These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at

EVE Information Portal

  • Topic is locked indefinitely.

New dev blog: What's in a name

First post First post
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#181 - 2012-02-29 20:09:06 UTC  |  Edited by: War Kitten

So we have all scripts now with the word "script" appended for ease of search (good thing), but we've had "launcher" removed from one of the missile launchers (fail). You couldn't come up with "light assault launcher"?

I'm torn - some of what you're doing sounds good and useful, but the sledgehammer approach is killing so much of the cool descriptive feel that modules in Eve have.

While most games are striving towards things like the "Maul of Doom" and "Ferdinand's Fantastic Flametongue", your approach is to use "Hammer +1" and "Fire Sword +2".

You may not have the goal of removing Eve's flavor, but it's a byproduct of what you're accomplishing, and coming from a senior writer, this surprises me.

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.

Uppsy Daisy
Caldari State
#182 - 2012-02-29 20:09:51 UTC
It's not 'dumbing down the game'. It's just removing pointless obscurity

I'll second that. This does not remove a single mechanic. It just removes totally pointless obscurity.
Arma Artificer
#183 - 2012-02-29 20:15:11 UTC  |  Edited by: Maldranan
Tampaxita wrote:
I think that some of the new names have not been understood properly.
For example, the new meta names. Most of you, if not all, have a problem with limited as you, wrongly, think that it's limited as in "mentally challenged"... well, no. It's limited as in limited edition. Think of sport cars, there is the basic car that comes out, then the producers makes 500 cars with white stripes and 50 more hp which represent a LIMITED edition of that car. In my opinion, this makes perfect sense and is very much applicable to EVE.

So yeah, I think that Meta 1 = Upgraded and Meta 2 = Limited is a very good choice.

However, I do agree that experimental and prototype is kind of the same thing, perhaps replace experimental with superior.
And to the guys whining about prototype, what the hell, it's nothing new ... it is already in the game ffs and it's awesome.

So, to conclude, I propose the following scheme:

Meta 1 - Upgraded
Meta 2 - Limited
Meta 3 - Superior
Meta 4 - Prototype

As for the whole missile launcher fiasco, I also think that Rapid Light Missile Launcher is better the Light Missile Array.

Other than this, I approve with the changes.

The fact that you have to explains this shows this has already failed in simplifying the naming convention.

Yes, Limited could be "Limited Edition", so I see where you're coming from. You know, except for the fact that this OMG so sweet Limited Edition hardener (or whatever) is dirt cheap, common as hell and is actually worse than most of the other hardeners out there. So while I understand your explanation, Limited Edition would make more sense for a rare and expensive storyline item than for a cheap meta level item.
Damion Rayne
#184 - 2012-02-29 20:15:12 UTC
Steijn wrote:
will you please stop dumbing the game down with these stupid generic name changes.

Will you please stop acting like a whiny school child? Thanks. :)

Stream lining the naming conventions in Eve, doesn't "Dumb" anything down people... Name changes don't suddenly lower the difficulty of Eve and to say they do is like saying that drinking milk makes you smarter. -DR


Xavier Quo
Ashfell Celestial Corporation
Ashfell Federation
#185 - 2012-02-29 20:15:16 UTC  |  Edited by: Xavier Quo
I don't understand why you don't just change the icons to include S M L as per the guns but also include 1-8 for meta level, so S2, L7 etc

that way the info is even easier to understand than what you're proposing, and you can still retain the names, which DO help the game immersion.

The implant additions are nice but the limited, experimental stuff is not very good and still confusing. Might as well go with Mk I, Mk II etc.
Captain Stroke
#186 - 2012-02-29 20:18:10 UTC
When will you change the shipnames?

Can't wait to hop in my Caldari Cruiser 3
Random Womble
Emo Rangers
Electric Monkey Overlords
#187 - 2012-02-29 20:19:30 UTC
Akrasjel Lanate wrote:
Djakku wrote:
this just makes the game more boring and less- sci fi...

