These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

[Odyssey 1.1] Skill group name changes

First post First post First post
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Adunh Slavy
#221 - 2013-07-04 16:00:39 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:


Spaceship Piloting: is the old Spaceship Command group, no change except with the name.




Yuck! The word 'command' has so much more to it than 'piloting'. Any jerk off can be a pilot, but not everyone can 'command'.

We're supposed to be these super powerful semi-god like beings, compared to the ants on the planets.

Necessity is the plea for every infringement of human freedom. It is the argument of tyrants; it is the creed of slaves.  - William Pitt
Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris
Republic Military Tax Avoiders
#222 - 2013-07-04 16:04:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris
Oraac Ensor wrote:
Systems Online wrote:
I do not like a skill name starting with an acronym. Pronouncing "SEE PEE YOU" Management. is just awkward.
CPU is not an acronym. If it were, it would be pronounced "c'pew".

If CPU isnt acronym for Central Processing Unit then what is?

Oraac Ensor wrote:
Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris wrote:
* Also Armor Honeycombing skill sounds silly and not sci-fi-ish while Armor (Plating) Management/Distribution will be much better imo.
Honeycombed armour is, by definition, not plating.

Well Shield skills have Shield Upgrades skill that reduces PG, also there are electronic upgrades, power grid upgrades, WU/AWU, but armor has no upgrade skill so Armor Honeycombing can be safely renamed to Armor Upgrades. It doesnt matter that they have different effects. I have a theory that armor tanking was designed to be opposite of shield tanking in everything for the sake of being different.

Opinions are like assholes. Everybody got one and everyone thinks everyone else's stinks.
Galen Dnari
Dnari Mining and Manufacturing
#223 - 2013-07-04 16:13:34 UTC
Kyt Thrace wrote:
MOVE the Anchoring Skill, it DOES NOT belong under Corporation Management. :P


So where does it belong?

http://eveboard.com/ub/1939472205-31.png
Galen Dnari
Dnari Mining and Manufacturing
#224 - 2013-07-04 16:16:38 UTC
Kirimeena D'Zbrkesbris wrote:
Oraac Ensor wrote:
Systems Online wrote:
I do not like a skill name starting with an acronym. Pronouncing "SEE PEE YOU" Management. is just awkward.
CPU is not an acronym. If it were, it would be pronounced "c'pew".

If CPU isnt acronym for Central Processing Unit then what is?

He's right. An acronym is, by definition, an abbreviation formed from the initial letters of other words and pronounced as a word. CPU is an abbreviation.

http://eveboard.com/ub/1939472205-31.png
Galen Dnari
Dnari Mining and Manufacturing
#225 - 2013-07-04 16:22:07 UTC
Throktar wrote:
+1 to most of this.
Keep Spaceship Command...I command, I do not "pilot"

You are both right and wrong about that. The difference being that a pilot does not necessarily command, though a ship commander must necessarily be able to pilot (though in pre-capsuleer days he would typically delegate that to a subordinate).

http://eveboard.com/ub/1939472205-31.png
Sugar Kyle
Middle Ground
#226 - 2013-07-04 16:34:17 UTC
Spaceship Command please. Spaceship piloting is terrible.

Multitasking was a great name. I know we are making things streamlined but some of these name changes are, frankly boring and uninteresting. They carry no creative flare or flavor for Eve as its own universe. Many times the name change appears to be done just because vs a need. Multitasking was not a mind bogglingly complex thing but it was cute and fit.

Member of CSM9 and CSM10.
Tu'yak Marowshay
Original Sinners
Pandemic Legion
#227 - 2013-07-04 16:48:19 UTC
WHY DO YOU KEEP DUMBING DOWN THIS GAME. You keep simplifying everything for 13 year olds getting bored with WoW.

I personally don't play this game because it is easy or simple, it is appealing because it is hard and confusing and if you don't have a decent head on your shoulders you won't do very well.

Many other more important problems that you need to address before making this game simplified and bringing in a bunch of middle school kids with daddy's credit card.

How about sov mechanics
Limited number of missions for high sec bears
Lack of **** to do in wormholes

To name a few ^^^^



From now on just name all the skills "ALADEEN" I am sure it will work out just fine.


New bro - "Hey what skill gives more tracking out of my guns".
Bitter Vet - "Aladeen"
Leskit
Pure Victory
#228 - 2013-07-04 16:51:57 UTC
I see what you're trying to do,Ytterbium, and I can appreciate that, but some of that just feels like dumbing-down terms. Spaceship piloting is terrible. Command is so much better. Command implies control, piloting is just getting in, and flooring the gas pedal.
Multitasking was a great one too; if you really have to change it, it could be "target multitasking", not advanced target management. blech.

renaming nanite control-good idea.
I like breaking shield and armor into their own groups.
Electronic warfare drone interfacing- the name doesn't relate to what it does :\
Ka Kapaj
Corelli Drive Yards
#229 - 2013-07-04 16:55:07 UTC
Tu'yak Marowshay wrote:
WHY DO YOU KEEP DUMBING DOWN THIS GAME. You keep simplifying everything for 13 year olds getting bored with WoW.

