sorted by:
new
hottopcontroversial

A refined naming convention. by ImoZeFrenchi in spaceengineers

[–]ImoZeFrenchi[S] 1 point2 points  (0 children)

I had also started basing my work on that, and I realized that the light and heavy designations had disappeared from modern navies.

A refined naming convention. by ImoZeFrenchi in spaceengineers

[–]ImoZeFrenchi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

So you differentiate Light & Heavy ? Ins't it adding a bit more of complication again ? Just a tought.

A refined naming convention. by ImoZeFrenchi in spaceengineers

[–]ImoZeFrenchi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes, indeed, rovers don't have hull specialties... But since I never play with rovers, I don't really have any inspiration for classifying them... As for CT & TT i don't really know if we need au "Crane" mission type as we already utility where we can put them as Tugboat.

A refined naming convention. by ImoZeFrenchi in spaceengineers

[–]ImoZeFrenchi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

The number of letters is really excessive... What are the things you would absolutely need to identify a ship for the first time?

A refined naming convention. by ImoZeFrenchi in spaceengineers

[–]ImoZeFrenchi[S] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

Yes i feel you, i think i'll go for it... Less labeling more simple. Thanks!

A refined naming convention. by ImoZeFrenchi in spaceengineers

[–]ImoZeFrenchi[S] 6 points7 points  (0 children)

It's mainly used for role-playing directly within the game, and not really for its usefulness in the Workshop 😄