| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
sparroth
   |
Posted - 2008.08.22 04:31:00 -
[1]
In order to get rid of cryptic system names that are hard to remember, and to enhance the value of sovereignty without altering game mechanics at all, allow an entity to rename a system they have established sovereignty in. The mechanics for sovereignty should prevent systems from being renamed too often and it would give an alliance a little bonus for establishing it without actually threatening game balance at all (it is just a cosmetic change after all)
|
Morgan Brykein
Gallente
New Eden Worker's Union
|
Posted - 2008.08.22 04:35:00 -
[2]
Edited by: Morgan Brykein on 22/08/2008 04:35:17
That would jettison the player world too much into the NCP storylinish world. I'd rather not see systems like "rabbitville" or "leet," that would sicken me to the point of no longer wanting to play the game.
|
sparroth
|
Posted - 2008.08.22 04:39:00 -
[3]
Well, it wouldn't affect empire space by definition, so unless you hang out in 0.0 where the storylinish stuff is pretty much player driven you wouldn't see "rabbitville" or "leet"
It would be cooler to talk about the battle of leet than the battle of ax-25C though. Even wolf-359 had a word in it :)
|
Kiki Arnolds
Caldari
|
Posted - 2008.08.22 04:49:00 -
[4]
CCP let alliances name outposts, and look where that has taken us...
Also, what happens when an alliance renames every system they own the same thing, for instance, 'Planet I'... FC over coms:"Align to planet I!" Or if that doesn't work, Planet_I, Planet__I, Planet___I, Planet____I, Planet_____I, Planet_1, Planet__1... Its hard enough to remember 0.0 layouts, we don't need endlessly changing system names...
ç¦ |
Morgan Brykein
Gallente
New Eden Worker's Union
|
Posted - 2008.08.22 07:05:00 -
[5]
Maybe alliances can submit ideas to CCP who will subsequently rename the system, after changing the name to make it sound more "realistic" to the storyline.
Or, why not keep the "cryptic name" thing? They have those names because they're unsettled by any specific nation...I think it's cool.
|
Rabid Rich
|
Posted - 2008.08.22 13:53:00 -
[6]
if they just cleaned up the system classification so it was LOGICAL, we would all be happier. e.g. all systems in a constellation share the same first 3 letter prefix, and then a number suffix.
why is it not done this way now already???
|
Straight Chillen
Gallente
Solar Wind
|
Posted - 2008.08.22 17:29:00 -
[7]
i dont know, ive grown fond of many many 0.0 system names, like MY-W1V, and 0SHT-A. They've created many of a laugh during fleet ops
|
Titus Canmore
|
Posted - 2008.08.22 17:36:00 -
[8]
Considering how many place names in the United States retain their original Native American names, that Europe has remained "Europe" for thousands of years, and that the name "China" has stuck in various cultures for two millenia, I think that renaming systems, systems which have common names used by all of EVE's 40,000-year-old cultures, is probably far beyond the scope of any player faction. If you rename a country, the underlying continent remains the same.
|
| |
|
| Pages: [1] :: one page |
| First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |