Login

russian armor

UI dream changelog

12 Jul 2020, 13:19 PM
#1
avatar of Osinyagov
Senior Modmaker Badge

Posts: 1324

I would like to say thank you to Miragefla and Sander for interesting idea to post your feelings in the separate thread like "how it would be". Here is the changelog of my dream for CoH 2. It is based on vanilla CoH2 and doesn't include ideas from Sander's and miragefla's threads. Mail goal - UI and QoL changes, some techical fixes. Special thanks goes to SneakEye and Kasarov. I've used some their UI assets.

Note:
- I didn't concentrate on soundlines issues. So you can help me and write about issues you've spotted.
- It's time consuming to collect everything. List include ideas and suggestions from last 3-4 years. So something may be missed or forgotten. WFA and UKF will be added later.
- Some issues, probably, can't be fixed. But my goal was to collect as much issues in one place as possible.

Feel free to add new spotted issues or give your feedback about already listed stuff.

Last update - 18.07.2020

Global




Red Army




Ostheer




USF





OKW



12 Jul 2020, 19:14 PM
#2
avatar of Fargoth88

Posts: 11

One thing i would like to see changed is the little icon on call-in vehicles with tech requirements. The icon they have is different from all the other call-in abilities and it still looks off to me. It's not the case for abilities with a required structure, but it is for call-ins requiring a player upgrade. So i used required not and set the required played upgrade to: is present, false. So it looks like this.

https://imgur.com/a/6DSyKZa
12 Jul 2020, 20:03 PM
#3
avatar of Smartie

Posts: 652

Thx for your work!
13 Jul 2020, 03:08 AM
#4
avatar of Svalbard

Posts: 33

Is it possible to give the Stug Heat Shell ability a unique icon? It currently shares the same icon with target weak point.
13 Jul 2020, 08:40 AM
#5
avatar of Osinyagov
Senior Modmaker Badge

Posts: 1324

One thing i would like to see changed is the little icon on call-in vehicles with tech requirements. The icon they have is different from all the other call-in abilities and it still looks off to me. It's not the case for abilities with a required structure, but it is for call-ins requiring a player upgrade. So i used required not and set the required played upgrade to: is present, false. So it looks like this.

https://imgur.com/a/6DSyKZa


Good catch, will add it to the list. Thank you!

Is it possible to give the Stug Heat Shell ability a unique icon? It currently shares the same icon with target weak point.


Yes, it's possible. It should be made altogether with other fixes for StuG's vetabilities, because G version shares textstrings with other TWP. In my mind, HEAT icon will fit perfectly here.


jump backJump back to quoted post12 Jul 2020, 20:03 PMSmartie
Thx for your work!

Thank you, feel free to suggest your own ideas! :)
13 Jul 2020, 10:42 AM
#6
avatar of Fargoth88

Posts: 11



Good catch, will add it to the list. Thank you!



Great, I really hope it can be changed in the future since it always looked weird to me.

There are some other things i would liked to see changed/fixed.

The extra text on the fallschirmjäger dispatch ability is: "effective at all ranges against infantry".
This should probably be changed to: New unit - Fallschirmjäger - available for deployment. This unit is dropped by air at the target location. Dropping into areas with a number of large objects increases the risk of a deadly landing.

There are also a lot of units with multiple upgrades, where the upgrade requirements aren't set to usage and display. I think this is the case for the Ostheer Bunker, Grens (G43), Pgrens, Volks (MP40), paratroopers and probably quite a few other units.

The ui position of infiltration grenades could also be changed to 23 so they're in the same place for all units with the ability.
13 Jul 2020, 10:55 AM
#7
avatar of JohnSmith

Posts: 991

I do like that you give credit whereas needed, but I would like to reiterate that I do not personally believe that it is a must to appropriate ideas and suggestions to individual people. It is the community who creates ideas and discussions, I always roll my eyes when people try to self-appropriate content they vaguely described years ago. It is a bad habit and utterly disheartening and counterproductive. Good work to yourself man for putting it all together into a nice well written manner. If you really need to thank people, thank them all at once instead of thanking for individual points.
13 Jul 2020, 11:52 AM
#8
avatar of Osinyagov
Senior Modmaker Badge

Posts: 1324

The extra text on the fallschirmjäger dispatch ability is: "effective at all ranges against infantry".
This should probably be changed to: New unit - Fallschirmjäger - available for deployment. This unit is dropped by air at the target location. Dropping into areas with a number of large objects increases the risk of a deadly landing.


