[V7.2.0 - geoscape] - usability/clarity - some base & aircraft upgrades have vague descriptions of benefits, making it hard to tell if they are worth building

[fusion-waffle]

Description

usability/clarity - some base & aircraft upgrades have vague descriptions of benefits, making it hard to tell if they are worth building

In many other places, the game does an excellent job of clearly communicating pre-decision information about the effects of building something / executing a strategic operation / winning or failing a ground combat mission.  But there's a few upgrades where this pre-decision information is missing. 

This one is arguably a feature request, not a bug, but could help with player experience, particularly for new players on their first campaign.

Examples

1. Air Weapons: Reinforced Plating 

• vague description: "increasing their survivability"
• Suggestion: "Armour: + 12 Armour, Payload: 3 Weight".  It seems there are also tooltips for aircraft armour that display when hovered in the aircraft screen -- these could also be added when hovering over these engineering projects in engineering screen, same as for the aircraft weapon upgrades.

2. Air Weapons: Angel: Engine Upgrade

• vague description: "significantly increasing their speed"
• Suggestion: "Effects: +x% speed"

 

3. Base Upgrades: Nanotech workshop

• vague description: "improving the efficiency of the engineers"
• Suggestion: "Effects: +x% engineering output per engineer"

 

4. Base Upgrades: Quantum laboratory

• vague description: "improving the efficiency of the scientists"
• Suggestion: "Effects: +x% research output per scientist"

 

5. Base Upgrades: Surgical Center

• vague description: "improving their healing rate and the survival chance of casualties"
• Suggestion: "Effects: +x% survival chance,  +y HP / day healing rate".

6. Armour: Guardian: Protection

• vague description: "Improves our Guardian Armour"
• Suggestion: "Effects: +x armour HP, +y hardness, +z weight".

 

 

Edited February 23 by fusion-waffle
added guardian: protection

[Kouki]

13 hours ago, fusion-waffle said:

Description

usability/clarity - some base & aircraft upgrades have vague descriptions of benefits, making it hard to tell if they are worth building

In many other places, the game does an excellent job of clearly communicating pre-decision information about the effects of building something / executing a strategic operation / winning or failing a ground combat mission.  But there's a few upgrades where this pre-decision information is missing. 

This one is arguably a feature request, not a bug, but could help with player experience, particularly for new players on their first campaign.

Examples

1. Air Weapons: Reinforced Plating 

• vague description: "increasing their survivability"
• Suggestion: "Armour: + 12 Armour, Payload: 3 Weight".  It seems there are also tooltips for aircraft armour that display when hovered in the aircraft screen -- these could also be added when hovering over these engineering projects in engineering screen, same as for the aircraft weapon upgrades.

2. Air Weapons: Angel: Engine Upgrade

• vague description: "significantly increasing their speed"
• Suggestion: "Effects: +x% speed"

 

3. Base Upgrades: Nanotech workshop

• vague description: "improving the efficiency of the engineers"
• Suggestion: "Effects: +x% engineering output per engineer"

 

4. Base Upgrades: Quantum laboratory

• vague description: "improving the efficiency of the scientists"
• Suggestion: "Effects: +x% research output per scientist"

 

5. Base Upgrades: Surgical Center

• vague description: "improving their healing rate and the survival chance of casualties"
• Suggestion: "Effects: +x% survival chance,  +y HP / day healing rate".

6. Armour: Guardian: Protection

• vague description: "Improves our Guardian Armour"
• Suggestion: "Effects: +x armour HP, +y hardness, +z weight".

 

 

As you pointed out, it's not really a bug(more of a feedback) but I'll bring this up with Chris , thanks!