I personally don't play this game because it is easy or simple, it is appealing because it is hard and confusing and if you don't have a decent head on your shoulders you won't do very well.

Many other more important problems that you need to address before making this game simplified and bringing in a bunch of middle school kids with daddy's credit card.

How about sov mechanics
Limited number of missions for high sec bears
Lack of **** to do in wormholes

To name a few ^^^^



From now on just name all the skills "ALADEEN" I am sure it will work out just fine.


New bro - "Hey what skill gives more tracking out of my guns".
Bitter Vet - "Aladeen"


That'd actually make the game harder, not easier.


That said, +1
Keep "Spaceship Command" as it is, though.
Ka Kapaj
Corelli Drive Yards
#230 - 2013-07-04 17:00:49 UTC
Tu'yak Marowshay wrote:
WHY DO YOU KEEP DUMBING DOWN THIS GAME. You keep simplifying everything for 13 year olds getting bored with WoW.

I personally don't play this game because it is easy or simple, it is appealing because it is hard and confusing and if you don't have a decent head on your shoulders you won't do very well.

Many other more important problems that you need to address before making this game simplified and bringing in a bunch of middle school kids with daddy's credit card.

How about sov mechanics
Limited number of missions for high sec bears
Lack of **** to do in wormholes

To name a few ^^^^



From now on just name all the skills "ALADEEN" I am sure it will work out just fine.


New bro - "Hey what skill gives more tracking out of my guns".
Bitter Vet - "Aladeen"



Stop being such an 3L337 player.

A game's difficulty should lay within its gameplay contents, not within the labeling.

It's not the shiny package that makes a gift pack good, it's the content inside it.
adopt
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#231 - 2013-07-04 17:14:29 UTC
Can we please keep the rigging and subsystem skills separate? It's confusing if they are put together.
Ka Kapaj
Corelli Drive Yards
#232 - 2013-07-04 17:17:08 UTC
Leave the subsystem and rigging skills separated, please.
CCP Ytterbium
C C P
C C P Alliance
#233 - 2013-07-04 17:25:45 UTC  |  Edited by: CCP Ytterbium
Update based on what we have seen so far.


    Starship Piloting instead of Starship Command:
  • For this particular point we wanted to distinguish the skill and the group so they do not overlap - it also ties on other plans we have on the future. However, we hear you, agreed it sounds less appealing than the one we have currently - we'll discuss this point internally again.

    • Energy Management and Operation:
  • Changing them to Capacitor Management and Capacitor System Operation makes sense, thanks for catching that.

    • Primary and secondary attribute concerns:
  • Relax, we thought this over, and this is less of an issue than you think it is Blink
  • Armor: only consists of Intelligence / Memory skills
  • Electronic Systems: same, Intelligence / Memory
  • Engineering: mainly has Intelligence / Memory skills, except for Weapons Upgrades and Advanced Weapons Upgrades, requiring either Perception / Memory or Perception / Willpower.
  • Neural Enhancement: mainly has Intelligence / Memory, except for the Informorph Phsychology skill that has Charisma / Willpower.
  • Production: skills only require Memory / Intelligence or Intelligence / Memory, which is not a problem.
  • Resource Processing: mainly has Memory / Intelligence skills, except for Interplanetary Consolidation, Command Center Upgrades requiring Charisma / Intelligence, and Astrogeology, requiring Intelligence / Memory.
  • Scanning: only has Intelligence / Memory skills.
  • Science: skills all are Intelligence / Memory, except for Research Project Management, which is Memory / Charisma.
  • Shields: have Intelligence / Memory attributes.
  • Ship Modification: skills are either Intelligence / Memory, or Perception / Willpower for Offensive and Propulsion Subsystems, but this will exist no matter in which group Tech3 subsystem skills are.
  • Targeting: are Intelligence / Memory based.


    • Multiple Targeting and Advanced Multiple Targeting:
  • Agreed, it doesn't sound that great. As with Spaceship Piloting, this will be discussed internally again - some options listed in that thread sound promising, but please remember that we would ideally like skill names to be representative of what they actually do.

    • Where is the Cynosural Field Theory skill?
  • In the Navigation group, will add that to the first thread, thanks.

    • Electronic Warfare Drone Interfacing:
  • Agreed the name doesn't really makes sense, we'll discuss that one as well.

    • Planetology and Subsystem groups:
  • If possible we would like to separate skills by purpose, not feature. For instance we are not splitting Sience skills if they are based on Tech2 Invention or Tech3 reverse engineering.

    • How about Hardwiring Implants?
  • Good point, suffixes need to be renamed to match the new groups as well.

    • Typos, typos everywhere! Seriously man, are you rolling your face on the keyboard when typing?
  • Eeep sorry, didn't double-check the last section of the OP, will fix this now P

    • Don't you think changing skill names is "dumbing the game down"?
  • EVE gameplay and sense of loss should be harsh, dark and unforgiving, in that there is no doubt and we agree completely. However, fighting the UI at every turn should not be the main complexity point here - it just means players have become used to an old and outdated interface for too long. Simply put, the hard and unforgiving nature of EVE should not be to retrieve information on a basic level, it should be on how players act based on that information and interact with the gameplay that revolves around it.

