[interface] Suggestions for improving the game interface

[ktchong]

Newbie here, has some suggestions to help improve the game's interface:

1. The "Unit List" menu item and "Recall" action dialog should show a unit's upkeep value.

A unit's upkeep-per-turn is an important information that is not currently available anywhere in the game's interface, menus or dialogs.


2. The right panel should have a "Profile" button for the selected unit, so new players will not have to access the "Unit List" menu item, "Recruit" action dialog or "Recall" action dialog to access the currently selected unit's profile information.

As a new player, I frequently access my current units' profile information to become familiarized with my units' statistics, strengths and weaknesses. I frequently have to bring up the "Unit List", "Recruit" or "Recall", then find and select a unit from the list, and then click on its "Profile" button to get to the information I want. That involves three steps every time I want to check a unit profile, and is becoming a hassle. I would like to be able to quickly and conveniently check on my currently selected unit by just clicking on a "Profile" button in the right panel.

Better yet, allow users to turn the "Profile" button on and off in Preferences. The default should be on, as new users are the most likely to appreciate unit profile information.


3. When I click on a unit, I would like to see the unit's (minimized) portrait instead of its icon like in most strategy game.

Currently, the game does not let us see a particular or selected unit's portrait. The Help menu lets us see a general unit's portrait, but not that of a character or special unit (like Konrad,Erlornas or Doeran.) The only way to see a character's/special unit's portrait is when some scripted event is triggered. I want to see their portraits because portraits give units more character and life.

Better yet, give users the option to show the unit's portrait or icon in Preferences. Let us decide if we want to see a unit's portrait or icon in the right panel, "Unit List" menu, and "Recruit" and "Recruit" actions.


4. I would like the game (campaigns in particular) to register and show a unit's "strongest enemy killed".

This may involve some overhaul of how the game works every time a unit kill an enemy, but it is a simple change. You just have to set up a unit to hold the information for its "strongest enemy killed". Whenever a unit kills an enemy, the program compares the enemy's power (based on its maximum damage = damage x attack) to the previously killed enemy's power. If the current enemy power is greater than the previous enemy, replace the unit's "strongest enemy killed" data with the current enemy.

I thought the game could use a few more improvements, but I did not write them down as I was playing the game. I can't think of them right now, but I will add to my suggestion later when I remember them.


5. Let user move the side-panel from right to left. This is more of a left-brain versus right-brain preference. This should be an easily implementable feature whose customizable option (right- or left-panel?) is available in Preferences.


6. Preferences -> Advanced should be organized hierarchically. Currently, they are disorganized and not even listed alphabetically. TPreferences -> Advanced seems to have collected more and more options over time, as the developer added more and more items and just throw everything into it.

[Iris]

I’m moving this to Ideas, where it belongs.

1. The "Unit List" menu item and "Recall" action dialog should show a unit's upkeep value.

A unit's upkeep-per-turn is an important information that is not currently available anywhere in the game's interface, menus or dialogs.

The unit’s upkeep cost is equal to the unit’s level unless it has the Loyal trait; both can be seen in pretty much all places where unit information is presented.

2. The right panel should have a "Profile" button for the selected unit, so new players will not have to access the "Unit List" menu item, "Recruit" action dialog or "Recall" action dialog to access the currently selected unit's profile information.

Tried clicking on the unit type label in the main sidebar, or right clicking on the unit and choosing “Show Description”?

3. When I click on a unit, I would like to see the unit's (minimized) portrait instead of its icon like in most strategy game.

There are some technical reasons against this (downscaling portraits look bad, 205x205 versions are provided but a lot of detail is lost, volunteer artists aren’t generally going to go through the effort of providing custom small portraits, etc.), but the experimental “Widescreen” theme shows downscaled portraits in one of the sidebars IIRC.

[ktchong]

Added suggestions no. 4 and 5:


4. I would like the game (campaigns in particular) to register a unit's "strongest enemy killed" and show that information in its profile.

