Symbols and Icons

Prepare yourself for a wargaming tour-de-force! Conquest of the Aegean is the next generation of the award-winning and revolutionary Airborne Assault series and it takes brigade to corps-level warfare to a whole new level. Realism and accuracy are the watchwords as this pausable continuous time design allows you to command at any echelon, with smart AI subordinates and an incredibly challenging AI.

Moderator: Arjuna

User avatar
wodin
Posts: 10709
Joined: Sun Apr 20, 2003 3:13 am
Location: England
Contact:

Symbols and Icons

Post by wodin »

WOuld it be possible for every military symbol there is a unique picture symbol instaed of some being shared. Otherwise you are penalised in a way for using picture symbols.
User avatar
Arjuna
Posts: 17768
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 11:18 am
Location: Canberra, Australia
Contact:

RE: Symbols and Icons

Post by Arjuna »

I agree in principle that it would be best to have a 1 for 1 match. However, my skills as an artist only stretch so far. Well more to the point is that the size of the area we have alloted for the symbol ( picture or military ) is pretty small and this limits what you can do. However, if someone else would like to profer their attempt at this we'll consider it.
Dave "Arjuna" O'Connor
www.panthergames.com
User avatar
Rooster
Posts: 669
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2001 10:00 am
Contact:

RE: Symbols and Icons

Post by Rooster »

Not very easy. The biggest hurdle is the standard vs. motorized vs. sp. Here's what I came up with:



Image
Attachments
pioneers.gif
pioneers.gif (5.15 KiB) Viewed 235 times
User avatar
Rooster
Posts: 669
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2001 10:00 am
Contact:

RE: Symbols and Icons

Post by Rooster »

And for paras:



Image
Attachments
para.gif
para.gif (3.37 KiB) Viewed 234 times
SeaMonkey
Posts: 796
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 3:18 am

RE: Symbols and Icons

Post by SeaMonkey »

Better Rooster,

Observing the counter, there seems to be a lot of wasted space in the lower quarter where the organizational size emblem is, I= company, II=battalion, etc. Couldn't that be put to better use displaying more info? Like, I / C.505 , or III / 505 Hq....etc....should free up some space to use for better layout.
User avatar
Arjuna
Posts: 17768
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 11:18 am
Location: Canberra, Australia
Contact:

RE: Symbols and Icons

Post by Arjuna »

Well actually the command bar at the bottom of the screen is quite full already. The left side is reserved for a HQ symbol, the centre for a size symbol ( and remember for an Army HQ that's four stars ), and the right side for the engagement status lights ( ie. blue = firing, yellow = receiving fire, red = takling casualties ).
Dave "Arjuna" O'Connor
www.panthergames.com
SeaMonkey
Posts: 796
Joined: Sun Feb 15, 2004 3:18 am

RE: Symbols and Icons

Post by SeaMonkey »

Oh yeah, that's right Dave, completely forgot.......see how long its been since I played, but that'll be remedied when CotA comes out.
User avatar
Rooster
Posts: 669
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2001 10:00 am
Contact:

RE: Symbols and Icons

Post by Rooster »

The problem is that things get very cluttered very quickly - at least at the limits of my design capability.

I suppose that, for the serious player, picture symbols will prove inadequate after a while, and switching to the military symbols will be the right thing. But even that gives a limited view of the force represented by the counter. Look at the armor military symbol and you'll see that you don't know wether it's Mark IIIs or Tigers coming at you.


hank
Posts: 629
Joined: Sun Aug 24, 2003 8:50 am
Location: west tn

RE: Symbols and Icons

Post by hank »

I am a HttR player and the only comment I had about the game engine was that the silhouette of vehicles did not match the vehicle type. Expecially in regards to armor. In the Equip tab on the left menu, tanks where shown as trucks in HttR.

I got one reply back on the HttR forum they would be making improvements on the silhouettes. Has it been addressed in CotA?

I would like to be able to see silhouettes of Panthers if the unit is Panthers or a Tiger Ie, or Sherman or Firefly, etc. The on map silhouettes can be more generic in my opinion because there's a lot of info on those little blocks but the graphics on the menu should be more descriptive of the vehicle type. Helps immersion.

just my $0.02

Hank
User avatar
Arjuna
Posts: 17768
Joined: Mon Mar 31, 2003 11:18 am
Location: Canberra, Australia
Contact:

RE: Symbols and Icons

Post by Arjuna »

hank,

Yeh I would like this too. But as I was the artist for the original symbols and I'm flat out on coding at present, this feature won't make the cut for COTA. If someone wants to draw a range of symbols for us then I'll see what can be done.
Dave "Arjuna" O'Connor
www.panthergames.com
User avatar
Rooster
Posts: 669
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2001 10:00 am
Contact:

Tanks for nuthin...

