Spriral sounds weird, but other than that, more logic in naming conventions is great. I always thought that whoever came up with these names did it to confuse new players :/

Its better then spinning

Can't be anything like faint becouse that would sound like they are the worst ones.

On with the name suggestions.

Foxfour do you have a list of names that content thinks would work so we can vote?

Modualted vs modulated (text)
Spriral vs spiral (sheet)

those ain't real words.

Even if it was 'spiral' it would be a pretty poor choice.

Also, when can we finally include pictures on forums ?

To be honest, I never understood lasers well with their 3 categories instead of 2 like the rest. So basically anything will be an improvement for me.

I don't think anyone has any qualms about fixing everything to fit one naming scheme. When prop mods and shield hardeners changed, it was a slight annoyance for like 30 minutes then it was just as good as always. One thing to keep in mind is making stuff easy to search for on the market though. Like when I'm fitting up a Drake (for example) and I want 3 kinds of hardeners, its nice to be able to type "field ii" and they all pop up. making it (prefix) Electron Blaster II or whatever would be p cool just because that would make navigating the market in general easier.

Erm, you must be a real programmer. Off-by-one error detected. (6 versions, right?)

"Modualted" is an obvious typo (modulated).

"Spriral" looks like a typo, but it appears many times so perhaps it is a mis-comprehension on the part of the author and should be "spiral". I agree with others that even as "spiral" it is somewhat awkward. A modest suggestion: "polarized".

I admire your gumption FoxFour; attacking the laser naming morass takes spunk.

MDD

As someone actually writing a fitting tool (aka, I will get issues with this in pyfa):

I like it.

However, wouldn't it be better to do everything in one big swoop ? That'd mean we (=app developpers / KB maintainers / etc.) get to deal with **** once and then get it over with instead of having to do it every expansion again and again when another set of modules gets renamed.

CCP FoxFour

In real life, the strength of a laser is often expressed in watts. Watts is a measure of the amount of energy per second they can put out.

For example this article speaks about a megawatt laser: http://www.popsci.com/technology/article/2011-01/navys-free-electron-laser-weapon-takes-big-leap-forward-powerful-new-electron-injector

Hybrid and Projectile turrets already have their barrel diameter in the name (ie. 250mm Railgun) why shouldn't lasers carry their wattage in the name? It fits nicely into a science fiction universe. The gigawatt values here very roughly reflect the actual energy consumption of the lasers too (though your resident physicist could certainly do a better job than me).

So this my proposal:

Frigate lasers
Light 2 Gigawatt Pulse Laser (formerly Gatling Pulse Laser)
Light 3 Gigawatt Pulse Laser (formerly Dual Light Pulse Laser)
Light 4 Gigawatt Pulse Laser (formerly Medium Pulse Laser)

Cruiser lasers
Medium 10 Gigawatt Pulse Laser (formerly Medium Focused Pulse Laser)
... (if it existed, this laser would be 15 Gigawatt)
Medium 20 Gigawatt Pulse Laser (formerly Heavy Pulse Laser)

Battleship lasers
Large 50 Gigawatt Laser (formerly Dual Heavy Pulse Laser)
... (if it existed, this laser would be 75 Gigawatt)
Large 100 Gigawatt Laser (formerly Mega Pulse Laser)

Capital lasers
X-Large 500 Gigawatt Laser (formerly Dual Giga Pulse Laser)

After that you, can add the usual meta prefixes (upgraded, limited, experimental, prototype)

Distinctive features of each turret, such as certain laser turrets having 2 "barrels", can be acknowledged in the description of the module.

Capacitors are charged in like Giga Joules or some such **** so naming them by Watts would A. Lead to boring as all hell names and B. Quite on the contrary, it would make no sense whatsoever seeing as Watts measure power and joules measure energy, I think ou lost a t somewhere in that naming convention of yours.

T1 gear is gear that isn't Meta 5+. You are confusing T1 and Meta 1. Refer above where i said you can ***** all day about what names FoxFour and them choose, or you can just look at them for 2 seconds and remember that Anode=Meta X. In short I wasn't saying it was a **** idea because you wanted the meta level to be more obvious, its a **** idea because you want the difference between every mod of similar types to be a number trailing it. Also under your bad system Tech 2 stuff would now be Meta 5 stuff because now T2 could mean Meta 2 or Tech 2 or maybe if you keep posting it could mean bad idea number 2.

I'm with Harri on this one. The naming convention for the meta level descriptor seems to have been a bunch of laser-related words that were selected at random and tossed in. What is proposed is dramatically improved. However, "focused" seems a weak word. Overcharged? Amplified? I don't know. Something that sounds more... destructive.

I like the standardization efforts. You might consider coming up with a word for the weapon type that also connotes its size. The listed names in your example are getting cumbersomely long.

An example, not directly from eve, something like:
Gun = small
Rifle = medium
Cannon = large

Long = Long range
Short = short range
Mid = mid range

You could end up with something like: Short Gun I, Long Gun I, Short Gun IV, Long Gun IV, Short Gun V (t2), etc. You can throw in one more word for the type: Short Laser Gun I, etc. You can condense it even further by turning size into part of the meta number: Laser Gun SR-1, Laser Gun LR-1.

Just some thoughts. Love to see you guys working on the details. Esp. ones that hide meaning and clarity from noobs.

With all due respect, then what are you looking an opinion on? Because looks like you're just testing how much blow back there will be and a lot less concerned about input on the naming schemes.

Also, as you did on the missile platforms you kept the "flavor" text.

Prototype 'Arbalest' Heavy Missile Launcher I.

So, it's not like you haven't already messed with your own scheme by incorporating the more interesting old designators as compromises to the situation. You've acknowledged by your own actions that the lack of interesting designators is a negative step and done design compromises to work with it even when it blatantly broke the schemes simplicity.

Just please, please, PLEASE don't change my target painters to the new system. They're too awesome to be confined by such a limited scheme! (*goes back to fitting PWNAGE*)

/votes CCP FoxFour for Empress of Amarr

Laser names have been wonky for AGES

"Small" armor repairer, "Small" Nosferatu, "Medium" lasers ???

THANK YOU!

CCP FoxFour

1. Maybe, set meta-level as number directly in name (as it was with mining upgrade)

Wasn't there already a thread on renaming lasers???

Modal used in different places to mean different things ('Scout' worked in a similar way between railguns and atrillery) is something I'd prefer to retain personally - although with the continued unification of all naming conventions everywhere the reasoning looks less and less sound.


[Edit] Yep...
here...
[/edit]

Barging in a bit late into the discussion; while I'd like for module names to "make sense" I wouldn't want to lose the coolness of having different names. Having every meta turret have the same base name makes things too homogeneous, too bland&boring. Lasers should have something "lasery" in their name and projectiles should have a "weaponsmithy" nomenclature. While making everything on par and viable (balance wise) makes good sense, making everything the same does not. Same goes for the names.

Ytterblum could probably tell you all about laser types (even though he spelled it wrong :P) but have a look here for some inspiration.

p.s. I'm no fan of adding meta into the name itself, the names would get too long (or you'd have to leave out the fun part of the name and just make it boring) and it would feel too spreadsheet-like. Being able to sort the variations, market etc on meta lvl would suffice.

While we're on the subject of weapon naming, how about removing the word "Artillery" from some of the Autocannon names?

That suggestion is perfect IMHO for Meta resolution.

So, using various suggestions I've seen so far, alternate schemes :

Light Pulse Laser I
Anode Light Pulse Laser I.1
Modal Light Pulse Laser I.2
Afocal Light Pulse Laser I.3
Modulated Light Pulse Laser I.4
Light Pulse Laser II


Clean, simple, module name is placed at end, so you can search "Light Pulse Laser" and get all meta types, if you want all T1s you can just do 'Light Pulse Laser I.', if you want T2, you just put 'II' at the end.

I think changing the anode, modal, etc is fine as long as you replace them with something better, more consistent or cooler.

If you insist on using the new conventions, then you can still wrap it in (I left flavor designators in this case)

Light Pulse Laser I
Upgraded Anode Light Pulse Laser I.1
Limited Modal Light Pulse Laser I.2
Experimental Afocal Light Pulse Laser I.3
Prototype Modulated Light Pulse Laser I.4
Light Pulse Laser II

I find that a bit of an eyeful to really enjoy. But, I think it's pretty sexy still.

There may be a better way than just I.1, but it's a step in the right direction.


And, I agree. When you start using the "Upgraded" designators alone, it basically doesn't have a name anymore.

Decimal Roman numerals? I now think I've seen it all.

Since meta level is available as a separate column I don't think we need to clutter the item name with it. Meta levels 1 to 3 are usually trash anyway and not a big concern. I'd like to see the "I" tech level indicator go away as well.

Maybe: [meta name] '[decorative name]' [size] [item type]

So we get: Upgraded 'Anode' Light Pulse Laser

The meta name provides an indication of the level of the item, we keep some storyline 'color' in the name and the final part is together to allow for searching. By using a common meta indicator with a name unique to a line of equipment you keep the best of both worlds without it becoming too long.

Light Pulse Laser I
Upgraded 'Anode' Light Pulse Laser
Limited 'Modal' Light Pulse Laser
Experimental 'Afocal' Light Pulse Laser
Prototype 'Modulated' Light Pulse Laser
Light Pulse Laser II

You could add in a manufacturer name in the Tech II model to add more color. The Tech I indicator could be dropped entirely as well.

Its tough to be as simple as possible, while being informative and also not making everything generic and bland. Good luck.

Seriously though FoxFour, why are you doing it one weapons system at a time rather than all at once? Wouldn't it be better to save them up and do them all at once to get it over with? It's not like it's urgent. The game has done mostly fine for almost a decade with the current names, after all.

CCP Foxfour, can you have a chat with CCP Gnauton (if he's still about) about the meta name system please? Especially about the use of the word "Limited".

When he was soliticting feedback about the new meta system it was pointed out by lots of people that Limited actually carried quite negative connotations and CCP Gnauton himself agreed, as using "Limited" on it's own didn't convey what he originally meant:


I would very much like to see "Limited" be changed into something more representing an improvement, rather that the current insinuation that it's a worse item.

As for the laser naming, I too support Rees Noturana's "[meta name] '[decorative name]' [size] [item type]" system of keeping it simple and concise while retaining the flavour, very similar to the missile system. Flavour is important.

Also, I'm glad that CCP and you in particular are giving serious time to the names again

*high five*

Considering that Eve is available in more than one language, such a list of names seems closely related to Unobtanium.

MDD

An alternate attack would be to ask the UI folks to add "order by meta level" to their repertoire.

MDD

I know 3 things:

Having a "limited" meta item being better than a "upgraded" meta items is super confusing and doesn't make sense for me and any other person I've talked with...
It should be T1 -> limited -> upgraded -> experimental -> prototype (Advanced???) -> T2

Be careful not having too long names (The implants could easily lose the "inherent" part...)

Make sure most modules get to keep their unique nick names!!
Removing nicknames for generic meta description names often makes it incredible hard to make fast search for unique items... Each category of items should have a unique nickname attached to them that doesn't mix up with too many other categories.

for missile launchers the malkuth, limos, xx-xxxx and arbalest are awesome and I would hate to see those going away.
"Arbalest" would result in about 7 results only instead of a word like "prototype" and name wouldn't be half the length of what implants have...

With blasters I think it is fair to have names changed to indicate their weapon size (light/small, medium and heavy)
Keeping the different tier names to electron, ion and neutron is a definite must!
As the blasters have the unique tier names and no current nick names they can do without...
Having a "light prototype neutron blaster I", "medium limited electron blaster I" makes good sense :-)

With pulse lasers you could easily revamp the names as most people find them super confusing:
light / medium / heavy + limited / upgraded / experimental / prototype + unique name + pulse laser I
unique names could easy be: scattered / focused or strike / impact (rather than afocal)

If I was handling all this I would take it 1 group at a time doing both short range and long range at once...
I think for most weapon types you should have space to have unique names within only 1 category to avoid confusion:

missiles : malkuth, limos, xx-xxxx, arbalest
Pulse : find new name like suggested or call them a unique size measured in MW
Beams : find new name like suggested or call them a unique size measured in MW
blasters : electron/ion/neutron should be good enough as a unique
Railguns : unique size should be good enough as a unique
(however I would consider renaming to avoid conflict between 125mm and 150mm)
Autocannons : unique size should be good enough as a unique
Artillery : unique size should be good enough as a unique

A model designation in the front for the low end meta items to better indicate progression with some fluff for color. I like where this is going. Maybe change the model number based on size too in order to add some variety. Medium weapons could be 100, 200, 300, 400. Heavy weapons could be 1000, 1100, 1200, 1300. Too much consistency between different weapon platforms would be boring but consistency within a type, being hybrid, projectile, laser.

Just some thoughts on the numbering. You could come up with a variety of schemes.

You can see the energy usage of lasers in its attributes tab. Even the smallest laser requires several GJ of energy each cycle.

In real life, roughly how efficient are lasers in converting input energy into an actual beam? That might help CCP finding appropriate watt numbers

I might just point out at this moment that "She" is actually a he...

She doesn't like it. So what? Let it go... I'm not getting upset that she didn't even really comment on my religious naming convention for the lasers (although I want to - lol) Personally I think the kW or GW with a number is extremely sterile myself.

Yes by all means change medium pulse lasers, to something else that makes sense, and sounds more deadly...

Please don't use the same Meta name scheme for all weapons and modules. I would much prefer a few meta schemes, at the very least one for weapons and one for modules.

Preferably a couple more, could do it based on slot. that could actually add information. If you've been playing a while then that would help you search. While being consistent.

If you add the shorthanded name please put it at the end of the name like you do with implants. It just looks wrong in front.

Thanks for all the time your putting into this.

Seems like the discussion is or has run out of steam. Just curious if you have had your internal meeting about this yet, FoxFour? And if any other ideas were rattled around because of the meeting...?

and nobody thinks that Strobe would be a better name for rapid firing lasers ? sheesh...

Perhaps you could rebalance scorch whilst you're there it adds way too much range and lower the pg too?

He seems to ignore me very often he makes me cry

CCP Foxfour perhaps you could get your OCD to get to work on adding all faction drones to the market please

Faction POS mods in the market please.