Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 33 post(s) |
Oktura Ostus
Native Freshfood Minmatar Republic
2
|
Posted - 2015.05.18 00:34:21 -
[121] - Quote
+1 for switching cruiser and battleship icons.
but, as for me, Titan is not like enhanced version of dread, and it deserves own icon. |
Nagarythe Tinurandir
House of Freedom The Pursuit of Happiness
199
|
Posted - 2015.05.18 11:36:21 -
[122] - Quote
So after further testing, as well as looking at the tables you provided, I finally uncovered what was bugging me. It's inconsistency in the icon progression (ships and their 'relation' to each other) plus disconnection of similar behaving entities through vastly different icons icons, such as Stargates and Wormholes for example.
To illustrate what I mean, let's have a look at the combat ships. Combat-oriented ships have pointy icons that get bigger, as the combat ships get bigger. So far, so good. I like the line below the frigate and cruiser icon to symbolise destroyers and battlecruisers, respectively. But than, Battleships happen, introducing the chevron shape - totally different from its smaller brethren - just for dreads to be represented by a icon looking almost like the cruiser icon. Squares for the carriers are fine, repetition of the underlined symbol for the beefed-up version, so called super carrier is good. that's how you repeat a theme. But then again chevrons for the titan, now two of them. Why is a titan is closer to a battleship than a dread?It would make more sense to me if you switched the dread icon with that of the battleships. As a follow-up, the newBS/oldDread icon would need further distinction from the cruiser icon. Maybe take the cruiser icon and slap the frigate icon turned upside-down under it, with a short line in between. industrial section is fine. Maybe the barge/industrial icon could be a little bit longer in the vertical direction, or the mining frigate icon could convey more speed.
Fighter/Fighterbomber/Logistic and to some extend the attack drones are way to similar. I like the attack/ECM/Sentry differentiation in general, so maybe consider the following things:
- only one icon for salvage/mining drones, no big differency here, doing almost the same thing. Not important to discern them on a glance. overview is sufficient. - logistic drones: center circle, like the ECM/sentry drones, but put two or three brackets on only one side of the circle, with brackets getting bigger the further they're away from the center circle - like so but pretty -> o))) - attack drones: give them the TIE fighter shape, would be more in line with sentry and ECM but different as well. |o| - give the shuttle a destroyer/BC treatment - capsule with some line underneath. looks more like a rookie now, but essentially shuttles are secondary plating on a capsule ^^ - possible design elements for identifying drones: small circle in the middle of the icon, geometric lines around them to emulate form (sentries) or function (my proposed logistic drones - resembles the RR rays coming of the drones)
All the other space entities:
- why are the asteroids so odly shaped? They look like a mix between a circle and a triangle. Please decide on one of the two and stick with it. I am voting for triangles in good roid-belt tradition. - gas cloud looks weird as well. Have you tried going for the stylised cloud (like soundcloud with only three bulbs)? keep it's recognisable and simple. - POS modules. Not using them much, how relevant will these be after the structure revamp? I'd say an icon for (each) for tower, offensive, defensive, industry and misc. ? - And finally stargates/ wormholes. The first one still looks odd in its filled state. Right now Gate and Hole share some similarities. On the proposal list they look totally different. Why not keep them as they are on TQ right now? Fit's even in the new set. Another possibilty I can imagine is keeping your new Wormhole icon and make the Stargate look related. Like a Wormhole with some stuff around (e.g. a torus) showing that it is artificial? The two are basically doing the same. The icons should reflect that.
|
Circumstantial Evidence
179
|
Posted - 2015.05.18 15:35:32 -
[123] - Quote
I like it |
Ensign Kenway
BAZINGA.
