Orders Arrows: Support to Move

Suggestions on improving the site or comments in general?

How should the arrows appear for support-to-move?

As-is
3
38%
Invert the arrowhead connecting the moving unit and the supporting unit
1
13%
Replace the current arrows with something else entirely
4
50%
 
Total votes : 8

Orders Arrows: Support to Move

Postby NoPunIn10Did » 14 Nov 2017, 17:18

I really like the Toggle Orders Arrows feature. I do find it unintuitive, however, that the support-to-move order contains two arrows pointing outward from the supporting unit.

Would it be possible to change the glyph at the end of the arrow that connects the supporting unit to the moving unit, as seen below?

Image

Personally, I'd also suggest swapping the dashed and solid lines, but I could see that argument going either way.

UPDATE:
Alternate Suggestion


Image
Last edited by NoPunIn10Did on 14 Nov 2017, 22:14, edited 4 times in total.
NoPunIn10Did
Gold Classicist & Benevolent Tyrant

Variant GM, Designer & Collaborator
User avatar
NoPunIn10Did
Premium Member
 
Posts: 901
Joined: 17 Aug 2011, 00:17
Location: North Carolina
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: 1000
All-game rating: 1303
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Orders Arrows: Support to Move

Postby NJLonghorn » 14 Nov 2017, 17:51

I don't know whether you care, but I'll chime in to say that I agree with both of NoPun's suggestions.
User avatar
NJLonghorn
 
Posts: 23
Joined: 07 Sep 2017, 23:41
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: 1072
All-game rating: 1074
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Orders Arrows: Support to Move

Postby super_dipsy » 14 Nov 2017, 21:36

Easy enough to do....but one person's intuitive is another's counter-intuitive ;)

Personally, I find the idea of the support arrow coming FROM the unit being supported TO the supporter is counter-intuitive. When you order a unit to support another, the orders interface ask you which unit you want to support, and then where you want to support it to. When you enter your order, it says X supports Y to Z. My intuition would say that X is the person giving the support, and 'giving' implies an arrow to show the 'gift'. You then have to draw something to show the details of the gift (where to).

But if the majority think it is better to have the unit giving support have the arrow coming into it from the supported unit, that's fine too :)

Maybe you want to run a poll?

One other factor occurs to me. If we want to go ahead and do this, presumably we move the blob from the end of the support to hold order to the supporting unit too for consistency? At the moment, support to hold is an arrow from the supporter to the supported unit but finishing in a blob not an arrow head. But if we want to make support arrows come towards the supporter rather than away from it, we should probably change that too.
User avatar
super_dipsy
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 10848
Joined: 04 Nov 2009, 17:43
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: (1000)
All-game rating: (956)
Timezone: GMT

Re: Orders Arrows: Support to Move

Postby super_dipsy » 14 Nov 2017, 21:43

I keep submitting and then thinking of something else!

We also need to take into account this may cause confusion with the convoy arrows. Convoy arrows go from the unit being convoyed to the fleet, and then from the fleet to the target location. If we make support arrows go from the supported unit to the supporting unit and then on to the target location, it may confuse even though you are proposing putting the arrow head at the start of the arrow rather than the end.
User avatar
super_dipsy
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 10848
Joined: 04 Nov 2009, 17:43
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: (1000)
All-game rating: (956)
Timezone: GMT

Re: Orders Arrows: Support to Move

Postby NoPunIn10Did » 14 Nov 2017, 21:54

super_dipsy wrote:Easy enough to do....but one person's intuitive is another's counter-intuitive ;)

Personally, I find the idea of the support arrow coming FROM the unit being supported TO the supporter is counter-intuitive. When you order a unit to support another, the orders interface ask you which unit you want to support, and then where you want to support it to. When you enter your order, it says X supports Y to Z. My intuition would say that X is the person giving the support, and 'giving' implies an arrow to show the 'gift'. You then have to draw something to show the details of the gift (where to).

But if the majority think it is better to have the unit giving support have the arrow coming into it from the supported unit, that's fine too :)

Maybe you want to run a poll?

One other factor occurs to me. If we want to go ahead and do this, presumably we move the blob from the end of the support to hold order to the supporting unit too for consistency? At the moment, support to hold is an arrow from the supporter to the supported unit but finishing in a blob not an arrow head. But if we want to make support arrows come towards the supporter rather than away from it, we should probably change that too.


I actually would leave the support-to-hold as is. It's fine. The problem is that an arrow of any sort implies action or movement, and a support-to-move isn't an action upon a unit but rather an action assisting that unit's move.

My personal preference would be to not draw any line at all directly between the supporting unit and the moving unit, instead connecting the support order somehow to the implied move order rather than the moving unit.

Examples
Backstabbr and jDip both do this by drawing a bezier curve that begins at the supporting unit, ends at the destination, and uses the origin unit as a point of intersection for the two tangents of the curve.
webDip and jDip use a two-segment line that connects from the supporting unit to the midpoint of the assumed move order arrow, then from there to the origin, along with some additional glyphs so that the support arrow isn't made invisible by the co-located move order.

My initial suggestions for this thread are based on the assumption that the direct lines are the low-hanging fruit.
NoPunIn10Did
Gold Classicist & Benevolent Tyrant

Variant GM, Designer & Collaborator
User avatar
NoPunIn10Did
Premium Member
 
Posts: 901
Joined: 17 Aug 2011, 00:17
Location: North Carolina
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: 1000
All-game rating: 1303
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Orders Arrows: Support to Move

Postby NoPunIn10Did » 14 Nov 2017, 22:00

super_dipsy wrote:I keep submitting and then thinking of something else!

We also need to take into account this may cause confusion with the convoy arrows. Convoy arrows go from the unit being convoyed to the fleet, and then from the fleet to the target location. If we make support arrows go from the supported unit to the supporting unit and then on to the target location, it may confuse even though you are proposing putting the arrow head at the start of the arrow rather than the end.


As said in the earlier post, I'd actually prefer to get rid of the two-segment approach we're using for support-to-move altogether.

The convoy orders as-is imply a path, which is a good thing. In a convoy, the moving army moves through the fleets to get to the destination.

For support orders, I think the better metaphor isn't a path but rather a source of gravity. The supporting unit is helping to pull the moving unit to its destination. That's why I suggested the inverted arrowhead, though I admit that's an imperfect design.
NoPunIn10Did
Gold Classicist & Benevolent Tyrant

Variant GM, Designer & Collaborator
User avatar
NoPunIn10Did
Premium Member
 
Posts: 901
Joined: 17 Aug 2011, 00:17
Location: North Carolina
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: 1000
All-game rating: 1303
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Orders Arrows: Support to Move

Postby NoPunIn10Did » 14 Nov 2017, 22:17

This is one possibility that might be easier to program than a bezier curve but would serve a similar purpose.

You calculate the midpoint of the triangle between supporter, origin, and destination.

Origin-to-midpoint and midpoint-to-destination is a solid green arrow, and only the destination has an arrowhead, thus implying motion (similar to the move order).

The segment from supporter to midpoint is dashed, showing that the supporting unit is giving that order but is not part of the path itself.

Image
Last edited by NoPunIn10Did on 14 Nov 2017, 22:37, edited 1 time in total.
NoPunIn10Did
Gold Classicist & Benevolent Tyrant

Variant GM, Designer & Collaborator
User avatar
NoPunIn10Did
Premium Member
 
Posts: 901
Joined: 17 Aug 2011, 00:17
Location: North Carolina
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: 1000
All-game rating: 1303
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Orders Arrows: Support to Move

Postby NoPunIn10Did » 14 Nov 2017, 22:35

Here's how the most recent rulebook pictures support-to-move.

They cheat a lot here, since their examples weren't automatically derived, but note how they picture a support-to-move order. It connects and aligns with the supported order rather than the moving unit.

Image
NoPunIn10Did
Gold Classicist & Benevolent Tyrant

Variant GM, Designer & Collaborator
User avatar
NoPunIn10Did
Premium Member
 
Posts: 901
Joined: 17 Aug 2011, 00:17
Location: North Carolina
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: 1000
All-game rating: 1303
Timezone: GMT-5

Re: Orders Arrows: Support to Move

Postby GPD » 15 Nov 2017, 00:06

Image
Or something like this?
The Devil makes work for idle forces

Better to have fought and lost, than never to have fought at all
Never NMR(Damnit!), Never Surrender
Gold Classicist
I did WDC 2017
User avatar
GPD
 
Posts: 937
Joined: 30 May 2015, 14:30
Location: England
Class: Star Ambassador
Standard rating: 1726
All-game rating: 1758
Timezone: GMT

Re: Orders Arrows: Support to Move

Postby super_dipsy » 15 Nov 2017, 08:17

NoPunIn10Did wrote:Here's how the most recent rulebook pictures support-to-move.

Gosh. Am I the only one who finds these confusing? ;)

If I have it right, a move is a straight arrow if it is not supported. If a move IS supported, then the move itself becomes a curve rather than a straight line, with the supporting line also curved to join the curved moving line. it looks like the curve is bent towards the unit supporting it, so that the supporting line curves in and sort of joins it. Do you have an example of when there is a supporter somewhere else? For example, in the last picture, if there was another unit in Con supporting the move from Rum to Bul, what would it look like? I can't immediately see how the support line from Con to the Rum to Bul line would be drawn?
User avatar
super_dipsy
Site Admin
Site Admin
 
Posts: 10848
Joined: 04 Nov 2009, 17:43
Class: Ambassador
Standard rating: (1000)
All-game rating: (956)
Timezone: GMT

Next

Return to Suggestions

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 6 guests