I want to present something which has been irking me for quite a while; whenever discrete shots are involved, the ammunition display just shows ten points representing 10% each:
Those ten points are not too bad given that those hundred rounds are expended at a rate of several per second, although if we look over at how a few other modules are treated:
Lasers, scanners and the anti-xeno version of ECM each get a continuous display, which would be much more appropriate for the Multi-cannons! The Caustic sink launcher is a little bit special in displaying its caustic capacity despite also having discrete "ammunition", although the Heat sink launchers and Gauss cannons illustrate another problem quite well:
In both cases, we have ten points shown despite those modules only having one shot before reloading; this ought to show one point, not ten. Of course, for single-shot modules there is also a case just for showing the remaining ammunition, but I can understand keeping things consistent. Then again, observe what happens when one has a lot of modules present:
Neither the Heat sink launchers nor the Shard cannons even show any numbers any more, despite having plenty of space available above into which their placement could expand. Luckily the Shard cannons have a capacity of five, which divides the fixed ten shown and therefore represents at least the correct proportion remaining before a reload occurs.
Things get really confusing for modules which some some other capacity which does not divide ten, though! For example:
All of those Research look much the same, save for spotting the quite significant difference where one of them has eight capacity and the others have only one. Any other type of limpet controller is that way; for example, it would look so much nicer if different classes of Collector limpet were represented by the points shown. Such also would avoid this problem when using those shots one by one:
Regardless of how the proportional boundaries are decided, something with eight shots cannot possibly present smoothly on a view which insists on showing ten points, with the 6–5 and 2–1 showing as using two points each in this case. Those points ought to adapt to the number of shots, and for high numbers such as 100 it is quite fine just to use the continuous, non-discrete version!
Those ten points are not too bad given that those hundred rounds are expended at a rate of several per second, although if we look over at how a few other modules are treated:
Lasers, scanners and the anti-xeno version of ECM each get a continuous display, which would be much more appropriate for the Multi-cannons! The Caustic sink launcher is a little bit special in displaying its caustic capacity despite also having discrete "ammunition", although the Heat sink launchers and Gauss cannons illustrate another problem quite well:
In both cases, we have ten points shown despite those modules only having one shot before reloading; this ought to show one point, not ten. Of course, for single-shot modules there is also a case just for showing the remaining ammunition, but I can understand keeping things consistent. Then again, observe what happens when one has a lot of modules present:
Neither the Heat sink launchers nor the Shard cannons even show any numbers any more, despite having plenty of space available above into which their placement could expand. Luckily the Shard cannons have a capacity of five, which divides the fixed ten shown and therefore represents at least the correct proportion remaining before a reload occurs.
Things get really confusing for modules which some some other capacity which does not divide ten, though! For example:
All of those Research look much the same, save for spotting the quite significant difference where one of them has eight capacity and the others have only one. Any other type of limpet controller is that way; for example, it would look so much nicer if different classes of Collector limpet were represented by the points shown. Such also would avoid this problem when using those shots one by one:
Regardless of how the proportional boundaries are decided, something with eight shots cannot possibly present smoothly on a view which insists on showing ten points, with the 6–5 and 2–1 showing as using two points each in this case. Those points ought to adapt to the number of shots, and for high numbers such as 100 it is quite fine just to use the continuous, non-discrete version!