This may involve some overhaul of how the game works every time a unit kill an enemy, but it is a simple change. You just have to set up a unit to hold the information for its "strongest enemy killed". Whenever a unit kills an enemy, the program compares the enemy's power (based on its maximum damage = damage x attack) to the previously killed enemy's power. If the current enemy power is greater than the previous enemy, replace the unit's "strongest enemy killed" data with the current enemy.

I thought the game could use a few more improvements, but I did not write them down as I was playing the game. I can't think of them right now, but I will add to my suggestion later when I remember them.


5. Let user move the side-panel from right to left. This is more of a left-brain versus right-brain preference. This should be an easily implementable feature whose customizable option (right- or left-panel?) is available in Preferences.

1. The unit’s upkeep cost is equal to the unit’s level unless it has the Loyal trait; both can be seen in pretty much all places where unit information is presented.

I know a unit's upkeep cost = level unless it has the Loyal trait. Every and any information - including every unit's profile and statistics - is available outside the game. Theoretically, the game can leave out any and every information and tell the users to look up the information themselves. However, the interface would be more user-friendly, intuitive and accessible if the information is readily available on-screen.

Is a unit's upkeep cost relevant to the gameplay? Yes. Then that information should be readily and intuitively available in the game somewhere. Then the user should not have to remember, know or look up the information elsewhere for themselves. That is the general rule of thumb for making a user-friendly interface.

2. Tried clicking on the unit type label in the main sidebar, or right clicking on the unit and choosing “Show Description”?

I clicked on the unit type label in the main sidebar. A transparent overlay with the unit description appears, but it does not show any detailed information

I did not know about the right-clicking on the unit. That is exactly the problem. It was not intuitive.

3. There are some technical reasons against this (downscaling portraits look bad, 205x205 versions are provided but a lot of detail is lost, volunteer artists aren’t generally going to go through the effort of providing custom small portraits, etc.), but the experimental “Widescreen” theme shows downscaled portraits in one of the sidebars IIRC.

So let users have the option to decide whether they want to see the portrait or unit in the side panel. If users feel the down-scaled portraits look bad, they can just switch over to icons. (And the result of a down-scaled portrait are determined by the downscaling software/algorithm.)

[Iris]

I know a unit's upkeep cost is its level unless it has the Loyal trait. Every and any information - including every unit's profile and statistics - is available outside the game. Theoretically, the game can leave out any and every information and tell the users to look up the information themselves. However, the interface would be more user-friendly, intuitive and accessible if the information is readily available on-screen.

The explanation of upkeep and pretty much all common gameplay aspects can be found in the in-game Help, actually. While I’m all for user-interface intuitiveness, sometimes it’s necessary to keep things clean and tidy and avoid presenting redundant information, which would be the case should upkeep be displayed in the same places as the unit’s level and traits. Since Wesnoth is a rather complex turn-based strategy game and not a platformer or first-person shooter, I don’t think it’s too much to ask from the users to read the in-game help before making (potentially wrong) assumptions about gameplay mechanics just by looking at terse chunks of data. There’s a lot that the user interface cannot, and should not, cover.

That said, the Tutorial should probably cover this and other aspects in a more “user friendly” manner too, but someone has to do the writing and coding and nobody from the development team so far has had the time and energy to do so, especially considering the plan since 2007 or so has been to rewrite it entirely — I think there’s someone from the community working on an alternative right now.

I clicked on the unit type label in the main sidebar. A transparent overlay with the unit description appears, but it does not show any detailed information

My bad. Clicking only works on 1.9.10, not 1.8.

That’s still rather unintuitive, all right...

I did not know about the right-clicking on the unit. That is exactly the problem. It was not intuitive.

But this is not unintuitive, at least not for anyone who has used a standard, modern PC graphical user interface. The only situation in which I could see this being a problem is people with single-button mice, but I believe the platform in which those tend to be used (Mac?) also provides a method to work with that limitation nevertheless.

So let users have the option to decide whether they want to see the portrait or unit in the side panel. If users feel the down-scaled portraits look bad, they can just switch over to icons.

I don’t think making this kind of things optional makes sense in general. We already have an excess of options in Preferences, but they are mostly provided to turn off potentially distracting features, or default choices that can severely impact performance on older systems. This is just my opinion, of course.

[ktchong]

The explanation of upkeep and pretty much all common gameplay aspects can be found in the in-game Help, actually. While I’m all for user-interface intuitiveness, sometimes it’s necessary to keep things clean and tidy and avoid presenting redundant information, which would be the case should upkeep be displayed in the same places as the unit’s level and traits. Since Wesnoth is a rather complex turn-based strategy game and not a platformer or first-person shooter, I don’t think it’s too much to ask from the users to read the in-game help before making (potentially wrong) assumptions about gameplay mechanics just by looking at terse chunks of data. There’s a lot that the user interface cannot, and should not, cover.

A unit's upkeep cost should immediately be apparently. Right now, I have to look at a unit's levels and traits -- two values -- to determine its upkeep cost, instead of quickly and efficiently looking at one value.

Also, some new players may not even know units have upkeep because they just jump in and play. Or, a lot of gamers play like me: we start playing first without reading the "boring" documentations. We figure out and learn what we can from the interface itself, which should be intuitive, helpful, self-explanatory. Later on, as we play the game, we refer to in-game help and on-line manuals to look for information that is relevant to my current gameplay/progress.

Take myself as an example: I actually did not know a unit has an upkeep cost for quite a while, even after I had completed a couple campaigns, because the game interface and menus do not even mention units have an upkeep. Then I was not quite sure if Loyal units costs only 1 to upkeep per turn or have no upkeep at all, and finding the pertinent information about upkeep and how Loyal exactly affects upkeep is actually not that simple. So I know the lack of upkeep values being displayed for individual units is, not good. Also, does main characters like Konrad has upkeep? They do not have the Loyal trait. I would not know because there is no simple way to find out.

And it is just one more line of information, which is important and varied (somewhat) for every unit. Upkeep cost is really an information that should be displayed for every unit.

I don’t think making this kind of things optional makes sense in general. We already have an excess of options in Preferences, but they are mostly provided to turn off potentially distracting features, or default choices that can severely impact performance on older systems. This is just my opinion, of course.

Another suggestion:

6. Preferences -> Advanced should be organized hierarchically. Currently, they are disorganized and not even listed alphabetically. TPreferences -> Advanced seems to have collected more and more options over time, as the developer added more and more items and just throw everything into it.

[Iris]

6. Preferences -> Advanced should be organized hierarchically. Currently, they are disorganized and not even listed alphabetically. TPreferences -> Advanced seems to have collected more and more options over time, as the developer added more and more items and just throw everything into it.

Actually, from 1.9.10 onwards, they are listed alphabetically as a temporary solution for the dialog’s organization problem and the current need to rewrite it for GUI2 so more people than just myself will be able to take care of it correctly. I also moved some of the most important items to more visible places in 1.9.9, and demoted others from elsewhere.

If you are going to suggest ideas, I advise you read the sticky at the top of this section (the Ideas forum, rather than Users’ Forum) and give the development version a try, especially since it’s already in beta phase in preparation for 1.10.

Also, some new players may not even know units have upkeep because they just jump in and play. Or, a lot of gamers play like me: we start playing first without reading the "boring" documentations.

People playing like that and refusing to do otherwise will miss quite a lot either way and unless they start reading about the gameplay basics and the units’ various special attributes (such as traits, abilities and resistance/movement cost/defense stats) they will get frustrated and quit.

[ktchong]

People playing like that and refusing to do otherwise will miss quite a lot either way and unless they start reading about the gameplay basics and the units’ various special attributes (such as traits, abilities and resistance/movement cost/defense stats) they will get frustrated and quit.

