New PTE Icons Discussion - New Icons Suggested

Discussion in 'Planetary Annihilation General Discussion' started by wpmarshall, June 29, 2014.

  1. wpmarshall

    wpmarshall Planetary Moderator

    Messages:
    1,868
    Likes Received:
    2,989
    So, for those who haven't explored the PTE recently there are a lovely set of new icons however, yes I know 'WIP' is synonymous with the PTE however the issues I'd like to highlight here relate more to a person like myself with certain visual problems and disabilities.

    Just before however a couple of tid-bits of feedback relating to the icons -
    -Double click select appears to be less responsive or reliable to actually select all of the unit double-clicked.
    -Selection 'boxes' for the icons at range perhaps need to be increased especially for the faster moving air-craft which are a nightmare to select from icon view individually without using a drag select box (which can pick up unwanted units)

    Now, the main issues I have with the icons.
    Having bad short-sighted vision and an astigmatism, from a distance or even up closer to the screen or unit I find it quite difficult to tell certain units and structures apart. I can only do so if I squint nearly all of the time. Especially when you get to the distinction between certain units which I shall list a few examples of below:
    ANT v SPINNER
    SINGLE v DOUBLE laser turret
    INFERNO v VANGUARD
    [Most of the t2 tanks from one another]
    DOX v GRENADIER

    And there are more. I feel the issue is not the icon shape but the symbols within them however with regards to t2 where the shapes are subtly different, again, it is somewhat too subtle and I would greatly appreciate it if these concerns could be addressed.
    Especially from a caster's perspective I do not want to be squinting at the screen 100% of the time in order to keep up with the cast and what's going on.

    A couple of solutions I have considered would be reducing the number of icons which have symbols in them e.g. Tank and Dox have a little line in them which I feel is not required and its existence only serves to add extra information to read and decipher, and in my case - squint at.

    I think the issue with the old icons is not the size or necessarily the shape (apart from AIR) but the symbols inside them which simply causes too much confusion because in order to know the unit represented one must first see the icon, then the colour, then the shape and then the symbol. If one can remove the final step the process of identification will be so much easier. Again with regard to shape differentiation - such differences cannot be subtle (e.g. new inferno having wierd sticky-outy corners. - However I can distinguish the inferno from ANT and SPINNER. But not so easily from T2 vehicles.
    (Personally I really liked the double link for T2 and single for T1 as for my vision it meant that if the icon had a thick border it was T2 - Heuristics and mental shortcuts are beautiful things in strategy games, so long as the game itself respects their existence).

    A final note - orbital icons are much more difficult to work with and see past because they are so large and obscure the icons behind them.

    TLDR - PTE icons need to be seriously reconsidered.

    Discuss.

    (Also, thanks for taking the time to read this post thoroughly as I feel, especially from a disability standpoint it is a really important topic)
    cwarner7264 and tohron like this.
  2. Teod

    Teod Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    483
    Likes Received:
    268
    Any screenshots for those who haven't explored the PTE?
    Quitch likes this.
  3. thetrophysystem

    thetrophysystem Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,050
    Likes Received:
    2,874
    Orbital being big definitely is a necesary evil, because those icons are usually what you zoom to that extreme for and are otherwise hard to pull out unless they have size and top layer priority. Commander should be only overlaying icon to them.

    Besides that, idk, a lot of the old icons were fine as were. The orbital is welcomed change.
  4. wpmarshall

    wpmarshall Planetary Moderator

    Messages:
    1,868
    Likes Received:
    2,989
    I think you may be missing the main point I was making with regard to the icons - recency in action.
    I'm more fussed about icon differentiation at a glance (or in my case even for a longer viewing time).

    Going back to get screenshots for those like @Teod I also notice that the Double lines outlining the icons for the T2 factories have become much thinner as well, adding to potential difficulties.
  5. mered4

    mered4 Post Master General

    Messages:
    4,083
    Likes Received:
    3,149
    Absolutely. I'll shoot some off a replay. *Replay doesnt work dang it*
    I'll play another game and Take some.
    I agree with his point about the top line on the Dox, Slammer, Leveler, and Ant Icons. It's confusing when looking at large armies where all you really see from a distance is lines, and not necessarily their direction. Vanguards are particularly hard to distinguish, because they're icon design does not scream *I AM A VANGUARD THAT SHOOTS BIG THINGS THAT HURT*. It just is a cross and a line with a slightly weird outline (Which I like for the Inferno). This outline is SLIGHTLY larger than that of a regular unit....which makes it confusing.

