Spells first.
Since YoshiP wasn't sure what to name the new AoE Fire and Blizzard spells I would like to suggest that any Single target spell just be numbered. Ex. Fire 1, Fire 2 etc. For AoE spells let them be the Fira, Firaga, Firaja, Firasa, then finally Firaza... if we get that high to begin with. (I believe FF12 was the first game with -ja spells and I remember KH3 having Stopza so... that's where I got them. Not sure where I saw Curasa tho but meh)
Roulette
For the Level 50/60/70 and now lvl 80 Roulette, how about just calling it Previous Capped Dungeons or Past Level Capped Dungeons?
Spell and Roulette name suggestions.
Printable View
-
10-19-2021, 05:43 AMBurningskullSpell and Roulette name suggestions.
-
10-19-2021, 05:45 AMXireanSpell name creativity I'm down for. Roulettes on the other hand I'd rather keep as is. It's quick and easy to understand with no need for questions at all. Except Expert; that shit is a terrible name considering what you find in there.Quote:
Originally Posted by Burningskull
-
10-19-2021, 05:49 AMBurningskullHaha. I get that. It was just so they didn't have to go in and change the name every expansion. I wonder how easy it is to find that line of text each expansion in millions of lines of code by now... hell probably 100s of millions.Quote:
Originally Posted by Xirean
-
10-19-2021, 05:54 AMXireanIt's more likely that they use a global variable file to define it then use that definition. It results in changing all that code only once.Quote:
Originally Posted by Burningskull
-
10-19-2021, 02:21 PMkaynide
I was always of the mind that there should really only be 1 fire spell, and 1 fire AoE. (So, Fire and Firaga).
For the other spells, they would really only need to add some kind of prefix (like enhanced fire for fire 3.. it an entirely new name like Magma Wave or Burst.)
The problem for me is that the naming systems are not across the board. Like, fire 2 is AoE, ice 2mis AoE, but stone 2…just upgraded stone 1.
There are a lot of naming conventions that just don’t make sense. Spells and abilities are just the tip of the iceberg.
For dungeons, I would rather they get rid of “hard” “ex” and “ultimate”, and just use stars or some other nomenclature.
Like the first Garuda should just be The Howling Eye (story mode), the actual first 8 man raid can be The
Howling Eye (star), with Ex being Howling Eye (2 stars).
This allows them to make as many new difficulties as they want without weird names that don’t represent the actual difficulty involved.
Similarly, treasure maps should just be “Treasure map grade x” with x being 1 to 12. That’s how it is in the Japanese translation.
On the other side, materia names in Japanese are a complete mess (materia, materija materiaja etc..) -
10-19-2021, 02:28 PMMomo_Kozuki
It has been written in the lore (check a note in Gubal Library about spell naming convention), so only ancient-time monsters pre-dated the convention (like Amon) use the -ra, -ga, -ja subfixes. This makes me think that SE won't bother dealing with the fixing spell name.
For roulette, I agree that Expert Dungeon Roulette is misleading about difficulty. It is just patch-capped dungeons. -
10-19-2021, 02:40 PMGarnix
I agree on the spells. The way they did it was really strange to me...It is still very confusing for beginners who will just think Fire 2 is a better Fire 1. Your solution sounds nice.
On the roulettes, I personally think they should change the dungeon roulette and split it in two at the very least.
Lvl 50/60 dungeons
Lvl 70/80 dungeons
The likelihood of getting level 80 dungeons in the roulettes would be extremely low otherwise, due to the very large amount of level 50/60 dungeons and the low amount of level 80 dungeons, but also due to the fact that people would need to be 80 or higher to join... -
10-19-2021, 07:11 PMBurningskullYeeaaahhh but lore can be changed when mechanics and naming requires. See MNK / SMN incoming rework lol.Quote:
Originally Posted by Momo_Kozuki
-
10-19-2021, 07:47 PMImakun
The spell naming system in XIV is a big mess and it's going to get even worse in EW.
SE already has a perfectly viable, easy to understand and future-proof system on XI but noooo.. we get things like High Fire now which is an AoE but Fire IV is single target but wait, what is more powerful IV or "high"? What the hell.
Or jumps from 1 to 3 for no reason at all because of course every language has a different naming system. How fun!
XI's system continues to work since its inception in 2002, works for ALL types of magic (damage, healing, buffing, debuffing..) and cannot fail:
Just the name (Fire, Blizzard, Cure, Poison, Protect, whatever): single target spell
Suffixes changes the target of the spell:
-ga > AoE around target
-ra > AoE around caster
-ja > AoE around target with added effect
Numbers indicate levels of potency for the spell.
That's it. Easy.
So let's take Blizzard for example:
Blizzard I/II/III.. single target.
Blizzara I/II/III.. AoE around caster.
Blizzaga I/II/III.. AoE around target.
So in ShB XIV, current Blizzard II and Fire II would become Blizzara and Firaga respectively. In EW Blizzara would change to Blizzaga since it's going to become a target spell. More potency? Upgrade to Firaga/Blizzaga II via trait.
Cure and Cure II are fine. Cure III would become Cura. Medica would become Curaga (AS IT SHOULD BE), Medica II would be Curaja because it adds Regen.
I have no idea why they decided to complicate their life with a naming convention that not only doesn't make ANY sense but is also different for every language XIV is available in.
It's a nightmare and I really hope they decide to admit it was a terrible idea and change it once and for all. -
10-19-2021, 08:04 PMJandor
I would like to combine your suggestions.
Leveling roulette would become Leveling I.
50/60/70/80 roulette would become Leveling II.
Level 90 roulette would become Expert I.
Expert roulette would become Expert II.
:p