Neo Standard for SE V?

[Suicide Junkie]

Of course, ALL of those are roles/classes, and not sizes.
(Though many do have typical sizes, even the ordering isn't fixed over time)

[President_Elect_Shang]

Thank you SJ, that is just the point I was making with my comment here:

President_Elect_Shang said:
As for a list what kind of list? I say Juggernaut and you say that is a class not a size.

To me those are sizes of ships not roles/classes. I honestly do not understand the definition you guys are using. To me a role is "Scout Ship" and a class is "Agamemnon Class" but "Destroyer" is a size. I would read the above example as:
Scout Ship - Agamemnon Class Destroyer
I don't think you guys are using the U.S. Navy standard (I'm not saying am either) so what makes a size a size?

[Suicide Junkie]

Are you sure?

Destroyer is what it does...
Battleship is what it does...
Cruiser is what it does...

I only use those names because I haven't come up with a better system yet... GritEcon uses "200kt General Hull", and such, but those are a bit bland.

[President_Elect_Shang]

Suicide Junkie said:
Are you sure?

Destroyer is what it does...
Battleship is what it does...
Cruiser is what it does...

I only use those names because I haven't come up with a better system yet... GritEcon uses "200kt General Hull", and such, but those are a bit bland.

Yes I am 100% sure; however, using a bland system is not a bad idea SJ. Does it matter what we call them here? In a mod they will be renamed by the mod's maker. Here aren't we just trying to get sizes laid out for inclusion? So why can't the model have a generic (or bland as you call it) name?

Edited: Ok SJ I get your comment above (or below depending on display mode). So I edited the "but" to a "however" to clarify what I was saying.

[Suicide Junkie]

Well, the main issue is that whatever we do has to be backwards compatible with stock.

Otherwise I'd suggest a simple Warship1 through warship9, plus transport1 through 3 and similar stuff.

PS:
I meant, are you sure I'm agreeing with you

[President_Elect_Shang]

Well since there are three calls for the model name in VehicleSizes.txt I didn't consider backward compatibility to be an issue. If you do though please explain since we should address and resolve that issue before proceeding. May I make a suggestion to kick it off please?

Vehicle Portrait Primary = NEO++
Vehicle Portrait Alternate = NEO+
Vehicle Portrait Default = Stock Standard

That is a good enough resolution. So long as there is a manner in which any modder can come along and easily tell which hull is larger than which. So Warship1 would be the smallest and Warship9 the largest, for example that is. And continuing along with the same example:

Warship1 = NEO++ = NEO+ = *Frigate
Warship2 = NEO++ = *MP = *MP
Warship3 = NEO++ = NEO+ = *Destroyer
Warship4 = NEO++ = NEO+ = *Light Cruiser
Warship5 = NEO++ = NEO+ = *Cruiser
Warship6 = NEO++ = NEO+ = *Battleship
Warship7 = NEO++ = NEO+ = *Dreadnought
Warship8 = NEO++ = NEO+ = *MP
Warship9 = NEO++ = NEO+ = *Baseship
*XXXX = Current Stock Size
*MP = Modder Picks one above or below.

Now clearly this is a rough draft of sorts but I think it conveys the basic idea right? Which is each "step" should be a little higher standard than the one before.

I thought you were disagreeing with me? That Destroyer (et el) isn't a size. Edit 2: I changed my previous post to make it clearer.

Edited: My chart was vague about stock, just trying to make it less confusing.

[Suicide Junkie]

What I meant was, you can't name the file warship3, since that would not work in a stock game.

[President_Elect_Shang]

This is the classifications the U.S. Navy uses. Now if you look at that and compare it with what you guys have been saying everything listed on this page would be considered a role, a size, and a class. So what are you guys saying [precisely] is a size?

Edit type-o's