Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 .. 21 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 8 post(s) |
Ben Fenix
CapStream
16
|
Posted - 2013.08.06 10:56:00 -
[511] - Quote
GUIDED MISSILE PRECISION
Quote:Guided Missile Precision Skill at precision missile homing. Proficiency at this skill increases the accuracy of a fired missile's exact point of impact, resulting in greater damage to small targets.
5% decreased factor of signature radius for light, heavy and cruise missile explosions per level of skill.
So as stated by the description, this is what the skill should do: (simplified) Bringing the missile closer to the target, so that the missile explosion can deal more damage to it.
What the skill actually does ingame: Giving a bonus to a missile's explosion radius attribute by -5%
Conclusion: It means that the skill isn't described accordingly to the actual game mechanic or in other words: The appliance of a bonus of -5% to the missile's explosion radius has nothing to do with the accuracy, the point of impact and the signature radius of a missile.
Proposal: Adjusting the skill name and description accordingly to the actual game mechanic.
Solution
Quote:Densifyed Missile Explosions Skill at adjusting missile explosion. Proficiency at this skill increases the density of a fired missile's explosion, resulting in greater damage to small targets.
5% decreased factor of explosion radius for light, heavy and cruise missile explosions per level of skill. _______________________________________________________________________________________________
TARGET NAVIGATION PREDICTION
Quote:Target Navigation Prediction Proficiency at optimizing a missile's flight path to negate the effects of a target's speed upon the explosion's impact.
10% decrease per level in factor of target's velocity for all missiles.
So as stated by the description, this is what the skill should do: (simplified) It predicts a target's navigational course to intercept the target in order to negate the target's velocity in order to apply full damage to it.
What the skill actually does ingame: Giving a bonus to a missile's explosion velocity attribute by +10%
Conclusion: It means that the skill isn't described accordingly to the actual game mechanic or in other words: The appliance of a bonus of +10% to the missile's explosion velocity has nothing to do with the optimization of a missile's flight path and the negation of a target's velocity.
Solution
Quote:Projected Missile Explosions Skill at adjusting missile explosion. Proficiency at this skill increases the velocity of a fired missile's explosion, resulting in greater damage to fast targets.
10% increased factor of explosion radius for light, heavy and cruise missile explosions per level of skill. CapStream Because Cap Is Life |
Soteria Ariste
Defiant Diddlers
1
|
Posted - 2013.08.06 20:08:00 -
[512] - Quote
A quick +1 to leaving Spaceship command and missile launcher operation as they are.
Overall i love the fact that someone thought it would be time to take the shield skills out of engineering.
And another +1 for changing the Energy management and operation to capacitor management. |
Rowells
Unknown Soldiers Against ALL Authorities
61
|
Posted - 2013.08.06 21:07:00 -
[513] - Quote
Rommiee wrote:My God.....CCP, what is WRONG with you people ?
This is completely pointless and adds nothing. Why donGÇÖt you spend your time fixing stuff that is broken, and not just sit there trying to thinking up the next pointless thing to do.
FFS fix broken stuff before messing with things that DO NOT need fixing.
Jeez.
who the hell pissed in your cheerios? it probably took like 20 minutes to do this, and it has no negative impact so quit whining. |
Solhild
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1071
|
Posted - 2013.08.06 23:04:00 -
[514] - Quote
Ben Fenix wrote:GUIDED MISSILE PRECISION Quote:Guided Missile Precision Skill at precision missile homing. Proficiency at this skill increases the accuracy of a fired missile's exact point of impact, resulting in greater damage to small targets.
5% decreased factor of signature radius for light, heavy and cruise missile explosions per level of skill. So as stated by the description, this is what the skill should do: (simplified) Bringing the missile closer to the target, so that the missile explosion can deal more damage to it.
What the skill actually does ingame: Giving a bonus to a missile's explosion radius attribute by -5%
Conclusion: It means that the skill isn't described accordingly to the actual game mechanic or in other words: The appliance of a bonus of -5% to the missile's explosion radius has nothing to do with the accuracy, the point of impact and the signature radius of a missile.
Proposal: Adjusting the skill name and description accordingly to the actual game mechanic.
Solution Quote:Densifyed Missile Explosions Skill at adjusting missile explosion. Proficiency at this skill increases the density of a fired missile's explosion, resulting in greater damage to small targets.
