Jump to content

maroder

WFG Programming Team
  • Posts

    779
  • Joined

  • Last visited

  • Days Won

    10

Posts posted by maroder

  1. On 20/03/2023 at 7:41 PM, wowgetoffyourcellphone said:

    Or move Multiplayer to the left side (making that whole side about gameplay), then "Design Tools" and "Exit" can be new buttons on the right side, putting 3 total buttons on each side. Just spitballing. "Design Tools" for now would only have Scenario Editor has an option, but in the future additional tools can and probably will be developed and would go into that dropdown.

    That would work.

    • Like 1
  2. 56 minutes ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

    However, the placement debate remains, especially if you ever want to add the vanilla backgrounds to the mod. (not sure if there are other constraints here)

    Main concerns are: 1) the center menu overlaps important aspects of the designs ; 2) color mismatch between the dark menu and a very light background.

    From the vanilla backgrounds in combination with this menu, I would say:

    • the kushite one looks quite nice as it is
    • the seleucid one has ok placement, but a bit hard contrast
    • the carthage one is ok color wise but would need some adjustments to the placing of the two soldiers (one a bit more down and to the left, the other one a bit more to the right)
    • the hellenes one has the least compatibility - the colors are quite different and the center menu overlaps basically all the people. They would need to be shifted quite heavily to either side and then it would still be a rather large contrast.

    So generally I think 3 out of 4 could be adapted to work "ok" with this menu design.

    The more general question is: Does it make sense design wise to use two completely different art styles in the main menu? One 3D rendered and one digitally drawn?

    This also only plays a role if this shall ever be included in the vanilla game ( which is questionable, since design changes are very much opinion based and I can guarantee that not everyone would like that ). So I don't actively work on making the old backgrounds compatible right now.

    1 hour ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

    one solution is to group mod selection, hotkeys, language, and options(settings) underneath a new large dropdown called "options". I would say options is on a similar level of importance as "learn to play" "Single Player" and "Multiplayer".

    Sure, one could greatly reduce the number of buttons and get rid of the center menu all-together. But one of my goals with this design was that every button is present, that is present in the vanilla menu - So maybe the first question would then be: Why are there so many buttons in the vanilla version :)

    1 hour ago, real_tabasco_sauce said:

    image.png.7f88e57e6d5d4140c02fdf596dced82a.png

    This way, with 4 items, you can have symmetry around the 0ad logo at the top, and leave space for the backgrounds in the middle of the screen. The last thing to consider then is where to put "scenario editor" and "exit". It would make sense to slide them both over to the top right, next to the WFG logo, since they both take you out of the game.

    Might work; Although if you put exit & scenario editor also to the left, there is not much symmetry left. It also might become quite crowded on the left side with the minimal resolution of 1024x768.

    • Like 1
  3. On 01/03/2023 at 6:56 PM, maroder said:
    On 01/03/2023 at 5:23 PM, hyperion said:

    To the right, maybe a different page would make sense as well. Covering existing buttons I'd say is bad practice.

    I'm gonna think about it

    Thought about it and no - I'll stick to the current horizontal layout. The downwards expanding submenu feels right to me.

  4. On 02/12/2022 at 2:44 PM, hyperion said:
    On 02/12/2022 at 1:40 PM, maroder said:

    What specific points do you have in mind regarding the inconsistency? I'm always open for feedback / suggestions

    Some random points:

    1. Start page has 4 different hover effects and there are more variants in other places
    2. red old style buttons need to go
    3. tooltip background transparency (only used sometimes) may lead to hard to read tooltips
    4. radio button are of the old theme, same for drop down arrow
    5. ai options icon color
    6. button borders come in variants
    7. some enabled buttons lack hover
    8. there is an issue when expanding the menu in-game
    9. full screen pages like match-setup shouldn't have inset window borders/decorations

    As for incomplete, well, the in-game game controls are untouched as of yet.

