These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

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

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Renaming modules and module tiericide

Author
Jennifer Maxwell
Crimson Serpent Syndicate
#1 - 2014-12-20 21:03:37 UTC
It's pretty obvious that a lot of people don't like the thought of renaming some of the uniquely named modules in the upcoming module tiericide. It's also pretty obvious that a lot of people don't care but if they don't care then they don't have a horse in this race.

I was looking at some of the updated module skins brought about with the updated lighting engine (at least they look new; the blasters have more Gallente colors and dirt, grime and corrosion around them, the rails have a lot more clean and Caldari look to them, ect), and I was thinking. Borderlands varries it's gun properties by the company that makes them. S&S Munitions made guns with high ammo capacity. Jacobs made slow but powerful sniper rifles and pistols and were made out of wood. Dahl made more professional style guns with reduced recoil. Hyperion had enhanced accuracy, among other stuff.

Why not have Eve corporations producing these products? We've got lore already pre-laid for the foundation, just build on it. Capsuleers produce T1 generic modules, but the different corps can add their own touches and flairs, maybe in the form of BPCs they sell through their LP store.

Let's take Caldari for an example.

"Lai Dai have always favored a balanced approach to their mix of on-board systems, leading to a line-up of versatile ships but providing very little in terms of tactical specialization."

Lai Dai makes a general upgraded version of the T1 meta 1 module, but doesn't doesn't do specialization. It's better across the board, but nothing sticks out.


"As befits one of the largest weapons manufacturers in the known world, Kaalakiota's ships are very combat focused. Favoring the traditional Caldari combat strategy, they are designed around a substantial number of weapons systems, especially missile launchers. However, they have rather weak armor and structure, relying more on shields for protection."

Kaalakiota makes missile launchers, obviously, but they decide to sacrifice structure for power. These modules have a little less HP when it comes to overheating, but are able to put out more damage, either cold and overheated, or just overheated.


"Caldari starship design is showing a growing trend towards armaments effective at high ranges, and in this arena, as in others, Ishukone do not let themselves get left behind; the Eagle was intended by them as a counter to the fearsome long-range capabilities of Lai Dai's Cerberus ship."

Iskukone's thing in weapons development is obviously range, with the Eagle and the Harpy being the more frontline combat ships they put out.



You could even extend this to new, faction tier stuff. CreoDron puts out a line of Hobgoblins. Minmatar corporations make specialized explosive and kinetic missiles (which is odd, because Minmatar made the kinetic missiles but Caldari specialize in them) while Khanid makes specialized Inferno types.

I'm sure you guys can come up with more examples of stuff like this.


What do you think?
Lugh Crow-Slave
#2 - 2014-12-20 21:19:09 UTC
Violet Hurst
Fedaya Recon
#3 - 2014-12-20 22:21:18 UTC
+1 It has been suggested in the last round of tiercide and actually the skill hardwiring implants already follow that naming scheme roughly. I wouldn't consider it lorebreaking if modules dropped by pirate NPCs had Empire corp's names on them either, chances are they're stolen in the first place. Aesthetically it's way better than "ample" missile launchers in my opinion, yet we'd still lose stuff like PWNAGE.
However the express purpose of the new naming scheme is to utilize names for easy classification of items. With just the corp's name on them, people would still have to memorize two dozen strings, since e.g. autocannons and blasters might have the same relative modifier to them, but would hardly be manufactured by the same corporation. A workaround here, as also has been suggested in the last round, would be to employ the full naming scheme of hardwiring implants and concatenate an identifier (e.g. EY-1005) to the name.
Foxicity
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#4 - 2014-12-21 05:50:49 UTC
As Violet said, the new naming was to make module variations easier to read. The corp names would need to be added in a way non-destructive to that goal. Maybe by appending it to the end or adding it to the Module Info tab.

With that said I support this idea. +1