Please do not try to be Apple and dictate how everyone should or should not do something or play a game. Everyone is an individual: everyone has different style, different habit, different preferences. Everyone has a different way of learning new things. Some learn by reading. Some learn by doing. Some learn by imitating. It is really not up to you or me to tell them how they should play or learn a game. Some people like to sit down and read before they get started. Others like to jump in and learn by doing/playing. The best you can do is to give provide an intuitive, self-explanatory interface that merges together learning and playing, and provide on-line help articles and user manuals for people who want/need it.

Also, people should always play a game first and before reading through a long manual. What if you read through a manual and then find out the game sucks or is buggy? Or that you do not enjoy the game? Then you would have wasted your time reading the manual that has become useless. (The manual is not exactly useful if you decide you do not want to play the game anymore.) Play the game first. If you like the game, then invest the time into reading the manual.

I can tell you at least half-a-dozen reasons why reading the manual before playing a game is not the ideal way to learn the basics of the game. Here is the most relevant reason: the Help (manual) in Battle for Wesnoth is not exactly designed for people to just sit down and read through. When a new player has just installed and started playing the game, most articles are missing from the Help. New players do not yet have access to article for units/abilities that they have not yet encountered. So it is not exactly helpful to tell new players to just read the Help or manual before they play the game, because most articles are missing in the beginning. It seems to me that the Help manual in Wesnoth is designed to be read as players go along and as articles start to be filled-in.

[Iris]

Also, people should always play a game first and before reading through a long manual.

Hence the Tutorial and the beginner-level campaigns, A Tale of Two Brothers, The South Guard and Heir to the Throne.

I can tell you at least half-a-dozen reasons why reading the manual before playing a game is not the ideal way to learn the basics of the game. Here is the most relevant reason: the Help (manual) in Battle for Wesnoth is not exactly designed for people to just sit down and read through. Most articles are missing from the Help initially. For example, new players can not access or read the article for units/abilities they have not yet encountered or gained. So it is not exactly helpful to tell new players to just read the Help or manual before they play the game, because most articles are missing in the beginning.

All the gameplay articles are available in the beginning, and only unit abilities, type descriptions and weapon specials depend upon encountered units. Of course, when the player encounters a unit type, ability or special they’ve never seen before they can just access their description in the Help, most likely coming from a Profile button from the Attack dialog or Recruit list, or the Unit Description command in context menus.

This happens to be an ancient design choice that (to my knowledge, anyway, I admit this could be merely the opinion of this single old-timer) none of the developers feel needs to be changed as many of us like to be surprised, and people who really, absolutely must see a list of every single unit type can use a certain console command or visit units.wesnoth.org. That said, 1.9.10 also introduces an Advanced Preferences option to disable the encountered units limitation.

[ktchong]

This happens to be an ancient design choice that (to my knowledge, anyway, I admit this could be merely the opinion of this single old-timer) none of the developers feel needs to be changed as many of us like to be surprised, and people who really, absolutely must see a list of every single unit type can use a certain console command or visit units.wesnoth.org. That said, 1.9.10 also introduces an Advanced Preferences option to disable the encountered units limitation.

I like the design of Help to open up new articles as new units are encountered. It fits my learning style. However, it is also less useful for people who like to sit down and read through the whole thing in one sitting, and think that they have already read the manual.

Anyhow, back to my first suggestion: I still think an unit's upkeep cost - which is different for each individual unit - should be shown somewhere in the interface, preferably as a column in the Recall action dialog. A most useful feature would let players sort recall-able units by their upkeep costs, so players can quickly recall everything with no or cheap upkeep costs. It is not helpful to have only the manual telling players how to calculate/determine each unit's upkeep value for themselves.

[Alarantalara]

Upkeep costs are hard for the game to calculate in the locations you most care about them. Would you still want the feature if it presents the wrong information?

Upkeep costs can and have been modified dynamically using WML. In the campaign Son of the Black Eye, the upkeep cost for all units is changed part way through the campaign but the effects are not applied until after the unit is recruited/recalled. Thus the values presented in the recruit and recall dialogs for upkeep would be incorrect.

What is the upkeep cost for a unit that might get the loyal trait when recruited? Just because non of the built-in units can get this trait randomly doesn't mean someone can't create one that does.