Deck One to Three, Three to One

[WickedCybs]

I keep mixing up whether deck one is the top deck or the hangar deck and whether deck three is the hangar deck or the top deck. In game of course, deck one is the hangar deck (lowest work deck) and deck three is the upper deck (with the bridge).

Not sure if anyone else really has this problem though. I'm just used to the way Aurora labelled its levels (1 is the top, 5 is the bottom) and how stuff like the camera program manages it if you go into map view. I also always get slightly annoyed clicking on the map files and having to go from bottom to the top to edit the highest level.

Edited August 17, 2022 by WickedCybs

[KingOfThePing]

What ist the suggestion here? 

[WickedCybs]

1 minute ago, KingOfThePing said:

What ist the suggestion here? 

As in. label deck one to be three, deck three to be one.

[wowzewow]

I think that would just confuse more people when Deck One and Deck Three is suddenly swapped around after a few months of NBT.

I would understand the switch if other people have this problem, but this sounds like a problem that only you have.

[WickedCybs]

Just now, wowzewow said:

I think that would just confuse more people when Deck One and Deck Three is suddenly swapped around after a few months of NBT.

I would understand the switch if other people have this problem, but this sounds like a problem that only you have.

That's why I posted the thread, I want to see if in general there's still problems with it or if people are used to it (except me).

[KingOfThePing]

How about naming them what they are. 

Hangar Deck

Operational Deck

Command Deck

 

Or something like that. 

[WickedCybs]

1 minute ago, KingOfThePing said:

How about naming them what they are. 

Hangar Deck

Operational Deck

Command Deck

 

Or something like that. 

Apparently this is how it is under the hood for the Aurora at least, so at least, your solution would be pretty nice at least as a background element.

Other than sometimes IC confusion it would help me out of the game when I map stuff to see specifically what deck is what. So it seems like the most harmless adjustment.

[Gromnax]

12 minutes ago, KingOfThePing said:

How about naming them what they are. 

Hangar Deck

Operational Deck

Command Deck

 

Or something like that. 

Sounds like the most reasonable option to me too. Top one could maybe be called "Administrative" since technically it covers liaisons and journalist as well, but besides that, this is really better than numbering decks as we do now.

[Confused rock]

I don't think this is going to be something you can fix. Aside from it being even more confusing to swap the names now, I'm still going to call them decks one, two and three, probably out of order for a while if we swap them, but definitely forever if we give them a different name, because it's faster to say and a lot of the time talking about decks is done with urgency.

[Gem]

it's fine as-is. think of the horizon like a skyscraper and it makes sense.

[Scheveningen]

green grom text spotted

I support renaming the decks non-numerically.

[niennab]

I don't mind adding the names to them but I think generally people are going to view the decks as they would a building. Swapping it out could end up a noob trap for new players, and confusing for existing players following the swap.

[Boggle08]

Going from top to bottom is apparently in-line with naval nomenclature. Really, I feel like the deck numeration is liable to throw people the fuck off, no matter how we arrange it. If we change it, it comes at the expense of a month or two of adjustment. If we don't, people fresh from other servers with ships are going to point at the elevator and scream at the buttons. I prefer things from going from top to bottom.

Edited August 17, 2022 by Boggle08

[Dreamix]

I just call the top, middle, and bottom decks... top, middle, and bottom.

No numbers, and no long names (operational deck? 😩), please.

[KingOfThePing]

Okay maybe not operational. I was bored out of mind wheni wrote this. 

Hangar Deck

Main Deck

Admin Deck

 

How about that? 

[SilverSZ]

I get confused by the current layout. But I think the Ping's suggestion is the ideal one. Lets just name them, the suggested names, Hangar, Main, Admin. Are short enough to be easy to say quickly. So I don't see that being an issue.

[Kintsugi]

17 hours ago, WickedCybs said:

I keep mixing up whether deck one is the top deck or the hangar deck and whether deck three is the hangar deck or the top deck. In game of course, deck one is the hangar deck (lowest work deck) and deck three is the upper deck (with the bridge).

Not sure if anyone else really has this problem though. I'm just used to the way Aurora labelled its levels (1 is the top, 5 is the bottom) and how stuff like the camera program manages it if you go into map view. I also always get slightly annoyed clicking on the map files and having to go from bottom to the top to edit the highest level.

Absolutely have to agree here. The current setup doesn't make any sense - and it still confuses me to this day. 

[Carver]

I wouldn't want the numbers reversed unless the hangar were altered to not have space tiles revealed when bombed/floors are removed. The current numbers leave an implication that residential is above the third deck, which makes some sense given we can't go above that deck.

[KingOfThePing]

This is something entirely oocly and shouldn't be considered. I think the consensus is that the residential deck is below the hangar deck. It shouldnt matter tho as this deck is not represented (and shouldn't be) since it's purely an ooc thing. Cryo on the Aurora also made little sense, especially during crisis times, yet it was handwaved - as it should have been. The same thing should be applied to the residential deck. 

[Carver]

I would hardly consider the existence of residential to be OOC or something not to be considered. Even disregarding it, the names are fine - they match the floors of a building in a way people can easily understand.

[Omicega]

The residential elevators come up from below the hangar level, as I understand.

I've always thought it made more sense to have Deck 1 be the top deck and then go downwards from there, so the Horizon deck numbering has always been confusing for me. I don't mind if we give them names (Bridge deck, Operations deck, Hangar deck or something) but for my preference I'd like the numbers switched too while there's still time.

I'd complain about every single IC direction being opposite to its on-screen counterpart too (port is right on your screen, fore is down on your screen etc) but that ship has well and truly sailed and can't be fixed.

[Gem]

13 minutes ago, Omicega said:

I'd complain about every single IC direction being opposite to its on-screen counterpart too (port is right on your screen, fore is down on your screen etc) but that ship has well and truly sailed and can't be fixed.

i think this is due to the nature of everything being "front facing" in-game. if fore was up then bridge crew would be staring at their character's backs.

[Omicega]

I know why it is how it is; I just think having the bridge be less aesthetic would be more than outweighed by the simple convenience of having the directions match up. Even a left or right facing ship would've been easier to work around for my brain.

Anyway, giving the decks official names could help but they're still going to get quickly referred to as D1-3, so I don't think it's a full solution. It would also help (?) imply that the residential decks are below the hangar where they actually are meant to be (I think) -- call decks 4-5 some interstitial maintenance stuff and then have the resi decks be below that, or something.

[niennab]

If we are to go by the logic that the ship is a boat and that the residential decks are below (and here I always thought they were above us), then doesn't the current numbering system work? If not that they should have a zero infront of them.

The helm of a ship is around the top, like our deck 3, and we're launching space craft from deck 1. Then, we can presume the residential decks are in descending order.

Drawing over some existing diagram:

Edited August 22, 2022 by niennab

[Gem]

28 minutes ago, niennab said:

[...]

good explanation. i second this.