These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

New dev blog: What's in a name

First post First post
Author
Khors
Doomheim
#341 - 2012-03-01 09:17:31 UTC
Pallidum Treponema wrote:

Oh, and while you're at it, change back missile names and add damage type icons to ammo. That makes a lot more sense, and is easier for both new and old players to grasp.


Missiles are already colour coded with their tips on the icons, even this suggestion wouldn't be needed.

Overall I agree with you and I think that CCP have misdirected some of their effort here.
Pallidum Treponema
Body Count Inc.
Pandemic Legion
#342 - 2012-03-01 09:22:46 UTC
Khors wrote:
Pallidum Treponema wrote:

Oh, and while you're at it, change back missile names and add damage type icons to ammo. That makes a lot more sense, and is easier for both new and old players to grasp.


Missiles are already colour coded with their tips on the icons, even this suggestion wouldn't be needed.

Overall I agree with you and I think that CCP have misdirected some of their effort here.


There are more ammo types than missiles. ;)
Plaude Pollard
Aliastra
Gallente Federation
#343 - 2012-03-01 09:30:10 UTC
CCP, could you please stop streamlining this? Anyone who bothers to actually sit down and look at the modules for long enough automatically learns what modules to keep and which to sell.

One of the best examples we have at the moment is Target Painters. You can learn how effective they are BY LOOKING AT THE BLOODY NAME! Just take the initials and you'll have:
Meta-1: PWN (Partial Weapon Navigation)
Meta-2: PWND (Periferal Weapon Navigation Diameter)
Meta-3: PWNT (Parallel Weapon Navigation Transmitter)
Meta-4: PWNAGE (Phased Weapon Navigation Array Generation Extron)
Is it really that hard to tell Target Painters apart by looking at their names? I think not, so why bother? You're only going to make it harder for the majority of your players who've played for a long time. I've only played for 2-3 years now, and I can usually tell modules by their meta-level by just looking at their names. So don't you think some of the older players are able to do the same? As for newer players, they can learn what modules to use through the Rookie-help chat.

How hard can that be to memorize? Answer: Not very hard. So why change it? This isn't some other typical cookie-cutter MMO, where everything needs to be obvious to even the most oblivious players. This is EVE. It's meant to be hard. Same goes for the module-names.

Furthermore, don't you dare touch my Launchers! If you change the names of Launchers, you are most likely going to lose thousands of subscriptions, because it's easier to keep track of now, than it will be with your new naming-conventions. I'm not talking about the part with "Light Missile Arrays" instead of "Assault Missile Launchers". I'm talking about their Meta-level identifiers. Most people already know that 'Arbalest'-launchers are the best T1 launchers you can get on the market. I don't want to fly around with "Prototype Rocket Launchers". I want to fly around with "'Arbalest' Rocket Launchers". Why? First off, because Missile Launchers are already standardized enough to make it easy for people who frequently use them to know which ones to use, and those you rarely use launchers are more likely to just sell them anyway.

At the moment, Turrets have the same advantage as missiles (at least Projectile Guns). It's easy to know which ones to go for on the market. If it has 'Scout' in it's name, its meta-4. If it has 'Protoype' in its name, it's meta-3. I haven't bothered learning the meta-1 and 2 versions, as I only use 'Scout' or 'Protoype' when flying Minmatar. Unless I use T2. Which I do more often than not, really.

Are you going to give Blasters the same mis-treatment? Are they also going to be "streamlined"? Are they going to end up being called "Low-Powered Blaster", "Medium-Powered Blaster" and "High-Powered Blaster" for Ion, Electron and Neutron Blasters, respectively? Because that just sounds like shooting yourselves in the foot with a 1400mm Howitzer Artillery Cannon II. All your older players know who use Blasters know which ones to use. Those who don't use Blasters very often can ask others who do know about it, and rookies can always ask for help in their Rookie-corp or the dedicated Rookie-Help chat. In fact, isn't that why it's there? Isn't Rookie Help in place to help rookies who want to learn things? That's what I thought it was there for.

I can accept the Implant name-changes, as the current system makes it quite hard to know which Hardwirings do what. So there's one good thing coming out of this. One good thing amongst a hundred bad things is not ideal.

TL;DR: Not supporting name-changes aside from Implants.

Note: I'm not angry. I'm just disappointed that EVE needs to be simplified for new players. You might want to consider changing your focus a bit, CCP. Otherwise you just risk a second huge-scale protest.

Does anyone else remember a time when games didn't need to be simplified, in order to appeal to new players?

New to EVE? Want to learn? The Crimson Cartel will train you in the fields of _**your **_choice. Mainly active in EU afternoons and evenings. Contact me for more info.

Khors
Doomheim
#344 - 2012-03-01 09:38:52 UTC
Pallidum Treponema wrote:
Khors wrote:
Pallidum Treponema wrote:

Oh, and while you're at it, change back missile names and add damage type icons to ammo. That makes a lot more sense, and is easier for both new and old players to grasp.


Missiles are already colour coded with their tips on the icons, even this suggestion wouldn't be needed.

Overall I agree with you and I think that CCP have misdirected some of their effort here.


There are more ammo types than missiles. ;)


Projectile ammo is the only ones who might have some small benefit from your amunition suggestion. But I'd argue it would only clutter the icons rather than anything. There must be a better way.

Redoing projectile ammo icons with different colours and mix of those to depict the damage type is one way.

I guess this has no place in this thread however.
R0nnie VanZant
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#345 - 2012-03-01 09:42:04 UTC  |  Edited by: R0nnie VanZant
OMG!

I just read ccp decided to do one useless change ( like noobship design before) again...
Changing names in a database very hard work Lol....... but lol what is it with you guys?
With this things can't cover the real problems in the game! Should be better to wake up and
find the real problems! Players help a lot about that... Just need to read and fix it, maybe harder
then change some name in database but more effective. This can't prove for us you guys there work really
just say something to cover our eyes.... pffff we are not stupid like that plz.... don't look us stupid!
If don't fixing problems and do more hidden changes ( nerf )

Tiger's Spirit wrote:


Hidden nerf everywhere. Eve window refreshing rate increased everywhere. Asset items refreshing delaying up to 5 min.
Double click on screen when try to navigate a ship is horrible slow. Security status check up from 15 minute to 20 minute.
I would be able to list many changes which is ruins the game experience, but for the CCP the most important thing is the name changes.


It means NOT The design and names, useless things make player have good mood to play!
Just really annoying some example : why need to spam buttons on OV when want my ship do my orders?
OV slow refresh like ****, missing CTRL+Double click (try to bumb cloaky ship fast!!! ) my ship almost die in WARP!!! after undock loading screen very slow ( undock----Black screen------still waiting-------Got the screen and i realized I'm in a pod LOL )... i lose one ship because of that and ect.... ect... ect....
Dont fix problems = players annoying = don't play... find another game.
We don't like to play with annoying game.
This is a rule.
Kaivix
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#346 - 2012-03-01 10:11:58 UTC
I had a look on Sisi (I know anything on Sisi can change but meh ) they seem to just add the prefix on front of the name or if it's one of the renames they just replace the word

thus XR-3200 Heavy Missile Bay is now the 'Experimental' XR-3200 Heavy Missile Bay

the ZW-4100 Siege Missile Bay is now the 'Experimental' ZW-4100 Torpedo Launcher

I don't see how this is dumbing down or making the game more "bland".

but in case
CCP keep the above and don't do what you did with the MWD and AB.




Luscius Uta
#347 - 2012-03-01 10:16:16 UTC
I suppose that those changes are made with good intent and for the better, even though I don't like having to do all my EFT/EVEHQ fits all over again, but missile launcher names are changed for the worse. Only renaming Siege Launchers to Torpedo Launchers makes sense. But if Standard Missile Launcers will be Light Missile Launchers, then Assault Missile Launchers should be Light Assault Missile Launchers. Then you leave Heavy (Assault) Missile Launchers named as they are.

And new meta 1-4 module names aren't exactly intuitive either. I'm sure you can come up with something better, like Basic/Standard/Improved/Advanced.

Workarounds are not bugfixes.

Medicated Maniac
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#348 - 2012-03-01 10:17:54 UTC
Meta Level 0: Shield Power Relay.
Meta Level 1: M1 Shield Power Relay.
Meta Level 2: M2 Shield Power Relay. Example Mod
Meta Level 3: M3 Shield Power Relay.
Meta Level 4: M4 Shield Power Relay.

Rocket Launchers 1 - Rocket Launcher M1 - M4
Assault Missile Launcher 1 - Advanced Rocket Launcher M1 - M4
Heavy Assault Missile Launcher 1 - Heavy Rocket Launcher M1 - M4
Siege Missile Launcher 1 - Torpedo Launcher M1- M4

Standard Missile Launcher 1 - Missile Launcher M1 - M4
Heavy Missile Launcher 1 - Advanced Missile Launcher M1- M4
Cruise Missile Launcher 1 - Cruise Missile Launcher M1- M4

RL Em Damage Rocket M1
ARL EM Damage Rocket M1
HRL EM Damage Rocket M1
TL EM Damage Torp M1

ML EM Damage Missile M1
AML EM Damage Missile M1
CML EM Damage Missile M1

I like this.
Jackson Firn
Doomheim
#349 - 2012-03-01 10:21:16 UTC
I must say i am struggling to understand what you are trying to avoid or improve? With these changes, if it’s a uniform convention for naming then how will that sit with the different races, by definition does it not imply that they all sat around the table together and said right l know lets create an IEEE of eve type thing? This is the universe where the proverbial buyer beware saying should be pasted across every contract entered into. Hardly the type of universe where it makes things easier for anybody

i know overkill, but i do get a sense that unless of course evidence exists this change will make little difference to player retention which is what i guess is your golden goose? I am not likely to leave over these sorts of changes but do get the feel that this is more for dust future than for the eve furture.


Kingston Black
Hostile.
PURPLE HELMETED WARRIORS
#350 - 2012-03-01 10:48:14 UTC
How on gods green earth is a limited module better than an upgraded module really???

Honestly I rarely get madbro at changes but the renaming of things like mwds is an fing shambles having to explain to newbies what all these bollocks names now mean and not having to go 'get the Y-T8' is a royal pita.

If your going to do it on meta lvl's can you at least put the number in the name so i dont have to look at this ******** naming system?



Cal Becka
Axiom Sprocket
#351 - 2012-03-01 10:48:32 UTC
Meta Name changing i Disagree with.
I like the Idea of standerdising names so its easier to make out whats what. but anyone who's used missiles knows that 'Arbalest' is your meta 4 etc etc.
why change it? (yes i know you haven't yet. but you plan too.)
I've seen this comment before and i'll say it again.
Have seperate meta descriptions for the diferent Module Groups.
leave the Missiles as they are... (at least i know standard heavy and cruise all have the same prefix. if the others need it so be it.)
have all Hybrid turrets with their own Meta Names, all Projectiles with their own, all Lazers with their own.
Hardeners with their own. Propulsion with its own. etc.

hardwiring Change. Thumbs up. I like. you can see what it is. but it still keeps its 'flavour' as you put it.

The Hardener rename i don't have a problem with persay. although personaly i'd prefer them all being Photon, Ballistic, Thermal (change the Rigs Hardeners to Match) i suppose the reason you gone that way is because Explosive are already Explosive. but thats not really a reason. give Explosive a new name rather... Blastproof or something. (i'm sure your content designers are more creative than me.)

As for the Launcher Rename.... ok so heavy assaults fire assault missiles so change the name to assault. same for the Torp Launchers and Standard Missile Launchers.

But the Light Missile Array is just going to confuse folks just as much as the heavy assault and assault launchers do now. only now it'll be the Light Missile Launcher and Light Missile Array thats gonna get confused.
*now admitidly i don't really see a better way of doing it at pressent, except changing the assault launchers to use there own ammo like the Heavy assaults do. and calling them somethign different. Swarm missiles or Something.


well thats my 2 cents. Take it or Leave it...(but i hope you take it.)
Ciar Meara
PIE Inc.
Praetoria Imperialis Excubitoris
#352 - 2012-03-01 10:53:06 UTC
I like this. The confusing as hell implant names and "All scripts in the game have had the word "script" added to their names" are excellent changes. I can't count the times I just typed in "script" in the market and then went "oh right, that doesn't work"

I have been playing for eight years and I still don't know what all the different implants do, its just to confusing now at least there is a basic rule on how their name reflects their function and they retain their flavour.

Most excellent.

Concerning the experimental versus prototype, it sounds right, you need a "first" prototype before you do experiments with several of them so carry on, most excellent work.

I am however curious about the armour and shield naming conventions because those touch my Amarrian hart directly.

- [img]http://go-dl1.eve-files.com/media/corp/janus/ceosig.jpg[/img] [yellow]English only please. Zymurgist[/yellow]

Tiger's Spirit
Perkone
Caldari State
#353 - 2012-03-01 11:05:13 UTC
Ciar Meara wrote:
I have been playing for eight years and I still don't know what all the different implants do...

Most excellent.


IQ -1
Jenn Makanen
Doomheim
#354 - 2012-03-01 11:11:01 UTC
Tiger's Spirit wrote:
Ciar Meara wrote:
I have been playing for eight years and I still don't know what all the different implants do...

Most excellent.


IQ -1



So you took the time to memorize what each and every implant does? And you think that this is a good thing? Go see the big blue room some time. I hear it's full of a lot more interesting things that that kind of rote memorization.
Vladimir Ilych
Gradient
Electus Matari
#355 - 2012-03-01 11:54:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Vladimir Ilych
In principle all sounds fine if you retain the flavour of the older names. Just one thing.

Meta Level 1: Upgraded
Meta Level 2: Limited
Meta Level 3: Experimental
Meta Level 4: Prototype

Seems a bit odd. Why is "Limited" better than "Upgraded"? How about..

Meta Level 1: Upgraded
Meta Level 2: Improved
Meta Level 3: Experimental
Meta Level 4: Prototype

Big smile
Velicitia
XS Tech
#356 - 2012-03-01 12:10:56 UTC
Khors wrote:


Redoing projectile ammo icons with different colours and mix of those to depict the damage type is one way.




http://wiki.eveonline.com/en/wiki/Item_Database:Ammunition_&_Charges:Projectile_Ammo:Standard_Ammo:Medium

granted, they're not necessarily clear (some of them are VERY close), but they are colourised.

One of the bitter points of a good bittervet is the realisation that all those SP don't really do much, and that the newbie is having much more fun with what little he has. - Tippia

Seamus Donohue
EVE University
Ivy League
#357 - 2012-03-01 12:11:01 UTC
I propose the following for the missile launchers:

Cruise Launchers go on battleships and fire Cruise Missiles, which are long-range battleship missiles.
Torpedo Launchers go on battleships (and stealth bombers) and fire Torpedoes, which are short-range battleship missiles.
Heavy Missile Launchers go on cruisers and fire Heavy Missiles, which are long-range cruiser missiles.
Heavy Rocket Launchers go on cruisers and fire Heavy Rockets, which are short-range cruiser missiles.
Deluxe Light Missile Launchers go on cruisers and fire Light Missiles, which are long-range frigate missiles.
Light Missile Launchers go on frigates and fire Light Missiles, which are long-range frigate missiles.
Light Rocket Launchers go on frigates and fire Light Rockets, which are short-range frigate missiles.

Survivor of Teskanen.  Fan of John Rourke.

I have video tutorials for EVE Online on my YouTube channel: http://www.youtube.com/user/SeamusDonohueEVE

Gripen
#358 - 2012-03-01 12:15:33 UTC
Devblog wrote:
There simply is not much inherent game value in having to do a Show Info every time you can't remember whether the Voltaic Nanite hardener is better than the Radioisotope one, or whether the Hardwiring - Inherent Implants 'Lancer' G1.5-Alpha goes into slot 6 or slot 7, and what kind of bonus it gives again, and how much of that bonus you get.

Easy solution: replace personal item names with generic ones.
Proper solution: display a quick tooltip for items with meta-level and slot information. You already have that on item icons in inventory.
Bent Barrel
#359 - 2012-03-01 12:20:01 UTC  |  Edited by: Bent Barrel
NO NO NO NO NO NO NO PLEASE !!!!!

I see that my return to EVE was very short. I thought Failcarna was the lowest you can go, but this is worse.

You are changing the game into one large spreadsheet with this. Yes it was a spreadsheet before, but the cells had color. How they all just have black font on white background. That's what you are doing with the renamings.

I see I will not renew my subscription after this hits TQ.

EDIT:

Please consider this: The corporations producing these items are competing in a galactic market. What do you thing does separate their products ? NAMING !!! Marketing is all about a good and catching name (cold-gas arcjet thrusters) while the unimaginative fail (experimental 1mn afterburner).

Also what's the difference between experimental and prototype ? They are both the same to me from the name. And all items that had the full 4 meta levels, how many were used ? Hint:

plain t1 for the poor
meta 2 for the cpu saving
tech 2/meta 4 when ever possible

based on that, you can cut the meta 3 from the line and nobody will notice. You needed to remember 2 meta names (meta 2 and meta 4) all others were ignored.

How often do you research implants or change them ? I bet very rarely. Thus the names are actualy unimportant in the orientation sense. But they look good and provide flavor.
TorTorden
Tors shibari party
No Holes Barred
#360 - 2012-03-01 12:33:58 UTC
Gripen wrote:
Devblog wrote:
There simply is not much inherent game value in having to do a Show Info every time you can't remember whether the Voltaic Nanite hardener is better than the Radioisotope one, or whether the Hardwiring - Inherent Implants 'Lancer' G1.5-Alpha goes into slot 6 or slot 7, and what kind of bonus it gives again, and how much of that bonus you get.


Easy solution: replace personal item names with generic ones.
Proper solution: display a quick tooltip for items with meta-level and slot information. You already have that on item icons in inventory.



Quoted for THRUTH!