It's an occasional complaint among players that when loading up a map from a player who added custom ships, they don't know what each ship has and does until after it has been built. There's a fun element to that when you get the surprise of what is on each ship, but most times it'd be better to know ahead of time what each ship is capable of.
I propose that you make it so that when in game the player mouses over a ship in the build menu on the left, that a little window appears that describes what components are on that ship. It could be a simple list that looks like:
4 lasers
4 cannons
2 lathes
1 shield
That would be super convenient for the player to help them decide which order they should build out their fleet.
You can select them to build and you'll see the colored range circles.
Assuming you memorized the weapon's colors you can tell fairly well what a ship has.
Virgil said about popup image of ship or something. :-\
I'm actually starting work on this right now. I'm debating the usefulness of showing a ship image vs a list of modules as you indicated. A simple and sorted list of modules and counts has some advantages over an image actually. And that same display (in either case) could also show estimates of build time and energy use.
I also plan to fold a bit more information into the button display. For instance, when the command module is building (the bridge), a % indicator on the button for that phase of the build would be nice. A % indicator for hull completion status (when building/rebuilding) would also potentially be nice.
All of that sounds fantastic, Virgil.
For the CM percentage, could I ask for absolute numbers next to it? This is useful for leviathans which will stay at 30% for a ...long... time.
It's not too bad... for a ship that takes 20 minutes to build the CM that's 'only' 12 seconds for each integer percent shown. Trying it out, I found myself occasionally glancing at the build panel and noting the % complete of the really large ships. The change was usually several percent or more, and I was particularly focused on it because it was what I was playing the mission for. In an actual mission, I doubt I would look that often.
That said, I can probably add absolute numbers in the popup window I am making that shows ship loadout and costs. At the bottom of that I could show how much total energy it takes to build the CM. So it would show something like 250/500, for instance, and go up by 1 every packet that comes in. Similar for hull counts.
Quote from: virgilw on November 21, 2016, 06:17:29 PM
Similar for hull counts.
I worry a little that newbie players might think that's an HP counter, then get confused when a ship explodes at half "health."
I'm inclined to agree. The current colour/icon system works well.
I love the new info window you made. It's perfect for ships in the build menu. It can be a little distracting for ships that are already built and in play.
I wonder if a solution is to put that information into the box on the bottom of the screen instead of in a popup box?
I will probably change the default to not show the info box upon mouse over of a ship. Right now you can turn it off in the graphics menu. I added an option there since I knew some people would find it distracting. It seems to have a lot to do with screen real estate. When I play in a 1024x720 window it is distracting one ship mouse over. When I play at 2560x1440 it is fine and I like it. Of course some people don't like things that appear and disappear on the edge of their vision, so for those folks it might always be off.
I could maybe show the info over the bottom panel. But that would also be a visual alteration in peripheral vision so I don't know if that would help folks that don't like that. My first guess was that people would like it for mouse over on the build bar, and that it would be 50/50 split for mouse over ships. So I added the option to turn it off for mouse over ships, but defaulted it to 'on' for the beta build to get people to see it.
A few thoughts:
A solution may be to simply include the informational box only when they mouseover the ship in the build menu, and not show it when you mouse over an already built ship. It seems like that's the time when it's most useful, anyway. Once the ship is built, it's easy to see what components it has onboard. Additionally, you could be expecting information to popup when you're in the build menu, but maybe not so much when you are working with live ships.
If you were willing, you could split this out into two options:
1) Show ship info over build menu
2) Show ship info over ship
Then default #2 to off and #1 to on.
Quote from: virgilw on November 21, 2016, 02:07:02 PMI'm debating the usefulness of showing a ship image vs a list of modules as you indicated. A simple and sorted list of modules and counts has some advantages over an image actually. And that same display (in either case) could also show estimates of build time and energy use.
I would like to apologize beforehand, English is not my first language.
I would like to disagree with a list approach. It's good for campaign ships, which are compact and well-rounded. But we need this feature for custom ships in exchange maps, which can be bigger and more unbalanced. A ship is not just a bundle of modules, it's hull shape, module and armor placement are important too.
Just allow me to show an example of two "hammer" ships:
Spoiler
(http://i65.tinypic.com/2i8jcc2.png)
Zillyhoo is accidental, I swear.
Same module composition, same armor and hull, these two would look identical on ship list, item count list, etc. But if I had energy to build one ship to park in front of emitter to shield lathes, I would take the left one.
