These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE General Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next page
 

fixed soon?!
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Taipion
Adeptus Petrous
#1 - 2012-02-26 18:56:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Taipion
CCP dammit, is this going to be fixed soon?!



You may have noticed that the new names for missiles and speed mods are bullshit, and ok, I know you are broke because EVE does not give you enuff money to finance all you other games, though you really tried to squeeze all you can out of the EVE-players.
But really, do you have to assign all your interns on the developement of EVE?!?!?!? WHY?!?

I really, REALLY, REALLY, thought I would get used to it, but its just too stupid the way its made:

(now assume we are looking for the "best named" a.k.a. meta4, as using all else (besides t2 for ABs) is just stupid)

All meta4 ABs are named Experimental, ok, I can live with that, BUT:

All MWDs are name DIFFERENT for each (1mn/10mn/100mn) "best named" module:
1mn = limted
10mn = experimental
100mn = prototype

And still "limited" and "experimental" are used to name ABs as well, its all mixed up meta-lvl-wise.

Now I, and probably a whole lot of other people, end up looking up the meta lvl on those buggers everytime we use a MWD.



DEAR CPP: The intention of this change was to make it EASIER for new player (and ******* all the old ones, as hey, you can do it).

FAIL -.-

Besides. your new missile names are not just ugly, but stupid and tedious in the same way that the speedmods names are.
Scourge = heavy + kinetic
Trauma = just gives you a trauma.

double fail



Now, CCP, if you got the balls, kick out those interns that made the **** and admit that you were wrong.

For the better of EVE.
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
#2 - 2012-02-26 18:59:38 UTC
Nice shirt.

Dust 514's CPM 1 Iron Wolf Saber Eve mail me about Dust 514 issues.
baltec1
Bat Country
Pandemic Horde
#3 - 2012-02-26 19:01:02 UTC
CCP troll successful.

It took me all of a day to get used to the new names.
Ris Dnalor
Tribal Liberation Force
Minmatar Republic
#4 - 2012-02-26 19:02:00 UTC
Taipion wrote:
CCP dammit, is this going to be fixed soon?!



You may have noticed that the new names for missiles and speed mods are bullshit, and ok, I know you are broke because EVE does not give you enuff money to finance all you other games, though you really tried to squeeze all you can out of the EVE-players.
But really, do you have to assign all your interns on the developement of EVE?!?!?!? WHY?!?

I really, REALLY, REALLY, thought I would get used to it, but its just too stupid the way its made:

(now assume we are looking for the "best named" a.k.a. meta4, as using all else (besides t2 for ABs) is just stupid)

All meta4 ABs are named Experimental, ok, I can live with that, BUT:

All MWDs are name DIFFERENT for each (1mn/10mn/100mn) meta4 module:
1mn = limted
10mn = experimental
100mn = prototype

And still "limited" and "experimental" are used to name ABs as well, its all mixed up meta-lvl-wise.

Now I, and probably a whole lot of other people, end up looking up the meta lvl on those buggers everytime we use a MWD.



DEAR CPP: The intention of this change was to make it EASIER for new player (and ******* all the old ones, as hey, you can do it).

FAIL -.-

Besides. your new missile names are not just ugly, but stupid and tedious in the same way that the speedmods names are.
Scourge = heavy + kinetic
Trauma = just gives you a trauma.

double fail



Now, CCP, if you got the balls, kick out those interns that made the **** and admit that you were wrong.

For the better of EVE.


amen, +1, and THIS

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=118961

EvE = Everybody Vs. Everybody

  • Qolde
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
#5 - 2012-02-26 19:02:50 UTC
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=710240#post710240 btw

Dust 514's CPM 1 Iron Wolf Saber Eve mail me about Dust 514 issues.
Serene Repose
#6 - 2012-02-26 19:03:25 UTC  |  Edited by: Serene Repose
Engineering types are known for their abyssmal naming abilities. Still, engineering types are so head-above-the-clouds (out of touch with reality) that they only hear the ringing of their own genius in their ears. It's been that way since the first steam engine employed a "governor", and it will always be so.

Actually, it's best they just name things and leave them that way. We're accustomed to unraveling their twisted linguistic logic and commiting to memory their names for things. Leave them to change them for the "better" and we wind up having to do the same thing all over again. (And they claim to be against duplication of effort!) I was happy memorizing the first set of dumb names. Now, I have to memorize a completely new set.

Engineers are not cunning linguists, and corporations are too cheap to hire those who are.