5% decreased factor of explosion radius for light, heavy and cruise missile explosions per level of skill. _______________________________________________________________________________________________ TARGET NAVIGATION PREDICTION Quote:Target Navigation Prediction Proficiency at optimizing a missile's flight path to negate the effects of a target's speed upon the explosion's impact.
10% decrease per level in factor of target's velocity for all missiles. So as stated by the description, this is what the skill should do: (simplified) It predicts a target's navigational course to intercept the target in order to negate the target's velocity in order to apply full damage to it.
What the skill actually does ingame: Giving a bonus to a missile's explosion velocity attribute by +10%
Conclusion: It means that the skill isn't described accordingly to the actual game mechanic or in other words: The appliance of a bonus of +10% to the missile's explosion velocity has nothing to do with the optimization of a missile's flight path and the negation of a target's velocity.
Solution Quote:Projected Missile Explosions Skill at adjusting missile explosion. Proficiency at this skill increases the velocity of a fired missile's explosion, resulting in greater damage to fast targets.
10% increased factor of explosion radius for light, heavy and cruise missile explosions per level of skill.
I like the thinking here, not happy with the word 'densify'. Not sure of an alternative solution yet. |
Ben Fenix
CapStream
17
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 00:59:00 -
[515] - Quote
Solhild wrote:I like the thinking here, not happy with the word 'densify'. Not sure of an alternative solution yet.
Yeah me neither. That's due to the fact that English isn't my mother tongue but it was the closest I could come up with. CapStream Because Cap Is Life |
Hehaw Jimbojohnson
Frontier Explorer's League Sadistica Alliance
66
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 02:54:00 -
[516] - Quote
Sorry, but I personally think this is a waste of time. This causes as many problems as it solves (such as breaking up logical skill groups like PI and subsystems, along with splitting up skills that require the same attributes to train). A lot of the skill names sound like they are designed to appeal to 10 year olds who barely understand English (Spaceship Piloting, really?)
There are hundreds of other things broke in the game that could use work, why waste time on name changes that aren't particularly broken and don't fix anything? |
Magnus Coleus
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
4
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 04:41:00 -
[517] - Quote
Hehaw Jimbojohnson wrote:SThis causes as many problems as it solves (such as breaking up logical skill groups like PI and subsystems,
Read the other dev posts, not just the first one. PI and subsystems are staying in their own groups.
Hehaw Jimbojohnson wrote:There are hundreds of other things broke in the game that could use work
Anything you consider a priority, someone else will consider a minor detail.
Skill names are a mess; this is an important change in terms of UI streamlining and information accessibility. Besides, it's mostly just editing a few text files; I doubt it will steal much (if any) time from the game's core development. Eve isn't made by a single person, and different people (ex., writers and coders) can work on different things at the same time.
|
Magnus Coleus
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
4
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 04:43:00 -
[518] - Quote
Rafael Tonka wrote:Dumbing down the game for the less mentally agile yet again?
If your sense of achievement in Eve comes from having memorized skill names, I have a Golden Magnate Navy Issue I'd like to sell you...
|
Moneta Curran
Lunar Industries Ltd
128
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 05:57:00 -
[519] - Quote
Magnus Coleus wrote:If your sense of achievement in Eve comes from having memorized skill names, I have a Golden Magnate Navy Issue I'd like to sell you...
There's this real life skill called reading comprehension.. you may want to look it up.
He didn't present it as an accomplishment, he rightly pointed out that taking the time to understand what you put in the skill queue is an absolutely trivial thing.
Those who apparently have trouble figuring out what "Spaceship Command" or "Energy Management" means would be far more likely to fall for a scam. Because they are idiots.
|
jwingender
Tar Valon Research and Development
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 06:16:00 -
[520] - Quote
If you are trying to clean up the skills then why wouldn't KEEP the subsystem category with all its own little skills. Hiding them in with the rig skills makes zero sense. It seems like you are creating a job for someone 2-3 years down the line when they "remove subsystem skills into their own category." Save that guy the time and just don't do this now.
Also: +1 for keeping Spaceship Command category, Electronics skill, and Engineering skill. They sound so much better than your proposed alternatives and are already quite intuitive.
Everything else sounds brilliant. |
|
Solhild
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
1071
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 10:48:00 -
[521] - Quote
OP should be updated to reflect other posts. This thread is confusing now. |
|
CCP Ytterbium
C C P C C P Alliance
2233
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 10:51:00 -
[522] - Quote
Solhild wrote:OP should be updated to reflect other posts. This thread is confusing now.
