I like these changes!
To improve HP bar readability, I suggest adding simple tick marks at 25%, 50%, and 75%. Because the health scales, it’s hard to tell at a glance where you’re at (like recognizing 47% armor is just below half). Even though the medallion has percentage readouts, the bars themselves should be intuitive without needing to rely on numbers. Notches would make reading health much faster for everyone.
Here is a rough example of what I mean:
i think they should just completely scrap the new hud
To be polite…this hud isn’t intuitive.
Intuitive Design would be. This is Shield/Armor/HP. With indicators.
As the design stands…and I threw you into the game without really explaining anything. You might not exactly see or understand anything in that screen shot.
Lets say we swap it to a ship with more armor or hull…similar problem…no indicators…a new player would either get confused if they get into another ship of another faction…or an unfitted ship.
This is another problem with the system. It doesn’t take into account that each faction has different baseline HP modifications. It doesn’t really show information of damage…its really hard to customize for specific interaction [sound alerts for shield/armor/hull]
The reactive indicators…regeneration/depletion of capacitor…have no proper indicators. The “overcharge” indicator…really should be a flame “over heat indicator” because use the power symbol for neutralization/nosferatu mechanics…NOT overheat.
Its also not very effective in communicating information.
Intuitive Design…understands international symbol usage. And how people move with their eyes and understand concepts. Its the same problem you get with languages. Some languages are up down…or bottom to top. Some are multi-directional. [so you need an indicator where you start] And some are left to right…or right to left.
And that is before you start tinkering with visual impairment…and colorblindness issues. To me this UI isn’t what the player base needs or wants. I get the ideas…but we have had a functional UI…that just needs some iteration and modernization. Suddenly jumping into the deep end of really untested by long term usage of the playerbase. Isn’t wise.
He was quoting @CCP_Junison , who, as is typical for developers, prefers to converse in his Discord echo chamber than ever grace the company’s own fora…
Anyway, here we get a classic example of CCP/Fenris pretending to listen to feedback whilst blithely ploughing on with arrogant stupidity in pursuit of what they have already decided. In this case, they have clearly decided that hit point display has to be “proportional”. Why? Personally, I hate it. What I need to know, very clearly with a glance, is that the current type of protection is getting a bit low. If it is the shield, then maybe I need to start the armour repairer. If it is the armour, and I am not within a few seconds of killing the last enemy, then maybe I need to think about withdrawing before I start losing hull. I know the relative strengths of my ship’s defences. I want to see three different dials. I could not give a rat’s proverbial about proportionality.
As I said above, I am horrified by the size of the HUD. It will be compounded by all the dead space in it being laid over all the unnecessary dead space in Python: the last time they lied about listening to feedback…
I totally agree.
I much prefer having three bars.
I really hope that if they continue to (stubbornly) push on with the proportional design, they’ll at least give us an option to switch to a second design more like the existing one with three equal-sized separate bars.
Please let me easily see the state of my relevant bar at a glance, this proportional health bar doesn’t do that.
Sorry I don’t speak all caps, also be sure to rephrase your answer in the form of a quetion.
Example: Is Fenris Creations HUD AI change is superb?
Answer is no.
Its actually interesting how…sometimes ideas come full circle
There is a wide variety of options to make the game legible and understandable.
I am also surprised that for all this time, they haven’t really done indicators for what type of damage on the shield/armor so you know if something is going for your resist holes. Sometimes the damage log isn’t clear enough for even experienced players to zero in on.
But I am concerned the feedback…and whom is giving the feedback and where is the problem. I am seeing a huge amount of frustration and push back…including youtube videos showing the problems and issues. So its going to be an interesting record of what the community didn’t want in comparison to what got put in the game.
Since 2020, there have been a series of controversial changes, we are still working out the compiications from, and I don’t think this change will be beneficial.
The simpliest test of an idea…would be do some experiments with the current HUD on SISI. See what works…what doesn’t work. Throw another test on…fine tune. Don’t just jump into the deep end like this.
Feedback from Fanfest is kind of iffy…because that is a very tiny fraction of the game itself that can afford to or can get to Fanfest on their own dime. The CSM is questionable because of two factors size representation, and well invested interests in the game [And history of being ignored even if the warning flags and lights were thrown up.] And feedback from the Discord(s) is also suspect due to who is on there on the regular. [Usually the same people all the time.] The forums seems to be ignored, even if its a more catalogued and worked out system, but then again TLDR mantra seems to be fairly common even if its written out.
Hopefully someone with a sensible head will kind of ask the questions of design that EVE needs, not some “change for change sake” situation. But as others have pointed out…there is a sense of inevitability in some peoples perspective. I would rather lay out alternatives and ideas, and then if they keep sticking to the bad idea…we have a record of what the community suggested and considered could be done.
We have done simplistic changes…rotating some elements of the current UI to get the same results and concepts and least disruption of the playerbase. [Easiest on Dev Time as well.]
We have considered some amendments to their current concepts…and adjusted it to more functional systems. And we can see some of the playerbase are very skilled and talented in figuring out different ideas of UI design..
