These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Chamile Eonic
The Church of MDAMC
#161 - 2013-07-04 08:35:23 UTC
Looks good.

When I first started it was pretty hard working everything out. This doesn't dumb down the game, it makes it better
Vaihto Ehto
#162 - 2013-07-04 08:41:38 UTC
Please don't change Spaceship Command to Spaceship Piloting. I want to manly 'command' my internet spaceships not 'pilot' them like a little girl.

Why would you not use an alt to post on the forums?
Creepy Brutor
Doomheim
#163 - 2013-07-04 09:00:24 UTC
I like it all apart from "spaceship piloting"
Aprudena Gist
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#164 - 2013-07-04 09:06:08 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:
i dont know about weapon upgrades and AWU in engineering...
while the latter might be placed rightly there, the former governs wether you can use dmg-mods or not, which is to me tightly connected to guns and the gunnery path.


You could make the same arument that Weapon Upgrades should be in the Missiles group. You need Gravitics for Warp disruption field generators, should that be in Electronic Systems? And so on.

But their primary function is as fitting skills, so that's why the CSM agreed they should go into the "Engineering" group.

The CSM saw these stupid ******* names and agreed? wow you guys are even worse then the last bunch.
thee lous3
Tech III Bone Cancer
#165 - 2013-07-04 09:29:52 UTC
Rayzilla Zaraki wrote:
marVLs wrote:
Cool but "Spaceship Piloting" ? Spaceship Command sounds better


I'm with this guy.

"Spaceship Piloting" is a little too limp-wristed.


It's not even limp wristed. Maybe I'm incorrect, but capsuleers aren't even pilots. Sure, they would know how to pilot the ship, but I've always imagined them in more of a admiral's role; making Spaceship Command more suitable.

Think aircraft carrier top dog, rather than commercial aircraft captain.
Nagarythe Tinurandir
Einheit X-6
#166 - 2013-07-04 09:31:35 UTC
Malcanis wrote:
Nagarythe Tinurandir wrote:
i dont know about weapon upgrades and AWU in engineering...
while the latter might be placed rightly there, the former governs wether you can use dmg-mods or not, which is to me tightly connected to guns and the gunnery path.


You could make the same arument that Weapon Upgrades should be in the Missiles group. You need Gravitics for Warp disruption field generators, should that be in Electronic Systems? And so on.

But their primary function is as fitting skills, so that's why the CSM agreed they should go into the "Engineering" group.


if you had quoted my complete post you may have seen that i recognised BCUs belonging to missiles.
i see were these changes are coming from and they make sense. somewhat.
but renaming is a tricky thing and i sincerely want to avoid a naming scheme as the TEST dude on page 7 or 8 (i refuse to quote it...) suggested. accessibility for new players is all good but imho it is desirable to retain some sci-fi flavour.
quirky names included.


as well: please keep spaceship command
Liafcipe9000
Critically Preposterous
#167 - 2013-07-04 09:31:49 UTC
marVLs wrote:
Cool but "Spaceship Piloting" ? Spaceship Command sounds better

this Cool
Chauvelleir
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#168 - 2013-07-04 09:35:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Chauvelleir
Seriously, you're spending time on this?

My thoughts,

Keep spaceship command

Agree with your other renaming proposals

Keep PI skills together

And whatever you do with the categories for goodness sake implement something like eve-mon within the client

The biggest barrier to new players regarding skills is a lack of a skill planning system unless they download another program and spend time learning to use it as well as getting to grips with the api system, this is time that the could be spending in your client getting a feel for eve and being immersed in the game.
Titus Tallang
EVE University
Ivy League
#169 - 2013-07-04 09:49:03 UTC
My thoughts on the matter:

  • I'm not sure if renaming for the sake of simplicity is good. Opening a skill's description, then reading what it does makes the skill system seem more in-depth than if you simply go through a group and see "Tracking efficiency", "CPU management", "Multiple Targeting".
  • Really, is it that much effort to read the description of a skill? When I started playing and created my first skill plan, I took the time to go through the list of all skills in EVEMon and read up on what they do. It may not be in-game, but doing so was still a tremendous sense of discovery for me. I feel like scrolling down a list and knowing what each skill does without clicking on it would've made this experience a lot more bland.
  • In other words, learning what all the different skills do is simply another "road block", if you may, that EVE throws at you, and overcoming that block will give a new player a sense of gratification and knowledge. I feel like oversimplifying skill names would really dampen this effect a lot.
  • Also, skill names give EVE a certain sci-fi "feel". I understand that you feel the need to make them more understandable, but hope that, if you really feel you need to go through with these changes, they could at least be achieved without any skills losing their distinctive names for a generic "X management" or "X efficiency".


