Jump to content


User Interface for missions


  • Please log in to reply
29 replies to this topic

Poll: User Interface for Missions. (80 members have cast votes)

You have to complete 250 battles in order to participate this poll.

What is your opinion on the Mission UI?

  1. I like the new Mission UI, it should stay. (2 votes [2.50%])

    Percentage of vote: 2.50%

  2. I prefer the old Mission UI, and the current should be reverted to what it was. (48 votes [60.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 60.00%

  3. WG should work on yet another Mission UI, based on the old one, but with improved looks. (28 votes [35.00%])

    Percentage of vote: 35.00%

  4. None of those, I'll post my own suggestion in the thread. (1 vote [1.25%])

    Percentage of vote: 1.25%

  5. Unsure / Don't use it / Don't care about it (1 vote [1.25%])

    Percentage of vote: 1.25%

Vote Hide poll

Spurtung #1 Posted 03 September 2017 - 10:54 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 63703 battles
  • 5,900
  • [GW-UP] GW-UP
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013

Based on what has been said in a few threads about this subject (like this one, or this one, or even this one), I decided to run a simple poll, and link those threads to it. There are certainly more threads about it, and opinions scattered in unrelated topics, but I don't think it's worth it to dig too deep into finding those.

 

The reason I'm creating this pole is to show the WG staff running the EU server's forum a visual opinion of the community that they can pass on. After all, we're in a new era where WG is listening to us, so why shouldn't they be aware of what we think about it?

 

Personally, I think the new UI is a disgrace, lacks information, takes too much space and needs a lot of clicking around to find the most basic information. I'm generally better off checking mission requirements directly from the newspage, and then simply following progression in-game, already knowing what it's actually being tracked.

 

Leave your vote, discuss, let's see if we can have some staff relaying this forward.

 

Edit: there is also this thread about it.


Edited by Spurtung, 05 September 2017 - 05:09 PM.


laulaur #2 Posted 03 September 2017 - 10:59 PM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 46632 battles
  • 986
  • [BLAUR] BLAUR
  • Member since:
    08-11-2011

Obviously the old Mission UI, maybe a bit cosmetized, is the best choice.

The UI that we have now is total garbage, lately i don't even bother to look at the missions in game.



Spurtung #3 Posted 04 September 2017 - 08:14 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 63703 battles
  • 5,900
  • [GW-UP] GW-UP
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013

View Postlaulaur, on 03 September 2017 - 11:59 PM, said:

Obviously the old Mission UI, maybe a bit cosmetized, is the best choice.

I liked it as it was, tbh. Simple and functional, as should be.



Dava_117 #4 Posted 04 September 2017 - 08:19 AM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 19460 battles
  • 3,298
  • [T-D-U] T-D-U
  • Member since:
    12-17-2014
I really don't understand why WG changed the old UI. It wasn't perfect, but was at least clear!

Geno1isme #5 Posted 04 September 2017 - 08:58 AM

    Lieutenant General

  • Player
  • 42636 battles
  • 7,851
  • [TRYIT] TRYIT
  • Member since:
    09-03-2013

View PostDava_117, on 04 September 2017 - 09:19 AM, said:

I really don't understand why WG changed the old UI. It wasn't perfect, but was at least clear!

 

I'd guess they got annoyed by people (rightfully) complaining about translation errors all the time and therefore went to replace most text content with graphics that need no translation. Now simply everyone is confused, not just people using localized clients, so you can call it a "fair play" update.

HeinrichVonDoucheberg #6 Posted 04 September 2017 - 10:24 AM

    Lance-corporal

  • Player
  • 47309 battles
  • 91
  • [SFFA] SFFA
  • Member since:
    11-08-2014

View Postlaulaur, on 03 September 2017 - 10:59 PM, said:

Obviously the old Mission UI, maybe a bit cosmetized, is the best choice.

The UI that we have now is total garbage, lately i don't even bother to look at the missions in game.

 

Same here. Now I look for the missions description on the WoT homepage, new UI is simply horrible.

CoDiGGo #7 Posted 04 September 2017 - 10:53 AM

    Warrant Officer

  • Player
  • 14997 battles
  • 569
  • [NEUR0] NEUR0
  • Member since:
    05-10-2015

Yerterday I tried to check missions, and after 2 mins I gave up about that crap riddle with schizophrenic setup

 

Wow, an urgent fix is needed !


Edited by CoDiGGo, 04 September 2017 - 10:55 AM.


Spurtung #8 Posted 04 September 2017 - 10:56 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 63703 battles
  • 5,900
  • [GW-UP] GW-UP
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013
Someone likes it :amazed:

Bordhaw #9 Posted 04 September 2017 - 10:59 AM

    Captain

  • Player
  • 11543 battles
  • 2,493
  • Member since:
    01-29-2017
  • It's not in any obvious order
  • it shows missions that I not eligible for
  • No details on what the mission requirements
  • Gives me tokens for I dont know what
  • etc etc.