We have pointed out the gaps in the concept…and how this might make it even harder for new players to understand the mechanics of the game.
I hope that Fenris Creation will hear the feedback, and maybe consider a little more baking it in the oven.
Or you might get some unforeseen consequences for the playerbase. Especially older players on break coming back might get frustrated by all the changes…and just say…no reason to keep up with this.
This is another little problem…that hasn’t even been broached in this discussion.
This is from 2011…and we are still having scaling issues…dependent on screen size.
Most EVE players who have bigger rigs solved this by…multi-screen. While Single Screen players are having serious “digital real estate” issues, because of the consistent bloat of UI elements. Especially the laptop players.
How are they going to scale this UI change? Because if we do 90% its going to be nearly illegible for most players…never mind the visually impaired!
With regard to the proportional HP bars: The HUD should tell me what my primary tank is based on modules fitted, and this tank bar should be the widest (without making the other too narrow). Secondary aspect should be the main tank type if things like dual tanking takes place. Triple tanking should explode the HUD outright.
For instance, my Legion has a Shield Extender fitted, this makes it shield tanked. Even though Shield and Armor have roughly the same HP, Shield should be wider. Instead of being directly proportional to the HP value, the bars should be split 50-25/25 between the main tank and the secondary tank layers. Additionally, the main tank should be highlighted. This way, it’s clear what is your main tank layer, while retaining the other 2 tank layers in an easily legible state.
Another example would be titans, which are generally dual tanked. For them, the HP bar split should be 45-35-20. This time, the main tank type of the ship gets the largest bar, the secondary tank layer due to modules gets the second biggest and the last, unmoduled layer the smallest. Same result as above with clear indicators what is your main tank and what your moduled secondary tank.
Without any tank mods fitted (does that even happen besides dumb haulers not fitting anything to their ships? 
), the normal HP distribution should govern the scaling of the bars, with the main tank type of the ship’s race be more prominent than the other tank layers.
Thinking on this…were they going to show indicators for a player that they are being affected by fleet boosters? Because there are a few different effects that can seriously mess up this proportional system pretty fast. [Wormholes/Storms/Fleet boosts/ Implants…that would kind of make this system either very silly…or cause visual problems as they get out of control.
An excellent point. Take a very simple example: Edencom Stellar Observatory effects. These impart either 10% shield or 10% armour, depending on owning empire…
At best, we will end up with displays which, like the never-fixed turret cycle animation, spin past the end of the cycle before actually letting one fire again, as the animation is mismatched to the actual weapon performance.
Of course, devs who actually played the game would know this 
For those who prefer seperate bars for shield, armor, and hull, for reading them quickly and easily, maybe turn them all into their seperate bars that are easy to read and are different from one another?
S = shield
A = armor
H = hull
C = capaictator
the drawing is bad on purpose because i am not a drawer.
Another drawing of seperating each meter, such as speed, capacitator, shield, armor, hull, health, etc, into its own rectangle or whatever
drawings are ugly because i made them. game devs most likely can make it look prettier.
also a menu to hide modules from view so the only module buttons visible in space are ones you want to see. Passive modules you can hide from view, so they dont take up screen space while you are in space
In my vision, this could be governed by the second example about dual tanking. Bonuses can be treated as modules to keep things simple.
Die-hard players clicking HUD? 1st time I hear about it. Keyboard…
Ctrl+F9 4tw \o/
This is Missionforce Cyberstorm from 1996. Its a quasi turn based strategy game with mechs.
Missionforce Cyberstorm video (https://youtu.be/tNfLWamChd8)
I wanted to show some interesting little tidbits on UI concepts. And ironically it seems to have some similarities to EVE Online with a twist.
We as EVE players are capsuleers. In Cyberstorm you have Bioderms. With a time system that degrades. And mechanics of drugs that increase their stats, but you also can destabilize your Bioderms with overuse of toxins. And you have the power to “recycle” them if they become less than useful for your operations. You can upgrade them, train them with various skills, but you have to eventually recycle them if they go past expiration date. And you thought EVE biomass mechanics on the loading screen was dark. [Think of the horrors of the game…if your capsuleers were just commodified to an expiration date!]
But the game although very simple by modern standards…has a functional and fairly simple at first…but complex interaction system. A reactor/battery/capacitor limitation for weapons and movment. A directional shield/cover/
But your point stands…several games actually have used your concept as well. SAHC [Or you will find SAHB [B=Battery]]
Active Modules/ Passive Modules choice and options, just not automatic.
Concord with its over-rep potential size based.
Marauders with Dual-Dual Tank…or multi-rep fits.
Hull Tanking.
Sig/Speed tanking is almost untrackable or displayable.
Dual or even Triple Tanking. [Dual Tanking more common.]
No considerations of system/fleet boost/ wormhole/ storm effects and the way they would radically change the proportional UI. I wouldn’t be surprised if someone panicked the first time their proportional UI suddenly inverts due to system effects.
