EVE Information Portal

Reprocess everything less and above Meta 5 and sell it because we don't need anymore Names Items harharhar

That...doesn't work.

The base capacitor penalty of the T1 is -20%, countered by a 36% reduction in capacitor recharge time. The equates to a net increase of 25% to cap regen.

The Compact version, using the numbers in the blog, is a 26.98% increase in cap regen, with the same -20% capacity penalty.

The T2 version, again from the blog, is a 31.15% regen increase, with the same -20% capacity penalty.

The Restrained, though, is backwards. It provides a 27.12% regen penalty (slightly more than the Compact, less than T2), but has a higher cap capacity penalty, at -25%. This makes it slightly better for actual potency, but much worse for drawback.

What it should be is -15% capacity (less penalty, which is what "Retrained" is supposed to indicate) with a 33% reduction in cap regen time. That gives it a net regen increase of 26.87% (right in line with the Compact version), but 5% less penalty to overall capacitor capacity.

Looks like all 16 pages have been in vain. The fact that there are no blue dev posts other than on the first page coupled with the next patch being released tomorrow reinforces that fact. Looks like the new names are soon to be in. It is a really sad day in Eve

On a side note, I have been playing around with new pvp Helios.. err.. i mean "Frigate of the Bear" fit and want your opinion.
Friagte of the Bear
Damage Control of the Bear
Magnetic Field Stabilizer of the Bear
Micro Auxiliary Power Core of the Bear

Warp Scrambler of the Bear
Tracking Disruptor of the Bear
1MN Afterburner of the Bear

150mm Railgun of the Bear
150mm Railgun of the Bear

Small Auxiliary Thrusters of the Bear
Small Hybrid Collision Accelerator of the Bear

Small Drone of the Bear


Let me know what you guys think.

This is a crappy idea, it's dumbing it down for people who CBA to click the compare tool and making the eve lore that much blander in the process. Gone will be the scout autos or malkuth rocket launcher... welcome the "ample" module. FFS... AMPLE ? Why not just call them "ok I guess" or "they'll do I suppose" or even just "average".

CCP can do one, they are creating a dull, dumb and dreary landscape, meh.

I still think the new naming system is bloody awful. I hate the fact that we didn't get to give any feedback on this.

Personally, although it may be more work, I think the naming system should be much broader. Instead of just having a set of prefixes for EVERY module in game, there should be a set of prefixes for each type of module (similar to now but simpler).
We need to keep the flavour of the Sci Fi nature of the game whilst making it easier to understand without ruining it.

Armour plates are a great example of this because we use materials to seperate the items.

We have
Steel
Nanofiber
Titanium
Crystalline Carbonite
Tungnsten

If we loose this for:
Upgraded
Compact
Restrained

I think it will look awful and not really make sense!

Take armour plates and simply do this to them:
Steel - Basic (snowflakes)
Titanium - T1
Tungnsten - "Upgraded" (All round best)
Nanofiber - Reduced mass penalty but not so good armour boost
Crystalline Carbonite - Easiest to fit
T2 Steel - T2 version (Best Armour, Most difficult to fit, More mass penalty than upgraded)

We keep names that make sense and still appear "Real" becase a "Restrained 800mm armour plate" sounds stupid.

Try to be a bit sci fi with shield extenders too.
Current:
Shield Extender I (T1)
Supplemental Barrier Emitter
Subordinate Screen Stabilizer
Azeotropic Ward Salubrity
F-S9 Regolith Shield Induction
Shield Extender II (T2)

We only need 3 meta versions so change the names to:
Shield Extender I (T1) or for the sake of continuity - F-S1 Shield Extender (T1)
F-S6-R Shield Extender (Lowest Sig Penalty)
F-S4-C Shield Extender (Lowest Fitting)
F-S9 Shield Extender ("Upgraded")
Shield Extender II (T2) or for the sake of continuity - F-S9-2 Shield Extender (T2)


The prefixed letters and numbers will become familiar to users. We don't need the words "Ample or Restrained".

Also, as suggested earlier. Start branding the things!! Implants are branded so why aren't modules!

Examples are easy:
Duvolle Labs Armour Repairer
Boundless Creation Shield Booster

FRONT!

Sol says Hi!

What would be a kind of awesome revenge would be for that ship to be blown up by a 'Salmon fit Destoyer'.

Absolutely unbearable....

sry couldn't resist

Hey guys. Thanks for the feedback so far.

We're doing some discussion internally about the concerns some people have expressed about the naming.
I will say that we absolutely reject any argument that attempts to claim that obscure name memorization should somehow be a requirement to play EVE. It's not "dumbing down the game" to make systems more easily understandable.
However some of the concerns about the lore and flavour have merit and we're talking about what we might change to better address those concerns. Nothing related to this will be changing for Oceanus, but everything can be iterated upon.

Also, if you've read the patch notes or dev blog today you'll have seen that we made an adjustment to the Restrained Cap Flux Coil stats. We had some wires crossed internally and thanks to your feedback we've cleared up the erroneous stats. The Restrained Cap Flux Coil will indeed have reduced drawback instead of increased drawback. It will have a capacitor pool penalty of -10% and a recharge speed bonus of 28%.

Thanks.

Fozzie,

I agree that obscure naming is a red herring argument and, sadly, it may drown out a different, possibly more fruitful line of exploration. As best I can see, this first pass module rebalancing does nothing to make fitting player produced tech 1 (meta 0) modules sensible in any case since even the compact versions not only use less resources (powergrid/cpu etc.) but also produce better results (rate of fire/powergrid increase, ect.).

This, of course, matches the current situation where generally the player manufactured tech one (meta 0) is the worst of all possible options including from a cost perspective (low meta being so numerous and reprocessing so poorly, it generally sells on the market for less than the meta 0 option).

Will drop rates be adjusted to make named modules rare enough to be more valuable/expensive than player produced meta 0 modules or is the thinking that Tech II manufacturing provides sufficient demand for player produced meta 0 modules and thus there’s no need to create even more demand for them by making them sensible options in their own right?

DireNecessity