We must accommodate the idiocracy.
Aruken Marr
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#7 - 2012-02-26 19:13:33 UTC
Trauma? Blunt force trauma... kinetic?
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#8 - 2012-02-26 19:28:44 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Roll Might as well give this a serious answer…
Taipion wrote:
All meta4 ABs are named Experimental, ok, I can live with that, BUT:

All MWDs are name DIFFERENT for each (1mn/10mn/100mn) "best named" module:
1mn = limted
10mn = experimental
100mn = prototype

And still "limited" and "experimental" are used to name ABs as well, its all mixed up meta-lvl-wise.
No. There are no meta4 ABs, and the naming convention is completely consistent.

For afterburners:

Meta 0: 1MN / 10MN / 100MN Afterburner I
Meta 1: N/A
Meta 2: Limited 1MN Afterburner I
Meta 3: Experimental 1MN / 10MN / 100MN Afterburner I
Meta 4: N/A
Meta 5: 1MN / 10MN / 100MN Afterburner II

For MWDs:

Meta 0: 1MN / 10MN / 100MN MicroWarpdrive I
Meta 1: Upgraded 1MN Microwarpdrive I
Meta 2: Limited 1MN MicroWarpdrive I
Meta 3: Experimental 10MN MicroWarpdrive I
Meta 4: Prototype 100MN MicroWarpdrive I
Meta 5: 1MN / 10MN / 100MN MicroWarpdrive II

Quote:
Now I, and probably a whole lot of other people, end up looking up the meta lvl on those buggers everytime we use a MWD.
No you don't. The meta level is encoded in the name. The encoding is the same for both ABs and MWDs.

The only fail here is on your part for not learning this very simple scheme that makes things easier for new and old players alike. You're thinking that things are broken just because that, somewhere, you've picked up the nonsense idea that "best named" is the same as "meta 4". It's not. Best named is best named. If there is no higher named meta level than meta 3, then meta 3 is best named. Best named could be meta 1 for all the game is concerned.

The only thing that needs to be fixed is your understanding of what meta levels are and what the names stand for. There certainly isn't anything wrong with the game.
Krixtal Icefluxor
INLAND EMPIRE Galactic
#9 - 2012-02-26 19:38:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Krixtal Icefluxor
Tippia wrote:
Roll Might as well give this a serious answer…[quote=Taipion]All meta4 ABs are named Experimental, ok, I can live with that, BUT:

All MWDs are name DIFFERENT for each (1mn/10mn/100mn) "best named" module:
1mn = limted
10mn = experimental
100mn = prototype

Major Snippage




THANK YOU for typing this truth so I didn't have to take hours of my time getting it ready.

It can be exhausting picking up the pieces of dis-information spat about all over these forums by Know-Nothings.............

This and the new missile names took all of about a GLANCE to get the new naming schema down pat. Roll

"He has mounted his hind-legs, and blown crass vapidities through the bowel of his neck."  - Ambrose Bierce on Oscar Wilde's Lecture in San Francisco 1882
Taipion
Adeptus Petrous
#10 - 2012-02-26 20:18:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Taipion
Nova Fox wrote:
Nice shirt.

Thanks! I am very proud of it, as though I was not there (at the fanfest), I got it from a corpmate that was there, and on top of it, that corpmate actually is a girl in RL, what makes it a thousand times better! LolLolLol



@ all who are upset about the new names stupidity:

Let CCP know what you think about it, it may not change their mind, but it could, as history proves, and you will feel better if you do! Blink



@ all the fanboys around:

Yes, I admit, I might have mixed up some meta lvls, and admitting I was wrong, puts me allready 2 steps ahead of what CCP got the balls for, though this is rather sad.

But the point of this outrage is no less valid, and I will break it up, just for you:

1.) Using any speed-mod other than best named (or t2 for AB only) is usesless, as t2 MWDs are far inferrior to best named (and they are mostly even cheaper, not only better, but cheaper than t2 MWDs)

2.) if you dont take the mere meta0 t1 item, because its the cheapest, you are looking for "best named", allways (again, as stated, except t2 ABs maybe)

3.) If you do so, you got all the same names for ABs, and all different names for MWDs, with the effect that MWD names are used for ABs of the respective meta-lvl as well, so its all mixed up.

Yeah, one could say that this issue is all about "best named" being different meta-lvls for all the MWDs...

YET, YOU MIGHT NOT HAVE GOT IT, SO I PUT IT ALL BOLD AND CAPS SO YOU SEE:

"Catalyzed Cold-Gas Arcjet Thrusters" are now known as "Limited 1MN MicroWarpdrive I"
"Cold-Gas Arcjet Thrusters" are now known as "Experimental 1MN Afterburner I"

"Y-T8 Overcharged Hydrocarbon Microwarpdrive" are now known as "Experimental 10MN MicroWarpdrive I"
"Y-S8 Hydrocarbon Afterburners" are now known as "Experimental 10MN Afterburner I"

Quad LiF Fueled Booster Rockets" are now known as "Prototype 100MN MicroWarpdrive I
"LiF Fueled Booster Rockets" are now known as "Experimental 100MN Afterburner I"

Both best named each, though different meta lvl, had THE SAME FKING NAME!

WHY?!?

Because it made FKING sense! -.-



There were TWO, in words, as well as in numbers (2) TWO options to "fix" these names, no matter what actual names you pick:

1.) Give them easier names, but make sure that "best named" AB and MWD of respective size are named the same
=> give all best named ABs AND MWDs the same name for the most "easy" in here
(Would have been an easy to implement and quite sound soloution)

2.) introduce the missing meta lvls for all ABs and MWD sizes, and give them a logical naming scheme, same meta lvl = same name, but still best named AB = same name as best named MWD as there are now all the missing meta-lvl-items
(Would have been the far best soloution, as it would add more items and more oomph to EVE, thats just what we need!)

But, who would have guessed it, CCP OFC took the third option, where there are TWO.

...makes it actually a tripple-fail for CCP, and sadly for EVE, too -.-
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#11 - 2012-02-26 20:30:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Taipion wrote:
But the point of this outrage is no less valid, and I will break it up, just for you:

1.) Using any speed-mod other than best named (or t2 for AB only) is usesless, as t2 MWDs are far inferrior to best named (and they are mostly even cheaper, not only better, but cheaper than t2 MWDs)

2.) if you dont take the mere meta0 t1 item, because its the cheapest, you are looking for "best named", allways (again, as stated, except t2 ABs maybe)
…and to find the best-named, you can either do it like in the days of yore and just remember what it is for each size, or you can learn the meta names and see on the market that, hey! there is a prototype version for the size/module I want — I'll get that. Or hey, there isn't one, but there is an experimental verision — so I'll get that. Or hey, at least there is a limited one (this will only happen if you're going for small MWDs), so let's go for that one instead.

Simple rule of exclusion. You really only need to learn two of the names to cover 5 modules. One more for small ships (and this single exception can be learned by heart or just ignored if you never really fly small ships). This makes it easier than the previous versions

The sheer level of cranirectal syndrome required not to grasp this simplification is simply massive. Your failure to learn a very basic and consistent naming scheme where nothing is mixed up is not a failure on CCP's part.
KrakizBad
Section 8.
#12 - 2012-02-26 20:34:02 UTC
You simply didn't read anything Tippia wrote did you.
Taipion
Adeptus Petrous
#13 - 2012-02-26 21:33:41 UTC
Tippia wrote:
…and to find the best-named, you can either do it like in the days of yore and just remember what it is for each size, or you can learn the meta names
and this is an improvement how?
Btw, you did not get it, did you? There was a consistent naming before, and now there is not.


Tippia wrote:
and see on the market that, hey! there is a prototype version for the size/module I want — I'll get that. Or hey, there isn't one, but there is an experimental verision — so I'll get that. Or hey, at least there is a limited one (this will only happen if you're going for small MWDs), so let's go for that one instead.
...and theres the chance you pick a "upgraded" instead, effectively not getting what you want, but hey, I guess you call that a feature, too


Tippia wrote:
...or just ignored if you never really fly small ships...
yea, and this whole change was never meant to help new players who start with small ships, it was just CCP trollin, right?


Tippia wrote:
The sheer level of cranirectal syndrome required not to grasp this simplification is simply massive. Your failure to learn a very basic and consistent naming scheme where nothing is mixed up is not a failure on CCP's part.
Your failure to not recognize a downgrade, but mistake it with an upgrade instead, is really enormous, your lvl of lunacity is far above anything I could dream of. (you get the pun here? ^^)
On the other hand, you might just be trollin, but hell no way, who in this forums would ever do that?!


KrakizBad wrote:
You simply didn't read anything Tippia wrote did you.
I did, but thanks for proving you did not read anything here in one sentence!



Now, just for you, let me put one on top of it all, as these changes are meant to help the new players, imagine this situation:

You are a almost brand new player, and finally got that drake you went straight for, because you are caldari (likely) and doing missions in caldari space (likely, too).
And damn, you are going to grind some of those lvl 3 missions, you might even be able to afford some riggs soon!

