Repeating autocannon is a silly name.

Why do you camel case AutoCannon, I suggest using `Autocannon` everywhere

Jetpacks?

Are there changes to Autocannons themselves to be expected?

I'm assuming the "dual" part is to differentiate between smaller class guns with the same caliber, but on a technical note, a lot of these guns, the way they are designed right now, could be considered "dual", such as dual 800mm Autocannon. And then there is artillery which are all dual-barreled. Maybe I'm just anal about it, but it would be cool if artillery had a single barrel design as opposed to double barrels. Then 650mm artillery cannon would look more like a 650mm, 1400mm wouldn't look like a dual 1400mm, etc. The naming just sucks for all the guns right now and almost don't correlate to what they actually look like.

You can remodel the 1200s to be single-barreled (it might even be better) but don't you lay a finger on my beautiful 1400s.

While we're talking about art assets, maybe the 800s can get some actual barrels inside their rotating cylinders, much like Valkyries have on their guns.

Okay, I admit the 1400mm's one of my favorite models, but.. but.. what if they made it a BFG

Subject - [Rubicon] Renaming some autocannons to actually be called autocannons


Dual 650mm Repeating Artillery and all its variations have been renamed as follows:

• ...
• Dual 650mm Gallium Machine Gun
• ...

800mm Repeating Artillery and all its variations have been renamed as follows:

• ...
• 800mm Heavy Gallium Machine Gun
• ...

6x2500mm Repeating AutoCannon and all its variations have been renamed as follows:

• 6x2500mm Heavy Gallium Machine Gun
• ...

Let me know if I have missed something in these weapons and their renaming.

6x2500mm Repeating AutoCannon and all its variations have been renamed as follows:

• 6x2500mm Heavy Gallium Machine Gun
• 6x2500mm AutoCannon I

Just following the convention already set out.

I admit that it is not "idiot"-proof but I actually liked eve when it wasn't ... CCP is now only working on making everything more ... well ... "idiot"-proof. Reorganising skills, changing a lot of names on things (siege launchers => torpedo launcher ... because omg it's soooo hard to remember that torpedoes will be launched from siege launchers), "rebalancing" ships (many of the ships were actually pretty useful the way they were even if they were not the last tier) and so on ...

Basically this game is getting more and more "******"-friendly (to change the term a bit.)

Don't you think changing skill names is "dumbing the game down"?

• EVE gameplay and sense of loss should be harsh, dark and unforgiving, in that there is no doubt and we agree completely. However, fighting the UI at every turn should not be the main complexity point here - it just means players have become used to an old and outdated interface for too long. Simply put, the hard and unforgiving nature of EVE should not be to retrieve information on a basic level, it should be on how players act based on that information and interact with the gameplay that revolves around it.

(https://forums.eveonline.com/default.aspx?g=posts&m=3301378#post3301378)

What would make more sense than "If you are wondering why, basically because it was stupid before and stupid needs to be fixed. I think most of these were actually supposed to be artileries when first created based on the item they were copied from and then later made into autocannons. Just their names and descriptions were never properly updated." would probably be:

They were called repeating artilleries because they were basically smaller sized artilleries (hence "artillery") which were shooting very fast (hence "repeating") and to make them shoot faster you need more CPU / PG.

I admit that it is not "idiot"-proof but I actually liked eve when it wasn't ... CCP is now only working on making everything more ... well ... "idiot"-proof. Reorganising skills, changing a lot of names on things (siege launchers => torpedo launcher ... because omg it's soooo hard to remember that torpedoes will be launched from siege launchers), "rebalancing" ships (many of the ships were actually pretty useful the way they were even if they were not the last tier) and so on ...

Basically this game is getting more and more "******"-friendly (to change the term a bit.)

Just following the convention already set out.

If you are wondering why, basically because it was stupid before and stupid needs to be fixed.

While we're talking about art assets, maybe the 800s can get some actual barrels inside their rotating cylinders, much like Valkyries have on their guns.

Why do you camel case AutoCannon, I suggest using `Autocannon` everywhere

Dual 650mm Repeating Artillery and all its variations have been renamed as follows:

• Domination Dual 650mm AutoCannon
• Dual 650mm 'Scout' AutoCannon
• Dual 650mm AutoCannon I
• Dual 650mm AutoCannon II
• Dual 650mm Carbine AutoCannon
• Dual 650mm Gallium AutoCannon
• Dual 650mm Prototype AutoCannon
• Gotan's Modified Dual 650mm AutoCannon
• Mizuro's Modified Dual 650mm AutoCannon
• Republic Fleet Dual 650mm AutoCannon

800mm Repeating Artillery and all its variations have been renamed as follows:

• 800mm AutoCannon I
• 800mm AutoCannon II
• 800mm Heavy 'Jolt' AutoCannon
• 800mm Heavy 'Scout' AutoCannon
• 800mm Heavy Carbine AutoCannon
• 800mm Heavy Gallium AutoCannon
• 800mm Heavy Prototype AutoCannon
• Domination 800mm AutoCannon
• Gotan's Modified 800mm AutoCannon
• Mizuro's Modified 800mm AutoCannon
• Republic Fleet 800mm AutoCannon

6x2500mm Repeating AutoCannon and all its variations have been renamed as follows:

• 6x2500mm Heavy Gallium AutoCannon
• 6x2500mm AutoCannon I

Should be more like this. Only Meta 1 and T2 should have I or II next to it's name. Change the names of all guns type group it belongs to would be nice too.

This is a very simple change, so I am just going to list out all the changes:

Dual 650mm Repeating Artillery and all its variations have been renamed as follows:

• Dual 650mm Carbine Repeating Cannon I
• Dual 650mm Gallium Machine Gun

800mm Repeating Artillery and all its variations have been renamed as follows:

• 800mm Heavy Carbine Repeating Cannon I
• 800mm Heavy Gallium Machine Gun

6x2500mm Repeating AutoCannon and all its variations have been renamed as follows:

• 6x2500mm Heavy Gallium Machine Gun

Dual 650mm Repeating Artillery and all its variations have been renamed as follows:

• Domination Dual 650mm AutoCannon
• Dual 650mm 'Scout' AutoCannon
• Dual 650mm AutoCannon I
• Dual 650mm AutoCannon II
• Dual 650mm Carbine AutoCannon
• Dual 650mm Gallium AutoCannon
• Dual 650mm Prototype AutoCannon
• Gotan's Modified Dual 650mm AutoCannon
• Mizuro's Modified Dual 650mm AutoCannon
• Republic Fleet Dual 650mm AutoCannon

800mm Repeating Artillery and all its variations have been renamed as follows:

• 800mm AutoCannon I
• 800mm AutoCannon II
• 800mm Heavy 'Jolt' AutoCannon
• 800mm Heavy 'Scout' AutoCannon
• 800mm Heavy Carbine AutoCannon
• 800mm Heavy Gallium AutoCannon
• 800mm Heavy Prototype AutoCannon
• Domination 800mm AutoCannon
• Gotan's Modified 800mm AutoCannon
• Mizuro's Modified 800mm AutoCannon
• Republic Fleet 800mm AutoCannon

6x2500mm Repeating AutoCannon and all its variations have been renamed as follows:

• 6x2500mm Heavy Gallium AutoCannon
• 6x2500mm AutoCannon I

If you are wondering why, basically because it was stupid before and stupid needs to be fixed.

Let me know if I have missed something in these weapons and their renaming.

I saw this mentioned elsewhere recently so I'll bring it up here since it seems reasonable...

Any chance Large weapons with the naming convention "Dual Medium Weapon" will be changed to use Medium sized ammunition instead of Large ammunition?

Weapons with the same calibre should use the same ammunition, no matter how many barrels they have.

Can you imagine trying to fit an ostrich egg into a double barrelled shotgun? The answer is a bad joke about making omelettes, but that's neither here nor there.



Example: a 650mm Artillery cannon takes medium ammunition, but a dual 650mm Autocannon takes large ammunition.

Repeating autocannon is a silly name.

If this were implemented, it would require significant changes to the "dual" guns, in tthe form of either notably higher ROF or a notably higher damage multiplier. This is because ammo of one size has much lower base damage than ammo of the next size up.

It's a neat idea in terms of immersion, but between the ammo damage problem and the market effects of changing the ammo demands of certain gun sizes, it needs careful review.

the names of items are not part of the UI; they are part of the game world. same goes for the names of skills (and arguably skill categories), recalling scanner probes (which should not happen automatically and instantly), agent types (which should never have been streamlined into security, mining and distribution) and so on.

I like repeating artillery. It sounds a lot cooler than autocannon. Also the explanation above.

Cold gas arcjet thrusters forever...

We can always count on CCP to correct "REAL" issues in game...

Awesomesauce

Repeating autocannon is a silly name.

I saw this mentioned elsewhere recently so I'll bring it up here since it seems reasonable...

Any chance Large weapons with the naming convention "Dual Medium Weapon" will be changed to use Medium sized ammunition instead of Large ammunition?

Weapons with the same calibre should use the same ammunition, no matter how many barrels they have.

Can you imagine trying to fit an ostrich egg into a double barrelled shotgun? The answer is a bad joke about making omelettes, but that's neither here nor there.



Example: a 650mm Artillery cannon takes medium ammunition, but a dual 650mm Autocannon takes large ammunition.

This.

It's like saying Automatic Autocannon.

Yet another change that nobody has complained about, another bit of immersion gone. The desire to understand and learn is a big part of the eve experience especially for noobs, we're all slightly poorer because of things like this.

Cold gas arcjet thrusters forever...

This is a very simple change, so I am just going to list out all the changes:

6x2500mm Repeating AutoCannon and all its variations have been renamed as follows:

• 6x2500mm Heavy Gallium Machine Gun
• 6x2500mm AutoCannon I

There is something just not right about a 6 barreled machine gun firing 2500mm slugs...

YAY Foxfour is back with his super vorpal sword of logic and justice!

Yeaah I'll have to agree here. "800mm repeating artillery" has way more punch than "800mm autocannon".

Same as "VM-15 Braced Multispectral Deflection Matrix" sounded way more awesome than "Limited Invulnerability Field I"

While the last was confusing, let's keep at least some awesomeness feeling to names.

and yet another nerf to Minmatar

By general feel of repsosnes, this was a BAD CCP move, once again, administrative mindset over gamers mindset, factory standards over art, homogenization over being interesting.

Bland... vs colored....

What about the aptly named meta 4 pulses?

"Mega Modulated Pulse Energy Beam I"

(this applies to all sizes).

one would have a hard time understanding wtf they are without looking at the stats or market categories.

I'd say it's more likely that the majority of players read the idea, think "Well... duh, that's an obvious change that needs to be made" and move on without bothering to comment. This isn't homogenization, it's removal of misleading language. Don't put the word "artillery" into an autocannon, just like you wouldn't put the word "blaster" into a railgun, or "afterburner" into an MWD.

My only complaint is about the CamelCase. Ew.

Do not call machine gun something that is NOT a machien gun. Anythign over 14mm is never called a machine gun! No matter how fast they fire!

What about the aptly named meta 4 pulses?

"Mega Modulated Pulse Energy Beam I"

(this applies to all sizes).

one would have a hard time understanding wtf they are without looking at the stats or market categories.

Do not call machine gun something that is NOT a machien gun. Anythign over 14mm is never called a machine gun! No matter how fast they fire!

We just don't need names that specifically mislead people into thinking a weapon is a different class than it really is.

This game has a class of weapons that are officially and technically called Artillery. It has a separate class of weapons that are officially and technically called Autocannons. These are useful distinctions for setting base expectations for what the weapons do and what skills they require. Don't put the word "artillery" into a weapon that is technically an autocannon, and don't put the word "autocannon" into a weapon that is technically artillery. Beyond that, I don't really care if you want to call them "machine guns" or "death cannons" or "Super Fantastic Automated Pony Launchers". We just don't need names that specifically mislead people into thinking a weapon is a different class than it really is.

if you can get confused by that.. I pity you.. and surely you are someone that should not emit opinions over anythign if you are so chalanged taht you can get confused by that.

We don't? Up until now no one had an issue with that.

....

Sure they have. That's why it's now being addressed.

No.
She noticed it and believed it should be streamlined.

Which makes sense in it's own way, but still sucks and isn't necessary.

First!

I would have thought that these guns being listed under the "Autocannons" section of the market would have served as sufficient indication that they are in fact not actually Artillery, but I've been wrong before.

Why? If an object at first glance could be A or B, and has A in its name, why is it so hard to believe that people will guess that it's A? Do a little forum sleuthing and you'll be able to find multiple cases where that's happened. (No, I'm not going to do your homework for you.)

If you are wondering why, basically because it was stupid before and stupid needs to be fixed.

Who gives a **** what you call the guns, fix missiles and caldari ships.

Glad you like. :D

Repeating autocannon is a silly name.

Why on earth is this thread still stickied? Rofl...