Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
332
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 17:15:00 -
[31] - Quote
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. |
Din Chao
Ministry of War Amarr Empire
0
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 17:19:00 -
[32] - Quote
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 REN0VATI0
14
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 17:20:00 -
[33] - Quote
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
340
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 17:22:00 -
[34] - Quote
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)-á |
Korinne
The Partisan Brigade Republic Alliance
0
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 17:22:00 -
[35] - Quote
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
Proposition Thirteen The Third Rail
2
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 17:29:00 -
[36] - Quote
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
71
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 17:36:00 -
[37] - Quote
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.
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
I now need to alter my spreadsheet, try and remember what was what before and rename them.
|
Taipion
Operations Control United Pod Service
9
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 17:36:00 -
[38] - Quote
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
332
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 17:46:00 -
[39] - Quote
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 |
Korinne
The Partisan Brigade Republic Alliance
4
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 17:49:00 -
[40] - Quote
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. |
|
Leah Solo
State War Academy Caldari State
24
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 17:52:00 -
[41] - Quote
J3ssica Alba wrote:can i haz my catalyzed cold gas arc jet thrusters back ... please?
This..for the love of god, THIS!!
New names are bland, stupid and make no sense. TRAUMA???
Also whoever thought these changes will make EVE easier on the new players, really has to cut on the pipe.
Seriously..I can really imagine thinking out all these new names, sitting in a circle, with a couple buddies in a very smokey room.
Terrible.. |
Zimmy Zeta
Battle Force Industries Tactical Invader Syndicate
747
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 18:00:00 -
[42] - Quote
In a few years, we will rant in local with other players about the good old times. And someone will say. "Do you still remember scourge missiles?" "Hell yeah, they were awesome..." And then some newbie will ask what scourge missiles are. And we will tell them them that they were so good they got nerfed to hell. But those were the golden days of Eve...
Hell, I am feeling like a vet already....can't wait for it to happen... -.- |
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
332
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 18:01:00 -
[43] - Quote
Korinne wrote: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. I always thought the hard part of Eve was supposed to be the fact that it's complex by virtue of mechanics, not by virtue of meaningless verbiage.
Calling it a "Thorn Rocket" or a "Trauma Rocket" makes no difference to knowing not to use it if your targets are frigates using afterburners... oh, my bad, I meant "cold-gas arcjet thrusters". |
Zowie Powers
Hole in the wall
44
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 18:02:00 -
[44] - Quote
Do you remember when you could call a Kinetic missile a Kinetic missile? Pepperidge Farm Remembers.
Do you remember when certain folk weren't allowed on the golf course? Pepperidge Farm Remembers.
All these fancy folk and their political correctness... you can't even call an em missile EM any more. Where will it end? |
Ehn Roh
Center for Advanced Studies Gallente Federation
3
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 18:06:00 -
[45] - Quote
I dont like the AB/MWD names. They took something that could admittedly be confusing but sounded cool, to something that doesn't sound cool but isn't any less confusing.
I also liked the old missile names... the Icon clearly showed the damage type, I don't see what the problem was. The old names were cool. |
Joahna Gramer
Deep Space Supplies Care Factor
4
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 18:06:00 -
[46] - Quote
If you ask me we should give every item depending on its Meta Level a distinguishable colour. How about grey, white, green, blue, purple and orange?
See here
|
Da'Than
Interstellar Military Industries
3
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 18:07:00 -
[47] - Quote
Missile names are crap (talking about post-TRAUMA-tic stress...). AB/MWD names are only slightly less confusing. Just put a bloody sign to the item picture to indicate the meta level, like with T2/T3/Faction stuff. Alternatively, use the same prefix for the meta level on every item type. 0: Heavy Missile Launcher 1: Modified Heavy Missile Launcher 2: Improved Heavy Missile Launcher 3: Experimental Heavy Missile Launcher 4: Prototype Heavy Missile Launcher Or other prefixes, just bring them in line. |
Korinne
The Partisan Brigade Republic Alliance
5
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 18:10:00 -
[48] - Quote
And then the prototype and experimental stuff can explode in your face, as such things are prone to do. |
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
332
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 18:11:00 -
[49] - Quote
Korinne wrote:And then the prototype and experimental stuff can explode in your face, as such things are prone to do. If you overheat it too much, yeah, it will. |
Korinne
The Partisan Brigade Republic Alliance
5
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 18:13:00 -
[50] - Quote
If by overheat you mean turn it on, then probably. |
|
stoicfaux
681
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 18:19:00 -
[51] - Quote
CCP really needs to crowd-source this kind of stuff, since flavor or fluff text is in the eye of the player.
In general, standardizing the missile names is a fine idea. However, "Trauma" is weaksauce. "Nova" isn't much better. The AB/MWD names still don't make sense and should be re-done.
At this point, I'm half-expecting CCP to somehow make the skill implant names even more confusing.
You can tell me what is and isn't Truth when you pry the tinfoil from my cold, lifeless head.
|
stoicfaux
681
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 18:21:00 -
[52] - Quote
Also, "Inferno" missiles really should have been "Eyjafjallaj+¦kull" missiles. (Eyjafjallaj+¦kull is the Icelandic volcano that erupted in 2010.)
You can tell me what is and isn't Truth when you pry the tinfoil from my cold, lifeless head.
|
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
214
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 18:21:00 -
[53] - Quote
Petrus Blackshell wrote: I always thought the hard part of Eve was supposed to be the fact that it's complex by virtue of mechanics, not by virtue of meaningless verbiage.
This "meaningless verbiage" is the language of EVE. This effort of simplifying it for the lowest common denominator achieves nothing but blandness and additional verbiage. Now, instead of saying Y-T8 or Quad LiF, you have to say Experimental 10MN MicroWarpdrive or Prototype 100MN MicroWarpdrive; or instead of saying Scourge or Terror, you have to say Trauma Heavy or Trauma Heavy Assault; ect. You've not only added necessary verbiage pollution, you've also made it dryer, blander, and more average. You've dumbed down the world of EVE with your misguided concern for a nubie underachiever who will leave anyway because he/she can't have instant gratification in our game. Nice going.
|
Reilly Duvolle
Hydra Squadron
265
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 18:29:00 -
[54] - Quote
A clear HELL YES from me. I've been playing this game for years. It took me TWO freakin years to finally learn all the names and what the diffrent stuff in EVE was. TWO years to learn freakin names, often without any connection to what the mod actually did.
This change is LONG overdue. EVE needs moar players, and a game shouldnt need a freakin dictionary to decode it. Just because YOU had it hard, doesnt mean that every new player has to go through the whole ordeal. |
stoicfaux
681
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 18:33:00 -
[55] - Quote
Razin wrote:Petrus Blackshell wrote: I always thought the hard part of Eve was supposed to be the fact that it's complex by virtue of mechanics, not by virtue of meaningless verbiage.
This "meaningless verbiage" is the language of EVE. This effort of simplifying it for the lowest common denominator achieves nothing but blandness and additional verbiage. Now, instead of saying Y-T8 or Quad LiF, you have to say Experimental 10MN MicroWarpdrive or Prototype 100MN MicroWarpdrive; or instead of saying Scourge or Terror, you have to say Trauma Heavy or Trauma Heavy Assault; ect. You've not only added necessary verbiage pollution, you've also made it dryer, blander, and more average. You've dumbed down the world of EVE with your misguided concern for a nubie underachiever who will leave anyway because he/she can't have instant gratification in our game. Nice going.
Oh please. There's a reason why CCP added the 'meta' column to the inventory windows, and why people use t1, t2, named, and officer as short-hand for quality of modules instead of their actual names.
The only reason why missiles were actually called by their names was because the listener could usually figure out the damage type from the name and the class of missile from the context. Which is in stark contrast to the randomly named railgun ammo, laser crystals, modules, etc., that have random stat tweaks.
You can tell me what is and isn't Truth when you pry the tinfoil from my cold, lifeless head.
|
Petrus Blackshell
Rifterlings
332
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 18:39:00 -
[56] - Quote
Razin wrote:Petrus Blackshell wrote: I always thought the hard part of Eve was supposed to be the fact that it's complex by virtue of mechanics, not by virtue of meaningless verbiage.
This "meaningless verbiage" is the language of EVE. This effort of simplifying it for the lowest common denominator achieves nothing but blandness and additional verbiage. Now, instead of saying Y-T8 or Quad LiF, you have to say Experimental 10MN MicroWarpdrive or Prototype 100MN MicroWarpdrive; or instead of saying Scourge or Terror, you have to say Trauma Heavy or Trauma Heavy Assault; ect. You've not only added necessary verbiage pollution, you've also made it dryer, blander, and more average. You've dumbed down the world of EVE with your misguided concern for a nubie underachiever who will leave anyway because he/she can't have instant gratification in our game. Nice going.
I am not CCP, nor do I work for them (as much as I'd like to).
I have never seen anyone refer to the meta modules by name. It's more to the tune of:
Quote: A > you should use a meta MWD on your fit B > which one? A > Y-Ts tend to be cheap on the market.
Replace "Y-Ts" with "experimentals" and you've got the same thing. I really see no long-term loss of "language of Eve".
The missile complexity of the naming shouldn't even need the extra word, since presumably the person asking about the missiles already knows what sort of launchers he's using. Just like you tell a Rifter with autocannons to get "EMP" and he knows to get "EMP S", you can tell a Drake with HMLs to get "Trauma" and he knows to get "Trauma Heavy Missile" because nothing else fits in there. If it were the old style of launchers where you could put heavy missiles in heavy assault launchers (or whatever it was, I'm not that old), then yes, this would be an unnecessary addition of complexity. As there is a 1-to-1 mapping of launcher to missile type now, it does not. |
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
214
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 18:44:00 -
[57] - Quote
stoicfaux wrote:Razin wrote:Petrus Blackshell wrote: I always thought the hard part of Eve was supposed to be the fact that it's complex by virtue of mechanics, not by virtue of meaningless verbiage.
This "meaningless verbiage" is the language of EVE. This effort of simplifying it for the lowest common denominator achieves nothing but blandness and additional verbiage. Now, instead of saying Y-T8 or Quad LiF, you have to say Experimental 10MN MicroWarpdrive or Prototype 100MN MicroWarpdrive; or instead of saying Scourge or Terror, you have to say Trauma Heavy or Trauma Heavy Assault; ect. You've not only added necessary verbiage pollution, you've also made it dryer, blander, and more average. You've dumbed down the world of EVE with your misguided concern for a nubie underachiever who will leave anyway because he/she can't have instant gratification in our game. Nice going. Oh please. There's a reason why CCP added the 'meta' column to the inventory windows, and why people use t1, t2, named, and officer as short-hand for quality of modules instead of their actual names. The only reason why missiles were actually called by their names was because the listener could usually figure out the damage type from the name and the class of missile from the context. Which is in stark contrast to the randomly named railgun ammo, laser crystals, modules, etc., that have random stat tweaks. That's bullshit. The short names were used routinely to identify different items. It all depended on the context. |
Sarpadeon
Rebirth Industries
0
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 18:45:00 -
[58] - Quote
old naming made it needlessly complex for new players, there was absolutely no reason missiles should have had 24 different names just for T1 in the first place, when every other ammo type had 8(12 if you count both different T2 lines)
only wish they kept different naming conventions based on if the missile is guided or unguided, ie rocket/HAM/torp would have a naming convention for each dmg type, and standard/heavy/cruise would have a naming convention for their damage type, so there would be the same number of missile ammo names as gun ammo names, and would cut down on the mass of faction results for each damage type in search.
ie unguided could be Mjolnir/Trauma/Inferno/Nova and guided could be Static/Scourge/Hellfire/Bane |
Razin
The xDEATHx Squadron Legion of xXDEATHXx
214
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 18:48:00 -
[59] - Quote
Petrus Blackshell wrote:
I am not CCP, nor do I work for them (as much as I'd like to).
Not surprised you found it hard to tell I was speaking to CCP.
Petrus Blackshell wrote:I have never seen anyone refer to the meta modules by name.
I have.
|
Ion Rubix
University of Caille Gallente Federation
2
|
Posted - 2012.01.24 18:49:00 -
[60] - Quote
Razin wrote: This "meaningless verbiage" is the language of EVE. This effort of simplifying it for the lowest common denominator achieves nothing but blandness and additional verbiage. Now, instead of saying Y-T8 or Quad LiF, you have to say Experimental 10MN MicroWarpdrive or Prototype 100MN MicroWarpdrive; or instead of saying Scourge or Terror, you have to say Trauma Heavy or Trauma Heavy Assault; ect. You've not only added necessary verbiage pollution, you've also made it dryer, blander, and more average. You've dumbed down the world of EVE with your misguided concern for a nubie underachiever who will leave anyway because he/she can't have instant gratification in our game. Nice going.
I agree. The "language of EVE" adds to the depth of immersion that CCP say they are always striving towards.
I liked the fact that as a new player I found it immensely rewarding discovering the nuances of different meta level modules just to see if they would fit onto my minimal skill piloted frigate.
"If I fit 'Catalyzed Cold-Gas Arcjet Thrusters' I get an extra 13% out of my engines!" - Noob Rubix said many moons ago. |
|
|
|
|
Pages: 1 [2] 3 4 5 6 7 8 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |