These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE Information Portal

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Dev blog: Stay on Target!

First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Takeshi Yamato
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#561 - 2012-10-11 21:29:19 UTC  |  Edited by: Takeshi Yamato
A small request: the current target crosshair should stand out more compared to targets that are merely locked.

There are also a bit too many vertical and horizontal lines. Try it with max number of locked targets in a fleet and you'll see what I mean.
Angeliq
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#562 - 2012-10-11 21:33:18 UTC
Tippia wrote:
Angeliq wrote:
Why are we still debating the direction from-to which the damage should flow in those circles and what colors those should be, since the majority of people already concluded that while this is indeed nice looking bendy shiny thingy, it is less functional and counter-intuitive.
Really? Could we get a vote count on that one? Roll

The reason we're still debating it is because answering those makes it just as functional and more intuitive.


The world you live in must be a strange one.

wow much space very ship such pvp many pew
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#563 - 2012-10-11 21:36:12 UTC
Angeliq wrote:
The world you live in must be a strange one.
So no vote count, and you've understood why it's still a topic for discussion, I take it. Goodie.
Logicycle
Stimulus
Rote Kapelle
#564 - 2012-10-11 22:04:50 UTC
Leave the rectangular damage indicators alone, the rest looks pretty cool.
Benedictus de Suede
Norsewing Naval Command
#565 - 2012-10-11 22:06:16 UTC
Looks really good and promising. I would like to make som additional suggestions though...

First however. There are a few important, I think, guidelines in order to get att good Tactical Awareness (TA).


1. Important (crucial) information should be in the center of ones field of view i.e where your target is. This is especially important in
a stressful combat/dogfight situation where u tend to get a "tunnel vision".
2. It´s a myth that u can do two things simultaneously. What u can do is to shift attention between 2 tasks more or less rapidly.
Keep that in mind when u design a TA system.
3. Textinformation should be short and concise. "Torpedo damage 345" instead of "Your group of bla bla ..hits ex...doing 345 of bla."
This should be general. In the Overview for exampel under "Type" it would be better with AJ 37 instead of Viggen Attack Version
or SR-71 instead of Blackbird. Do we really need to know if it´s a Caldari Sentry Gun III or is it enough with just "Sentry Gun III"
4. Symbols always gives faster input then text, but they sould be good also. The "Class symbol" i.e different sizes of + makes it
easy to differentiate between NP battleships and cruisers. The "player" version a "box" is harder to read. In addition I would like a
symbol that tells something about the ships roll. Is it a transporter, ewar cruiser etc. U sholuldn´t be living dictionary in order to
tell what kind of a threat a ship impose.
5. Always prioritize functionality over "good looks". Ask yourself...If this was for real how would they do (design) it?

Ok, with this in mind here are my suggestions:

The symbol for "In target range" is good but u should also ad information that tells something about the abillity of your guns to track the selected target and the chance to inflict a good hit. For example a dragging circle behind a fast mowing frigate could give a split second information that there is no chance in hell that I could hit that sucker with my 1400 mm guns. If the same circel had an X in it the target is totally out of range. If the circle i flashing the target would be in "fall-off range". The flashing should end as the target approaches optimal range. The same principle goes for missiles. For dragging triangle could indicate a fast moving target with lesser chance to get a clean hit. OK u would to have different size and multiple circles if u mix heavy, medium and light guns. But it could be a cool effect to se those chasing circles finally merging to a decision of a maxium "fire for effect".
Tyberius Franklin
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#566 - 2012-10-11 22:09:04 UTC
Angeliq wrote:
Why are we still debating the direction from-to which the damage should flow in those circles and what colors those should be, since the majority of people already concluded that while this is indeed nice looking bendy shiny thingy, it is less functional and counter-intuitive. While the brackets MIGHT prove to be useful to new player experience, the new targeting UI is just shiny. It adds no new usability, it is actually worse than the current UI.

I disagree on it being counter-intuitive and I like shiny. I also don't see how it would be less functional as it only adds information while leaving the info we have always had access to in the same locations.
Oberine Noriepa
#567 - 2012-10-11 22:18:27 UTC
Takeshi Yamato wrote:
There are also a bit too many vertical and horizontal lines. Try it with max number of locked targets in a fleet and you'll see what I mean.

Agreed. I find the extra lines superfluous.

∃
Rengerel en Distel
#568 - 2012-10-11 22:26:13 UTC
Galmas wrote:
Rengerel en Distel wrote:
Galmas wrote:
Viddles wrote:
Overall I like that you're trying to improve the UI.

The things I'd like to see changed that you haven't mentioned would be the horizontal and vertical lines that splay all over the screen when you have like 7 targets locked. Very messy and cluttered. When you have 7 targets to manage, that's when you need an especially clear screen, and those lines do nothing for me except make it more confusing. The lines are a neat idea... but how about they get some lovin' too? I suggest that instead of continuing them to the edges of the screen, no matter how long the lines will be, change them so that they fade out over a distance that is about 1/3rd if your window size - or perhaps just a fixed length like 400 pixels. That way you can still be guided toward them, but they won't take up the whole screen bombarding you with parallel lines leading off to nowhere, doing you no good.

-V


This one is a very good point. This is actually one big thing (beside the usless damage notification in the middle of the screen) that is not very good with the current Targeting UI.

You can turn those off in general settings, which i think i mentioned 5 or 6 pages ago.



afaik it will turn off the damage notification in the log too, doesnt it?

I was making reference to the targeting crosshairs which you can turn off in the settings.

With the increase in shiptoasting, the Report timer needs to be shortened.
CCP karkur
C C P
C C P Alliance
#569 - 2012-10-11 22:30:13 UTC
Takeshi Yamato wrote:
A small request: the current target crosshair should stand out more compared to targets that are merely locked. .

In the new version, there is actually quite a difference between the lines for the selected target and the other targets.

CCP karkur | Programmer | Team Five 0 | @CCP_karkur
Jace Errata
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#570 - 2012-10-11 22:42:27 UTC
I much, much prefer the Fanfest presentation UI to this proposal.

Also, with the in-space HP bars (not the target row ones), what happens if you have several targets within say 25k or so of each other, and zoom quite a way out? Do they overlap?

tweeten

One day they woke me up so I could live forever

It's such a shame the same will never happen to you
OlRotGut
#571 - 2012-10-11 22:53:57 UTC
Please try to keep this in mind when revamping this.

Try to make it as easy as possible to know when you are being red/yellow boxed by enemies when you have brackets off, or if you are configured to see say "Friendly Logi" vs "all hostiles".
CCP karkur
C C P
C C P Alliance
#572 - 2012-10-11 22:54:17 UTC
Jace Errata wrote:
I much, much prefer the Fanfest presentation UI to this proposal.

Also, with the in-space HP bars (not the target row ones), what happens if you have several targets within say 25k or so of each other, and zoom quite a way out? Do they overlap?

The HP bars are only on the active target... on the screenshot you have 2 targeted, and are targeting the 3rd ship, but you don't have the the HP bars on my friend skills, only on the Avatar

CCP karkur | Programmer | Team Five 0 | @CCP_karkur
CCP karkur
C C P
C C P Alliance
#573 - 2012-10-11 22:58:21 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP karkur
Djakku wrote:
skills needs an avatar

do you mean a new one? because poor skills used to have an Avatar, but some noob shot it down earlier this yearP

CCP karkur | Programmer | Team Five 0 | @CCP_karkur
betoli
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#574 - 2012-10-11 23:00:26 UTC  |  Edited by: betoli
It would be nice to have an option so that the inbound damage from each ship is a time average (rolling 20 seconds?)

The flash flash will look better, but a rolling average is surely what you need. visually telling the difference between

flashflashflashflashflashflashflashflashflashflashflashflashflashflashflashflash

and

FLASH...........FLASH............FLASH...........FLASH............FLASH...........FLASH............

is not terribly intuitive in comparing relevence. or combine both. ITt should only take a small amount of arithmetic in the client....
Praerian
Perkone
Caldari State
#575 - 2012-10-11 23:01:55 UTC
As long as we don't lose the tooltips that show percentages, and each segment of UI is clearly defined as Sh Ar and str looks good.
Maraner
The Executioners
#576 - 2012-10-12 00:05:50 UTC
CCP Explorer wrote:
CCP karkur wrote:
Myxx wrote:
So, any way to make this something we don't need to have forced on us? I kinda like the current targeting UI atm.
I would like to see it as something we are "delivering" to you, not forcing it on you Smile We do not want to have the 2 system living side by side, we just want to make this on right so you will like it! Big smile
What CCP karkur said. The code would very soon become entangled and messy unless we refactor and remove the old system. We want to get this right and we don't want to maintain two separate systems.



I realise I'm going back a bit on the current discussion, I have to say I very much like the look of the new system and you may not want to have two running but I STRONGLY and humbly urge you to leave the current three bar system in there as an optional extra.

I am not sure what sort of resources would be required to do this but many may not like the new system. Lack of optionality to the Unified inventory was largely responsible for the rage from the community in regards to that feature. We all like the new stuff, but I would prefer to wait for it if it means that there is an option around retaining the old system.

If you have to remove the old system so be it, but please re-code it's current functionality in the new system and provide it as an option. I'm still running all of my stuff of the station tab in regards to items and ships as I still find the Unified Inventory horrible.

So please, provide the old system as an option, we all are drawn to the shiny and new but it has to be shiny, new and have improved functionality.

p.s Unified Inventory still suks Twisted
Battlingbean
Wings of the Dark Portal
#577 - 2012-10-12 00:08:09 UTC
The real question we should all be asking is why does skills have a Focused medium Pulse Laser I on his Raven?
CCP karkur
C C P
C C P Alliance
#578 - 2012-10-12 00:11:30 UTC
Battlingbean wrote:
The real question we should all be asking is why does skills have a Focused medium Pulse Laser I on his Raven?

skills is just clueless and does whatever... for example he loses avatars to noobs

CCP karkur | Programmer | Team Five 0 | @CCP_karkur
Misanth
RABBLE RABBLE RABBLE
#579 - 2012-10-12 00:15:02 UTC
Rengerel en Distel wrote:
CCP karkur wrote:
mkint wrote:
I like how the typical dev response so far has been 'I'm right you're wrong, suck it.' I'm getting that bad feeling that comes before things like before the inventory changes, and every other unpopular failure that I've seen added to the game.

wow, really?


I think when people said the target icons are larger, and you dismissed it saying they're not that much larger that it shows the same kind of thing as with the module icon windows. We also complained those were too large, and you didn't think so, and all iteration on the feature has gone silent. Icons and window borders keep getting bigger with each new feature, without any way for the players to adjust it, because you guys know best.

Nearly every other MMO allows the players to customize the UI, because only the players know how they want it to look to themselves, but EVE says no, you're doing it wrong, and you have to do it the way we say to do it. That is the feeling I tend to get with the feedback on each feature. You'll tweak it as long as it works with what you wanted to do anyways, but if it's outside the scope of the work you want to do, then it's not going to happen.


Yah this is unfortunately quite common with CCP.

I have repeatedly highlighted every recent UI change for how everything just increases in size. At one point I asked Punkturis straight out if she's blind as a bat, and I even said the very least they can do is to give players the option to customize, as that is never a bad option. She was at least honest in her reply, stating she disagrees, and that more options is bad.

But frankly, in this case, those circular icons looked to be smaller to me, not bigger? I could be wrong, as others pointed out, the pictures doesn't really show. Either case, I completely agree with you, CCP should stop making everything so damn big, and they should really re-consider their stance that customizeable is bad.

AFK-cloaking in a system near you.
KIller Wabbit
MEME Thoughts
#580 - 2012-10-12 00:18:40 UTC  |  Edited by: KIller Wabbit
space chikun wrote:
Kage Toshimado wrote:
"And the DevBlog clearly states this is a work in progress and not a final We're shipping this straight in your FACE! Dev blog.
I'm also on the team, so clearly the team members are aware of this flaw."

Prism,

Not to heap on, but you have to understand that we are tired of this. Many, many people don't like the Unified Inventory, and we were told it was a work in progress and then BAM!!! we all got this piece of garbage anyhow.

If we don't speak up, chances are (at least we are worried) we'll have this forced upon us as well.



I hate to break it to you, I've only heard complaints from a small number of people on the UI. It was difficult to get used to, but once you've actually taken the time to explore its features, it makes a GREAT NUMBER of tasks a LOT easier than before. And a very, very small number a tiny bit more difficult if you're in a hurry.

Who am I kidding, I do like breaking it to you - just like Prism X, I'm getting sick of the vocal few jumping up and down like toddlers whenever CCP wants to make their game look cool or function in a more modern way. Just because you're USED to the crappy old way, doesn't mean the game should continue using the crappy way.

The game needs players to keep getting better. This change makes it more accessible for some players, and knowing CCP, there's probably a backend revamp that went with this to make it less laggy. I hope. Well lag never gets fixed, just induced, so I could be wrong.


You must play with just yourself. I hear from my Alliance all the time about how poor the new inventory is - of course they use much more appropriate language for a half-birth. I also see it in local in my travels throughout EVE.

If you deal with anything beyond simple personal stuff it lags like crazy and makes getting things done a total pain. They said they were going to improve lag - my corporate inventory takes a LOT longer to open than is intuitive, which make me think I missed clicking it, which results in me closing it - and around and around I go.

Constant half-baked ingredients added to game make it a half-baked game.