    Shellers are just strange, imho. I see them and I'm like a Pelter? What? Oh it moves....

    The AA vehicle is so difficult to distinguish from regular tanks in a few moments that I usually just send my air force over the army to see if there is any AA.

    This is after 4 games of large scale battles, mind. Things will certainly become easier as time goes on, but my initial impression is one of confusion towards these parts.

    Orbital:

    This part of the game is in need of being LESS of a *oh-ho! We added in a higher air layer for laughs!* and more of a *Orbital so serious* type of deal.
    With that in mind, I love the new Orbital Icons' animations for hovering, Size, and Significance.

    That is, unfortunately, also their downfall.
    When I see an icon that looks like a RADAR ICON for the Anchor, I DO NOT think, OOO that's an ANCHOR.

    I think, why does FredMcBob have 15 radars above his base? Huh?
    Thought that one would have been shot down at the daily office coffee break, Uber. :p

    I think there needs to be a distinguishing factor between the icons of the Orbital Radars and the Ground Radars. For example, observe my amazing MS Paint skillz:
    [​IMG]

    Also, can we please change the Laser Icon to something that doesn't mean *I shoot at things in my layer* (A straight line at the top like the Ant and Dox)? Like, for example, a down arrow for emphasis.
  6. wpmarshall

    wpmarshall Planetary Moderator

    Messages:
    1,868
    Likes Received:
    2,989
    So the following screenshots were taken to try and emphasise my point - try and view the image as a whole as if you were quickly surveying the battlefield.
    Those screenshots with orbital feature at least ONE of each of the 'basic' orbital by which I mean launcher stuff, an anchor and an orbital factory.
    Images:
    1. Vehicles
    2. Air
    3. Bots
    4. Base and Defence
    5. Base + Units (Try and see what's going on as if you were in the middle of a game scouting an enemy)
    6. Orbital above your base
    7. Viewing orbital from the side (Like I frequently used to do in order to see them better)

    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG] [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    [​IMG]
    liquius likes this.
  7. lucidnightmare

    lucidnightmare Member

    Messages:
    35
    Likes Received:
    35
    Perhaps it might be worth taking a look at the Nato symbols and the design ideas behind them?

    While possibly confusing at first, once basic familiarity with the symbols is achieved, rapid differentiation can occur. In addition, symbols can be combined to represent new units that are able to be rapidly interpreted (eg. "Mechanized infantry" is a combination of "infantry" and "tank" symbols)


    From wikipedia: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/NATO_Military_Symbols_for_Land_Based_Systems

    [​IMG]
    PeggleFrank likes this.
  8. japporo

    japporo Active Member

    Messages:
    224
    Likes Received:
    118
    SupCom used a modified version of the NATO unit symbols, so many people are familiar with them already.

    IIRC, there's already a mod for PA that replaces the unit icons with SupCom like unit symbols, though the name escapes me.
  9. tripper

    tripper Active Member

    Messages:
    135
    Likes Received:
    48
    I would just like to point out that easily recognized icons are only part of it, as you show in this image:

    [​IMG]

    All the icons are an unholy mess. Add to this a typical mid-late game scenario, where you may have legions of Aircraft patrolling your base, clusters of units, dotted throughout and masses of orbital assets cluttering the sky. Unit selection becomes an extremely exasperating and a painstakingly slow process, it's near impossible to achieve anything as specific as 'just' sending ground vehicles to a location. Particularly as the UI is pretty much on it's knees by now and about as responsive as a drunk sloth.

