Ship name Tags?

This isn’t really a sugegstion for Cliff so much as it is a thought experiment to generate discussion, but I just had a strange idea and wanted to know if I was completely insane or if other people agree with me… or you know, both…

What if there was a way to apply tags to ships?
We could apply tags like “Anti-fighter”, “Fast”, “Tanks”, or even “ECM”? We already have “Cruiser”, “Frigate”, and “Fighter” tags…

I’m thinking this could be helpful in deploying ships – searching and filtering by tag instead of just going through ship names. You could assign tags based on the ship’s function, role, speed, weaponry, or whatever other aspect you consider important.

Even if we had to impose ridiculously arbitrary limits like only one or two tags per ship, or some maximum total of tags, it still seems like it would provide a valuable organization tool and allow players to excessive a little creativity.

In hindsight maybe “folders” and “subfolders” would be a better organization tool than tags.

In any case, I think I’ve had too much caffeine now. Or not enough.

Tags would be a little harder than folders to figure out a UI for, but would be better in terms of organization. Either would be a huge improvement over the current state.

You mean something like this? -> viewtopic.php?f=19&t=4146&p=24105&hilit=organizing#p24105

Or, simpler designations, like U.S.Navy ship designations (CA (Cruiser (Armored)), CG (Guided-missile Cruiser), FF (Fast Frigate), FG (Guided-missile Frigate))?

I’m going to start including the ship’s speed in my designations. Right now, I’m just using: race/weapon/designation. Example: Alliance Ion FF (Fast Frigate), or Imperial Ion EMP Frigate.

On a related note, there are plans afoot to do this naming thing:

I would definitely support this addition to the ship designer. Life would be much easier if I had an external tag system.

As scratch intimated above, I’ve been using a derivative of the standard modern warship classification codes, which are in turn derived from the standard codes established in the Washington Naval Treaty, which int turn… well, you get the idea. I used the hull data spreadsheet (which was assembled by some kind soul here) to break down the classes. I sorted them by total hull slots, (hardpoint + standard), then looked at each ship’s stats independently to classify the hulls by type. Specifically, I use the following base codes:

BB = battleship
BC = battlecruiser
CA = heavy cruiser (cruiser, armored)
CP = protected cruiser (this one fell out of use at the end of the 19th century, but I’m a hopeless romantic)
CL = light cruiser
DD = destroyer
FF = frigate

I apply class modifiers as necessary. “CG” is a guided missile cruiser; “CV” a fleet carrier; “CVL” a light carrier; “FFE” a point-defense frigate, etc. I’ve added my own twists as well, so “LCL” means a light cruiser that is primarily laser-armed. Additionally, I make specific notes on variants. A minor refit would have R1, R2, etc, appended. A major refit would be more specific, e.g., EMP0 is the first major refit of that class with EMP attack technology. For example, one of the my currently successful ship classes is “Fed_BCG Longbow (FM) R4”. This is a Federation battlecruiser-class ship, primarily missile-armed and equipped with fast missile technology. It is currently on the fourth refit cycle.

This system has worked well so far, but it is starting to get cumbersome – especially as I continue blurring the traditional lines between classes. It’s getting difficult to remember what the principles were behind a particular design. You take a few online challenges, and pretty soon you’ve got enough refits of a base class to drive the paper-pushers at BuShips into a nervous breakdown. =oP

I agree that Something Must Be Done.

Personally, I’ve been naming all of my designs off of whatever sounds ludicrous, yet cool.

My main laser-based cruiser is called “Beam is the New Black”

It’s also easier for me in the fact that I hardly have more than 4 ships per classification, so I use a different hull design each time.