The problem grows bigger with ship size and ship-to-ship combat.
10 laser modules on a tiny ship(lathe-size) just make this ship a laser blob, putting them on Varro is different - you can put them all around to create some kind of point defense against stray particles or drop them into one place to create one heavily defended spot against particles and missiles, and that will change the way you use and position your ship.
In a ship-to-ship combat (very popular on exchange maps) your armor plays a big role - it's hard to deflect MK7 shot or wolf's salvo, so your ships will get damaged, and some modules would be destroyed, and that will change the effectiveness of your ship, so you have to choose ships with acceptable armor or module composition for frontlines. Ship with MK7 behind one layer of armor would quickly lose it to enemy fire and will be useless, so it should be kept behind your other ships. Ship with four layers of armor would be useful on frontlines as anti-ship ship and would actually be useful as a decoy to protect your other, more fragile ships. This information can be easily obtained with a quick glance at ship image and much harder to derive from item list and range circles.
Another example:
Spoiler
(http://i67.tinypic.com/szby2a.png)
Once again - same modules, armor and size. You can differentiate them by looking at range rings, of course. Left ship is more useful as a part of the fleet, on frontlines - it's front-heavy on lasers against particles, it would probably tank an MK7 shot or two from the front, but it's more vulnerable from sides and rear, that should be guarded by other ships of the fleet. Right one is better as a lone ship, for example, guarding a remote energy mine from medium particulate treat - it's defenses are spread around, but a MK7 shot from the front would probably take out shield generator, making this ship very vulnerable to further damage.
Few good examples can be found in Sorrontis' fleet - ships with unbalanced, unsymmetrical design that should be used with a design in mind and a simple list of modules does not reflect it's weaknesses.
I would also like to agree with stdout everything he said about mouseovering a building ship. If it would have image preview - please let us have a delay before image popup as an option.
Last one piece of mind - THIS GAME IS ABSOLUTELY GREAT ON VISUALLY SHOWING IT'S GAME MECHANICS, DON'T BURY IT IN LISTS
At least don't bury it too much and allow people who love lists have them.
Seriously, "show, don't tell" is absolutely amazing here. So much information gets to the player via visuals. Take something simple, like moving a ship - game will show you how exactly will your ship be positioned, will show you what would be in range of it's weapons, shows via a faint lines what energy sources can support it. Your ship doesn't perform worse because it's HP bar is at 50%, it's because particles ate a hole in ship and two of it's cannons are missing. Every energy packet is shown, allowing player to intuitively see how much energy is taken - difference between occasional packet and steady green stream is obvious. Stunner balls grow smaller when you attack them. You can literally see when missiles are reloaded and tanks are full. Please keep this trend.
Great points above. You've converted me to your line of thinking. Showing the ship itself (maybe with a list of modules below?) in a window next to the build menu sure would be great.
Quote from: Stickman on November 25, 2016, 11:55:36 AM
[...]
Few good examples can be found in Sorrontis' fleet - ships with unbalanced, unsymmetrical design that should be used with a design in mind and a simple list of modules does not reflect it's weaknesses.
[...]
Did somebody call good old Sorrontis? I heard my name. :D
But I love Stickman's analysis of the situation.
I don't want to sound like a whiner, but I forgot to address one more issue - (if you use big words) screen space and information density.
I took a screenshot from tutorial mission and marked fields that kinda give information and those that kinda don't.
Spoiler
(http://i65.tinypic.com/27y1iy8.png)
As you can see, this information screen would show most modules as "-" for a lot of ships. If you take campaign fleet (correct me if I'm wrong), reactors are used only on HQ, grabbers on grabbers, discharges on discharges and fighter bases on carrier. That's about 25% of total modules, and they would be unique for one type of ship. Also, there is no line for custom modules.
Full list has its advantages:
1) It's easier to find ship with some modules you need (lathes, for example) by going through list.
2) It's easier to compare two ships in terms on module count, because you always have same modules on same spaces. But there is no dedicated "compare" mode, so if you want to check stats on two ships, you'll have to mouseover between them while memorizing numbers for different modules.
3) I think it's easier to implement because it's static, no need to adjust size of a window, add/delete lines, etc.
Compressed list (just don't show "-" modules) also has advantages:
1) Takes less space and less likely to bloat due to custom modules
2) It's easier to understand what modules do you actually get on your ship, to figure out what's its specialization.
