EVE Information Portal

This.


Thanks for listening to us, ok guys now we need to come up with an easier naming scheme but keep it super sci-fi .


My thoughts on rails -

When you do the bg research on rail guns there are different types rail guns , coil, gauss etc and the way they are built are all different. Anyway i digress.

For rails

Railgun I - ok

my issue is with the carbide and 'scout' guns. See when searching for items the minmatar meta 4 are all 'scout' cannons so all I have to do is search for scout but it also brings up minmatar. which is bad. I would suggest carbine but that might get mixed up with the carbide as they are too similar. Also cannon seems a little too out there as when i think of cannon i dont think of a rail gun.

So here our my thoughts.

Railgun I
Plasma Armature Railgun
Carbide Railgun
Compressed Coil Railgun
Prototype Gauss Gun
Railgun II

- I am trying to keep comformity using guns in all of them. But looking at this random wiki page There are some interesting variations to the rail gun.


Now as for blasters - I have always found that was confusing until i could use t2 then i said screw trying to remember it.
Limited, regulated, anode, modal. Now I think anode and modal are cool and easy to remember for 3 and 4, limited and regulated dont seem to fit the scheme. As i think about it more they dont seem to fit at all, any of them. When being issued a set of large armorments I like to think of a serial number or something on them.

so for blasters why not make a naming scheme kind of similar to that of implants.

Light neutron blaster I
LNB-100 neutron blaster
LNB-200 limited neutron blaster
etc.

This preserves some of the original naming scheme but also gives a prefix similar to that of implants which makes it easier to search and preserve some uninqueness to naming.


As for others give me a few I think all minmatar guns should be renamed to the appropriate ammo they use from spare change to volkswagons. I for one welcome the new 1400 series volkswagon launcher II.

i am not sure what you intended to fix with the metalevel renaming in the first place.

the meta levels lead to the thinking that the higher the level the better the item. Items however have more than one attribute. So its hard to say what is better. For example, there are some meta 4 items which are better (or equal) in basically every attribute which matters including the price compared to the tech 2 equivalent. I am not sure if this is intended or just a balancing artifact.

So... please go back to the drawing board and think again about all that. Maybe it would make sense to use scify tokens instead of bad/better/ok/good modifiers. It looks to me like you tried something like that however since you didn't explain what you tried to do, it was probably misunderstood since 90% of all people i talked to think in the higher the meta, the better the item scheme.

and yeah, find a better name for small medium lasers since they collide with medium lasers - but i said that already :)

A hopefully sufficiently convincing and objective reason to change the name "Trauma" is that this word is related to organic matter. Since the majority of Ships in EVE is not organic a medical expression like "Trauma" is simply not suitable. When im surfing in space on my fresh rescued damsel with my bean fueled methane thruster and my damsel bounces her head on the jita hangar door while playing docking games then a "Trauma" is in the right place to describe the damage done to my space vessel. But when im hit by a kinetic missile in that situation my damsel should be chunky salsa instead of having a Trauma. In addition the word Trauma lacks of coolness in comparison to old kinetic missile names like "Terror" or "Scourge" for example.
I personally would prefer the name "Impact" for kinetic damage. Its much more suitable for what a kinetic missile does when it meets the cold steel of a spaceship. Much like "Inferno" it can easily be associated with the kind of damage it does while it simply sounds cool. The name "Nova" sounds too soft for an explosion. Try to find something with more hard consonants that you can feel the BAM by spelling the word. And for EM damage i had to google the word "Mjolnir" to determine what type of crispbread it is. Please consider to change it to something more sci-fi.

Here comes a list of words i would prefer:

Thermic: Inferno (cant think of a better name to assoiciate with "really hot" )

Kinetic: Impact / Force (if you cant feel the punch of fathers fist its definitely the wrong word)

Explosive: Detonator / Devastator / Blast (thats what it does and sounds like "BAM")

EM: Photon / Quantum (electromagnetic radiation consists of them and it permits to have photon torpedoes )

One thing that has been bugging me actually in general is the slight obsession with meta level as an indicator of the quality of the item as a higher meta level does not always mean a better item even within T1 named modules (faction have more examples but is outside the general scope of this discussion)

Missile launchers are a good example where although higher meta level does reflect more DPS for another attribute (CPU requirements) the order of best to worst by meta level is 1>4>2>3>0 (this is a good thing in a way as it makes lower grade weapons useful in some situations)

Then there are hull upgrades like cargo expanders. Firstly here to confuse matters you have module types with separate variations with the same name the basic expanded cargohold (and its offshoots) and the expanded cargohold I and its offspring .

Ignoring the Expanded Cargohold I family initially and looking only at the basic family all of the basic family are considered meta 0 yet have a cargo capacity bonus which ranges from 15% to 24.2% and when you then bring in the Expanded cargohold I family matters get more confusing with the best basic (meta 0) module being better than the meta1 and 2 modules for the cargohold I family variety of mods.

Then there are the ECCM mods and backup arrays which have one set of meta 0 and 1 modules but 2 meta 2, 3 and 4 modules,, the backup arrays have no variations in quality but the ECCM modules have different cycle timers, activation costs, and heat damage for the 2 modules at each meta level giving each different small advantages and disadvantages (and because of this i would advocate not removing them)

This is only if you rely on meta level as an indicator and generally i think that these variations that dont keep in line with meta level variation offer up different options (E.g. do i fit a co-proc and arbalest launchers or do i fit malkuths and fit a BCS) and faction and storyline items can often be worse or the same as T1 counterparts in some areas same goes for T2.

Zainou 'Snapshot' Heavy Missiles HM-703.....


is still a mouthful

change to just acronyms so this one would be:

Zainou 'Snapshot' HM-703


after all any idiot can figure out the acronyms for skills

will not work always ... there are duplicates ... f.e.:

Evasive Maneuvering - EM - agility
Energy Management - EM - capacitor capacity

I support the name changes in general to make it more intutive to use items and their meta variations. This might help beginners while not cutting any gaming complexity.
Nevertheless i will miss they joy i had back in the days finding an 'Arbalest' Heavy Missile Launcher.

You should somehow, as mentioned before, rethink the naming and maybe come up with some different wordings.

cheers \o/

PS: Some players should start to get a life... very very sad but true.

Then just search for "10mn m" and you will get the list of all 10mn mwds, and that is freaking awsome.

I think "Scourge" has a special place because it is the ammunition used by drakes, and many of us have flown one at some point or other. There's not the same passion with the Cruise launchers, as none of the battleships are bonused to a specific type of ammo. You might get a similar effect if you renamed multifrequency or antimatter.

That said, I liked the flavour text associated with each missile name, and would much prefer the combined Scourge Kinetic Heavy Missile, which keeps the naming flavour (and unique name) and still completely defines the missile.

Yep - key parts of old names should remain in the new name if any renaming has to be done.
Roll the old missile names back and add the damage type to them with one extra word. People will spank you much less after that (including myself .)