These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#21 - 2012-01-24 16:56:54 UTC  |  Edited by: Petrus Blackshell
I am surprised at the amount of butthurt "don't change anything ever" attitudes that are present among the Eve community. If you never change anything, nothing will ever improve. I know that "if it ain't broke don't fix it", but just because it's not broken for you doesn't mean it's not broken. There is only so much HTFU you can toss at newbies before they give up and go do something else, and Eve is badly in need of new blood.

Chill, people, and give it a chance.

Now, to answer the thread:

Taipion wrote:
Do you like the new names?

Was it a good step?

Was it necessary?


Clear HELL NO on all 3 from myself, but what about YOU?!?

Yep.

In my opinion, yes.

Depends on your point of view. For vets it's not, but it's one of those little things(tm) that can really bug newbies.

Quote:
so i typed "trauma" into market search instead of "scourge"

i get all missiles in eve???


Try "trauma heavy", or "trauma assault". I, for one, find that far more convenient.

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)
Korinne
The Partisan Brigade
#22 - 2012-01-24 16:59:41 UTC
It's not so much a 'don't change anything' attitude as much as a 'don't change anything for no reason'. The latter seems to be all that CCP does in the present; changing things for the sake of changing things in a way that adds virtually nothing to the game other than headaches, providing the corporate suits with a small amount of 'feeling good because we did something'.
Heo Hyungie
Chimaerazz
#23 - 2012-01-24 17:01:16 UTC
By renaming the missles , its now more powerful than eva aye ? Like hybrid ?
Fidelium Mortis
Minor Major Miners LLC
#24 - 2012-01-24 17:03:31 UTC
Could it be of benefit to new players... maybe.

Was it really necessary.... probably not.

If a simple name change blows your mind... you have other issues to worry about.

ICRS - Intergalactic Certified Rocket Surgeon
Berendas
Ascendant Operations
#25 - 2012-01-24 17:03:54 UTC
The changes make sense, and will be good for newer players, but I will miss the old names. Having them memorized was like being in the cool kids club, and added effortless some roleplaying to conversation. Whenever I would refer to a Y-T8, I would always feel like the Stormtrooper from A New Hope; "You see that new BT-16?" Cool
Korinne
The Partisan Brigade
#26 - 2012-01-24 17:05:23 UTC
Since when has eve EVER been about making things easier for new players? Last I checked the learning curve was half the appeal.
Amsterdam Conversations
Doomheim
#27 - 2012-01-24 17:06:18 UTC
I don't like the renames, but I think they were necessary. Not so much on the MWDs/ABs, but very much on the missiles. All those weird-ass missile names were horrible.
Taipion
Adeptus Petrous
#28 - 2012-01-24 17:11:46 UTC
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
I am surprised at the amount of butthurt [...]


Either you did not get the point, or you try to troll, and they say you should not feed the trolls...
Ion Rubix
University of Caille
Gallente Federation
#29 - 2012-01-24 17:13:03 UTC
What annoys me is the acknowledgement of great suggestions and potential problems in this post, which refers to some really decent points, and then just completely ignoring them!

I am all for the principle of being able to tell what a module does from it's name but why do we need to completely remove names that we have come to know and love... why can't we have 10MN Y-S8 Hydrocarbon Afterburners?
Korinne
The Partisan Brigade
#30 - 2012-01-24 17:14:47 UTC
I find that suggestion to be completely reasonable and well articulated; and such suggestions have no place on these forums. Good day sir!
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#31 - 2012-01-24 17:15:36 UTC
Korinne wrote:
It's not so much a 'don't change anything' attitude as much as a 'don't change anything for no reason'. The latter seems to be all that CCP does in the present; changing things for the sake of changing things in a way that adds virtually nothing to the game other than headaches, providing the corporate suits with a small amount of 'feeling good because we did something'.


Other than Incarna, which was a misconceived piece of crap, I have not seen anything CCP has done recently that has not had solid reasoning behind it.

