Personally, I think I'd also prefer to not have the "names" on their like rifleman, or whatever. But allowing a custom set of templates to use, or better still, name the templates ourselves is preferred.yeah -- that's the idea of option 2. it needs a few more buttons to make those options clear, I think, but what you said is what was intended.
The only viable in long-term and lying in the "oldschool" concept is having loadout "copy" and "paste" buttons (plus ctrl+c/ctrl+v shortcuts). Anything beyond that is too much.ctrl combination hotkeys aren't supported in OpenXcom, but the default shortcuts for option 1 are indeed 'c' and 'v'. if you'd like to try it out to see if it is really what you'd like to use, the code is complete at https://github.com/myk002/OpenXcom/tree/loadout_copy_paste
Will the save, made with one option work with another option?Merging both only have a sense if they work with each other...
I had an idea which may further reduce the number of clicks:I had a few thoughts along these lines for option 3 too:
I could erase those two big-ass buttons up, and only two label would be on their places, and they would be:
"To set the selected layout to a soldier, LEFT-click on that soldier."
and:
"To save the layout of a soldier to the selected layout, RIGHT-click on the soldier."
1. you don't need a rename button. similar functionality is available elsewhere in the UI (like renaming crafts) simply by clicking on the name.I thought this before. But consider the following: The player clicks to the editbox, types a name, then clicks to Create. Now he renamed a layout, and created a new one with identical name. But his original intention is to create a new layout with the typed name. Of course he can do that by clicking on the Create FIRST and then typing the name (rename).
2. for parity with how other UI screens look (such as the purchase/sell/equipment screens), perhaps remove the top two buttons and replace them with left/right arrow buttons to the left of each soldier name. this would also enable the left arrow key as a shortcut for saving the soldier's layout to the selected layout name and the right arrow key as a shortcut for applying the selected layout to the soldier. this would make this screen as keyboard-accessible as option one. just type down-right-down-right-down-right... to apply a layout to the entire squad instead of option 1's tab-v-tab-v-tab-v... This is a little different from the idea of using left click to apply and right click to save, but nowhere else in the UI is a right click used for anything but cancel or "take all", and using right click to save might be out of place.This is a very good idea!!!
3. a limitation of the current screen for option 3 compared to the other two options is that you can't see what the layout includes. is there any way to show the regular inventory screen as a background image for the layout manager screen that can indicate what the selected layout is? that may not be possible (or aesthetically pleasing), though.You're right about this, and i also thought this before. But think about it. There are NAMES for the layouts. You have to know what layout name associated with what layout. The name should be communicative. This way you don't have to actually see the layout itself. But if you want to see it, you can see it by moving back to the Inventory view.
4. if space becomes tight because of these revisions, create and delete buttons could be replaced with plus and X symbol icons.This is also a good idea, but not those spaces occupied by those buttons is our real problem now.
I thought this before. But consider the following: The player clicks to the editbox, types a name, then clicks to Create. Now he renamed a layout, and created a new one with identical name. But his original intention is to create a new layout with the typed name. Of course he can do that by clicking on the Create FIRST and then typing the name (rename).Ah, understood. That does seem simpler than the alternative, which I suppose would be to have textbox edits always be a rename operation while the create button would pop up a dialog asking for the name of the new layout.
But this usage is not self-explanatory, not evident. Most of the people would use it as if it would work like it works now.
And not the place of the Rename button is what we really have to make free for something else.
There are NAMES for the layouts. You have to know what layout name associated with what layout. The name should be communicative.While that is true, I can certainly conceive of a situation where a player wonders whether he has upgraded the "Sniper" layout to use alien grenades yet, or whether it still is using the standard grenades. It may not be that big of a deal..you have to go back to the inventory screen to see that you need to update the layout, but once you do, it will be applied to all soldiers with that layout, right?
Hmm, maybe if the layout itself would only be showed when the player moves the mouse cursor on a specific part of the layout button, maybe half of the layout button. Or a little icon would be next to the layout button, and when the player moves the mouse cursor over it, the game would show that layout, but not as a background, it would show it foreground, with all other buttons/etc temporarily hidden. Only when the mouse cursor is over that little icon next to the layout button.if it is done, +1 for showing in the foreground, either as a dismissable popup or as a hover popup, but either way is somewhat out of place in the xcom ui. I'd be worried about making the interface (and the code) too complicated.
What do you think?
Don't forget to leave some room for the Quickdraw mod, I love using that one too!Since both Fenyő's and my code are inventory layout agnostic, quickdraw should work as it always has and be compatible with all options discussed here.
On that note, though, how do you indicate that there isn't enough equipment to fully equip all the soldiers with a particular layout when you change that layout?When the layout changes, it reapplies to all soldiers whose have that layout. It applies as much as it can, and if there is not enough, then it reverts to custom layout (but keeps as much close to the layout as possible), and shows an error message.
if it is done, +1 for showing in the foreground, either as a dismissable popup or as a hover popup, but either way is somewhat out of place in the xcom ui. I'd be worried about making the interface (and the code) too complicated.Never worry about the code. That's my problem. :)
@SupSuper and @Warboy1982: What do you guys think about the ideas in this thread? What would you like to see?I'm also curious about their opinion. :)
So what do you guys think? Is this a feature that you'd like to see? How simple/complex should it be? What do you think your common use cases would be?
Accidental click without copying will clear loadout, it's not UI-wise. It was never the way copy/paste worked. Common concept is: "If nothing to paste - don't paste at all."
Also, if there are not enough items on the ground to equip the soldier according to the stored template, none (or only the available ones?) are equipped. There is a message informing you that this event occurred, but you end up with a partial or completely unequipped soldier. I believe that a check with a popup like "Not enough items on the ground, equip only the available ones?" and a list of required and available items should be displayed. Is it possible to have popups in the inventory screen?
something like that ?I would say b1 + b4
something like that ?
and with a floppy just 9 pixel cutting a small corner is not really possible i think
| filename | was | becomes |
| invcopy.png | (https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/3616568/2588748/6d68d010-ba40-11e3-8f7f-4857b9132dad.png) | (https://openxcom.org/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1986.0;attach=9265;image) |
| invcopy_active.png | (https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/3616568/2588750/72b41b38-ba40-11e3-8ec7-57a9f9bde110.png) | (https://openxcom.org/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1986.0;attach=9265;image) |
| invpaste_empty.png | (https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/3616568/2588756/7b18abfe-ba40-11e3-805f-6050c2428602.png) | (https://openxcom.org/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1986.0;attach=9268;image) |
| invpaste.png | (https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/3616568/2588760/87d8734c-ba40-11e3-8c1d-bc0442b22528.png) | (https://openxcom.org/forum/index.php?action=dlattach;topic=1986.0;attach=9269;image) |
| filename | was | becomes |
| invcopy.png | (https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/3616568/2588748/6d68d010-ba40-11e3-8f7f-4857b9132dad.png) | (https://github.com/myk002/OpenXcom/raw/fc7794a1be01b96e2b80c0177e0f2ccb3c628d0a/bin/data/Resources/UI/invcopy.png?raw=true) |
| invcopy_active.png | (https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/3616568/2588750/72b41b38-ba40-11e3-8ec7-57a9f9bde110.png) | (https://github.com/myk002/OpenXcom/raw/fc7794a1be01b96e2b80c0177e0f2ccb3c628d0a/bin/data/Resources/UI/invcopy_active.png?raw=true) |
| invpaste_empty.png | (https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/3616568/2588756/7b18abfe-ba40-11e3-805f-6050c2428602.png) | (https://github.com/myk002/OpenXcom/raw/fc7794a1be01b96e2b80c0177e0f2ccb3c628d0a/bin/data/Resources/UI/invpaste_empty.png?raw=true) |
| invpaste.png | (https://cloud.githubusercontent.com/assets/3616568/2588760/87d8734c-ba40-11e3-8c1d-bc0442b22528.png) | (https://github.com/myk002/OpenXcom/raw/fc7794a1be01b96e2b80c0177e0f2ccb3c628d0a/bin/data/Resources/UI/invpaste.png?raw=true) |
I think, instead "invpaste_empty.png" better to use "invpaste_empty2.png", because nothing to load.That looks great -- but is that a vote for option 1, 3, or 4?
That looks great -- but is that a vote for option 1, 3, or 4?