| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 14 post(s) |
Geanos
V I R I I
Triumvirate.
11
   |
Posted - 2015.02.27 11:10:29 -
[1] - Quote
I suggest you guys take a look at World of Tanks tank type icons. They are clearly visible and extremely easy to recognize at any resolution. |
Geanos
V I R I I
Triumvirate.
11
|
Posted - 2015.02.27 13:04:52 -
[2] - Quote
Marcus Gord wrote:I don't even see icons anymore. i see THE COLUMN THAT TELLS ME WHAT IT IS BY NAME.
the fact that something is a cruiser is not as relevant as the fact it is a Guardian, for example.
why do we even have icons?
Hahahaha, epic! As long as the icons show only the class of ship, we're still ending up with a crowded overview (need for type column for ex). So I guess, the change is about making the overview more eye candy.
|
Geanos
V I R I I
Triumvirate.
14
|
Posted - 2015.03.02 10:57:23 -
[3] - Quote
ISIS icons are very nice and they look wonderful there, but they don't mix well with the overview. Why not use clear shapes that would show a clear progression for each category of ships or drones? I made a quick mockup to illustrate this:
Combat - circle & diagonal lines
Industrial - triangle & horizontal lines
Drones - square & vertical lines
It is not polished but you'll gt the idea |
Geanos
V I R I I
Triumvirate.
16
|
Posted - 2015.03.02 14:30:06 -
[4] - Quote
Geanos wrote:ISIS icons are very nice and they look wonderful there, but they don't mix well with the overview. Why not use clear shapes that would show a clear progression for each category of ships or drones? I made a quick mockup to illustrate this: Combat - circle & diagonal lines Industrial - triangle & horizontal lines Drones - square & vertical lines It is not polished but you'll gt the idea
Quick update. The reason is that we need to see at the first glance with what kind of ship we are dealing and rely less on the type column for identification:
- transport ship icons should have their own category
- I want to see at the first glance the ship type (logi, recon, etc) - huge new player bonus
- I want to see at the first glance the tech level (T1, T2, T3) - huge new player bonus
There it is |
Geanos
V I R I I
Triumvirate.
18
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 10:40:21 -
[5] - Quote
Tippia wrote:Geanos wrote:Quick update. The reason is that we need to see at the first glance with what kind of ship we are dealing and rely less on the type column for identification: - transport ship icons should have their own category - I want to see at the first glance the ship type (logi, recon, etc) - huge new player bonus - I want to see at the first glance the tech level (T1, T2, T3) - huge new player bonus There it is One problem: you can't use colour to denote ship classes or types. Colours are already used to signify allegiances, aggression levels, social connections and lots more. If you colour the icons, they will get lost in that and cause all kinds of issues for colour-blind people. The colours you've picked have suddenly erased all possibility of distinguishing different types of neutral, low-sec, same-corp, and bluelist/alliance ships. While it might conceivably be possible to find colours that are not represented by the colour options for overview and bracket settings, it would be next to impossible to find ones that don't clash in some way, or that offer sufficient separation in every combination. Also, while your original idea definitely has some merit, you need to test it with the various +, -, and skull tags that will be superimposed on top of them and see what that does to the clarity of what you want to convey. The originals look small enough that there won't be much overlap, but on the other hand, that might in and of itself hit that you're not using the available space efficiently.
You've seen the dev feedback on our feedback... Why bother? As I see it, they are not looking to make a better overview, they just want to replace the icons. It's not like the overview is probably the most important part of the UI  |
Geanos
V I R I I
Triumvirate.
18
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 10:43:39 -
[6] - Quote
epicurus ataraxia wrote:CCP Surge wrote:Paddy Finn wrote:How about putting a numeral 2 or 3 in a corner for Tech 2 or Tech 3 ships to differentiate them in a fight. We realize thereGÇÖs a huge strategic differences between ships of different tech levels and faction ships even though they carry the same base hull. And we want to figure out how we can include that information as well. One option on the table is simply adding a new overview column for tech type. This way the info can be toggle-able for those who want it, and wonGÇÖt further complicate the already attribute-dense icon space. That is a great idea as it allows you to reduce the information density by avoiding trying to condense it into a small icon, the ability to select icon size is also very welcome. Thanks for taking note of our concerns.
We already have the type column btw. Nice dev solution.
|
Geanos
V I R I I
Triumvirate.
18
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 11:08:14 -
[7] - Quote
epicurus ataraxia wrote:Sgt Ocker wrote:Darkblad wrote:lexa21 wrote:Thats the same product of a stomach as new UI icons and styles. Please give us a chance that there will be a button "i dont have to use this". It'd help those that want to stick with the old UI (and Icons/Brackets) but CCP repeatedly explained that this would also require maintenance of two versions (or more as time passes and further things change that some might dislike). Given that there are still issues with the current UI, it's probable that none of the different versions that'd be kept available would ever be finished. (I think I can already tell what the response to this matter of finished will be). Yep. These icons are what we're getting, the blog and feedback thread is just a kind of courtesy because CCP are still trying to make players think they have a say in the direction of their game. The UI icon changes alone show CCP don't really care what players think or want. Feedback in that thread was majorly against the changes but CCP had already made their decision and now we just have to live with it. According to Dev feeback, these changes are for a specific technology which most of us won't consider using for 4 or 5 years due to the current cost of the technology. The majority will just have to suffer crappy looking, limited information icons so the minority can have icons that look good in a 4k monitor. - - - - - - - - - - Adding another column to the overview to for tech type? Who are these geniuses ? If that extra column for an icon, was used for ALL the secondary info that is confusing the primary icon and making it hard to differentiate, then that would allow the information to be conveyed, rather than reading the text information as currently. It has potential as an idea.
Can you please explain why do we need another type column? Don't we have one already? Do you use it? |
Geanos
V I R I I
Triumvirate.
18
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 11:41:28 -
[8] - Quote
epicurus ataraxia wrote:
The idea of condensing the differentiating items into a second overview icon column, will be much smaller than that column, and simplify the primary icon, by seperating out the secondary attributes, to this new icon column. If done well, this would tell you the critical information at a glance, and offering the secondary info into an easily differentiated new icon, rather than overloading the primary with so much info that all is lost in the confusion.
Looking into the already existing "Type" column, I can see at a glance all the extra critical information that I need. Like I said, except for when shooting NPC crosses, when the "Type" column duplicates the "Name" column, the "Type " column gives us all the info we need. What CCP needs to do is to replace the DB entries for NPC's in that column. Please try the "Type" column outside missions or complexes and you'll see what I mean.
Also, you got me confused... So this "overload" doesn't apply to the new drone icons? Or they just don't matter? |
Geanos
V I R I I
Triumvirate.
18
|
Posted - 2015.03.03 14:16:57 -
[9] - Quote
Looks like 2013 was the year when CCP Arrow & co did the overview job. |
| |
|