On to singular changes:

  • "Multiple Targeting" seems odd. "Target Management" is more in line with what the error message states ("You are already managing X targets, as many as you have the skill to.")
  • "Spaceship Piloting" sounds a lot less awesome than "Spaceship Command". We're commanders of the ship, not merely pilots. I'd strongly prefer if you kept the old name.
  • Subsystems should stay their own separate group. This makes it easier to grasp that these are the skills you will lose SP in if you die in a T3 ship.
  • I prefer "MIssile Launcher Operation" over "Missies". They both obviously state what they are, and, well, the former just sounds better to me.
  • I agree with you that "Nanite Control" is indeed confusing. Also, "Neurotoxin Control" does not really lose any of its "sci-fi feel". This is a change I can definitely get behind.

Director of Education - EVE University - http://wiki.eveuniversity.org/
Number One Everything
D'Anconia Commerce
#170 - 2013-07-04 09:52:11 UTC
If its fine, don't fix it.
Spaceship Command vs piloting is a no-brainer. Leave it as command. It sounds better, and if someone is too stupid to know that spaceship command means piloting a ship, they are too stupid to play EVE.

Splitting up PI to the four corners is the exact opposite of the intent of this cleanup. Leave it alone!

I agree for the most part with the skills being split up based on their primary/secondary attributes. Yes, there are a few variations within them now, but anyone that's played EVE for 6 months should have most of the groups memorized based on the group its in. Scattering skills from their attributes won't make it easier, it will just make people rely even more than they do already on 3rd party tools like EVEmon.

Lastly, and for me, the most important thing, is that no skill attributes are changed. I expect after this patch all the attributes for all the skills will be the same as they have been for years, otherwise 1.1 better come with a bonus remap. Many people, myself included, have year long plans.

Off topic, maybe remaps could be changed to 6 months instead of a year? A lot of recent changes to EVE have tried to make it easier to use, and more flexible. Lowering the remap timer to 6 months isn't game breaking, but it gives twice the flexibility as we have now.
sytaqe violacea
Choir of morning
#171 - 2013-07-04 10:05:27 UTC
CCP Ytterbium wrote:


RENAMING SKILLS

This is done in an effort to reduce confusion between the skill names themselves and the groups they belong to. Usually, a group name is to be as generic as possible since it usually contains more than just a single theme. On the contrary, Skill names need to be as specific as possible to let players know what effects they have without having to read their description.


  • Electronics: has been renamed to “CPU management” not to conflict with group names and be more explicit at what the skill actually does.

  • Engineering: has been renamed “Power Grid management” not to conflict with group names and be more explicit at what the skill actually does.

  • Targeting: for the same reasons as above, this skill has been renamed "Multiple Targeting".

  • Multitasking: has been renamed "Advanced Multiple Targeting" for the same reasons as above.

  • Nanite Control: has been renamed "Neurotoxin Control" to make it clearer it's a booster related skill and not something tied with overheading (nanite repair paste comes to mind).



I'm against this.

When I was a newbie, I could't understand what "(1x)" imply. But I could realize that Engineering skill is basic skill of Engineering group, that Electronics skill is basic skill of Electronics group, owing to their name. Then I started learning the shape of skill tree with clicking "show info" again and again.
When this idea are executed, I doubt that new player can identify "CPU management" as a basic skill of Electronics, identify "Power Grid management" as a basic skill of Engineering. I think this change will confuse new player.

Those change should be fixed like this:

Electronics has been renamed to "Basic Electronics"
Engineering has been renamed to "Basic Engineering"
Targeting has been renamed to "Elementary Targeting"

Skill is not stand-alone. It's a part of tree.
gramafon
The Night Watchmen
Goonswarm Federation
#172 - 2013-07-04 10:16:27 UTC  |  Edited by: gramafon
Can you please make sorting not alphabetically ! ! !
Look at this:
http://clip2net.com/s/5kNJm2

And how you think a new player must understand this "garbage" of skills ? Alphabetically sorting is evil !!!!
Make please it easy, for exaple - see below.
IdeaIdeaIdeaIdeaIdeaIdeaIdeaIdeaIdeaIdeaIdeaIdeaIdeaIdea

From smaller to bigger class of "pvp" ships, then
For example, Spaceship command group of skills:

{general skills for T1 ships and ORE}:

- Spaceship command
- Advanced spaceship command
- Capital ships
- Mining frigate
- Mining barge
- Exhumers
- ORE Industrial
- Industrial command ships

