project-navigation
Personal tools

Author Topic: Some rant about ufopaedia texts  (Read 14258 times)

Offline TrashMan

  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 833
    • View Profile
Re: Some rant about ufopaedia texts
« Reply #15 on: January 09, 2012, 12:43:02 pm »
Being a bit..anal..aren't we?

Descriptions give flavor. You complain the Storage description is too long? Bah.

If anything, the base model could use an update.

Offline Vassilios de Veritas

  • Rookie
  • ***
  • Posts: 19
    • View Profile
Re: Some rant about ufopaedia texts
« Reply #16 on: January 09, 2012, 03:10:55 pm »
Quote
Being a bit..anal..aren't we?
Oh boy, here we go. What's next, "U MAD BRO?"?
Quote
Descriptions give flavor.
Nobody argued about that, i personally pointed out problems in one particular text.
Quote
You complain the Storage description is too long?
No. I complain [link to my huge post, with no complains about size].

Quote
But it does look ugly, any better ideas how the same info could be said in a different way?
Quote
The Storage facility is the base's repository for ammunition, weapons, and other equipment not currently in use, and a garage for battlefield vehicles. These remain in their bays until mission time, with fully-loaded magazines in case of a base attack.
Objects are being stored on pallets, and the Storage facility can fit a maximum of 50 standard-sized pallets of equipment. The amount of items in a pallet is relatively unimportant, size is the main restricting factor with regards to Storage facility space. A dedicated production base may require two Storage facilities to keep production running smoothly. Please note Commander, that all equipment used by soldiers, and all items needed for research and production are also being stored in this facility.

Recommended Doctrine
During a base attack, the Storage facility would not be more than a target of opportunity. Any sensitive equipment in the facility will most likely be protected and require significant effort to destroy. Facility does not depend upon any other base facilities to function, and is cheap and easy to repair.

Offline homunculus

  • Sergeant
  • *****
  • Posts: 387
    • View Profile
Re: Some rant about ufopaedia texts
« Reply #17 on: January 09, 2012, 10:21:16 pm »
I see.
If I was a base commander, though, all e-mails sent to me would need to have the following format.
So that I would not need to read every word of the blob to find out just one little fact somewhere in the middle of it.
And that would mean NO fiction-writing artistic freedom for the sender of the e-mail.
Quote
What?
Plastic cup
For whom?
Mom
Purpose
Storing scissors
Solves problem of
Scissors being lost

Offline Vassilios de Veritas

  • Rookie
  • ***
  • Posts: 19
    • View Profile
Re: Some rant about ufopaedia texts
« Reply #18 on: January 09, 2012, 11:20:51 pm »
You lost me bro, i don't know what you want now. I pointed out problems in text, i rewrote that text without those problems, and text didn't end up like the one in your post. What "fiction-writing artistic freedom" do you need for a description of a warehouse? It's not even a Command center. And we (not me for sure) weren't talking about all emails, just building description.

Offline homunculus

  • Sergeant
  • *****
  • Posts: 387
    • View Profile
Re: Some rant about ufopaedia texts
« Reply #19 on: January 09, 2012, 11:32:08 pm »
i mean, your text was brief and concentrated, it covered most points, and all was nice and good, but i still had to read all of it very carefully to find out how, say, assigned soldier equipment is handled.
actually i had to read it twice.
i see the structure as a problem, as in the first post i wrote:
Quote
I would expect item categories and associated security standards (id and name), and it better be formatted as a list or else Maj. LeClerc might be in trouble.
however, real encyclopedia texts also have the structure not so obviously visible, and i cannot say it is bad, but rather a matter of preference.

i hope that clarifies the difference.

Offline Vassilios de Veritas

  • Rookie
  • ***
  • Posts: 19
    • View Profile
Re: Some rant about ufopaedia texts
« Reply #20 on: January 09, 2012, 11:44:12 pm »
So you want a simple list because it's hard for you to find things in text?
Quote
The Storage facility is the base's repository for:
*ammunition
*weapons
*other equipment not currently in use
*battlefield vehicles.
???

Offline homunculus

  • Sergeant
  • *****
  • Posts: 387
    • View Profile
Re: Some rant about ufopaedia texts
« Reply #21 on: January 10, 2012, 12:06:19 am »
lol, yeah, i might have a constant heavy hangover or alzheimer or i might be just tired, and i might have low iq, and aliens might be attacking me or just killing people somewhere else.
therefore i find lists much more clear to find info from, and they are also more routine to write.

there is such format, though, where
1. intro text is brief free-form, preferably one sentence (to get you in the mood).
2. exhaustive details as lists, usually with numerical references (you can find the detail you are looking for).
3. explanatory text can be a bit more verbose free-form (some common sense explanations and ideas).

this is the thing i was trying to do in my own version of the storage facility.