On the topic at hand, I feel that many vets don't see the change as necessary because they are lacking the perspective to. We (established players) are already used to the missile names, and don't see any issue with remembering Thorn, Bloodclaw, Scourge and the others. We look at newbies and go "just HTFU and memorize them".

While varied missile names adds a sort of feeling of diversity to missiles, a newbie really isn't going to go "aw sweet, the missiles are so diverse, I can't wait to learn what they're all called"... most likely, anyway. They are more likely to go "why would I even bother".

Additionally, all the varied missile names are relics of a time when missile types were not locked into launcher types, so "I'm loading Scourges" meant "I'm loading kinetic heavy missiles" rather than "I have a HML fit and am loading kinetic missiles". There's a subtle difference there, which provides some extra reason to name the missile damage types rather than the damagetype+size combination.

So far as the MWD/AB name changes, I think they make a lot of sense. I would be fine with fancy names for them if they made any degree of sense. Take "Cold-gas Arcjet Thrusters" vs "Catalyzed Cold-Gas Arcjet Thrusters", for example. What the heck do you catalyze about an afterburner that makes it bend space and time?! Alternatively, how does putting four LiF Fueled Booster Rockets on a ship (to turn them into Quad LiF Fueled Booster Rockets) do the same thing? It makes no sense.

I would have preferred to have some "sensical" names and meta-search, but eh.

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)
Din Chao
#32 - 2012-01-24 17:19:22 UTC  |  Edited by: Din Chao
Considering color has always been a pretty simple indicator of what a missile does, this seems entirely unnecessary.

The change to the propulsion mods is equally pointless, as none of us are forced to learnd them all at once. You start with 1mn, move on to 10mn, then 100mn. Tere's plenty of time to learn the 2 or 3 meta names for each size as you progress. And the new names, as has already been pointed out, don't even make sense.
Vile Coyote
Deep Space Legacy
#33 - 2012-01-24 17:20:16 UTC
I like the idea of clarification, but the new names are not that much clearer. And the propmods really weren't the worst part, there are really few of them and fewer that see use so they were not that hard to memorize.

The guns on the other hand... Differences in meta and calibers makes their liberal naming a major PITA. Only projectiles stand out a bit, because anyone can tell a 1400mm gun does bigger holes than a 125mm one. Nerf projectiles.
Lazers and hybrids... honestly I can't even tell which one is a medium short-range and which one is a X-L long-range. How the f**k are you supposed to know that a "medium blahblah pulse" is a small gun ? And that "heavy disco pulse" is a medium one ? The names does not need to be totally self-explanatory ("High caliber blaster meta 2 size M"), but they should not trick the player either.

About missiles... HELL NO. Usually I'm not overly conservative, that's just a totally unnecessary change. If you want flavor, return to the old names. If you want simplicity, name them "Kinetic missiles" and "EM Torpedo". The current compromise shares the cons of both.
And if you are told that finding the right missile is difficult and want to improve the game, fix the market UI and allow for more 2012-like searches. Like, with filters.
J Kunjeh
#34 - 2012-01-24 17:22:13 UTC
Geez, Taipon...must you rage so hard about such a stupid little thing? Really, some people's kids...

"The world as we know it came about through an anomaly (anomou)" (The Gospel of Philip, 1-5) 
Korinne
The Partisan Brigade
#35 - 2012-01-24 17:22:57 UTC
Petrus Blackshell wrote:


While varied missile names adds a sort of feeling of diversity to missiles, a newbie really isn't going to go "aw sweet, the missiles are so diverse, I can't wait to learn what they're all called"... most likely, anyway. They are more likely to go "why would I even bother".



You make it sound like such an insurmountable feat, when it really isn't. Besides, when did requesting a bit of effort become such a bad thing?
Fan Shu
Doomheim
#36 - 2012-01-24 17:29:15 UTC
I kind of like it, but it'll be hard to get used to; and they definitely could have chosen better names.
Seriously, why have a big "renaming" campaign and not actually follow a naming convention?

Two missile types are named after the original Torpedo versions but two types are just random new names.
What?
Just pick one or the other: reuse a class or pick all new names.
I would have chosen either Heavy or Cruise missiles to reuse.
The good thing about the way the missiles were, other than RP/flavor, is that you only learned one type at a time; e.g. Light when you first start, then Heavy as you went into Cruiser, etc., so it wasn't really that confusing.
Sure that doesn't really apply if you weren't Caldari, but I'd bet that any non-Caldari already had a good grasp of the game by the time they wanted to train missiles anyway, so still not much confusion.

And for boosters:
"Monopropellant Hydrazine Boosters" is now "Limited 1MN Afterburner I"
"Cold-Gas Arcjet Thrusters" is now "Experimental 1MN Afterburner I"

"Phased Monopropellant I Hydrazine Boosters" is now "Upgraded 1MN Microwarpdrive I"
"Catalyzed Cold-Gas Arcjet Thrusters" is now "Limited 1MN MicroWarpdrive I"

"Y-S8 Hydrocarbon Afterburners" is now "Experimental 10MN Afterburner I"
"Y-T8 Overcharged Hydrocarbon Microwarpdrive" is now "Experimental 10MN MicroWarpdrive I"

"LiF Fueled Booster Rockets" is now "Experimental 100MN Afterburner I"
"Quad LiF Fueled Booster Rockets" is now "Prototype 100MN MicroWarpdrive I

Okay, so the 10MN did follow a standard, but everything else is a random hodgepodge of confusion.
So, it's kind of only an issue with the 1MN versions since there are two non-meta-0 modules, but still.
And about that, why do we need 2 versions of the 1MN but only 1 version of the others? Or, why don't we have 2 versions of the 10MN and 100MN modules to match the 1MN group?
Emma Royd
Maddled Gommerils
#37 - 2012-01-24 17:36:19 UTC
Why didn't they go for the ultimate dumbing down, and just call missiles after the damage they do, it's just a name all said and done. Roll

I can sort of see the point, all the other ammo types have the same names be they XL down to S and missiles were the oddity to this, but the AB/MWD is just confusing Ugh

I now need to alter my spreadsheet, try and remember what was what before and rename them.
Taipion
Adeptus Petrous
#38 - 2012-01-24 17:36:52 UTC  |  Edited by: Taipion
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
Other than Incarna, which was a misconceived piece of crap, I have not seen anything CCP has done recently that has not had solid reasoning behind it.


This, and that you look like Soundwave, clearly a CCP forum troll alt.


Korinne wrote:
I find that suggestion to be completely reasonable and well articulated; and such suggestions have no place on these forums. Good day sir!

This, too.

Fan Shu wrote:
Two missile types are named after the original Torpedo versions but two types are just random new names.
What?
Just pick one or the other: reuse a class or pick all new names.

And This!
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#39 - 2012-01-24 17:46:13 UTC  |  Edited by: Petrus Blackshell
Din Chao wrote:
Considering color has always been a pretty simple indicator of what a missile does, this seems entirely unnecessary.


7-10% of men are colorblind. I happen to be one of them. I do not see your point. (ba dum kssh)

Quote:

The change to the propulsion mods is equally pointless, as none of us are forced to learnd them all at once. You start with 1mn, move on to 10mn, then 100mn. Tere's plenty of time to learn the 2 or 3 meta names for each size as you progress. And the new names, as has already been pointed out, don't even make sense.


The old ones didn't make much more sense, either.

Korinne wrote:
You make it sound like such an insurmountable feat, when it really isn't. Besides, when did requesting a bit of effort become such a bad thing?


Rote memorization for the reason of "just because" or for "effort" is pretty much one of the most unfun things ever (at least in my opinion). To have unnecessary amounts of it be a requirement for starting out in a game can make it a giant turn-off.

Try to guess why I avoided touching missiles for my entire first year of play. That's right, the inane naming scheme.

Edited for bad wording

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)
Korinne
The Partisan Brigade
#40 - 2012-01-24 17:49:40 UTC
To sound somewhat trollish, it isn't 'just because', it's to weed out the lame and the weak. I personally don't want to play a game where everything is spoon fed to you, the reward feels proportionally greater to the amount of effort required to obtain it.