    1) Mostly done, I tried to unify it a bit more

    2) replaced. I feel like the current buttons may be a a little bit to hard to see tho, so maybe they need to be adjusted in the future.

    3) adjusted

    4) radio buttons replaced, dropdown arrow not yet; I don't mind it that much (I thought about using google's Material icons, but that would require switching from GPL2 to GPL3 if I'm not mistaken)

    5) TODO

    6) Half way adjusted - still different borders but more similar themed now. Feels ok for me.

    7) Which ones? / Still an issue?

    8) Should be fixed? Not sure what the original problem was.

    9) Done

    In-game: True, there are some changes in this version tho. Sometime in the future I would like to redo the HUD, but too much work right now.

  5. iirc those values you found determine the AI difficulty. But generally that sounds like a nice idea for a mod to test how that would play out :)

    You may want to look at https://code.wildfiregames.com/D4250 and there specifically at the file " binaries/data/mods/public/simulation/data/technologies/special/turbo_match.json "

    You basically only need one auto-researched tech file, that changes the appropriate values

    I.e. for you goals you would need:

    		{ "value": "Cost/BuildTime", "multiply": 2},
    		{ "value": "ProductionQueue/TechCostMultiplier/time", "multiply": 2}

    instead of 0.5 and

    "affects": ["Unit"],

    instead of "affects": ["Unit", "Structure"],

     

    (and the same can be done for the capture rate ect... -> See how it's done in other techs https://github.com/0ad/0ad/tree/master/binaries/data/mods/public/simulation/data/technologies)

    • Like 1
  6. 28 minutes ago, hyperion said:

    As for vertical orientation of main buttons, I'd place them roughly where Athena upper body is in the above screenshot, just in case you are still brooding this question.

    No, that part was relatively clear to me, I'm rather thinking about how to handle the sub-menus. I.e would you want them just on the right hand side as it is the case with the current menu? Because that would look a bit unbalanced imo.

    On the other hand, one could possibly still have a drop-down, that just overlays the button beneath it. Not quite sure how that would look like.

  7. sure the berry placement can be annoying and could be improved (but I also don't think that its game deciding).

    1 hour ago, Stan` said:

    That's because random is the wrong word. The word we should use is procedural.

    true. although procedural maps can/do also feature different levels of randomness and it seems to me that what some people want is _no_ randomness. So even if we get https://code.wildfiregames.com/D4053 committed, it seems like that would not satisfy what some of the mp people want?

  8. ref:

    This topics keeps coming up but I'm still unsure how many people would really like such a "plain" map. (The balancing options are a good idea regardless, I'm only talking about this "no hills - everything absolutely the same" kind of map).

    At the end this description doesn't sound like a random map to me and more like a scenario map - specifically the option to choose the specific position for each player.

  9. 3 hours ago, Grapjas said:

     is it possible with current code to use all 3 and just switch background after 10s or so? With a bit of a fadeIn fadeOut nicety.

    Should be possible with some extra work (one would need to implement a specific timer first) but I agree with @vv221 that this might be a bit too much.

    Changing every time you go back to the main menu seems nice but iirc it should do that already if you go to any fullscreen gui page ?. I.e. if you go back from the gamesetup/ the replay page / the mod selection it should change. I am not sure if it is desired that it also changes when you just have a small window on top of the main menu and you can still see the current background. (E.g. when opening the options)

    I think in that case we would certainly need a slow fade out / fade in.

    • Like 1
  10. The answer is that it's complicated and depends on: The capture strength of your units, the capture points and the capture regeneration of the building, which is influence by the type and number of units garrisoned inside of it. (Also a number of techs may influence the result)

    If you are super interested, I recommend to look at this file: https://github.com/0ad/0ad/blob/master/binaries/data/mods/public/simulation/components/Capturable.js

    But imo there is no way you will be able to accurately calculate during a game how much time it will "exactly" take. I would recommend to try it, see how fast the bar is going down and then decide if it's worth it to commit to the attack or rather retreat.

    • Like 1
×
×
  • Create New...