Summary Screen

[Bajter]

Due to this topic: http://www.wildfiregames.com/forum/index.php?showtopic=13683 being old and outdated I have decided (after talking with Mythos_Ruler) to create a new one instead of necroing the old.

The old topic started as mostly a design thing, I wanted to work on these tasks with Kabzerek: http://trac.wildfiregames.com/ticket/686 http://trac.wildfiregames.com/ticket/2268 but we've stumbled upon some unexpected problems connected with two things:
1. We are newbies in here.
2. Many things have changed during last two years of game development.
3. There are things discussed in the topic as "implemented" which actually aren't in the game (I think it has something to do with one person doing many things over long course of time which ended with a failed commit due to changes made in the game in the meantime).

I wanted to suggest few improvements to contents of the summary screen.

ATM it's done like this:

Score
Economy Score | Military Score | Exploration Score | Total Score

Units/buildings
Units trained | Units lost | Enemy units killed | Buildings constructed | Buildings lost | Enemy buildings destroyed

Conquest
Civ centres built | Enemy civ centres destroyed | Map exploration

Resources
Resources Statistics ( Gathered / Used ) | Vegetarian ratio | Treasures collected | Tributes ( Sent/ Received)
Food | Wood | Stone | Metal

Market
Food exchanged | Wood exchanged | Stone exchanged | Metal exchanged | Barter efficiency | Trade income

We could add few things into the summary screen: (as proposed in the #686, forum posts and in my mind)
#686:

• Total Resources (sum of all resources gathered)
• Deforestation ( percent of total trees cut by player)
• Kill/Death ratio (a fraction of two values that are in summary screen already)
• Temples built (number)
• Special Buildings built (number)
• Warships destroyed (number)
• Champion Units trained (changed from super units)
• Heroes killed (number)
• Favourite Military Unit (military unit with highest built count, mentioned by name)
• Most Bloodthirsty Hero (hero with most kills)
• Average Unit Lifespan ( I don't think this stat is a good idea tbh)

My ideas:

• Tab for detailed units stats (infantry, workers, females, cavalry, champion, heroes, navy units built/lost).
• Tab for detailed buildings stats (houses, outposts&towers, fortresses, economic, military, resource, temples, special, wonder built/lost).
• Team Changes in Score tab, maybe interchangable with Team Score (explained at the bottom of this post).
• Under the suggested organisation there are things that I'm not sure about.

Summing it all up - I think it might work better if it was organised like that:

Score
Economy Score | Military Score | Exploration Score | Total Score

Units/Buildings
Units trained | Units lost | Enemy Units killed | Kill/Death Ratio | Buildings constructed | Buildings lost | Enemy Buildings destroyed

Conquest
Civ Centres built | Enemy Civ Centres destroyed | Map Exploration

Resources
Resources Statistics ( Gathered / Used ) | Deforestation | Vegetarian ratio | Treasures collected | Tributes ( Sent / Received)

Food | Wood | Stone | Metal | Total

Market
Food exchanged | Wood exchanged | Stone exchanged | Metal exchanged | Barter efficiency | Trade income

Detailed Units

Units ( Trained / Lost / Killed )
Total | Infantry | Workers | Females | Cavalry | Champion | Heroes | Navy | Favourite Military Unit

Detailed Buildings
Buildings ( Built / Lost / Destroyed )

Total | Houses | Outposts | Towers | Fortresses | Economic | Military | Resource | Temples | Special | Wonders

Of course it's something to discuss

I'm not sure about counting Temples separately from Special buildings, but they don't really have their category after we count Houses out. (I mean, they are both Civic, right?)
I'd also think about counting outposts and towers together, but im not sure about this one.

Maybe one should note walls and such, or even contain them all as "Defensive". I'd suggest considering making two tabs instead of one building tab - one for Civic, second for Military buildings. Civic containing Special, Wonders, Temples, Houses etc. Military containing walls, outposts, towers, technology and production buildings separately.