Post by Rooster »


Image
Attachments
tanksfornuthin.jpg
tanksfornuthin.jpg (38.53 KiB) Viewed 234 times
User avatar
Rooster
Posts: 669
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2001 10:00 am
Contact:

RE: Tanks for nuthin...

Post by Rooster »

Of course, you will have mixed armor in a single estab - Sherman and Firefly, so the counter graphics can only give you so much info, whether you use the military or pictographic symbols.
User avatar
Fred98
Posts: 4019
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Wollondilly, Sydney

RE: Tanks for nuthin...

Post by Fred98 »

Graphically there is little difference between a Sherman and a Firefly, but there is a huge difference if you compare them to an M5.

And there is a huge difference in the German tanks between the Mark 111/1V range compared to the mark Vs and mark V1s

Good work with the silhouettes!

User avatar
Rooster
Posts: 669
Joined: Tue Jan 09, 2001 10:00 am
Contact:

RE: Tanks for nuthin...

Post by Rooster »

True that the sherm and the ff are very very similar in appearance, but I would like to know if I were facing one vs. the other all the same. The ff packs a "heavy tank" punch, even if it's not quite constructed as a heavy tank.
User avatar
Brady
Posts: 6084
Joined: Fri Oct 25, 2002 12:48 pm
Location: Oregon,USA

RE: Tanks for nuthin...

Post by Brady »


It would be cool if the Tac symbols for German equipment matched those they used during that time, instead of the ever present allied/modern sysmbols used almost universaly by games.

Image


SCW Beta Support Team

Beta Team Member for:

WPO
PC
CF
AE
WiTE

Obi-wan Kenobi said it best: A lot of the reality we perceive depend on our point of view
User avatar
Plodder
Posts: 974
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 3:56 pm
Location: New Zealand

RE: Tanks for nuthin...

Post by Plodder »

ORIGINAL: Brady


It would be cool if the Tac symbols for German equipment matched those they used during that time, instead of the ever present allied/modern sysmbols used almost universaly by games.


Hey,that idea actually sounds pretty good.You could also have the option to choose between either the allied symbols and the german ones for all units.It could help with immersion somewhat,and would be cool to see a what a real german commander would've seen on his map.[8D][:)]
Gen. Montgomery: "Your men don't salute much."
Gen. Freyberg: "Well, if you wave at them they'll usually wave back."
Agema
Posts: 158
Joined: Mon Jan 17, 2005 8:40 pm

RE: Tanks for nuthin...

Post by Agema »

Creating symbols for each tank can be impractical. There's not much difference in shape across the Panzer III and Panzer IV models, yet a large variation in capability.

At best, maybe splitting the symbols up into light, medium and heavy tanks is feasible - Rooster's designs look good. However, you'd have to bear in mind even then a Sherman crew might fancy their chances against a medium tank Panzer IV, but decide discretion is the better part of valour against a medium tank Panzer V. Besides, fully accurate knowledge of what the enemy tank was poor historically, and this is reflected in HTTR when those relatively harmless-looking Panzer IV(H)s turn out to be Panthers when your soon-to-die Shermans get a bit closer.
.
User avatar
Fred98
Posts: 4019
Joined: Fri Jan 05, 2001 10:00 am
Location: Wollondilly, Sydney

RE: Tanks for nuthin...

Post by Fred98 »

I would be happy if they were "small" "medium" and "large"

The counters are too small for further detail. The samples above are proof.

User avatar
RedMike
Posts: 289
Joined: Wed Mar 13, 2002 11:33 pm
Location: Alaska

RE: Tanks for nuthin...

Post by RedMike »

Hey that's a cool idea, I like it!!

The German tactical symbols idea I mean.
Hannibal ad portas
User avatar
Plodder
Posts: 974
Joined: Mon Jul 28, 2003 3:56 pm
Location: New Zealand

RE: Tanks for nuthin...

Post by Plodder »

ORIGINAL: Agema

Creating symbols for each tank can be impractical. There's not much difference in shape across the Panzer III and Panzer IV models, yet a large variation in capability.

At best, maybe splitting the symbols up into light, medium and heavy tanks is feasible - Rooster's designs look good. However, you'd have to bear in mind even then a Sherman crew might fancy their chances against a medium tank Panzer IV, but decide discretion is the better part of valour against a medium tank Panzer V. Besides, fully accurate knowledge of what the enemy tank was poor historically, and this is reflected in HTTR when those relatively harmless-looking Panzer IV(H)s turn out to be Panthers when your soon-to-die Shermans get a bit closer.
.

And besides,EVERY german tank an Allied soldier saw after 1942 was a Tiger[:D]
Gen. Montgomery: "Your men don't salute much."
Gen. Freyberg: "Well, if you wave at them they'll usually wave back."
Post Reply

Return to “Conquest of the Aegean”