Author Topic: Carrier Operations/Interface Suggestion thread  (Read 1335 times)

0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.

Offline SpaceMarine (OP)

  • Bug Moderators
  • Rear Admiral
  • ***
  • Posts: 904
  • Thanked: 877 times
Carrier Operations/Interface Suggestion thread
« on: January 25, 2021, 09:24:49 AM »
In this thread I will be and hopefully others discussing suggestions to improve the interface in which carriers operate as well other ways to simplify and make it easier to understand, to help do this I will keep a list of the suggestions people have that we have agreed on would make the most sense and work at the top of the thread so steve can have a look and decide which ones he would like to do and or focus on.

To help with this I am going to create a template for which people can suggest these improvements so its easier for steve.
The template is as follows:

Suggestion: (for example, "add x button to y screen")
Implementation: (What the suggestion would entail and how it would be implemented)
Pros: (Quick list of benefits that this suggestion would bring)
Cons: (Problems that may arise through adding this suggestion)
Notes: (anything extra you want to say)


I will add my own suggestions here as well, happy discussing! Please make sure to use the template

Suggested Changes:

1.
Suggestion: Add a "land/takeoff" button to the ship list section of the fleet window whenever there is a ship with hangars in the fleet.
Implementation: like the detach button, with this you would be able to box select or control/shift click your fighters in the fleet through the ship list and land them on their assigned mothership as well as have them take off, the main benefits to this are that it would reduce confusion in terms of taking off and would also make landing significantly easier when in a fleet, as currently you would have to detach the fighters then use movement commands to land them.

Now an issue that can arise here is that how would you make the parasites land onto the mothership you actually want them on if they are not already assigned, for this I suggest a possible fix, when using the button with the ship list if you also select the ship which is the carrier in combination with the fighters and then hit the button it will land the fighters onto that carrier and assign themselves, while  if you only select the fighters it will just land all the fighters to any available free hangar space.

Pros:Makes it clearer on what button to click to have fighters take-off, makes it easier to land parasites already within a fleet and overall require less clicks.
Cons: Could be tricky to implement in regards to logic for where to land the parasites and possible other UI implementation challenges could arise.
Notes: My first suggestion regarding carriers let me know if anyone has any further ideas on how this would be better executed would love to hear it.

2.
Suggestion: The ability to auto-distribute CAS fighters to formations with FFD

Implementation:
When there are ground support fighters present, a new tab appears under the relevant body for ground support buttons - when this is selected simply add a new "auto-assign" button that distributes 6 fighters to every formation that has FFD until there are no unassigned fighters left.

Pros: CAS fighters can now be feasibly used in large numbers, allowing them to provide meaningful contribution to a ground battle.
Cons: Lack of control over where the fighters get auto-assigned - one might want only formations in FA positions to receive fighters for example. Also might consider formations with multiple FFD units, does a formation with 2 FFDs get 12 fighters?

Notes:
I make this suggestion because this isn't just a QOL change as far as I'm concerned, CAS fighters are essentially unusable in any meaningful quantity without auto-assignment because of the obscene amount of time it takes to set up even 42 fighters.


3. Suggestion: Add a "Land on mothership and assign as subfleet" order.
Pros: Enable fighter squadrons or other subfleet groupings to land on a new carrier and retain their subfleet instead of forcing the player to re-create the grouping. Presently this option exists only for landing on an already-assigned mothership.
Cons: Adds another order to the order list. Oh the horror.

4. Suggestion: Change default behavior so that click-and-dragging a fleet into another fleet adds the first fleet to the second as a subfleet instead of as an additional group of ships.
Pros: Presently combining fleets as subfleets requires either a 5-second move order or laborious clicking and re-creating of (sub)fleet groupings. The latter is annoying, the former is at best annoying and at worse infeasible e.g. in the heat of battle when trying to coordinate with other fleet movements.
Cons: As this is a change to default behavior it may confuse people. I don't know how other people play the game so it is possible most players' workflows would be significantly disrupted as far as arranging fleets.
Notes: In light of the cons this could be a toggle checkbox in the Fleet window. This is a more general suggestion, but in my experience it interfaces closely with fighter operations due to the reliance on subfleet mechanics to manage fighter groups which is why I mention it here.

