As you asked for comments, here's what I notice on r4635 (much of which is not specific to your recent changes):
1. The white frame around the player name input field has a different size than the shaded background. This looks ugly. I'm not sure the white frame is actually needed since there is the shaded background and a "cursor" (which doesn't allow you to go back and forth without deleting characters as you would expect in a text editor).
2. The player name field has a lighter shaded background than all other fields.
There is no padding between the left border of the player name input field and the first character, which looks ugly.
3. The player name can overwrite the right border of the player name input field. Note the player name input field's cursor below "ma" of the word "Human" which is the current value of a different selection box ("Control"). This looks ugly.
4. The buttons on the Faction selection field are smaller than on all other selection fields. This is incoherent.
There is no padding between the left button and the left border of the faction selection field, however there is padding between the faction selection buttons and the top and bottom border of the faction selection field. This looks ugly.
5. The positioning of the "forward" button within the the selection field differs from that on all other input fields. This is incoherent.
6. The faction name(s) can overwrite the right border of the faction selection field. Note the faction selection field's text "ptu" below "1" which is the current value of a different selection box (team identifier). This looks ugly.
7. There is no padding between the left border of the server name input field and the first character, which looks ugly.
8. In this example, on the player list, next to a hardly readable dark blue slot ID ("1") there is a differently colored (light green) pound character, right next to the differently colored player name. It is unclear what this pound character indicates. I noticed later that this is a readiness indicator, but this is not intuitive, and looks ugly, too.
9. The chat has the potential of overwriting any UI elements to the right of it. This looks ugly and breaks the UI.
10. Player IDs should start at 1, since this is how humans count. When there are eight players, the first player should be labelled
1, the last one should be labelled
8. Whether or not the game handles this differently internally does not matter. This simply should not be exposed to the UI.
New players are usually unable to notice how players' start positions on the mini map (indicated by a cross) map to player IDs (on the player list). It would be better (in addition to color coding) to use the same indicator on both mini map and player list (so either use the same graphical cross as found on the mini map also on the player list, or - maybe better - place the player IDs on their start positions on the mini map (removing the cross indicator). Also, the mini map would be better placed on top of or left of the player list, so that an admin will look at it before s/he looks at the player list and thus has a better chance of understanding how the two relate to each other.
I'm criticising rather harshly here, please don't take this personally. It's just that I'm still very unhappy with our mediocre user interface (and lack of proper widgets). It is nice how GAE (while they have a LOT less options they need to present) was able to solve this once and (possibly) for all and I still long for something comparable in MegaGlest. Text input fields which allow you to overwrite other fields are a perfect example of what is really not an acceptable quirk in UI design past year 2000.
