Incorrect Terms: Cargo
-
@ubernaut Embarked?
It would be easier to answer if you give a set of sentences in which you use the term "cargo", to see what to say instead. I'm not sure the term is necessary at all.
-
@cernel embarked is a verb cargo is a noun
-
@ubernaut A participle is a verbal, or a word based off of a verb that expresses a state of being, like a word like "cargo" does.
-
@cernel Meaning that saying that these units are cargo is about the same as saying that these units are embarked (except that only the second sentence is correct if the unit is an infantry or such).
-
@cernel yeah none of this makes any sense to me sorry ¯\_(ツ)_/¯
-
@cernel Are there any places this is an actual problem? Is it actually confusing?
'cargo' is a useful homogenizing term. If we talk about transports being able to transport either things like 'aa guns' or 'infantry', and it has a certain cargo capacity, we can refer to the 'aa guns' and 'infantry' both as having a cargo requirement.
If we instead said that the transport had a troop capacity or a cargo capacity, I don't see the value in that distinction. It further gets confusing whether then considering if tanks require troop capacity or cargo capacity.
Renaming terms is a high effort activity. Particularly so because there is a reasonable chance this will break save games.
FWIW, 'cargo' may refer to people in some cases. EG: "Precious cargo" almost exclusively refers to humans (usually babies or young children) and/or their pet animals.
Overall, my 2 cents is that the term 'cargo' is pretty descriptive, universal, and is not terribly confusing.
-
Thinking about this a bit more, we could rename 'cargo' to be 'transport cost'. Instead of a transport having a 'cargo capacity' it would have a 'transport capacity' and units would have a 'transport cost'.
As-is, cargo and cargo-cost seem to be pretty straight forward though. We also have a good verbage where we can say transported units are considered as 'cargo', which makes it clear they do not participate in battles. With the 'transport cost' verbage, that concept is seemingly harder to explain.
-
I don't actually know where the term "cargo" is used in TripleA if anywhere. It might be that it is not used and I'm just thinking at the rule-books.
@redrum already renamed the automatic tooltips information labels as "Transporting Cost" and "Transporting Capacity". I don't actually like "Transporting Cost", as that makes me think it is something being consumed for transporting the unit, like a fuel cost charged for transportation.
-
@cernel Okay, let's try to stay focused on specific desired outcomes when raising new topics : )
-
@lafayette I'm just waiting around for a reply to a query I posted late last night (early this AM); but I have to say that I agree with you (and what follows are my 2 cents).
An RC-135 is a Cargo Plane and the Air Force does use it to transport service members and their family members. It's damn cold, but it gets them from point A to B to C, etc.
Just saying.
PS. I don't recall them ever refitting a B-52 to hull troops and do believe there should be a distinction between bombers and Cargo Planes. On the other hand, Cargo planes have been used to hull Paratroopers...
Hello! It looks like you're interested in this conversation, but you don't have an account yet.
Getting fed up of having to scroll through the same posts each visit? When you register for an account, you'll always come back to exactly where you were before, and choose to be notified of new replies (either via email, or push notification). You'll also be able to save bookmarks and upvote posts to show your appreciation to other community members.
With your input, this post could be even better 💗
Register Login