Another thing is the realisation of Team Scores. http://trac.wildfiregames.com/ticket/2268
Do we want the whole summary screen version for teams, or just Team Score field in Score tab? (I'd personally preffer the latter)

Attached are screenshots of current Conquest and Resources tab made in 1024x768 (I've edited this bit)

IMO it's very noticable that Conquest tab is somewhat empty. I have no idea what to add there though.

The Resources tab is here for reference, so everyone can see that there's still place if we play a bit with the numbers.

Edited December 17, 2013 by Bajter

[Loki1950]

Maybe the conquest tab could hold the combat related stats.

Enjoy the Choice

[Mythos_Ruler]

I like your work so far. As far as which stats to show, I think it is more important to show the most relevant stats to the game's gameplay, than to show every stat we can come up with. This should be kept in mind.

[hollth]

With the setup of

Score

Economy Score | Military Score | Exploration Score | Total Score

Exploration seems a bit out place. Better to have something that can be expanded there. Personally I'd like economy and military to be broken into their tabbed parts too. e.g..

Score

Units/Buildings | Units | Buildings | Market | Resources | Conquest | Total score

That way everything in the main screen may be expanded for more detailed information.

If there is enough space units/buildings could probably be taken out as a tab since there are separate tabs for each one. Conquest could probably be taken out and put in buildings. Only problem is where does exploration go then? tbh it doesn't seem to fit into anything. I'd say make a technology tab but there aren't enough important things to track to warrant that.

Tack team scores on the end after total score? Depending on how team scores are calculated having another tab for it might not be needed.

For grouping having a team number on the left of the player colour might work? Or grouping the players together and have greater spacing between the teams? e.g.

player

player

player

player

player

player

player

player

[Bajter]

After few days of discussions on IRC and between each other we've managed to create a patch http://trac.wildfiregames.com/ticket/686 to include the following layout (with the counters):
( just a copy paste from our doc)

Score

Economy Score | Military Score | Exploration Score | Total Score

Units

Units ( Trained / Lost / Killed )

Total | Infantry | Workers | Cavalry | Champion | Heroes | Navy

Buildings

Buildings (Constructed / Lost / Destroyed )

Total | Houses | Economic | Outposts | Military | Fortresses | Special | Wonders

Conquest

Civ Centres built | Enemy Centres destroyed | Map Exploration

Resources

Resources Statistics (Gathered/Used) | Treasures Collected | Tributes (Sent/Received)

Food | Wood | Stone | Metal | Total

Market

Food exchanged | Wood exchanged | Stone exchanged | Metal exchanged | Barter efficiency | Trade income

Miscellaneous

Vegetarian ratio | feminisation | Kill/Death Ratio

Next thing we're gonna work on is the task #2268 http://trac.wildfiregames.com/ticket/2268, it'll be mostly handled by Kabzerek.
So heads up, wait for his post on the matter.

Attached are screenshots of how it's done now. (not tagged because they're 1024x768 and take up a lot of space, so just feel free to press the links )
http://i.imgur.com/U2cQ2uc.png
http://i.imgur.com/AiCKpqN.png
http://i.imgur.com/seE3fq5.png
http://i.imgur.com/J97X0x9.png

[Josh]

(note this was written before the previous reply)

I'd try to eliminate closely related/similar tabs and keep the interface as straight forward and as clean as possible. I think the following arrangement would work best:

__________________________________________________________

| Overview | | Units | | Buildings | | Resources | | Trade |

|__________|_|_______|_|___________|_|___________|_|_______|

1. Overview
   • Default tab, contains sub-scores and total scores along with stats that don't fit as well in other places (like % exploration).
2. Units
   • Pretty self-explanatory, anything and everything units (trained, killed, most used unit).
3. Buildings
   • Again, pretty simple, anything and everything building-related (built, destroyed, most built).
4. Resources
   • Total resources gathered, ending resources.
5. Trade
   • Resources obtained through trade (market), resources exchanged with other players through diplomacy.

This doesn't really leave space for many miscellaneous stats, but removing some/all of those would be non-consequential.

Each tab would be broken into team groupings. Here's an example in ACSII (ignore the numbers):

__________________________________________________________

| Overview | | Units | | Buildings | | Resources | | Trade |

| |_|_______|_|___________|_|___________|_|_______|

| __________________________________ |

| | Food | Wood | Stone| Metal| Total| |

| ___________________|______|______|______|______|______| |

| | Team 1 Player 1 | 1515 | 9586 | 6345 | 2465 | 9878 | |

| |_______ | | | | | | |

| | Player 2 | 4871 | 1234 | 5745 | 4566 | 9998 | |

| |__________|______|______|______|______|______| |

| | Total | 2438 | 2346 | 6326 | 2453 | 4527 | |

| |__________|______|______|______|______|______| |

| _______________________________________________________ |

| | Team 2 Player 3 | 1515 | 9586 | 6345 | 2465 | 9878 | |

| |_______ | | | | | | |

| | Player 4 | 4871 | 1234 | 5745 | 4566 | 9998 | |

| |__________|______|______|______|______|______| |

| | Total | 2438 | 2346 | 6326 | 2453 | 4527 | |

| |__________|______|______|______|______|______| |

|__________________________________________________________|

[Bajter]

I've gotta defend the layout that I posted in the patch, because it responds to needs of people that love to see lots of numbers in stats.

Most of the work was done to expand units and buildings tabs, so we got it broken down into certain types of units, it shows how did certain person play the game very specifically (ofc not too much).

Leaving the tabs with two-three columns would make them as empty as conquest tab is at the moment.

I kind of agree with your point on miscellaneous and conquest tabs, but I'd rather say to leave them as they are now, so they can be expanded later (as you probably noticed people are sometimes coming with some crazy, nice to have stats, that could just fit in the game).

Still, it's not really my call to make.

[hollth]

What exactly is the point of the summary screen? Why show it?

There are a number of different reasons why and you/design team need to pick one or two and from that build a criteria of what numbers to include. Otherwise the list will end up containing extra unnecessary and pointless things. There shouldn't be things that people ask 'why is this here' and at the moment there kind of is (No offence)

Sorry if this comes of as aggressive or ambiguous I can't really think of a better way to word this atm. (Sick tired and 40+ degree heat = brain dead)

[LordGood]

What exactly is the point of the summary screen? Why show it?

There are a number of different reasons why and you/design team need to pick one or two and from that build a criteria of what numbers to include. Otherwise the list will end up containing extra unnecessary and pointless things. There shouldn't be things that people ask 'why is this here' and at the moment there kind of is (No offence)

Sorry if this comes of as aggressive or ambiguous I can't really think of a better way to word this atm. (Sick tired and 40+ degree heat = brain dead)

It's a long standing tradition common among RTS games, mr veteran. It takes a long time to play a RTS game in comparison to other genres and it's satisfying to track statistics gathered over that time, even if they are silly ones. (which, by the looks of it will have their own tab)

Empires DMW counted mouse clicks and keystrokes. Not very practical but it would wow me a bit

[hollth]

As i said, not in the best state when writing this and apologies for coming off as arrogant as you obviously found me to be.

Even among the RTS that track things like clicks there is a finite number of things that are tracked and they needed to meet some criteria. I've never played Empires DMW but i would assume from the click and keystrokes that the the summary screen had the primary purpose of tracking things people could improve upon. In which case it would be metrics of skill and they would operationalise the most important ones for the summary screen.

My point is that tracking things for the sake of tracking them and having only the criterion of 'it would be good to have' is not really the best way to go. There are other, better ways of doing it. It would be beneficial to decide what direction now rather than double handling and having to decide later when its too cramped.

[kabzerek]

Ok. When patch with summary counters will be accepted i would like to start working on team scores.

I have 2 ideas how to organise them:

1) http://i.imgur.com/gWvGPco.jpg

2) http://i.imgur.com/3aDJp4E.jpg

I would appreciate any opinions about these ideas.
Also someone might have a better idea and could share it here.

A little about Joshs idea:
Team number on the left side requires to move all other counters to the right and... there isn't enough space for this operation in some tabs.

Of course (as mentioned here: http://trac.wildfiregames.com/ticket/2268 ) all of this makes sense only if teams are locked. When they aren't than this shouldn't be displayed.

[Mythos_Ruler]

I like this one. It's better organized:

[GunChleoc]

I like this one. It's better organized:

+1

It's easier to see who was on which team.

[Josh]

I like number one better as well, but I'd suggest getting rid of the "Player Name" header and just bumping the rest up so that "Team 1" would be in the same place.

An example might be better:

__________________________________________________________

| Overview | | Units | | Buildings | | Resources | | Trade |

| |_|_______|_|___________|_|___________|_|_______|

| _________________________________________________ |

| | Team 1 | Food | Wood | Stone| Metal| Total| |

| |______________|______|______|______|______|______| |

| | Player 1 | 1515 | 9586 | 6345 | 2465 | 9878 | |

| | | | | | | | |

| | Player 2 | 4871 | 1234 | 5745 | 4566 | 9998 | |

| |______________|______|______|______|______|______| |

| | Team 1 Total | 2438 | 2346 | 6326 | 2453 | 4527 | |

| |______________|______|______|______|______|______| |

| ______________ |

| | Team 2 | |

| |______________|___________________________________ |

| | Player 3 | 1515 | 9586 | 6345 | 2465 | 9878 | |

| | | | | | | | |

| | Player 4 | 4871 | 1234 | 5745 | 4566 | 9998 | |

| |______________|______|______|______|______|______| |

| | Team 2 Total | 2438 | 2346 | 6326 | 2453 | 4527 | |

| |______________|______|______|______|______|______| |

|__________________________________________________________|

(feel free to reuse and modify the above for demonstrative purposes)

[quantumstate]

I also prefer the same one as Mythos. Much easier to read.

[Donner]

The the selection of the statistics that are to be displayed on the summary screen could be left to the discretion of the individual players through configurable settings displaying the statistical subject and their relevant checkboxes.

[hollth]

Since teams don't need the same number of people wouldn't an average be a better representation than sum? So while of the two I prefer the one Mythos said, I actually wouldn't suggest taking that route. I still think a column to the right would be better but since everybody else wants rows I say pick the other one.

It would be good to deconstruct where points come from so its not as ambiguous too.

Also, what happens when teams aren't clear cut?

[sanderd17]

Since teams don't need the same number of people wouldn't an average be a better representation than sum?

If teams aren't equal, it's normally chosen in a way that the team with less players are considered better. Showing the sum of the scores is still a nice way to compare the teams.

Also, what happens when teams aren't clear cut?

Good call, it should probably only be shown when teams are locked.

[hollth]

If teams aren't equal, it's normally chosen in a way that the team with less players are considered better. Showing the sum of the scores is still a nice way to compare the teams.

Good call, it should probably only be shown when teams are locked.

My concern was that there would probably be a victory condition attributed to team score. Even an unexperienced player is a huge boost to score. That seems a bit unfair.

How would this work with multiplayer/lobby? Can teams be build in uneven ways there? Maybe it would be better to restrict it to scenarios etc

[sanderd17]

In the lobby, games with more than two players aren't rated. There are plans to apply some rating there though. But it would require carefull thinking.

And I don't think there will ever be a victory condition attributed to the team score, as IMO, it's quite a big achievement if you can win from someone while having a lower total score. It means you mastered your economy and military, without spilling a single unit. While the other one worked on gathering unneeded resources, or building unneeded stuff.

[hollth]

I don't see you point regarding not having a team score victory condition. Is it that different from an individual team score victory condition?

[sanderd17]

No, my reasoning also works for individual total score. I don't see a reason to add a victory condition to that.

[hollth]

I disagree that it is an achievement because of the implementation of score.

On the implementation of score. As it is, score is not an indication of playing well. It may as well be random numbers. It doesn't mean that you didn't horde resources of had an army that counted theirs better. It doesn't for because there is no way of knowing that. Score is so ambiguous it may as well be random. Nobody who doesn't work on the code would have any idea how its calculated. I could acquire more points for never fighting and I'd never know. If you need/want points then un-obfuscate it. A point system relies on being unambiguous. If I want to get more points I need to know how.

But point/score systems have a deeper purpose too. What that purpose is depends on the game itself. That goes back design cohesiveness and purpose.

There is all this visual emphasis on score and team score. Its the first, most obvious thing you see on the summary screen.And yet it serves no purpose and is completely meaningless. There is nothing in the game that links to it. Even if you made it so that people understood where those points came from. It is still has no point.

So why have score? Why have the summary screen at all?

Tradition is not a good answer. You don't retain things from preceding games without understanding why they were in those games first. Each of those games were different and had different things in the summary screens because they met different purposes for each game. Even if they were similar, they were still distinct. So it this game. It's not AoE. It's not Starcraft, Civ V. It's 0 A.D. An utterly disparate game.

At the moment the summary screen has no purpose. It achieves nothing. It's a random collection of stats and numbers. I am by no means saying take out the summary screen, but it kind of needs a more holistic approach.

Edited December 22, 2013 by hollth

[Mythos_Ruler]

So why have score? Why have the summary screen at all?

Tradition is not a good answer. You don't retain things from preceding games without understanding why they were in those games first. Each of those games were different and had different things in the summary screens because they met different purposes for each game. Even if they were similar, they were still distinct. So it this game. It's not AoE. It's not Starcraft, Civ V. It's 0 A.D. An utterly disparate game.

At the moment the summary screen has no purpose. It achieves nothing. It's a random collection of stats and numbers. I am by no means saying take out the summary screen, but it kind of needs a more holistic approach.

I agree that things need a holistic, well-designed approach, that takes into account usefulness. Let's not forget presentation as well. The way stats are presented is almost as important as why we present them.

In the end, I think we do things because people request them. People want to see certain statistics for their own reasons. But we also fall into the trap where 3 or 4 people request something and then all of a sudden we think it's an important feature without asking "why." 3 or 4 people requesting something out of tens of thousands of users and a few thousand forum members does not a priority make.

Let's answer these questions:

Why do we want a statistic screen?

If we have a good reason to have one, what statistics are important to how the game is played? Another way of asking this is, which aspects of the game are useful to quantize onto a statistics screen? Right now we have a very shotgun approach.

What is the best way to convey these statistics to the players? Graphs? Raw numbers? Some other method?

What is the best way to present these statistics in a way that is both aesthetically pleasing and consistent with the visual presentation we want to make for the game?

[sanderd17]

The scores are a bit arbitrary, in fact they only show the breakdown between economy and military. the total score helps a bit with visualising that breakdown, but has very little purpose on its own.

The stats on the other pages are more interesting. They show a more detailed breakdown of your play style. Like if you just spawn masses of units, or if your primary goal is claiming more land, or if you invest in defensive structures.

As such, you can see what playing style counters an other playing style, and learn from it. Though I have to agree the current stats don't show all of that, but that's why we appreciate someone working on it.

Edit: To answer Michael's questions:

* Why do we need a statistic screen?

To check out the play style of different players, see how well it was executed, and check what strategy wins from another, or which strategies are cooperating well.

* Which stats are usefull?

We will only know this after playing some games with them implemented. If they're not implemented, we can only guess how important they will be, or how much information they will contain. If the design is made rather modular. It should be really easy to add or remove a stat.

* What is the best way to show the stats to the player?

A combination of graphs and numbers. Though we are limited by the GUI in this case. Nobody ever got around creating graphs in the GUI. But Santa at least wants to try. Lets see how this turns out and which stats can be better represented as graphs. There will obviously be some stats that will be better shown as graphs. But as long as we don't have the code, we don't really have to discuss this.

* What's best for aesthetics?

That's something for the art team. I'm no master in GUI aesthetics, as long as it's somewhat consistent, I'm ok with it.