Indeed it is, forgot about the OP Just updated it right now from the changes listed there. |
|
TehCloud
Carnivore Company 24eme Legion Etrangere
80
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 12:02:00 -
[523] - Quote
Thanks for keeping Spaceship Command :3
Still I feel that "Armor" and "Shield" just feel wrong. But still, I'm happy. My Condor costs less than that module! |
Harvey James
Deep Core Mining Inc. Caldari State
433
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 12:29:00 -
[524] - Quote
please change mechanics and hull upgrades .. they don't explain what they are and is hard to remember the difference.. Tech 3's need to be multi role ships not cruiser hulls with battleship tank and insane resists ABC's are clearly T2 in all but name AB's need a buff-á like a big mass reduction ... module tiercide FTW role based instead of tiers please. |
Frenjo Borkstar
Viziam Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 14:53:00 -
[525] - Quote
Things don't need to be changed, they are perfectly fine, and not everyone that plays eve is in need of things being "dumbed down", as for Armor Layering, NO WAY, armor honeycombing is pretty good. Things have been this way for 10 years, don't change them now and get everybody confused. |
Mongo Edwards
Hounds Of War WHY so Seri0Us
11
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 15:57:00 -
[526] - Quote
Capacitor Emission Systems and Capital Capacitor Emission Systems sounds kind of silly. A capacitor is a peice of hardware used to store energy. The modules requiring the skills transfer giga joules (energy) to another ship not the hardware used to store the energy.
Please leave the skills named Energy Emission Systems and Capital Energy Emission Systems as it is more descriptive of what they effect. |
Magnus Coleus
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
5
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 18:29:00 -
[527] - Quote
Moneta Curran wrote:he rightly pointed out that taking the time to understand what you put in the skill queue is an absolutely trivial thing.
Not sure how you get "he rightly pointed out [anything]" when all the post says is this:
Rafael Tonka wrote:Dumbing down the game for the less mentally agile yet again?
Correcting ambiguous terms is not "dumbing down", it's improving the interface (or documentation, etc.). It's precisely the "less mentally agile" people who oppose any change (even when it makes the terminology more concise) because it means they will have to learn something new.
|
Magnus Coleus
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
5
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 18:32:00 -
[528] - Quote
Mongo Edwards wrote:Capacitor Emission Systems and Capital Capacitor Emission Systems sounds kind of silly. A capacitor is a peice of hardware used to store energy. The modules requiring the skills transfer giga joules (energy) to another ship not the hardware used to store the energy.
Please leave the skills named Energy Emission Systems and Capital Energy Emission Systems as it is more descriptive of what they effect.
I agree "capacitor emission" sounds a bit weird, but you are effectively emitting energy from a capacitor to another capacitor, not to or from the energy grid, so the term needs to make that clear.
I would suggest something like "Remote Capacitor Charging".
|
Magnus Coleus
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
5
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 18:56:00 -
[529] - Quote
Siresa Talesi wrote:Show me the dictionary that lists "targeting" as a noun.
DOD DoMT, Joint Education and Doctrine Division, J-7 wrote: targeting (n.) The process of selecting and prioritizing targets and matching the appropriate response to them, considering operational requirements and capabilities. See also joint targeting coordination board; target.
That's from the DOD Dictionary of Military Terms (which anyone who's served in the US probably came across at some point). Authoritative and appropriate enough for ya? I can also show you military manuals with entire chapters dedicated to "the targeting of" various things. Wouldn't be surprised if there are even some parts about "multi-targeting" (which is really just a better-sounding abbreviation of "multiple targeting").
Maybe English isn't your first language, but no native speaker has any doubt that "targeting", "opening", or hundreds of other words ending in "ing" can be nouns. Heard of Shakespeare? He wrote "The Taming of the Shrew". I guess that illiterate oaf didn't know that "taming" isn't a noun...
Now please stop spamming about "bad grammer" (or at least learn to spell "grammar").
CCP admitted it sounded bad and changed the term about five pages ago, anyway. |
jwingender
Tar Valon Research and Development
1
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 19:27:00 -
[530] - Quote
Chris Winter wrote: "Armor layering" implies adding armor, which isn't what the skill does. "Armor honeycombing" implies making the armor lighter, which is exactly what the skill does.
Not sure why you need to change that one...
