Slitherine

Here is an update on stat icons, strategic map and minimap.

Icons were made bigger, and many were changed:


Minimap was changed to use colors to indicate terrain, because in this size scaled sown main map is very hard to understand. Added rect to indicate current scroll position, unit indicators and victory hexes indicators.


Strategic map was changed to show units instead of flags.


What do you think? Is it a step forward or step back?

Well I like the idea of Icons vice flags for the strat map - has a better feel for me.

Very nice additions! I think I will have to see the strategic map in action to know for sure how well it conveys the state of the battle, but the screen cap looks really good. I really think it is great that your team continues to show that they value the feedback they are getting this forum. I love seeing feature requests and improvements come to life each week

Movement type is still missing.

I liked the old range icon better.

If the two tanks side by side is initiative, which I assume it is, I like it better than the daggers, but it the two tank turret were pointed at each other(just the turrets not the whole chassis) it would be better.

Let me get my little assistant and we'll compare old (left)to new(right)...


$ vs Stack of Coins.
I initially mistook the pile of coins for oil drums/fuel. Even so, still superior to the dollar sign in my opinion. If the coins could appear less like drums though, that would be good. Add a third, very short pile of coins in front of all the stacks, and slightly to the left of the current center stack and that should dispel the similarity to drums.

Loafers vs Dress shoes.
About the same, no real change.

Fat binoculars vs skinner binoculars.
I almost prefer the old ones, but not a big difference.

Arrow over ruler vs crosshair over ruler.
I don't like this change, much prefer the old icon.

Daggers vs tanks.
Improvement, but I can improve it even more:


Dot vs man.
Man wins. Hence why dots are extinct, just like saber tooth tigers.

Block vs tank.
Tank wins, as we can see here.


Wings under vs aircraft inside.
Aircraft wins. Ever see a bird take on an airplane? No, Sean Connery from Indiana Jones doesn't count. That was a flock of birds, not just one.
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Nf1bx37lh_M

Swiggle under vs anchor inside.
I prefer the anchor instead of the symbol that represents 'approximately', but I'm not completely sold on an anchor being the best choice. It's better, but perhaps an actual ship silhouette would be even better?

Hard line under vs tank in shield.
Tank is pretty much a solid winner. Clearly conveys 'defense' and 'hard target'.

Wings under plane in shield.
Plane wins, same reason as tank in shield above.

Body armor vs infantry in shield.
I'm a little conflicted. The infantry is better, but I'm not sure that's the best infantry image to use. That posture looks like where you would find infantry in open terrain, running with gun up. Perhaps crouching(camping) would better represent close quarter combat. Or him being armed with a grenade or molotov instead of holding up a gun.
Posture more like the ones seen here:

Or

Or

Not the entire images of course, but the posture of the man with the grenade.

With regards to:


My only quarrel is that non-Victory Hex cities (white dots) are identical to airfields (white dots). The two should be different colors, because the difference between the two is fairly significant.

And for the strategic map:

I'll miss seeing the flags, but units representation is clearly more useful. Would it be possible to simply use the flag as a background behind the unit image, instead of the green/black background, or would that not look good? Also, from that picture all units are active, what, if any, plan is there to show inactive, or partially inactive, units on the strategic map? Partially inactive such as 'moved but not fired' or 'fired but not moved'.

Kerensky wrote:I'll miss seeing the flags, but units representation is clearly more useful. Would it be possible to simply use the flag as a background behind the unit image, instead of the green/black background, or would that not look good? Also, from that picture all units are active, what, if any, plan is there to show inactive, or partially inactive, units on the strategic map? Partially inactive such as 'moved but not fired' or 'fired but not moved'.

I'm afraid that using flags as background will turn the map into a mess... And frankily, I always thought that the flags are marginally useful in this game, only the side of a unit really matters.

Active/inactive units will be indicated. Perhaps we can use the same animation we end up with for strength labels on the main view. But this is not implemented yet.

Kerensky wrote:With regards to:


My only quarrel is that non-Victory Hex cities (white dots) are identical to airfields (white dots). The two should be different colors, because the difference between the two is fairly significant.

Any specific suggestions how the airfields should be marked?

Kerensky wrote:Let me get my little assistant and we'll compare old (left)to new(right)...

Thanks for feedback, I tend to agree with many of your points. Not sure about initiative, it looks wider than other icons?

2All: I would really love to hear some more opinions on these icons. If you don't like them, tell us. If you like them, tell us too. Thanks!

Rudankort wrote:Any specific suggestions how the airfields should be marked?

I would imagine another color would be sufficient. I don't know what color an empty VH currently uses (all the VHs are occupied by enemy units in your picture), but I assume it's white with the ring around it. Begs the question, what does a city like Moscow look like, with multiple adjacent VH?

As for airfields, I don't know what colors are left available to choose from, but I would go with a sky blue or grey.

Come to think of it though, maybe cities, VHes, and airfields should be symbols or letters and not dots? A white dot does not show ownership, a symbol that can be colored does. Something to consider.

Rudankort wrote:2All: I would really love to hear some more opinions on these icons. If you don't like them, tell us. If you like them, tell us too. Thanks!

Quote for emphasis.

As for tanks facing each other, I had to make it wider or the tank barrels would overlap. If they were trimmed, it would fit better. I don't think two tanks squaring off is perfect, but it's a lot less confusing than a sword and a dagger, especially considering the WW2 era.

How about this for initiative:



Grab the tank from the hard defense icon, turn it to face to the right, put a little golden arrow at ~30 degrees over it's head, et voila.

Kerensky wrote:Grab the tank from the hard defense icon, turn it to face to the right, put a little golden arrow at ~30 degrees over it's head, et voila.

What is that golden arrow supposed to mean?

I just said gold as that's the font color of all the icons. In the sample I made, it's black, but the idea is that it wasn't going to be black on the icon.