Discussion about the formatting of output

    This site uses cookies. By continuing to browse this site, you are agreeing to our Cookie Policy.

    • Discussion about the formatting of output

      Well, thanks again Warsaalk because you are doing a great job, and seem very active ;)

      I put the word “discussion” on the subject of this thread because this is not intended as a suggestion by itself but —hopefully— the start of a discussion (if other people is interested in adding ideas) that would change OGotcha to the better. If this is not the place, or you prefer to open a discussion thread yourself, well, that's up to you.

      I think it would be great if the formatting of the battle (colors, information, structure) could be discussed so we could get to a consensus, or at least Warsaalk could take interesting ideas and implement them. I will put the ideas that I have now here, but of course, I hope other users add suggestions here.
      1. Why the rules?
        [align=center]Attacker UniverseView [UV-TEST]
        ________________________________________________

        Small Cargo 1.245 -> 334 (-911)
        Large Cargo 9.412 -> 4.170 (-5.242)
        Light Fighter 2.735 -> 740 (-1.995)
        Heavy Fighter 6.334 -> 2.730 (-3.604)
        Cruiser 3.523 -> 2.457 (-1.066)
        Battleship 1.244 -> 1.097 (-147)
        Colony Ship 2 -> 2 (-0)
        Recycler 1.284 -> 660 (-624)
        Espionage Probe 9 -> 0 (-9)
        Bomber 400 -> 358 (-42)
        Destroyer 1.952 -> 1.741 (-211)
        Deathstar 3 -> 3 (-0)
        Battlecruiser 2.534 -> 2.239 (-295)
        _________________________________________
        [/align]
        Are they really necessary? I think it would be cleaner without them.
      2. If you want to have arrows, why not use unicode arrows? Would there be a problem?
        So we get Small Cargo 1.245 → 334 (-911) instead of Small Cargo 1.245 -> 334 (-911)
      3. The same with the minus sign which as of this moment is an hyphen which is too short, may be better with unicode minus sign (it may seem a silly difference, but I think the hyphen is too short with the font used by default in OGame forums).
        So we get Small Cargo 1.245 → 334 (−911) instead of Small Cargo 1.245 -> 334 (-911)
      4. The same with the coloring, I think the colors used in battles are not really good to read over a dark background (which is the default theme in these forums). May be someone with more experience with colors or user interfaces could suggest a better palette. As a first step, may be removing color from some parts would ease the reading (I add in the last lines the Spanish colors, not that I suggest them, but because that's what I see there, and may be gives you ideas):
        [align=center]
        Small Cargo 1.245 -> 334 (-911)
        Small Cargo 1.245 → 334 (−911)
        Small Cargo 1.245334 (−911)
        Small Cargo 1.245334 (−911)
        [/align]
      5. What about leaving the ending results to the last part of the line? Instead of Small Cargo 1.245 -> 334 (-911)
        we could have Small Cargo 1.245 -> (-911) -> 334 or
        [align=center]
        Small Cargo 1.245 → (−911) → 334
        Small Cargo 1.245 → (−911) → 334
        [/align]
      6. Another idea that might ease the reading might be using words (as you can see these are mostly ideas coming from Spanish, that is basically what I know):
        [align=center]
        Small Cargo 1.245 lost 911 (remaining 334)
        Small Cargo 1.245 lost 911 (remaining 334)
        [/align]
        The reason for this is because Small Cargo 1.245 -> 334 (-911) compresses all the information in a small space, and may be giving space to breathe might give better results.


      So, here they go a bunch of suggestions that might get this thread started. I hope people contribute with their ideas. Mine are just suggestions that come from thinking a little bit about what would ease the view of a battle, also mixed with ideas that I see in the Spanish forum (other communities probably have ideas that are not in the rest of communities).

      For instance the above battle could be also written like

      Attacker UniverseView [UV-TEST]

      Small Cargo 1.245334 (−911)
      Large Cargo 9.4124.170 (−5.242)
      Light Fighter 2.735740 (−1.995)
      Heavy Fighter 6.3342.730 (−3.604)
      Cruiser 3.5232.457 (−1.066)
      Battleship 1.2441.097 (−147)
      Colony Ship 22 (−0)
      Recycler 1.284660 (−624)
      Espionage Probe 90 (−9)
      Bomber 400358 (−42)
      Destroyer 1.9521.741 (−211)
      Deathstar 33 (−0)
      Battlecruiser 2.5342.239 (−295)


      Attacker UniverseView (UV-TEST)

      Small Cargo 1.245 lost 334 (remaining 911)
      Large Cargo 9.412 lost 4.170 (remaining 5.242)
      Light Fighter 2.735 lost 740 (remaining 1.995)
      Heavy Fighter 6.334 lost 2.730 (remaining 3.604)
      Cruiser 3.523 lost 2.457 (remaining 1.066)
      Battleship 1.244 lost 1.097 (remaining 147)
      Colony Ship 2 lost 2 (remaining 0)
      Recycler 1.284 lost 660 (remaining 624)
      Espionage Probe 9 lost 0 (remaining 9)
      Bomber 400 lost 358 (remaining 42)
      Destroyer 1.952 lost 1.741 (remaining 211)
      Deathstar 3 lost 3 (remaining 0)
      Battlecruiser 2.534 lost 2.239 (remaining 295)
    • Hi,

      Thanks a lot for putting so much though into this.
      In update 4.1.0 I did implement this solution, which in my opinion is the best for now:


      Attacker UniverseView [UV-TEST]
      ________________________________________________

      Small Cargo 1.245334 (−911)
      Large Cargo 9.4124.170 (−5.242)
      Light Fighter 2.735740 (−1.995)
      Heavy Fighter 6.3342.730 (−3.604)
      Cruiser 3.5232.457 (−1.066)
      Battleship 1.2441.097 (−147)
      Colony Ship 22 (−0)
      Recycler 1.284660 (−624)
      Espionage Probe 90 (−9)
      Bomber 400358 (−42)
      Destroyer 1.9521.741 (−211)
      Deathstar 33 (−0)
      Battlecruiser 2.5342.239 (−295)
      _________________________________________


      The rulers are, for me, something which seperates the fleets in a nice way.

      Grtz,
      War