View Issue Details
| ID | Project | Category | Date Submitted | Last Update | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 0021478 | AI War 2 | Gameplay Issue | Aug 9, 2019 1:04 am | Oct 21, 2019 4:50 pm | |
| Reporter | zharmad | Assigned To | Chris_McElligottPark | ||
| Status | feedback | Resolution | open | ||
| Product Version | 0.879 Many Fixes and the Tutorial Rework Starts | ||||
| Summary | 0021478: Visual indicators of explored, explored by nanites, watched, and permanently watched. | ||||
| Description | There is no clear visual difference between each of these options, where I would like to be able to tell which planets I have updated intel on. "Explored" and "explored by nanites" gives players a snapshot of the ships and structures that were on that planet. I can understand that the two don't work together in the sense that you can't gain additional scouting by hacking-exploring planets elsewhere in the galaxy, and then trying to grow from there by taking command stations. However, there isn't much to tell me at a glance that I have permanently watched a planet versus if I have explored it some time ago. The ships present when the planet is explored will keep moving unless they disappear into a wormhole, and so a planet might appear to be watched when it is isn't, potentially harboring something important. I guess I've adapted by keeping track of the strength count. This allows players to know where a macrophage roughly is, for instance (it's 35 strength). Would be nice to have Ctrl-hightlight also show watched status, over just explored/unexplored. Similarly if there's a way to differentiate watched/explored when on a planet. | ||||
| Tags | No tags attached. | ||||
|
|
If you hover over a planet in the galaxy view it tells you it's status Explored vs Watched vs Permanently Watched right now. Or at least, it's supposed to. For explored planets it tells you how long ago they were explored too. And if you look at an Explored vs Watched planet there are significant visual differences. Explored planets looks like they have TV static on them. |
|
|
> If you hover over a planet in the galaxy view it tells you it's status Explored vs Watched vs Permanently Watched right now. Yes this does - but then I'd have to hover over every planet to check which ones I have decided to hack and place on permanent watch. I usually forget over the course of an expansion to hack things here or there and end up never using the feature. > Explored planets looks like they have TV static on them. Not on my computer. Unexplored planets have TV static on them. Explored planets have no TV static. |
|
|
There is kind of a small indicator. Watched AI planets, like those touching your Homeworld, have just the fully coloured in circle. If it's only explored, there's a - shape in it. For neutral, watched is a grey hexagon. Explored only has a smaller hexagon inside. Bit of a rubbish image to show it. Also images of the Explored static, and the Unexplored distortion. |
|
|
Thanks for the pictures, as this confirms that I do not see the static for explored planet. Here are a series of three images showing an unexplored planet, explored then watched by hacking. The distortion is similar. Instead of the static image, my game gives a black starfield. The effect of watching the planet is the appearance of background nebula, which is more obvious at some planets. I'll check if I'm using the in-chip intel GPU instead of the dedicated GPU. |
|
|
The last uploaded are indeed using the integrated graphics processor. Here are equivalent screenshots using the dedicated NVidia GPU, on a planet with a proper nebula. It looks like the static field is being replaced by a blank, semitransparent, black mask. The dots arising from the static overlay are incredibly hard to see on a laptop 4K monitor, and my screenshot of the background nebula is still rich in colour such that it's not noticeable unless juxtaposed as a before and after. (Don't know why Steam gives a different JPG compression size.) I can also understand the galactic iconography now after you explained it - I wasn't sure what the line in the circles and the hexagons were. Would suggest that this be made somehow consistent. |
|
|
The last uploaded are indeed using the integrated graphics processor. Here are equivalent screenshots using the dedicated NVidia GPU, on a planet with a proper nebula. It looks like the static field is being replaced by a blank, semitransparent, black mask. The dots arising from the static overlay are incredibly hard to see on a laptop 4K monitor, and my screenshot of the background nebula is still rich in colour such that it's not noticeable unless juxtaposed as a before and after. (Don't know why Steam gives a different JPG compression size.) I can also understand the galactic iconography now after you explained it - I wasn't sure what the line in the circles and the hexagons were. Would suggest that this be made somehow consistent. |
|
|