Aikl #10 Posted 04 September 2017 - 11:12 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 25547 battles
  • 4,349
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

You do a mission to get tokens for a mission that gives you tokens that completes a final mission that gives you the reward. Clear as ink to me.

 

They can improve on this, however.

1. Mission that grinds token A.

2. Mission that requires a set number of token A to give you token B.

3. Mission that requires a set number of token B, but has no actual reward, and only serves to unlock the final mission.

4. Mission with rewards, a one-battle requirement but only a misleading pictogram to make you guess what your objective is. Ideally this should be something obscure, like injuring enemy commanders or getting a ramkill. :D



Spurtung #11 Posted 04 September 2017 - 11:19 AM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 63703 battles
  • 5,900
  • [GW-UP] GW-UP
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013

View PostAikl, on 04 September 2017 - 12:12 PM, said:

a one-battle requirement but only a misleading pictogram to make you guess what your objective is. Ideally this should be something obscure, like injuring enemy commanders or getting a ramkill.

Why not a GIF of a mime explaining it in 3s?



Wrinkly #12 Posted 04 September 2017 - 11:19 AM

    Sergeant

  • Player
  • 45411 battles
  • 264
  • Member since:
    09-05-2012

This new mission layout looks like it was designed by the same crayon munchers that are designing maps.

 

Give me the old layout with larger font sizes for those of us who have decent monitors.

 

The game in general would benefit from fully scalable UI objects as text is often too hard to read accurately.



Aikl #13 Posted 04 September 2017 - 11:34 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 25547 battles
  • 4,349
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

View PostSpurtung, on 04 September 2017 - 10:19 AM, said:

Why not a GIF of a mime explaining it in 3s?

 

Judging from how posting, ahem, creative GIFs on the forum is treated, I think it's quite limited in-game.

 

Besides, displaying animations in a game? I won't take that over 3dfx Glide support. 



Aikl #14 Posted 04 September 2017 - 11:41 AM

    Brigadier

  • Player
  • 25547 battles
  • 4,349
  • [-MM] -MM
  • Member since:
    04-13-2011

View PostGeno1isme, on 04 September 2017 - 07:58 AM, said:

 

I'd guess they got annoyed by people (rightfully) complaining about translation errors all the time and therefore went to replace most text content with graphics that need no translation. Now simply everyone is confused, not just people using localized clients, so you can call it a "fair play" update.

 

Translation, transchmation.

 

 

Sadly, I'm gone almost the whole month of Ñåíòÿáðü - hoping to catch the missions in Äåêàáðü however. :(



tankqull #15 Posted 04 September 2017 - 11:49 AM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 20924 battles
  • 1,499
  • [-FD-] -FD-
  • Member since:
    08-31-2011
your options are as crappy as the UI.

Spurtung #16 Posted 04 September 2017 - 12:11 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 63703 battles
  • 5,900
  • [GW-UP] GW-UP
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013

View Posttankqull, on 04 September 2017 - 12:49 PM, said:

your options are as crappy as the UI.

 

Of course. As it is, as it was or something else in between sure sound like terrible options for what is being discussed. :rolleyes:

Wintermute_1 #17 Posted 04 September 2017 - 12:49 PM

    Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 44222 battles
  • 1,572
  • Member since:
    11-25-2013
I just want something simple that tells you the requirement and reward on as few pages as possible. The old version fits that description better imo. Maybe you could pretty it up a bit though.

eldrak #18 Posted 04 September 2017 - 01:50 PM

    Second Lieutenant

  • Player
  • 47424 battles
  • 1,040
  • [NE-VO] NE-VO
  • Member since:
    01-27-2011

View PostSpurtung, on 04 September 2017 - 11:11 AM, said:

 

Of course. As it is, as it was or something else in between sure sound like terrible options for what is being discussed. :rolleyes:

 

One of the least biased polls I've seen here lately, well done.

Could have used a fourth and fifth option to maximize inclusion:

  • Other: posting my suggestion in the thread
  • Unsure/haven't used it


Spurtung #19 Posted 04 September 2017 - 01:54 PM

    Major General

  • Player
  • 63703 battles
  • 5,900
  • [GW-UP] GW-UP
  • Member since:
    07-05-2013

View Posteldrak, on 04 September 2017 - 02:50 PM, said:

 

One of the least biased polls I've seen here lately, well done.

Could have used a fourth and fifth option to maximize inclusion:

  • Other: posting my suggestion in the thread
  • Unsure/haven't used it

 

Done

malachi6 #20 Posted 04 September 2017 - 02:21 PM

    Lieutenant Сolonel

  • Player
  • 49911 battles
  • 3,463
  • Member since:
    04-14-2011
New UI definitely lacks clarity.  Not sure if it can be rescued or we need a rebuilt old one.  I think the problem is they did not give the UI to people that do not regularly use it.  Their in-house testing would only show positives.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users