Firstly the above quote is so true it really makes everything very dull.

It also makes it more long winded to distinguish between different items. While im sure it is somewhat intentional that searching for 10mn now brings up all afterburners/MWDs it at the same time reduces the functionality of the market search function by forcing people to type in longer strings to pull up a specific item. Normally if im using the market search function im looking for a specific item not to compare all the options.

Right now if i want to find a missile launcher i can just type in "th' a" if i want a 'Malkuth' assault launcher but if a lot of meta items get named the same way this is likely to lead in the future to long lists being produced or typing some more letters. You may say what are a few more letters but the reality is they represent additional unnecessary stages to a process which is bad design.

Im all for getting rid of the ' around the named launcher names but no wholesale changes to the names.

If you really insist on having prototype or similar in every name of a given meta level then fine tag it on to the names that already exist but dont rework the names entirely. Im ok if you switch the AB back to prototype y-s8 blah blah afterburner and prototype cold-gas blah blah AB. Thats fine because it keeps the search functionality and keeps the names unique giving them a less boring feel while adding an extra layer of information (ok it makes the name longer but that does not hit functionality) and you can even stick 10mn and 1MN in there (Prototype Cold-Gas Arcjet 1MN Thrusters sounds quite good imho even if its a bit on the long side). It also has a bit of a classic RPG element to it since most RPGs have weapons with wide ranging names so i might have an "uber sword of death-bringing" or a "Trident of inferior forum posts" but with some part of the name giving a partial clue as to the quality and type but other parts making the item feel unique.

On the topic of missiles the changes to the missile names were really not great. For a start why use names from obscure rarely used missile types if you wanted to use names previously used for damage types probably heavy missiles would have been the best since most people already recognise what damage types those missiles did but i doubt many knew most of the others beforehand (is nova and trauma from citadel cruise or a new name?) plus thunderbolt is easier to say than Mjolnir!

Secondly again if you insist on standardising the names then at the very least guided and unguided missiles should get different naming conventions to highlight that those missiles react differently (as should F.O.Fs but by the looks of it those have not been changed yet anyway).

The launcher name changes that have been documented may confuse people however i can understand them but i would say that the assault missile bay if it is going to be changed should give some indication its a cruiser size bay for STD missiles.
Witchking Angmar
#188 - 2012-02-29 20:21:30 UTC
Sodone Gristein wrote:
A lot of RPGs have cool item names. Removing features is a pretty silly approach to game design, especially when dealing with such an old game. Why not add meta level symbols to icons (a la T2/faction) and display meta level in the market interface as others have suggested ?

Yes please.
The Kronos Ritual
#189 - 2012-02-29 20:22:17 UTC
Light Assault Launcher instead of Light Missile Array... please... That is some fail logic right there when you drop launcher from the name, yet you add script to all the script names for ease of search.

Should be:
Heavy Assault Missile Launcher
Light Assault Missile Launcher
Light Missile Launcher

I see that you're trying to keep it down to three parts to a name. Screw that.
Celebris Nexterra
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#190 - 2012-02-29 20:22:51 UTC
Everything else is fine and makes sense, but renaming the missile launchers DOES NOT.

I have never been confused which launcher was which, not even when I first started the game. "Siege launcher" sounds way more badass than "Torpedo launcher."

If you want to remove the confusion, I think renaming all the assault missiles to HEAVY assault missiles would suffice. The launchers aren't the confusing part, it's the lack of consistency with the missile names. It's pretty easy to figure out that assault missile launchers use light missiles and heavy assault missile launchers use HEAVY assault missiles.

Or better yet, since essentially no one who knows anything about PvP uses assault launchers, make them use rockets and give them a velocity or flight time bonus or something, with greatly increased capacity. A rocket Caracal sounds pretty sweet to me.

But leaving one launcher named "array" makes literally NO SENSE.
Celebris Nexterra
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#191 - 2012-02-29 20:24:00 UTC
Witchking Angmar wrote:
Sodone Gristein wrote:
A lot of RPGs have cool item names. Removing features is a pretty silly approach to game design, especially when dealing with such an old game. Why not add meta level symbols to icons (a la T2/faction) and display meta level in the market interface as others have suggested ?

Yes please.

Phoenix Naval Operations
Phoenix Naval Systems
#192 - 2012-02-29 20:25:02 UTC
Celebris Nexterra wrote:
Witchking Angmar wrote:
Sodone Gristein wrote:
A lot of RPGs have cool item names. Removing features is a pretty silly approach to game design, especially when dealing with such an old game. Why not add meta level symbols to icons (a la T2/faction) and display meta level in the market interface as others have suggested ?

Yes please.


This is an acceptable idea. Same names, now with tags.
Penelope Raven
#193 - 2012-02-29 20:25:10 UTC
I like the Light Missile Array. Assault does need to be owned by the cruiser short range missile system and I would like the names kept as short as possible. If Array isn't perfect, how about Battery? I do not want a Launcher Array or Launcher Battery. Does everyone remember that the current Assault Missile Launcher uses Light Missiles but with greater capacity?

I also have issues with the names used for the different meta levels. Limited comes across as quantity rather than quality to me. Experimental and Prototype are very similar but I am used to Prototype railguns.

Daedalus II wrote:
I'd like to have the meta levels something like this:

Meta Level 1: Advanced
Meta Level 2: Enhanced
Meta Level 3: Experimental
Meta Level 4: Upgraded

Why in this particular order you might ask? Well because it's in alphabetical order, and as such it will sort very nicely in all programs, but especially in the market.

I do like this suggestion!

Others have also come up with better choices of names so I hope this dev blog doesn't indicate this is all set in stone. Here is another set...

Meta Level 1: Converted/Effectual/Efficient
Meta Level 2: Enhanced/Improved
Meta Level 3: Proficient/Potent/Prominent
Meta Level 4: Sophisticated/superior

The current names of the target painters are classic. Please don't touch these!

I hope you are also going to update the market group names and skill names? Please replace the Standard Missiles skills!
Grey Stormshadow
Sebiestor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#194 - 2012-02-29 20:25:47 UTC
Grey Stormshadow wrote:
There is better ways to aid those who think that comparing items is currently too difficult and items are too difficult to search.
Renaming is just easy way to get around doing anything too complex, which would actually require some coding.

I would:

- add shortcut button to neocom for compare tool
- add some default selectable item groups to compare tool like different kind of ammo, charges and missiles for easy viewing.
- add right click function "show all variations (in compare tool)" to items with multiple meta levels and variations.
- add right click function "show other items of the group (in compare tool)" to (all?) items. Would show same items than in bottom level market group. For example other minmatar frigates or small projectile ammos.
- add own search function and hideable item browser to compare tool. Should support also drag and drop like atm.
- add filters to market to show only items related to kinetic, thermal, em or explosive (similiar than the button which u can press to "show only available") *special thanks to "Alpheias" for the original idea.

Dumping stuff down is really bad solution. Giving easier access to study and learn the complex will be much better solution in long term. Variety in item names has history and it gives so much more lifetime to the game.

Also you shouldn't forget how much people have invested time for 3rd party spreadsheets, programs and websites, which all use the standard eve item database. If you change the name from your code, hundreds are forced to do the same. Some may get this done by updating some database from standard dump, but many will do this manually. I'm sure they feel great passion towards individuals who did the name change pretty much just because it seemed like good idea, but really wasn't and if it was, it absolutely wasn't necessary and important one. There is million more important things to do than **** people off with the least obvious ones.

...And leave the names alone campaign is active - sign up

Get classic forum style - custom videos to captains quarters screen

Play with the best - die like the rest

Jita Alt666
#195 - 2012-02-29 20:26:00 UTC
Please talk to Nova Fox about naming progressions.
None ofthe Above
#196 - 2012-02-29 20:27:17 UTC  |  Edited by: None ofthe Above
This could have been a huge win, but as people have been saying here and forever the new module names make little to no sense. You are swapping one type of obscurity for another, and losing flavor in the process.

"Limited" would be a good replacement for Civilian, not a higher meta. Prototypes and Experimentals are usually less than production, although I get that they could be prototypes of future better versions.

Leaving at least some of the old "flavor" names ('Malkuth', 'Bloodclaw',etc) in quotes would have been nice.

You could have also made them alphasort correctly, thereby adding functionality. I suppose if you folks add sort by meta to the variations tab, that could be forgivable.

Did you ever consider putting the name changes out as a proposal to be critiqued? Instead of just "these are the new names". (not just this round either, but as a whole the new names could have used some public comment).

Did the CSM get a chance to give feedback on these?

As it stands this renaming shows that CCP still needs to do more work to reconnect with its users and improve communication.

Understand and agree with the reasons for doing this but can't say execution was well done.

The only end-game content in EVE Online is the crap that makes you rage quit.

Jotunn Risi
#197 - 2012-02-29 20:28:10 UTC
Destination SkillQueue wrote:
ze blog wrote:
Assault Missile Launchers have become Light Missile Arrays

Standard Missile Launchers have become Light Missile Launchers

This seems like a bad idea to me. Every other launcher has the word launcher in it, so why is the assault launcher a special case? Why not just call it a rapid/fast light missile launcher, since that is exactly what it is and would fit better with the new launcher naming convention.

Very much agree with this, 'array' doesn't communicate what the module does very well. 'Rapid Missile Launcher' maybe?

Catch CCP Gnauton at the Storyline Roundtable at Fanfest 2012! More information on Fanfest topics, tickets and travel can be found here.

The first time I don't go to fanfest in FOUR YEARS and now you hold a storyline roundtable? You people are killing me!

The Jotunn Risi are now recruiting, Brutor ancestry required in order to best represent the Brutor interest.  Join channel JORIS to learn more!

Pedro Snachez
Red Horse Heavy Industries
#198 - 2012-02-29 20:28:24 UTC
I like the changes overall, although the idea about changing array to a more fitting term containing launcher is a good one. I don't know what all the complaining about the terms being "less sci-fi" is about. Considering the ubiquity of the modules in Eve, having these naming schemes is realistic, whether you're talking about the far future or today.

What would be a cool addition would be if players could eventually name their own created modules (I think I remember the Devs talking about corp storefronts at one point in the far past). That would definitely add some flavor.
Penelope Raven
#199 - 2012-02-29 20:29:10 UTC
Captain Stroke wrote:
When will you change the shipnames?

Can't wait to hop in my Caldari Cruiser 3

That's no big deal. I want to see you jump in your Caldari Cruiser 2!
War Kitten
Panda McLegion
#200 - 2012-02-29 20:30:15 UTC
Trebor Daehdoow wrote:
While I'm sure we all have quibbles about particular name choices, the overall goal of consistency is a laudable one, and Gnauton deserves some +1's for taking on this non-sexy but useful project.


How about actually hitting the mark of consistency if you want my +1.

Merely taking on the task and leaving the waters cloudy with a different color of mud is not worthy of applause.

If ever there was a task that could've had a grand conversation and benefitted greatly from the community's involvement, while at the same time not risked a single overpowering or unbalancing change, it would be this project. Interested players could've weighed in and developed some ownership of the game. Actual consistent goals could've been worked out together. Hundreds of instant beta testers could've discovered all sorts of naming anomolies quickly.

Instead, typical of CCP, the change goes in with no communication, no feedback and shoddy workmanship.

I don't judge people by their race, religion, color, size, age, gender, or ethnicity. I judge them by their grammar, spelling, syntax, punctuation, clarity of expression, and logical consistency.