Come to think of it, while we're on the topic of base information QoL stuff, one thing that OXCE is likely not to revisit (don't recall if it's been explicitly rejected) that has bugged me for half of forever, is that all the base display info bars go off the right edge instead of scaling the bars according to their max value. No idea if that's something of interest to you.New thread, as requested. I recall Meridian advising modders to control the base storage bar via item size instead, so any of this probably won't be accepted into OXCE as is. I can see the reasoning, but I don't think his expectations of modder self-control are lining up with reality.
Edit2: The same applies to craft equipment list icons, which also overflow really quickly and are thus mostly useless as information. This could scale to 'maxItems' or 'maxStorageSpace', or some ruleset variable if these are not in use.
One issue is going to be the base background image with its hardcoded numbers. Probably not too hard to erase those.
that all the base display info bars go off the right edge instead of scaling the bars according to their max value.
Come to think of it, while we're on the topic of base information QoL stuff, one thing that OXCE is likely not to revisit (don't recall if it's been explicitly rejected) that has bugged me for half of forever, is that all the base display info bars go off the right edge instead of scaling the bars according to their max value.
Edit2: The same applies to craft equipment list icons, which also overflow really quickly and are thus mostly useless as information.
I recall Meridian advising modders to control the base storage bar via item size instead, so any of this probably won't be accepted into OXCE as is. I can see the reasoning, but I don't think his expectations of modder self-control are lining up with reality.
Thoughts?
You are right about that. The background is a screen wide picture. I don't see how scale can be adjusted dynamically for a single bar.
Scale can be removed altogether. Nobody reads the scale anyway (I think).
The background is a screen wide picture. I don't see how scale can be adjusted dynamically for a single bar.Yeah, as Meridian said, removing the numbers altogether would be best. Perhaps making a ruleset option for 'no overflow' that switches to that alternate image.
What is scaling based on max value? Do you mean bar is staying more less as is but the scale under it shrinks?I was imagining just rescaling the full/empty cutoff (which is the most important bit of info) and putting the rightmost edge of a 'max' bar at, IDK, 280 or 290. Small bars can stay as they are, anything over OG defaults (the background numbers) gets scaled down. Optionally, have a variable for each entry to define the 'soft max' (current 150/300/1150 or whatever the defence number is).
Also I see your numbers are so big they don't even fit to the number space. That is more of a mod problem that allows it. I faced same in mine and ended up just reducing item sizes across the board so that standard storage capacity can accommodate more of them rather than building more storage facilities.Yeah, but that also applies to living space, radars, etc. I get it that rebalancing the mod is the way to go, but I've never had the willpower to periodically go through all the hundreds of items in XCF and change their sizes instead of just altering half a dozen values in facilities.rul, changing all the research and manufacture values instead of playing around with scientist/engineer capacity, etc.
For equipment bar I am not sure what it depicts. Is it a sum of all items "sizes" or a count?I'm not sure, either, but it fills up really fast, usually at under 100 items, and I can have just that much ammo for 2-3 types of guns there. Less insane people than me will still easily break the 80-item limit. XCF used to have limits of 999 items a little while ago, but got rid of them for technical reasons.
What use of this bar anyway? Why would I care how many items are on board?There can be a limit. Two, in fact, 'maxItems' and 'maxStorageSpace'.
Unless, of course, there is a limit. Then naturally the limit should be whole screen.
I don't remember discussing this.Yeah, I can't find it either, not even the storage advice, although I definitely remember reading that.
Either didn't happen, or I wasn't there, or it was too long ago for my old memory.
I don't recall advising that either, but it sounds like me, that's true.
In any case, it wasn't explicitly rejected (I'd remember that).Maybe we should try to hash out a solution here, and then make an OXCE feature request if it looks passable to a few people (and hopefully also at least one published modder)?
Sounds like an easy implementation to me... if someone can propose a good solution (with all above considerations considered).
With this in mind, it may make sense to draw bars in the form of percentage or something. Like scientist bar max is always same length (100%) and the value is the percentage.Well, my proposal is to let small bases have smaller 'max' bars, but after a threshold number it'd be exactly that.
Edit:Well, my proposal is to let small bases have smaller 'max' bars, but after a threshold number it'd be exactly that.
Values instead of percentages are still useful, I'd certainly like to know whether that '50%' is 200 scientists or 500. :D
For transport load bar I would not do anything at all. In vanilla it probably helped to control load under 80 items. It is mostly useless now especially since there is a clear warning when you cannot add more items.One can still have that 80-item limit (or 1000, or 1 000 000). And you'll only know the limit when you hit it, not whether you're half-full, or mostly full, or whatever. So that functionality could be restored/extended.
For base info bars I would convert them to percentage whenever two numbers are given. I.e. usage percentage.Do you mean bars as percentage while the left-hand values remain absolute?
Just for visual check whether you have some spare or not. No scale needed.Absolute scale/numbers is still useful for comparing bases and deciding where to move your troops, scientists or whoever.
Personnel and space are indicators are begging for that.Er, what?
As for defense and radars, I have already proposed percentage display.Yep.
Does it make sense to show used/occupied personnel as well?Doesn't bother me, the different bar colours and screen areas make them distinct enough, and there are probably lots of people heavily used to that. So I'd be wary, or at least make it an option.
They sure are! And they are displayed as numbers for the purpose. As Meridian said, I doubt anyone is trying to deduce actual number by reading bar against the scale. They are for quick visual check mostly.Indeed.
Do you mean bars as percentage while the left-hand values remain absolute?
Absolute scale/numbers is still useful for comparing bases and deciding where to move your troops, scientists or whoever.
Er, what?
What's your opinion about the small/large dichotomy?
Oh, they are. However, you yourself raised the question that it is difficult to find a good scale. With dynamic scale as you suggested, they are not comparable between bases anymore.I propose using full dynamic scale only for bases that exceed current maximums. So it's as unintrusive as possible, and vanilla max values (on the background picture) seem like a reasonable compromise. Everything below that would still use current bars, more or less.
Elaborate ...The sad bit in the upper middle of the image.
When I look at them I hear faint voices in my head: "... we want to be dissssplayed as persssentagggge ..."Resist the siren song of the number succubi!
For equipment bar I am not sure what it depicts. Is it a sum of all items "sizes" or a count?I looked. It's ⌈[number of equipment]/4⌉.