open All Channels
seplocked Ships and Modules
blankseplocked Some Language Consistancy Is Needed
This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.

Author Topic

Quantum Industries Inc.
Posted - 2003.07.25 17:55:00 - [1]

Edited by: Echo on 25/07/2003 17:56:07

Okay, I have begun to notice a few too many cases where word usage in the description of skills, ships, modules, etc. could be improved.
A few examples..

1) If you compare the ship-specific bonuses granted for flying the Caldari Battleship Scorpion and the Caldari Industrial Badger Mk. II, you will notice a descrepancy. For the industrial, you are granted a +5% bonus to "shield capacity" per level. For the BS however, the description says that you are given a +5% bonus to "shield strength" per level. Now I am an Engineer, and this kind of ambiguity in technical specs is unacceptable. Please use one term to describe shield HP, and stick with it. Uniformity is important, because this game is too complicated and involved for us to run around testing what something meant...

2) Gunnery Skill...what the heck does a 5% Bonus to "turret speed" per level mean? How is that different from "turret tracking speed" (Motion Prediction skill) or "weapons speed" (Rapid Fire Skill)? Consistent language needs to be used so confusion is minimized.

3) Some skills have bonuses listed that say "Skill at fast turret firing. 5% Bonus to weapon speed" (Rapid Fire) or "Skill at long-range turret firing. 5% Bonus to weapon range" (Sharpshooter). Notice that in the description it does not say "per level." If you take that literally, then you would have to infer that it is a one time bonus, regardless of the level you have attained, of 5%. There are many skills that have this problem in their descriptions. A few actually only do grant a one time bonus. But how can we tell the difference between the two types of skills if both exist? This needs to be addressed...

These are just a few of the ones that I have found. Thanks in advance for reading this. I am only trying to help improve the quality of the game.

X-Factor Industries
Synthetic Existence
Posted - 2003.07.26 11:00:00 - [2]

I agree completely. There's just way too much confusion caused by this.

Another thing that bugs me is the inconsistent usage of percentual and fractional notation, and even the mixing up of both. Ie.

Something Multiplier:
1.05 x

Otherthing bonus:

0.005 %

Now me being a mathematically oriented person, I would say: stick with the "1.05x" notation. However I can see how "5%" may be more userfriendly. However, I think ONE notation should be chosen and stick with that for ALL values to avoid confusion.

Test Alliance Please Ignore
Posted - 2003.07.26 14:40:00 - [3]

<< Andsomeotherincorrectlydisplayedbonus:
0.005 %
Yeah, those are annoying... Tracking computers giving a bonus of "1.2 %".

Avaton White
Posted - 2003.07.27 04:10:00 - [4]

I agree 100.5x% !!!! I've been confused so many times by what something means or says that I have lost count. I suggest submitting bug reports about them as I do every time I see something like that.

Darth Maul
Caldari Provisions
Posted - 2003.07.27 04:48:00 - [5]

Totally agree.. it's like they have 5 different people writing the stats on stuff.. and each person has their own way of describing it.

Deep Core Mining Inc.
Posted - 2003.07.27 06:59:00 - [6]

Yup, agree completely :)

Joshua Calvert
Rule One
Posted - 2003.07.27 16:56:00 - [7]

The problem with these bonuses is that 5% of 3 or 4 doesn't really amount to much when it comes to cap usage or length or time the module runs.......


This thread is older than 90 days and has been locked due to inactivity.


The new forums are live

Please adjust your bookmarks to

These forums are archived and read-only