0
|
Posted - 2015.05.18 21:46:40 -
[124] - Quote
Please fill player ship icons interior.I'm using no standing background color.I cannot understand any ship hollow icons.If this new icons will apply, you must replace with new icons in ISIS. |
Christopher Mabata
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
321
|
Posted - 2015.05.19 00:55:02 -
[125] - Quote
Some of the icons are alright, others like the gates and deployables need a new coat of paint. But for the most part as a player who has spent years getting used to the current system i actually just opted to remove the icons column from my overview entirely and now just sort by name and distance, at least until i have had enough time to adjust again. Which was pretty much what i did anyway except for getting to stations or gates in the first place, but still an option to keep the current system would be a very appreciated feature by plenty of players im sure
#USA #PODSQUAD #Waitthisisn'ttwitterthenewlookconfusedme
|
Vic Jefferson
The Greater Goon Clockwork Pineapple
294
|
Posted - 2015.05.19 03:32:04 -
[126] - Quote
Please, please, PLEASE have an option to turn this OFF. I understand that you are working hard to make things better for the majority of players, and its appreciated, but I literally cannot play the game with the confusion this causes.
I seriously cannot even play the game with more than a few ships on grid. PLEASE have an option to disable this.
Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X
|
bigbud berito
Kids with Catalysts Clockwork Pineapple
1
|
Posted - 2015.05.19 03:35:47 -
[127] - Quote
Vic Jefferson wrote:Please, please, PLEASE have an option to turn this OFF. I understand that you are working hard to make things better for the majority of players, and its appreciated, but I literally cannot play the game with the confusion this causes.
I seriously cannot even play the game with more than a few ships on grid. PLEASE have an option to disable this.
At least give us the opportunity to not use these brackets, they are horrible and alot of people i've talked to just hate them. |
Gene Hawking
The Greater Goon Clockwork Pineapple
0
|
Posted - 2015.05.19 03:36:12 -
[128] - Quote
Do not like this change. |
Damishu
Life. Universe. Everything. Clockwork Pineapple
1
|
Posted - 2015.05.19 03:39:16 -
[129] - Quote
These new brackets are incredibly annoying. While looking at a large grid, it is very hard to make sense of what is what (Drones vs ships especially blend together) |
kai il
Stimulus Rote Kapelle
15
|
Posted - 2015.05.19 03:39:56 -
[130] - Quote
Do not want. |
|
Vic Jefferson
The Greater Goon Clockwork Pineapple
295
|
Posted - 2015.05.19 04:03:43 -
[131] - Quote
Like, if the complexity of the drone glyph/character/symbol whatever, were drastically reduced, this would work. The main problem here is that the drone shapes and patterns are too similar in complexity to the ship ones - differentiation is hard.
Like, the shuttle icon is perfect for a drone: simple. Or even filled in smaller shapes for drones and boxes for ships if you are too convinced on that. There is WAY too much overlap currently.
Vote Vic Jefferson for CSM X
|
Damishu
Life. Universe. Everything. Clockwork Pineapple
2
|
Posted - 2015.05.19 04:05:03 -
[132] - Quote
I feel like having unique icons for all different drone types puts this over the critical mass for info on screen. Lots of fights are heavy on drones and having to pick them all out just becomes too much. Having the option for users to toggle the detailed icons for Drones / Ships / Deployables in groups would be a good idea. |
X4me1eoH
AirGuard LowSechnaya Sholupen
181
|
Posted - 2015.05.19 08:57:07 -
[133] - Quote
Attack drones look like frigates. In battle, frigates and attack drones will be difficult to discern. May be make the icons drones as they are now? But sentry drones icons like as the picture. |
thowlimer
Roprocor Ltd
31
|
Posted - 2015.05.19 09:51:44 -
[134] - Quote
One thing that just struck me is how these new icons would look in Alliance Tournament
Imagine the commentators trying to find a good view angle/zoom with these
Seriously though would be interesting if some mockup battle on that scale could be used for reference in CCP, you have a few old commentators on board allow them to utilize your new icons and see how they find the readability in such a situation.
|
uhnboy ghost
retard hills
32
|
Posted - 2015.05.19 10:34:16 -
[135] - Quote
this is really bad, i cant see what im fighting it just a bigg cluster f***
//uhnboy 84K probe scans in 2014 http://i.imgur.com/Uaid5iu.png
|
Ensign Kenway
BAZINGA.
