On 13.07.2011 12:00, Michael T. Pope wrote:
> [Responding first to Nick]
>>> Known bug: the line is too long.
>> If no colonies have any production or consumption of a certain good,
>> do not display that good's column.
> It used to do that. I took it out because it helps very little once
> the number of colonies grows, which is my primary use case. When
> there are few colonies just bringing up each colony in turn is
> adequate, but around 8+ I find I make fewer mistakes with this new
> fangled panel, and once you are producing muskets the only thing
> missing might be a luxury good or two that you do not have a good raw
> material supply for, and eventually not even those.
>> If a colony does both produce and consume a good, but the net is zero,
>> put a dark grey "0" in the column rather than leaving it blank. don't
>> use 50%, that's too light.
> Good point. Done.
>> It may look nicer to simply put three lumberjack icons rather than one
>> lumberjack and the text "x3"
> Used to do that too:-). I found that on average the "xN" notation
> tends to reduce the peak line length more as it deals with colonies
> that need a lot of one type (I have several cases like Fisherman x5 in
> a current game). What might be better though would be to group them
> up like we do with goods types... have to look into that.
> OTOH, while I like having the information the unit icons provide, it
> is not enough. I really want to quantify the benefit they would
> provide--- they are intended to help me answer the question of where
> to send the next trainee from Europe and/or<school>, but currently all I
> can tell is that colony A and B both need a Farmer, not whether
> colony A has a Grain bonus on ploughed land while colony B wants to farm a
> swamp. This might mean I will have to add at least one more number (the
> maximum production gain) to each unit icon, which is not going to help
> line length at all. I should also probably move the "how many
> colonists can I add to this colony without wrecking production" column
> over next to the "Wanted" column as that is part of the constraints.
> The other bug with them is that the suggested unit type is often
> wrong. If I have a colony that I want to build up to an Iron Works, I
> am much more likely to want its swamp tiles to be producing Ore than
> food. This may have to wait until we have some sort of tile annotation
>> The colonist icons could do with being a bit bigger, as could the font
>> size. I know this will exacerbate the line length, but what good is a
>> report that's too small to read?
> I agree about the font, but as I am using the default font size that
> is not entirely specific to this panel. The colonists are indeed
> pretty small (which is why I made certain that their tooltips work)
> but I am being careful with vertical space too for the benefit of the
> `Mighty Empire' games with 50+ colonies.
>> The yellow text is too hard to read on a parchment background. Use
> I thought it was orange! I can not read it, but I have been ignoring
> this as I usually do not care what the value is, just that it exists
> and is an indicator of a (minor) problem. I do need to make the
> colours configurable though.
>> You can reduce the insets on the reportPanel to half their current value.
> I am always slowest to do the things I do not know are possible:-).
>> The turns till colonist birth should be in its own column so that they
>> line up for easy comparison.
> How about I just put them at the front of their current column? Each
> extra column grows peak line length. The build queue item will not line up
> then instead, but its length varies more anyway.
>> When a colony is not constructing anything, the red "Nothing" is not
>> linked to the build queue.
> Good catch. Done.
>>> Wart: Underlines on the links. Underlines are ugly,
>> On my Mac, they are very ugly, being about 2.5 pixels thick (vs. an
>> x-height of 6 pixels) and poorly dithered. In fact, it looks like they
>> are falling on exact half-pixel boundaries. Can you move the underline
>> down by 0.5 pixels so that it doesn't dither?
> I have no such control. Underlining is implemented by wrapping the
> text you initialize the button with in "<html><u>" /"</u></html>".
> What you are seeing is Java graphics lameness. I see something
> similar when the panel pops up, but *really* *exasperatingly*, if you
> scroll up and down, it starts to get it right and produces much neater
> 1-pixel underlines.
>>> but I need colour for the
>>> problem-status, yet want to make the clickable fields discoverable.
>> The mouse cursor does not change to the web browser pointing hand
>> cursor when hovering on the links. That would help.
> Good point. Another thing I do not know how to do yet.
>>> Unimplemented for the moment: the production fields do not take into account
>>> goods movements via trade routes
>> Awesome idea, I would have never thought of that (mainly because I
>> never use trade routes (all wagons are done manually)
> Not sure whether you deserve great respect for your patience or doubts
> about your sanity:-). Trade routes save mine as the colony count rises.
> [Now responding to Michael]
>> Aargh! It is horrible! I may have been permanently blinded!
> Oh no! Not again!
>> Much too long, although the unit labels are too small. Could the
>> information be distributed across several tabs, such as production and
>> education, for example?
> Probably. I really want the whole thing there in one glance though.
>>> Wart: Underlines on the links. Underlines are ugly, but I need colour for
>>> problem-status, yet want to make the clickable fields discoverable.
>> The green and yellow labels are difficult to read, and they don't seem
>> to be configurable, either.
> Mostly true. The colony name colour is its production bonus colour,
> which is in resources.properties. The green for exported goods is
> following the convention in ColonyPanel, but is hardwired as are the
> rest. I have been ignoring the green being unreadable because if a
> goods type is exported I can forget about it.
>> I agree with Nick that using different
>> cursors would be a great improvement and would make links more easily
>> discoverable. Alternatively, the links themselves could change when the
>> pointer hovers above them.
> Yet again, I need to learn how to do that.
It's easy. I have modified the "link button" to use a hand cursor. What
I can not understand is why I didn't think of this before. Actually,
that's only half true. I once had the idea of using a question mark
cursor to provide tool tips or similar information, but never followed
> Alternately, perhaps I should just make every non-blank field
> clickable. Apart from the build queue, it would just bring up a
> colony panel, but that would at least allow dropping the underlines.
>> I realize that this report tells you exactly what you want to know, just
>> like the compact labour report told its original author all he wanted to
>> know. Others might not benefit as much. I suggest letting the players
> Fair enough. I do not have high expectations that my view of what
> information a player needs to see is particularly universal, and am
> quite prepared to revert and maintain this out of tree (although
> in-tree probably saves me some work:-). The tentative nature of this
> hack is why I put it on the Other tab.
> What I was trying to do here is implement what I had previously been
> doing with an open editor window next to/overlapping the FreeCol
> window. It started with lots of notes to the effect of "Fort Foo
> needs more wood" and "Fort Bar needs 1 clear forest, 2 ploughings, a
> road, and *really* needs a Farmer", and most annoyingly, "Fort Quux
> needs 50 Tools in 3 turns" (annoying because it needed a lot of
> updating). This eventually formed itself into a one line per colony
> TODO list with some standard fields, for which the bookkeeping
> overhead encouraged me to turn it into code.
> Something I did notice in the process though, is just how little I use
> any of our standard reports:
> Religion: Never
> Labour: Never
> Colony: Never (old style that is)
> Foreign: Rarely
> Indian: Not now that trade prices and skill are in SelectDestination
> Continental: Usually only because I have forgotten who it is:-)
> Military: Only when closing in on declaring independence
> Naval: Never, I know the REF has a better navy
> Trade: Never
> Turn: Yes
> Cargo: Never
> Exploration: Never
> History: Rarely, and I like history
> Production: Never
> Education: Never
> Perhaps that is why they are up there on F*. What reports do you
> people find useful?
I find the requirements report quite useful. You might find that it
serves a similar purpose to your new colony report panel, but looks
quite different. At the very least, I think the two reports could share
The exploration and history reports are just eye candy. They don't help
you play, but add a certain flair to the game.
Basically, I think most reports serve one of two functions: they either
tell you what your units are doing and where to find them, or they tell
you what your colonies are producing, and how that production might be
improved. Several reports more or less re-implement reports in the
original game, but a new approach might be worthwhile.
>  Now I am tempted to add the REF to the Foreign Affairs panel
> pre-declaration, as I am only interested in rough strength rather than
> the unit breakdown.
>> Maybe we should combine Messages with reports?
> Good idea.
>> And put the default zoom level on the display tab?
> Agreed, especially now that zoom works.
>> Also, the colony report uses a boolean option, whereas the labour
>> report uses a select option. This is not very consistent. I think
>> the select option is the better choice because at some point there
>> may be more than two different implementations of a single report.
> Yes, that was probably just laziness and/or low expectation of
> committing this when I started on it.
>> Finally, toggling the colony report option is not effective immediately.
> Maybe my client option hacks have broken all option setting, as in BR#3365806.
> Mike Pope