I didn't put any text issues, which can be fixed with numerical localizations. Listed here issues with text are about technical part, which cannot be fixed without Relic.
And i don't have a data of this kind of issues, since i fixed them long time ago in russian localization mod.
Technical issues with text i've collected here: https://docs.google.com/spreadsheets/d/1ZsVcT2zuDtvSGPpgAI7tkEOlWFu0Ing-q11zNnklFQQ/edit

There are also a lot of units with multiple upgrades, where the upgrade requirements aren't set to usage and display. I think this is the case for the Ostheer Bunker, Grens (G43), Pgrens, Volks (MP40), paratroopers and probably quite a few other units.


Can you elaborate? I don't understand :faint:

The ui position of infiltration grenades could also be changed to 23 so they're in the same place for all units with the ability.


You mean OKW doctrinal grenades? If so, it will be in OKW section.

I do like that you give credit whereas needed, but I would like to reiterate that I do not personally believe that it is a must to appropriate ideas and suggestions to individual people. It is the community who creates ideas and discussions, I always roll my eyes when people try to self-appropriate content they vaguely described years ago. It is a bad habit and utterly disheartening and counterproductive. Good work to yourself man for putting it all together into a nice well written manner. If you really need to thank people, thank them all at once instead of thanking for individual points.


Maybe you are right. I just don't want to appropriate anything from anybody, and i was sure, that credits for exact points is a good idea.
13 Jul 2020, 12:33 PM
#9
avatar of Fargoth88

Posts: 11



Can you elaborate? I don't understand :faint:



You mean OKW doctrinal grenades? If so, it will be in OKW section.



When you buy the Paratrooper LMG for example, you'll see this.


https://imgur.com/a/fKbI4ne

If you change the 2 weapon slot requirement of the thompson to reason: usage and display, you'll see this.

https://imgur.com/a/cCqsZWx

and i meant the okw doctrinal grenades.
14 Jul 2020, 11:34 AM
#10
avatar of Osinyagov
Senior Modmaker Badge

Posts: 1324

USF



15 Jul 2020, 00:18 AM
#11
avatar of KoRneY

Posts: 364

You are a beautiful wizard. Thank you for everything. Tbh I can't even think of anything else because I'm blown away by your attention to detail. Very nice work.
15 Jul 2020, 07:14 AM
#12
avatar of BlobSponge²

Posts: 31

Awesome work! You do an impressive work to keep this game up-to-date. You're picky and you uncovered some points that I never realized (for example, different templates for vet abilities not located at the same case). Thank you!
15 Jul 2020, 13:41 PM
#13
avatar of Redgood

Posts: 11

Good work, i am looking forward for patch going live :)
15 Jul 2020, 13:45 PM
#14
avatar of Osinyagov
Senior Modmaker Badge

Posts: 1324

jump backJump back to quoted post15 Jul 2020, 13:41 PMRedgood
Good work, i am looking forward for patch going live :)


It's not official patch, only my dreams about it
15 Jul 2020, 13:48 PM
#15
avatar of Widerstreit

Posts: 1216



It's not official patch, only my dreams about it


Let's hope it will get a chance.
15 Jul 2020, 13:54 PM
#16
avatar of Hannibal
Senior Moderator Badge

Posts: 1281 | Subs: 1

I do like that you give credit whereas needed, but I would like to reiterate that I do not personally believe that it is a must to appropriate ideas and suggestions to individual people. It is the community who creates ideas and discussions, I always roll my eyes when people try to self-appropriate content they vaguely described years ago. It is a bad habit and utterly disheartening and counterproductive. Good work to yourself man for putting it all together into a nice well written manner. If you really need to thank people, thank them all at once instead of thanking for individual points.