0
|
Posted - 2015.05.19 16:26:46 -
[136] - Quote
I liked previous icons : http://cdn1.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/66945/1/Concept_NewOverviewIcons_PlayerShips_V2.png (Filled interior icons include player ships) - http://cdn1.eveonline.com/www/newssystem/media/66945/1/Concept_NewOverviewIcons_NPCShips_V2.png (NPC Ships). Please bring back to SISI again. |
Almost Hum4n
Almost Human.
8
|
Posted - 2015.05.19 16:51:01 -
[137] - Quote
I've tried getting used to the new icons but they are just terrible, it may be cuz I'm an old bastard but this change is not needed. |
Desert Ice78
Gryphons of the Western Wind
456
|
Posted - 2015.05.19 16:54:17 -
[138] - Quote
I found this iteration an improvement in general, however I still have some reservations:
- I still find it a problem telling the NPC icons apart from the non-NPC. This is information I need with just a glance at the overview, and I'm not getting it. - Icons that are filled and not filled with shading - problem is with the opaqueness of the fill. The background colors are changing constantly while I pan the camera around - now your looking into deep space, now at a nebula, now directly at the sun. This changes the effect of the fill shading so you never become a costumed to viewing it. You end up double checking to see is that filled, or not fill, or just the background. - I still try to warp to a mobile depot when I want to go back to the station. Could a size difference be used to differentiate? Even just a slight difference to better distinguish between the new 3 sizes of "deployables." See the above comment as regards the fill shading.
I am a pod pilot:
http://dl.eve-files.com/media/corp/DesertIce/POD.jpg
CCP Zulu: Came expecting a discussion about computer monitors, left confused.
|
Sean Roach
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
1
|
Posted - 2015.05.19 20:31:40 -
[139] - Quote
My impressions. Combat is fine. Industrial is fine. Misc. is fine. I think you should give more thought to the drones. I'd recommend trading Fighters with Mining, so the mining drones have the same blunt top as the mining ships, then recreate the fighter-bombers based on what the fighters end up being. Likewise, I'd consider redesigning logistics. Salvage is unambiguous, within this sample, but doesn't really share any design motif with anything else. Then there is the pictograph soup of the POS set. Perhaps, give salvage the same blunt end as the industrial ships, esp as the next page of icons is far more varied in design elements. Might want to reconsider the Logi and EW drones, as well, and give them elements that indicate their relationship to the fighter drones. Maybe use the design tweaks of the POS batteries, underneath the carat of the fighter drone. The 'x' from the EW battery is an easy relationship to make, if the same 'x' were put under the carat to indicate an EW drone. A wrench icon under a carat might make a good logi drone icon.
On the other page... First column is good. POS, however.. The Mobile Reactor shape reminds me of an Erlenmeyer flask. Might that be a better symbol for Mobile Lab? Perhaps the classic 3 electron orbit atom symbol for reactor? In general, it'd take me a good, long while before those symbols started to mean anything to me at a glance.
|
Bagrat Skalski
Poseidaon
8533
|
Posted - 2015.05.20 10:59:55 -
[140] - Quote
Very nice.
CCP, make it so.
Custom ship skins | Since 2014 | Character creator style "repaint" | Bring back the dream
|
|
Damishu
Life. Universe. Everything. Clockwork Pineapple
3
|
Posted - 2015.05.20 12:45:00 -
[141] - Quote
Bagrat Skalski wrote:Very nice. CCP, make it so.
These really are much better. |
Martin Gregor
Kriegsmarinewerft Goonswarm Federation
4
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 10:31:31 -
[142] - Quote
+1 Very intuitive and simple. -> Give her a cookie for that!
|
Bagrat Skalski
Poseidaon
8539
|
Posted - 2015.05.21 19:40:20 -
[143] - Quote
I like how the icon for battleship is more bulky than cruiser. And cruiser have these wings as to suggest it is more nimble than bulkier battleship.
All capitals have the same theme going, and they still are recognizable.
Custom ship skins | Since 2014 | Character creator style "repaint" | Bring back the dream
|
Primary This Rifter
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
838
|
Posted - 2015.05.24 02:35:38 -
[144] - Quote
Honestly this **** looks like busywork.