Totally agree. Layering is counter-intuitive with what the skill actually does. Another change to get reversed later...
|
|
Mongo Edwards
Hounds Of War WHY so Seri0Us
11
|
Posted - 2013.08.07 20:26:00 -
[531] - Quote
They could also just change the "Energy Grid Upgrades" skill to "Power Grid Upgrades" it seems to fit better with what the skill actually does. |
CW Itovuo
The Executioners Insidious Empire
7
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 03:28:00 -
[532] - Quote
How many times did CCP change the names of Missiles to make the game moar bettah? Yeah. Brilliant.
Just leave the skill names as they are.
Changing them is counter productive to the hundreds of people who maintain webpages.
|
Moneta Curran
Lunar Industries Ltd
128
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 07:03:00 -
[533] - Quote
Magnus Coleus wrote:Moneta Curran wrote:he rightly pointed out that taking the time to understand what you put in the skill queue is an absolutely trivial thing. Not sure how you get "he rightly pointed out [anything]" when all the post says is this: Rafael Tonka wrote:Dumbing down the game for the less mentally agile yet again? Correcting ambiguous terms is not "dumbing down", it's improving the interface (or documentation, etc.). It's precisely the "less mentally agile" people who oppose any change (even when it makes the terminology more concise) because it means they will have to learn something new.
Again, look up reading comprehension. I was offering an exposition of the crux of his statement.
You are misreading our objections. It's not learning new, purposely self-explanatory names that is the issue here.
The main objective, at least on my part, is that the alternatives offered for the current skill names range from cringe worthy to absolutely -ğetarded.
|
Magnus Coleus
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
7
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 07:52:00 -
[534] - Quote
Moneta Curran wrote:I was offering an exposition of the crux of his statement. Thanks for the chuckle.
Moneta Curran wrote:the alternatives offered for the current skill names range from cringe worthy to absolutely -ğetarded. So, tell me, renaming "Nanite Control" (a skill that affects boosters, and not nanite paste use) to "Neurotoxin Control"... is that "cringe worthy" or "absolutely -ğetarded" ?
What about changing "Energy Management" (which affects your capacitor, and not your energy grid) to "Capacitor Management"? "Cringe worthy" or "absolutely -ğetarded" ?
What about "Rigging" for the group that contains rigging skills? What about "Neural Enhancement" for the group that contains skills related to boosters and implants? Where do those fall in your scale? And so on...
I'm just trying to get to the crux of your rating system. |
Alticus C Bear
University of Caille Gallente Federation
163
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 08:29:00 -
[535] - Quote
Glad Spaceship Command is back. Changes look mostly sensible except armor layering which as pointed out above sounds like it adds armor. Armor Honeycombing is a better name. |
Balzac Legazou
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
21
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 08:45:00 -
[536] - Quote
Harvey James wrote:please change mechanics and hull upgrades .. they don't explain what they are and is hard to remember the difference..
The problem there is that "Hull Upgrades" actually improves armor (and also allows you to install lots of different upgrades, some armor-related, some not), while "Mechanics" improves structure (which in some places is called "hull"), and is also required for some very different modules (some armor-related, some not).
Simply changing the names won't really fix the problem(s). The reason why it's hard to remember which is which is that they both overlap in many places.
And if they can't fix it properly, they might as well keep the current names. |
Moneta Curran
Lunar Industries Ltd
129
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 09:04:00 -
[537] - Quote
Magnus Coleus wrote:So, tell me, renaming "Nanite Control" (a skill that affects boosters, and not nanite paste use) to "Neurotoxin Control"... is that "cringe worthy" or "absolutely -ğetarded" ?
Neither. That's one of the few exceptions that proves the rule. It actually makes sense.
Magnus Coleus wrote:What about changing "Energy Management" (which affects your capacitor, and not your energy grid) to "Capacitor Management"? "Cringe worthy" or "absolutely -ğetarded" ?
Cringe worthy. I'm not sure why anyone would think that the power grid is involved here. Why should we cater to those who can't be arsed to read the skill descriptions? You cannot fix stupid anyway.
Magnus Coleus wrote:What about "Rigging" for the group that contains rigging skills? What about "Neural Enhancement" for the group that contains skills related to boosters and implants? Where do those fall in your scale? And so on...
I can point out a dumb suggestion for every remotely sensible one you have cherry-picked here. There's just no real need to change these either. It's a waste of development time. So, bearing in mind the bigger picture, it's -ğetarded. |
Siresa Talesi
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
73
|
Posted - 2013.08.08 19:34:00 -
[538] - Quote
Magnus Coleus wrote:Siresa Talesi wrote:Show me the dictionary that lists "targeting" as a noun. DOD DoMT, Joint Education and Doctrine Division, J-7 wrote: targeting (n.) The process of selecting and prioritizing targets and matching the appropriate response to them, considering operational requirements and capabilities. See also joint targeting coordination board; target.