I disagree on that one. Credit should be given for what a specific person did where ever possible. Getting at least some acknowledgement for the work/thought that someone did motivates people and also makes it visible how large the contribution of someone was.
Should I get credit because I posted the 20th post in a thread complaining about the bad USF base layout? No. But the people that actually came up with the new idea, designed and tested it, they should. That's also how it works in science: You cite the people that were able to show something for the first time. Crafting theories and testing them requires effort and is an achievement. And while many people participate in discussions at least to some degree, truth still is that the main contribution comes from only a hand full like OP.

The boasting that some people here unfortunately do á la "nice to see something I suggested 3 years ago" often lacks major parts of the whole process: Most of the time they only complained about something, but very rarely they offered the solution that was implemented in the end and/or put work into the actual fixing of the issue.
15 Jul 2020, 14:08 PM
#17
avatar of JohnSmith

Posts: 991


The boasting that some people here unfortunately do á la "nice to see something I suggested 3 years ago" often lacks major parts of the whole process: Most of the time they only complained about something, but very rarely they offered the solution that was implemented in the end and/or put work into the actual fixing of the issue.


That is exactly what I do not want to see on this forum; individual people taking full control and attribution over some idea that has been discussed for months with a lot of threads with a lot of posts from a lot of users.

If there are major implementations, solutions and contributions that can be identified to individuals, yes, that's more than OK. But it is just stupid when people are trying to say it was their idea to fix a problem or some to individual fix/nerf (and thus should, therefore, be credited). Let's suggest, for example, the hot topic of the moment, the OKW flares, is fixed in a future patch. If that is ever fixed, I do not think a unique individual can be thanked, as the problem was discussed for months in the forums. The credit of fixing it would be the balance team who merged all the posts together to find a unique fitting solution. Nonetheless, I bet people will try to credit the fix to themselves.

There's nothing stopping people to try to force people's hands saying that each point might be theirs. It is mostly to protect Osinyagov, if he starts crediting individual users, he might feel or be forced that he has to do it for everyone for every point, I don't want him to get endless PMs from random users who want credits due because they posted some similar idea months or years ago.

I know it is very off-topic, but I generally rant when people try to get individual credit for community work. Credit due, yeah, but I beware that it might spiral out of control. The forum is to me a welcoming place to discuss the game we love and to be a community, it is not there to win e-pen points about who has the most suggestions and to boast with them.

TLDR: I agree with proper naming of individual valid contributions - but I beware of people who want to get internet points whilst piggy back-riding on others (and them having naming and shaming them) for just posting about something.
15 Jul 2020, 14:54 PM
#18
avatar of Vipper

Posts: 8836 | Subs: 1


I disagree on that one. Credit should be given for what a specific person did where ever possible. Getting at least some acknowledgement for the work/thought that someone did motivates people and also makes it visible how large the contribution of someone was.
...

Yes people who contribute should be acknowledged to become more motivated.

Unfortunately people who bring up issues and make suggestions are more often personally attacked and trolled usually by user who have made very few suggestions on improving the game themselves. In many cases it seems that people are more often discouraged than encouraged.

That is why I would like once more congratulate Osinyagov, Kasarov, Rita Rush and all the other people who have contributed so much in improving the aesthetics of the game.
16 Jul 2020, 22:45 PM
#19
avatar of Osinyagov
Senior Modmaker Badge

Posts: 1324

OKW



17 Jul 2020, 23:52 PM
#20
avatar of Osinyagov
Senior Modmaker Badge

Posts: 1324

UKF



1 user is browsing this thread: 1 guest
64 bit beta
Event in Progress

Ladders Top 10

  • #
    Steam Alias
    W
    L
    %
    Streak
Data provided by Relic Relic Entertainment

Replay highlight

VS
  • Ostheer flag Scotch
  • Oberkommando West flag VonAsten
  • U.S. Forces flag [NS] aerafield
  • U.S. Forces flag T.R. CrossFire
uploaded by aerafield

Board Info

143 users are online: 4 members and 139 guests
Serrith, Yukiko, Muad'Dib, aerafield
53 posts in the last 24h
627 posts in the last week
2099 posts in the last month
Registered members: 21178
Welcome our newest member, m2ar2t4r2356
Most online: 1221 users on 25 Feb 2020, 12:03 PM