14 replies to this topic

[Leafia Barrett]

I remember MW2:M having an option like this, where instead of using the paper doll to display your mech's integrity, you could have HP bars for each structure.

My idea is something like this:

The black represents armor, and the gray represents internals. Both would have colors, getting more red as they weaken (like the paper dolls), and the armor bars & internal bars would function independent of one another. Undamaged sections are green.

Now, since I'm bad at explaining, I'll give an example instead.
Let's say I'm in a Jenner-D. This is my mech's current paper doll - I've been kicked around pretty good.


When you filter out the transparency and such from the colors, you end up with something like this:


In the heat of battle, I usually find that looking at the color doesn't really indicate much, especially when the entire mech is roughly the same color. All I get is it's either meh or about to fall off. For example: the "yellows" in that image are very much orange- I put a swatch of actual yellow next to a swatch from the arm armor for comparison.

Now, for the sake of the example, let's say my left arm hasn't taken any damage, and my right arm has some internal damage, I guess from overriding a heat shutdown or something.

hurr I'm so good at photo manipulation

Again, filtered to just pure color:


Now, with the HP layout I used above, this would correlate to:


something along those general lines. (It's not exact, I don't know the exact relation between color and HP percentage or anything, this is just a mockup.)

This is roughly what they would look like in place of the paper doll:


And a variant with the blacks replaced by white for more visibility:


Now, obviously I'm not a graphic designer, and let's not mince words here, these mockups are pretty god-awful. Don't judge by art quality- if PGI was to do something like this, they'd obviously make it a lot better than mine. It's the concept I'm looking for feedback on.

[warner2]

+1!

Has been asked for before, most players I know moved to the bar display in MW4, it gives you more detail.

[Greeve]

i like the idea!

[Blyze]

I like this idea!

Alternatively, if the 'paperdoll' display is preferred, a better way of displaying armor status might be to vary the width of the 'armor' line according to the remaining armor there. Something like this:

[Merit Lef]

Did a great job explaining your view point and I agree that it does gives more detail to the user. But that's why I voted no. The paper doll is not 100% accurate and some interpretation is required by the user. And that interpretation adds a level of risk to the combat and influences player style. A little uncertainty is beneficial in trying to mimic reality, and plays into the fog of war of not having 100% awareness on the battlefield. And again good post.

[Leafia Barrett]

Merit Lef, on 12 August 2013 - 11:20 AM, said:

Did a great job explaining your view point and I agree that it does gives more detail to the user. But that's why I voted no. The paper doll is not 100% accurate and some interpretation is required by the user. And that interpretation adds a level of risk to the combat and influences player style. A little uncertainty is beneficial in trying to mimic reality, and plays into the fog of war of not having 100% awareness on the battlefield. And again good post.

In that case, they should at least make the colors more distinct. Uncertainty is good, but absolute ambivalence is not.

[General Taskeen]

That's in the other Mech games called HTAL display or something, except its vertical instead of horizontal.

[Strum Wealh]

I voted "yes", "different idea" (to be explained shortly), and "different idea" (to be explained shortly).

Specifically, I think the current "paper doll" implementation should remain the default setup, and that the bar-style display should become an available for one's own 'Mech as a standard option, while becoming an option for the current target if/when, and only if/when, BAP is installed on the 'Mech & functional & not being inhibited by ECM.

As it happens, the both the display represented by the current "paper doll" and BAP offering more detailed info are supported by BT.

Tactical Operations, page 219 said:

Any unit that has active sensors (is not shut down, its sensors are not destroyed and so on) can always tell the following basic information without any scanning required.

How much armor is left in a given location. The sensor readings follow a color code, based on the percentage of armor left compared to its standard undamaged condition: 100-90 percent = green; 90-50 percent = yellow; 50-10 percent = red; 10-0 percent = black.

The unit’s current heat level. Once again, the sensors follow a color code: 1-7 = blue; 11-14 = green; 15-21 = yellow; 22+ = red.

Tactical Operations, page 219 said:

Any time a unit enters the range of any type of active probe operated by an opponent, the player must reveal that unit’s record sheet to the opponent. The player must leave the sheet face up and available for the opponent to examine as long as the unit remains within the probe’s effect radius.

Any unit mounting an ECM suite can potentially defeat an active probe on a 2D6 dice roll against a Target Number of 8. If the roll fails, the unit must reveal its information.

That is, I would personally prefer to see basic sensors give what we're getting now (plus some general indication of the current target's heat level heat level) for the target & advanced active sensors (e.g. Beagle) giving more info (e.g. exact armor amounts by location, remaining ammo counts, exact heat percentages, etc) on the target but being affected by ECM when outside of the countering/"burn-through" distance (by reverting the display back to "basic sensor mode"), while always remaining a toggable option for one's own 'Mech (the equivalent, in TT terms, of always having access to one's own record sheet).