{Racial skills}


- Minmatar frigates
- Minmatar destroyers
- Minmatar cruisers
- Minmatar strategic cruisers
- Minmatar battlecruisers
- Minmatar battleships
- Minmatar dreadnoughts
- Minmatar carriers
- Minmatar titan
- Minmatar Industrial ships
- Minmatar freighter
{repeat this for all races)

{General skills for T2 ships, from smaller to bigger}


- Interceptors
- Electronic attack frigates
- Assault frigates
- Covert ops

- Heavy assault cruisers
- Heavy Interdiction cruisers
- Recon ships
- Logistics
- Transport ships

- Marauders
- Black Ops

{maybe T2 minig barges should be in this group}

IdeaIdeaIdeaIdeaIdeaIdeaIdeaIdeaIdeaIdeaIdeaIdeaIdeaIdeaIdeaIdea

Beause current sorting is very difficult for new players. I think they should see ships skills as tree, as in EVEmon, and this could be perfect if you want to take your time in skills
Aijle Mijleroff
Infernal Laboratory
Infernal Octopus
#173 - 2013-07-04 10:20:14 UTC
CCP spends time on a completely idiotic things pretending to work!Evil
Maybe you already start working on really pressing problems?

PS waiting for new bugs..... Cry
Lucas Quaan
Dark Enlightenment
Project 2025.
#174 - 2013-07-04 10:26:28 UTC
Does this mean you will also rename all the related hardwirings so that the EE-family will now be CU- or something, EG- becomes PG- and so on?
Buhhdust Princess
Mind Games.
Suddenly Spaceships.
#175 - 2013-07-04 10:34:25 UTC
Talk about dumbing it down CCP,

the only one I agree with is the Neurotoxin Control skill, that was badly named on your part, the rest, well, they were fine.
Iq Cadaen
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#176 - 2013-07-04 10:38:10 UTC
Some pretty bad Engrish in there.
Some suggestions for improvement:

  • "Multiple Targeting" sounds ridiculous, change to "Multi-Targeting" and "Advanced Multi-Targeting".
  • "Electronic System" group should be "Electronic Systems" or, even better, "Electronic Warfare [Systems]".
  • "Missiles" might be better as "Missile Systems" or just keep it as is.
  • "Shields" and "Armor" to "Shield Systems" and "Armor Systems".
  • "Spaceship Piloting" should just stay "Spaceship Command", there's just no way "Piloting" would sound good there.
  • "Targeting" to "Sensors & Targeting"
OldWolf69
EVE-RO
Goonswarm Federation
#177 - 2013-07-04 10:47:47 UTC  |  Edited by: OldWolf69
Why? Just tell me why?
There's a lot of more necesare and utile things that need to be fixed.Big smile
What should i presume now? That CCP has a such lack of activity that they started to think renaming skills is actually work, and does benefit somehow the game? It worked fine, and it also works fine in this very moment when i write this. Noone complained, or had problems with the damn names. You know, it reminds me of the communist politrucs in the Eastern EU Block. No matter how stupid things they did, those needed to be put up because it was a precise "somebody" wich's work needed to be put up to fill a statistic necesare to him, for leveling up in party hierarchy.
***
Get a job, gentlemen. A real one.Lol
Kekminator
Loktar Ogar Co.
#178 - 2013-07-04 11:13:41 UTC
Some of the changes are for the better: Neural Enhancement, Production, Resource processing, Scanning, new Science, Shields, Armor. Grouping CPU and PG skills and throwing WU and AWU in there is OK too.

Some changes are definitely bad:

  • Spaceship Command, as everyone said.
  • PI skills should stay together, they serve a single purpose.
  • Subsystem skills should stay separate from rigs - ideally forever, or at least until skill loss on ship loss is removed.
  • Targeting skill : "multiple targeting", while specific, sound really bad. I support "Target Management" suggestion.


Also, I agree that "CPU Management" sounds a bit awkward, and Electronic Systems should have an "s" as bolded. There were several other good proposals in the thread, won't list everything.
Keras Authion
Science and Trade Institute
Caldari State
#179 - 2013-07-04 11:15:15 UTC
I'll throw in my 0.02 isk.

Electronics, Engineering, Targeting and Multitasking are more obvious but feel bland. It might be a matter of taste but I think something in line with Multilple Target Aquisition would be better.

The skill groups look good except the planetary interaction has been split into several ones. Later down the road you might run into trouble with that many skills in ship modification if you ever get to releasing more tech 3 ships and need new skills for them.

This post was rated "C" for capsuleer.
Roime
Mea Culpa.
Shadow Cartel
#180 - 2013-07-04 11:15:16 UTC
Cool stuff, what about the drone fixes?

.