That's from the DOD Dictionary of Military Terms (which anyone who's served in the US probably came across at some point). Authoritative and appropriate enough for ya? I can also show you military manuals with entire chapters dedicated to "the targeting of" various things. Wouldn't be surprised if there are even some parts about "multi-targeting" (which is really just a better-sounding abbreviation of "multiple targeting"). Maybe English isn't your first language, but no native speaker has any doubt that "targeting", "opening", or hundreds of other words ending in "ing" can be nouns. Heard of Shakespeare? He wrote "The Taming of the Shrew". I guess that illiterate oaf didn't know that "taming" isn't a noun... Now please stop spamming about "bad grammer" (or at least learn to spell "grammar"). CCP admitted it sounded bad and changed the term about five pages ago, anyway.
Actually, I've served in the military enough to know that they are hardly any sort of authority on proper English. Some of the terms and phrases they come up with are downright ridiculous and would be laughed at by any high school English teacher. Besides, I've referenced the DOD Dictionary of Military Terms on multiple official military sites, and no copy I've seen includes the (n.) designation; so I can only assume that you added that yourself.
Include a reference from a respected and known English dictionary; Websters, Rogets, etc., someone whose business it actually is to set the standards of the English language.
I never claimed that words ending in "ing" couldn't be nouns, only that "targeting" specifically is a verb in the case in which it was used.
Again, CONTEXT, CONTEXT, CONTEXT!!! Context will always determine the form fo the word. In the skill names, the name "Multiple Targeting" was specifically given to describe the action of acquiring multiple targets; in this case there should be no question that the use of targeting here is a verb. |
Rowells
Unknown Soldiers Against ALL Authorities
73
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 00:02:00 -
[539] - Quote
Siresa Talesi wrote:Magnus Coleus wrote:Siresa Talesi wrote:Show me the dictionary that lists "targeting" as a noun. DOD DoMT, Joint Education and Doctrine Division, J-7 wrote: targeting (n.) The process of selecting and prioritizing targets and matching the appropriate response to them, considering operational requirements and capabilities. See also joint targeting coordination board; target.
That's from the DOD Dictionary of Military Terms (which anyone who's served in the US probably came across at some point). Authoritative and appropriate enough for ya? I can also show you military manuals with entire chapters dedicated to "the targeting of" various things. Wouldn't be surprised if there are even some parts about "multi-targeting" (which is really just a better-sounding abbreviation of "multiple targeting"). Maybe English isn't your first language, but no native speaker has any doubt that "targeting", "opening", or hundreds of other words ending in "ing" can be nouns. Heard of Shakespeare? He wrote "The Taming of the Shrew". I guess that illiterate oaf didn't know that "taming" isn't a noun... Now please stop spamming about "bad grammer" (or at least learn to spell "grammar"). CCP admitted it sounded bad and changed the term about five pages ago, anyway. Actually, I've served in the military enough to know that they are hardly any sort of authority on proper English. Some of the terms and phrases they come up with are downright ridiculous and would be laughed at by any high school English teacher. Besides, I've referenced the DOD Dictionary of Military Terms on multiple official military sites, and no copy I've seen includes the (n.) designation; so I can only assume that you added that yourself. Include a reference from a respected and known English dictionary; Websters, Rogets, etc., someone whose business it actually is to set the standards of the English language. I never claimed that words ending in "ing" couldn't be nouns, only that "targeting" specifically is a verb in the case in which it was used. Again, CONTEXT, CONTEXT, CONTEXT!!! Context will always determine the form fo the word. In the skill names, the name "Multiple Targeting" was specifically given to describe the action of acquiring multiple targets; in this case there should be no question that the use of targeting here is a verb. Target is a noun and a verb. being a verb allows you to add "-ing" to it which shows that it is an immediate or continuous action. so while it isn't a standalone word in the dictionary it's still legitimate English. there you go. back to the topic at hand. |
Rowells
Unknown Soldiers Against ALL Authorities
73
|
Posted - 2013.08.09 00:05:00 -
[540] - Quote
I'm surprised that a simple clean-up like this got so much rage. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 [18] 19 20 .. 21 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |