These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

New dev blog: What's in a name

First post First post
Author
Newbee
New-Roots
#141 - 2012-02-29 18:31:16 UTC
The hardwiring change is one of the few things I like about this. It really makes a lot of sense and they were confusing as hell.

All other changes for me feel like they are killing a big part of eve history that we have become so accustomed to

I remember my first time getting a 'malkuth' missile launcher and I would not have found it as cool if it had been an 'upgraded' one

Those specific names make items feel special and by making them all "one size fits all" even though it might be easier for some people it is really not worth losing that special feel in my opinion. I always felt like those names even if they are just technobableish added flavor to the game.

Also the missile launcher changes I have to agree with a few people that the "Light missile array" one sounds wrong

My point is keep the flavor of eve and have lots of technobableish cool names but also have good backstory for them. Don't make a boring name scheme that just names everything almost the same
zcar300
SERCO Group
#142 - 2012-02-29 18:33:54 UTC  |  Edited by: zcar300
Limited should come before upgrade. Otherwise what is it an "upgrade" of? And why is the upgrade limited?

Experimental and prototype kinda sound like the same thing. Although I certainly don't think they should be the other way around.
Ifly Uwalk
Perkone
Caldari State
#143 - 2012-02-29 18:34:59 UTC
If you rename my holy PWNAGE the Statue gets it.
Klam
Church of Boom
#144 - 2012-02-29 18:38:21 UTC
Cailais wrote:
All sounds pretty boring and uninspired to me. If you want to jettison flavour and the sense of an exotic universe lets just get it over with: here you go

Modules:

Bestest
Better
Good
Rubbish

Ships:

Biggest
Big
Average
Small

Races:

A
B
C
D

Job done.

C.



Well put.
Witchking Angmar
Perkele.
#145 - 2012-02-29 18:39:40 UTC
This is certainly the most mind-bogglingly stupid dev blog i have ever had the displeasure of reading. You sir deserve a swift and painful kick in the genital area for even mentioning such atrocities.
TheLostPenguin
Surreal Departure
#146 - 2012-02-29 18:43:40 UTC
No replies from anyone at CCP yet? Well I guess your engagement with the playerbase was nice for the little while it lasted, we got a few nice devblog comment threads where the relevant CCP peoples actually gave a damn and posted, even if I didn't agree with what they were saying at least they made an effort to discuss/defend their ideas.

Guess we're right back to head-in-the-sand "Screw you lot" CCP againRoll
Ajita al Tchar
Doomheim
#147 - 2012-02-29 18:46:41 UTC  |  Edited by: Ajita al Tchar
-1 CCP Gnauton. Also, there's a backwards letter in your nametag. Is that supposed to give some warning about ability with names..?

"Light Missile Array" makes it impossible to find said item by searching for "launcher".

The meta naming schema makes no sense. Did you know that Meta 4 items are better than Meta 1 items? Well, within the new meta naming paradigm that isn't obviously the case (it wasn't obviously the case with the old names either, but I thought the goal was to fix that..?). Please use names that are less synonymous and that people can agree on as immediately conveying the "this item is better than that one" idea. And please for the love of god find a way to make the names descriptive, helpful and NOT BORING.

Invulnerability Fields ... Either Adaptive or just Invulnerability. Using both is pretty redundant.

Trauma is still a bad replacement name for kinetic damage. Scourge is so much more awesome.

I'm not against change as such, not at all. The old naming conventions were not that great for many things. But the new names aren't really an improvement that I'd personally be proud of. Pretty underwhelming, and falls short of the goal of making the names sensible. Playing the game sometimes might help...

Good job with the implants though, they were a total clusterfuck. Now they are much more clearly named and the names aren't devoid of sci-fi flavor. Please do the same for the other things that got an unflattering makeover.
Shin Dari
Covert Brigade
#148 - 2012-02-29 18:46:44 UTC
Nova Fox wrote:
https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&t=62254 ill leave this here since it take to long to boil the entire argument down.

I would like to add that if you do go the meta theming arrage them a bit.

1 Enchanced - means you made some tweaks to get better performance
2 Upgraded - The fact you had to go out and replace parts to get better performance.
3 Prototype - Is basically the mass production variant before release.
4 Experimental - Not ready for the world or the world isnt ready for it.

This however... doesnt make in alphabetical order (oh noes)

So altenratively this is a generic list of useable words in alpha order

0 [_] Blank Space to force sort it to have it at the start of the list
Advanced
Augmented
Boosted <- Meta 1 Nomation
Converted <- Meta 1 Nomination, Sounds like no major engineering was required to improve performance
Developed <- Meta 2 Nomination
Enhanced <- Meta 2 Nomination, Sounds like some thought went into increasing performance
Engineered <- Meta 3 Nomination, Sounds like alot of money and thought went into increasing performance
Enriched
Evolved
Expanded
Experimental <- Meta 3 Monimation, Once against sounds like money and time went into it.
Innovated <- Meta 3/4 Nomation, Sounds like major investements where made to make these
Improved
Refined
Perfected <- Meta 4 Nomation, Seriously only the obessed with would try to name something this confident it is so.
Progressive
Prototype <- Meta 4 Nomation, well it sounds cool but i have to agree dont use this if you use experimental.
Upgraded
Ultimatium
Then you interject flavor names in partial or whole.

[Meta Name][Flavor/Faction Name][Module Name][Tech Mark]

Perfected Carbine 150mm Artillery Cannon I
Caldari Navy Torpedo Launcher I
Enginnered Scout's 425mm Railgun I

Then go around and smash alot of the longer multiple flavor names into smaller ones to keep the names small.

Also go back and redo the afterburners/mwd if you go with the above plan

Innovated Arc-Jet 100MN Afterburner I

This I strongly belive is the best of all worlds.

Also change the light missile array into something different, it still needs the launcher name in it but the light missile must be included.

The Rapid Light Missile launcher idea was good but has no indication it goes on larger ships.

Light Missile Battery Launcher however does.


I would go with:

1 Tuned
2 Upgraded
3 Experimental
4 Perfected


And this:
Quote:
[Meta Name][Flavor/Faction Name][Module Name][Tech Mark]
Is good stuff.
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
#149 - 2012-02-29 18:52:27 UTC
We'd tried arguing this last time and ccp's in charge of the project never replied back acknoledging anything.

Reason why I made the alpha list was to make it easier on the sorting but one must carefully pick from the enitre list in order of increasing not so awsome to awsomest.

Dust 514's CPM 1 Iron Wolf Saber Eve mail me about Dust 514 issues.

Witchking Angmar
Perkele.
#150 - 2012-02-29 18:52:42 UTC
Nova Fox wrote:
Caldari Navy Torpedo Launcher I


Faction is not T1 and should not be marked as such.
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
#151 - 2012-02-29 18:57:34 UTC  |  Edited by: Nova Fox
Witchking Angmar wrote:
Nova Fox wrote:
Caldari Navy Torpedo Launcher I


Faction is not T1 and should not be marked as such.


You're saying it would be impossible for the navy to roll out a tech 2 launcher?
Its a high meta leveled tech 1 module regardless. Tech 2 skills have NO impact on said launcher and as far as the database is concerned its a tech 1 item.

It may be never we would ever see tech 2 faction mods but who knows. I rather have the foundation prexisting and work done ahead of time instead of going back and redoing more work.

Dust 514's CPM 1 Iron Wolf Saber Eve mail me about Dust 514 issues.

Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
#152 - 2012-02-29 18:59:09 UTC
Nova Fox wrote:
You're saying it would be impossible for the navy to roll out a tech 2 launcher?

Not impossible, but pointless. "T2" technology is made to be attuned to capsuleers. The navies do not use capsuleers in their army, and will not ever as capsuleers are loose cannons.

Accidentally The Whole Frigate - For-newbies blog (currently on pause)

Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
#153 - 2012-02-29 19:03:03 UTC  |  Edited by: Nova Fox
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
Nova Fox wrote:
You're saying it would be impossible for the navy to roll out a tech 2 launcher?

Not impossible, but pointless. "T2" technology is made to be attuned to capsuleers. The navies do not use capsuleers in their army, and will not ever as capsuleers are loose cannons.


According to a story line mission in caldari space you basically pod a gallente loyalist capsuleer as your caldari intel officers basically said yup she woke up in a station over here.

Several of the named pirates are considered capsullers as well which is why no matter how many times you sink thier ships they always come back. Even the 'commanders' and elites could be capsulleers as well since thier ships are so much more powerful than the normal non pod captained ships.

Sansha Ships in incursions I honestly belive are controlled by permawater graved kidnapped people.

Also I am more questioning your source of technology 2 development, most lore I can find on it was morphite which just basically states that morphite allows alot of enhancments never thought of before.

Similar to how fullerides are technology 3's backbone.

Dust 514's CPM 1 Iron Wolf Saber Eve mail me about Dust 514 issues.

Witchking Angmar
Perkele.
#154 - 2012-02-29 19:04:55 UTC  |  Edited by: Witchking Angmar
Nova Fox wrote:
Witchking Angmar wrote:
Nova Fox wrote:
Caldari Navy Torpedo Launcher I


Faction is not T1 and should not be marked as such.


You're saying it would be impossible for the navy to roll out a tech 2 launcher?
Its a high meta leveled tech 1 module regardless. Tech 2 skills have NO impact on said launcher and as far as the database is concerned its a tech 1 item.

It may be never we would ever see tech 2 faction mods but who knows. I rather have the foundation prexisting and work done ahead of time instead of going back and redoing more work.


Storyline, deadspace, faction and officer mods are a whole different class of modules. Would you also have the T1 mark on officer and deadspace mods?

Edit: I personally think only mods that can be built by players should ever have the mark for T1 or T2.
TorTorden
Tors shibari party
#155 - 2012-02-29 19:05:07 UTC
Im only posting this to stress the importance that we third party devs get an updated static data export withvthese changes ASAP, preferably 48 hours before changes go live or our stuff is going to be outdated at best, without this all killmail and loot log analyzers will be broken on patch day.
Allianc
Imperial Academy
Amarr Empire
#156 - 2012-02-29 19:05:40 UTC
CCP, i get that youre trying to make this game easier for newbies to get into and i applaud the effort. The hardwiring changes are an excellent idea.

But for the love of god please leave my modules alone.
There are nigh 400k of us who have lived with these mods for years, we love the unconventional names that they have, please dont go changing them.
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
#157 - 2012-02-29 19:09:16 UTC
Allianc wrote:
CCP, i get that youre trying to make this game easier for newbies to get into and i applaud the effort. The hardwiring changes are an excellent idea.

But for the love of god please leave my modules alone.
There are nigh 400k of us who have lived with these mods for years, we love the unconventional names that they have, please dont go changing them.


more like 250k the new 150k havent been here for a year or a second year to pluralize.

Dust 514's CPM 1 Iron Wolf Saber Eve mail me about Dust 514 issues.

Razin
The Scope
#158 - 2012-02-29 19:10:39 UTC  |  Edited by: Razin
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
Nova Fox wrote:
You're saying it would be impossible for the navy to roll out a tech 2 launcher?

Not impossible, but pointless. "T2" technology is made to be attuned to capsuleers. The navies do not use capsuleers in their army, and will not ever as capsuleers are loose cannons.

The problem with using RP arguments is that they don't work because the 'official canon' is contradictory at best and just plain silly at worst. In this case the Empyrean Age novel is pretty specific on the empire navies using capsuleers since some of those are among the book's central protagonists.

p.s. Fucking_forums tried to eat this post. Thanks to Lazarus I got it back.
Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
#159 - 2012-02-29 19:11:10 UTC
Witchking Angmar wrote:
Nova Fox wrote:
Witchking Angmar wrote:
Nova Fox wrote:
Caldari Navy Torpedo Launcher I


Faction is not T1 and should not be marked as such.


You're saying it would be impossible for the navy to roll out a tech 2 launcher?
Its a high meta leveled tech 1 module regardless. Tech 2 skills have NO impact on said launcher and as far as the database is concerned its a tech 1 item.

It may be never we would ever see tech 2 faction mods but who knows. I rather have the foundation prexisting and work done ahead of time instead of going back and redoing more work.


Storyline, deadspace, faction and officer mods are a whole different class of modules. Would you also have the T1 mark on officer and deadspace mods?

Edit: I personally think only mods that can be built by players should ever have the mark for T1 or T2.


There was an accidental medium armor repairer (only 2 of existence and was forcibly removed if i recall right) that was a named Tech 2 Meta module. but this was before they had meta levels offically listed in the game, damn thing out repaired the best large armor reppers back then.

Dust 514's CPM 1 Iron Wolf Saber Eve mail me about Dust 514 issues.

Nova Fox
Novafox Shipyards
#160 - 2012-02-29 19:14:02 UTC  |  Edited by: Nova Fox
Razin wrote:
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
Nova Fox wrote:
You're saying it would be impossible for the navy to roll out a tech 2 launcher?

Not impossible, but pointless. "T2" technology is made to be attuned to capsuleers. The navies do not use capsuleers in their army, and will not ever as capsuleers are loose cannons.

The problem with using RP arguments is that they don't work because the 'official canon' is contradictory at best and just plain silly at worst. In this case the Empyrean Age novel is pretty specific on the empire navies using capsuleers since some of those are among the books central protagonists.

p.s. Fucking_forums tried to eat this post. Thanks to Lazarus I got it back.


I am more questioning thier source of the lore, I havent seen any evidence tech 2 equipment is capsuleer only, even more recently ships. Ive read stories where a covert ops frigate had a subsantially sized crew and boarding party, and ships I could understand so much more of the room eaten up by the tech leaving little room for a normal non pod captained crew meaning the ship could only fully function with a crew compliment only possible by pod technologies.

I strongly belive this was the other major revision lore changes they rolled entirely though all the articles.

Dust 514's CPM 1 Iron Wolf Saber Eve mail me about Dust 514 issues.