5. Suggestion: Implement officer auto-assignments for fighters specifically.
Implementation: Append to the current naval commander auto-assign procedure a step assigning officers with Fighter Combat skills to fighters. I would do this after filling the officer module positions (aux control, main engineering, etc.) since these should be more premium positions, but before the Reaction/Engineering/Tactical for uncaptained warships steps as fighters should be included in those final steps.
Pros: Auto-assign would make use of the Fighter Combat skill, which it currently does not, making the auto-assignments just that much better and integrating game mechanics more thoroughly.
Cons: None.
Notes: I realize this isn't strictly a carrier operations suggestion but I think it is closely enough related to mention here.
« Last Edit: January 26, 2021, 04:52:34 AM by SpaceMarine »
 
The following users thanked this post: serger, Dawa1147

Offline Droll

  • Vice Admiral
  • **********
  • D
  • Posts: 1703
  • Thanked: 599 times
Re: Carrier Operations/Interface Suggestion thread
« Reply #1 on: January 25, 2021, 09:39:15 AM »
CAS fighters are usually assigned to carriers so I'm going to hope that this is the correct place for this

Suggestion:         The ability to auto-distribute CAS fighters to formations with FFD

Implementation: When there are ground support fighters present, a new tab appears under the relevant body for ground support buttons - when this is selected simply add a new "auto-
                            assign" button that distributes 6 fighters to every formation that has FFD until there are no unassigned fighters left.

Pros:                    CAS fighters can now be feasibly used in large numbers, allowing them to provide meaningful contribution to a ground battle.

Cons:                   Lack of control over where the fighters get auto-assigned - one might want only formations in FA positions to receive fighters for example.
                            Also might consider formations with multiple FFD units, does a formation with 2 FFDs get 12 fighters?

Notes: I make this suggestion because this isn't just a QOL change as far as I'm concerned, CAS fighters are essentially unusable in any meaningful quantity without auto-assignment because of the obscene amount of time it takes to set up even 42 fighters.
 
The following users thanked this post: serger, BAGrimm, SpaceMarine, nuclearslurpee

Offline nuclearslurpee

  • Admiral of the Fleet
  • ***********
  • Posts: 2960
  • Thanked: 2222 times
  • Radioactive frozen beverage.
Re: Carrier Operations/Interface Suggestion thread
« Reply #2 on: January 25, 2021, 04:32:04 PM »
Personally in my admittedly limited experience with fighters (I don't use them as much as some as I'm more of a big guns guy), I feel that the interface is broadly usable if a bit unintuitive at first since we essentially give fleet orders instead of land/takeoff orders. However once one knows the mechanic it generally works pretty well, and IMO a few relatively minor QOL changes are mainly needed.

Apologies for fudging the format a bit as some of my suggestions are quite minor.

1. Suggestion: Add a "Land on mothership and assign as subfleet" order.
Pros: Enable fighter squadrons or other subfleet groupings to land on a new carrier and retain their subfleet instead of forcing the player to re-create the grouping. Presently this option exists only for landing on an already-assigned mothership.
Cons: Adds another order to the order list. Oh the horror.

2. Suggestion: Change default behavior so that click-and-dragging a fleet into another fleet adds the first fleet to the second as a subfleet instead of as an additional group of ships.
Pros: Presently combining fleets as subfleets requires either a 5-second move order or laborious clicking and re-creating of (sub)fleet groupings. The latter is annoying, the former is at best annoying and at worse infeasible e.g. in the heat of battle when trying to coordinate with other fleet movements.
Cons: As this is a change to default behavior it may confuse people. I don't know how other people play the game so it is possible most players' workflows would be significantly disrupted as far as arranging fleets.
Notes: In light of the cons this could be a toggle checkbox in the Fleet window. This is a more general suggestion, but in my experience it interfaces closely with fighter operations due to the reliance on subfleet mechanics to manage fighter groups which is why I mention it here.

3. Suggestion: Implement officer auto-assignments for fighters specifically.
Implementation: Append to the current naval commander auto-assign procedure a step assigning officers with Fighter Combat skills to fighters. I would do this after filling the officer module positions (aux control, main engineering, etc.) since these should be more premium positions, but before the Reaction/Engineering/Tactical for uncaptained warships steps as fighters should be included in those final steps.
Pros: Auto-assign would make use of the Fighter Combat skill, which it currently does not, making the auto-assignments just that much better and integrating game mechanics more thoroughly.
Cons: None.
Notes: I realize this isn't strictly a carrier operations suggestion but I think it is closely enough related to mention here.
 
The following users thanked this post: Droll, TheBawkHawk, serger, BAGrimm, Warer

Offline Desdinova

  • Lt. Commander
  • ********
  • D
  • Posts: 280
  • Thanked: 280 times
Re: Carrier Operations/Interface Suggestion thread
« Reply #3 on: January 25, 2021, 05:46:46 PM »
I'd like to see a return of the "fighter squadrons" interface from VB6. The squadron organization was useful, the name generator was fun, and you could land/launch/organize fighters from a single interface.
 
The following users thanked this post: Warer

Online kingflute

  • Chief Petty Officer
  • ***
  • k
  • Posts: 39
  • Thanked: 19 times
Re: Carrier Operations/Interface Suggestion thread
« Reply #4 on: January 26, 2021, 04:40:27 AM »
I'd like to see a return of the "fighter squadrons" interface from VB6. The squadron organization was useful, the name generator was fun, and you could land/launch/organize fighters from a single interface.
Seconded.
 
The following users thanked this post: Warer