Offline Vassilios de Veritas

  • Rookie
  • ***
  • Posts: 19
    • View Profile
Re: Some rant about ufopaedia texts
« Reply #22 on: January 10, 2012, 12:22:29 am »
Oh, i get it.
And it sucks.
 8)

Offline homunculus

  • Sergeant
  • *****
  • Posts: 387
    • View Profile
Re: Some rant about ufopaedia texts
« Reply #23 on: January 10, 2012, 01:15:00 am »
If Maj. LeClerc wrote like this:
Quote
My mom is spending a lot of time on insignificant trifles. Like looking for scissors. I find this unfair for her that she needs to spend time and be stressed like that. I think if she had a focus point for storing her scissors, like a plastic cup or something, finding scissors would become a no-issue that she would not even notice anymore.
instead of like this (notice how the structure is exactly the same as previously posted):
Quote
A plastic cup is required for my mom to store scissors in, so that the scissors are not lost regularly.
The cup would be a focus point for her to store the scissors after use.
then a good base commander would enforce the text structure by requiring that from this moment onwards, all e-mails will need to follow the previously posted 'plastic cup' example, including the bold.

And it would fit with the formal headings.

Offline TrashMan

  • Captain
  • *****
  • Posts: 833
    • View Profile
Re: Some rant about ufopaedia texts
« Reply #24 on: January 10, 2012, 09:29:29 am »
Frankly, I'd make a new model for the base.


It just doesn't look like a secure storage facility. The way the base is built limits things.

I'd put shelves and lockers on the walls and in the center of the room a massive armored holding chamber OR a lift to underground storage area.

Alos, a good idea would be to add blocks that cna be used to clsoe off unused entrances. It's still for sensitive areas to have 4 entrances.

Offline Coyote

  • Rookie
  • ***
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile
Re: Some rant about ufopaedia texts
« Reply #25 on: January 10, 2012, 09:12:56 pm »
Being a bit..anal..aren't we?

Descriptions give flavor. You complain the Storage description is too long? Bah.

If anything, the base model could use an update.

+1

I really don't see what the problem is.  Strictly speaking, the storage facility doesn't need a description at all - the name is kind of self-explanatory.  It's a facility, in which you store items.  Since every item takes up storage space, you need one.  That's all you need to know, and it's explained right there in the name.  But just because it doesn't need one doesn't mean it shouldn't have one - and just because it doesn't need to be more than three or four sentences doesn't mean it necessarily should be that brief.  Some people - myself included - actually like reading the minor details about the various facilities, and it's not like the game actually forces you to read the entry at any point, so if you would prefer not to hear about how a storage room is organized or whatever, you could always just not read it.

Offline homunculus

  • Sergeant
  • *****
  • Posts: 387
    • View Profile
Re: Some rant about ufopaedia texts
« Reply #26 on: January 11, 2012, 03:09:56 am »
@Coyote
Oh, trust me, I am not going to go through the same explanation again.

To sum it up:
1) The structure of the text is too chaotic to fit the formal heading.
2) Maj. LeClerc writes his personal opinions like a civilian and therefore appears incompetent for the position (at least compared to what I would expect from military and even just most formal work, and compared to real world arms room SOP).
3) The little info about some minor details that the player might want to check sometimes, is not accessible within 3 seconds, and often it is not there at all. There is at least one piece of wrong info.

But this is getting stale in my opinion (on the positive side, it might develop into a modeling thread  ???), anything else that would be fun to rant about?

Offline Coyote

  • Rookie
  • ***
  • Posts: 15
    • View Profile
Re: Some rant about ufopaedia texts
« Reply #27 on: January 11, 2012, 04:53:58 am »
No need, I went over it again myself and, upon second thought, you actually kind of have a point there.  Either way it and some of the other descriptions should also be revised a bit to take into account when they were written - the workshop entry mentions industrial robots even though it was ostensibly written in the 1950s.  I know PHALANX was ahead of its time and all that, but since they were supposedly founded in 1958, and the entry was written in 1958, there's no way they could have had enough time to invent, mass-produce, and implement industrial robotics.

EDIT: Thinking about it, this is a fairly simple rewrite, by shifting some of the information about automated systems and such to the 'Addenda' section pointing out that they were added to the design in later years.  Maybe have the addendum mentioning them being from the 1970s or 80s rather than 2084, since advanced automated systems seem like a logical thing to add to the base workshop as soon as they're available.

EDIT THE SECOND: Actually, the first industrial robots were apparently around by the mid-1950s, so my entire rant is invalid.  Disregard.
« Last Edit: January 11, 2012, 04:59:32 am by Coyote »