I would like compressed one though
I would also like to specifically state that Virgil is incredibly amazing person and developer, and my point of view is highly subjective and uninformed (never even created a map on PRPL/CRPL script), and I'm actually very pleased with an inclusion of this module list and would be happy if it goes from beta to production as is, because it is, from my point of view, a definite improvement.
Quote from: Sorrontis on November 25, 2016, 01:39:15 PM
Did somebody call good old Sorrontis? I heard my name. :D
Well, your ships have interesting designs. They are different from campaign well-balanced ships. Let me use some images:
Spoiler
(http://i.imgur.com/coqrUYt.png)
While it's kinda analogous in terms of modules to campaign's wolf (basically missile barrage with some lasers), it's core is better protected, so some side shot or emergent is less likely to plow into it and destroy it, but missiles are protected very poorly and can be taken out with any stray shot. If duahcim would engage in a battle with enemy wolf, it would quickly loose it's missiles and loose. That makes this ship strictly second-line ship, while wolf could be used on frontlines.
And these two:
Spoiler
(http://i.imgur.com/JyU52Sl.png)
(http://i.imgur.com/HKsGX7q.png)
They are very comparable in terms of firepower, but first one would loose too much of it's firepower on a solid hit. Second one has very "spaced" design, that allows it to loose firepower slower with damage. So when I had these on maps with some enemy MK7, I've used Razor for second-line support, because MK7 tore it apart and I had to rebuild it. Razorbacks, on contrary, I've used on frontlines, actually baiting first couple of MK7 shots with its "prongs" to soak up damage and get enemy ship in range of my weapons.
These two are quite different ships, although their module lists would look deceptively similar.
I've released a new beta that removes the list of things on a ship an instead shows a ship preview image.
Quote from: virgilw on November 29, 2016, 11:52:28 AM
I've released a new beta that removes the list of things on a ship an instead shows a ship preview image.
Awesome. Downloaded and tried on one campaign mission and two quick exchange missions with a some big, slow-building ships. Everything works and looks nice for me. I like that different relevant information is shown when ship is not built, CM is building and ship is operational. Ship building progress in info window is a nice touch. Do you plan to expand on this, like adding some graphical indication to modules completion times (would be useful for stuff like MK7, fighter bases and, possibly, custom modules)? Just a question, not a suggestion or request.
Actual suggestions:
1) Add full cost of the ship to "unbuilt" information. Useful to judge what you can pull off with energy pods on maps with early pressure.
2) Add guppies to energy display if possible/reasonable, maybe as ["ship energy" + "guppy energy"] to separate it slightly. Guppies work (from gameplay perspective, not code-wise) as mini-tanks and full tanks are already included.
3) Show energy as "current/max [percentage]". More information without overinformation. I know that energy is already can be eyeballed by checking tanks and CM and actual percentage can be judged by green bar on ship list, but information in suggested format would help to judge time needed to fill ship energy completely.
Looks great.
As for preferences go, I'd love to have the popup window appear when I'm mousing over a ship in the build area, but when a ship is in the battle field, I'd rather not see it. Could you break those two scenarios out into two different preference options?
Quote from: stdout on November 29, 2016, 02:38:59 PM
Looks great.
As for preferences go, I'd love to have the popup window appear when I'm mousing over a ship in the build area, but when a ship is in the battle field, I'd rather not see it. Could you break those two scenarios out into two different preference options?
The graphics menu has one of those options right now. It should be what you are looking for. Go there and uncheck the option to show when you mouse over a ship in the play area. For people just trying the beta, it is off by default. I had it on by default in b1, so it will be on for you.
I could also have a separate option to turn it off when mousing over the build area... but my suspicion is that isn't really a big deal or something most people would want.
I love the way it is in 3b2. It's very good~
Quote from: virgilw on November 29, 2016, 03:38:19 PMGo there and uncheck the option to show when you mouse over a ship in the play area. For people just trying the beta, it is off by default. I had it on by default in b1, so it will be on for you.
I could also have a separate option to turn it off when mousing over the build area... but my suspicion is that isn't really a big deal or something most people would want.
Ok, I did that and it works perfectly. I think you've got this just right now.
Okay, after playing with this a bit, I see something that doesn't feel right to me. When you tell it to build a ship, the preview window then turns red and it's now hard to see what it'll have once it's finished building. I can see that then as each module is built, the red areas turn into the finished modules.
That's kind of a cool feature, but I think the player would rather just see the modules on the ship as they will be when they are finished, consistent with how it behaves before you tell it to build.