Q4 - Do you want structure and unit categories in a Sidebar?

[Grant]

CnCNet Question:

Quote

In a C&C or a Red Alert Remaster, would you want structure and unit categories on the sidebar like RA2, C&C3 and RA3 or do you prefer having 1 list with structures and 1 list with units like C&C1, RA1 and TS

• How to up-vote or down-vote on replies - Read here
• Questions will automatically close after 2 weeks.
• Questions are about Tiberian Dawn and Red Alert since the latest announcement - Read here
• Note: Unless question topics are tagged by an EA tag, this question is not from EA and is from CnCNet.

 

Let your voice be heard!
Join in on the discussion on Twitter!

Would you want to see Structure and Unit Category lists in a C&C Remastered Sidebar? ?https://t.co/gUn7LTITdc#commandandconquer #cncremaster pic.twitter.com/HLTblNxgUE

— CnCNet (@cncnetofficial) November 25, 2018

Or alternatively on Facebook!

[ore_truck]

I prefer like in C&C1,RA, and TS. Everything is in one place so I can just scroll with the mouse-wheel if I wanna buy anything. Having additional categories takes some time to get used to and needs to assign more hotkeys (to change between tabs) if you wanna buy things fast. I want this especially in TD where there's not many stuffs and the sidebar shows lots of purchasable options on high resolution so I don't have to press an extra hotkey or click a tab just to buy something if it's a different category of my last purchase.

I played a lot of Red Alert and Tiberian Dawn but a few weeks ago I played RA3 and C&C3 again and I find the different categories in the sidebar more complicated. Especially in RA3 since there's additional tabs for boats and planes (at least RA2 only has 4, where all vehicles share the same category).

Tldr: I prefer the sidebar like the original, everything is in one place and can be easily scrolled with the mouse wheel.

Edited November 25, 2018 by ore_truck

[cn2mc]

No. Too cumbersome for TD/RA, in my opinion. Just let people change the order construction options appear in at will. I already said something to that effect in a reply to one of the previous questions. 

[X3M]

I voted maybe. Make it optional.

I got reasons that would support the yes AND the no vote. I bet all of them are going to be mentioned in this topic in the next week.

[chem]

 

Can my vote be undone I picked the wrong one?

 

Judging by what cn2mc says it is an inferior way to do it because there's so few units and structures in TD, if there were alot of units/structures it would be the better design.

Also will it make the game slower and require more hotkeys?

Hot keys are a chore to learn not an enjoyable part of rts imo, im all for minimising hotkeys where ever possible, why add MORE buttons to learn especially if they are unnecessary? It just makes it harder to control when you are in a high adrenaline game.

 

Also I think votes on this are going to be very faulty any normal rational person is going to choose what looks like a neater clearer better layout ie the ra2 layout  but many of them will lack the knowledge someone like cn2mc has , and if they had that knowledge they'd vote the opposite way.

 

 

Edited November 25, 2018 by chem

[Chad1233]

I say make it optional because if the remasters had mods in the future that added more units I could see it useful

Though Retaliation's sidebar was optimized for controllers I did like how they worked the categorized sidebar where the latest unit/building you selected stays selected allowing you to quickly build the same unit you press O or Square on it to select a new one. Of course this feature wouldn't be needed if the units were given shortcut keys.

Spoiler

 

Edited November 25, 2018 by Chad1233

[Ferret]

Yes.

Let it be able to be toggled on or off so it gives the user options. It comes down to a preference thing, so having it be an option means everyone's happy in that regard. Best of both worlds in that case.

[Kampfkekskrieger]

Enough of the words! Give me my sword!

Why is that a Question? You KNOW the people are devided, or get devided: Where is the problem to just make both?

Maybe we get a minority with taking the old style, the other is worse, but not worse (and probably more popular) than the old. the old is better because you see all units and buildings on one glance what I wish, but let the people

1. Get the power to decide the matters of interface

2. Room to adjust that! (1. ingame options for both; and 2. [I only suggest] without impact on the gameplay: Just let them define the interface on code by editing a xml file or such.)

The time is passing on on computer games. Controls is very individual. If you devide it, you devide customers, no matter what you do.
We are COMMANDERS! WE want to control that! I did see in... oh what was that game... Guild wars I think, there you could customize your interface, where you had what. Its not that terrible. Its terrible, if you cannot make queues, where you want some, or 'caged' stances, that you cannot change.

Other modes are better without queues, then let them make manually.

If you are not open for further into the question, to more than just answer, you can ignore the question.

Edited November 26, 2018 by Kampfkekskrieger

[Alex06]

I feel like RA2/C&C3/RA3 makes sense and would add a layer of complexity to skills, you have to switch tabs. Problem is, TD/RA1 doesn't split build queues for defenses and production structures, so I'm sure if it'd do anything. It would, however, remove confusion and having to scroll up and down to find the Barracks units. Consolidating them makes more sense and the time used to find the unit can be better spent, some of it still being lost due to having to switch between tabs, so it's not like it'll make it that much easier and remove skill (IMO).