    • How about moving the Anchoring skill out of the Corporation Management group?
  • Definitely, CSM suggested moving it to the Electronic Systems group as it's tied with bubbles, but one could also argue it fits under Production as its tied with Starbases. What do you think?


    • In all cases, many thanks for the comments people!
Xolve
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#234 - 2013-07-04 17:35:36 UTC
:cripes:
Harvey James
The Sengoku Legacy
#235 - 2013-07-04 17:41:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Harvey James
CCP Ytterbium
what about navigation skill? being the same as the navigation set of skills
and mechanic and hull upgrades skill making no sense at all

also any chance of adding skills or answering any of my suggestions?

T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using
Sugar Kyle
Middle Ground
#236 - 2013-07-04 17:41:15 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:

How about moving the Anchoring skill out of the Corporation Management group?
  • Definitely, CSM suggested moving it to the Electronic Systems group as it's tied with bubbles, but you could also argue it fits under Production as its tied with Starbases. What do you think?
    • [/list]


    It would have functioned beautifully under the mechanics skill. But since you are onlining and offlining it may just belong to a computer/interface focused skill section.

    I'm not rawr rage over the name changes. They make sense. I am more wondering why it is wrong to have some unique or interesting versions of things, such as multitasking, to describe it when the word does work, vs everything having to be multi-targets to advanced multi-targets. I don't have problems with the bulk of the changes or moving things into better sections.

    I may simply like words too much and be one who finds appreciation in the game having a bit of its own lexicon and feel to terms. It is a future state with different social cultures. Comprehensible does not have to mean super simple. Appropriate and translatable. Understandable. It is the question of why would the topic of Spaceship Command come up at all as something that needed to change? I understand and appreciate that it has been readdressed. I don't understand why it happened in the first place.

    What would Spaceship Command have been confused with that it needed to be updated to Spaceship Piloting to remove unnecessary complexity and update it from its outdated structure? Those are the little aspects of the proposed changes that make me a bit puzzled. Much of this makes complete sense and I agree. Yet, some of it seems to be touched just to be touched and change/updated/refreshed.

    That is my 'rawr rage' I guess. Sorry if it sounds angry and full of emo.

    Beyond that, thank you for reading through our feedback and integrating our opinions into your discussion and decisions.

    Member of CSM9 and CSM10.
    James Amril-Kesh
    Viziam
    Amarr Empire
    #237 - 2013-07-04 17:42:31 UTC
    Don't dump subsystems into the same group as rigging skills. That's a ******* awful idea and it causes the exact problem you're trying to fix with the science and mechanics skill groups.

    Keep the subsystems skill group and add a rigging skill group.

    Enjoying the rain today? ;)
    Elizabeth Aideron
    The Scope
    Gallente Federation
    #238 - 2013-07-04 17:45:23 UTC
    Tu'yak Marowshay wrote:
    WHY DO YOU KEEP DUMBING DOWN THIS GAME. You keep simplifying everything for 13 year olds getting bored with WoW.

    I personally don't play this game because it is easy or simple, it is appealing because it is hard and confusing and if you don't have a decent head on your shoulders you won't do very well.

    Many other more important problems that you need to address before making this game simplified and bringing in a bunch of middle school kids with daddy's credit card.

    How about sov mechanics
    Limited number of missions for high sec bears
    Lack of **** to do in wormholes

    To name a few ^^^^



    From now on just name all the skills "ALADEEN" I am sure it will work out just fine.


    New bro - "Hey what skill gives more tracking out of my guns".
    Bitter Vet - "Aladeen"


    looking things up in the wiki is appealing?
    CCP Ytterbium
    C C P
    C C P Alliance
    #239 - 2013-07-04 17:46:19 UTC
    Going to edit my previous post to be less sarcastic - we value your feedback, which is why we're posting here.

    Regarding the Subsystem / PI groups, we're not saying it's going to be final, we're just mentioning our preference here, we definitely see where you are coming from.
    Harvey James
    The Sengoku Legacy
    #240 - 2013-07-04 17:47:32 UTC  |  Edited by: Harvey James
    CCP Ytterbium wrote:
    Going to edit my previous post to be less sarcastic - we value your feedback, which is why we're posting here.

    Regarding the Subsystem / PI groups, we're not saying it's going to be final, we're just mentioning our preference here, we definitely see where you are coming from.


    arr but the sarcasm is the best bit :)

    also cyno should be a science skill surely?

    maybe switch spaceship piloting to the set of skills rather than to the skill itself

    T3's need to be versatile so no rigs are necessary ... they should not have OP dps and tank

    ABC's should be T2, remove drone assist, separate HAM's and Torps range, -3 HS for droneboats

    Nerf web strength, Make the blaster Eagle worth using