[Leafia Barrett]

Strum Wealh, on 12 August 2013 - 05:19 PM, said:

I voted "yes", "different idea" (to be explained shortly), and "different idea" (to be explained shortly).

Specifically, I think the current "paper doll" implementation should remain the default setup, and that the bar-style display should become an available for one's own 'Mech as a standard option, while becoming an option for the current target if/when, and only if/when, BAP is installed on the 'Mech & functional & not being inhibited by ECM.

As it happens, the both the display represented by the current "paper doll" and BAP offering more detailed info are supported by BT.
That is, I would personally prefer to see basic sensors give what we're getting now (plus some general indication of the current target's heat level heat level) for the target & advanced active sensors (e.g. Beagle) giving more info (e.g. exact armor amounts by location, remaining ammo counts, exact heat percentages, etc) on the target but being affected by ECM when outside of the countering/"burn-through" distance (by reverting the display back to "basic sensor mode"), while always remaining a toggable option for one's own 'Mech (the equivalent, in TT terms, of always having access to one's own record sheet).

The underlined portion is all I was actually talking about in the OP, hehe... I wouldn't be opposed to having the BAP increase the amount of data that targeting gives us, mind you.

[Steel Talon]

Use doll as HP bar like in Planetside 2, or place %/HP text inside of the parts.

Doll part: (CT,arm,...)
┌─────┐
│armor% │
│----------- │
│HP% │
└─────┘

8 HP bars below each other arn't really clear either.

Edited by Steel Talon, 28 September 2013 - 03:40 PM.

[RandomLurker]

I definately miss my HTAL readout. On that note, there's no need to design a mockup. Previous games all had the same HTAL layout and it worked great in all of them.

[Johnny Z]

With the OP on the idea it isnt a bad idea to make the hp visuals look better, but not for the bars idea. A hologram might be an idea. Maybe a different style than whats in now. I am guessing the clan mechs will have something different maybe.

No matter which idea turns out best, i prefer as little ui cluttering up the nice view of the field and cockpit itself as possible.

Edited by Johnny Z, 29 September 2013 - 03:15 AM.

[Stealth Fox]

DEAR LORD IN HEAVEN YES!

Sorry.. got a bit excited.. See..I'm color blind.. the paper doll doesn't tell me crap until it is to late. I would LOVE to have the HP Bar, it's all I used in MW2 and on.
PGI, We NEED THIS!

[Generic Internetter]

At the very least they should change the colours to match the BT quoted above.
Red, orange, yellow.... That's barely a step up from monochrome.

I do agree with one of the above posts however, that precise numbers should not be given. In real practical reality, structural integrity and armour can't be quantified into simple numbers or percentages. Real life is actually muchy more random and luck-prone than what we see in MW. Also, impact angle á lá War Thunder...?

Sure this isn't reality, but if you want quality you need to do what feels real and natural, unless the thing you are doing is specifically and deliberately a departure into another sensible system.

Really, armour and structure should used versus a damage dice roll, more realistic. If they did damage vs armour/struct calc right, the paperdoll would just drop from green to red for damaged, then red to black when destroyed; No gradients or percentages involved.

[Alardus]

Merit Lef, on 12 August 2013 - 11:20 AM, said:

Did a great job explaining your view point and I agree that it does gives more detail to the user. But that's why I voted no. The paper doll is not 100% accurate and some interpretation is required by the user. And that interpretation adds a level of risk to the combat and influences player style. A little uncertainty is beneficial in trying to mimic reality, and plays into the fog of war of not having 100% awareness on the battlefield. And again good post.

Thats what I was going to say.

On the other hand, it is no harm, no foul, to include these meters if they:

A. Flash like the paperdoll does, keeping things uncertain in the heat of combat.
B. Aren't correlated to numbers.
C: Have a delay, like the paperdoll does, of when it actually goes down to the next value from damage.

Anyway, I'm sure pros have some color reference for their paperdoll sitting right next to them, or some other way to translate what they see into a value with low margin of error. Someone even did a test of gathering all the data of armor and internal color scheme through the various points of damage. That is known stuff. Such lengths "pros" go to is no different than this:

https://dl.dropboxus..._brightness.jpg

What you can see is someone intentionally borking the color scheme of the game to have much better visual acquisition. This has distinct game advantages, and the person who made the picture then complained that PGI just made the game look bad, because they're trying to cheat and make the colors look bad themselves.

See here: http://www.nogutsnog...hp?topic=3023.0

So while I'd like to say that fog of war and uncertainty should play a role in the game, "enterprising" individuals (a.k.a. cheaters against the spirit of the game, if not the rules) will get around these things with tools. That simply leaves people who don't use those tools at a disadvantage.

Edited by Alardus, 30 January 2016 - 10:31 PM.