Now you have those heavy launchers, and look in the market, look for "heavy", and soon you find your scourge heavy missiles.

The next time you shop for ammo, as theres nothing left, you just type in "Scourge", as you (likely) rememer the first word there was, and you get kinetic heavy missiles, and thats good, as you dont need anything thats not heavy or kinetic.

Now guess what happens when you type in trauma instead of scourge.



Yep, CCP, this truely is an upgrade for new players, further increasing the all beloved learning curve, and keeping us safe from those wow-noobs, that would not last a week anyway.
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#14 - 2012-02-26 21:49:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Tippia
Taipion wrote:
and this is an improvement how?
Simpler, more consistent, lets them add new modules and still maintain the formula, falls in line with the naming convention for top-meta modules.

Quote:
There was a consistent naming before, and now there is not.
There was an inconsistent and thoroughly unclear convention before that didn't differentiate between module types and which would have been broken instantly had they ever wanted to introduce new modules; now there's a consistent one that does every kind of differentiation needed very simply and opens up for further additions.

Quote:
...and theres the chance you pick a "upgraded" instead
Not really, no, since it's a meta-one name and thus always the worst named.

Quote:
Now guess what happens when you type in trauma instead of scourge.
You spot some heavy missiles that you can buy, all without having to learn the myriad of different (and occasionally conflicting) names for different missile and damage types.

Yes, this does indeed simplify things for new players as long as they capable of duplo-level pattern recognition.
Bienator II
madmen of the skies
#15 - 2012-02-26 21:53:19 UTC
Taipion wrote:
EVE?!?!?!? WHY?!?

this is where i stopped to read.

how to fix eve: 1) remove ECM 2) rename dampeners to ECM 3) add new anti-drone ewar for caldari 4) give offgrid boosters ongrid combat value
Taipion
Adeptus Petrous
#16 - 2012-02-26 23:43:30 UTC
Tippia wrote:
[...]Yes, this does indeed simplify things for new players[...]
Anything you say, only makes sense if there will be the missing-meta-speed-mods soon, any proof?
Except ofc what you say about missiles, as this makes no sense at all.

Btw, what was your point besides being a fanboy?
Got any at all?


Bienator II wrote:
Taipion wrote:
EVE?!?!?!? WHY?!?

this is where i stopped to read.
Keep on the good work, you will get far eventually!
Ammzi
Dreddit
Test Alliance Please Ignore
#17 - 2012-02-26 23:54:02 UTC
OP - listen to Tippia and then shut up.
Seriously.
Taipion
Adeptus Petrous
#18 - 2012-02-26 23:59:52 UTC
Ammzi wrote:
OP - listen to Tippia and then shut up.
Seriously.


You:
- either think that mixing up names from sense to nonsense is good, or, most likely
- troll

But thanks for the bump! P
Tippia
Sunshine and Lollipops
#19 - 2012-02-27 00:05:50 UTC
Taipion wrote:
Anything you say, only makes sense if there will be the missing-meta-speed-mods soon
Not really, no. It makes just as much sense without it, just like how the meta-11–14 made sense even before the full set of complexes were in the game.

Quote:
Except ofc what you say about missiles, as this makes no sense at all.
So not only do you not know how meta levels work and how ‘named’ modules work — you now say you are unable to both use the search function and to spot something as simple as a heavy missile? Ugh

Yeah, no. The more you describe the problem, the more you manage to convince me that it's not the game that needs to be fixed…

The fact remains: the new naming scheme is consistent, easier to learn, more encompassing, more structured, and allows for more differentiation than the old one. Learning it takes roughly zero time and effort (bring up the compare window, study it for a little while, done). It even lets you evaluate things that you have no idea what they're doing, just because they fit the overall scheme, unlike the old (lack of a) scheme.
Ajita al Tchar
Doomheim
#20 - 2012-02-27 00:16:31 UTC
You know, I agree with the sentiment that the new names could have been so much better (but really, the meta levels of prop mods are just kind of messed up, hence the apparent inconsistency although it's not actually an inconsistency). The new names are boring and ugh. A change was needed but if this particular execution of the change is the best designers could have come up with--i don't even

But I must say. This--

Taipion wrote:
Nova Fox wrote:
Nice shirt.

Thanks! I am very proud of it, as though I was not there (at the fanfest), I got it from a corpmate that was there, and on top of it, that corpmate actually is a girl in RL, what makes it a thousand times better! LolLolLol


is such a herpa derpa hurf blurf that if i palmfaced any harder, my face would emerge on the other side of my palms. And I'm saying this as a social tardface.
123Next page