More thoughts about iconography... Would it be possible to use shape purely for unexplored, explored and watched status, and colour purely for ownership status? For example, triangle = unexplored, hexagon = explored, and circle = watched. Marking all "neutral" territories with hexagons doesn't help with gameplay decision-making when it is in fact occupied by a 200 Strength Nanocaust swarm. I was also intuitively expecting the hexagons to morph back into (green) circles when the (green) marauders built an outpost there, effectively preventing players and AI from building their own command stations. Thankfully, the team color palette doesn't have a neutral grey to fully confuse players with actual neutral territory where no command stations are. |
|
|
Strange. I can see the static fine in both of your examples, though the first one mainly only on the planet. My monitor is pretty old as well. Those ideas are intriguing, though I don't do anything like that. I believe planet names take on the colour of the owning faction? |
|
|
SInce I can't see it, can you tell me what the size of the static grains are, and the pixel density of your monitor?This 2015 monitor is 4K on 15" with slight blurring - it's designed to not be possible to see details at the level of individual pixels, with each pixel being physically ~0.1mm. (Applications without DPI scaling are a pain, so is most of Linux.) Yes, the planet names take on the colour of the faction, and will be gold when nobody owns it. The normal behaviour is to not show these names until mouse hover or the Ctrl is held down. One game I was following an ant-trail of superficially grey planets back towards the AI world, taking out Nanocausts along the way. |
|
|
If you'd like planets owned by factions that can capture planets (like Nanocaust or Marauders) to take on the colour of that minor faction, that's doable, but open a new bug report for it so we don't sidetrack this one. |
|
|
Okay I got it, zoomed in on my own image and can now diagnose why. It's my brain doing spatio-temporal averaging (this one I know). (1) I don't have the visual acuity to see 0.2~0.3mm detail at my sitting distance on my monitor. It auto-blurs into an average shade unless I downscale to 1080p. Shade is too close. (2) Even playing at 1080p AI war, the 30+ FPS refresh rate blends it in again in game. In any case, it doesn't seem like the static layer works well on planets in shadow over a black starfield. The static is only present on the green crescent here? and I think such examples cover about 10~15% of the planets depending on seed. |
|
|
It's very hard to tell what the size of one is, but using calipers (yeah...) it kinda seems like 0.3mm? Monitor is from using a ruler (I don't remember what it is), 24", 1920x1080. This thing is...probably 9-10 years old? I know very little about monitors and the like. |
|
|
Thanks - this helps. I think I would be able to see the static using your monitor, clearly as a single image, but a bit blurry in-game (its intended effect). |
|
|
How are things feeling on this front, now? Things do indeed show indicators for their explored status, but I'm curious if it's clear enough. |
| Date Modified | Username | Field | Change |
|---|---|---|---|
| Aug 9, 2019 1:04 am | zharmad | New Issue | |
| Aug 9, 2019 1:50 am | BadgerBadger | Note Added: 0052496 | |
| Aug 9, 2019 3:47 am | zharmad | Note Added: 0052497 | |
| Aug 9, 2019 7:18 am | RocketAssistedPuffin | File Added: PlanetIndicators.jpg | |
| Aug 9, 2019 7:18 am | RocketAssistedPuffin | File Added: ExploredStatic.jpg | |
| Aug 9, 2019 7:18 am | RocketAssistedPuffin | File Added: Unexplored Distortion.jpg | |
| Aug 9, 2019 7:18 am | RocketAssistedPuffin | Note Added: 0052498 | |
| Aug 9, 2019 8:51 am | zharmad | File Added: 20190809224702_1.jpg | |
| Aug 9, 2019 8:51 am | zharmad | File Added: 20190809224711_1.jpg | |
| Aug 9, 2019 8:51 am | zharmad | File Added: 20190809224717_1.jpg | |
| Aug 9, 2019 8:51 am | zharmad | Note Added: 0052500 | |
| Aug 9, 2019 9:06 am | zharmad | Note Added: 0052501 | |
| Aug 9, 2019 9:07 am | zharmad | File Added: 20190809230005_1.jpg | |
| Aug 9, 2019 9:07 am | zharmad | File Added: 20190809230018_1.jpg | |
| Aug 9, 2019 9:07 am | zharmad | File Added: 20190809230027_1.jpg | |
| Aug 9, 2019 9:07 am | zharmad | Note Added: 0052502 | |
| Aug 9, 2019 9:25 am | zharmad | Note Added: 0052503 | |
| Aug 9, 2019 10:44 am | RocketAssistedPuffin | Note Added: 0052504 | |
| Aug 9, 2019 11:11 am | zharmad | Note Added: 0052505 | |
| Aug 9, 2019 11:18 am | BadgerBadger | Note Added: 0052506 | |
| Aug 9, 2019 11:33 am | zharmad | File Added: 20190810012731_1.jpg | |
| Aug 9, 2019 11:33 am | zharmad | Note Added: 0052507 | |
| Aug 9, 2019 11:41 am | RocketAssistedPuffin | Note Added: 0052508 | |
| Aug 9, 2019 11:47 am | zharmad | Note Added: 0052509 | |
| Oct 21, 2019 4:50 pm | Chris_McElligottPark | Note Added: 0053818 | |
| Oct 21, 2019 4:50 pm | Chris_McElligottPark | Assigned To | => Chris_McElligottPark |
| Oct 21, 2019 4:50 pm | Chris_McElligottPark | Status | new => feedback |