    What is desperately, desperately needed, is a way to isolate layers from selection actions. So the nth layer can be effectively made immune to selection, so that you might select all ground units and send them to defend without sending all your patrolling aircraft too. Or deal with orbital invasions without accidentally sending ground units to their doom, or the wrong bloody direction!
  10. emraldis

    emraldis Post Master General

    Messages:
    2,641
    Likes Received:
    1,843
    I find the new symbols aren't nearly as consistent as they were before... I liked the double-border of the old symbols indicating if something was T2. Now not everything has that anymore...
  11. squishypon3

    squishypon3 Post Master General

    Messages:
    7,971
    Likes Received:
    4,357
    Not to mention a lot of these are really confusing to me. I have no idea what a line with two dots next to it means for example...
    stuart98 likes this.
  12. mered4

    mered4 Post Master General

    Messages:
    4,083
    Likes Received:
    3,149
    In the PTE, there is ZERO UI lag until you have filled up at least 3 planets with units.
  13. tripper

    tripper Active Member

    Messages:
    135
    Likes Received:
    48
    This pleases me to no end but still, If I'm using only using my air layer defensively for the most part, would it not make sense that I have the choice to temporarily turn off air layer selection in order to expedite ground based actions?
  14. aevs

    aevs Post Master General

    Messages:
    1,051
    Likes Received:
    1,150
    I like some, I don't like others.
    Example of something I like:
    the + used for fabricators is better than the . from before.
    Examples of things I don't like:
    the / used for AA should be ^ in my opinion.
    The turret icons are not exactly clear.
    The combination of strange symbols for different units in asymmetrical ways, such as "_.." or "-ϵ" is not very informative and not easily recognizable from a distance. I believe it's best to keep unit icons relatively symmetrical, or to at least keep their specialization centered on the icon.
    Also; perhaps the metal icons could use a more informative symbol.
  15. mered4

    mered4 Post Master General

    Messages:
    4,083
    Likes Received:
    3,149
    I suggest learning how to use the CTRL and SHIFT click functions on the lower left corner unit boxes. Really helps when selecting specific units.

    Also, there was a way to turn off the icons of the ground and air layer just by zooming out a certain distance or selecting an orbital unit. It didn't stop you from selecting ground, but it made it a hell of a lot easier. I just haven't found the right settings to make that happen in some of the new builds.
  16. bgolus

    bgolus Uber Alumni

    Messages:
    1,481
    Likes Received:
    2,299
    Orbital icons are a little messed up in the PTE build, they're supposed to be partially transparent so they're not as overbearing.

    Right now icons are all on (per planet) or all off. There's no "only show one strata" of icons. Unit selection is also always just selecting the actual unit rather than being able to select the icons directly. These are things I'd love to get improved but they're both fairly big changes to what we currently do and it's low priority right now over optimization work.

    Here's what some of the icons mean right now:
    _ hits ground
    / hits air
    | hits orbital
    _. hit ground at long range (_.. even further)
    _♦ (bar * diamond) hit ground, high damage
    _ € (bar * euro like symbol) hit ground, flame
    ͡ (dome curve) radar
    + fabricator
    x explosive

    There's further work on these, but there's obviously more to do here.
  17. mered4

    mered4 Post Master General

    Messages:
    4,083
    Likes Received:
    3,149
    Could you guys start by making the Asymmetrical icons symmetrical??

    I think that would certainly help things by a ton.

    Also, as Marshall said, attempting to differentiate units by both size and symbol is just....not consistent. I couldn't have told you what you just told me by looking at a unit. Vanguards and Infernos especially, moreso Fighters/bombers.
    PeggleFrank and aevs like this.
  18. wondible

    wondible Post Master General

    Messages:
    3,315
    Likes Received:
    2,089
    I could make a mod to do this, but I shouldn't be spending time on that right now.

    The Icon Atlas is live. Set visibility: hidden on the icons you don't want and they go away. opacity: 0.5 allows for a little more subtlety.
  19. bgolus

    bgolus Uber Alumni

    Messages:
    1,481
    Likes Received:
    2,299
    I'm not sure if changing the strategic icon atlas while the game is live actually updates the icons. If it does, that certainly would let you do that. It's an rather expensive way to handle it though.
  20. Corang

    Corang Well-Known Member

    Messages:
    772
    Likes Received:
    313
    If you don't want to do this I can throw something together by tomorrow night

Share This Page