
If it is possible to add the losing unit name to the message and the unit location that would help tremendously.

I think what that actually means is that the leader has arrived, much like a ship, lcu, or a/g.

If that is true, I have issues with the wording - it ought to say "Maj. Jones has arrived at Unit XXX located at YYY". I am still not convinced it means someone arriving rather than departing. I have seen instances where a unit in which I placed a good leader is later found to have a poor one. Particularly bad when you send an air unit to battle and lose half the planes and pilots.

In the Databases should there not be a back button like many of the other screens?

The tool tip when you point at the name of what you are looking at helps but clicking again on the name is not consistent with other screens or intuitive like a back button.

I second this. I clicked the "Exit" button several times thinking it acts the same way as "Back" button in other screens. Only with time have I learnt to click an item name to go back to the item list. Frustrating.

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

ORIGINAL: Admiral DadMan

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy


Don't know whether to call this a technical issue or an interface one, so here goes:

Speaking of leader changes, I hate the messages in the Op Report that tell you "Major Jones is now available for reassignment" without telling you which unit he is leaving and the location.
If you have just lost a good leader it is critical to check and see if he has been replaced with a real dog!
Also annoying if you just spent PP to get the good leader into the unit.
If it is possible to add the losing unit name to the message and the unit location that would help tremendously.

I think what that actually means is that the leader has arrived, much like a ship, lcu, or a/g.

If that is true, I have issues with the wording - it ought to say "Maj. Jones has arrived at Unit XXX located at YYY". I am still not convinced it means someone arriving rather than departing. I have seen instances where a unit in which I placed a good leader is later found to have a poor one. Particularly bad when you send an air unit to battle and lose half the planes and pilots.

The instance of an involuntary air group leader change can occur if the leader is also a pilot, and he is killed. I've seen/had it happen.

Hotkey for Submarine patrols (and why not other TFs too) for "Patrol around hex"

ORIGINAL: Tejszd

In the Databases should there not be a back button like many of the other screens?

The tool tip when you point at the name of what you are looking helps but clicking again on the name is not consistent with other screens or intuitive like a back button.

Agreed. I had to learn the hard way (more than once) that to go "back" to the list, click on the highlighted item, NOT the "Exit" button.

ORIGINAL: BBfanboy

I am running the game at highest resolution I can so as to get as much of the map as possible on screen.
The unfortunate consequence is small text, which I can see adequately but have some trouble accurately clicking with the mouse when I am going a little fast. The specific annoyance is that about 5% of the time when I go to transfer ships to/from the TF, I go a little high and hit the disband text instead - blame it on old age! When you are trying to build an Amphib TF of many ships before loading, this can be really annoying to redo!
Is it possible to move the disband command somewhere safer?

+1 the buttons here are extremely crowded.

Hit that damn disband button by accident more times than I care to remember.

Can we get the hex stacking limit text out from under the three buttons in the uppermost right corner at less than maximum resolutions?

Been stuck playing at 1680x1050 due to limitations of my current monitor and it's really tough to get a read on the stacking limits of hexes I don't already control.

ORIGINAL: HansBolter

Can we get the hex stacking limit text out from under the three buttons in the uppermost right corner at less than maximum resolutions?

Been stuck playing at 1680x1050 due to limitations of my current monitor and it's really tough to get a read on the stacking limits of hexes I don't already control.

I'm having trouble visualizing what you mean.

I almost started another thread for this one as it's a bug but it does have to do with the UI...

Managing repair ships is exceedingly annoying, at least when an ARD is involved. There appears to be a bug in the UI and what it displays with regard to Pier Side mode and the presence of an ARD. Specifically, it looks like this:



This is at a Port 6, so it can't fix any major damage. Note that the second ship on the list shows that it will finish repairs in 4 days, even though it has 1 point of (major) flooding damage. It will never repair this at this port, unless I assign it to the ARD (in the screenshot it is at Pier Side).

But the biggie is the ship with more damage in this screenshot. There is only the size 6 port and the ARD in terms of repair facilities at this base, yet the interface implies that each ship will repair its floatation damage despite not using the ARD at all. Given the difficulty in getting ARDs to be used by the ships you want to use them (having to set priorities despite only 1 ship being set to Repair Ship, for example), this makes determining whether your ship is using an ARD or not unnecessarily complicated. Even worse, you can have a ship using the ARD (say the more damaged ship in this case) and another ship at Pier Side (the ship with just 1 point of major damage left to be fixed), and the ship at Pier Side will appear as if it's going to have that 1 point fixed even though the ARD is currently being used by another ship.

So far as I can tell, ARs function fine (they don't cause a bug like this). Basically, ARDs function really queerly in the ship repair interface with the Pier Side/Repair Ship functionality. This may be a tall order in terms of the code, but wouldn't it just be easier to treat them exactly like mobile shipyards - having the Shipyard option appear when an ARD is present, and moving the code for an ARD only working on 1 ship at a time to the Repair Shipyard section(s)? Maybe that's too hard, but since they're basically mobile shipyards... it would make sense and they'd be easier to use/manage.