What's even the point of doing this? It seems like you're just changing things for the sake of changing them at this point. Stop. |
Gustav Mannfred
Summer of Mumuit
110
|
Posted - 2015.05.24 11:10:30 -
[145] - Quote
I would prefer, if Npc icons remain as they are right now, theres nothing wrong with them. Also wrecks and cans should be the same as they are on Tq.
i'm REALY miss the old stuff.-á
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&find=unread&t=24183
|
Hakaari Inkuran
State War Academy Caldari State
276
|
Posted - 2015.05.24 12:40:27 -
[146] - Quote
X4me1eoH wrote:Attack drones look like frigates. In battle, frigates and attack drones will be difficult to discern. May be make the icons drones as they are now? But sentry drones icons like as the picture. Sentry drones look fine there, agreed. And the only differentiation required for drones is small/medium/large. |
Uriel Paradisi Anteovnuecci
Jovian Labs Jovian Enterprises
18626
|
Posted - 2015.05.24 17:32:26 -
[147] - Quote
I did my own take on icons- it's rough, but I'm working on them.
http://go-dl1.eve-files.com/media/1505/iconsrough.png
All of them have transparency. The only ones I really don't like of the current SISI ones are the BS ones- they don't look BS-like, at least to me.
"A City made of Dreams...is built in heaven" - GÖâ-
GPƒ U-Ç+¬ß¦ç-ƒ's Sߦ¢ß¦Å-Ç-Å
|
Dangeresque Too
Pistols for Pandas
167
|
Posted - 2015.05.25 02:22:12 -
[148] - Quote
Uriel Paradisi Anteovnuecci wrote:I did my own take on icons- it's rough, but I'm working on them. http://go-dl1.eve-files.com/media/1505/iconsrough.png All of them have transparency. The only ones I really don't like of the current SISI ones are the BS ones- they don't look BS-like, at least to me. I see very little difference between this is the gawdawful first attempt from CCP. Terribad all around, the red crosses are better to be honest. Just make red crosses for everyone (or white crosses for players).
These are more the way we need to go, with some modifications:
I still say they need to fix some of the extra variations they are forcing like individual icons for shuttles and noobships etc. They need to just Keep It Simple...
Primary This Rifter wrote:Honestly this **** looks like busywork.
What's even the point of doing this? It seems like you're just changing things for the sake of changing them at this point. Stop. Yup, and when you take into account the complete lack of any honest consideration for any of the feedback its even moreso looking like they are just doing this to give a team something to do and to heck with what the people that use it have to say. What was the huge outcry that deemed the old brackets so unusable that they felt the need to justify all this? |
Primary This Rifter
4S Corporation Goonswarm Federation
840
|
Posted - 2015.05.25 04:06:28 -
[149] - Quote
Dangeresque Too wrote:Primary This Rifter wrote:Honestly this **** looks like busywork.
What's even the point of doing this? It seems like you're just changing things for the sake of changing them at this point. Stop. Yup, and when you take into account the complete lack of any honest consideration for any of the feedback its even moreso looking like they are just doing this to give a team something to do and to heck with what the people that use it have to say. What was the huge outcry that deemed the old brackets so unusable that they felt the need to justify all this? Once this hits TQ people are going to be upset.
They probably won't leave the game over it, but it'll certainly contribute to their distrust and irritation with CCP for screwing with yet more things that aren't broken. |
Dangeresque Too
Pistols for Pandas
168
|
Posted - 2015.05.25 12:46:50 -
[150] - Quote
Primary This Rifter wrote:Once this hits TQ people are going to be upset.
They probably won't leave the game over it, but it'll certainly contribute to their distrust and irritation with CCP for screwing with yet more things that aren't broken. Just think they were just about to actually push this to TQ last patch but pulled it at the last second... thank goodness. But then they put it right back up saying that we the players just needed to take more time to get used to them because there was nothing wrong with the new ones. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 [5] 6 7 8 9 10 11 .. 11 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |