These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

New Names! (for Missiles and Meta-Speed-Mods) Do you like them?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Jace Errata
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#121 - 2012-01-24 22:52:42 UTC
I don't really mind the AB/MWD changes. Missiles though...

I mean if they absolutely had to do this, they could have picked better names, maybe copied the Heavy or Light Missile names. They sound so much more awesome than the ones they chose instead.

tweeten

One day they woke me up so I could live forever

It's such a shame the same will never happen to you
Sicex
#122 - 2012-01-24 22:55:20 UTC  |  Edited by: Sicex
Frankly it sounds like they assigned the renaming of these modules to 3 different people in 3 different offices who never once spoke to each other.

Sometimes I wonder if it has something to do with an Icelandic to English translation.
Razin
The Scope
#123 - 2012-01-24 23:04:50 UTC  |  Edited by: Razin
OlRotGut wrote:
Razin wrote:
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
The game and its mechanics (and thus its complexity) are absolutely unaffected by the change in name.

Complexity in terms of game mechanics is unaffected. However, complexity in terms of simulation of an immersive world sure is. It is unreasonable to believe that in such a geographically and culturally varied world as EVE all of the manufactured missiles are named the same just because they carry similar warheads. It's just one more break in suspension of disbelief.

If CCP were'n concerned with variety (as current changes clearly aren't), why not just append the damage type to the old name and be done with it? This change could have been made to satisfy both the usability concerns and the fluff concerns with such a small amount of additional effort on the part of CCP devs... Instead, CCP happened with a vengeance.



Simulation of an immerse world?

1000+ ships in a space station that obviously isn't scaled to handle that amount?
planets that do not orbit the stars in the solar system?
magically re-spawning pirates and 'roids?

i mean i could go on and on... that is a weak stance to the renaming argument for certain.

You forgot to mention submarines.

Yes, the world of EVE already suffers from a high number of inconsistencies and 'approximations'. That's no reason to add another item to that list.
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#124 - 2012-01-24 23:06:24 UTC
Solved all your problems forever.

You're welcome.

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)
Ion Rubix
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#125 - 2012-01-24 23:11:55 UTC
Reilly Duvolle wrote:

So? Todays noob will say "If I fit an 'Experimental 1MN Microwarpdrive' I wil get an extra 13% out of my engines!"

At least this name indicates that we are in fact talking about a MWD


I guess you missed my previous post. Roll
Chaos Dreams
#126 - 2012-01-24 23:53:26 UTC
Seriously? There aren't enough legitimate issues and problems with the game that CCP have to sit some uncreative plebes around a table and come up with new names for everything? Are they just complete ******* morons, or is it their goal to detract from the fun of the game?

Here's a couple tips:
Creative names = Good. Bring back hellfire.
Generic names = Bad. You're killing the flavor of the game.
Changing the names of stuff for no reason = completely brain-dead and clueless. Confusing players, messing up killboards, and breaking every third party program does NOT add to the enjoyment of the game.
Mr M
Sebiestor Tribe
#127 - 2012-01-25 00:09:45 UTC
Instead of the different names they could've just gone with emp heavy assault missile and so on. That would also make it fairly easy to search for.

Share your experience

Write for the EVE Tribune

www.eve-tribune.com
Aldous Borrn
League of Gentleman Cartographers
#128 - 2012-01-25 00:33:02 UTC
I, too, am frightened by change.
Lifelongnoob
State War Academy
Caldari State
#129 - 2012-01-25 00:37:55 UTC
i dont like these changes......... eve search function has effectively been ruined
admiral root
Red Galaxy
#130 - 2012-01-25 00:56:03 UTC
They seem to have fixed something that wasn't broken.

No, your rights end in optimal+2*falloff
greythorne012511
Doomheim
#131 - 2012-01-25 00:56:49 UTC
No, the name changes were neither necessary nor desirable. These generic names are bland, and a form of vandalism., done for no reason other than someone could. Some of the allure of the game has been erased.
DarkAegix
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#132 - 2012-01-25 00:59:07 UTC
So much butthurt.
This is excellent.
Imuran
Zentor Industries
#133 - 2012-01-25 01:06:34 UTC
Chaos Dreams wrote:

Creative names = Good. Bring back hellfire.
Generic names = Bad. You're killing the flavor of the game.

Thia
ACE McFACE
Federal Navy Academy
Gallente Federation
#134 - 2012-01-25 01:37:34 UTC
Quote:
This is NEX Store 2.0!

You're an idiot

Now, more than ever, we need a dislike button.
Sicex
#135 - 2012-01-25 01:41:39 UTC
xRazoRx wrote:
Black Dranzer wrote:
xRazoRx wrote:
Why not rename all the ships too?
Drake frigate - kestrel
Drake cruiser - caracal
Drake battleship - raven
HELL YEAH STREAMLINING

Don't assume your question is rhetorical or that your analogy is sound.

The main problem with unifying ship names would be that ship stats vary enormously from ship to ship. A Kestrel ISN'T simply a Drake frigate. But modules are just straight up upgrades of each other. The difference between a Kestrel and a Caracal is huge. The difference between a Meta 1 and a Meta 2 Afterburner is a slight increase in velocity.
What about missiles, genius?

I could type in "bloodc" and find bloodclaw missile. Now i have to type "trauma li"? Great.


Laugh!

Is this a real gripe? Are we ******* serious?
Taipion
Adeptus Petrous
#136 - 2012-01-25 01:51:24 UTC  |  Edited by: Taipion
Razin wrote:
OlRotGut wrote:
Razin wrote:
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
The game and its mechanics (and thus its complexity) are absolutely unaffected by the change in name.

Complexity in terms of game mechanics is unaffected. However, complexity in terms of simulation of an immersive world sure is. It is unreasonable to believe that in such a geographically and culturally varied world as EVE all of the manufactured missiles are named the same just because they carry similar warheads. It's just one more break in suspension of disbelief.

If CCP were'n concerned with variety (as current changes clearly aren't), why not just append the damage type to the old name and be done with it? This change could have been made to satisfy both the usability concerns and the fluff concerns with such a small amount of additional effort on the part of CCP devs... Instead, CCP happened with a vengeance.



Simulation of an immerse world?

1000+ ships in a space station that obviously isn't scaled to handle that amount?
planets that do not orbit the stars in the solar system?
magically re-spawning pirates and 'roids?

i mean i could go on and on... that is a weak stance to the renaming argument for certain.

You forgot to mention submarines.

Yes, the world of EVE already suffers from a high number of inconsistencies and 'approximations'. That's no reason to add another item to that list.


@OlRotGut:

Yea, EVE is not fully immersive, so why bother if we destroy what is left?!?

Dear OlRotGut, please gb2wow, thanks.
MadMuppet
Critical Mass Inc
#137 - 2012-01-25 03:07:42 UTC
I hate the new names. I mean seriously, EMP S, EMP M, EMP L... whatever they thinking???....

...er oh wait...

... um...

nevermind. :)

This message brought to you by Experience(tm). When common sense fails you, experience will come to the rescue. Experience(tm) from the makers of CONCORD.

"If you are part of the problem, you will be nerfed." -MadMuppet
ASadOldGit
Doomheim
#138 - 2012-01-25 03:13:11 UTC
I'll just add my 3 ISK worth.

Look at it from a different point of view.
Imagine if you'd been playing since day 1 and all you ever knew for years was "EM torps" or "thermal heavies", then, out of the blue, CCP added fancy, exotic names, like "Scourge" and "Mjolnir" to the front of them. I GUARANTEE the forums would implode with the shear number of people complaining about the unnecessary clutter of these stupid "non-EVE" names.
Some people just complain about change regardless of how good/bad it is. Just embrace it and learn the new names - you'll forget about it in a few days. (Not saying they're perfect, but they can be improved over time)


Also, if you're shopping for these things on a regular basis, why are you searching for them more than once?
Why don't you make a "Missiles" folder in the Market Quickbar and just click it when you need them? Make a "Torpedoes" and "Afterburners" folder too, for all I care.
If you're shopping for a ship, surely you've dragged the fitting into the Quickbar, right? So you don't have to search...?

This signature intentionally left blank for you to fill in at your leisure.
Scrapyard Bob
EVE University
Ivy League
#139 - 2012-01-25 03:15:46 UTC
Pointless and bad change (on the missile names).

They could have just as easily renamed the heavies as:

Widowmaker Thermal Heavy Missile
Thunderbolt EM Heavy Missile
Havoc Explosive Heavy Missile
Scourge Kinetic Heavy Missile

Which would have ended up with the exact same "ease of figuring out which one does which damage type", while preserving the old names that everyone was used to.

Instead, they completely ignored our feedback thread and just pushed the change out - just like the old CCP that brought us Incarna.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=54444
Taipion
Adeptus Petrous
#140 - 2012-01-25 03:37:06 UTC
ASadOldGit wrote:
I'll just add my 3 ISK worth.

Look at it from a different point of view.
Imagine if you'd been playing since day 1 and all you ever knew for years was "EM torps" or "thermal heavies", then, out of the blue, CCP added fancy, exotic names, like "Scourge" and "Mjolnir" to the front of them. I GUARANTEE the forums would implode with the shear number of people complaining about the unnecessary clutter of these stupid "non-EVE" names.

You would be right with this, but it was exactly the other way round. Full stop.

Scrapyard Bob wrote:
Pointless and bad change (on the missile names).

They could have just as easily renamed the heavies as:

Widowmaker Thermal Heavy Missile
Thunderbolt EM Heavy Missile
Havoc Explosive Heavy Missile
Scourge Kinetic Heavy Missile

Which would have ended up with the exact same "ease of figuring out which one does which damage type", while preserving the old names that everyone was used to.

Instead, they completely ignored our feedback thread and just pushed the change out - just like the old CCP that brought us Incarna.

https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=54444


I would have LOVED the heavy missile names, but taking 2 names from torps, and 2 random-fingerpointing-in-a-dictionary... yes, that makes sense, as much sense as ignoring the community, again.

Welcome to Incarna 2.0!

(This wont stop here)