Tags

, ,

The new devblog has come out from CCP Gnauton: http://community.eveonline.com/devblog.asp?a=blog&nbid=9130 and it relates to finally going through and clarifying the name of several modules.

Of course, there are plenty of tears.

But first, here is a summary of what CCP Gnauton proposes:

Standardized Global Naming Scheme

  • Meta 1 Items: Upgraded
  • Meta 2 Items: Limited
  • Meta 3 Items: Experimental
  • Meta 4 Items: Prototype

Hardwired Implants Renamed

All implants will be named the following way:

  1. Corporation
  2. Implant Group Name
  3. Skill/Function Name
  4. Two-Letter Flavor Acronym
  5. Implant slot Location
  6. Percentage Bonus

– or –

[Corporation][Implant Group Name][Skill/Function Name][Two-Letter Flavor Acronym]-[Implant Slot Location][Percentage Bonus]

For example, the currently named “Hardwiring – Inherent Implants ‘Lancer’ G0.5-Beta” implant will now be renamed as the “Inherent Implants ‘Lancer’ Controlled Bursts CB-702” implant.

Clarification of Resist Modules

Partially descriptive words like, “Reflective”, “Reactive”, and “Magnetic” will be replace with more appropriate resist comparisons like EM, Explosive, and Kinetic.

Clarification of Missile Launchers

  • Heavy Assault Missile Launchers will be Assault Missile Launchers
  • Assault Missile Launchers will be Light Missile Arrays
  • Standard Missile Launchers will be Light Missile Launchers
  • Siege Launchers will be Torpedo Launchers.

Scripts named.. scripts

Scripts will have the word “Scripts” added into their name for easier searching on markets.

And the Whines Flowed.. and the Cheese was Present in Great Numbers..

All in all, this is a pretty good devblog and many of the changes are reasonable and have been a long time coming.  It is interesting, however, the tears and whines and moans that were being put on display over the general naming change.  The whines were consistent enough that it was possible to group them into categories:

Missile Launcher Naming Whine. 

There are two whines here, the more predominant one being that renaming the Assault Missile Launcher into the Light Missile Array isn’t descriptive enough to set it apart from the Light Missile Launcher.  The second is that the really isn’t any beneficial change to go from Heavy Assault Missile Launcher to Assault Missile Launcher.  Not really much of a difference.. and probably counterintuative because it no longer has “Heavy” in the title.  I have to agree that these whines have some pretty solid basis for them.  Whine Usefulness: 3 out of 5

Global Naming Scheme Dumbs Eve Down

At the time of me reading the devblog, there were a few postings making this argument.  My sincere belief is that the people who argue this either are too enamoured with their own intelligence or are scammers by trade.  Simple response?  No, it doesn’t.  Nuff said.  Whine Usefulness: -10 out of 5

Global Naming Scheme messes up everyone’s spreadsheets

Oh, do programmers just HATE to be one-upped.  This argument was going pretty strong until someone properly mentioned that had you used the “itemid” rather than the actual name, then your spreadsheets would update automatically.  This argument disappeared pretty quick after that.  Whine Usefulness: 0 out of 5

Global Naming Scheme doesn’t use the right terms

This is almost based entirely around the word “Limited”.  As in, “Limited Edition”.  However, quite a few make the argument that new players might view “Limited” as being less than standard.  I’m about 80% thinking this is a pointless argument simply on the fact that the term is used for both frequently, and if they see that “Limited” in this game means better than standard just once, they’ll equate it pretty quickly and it won’t be an issue again.  Scratch that.. make it 100%.  Whine Usefulness: 0 out of 5

Global Naming Scheme messes up the “flavor” or “sci-fi”-ness in Eve

This is a good argument only in that it scratches the surface of the deeper problems in the META system.  As most of you know, the Meta system is pretty flawed.. in addition, there are no deep ties into gaming lore despite the obvious intention for there to be those links.  I did a project (one that I had to put on hold because of RL and changes to hybrid weaponry) detailing all the attributes of all non-faction meta items.  Everything from Meta 0 to Meta 5.

To put it bluntly, it clearly appears that at least two, probably three people put the meta system together.. without really talking to each other about how it should work.  The general understanding is that Meta 0 is the Base model and Meta 1-5 are the improvements to that model.  However, the improvements aren’t always progressive.  Sometimes Meta 2 or Meta 3 versions will have better CPU usage.  Sometimes there simply isn’t a Meta 1, 3, or 4.  Sometimes there are items that are actually sub-Meta 0.

But I think the problem really shows up when you deal with the Tech 2 items.  Once you reach that level, there is zero need to use Meta 0-4 items 90% of the time.  True, there are modules like the 1600mm Rolled Tungsten plate as well as several E-war and electronic modules that are better than their Tech 2 variants.. but even then the discussion is between Meta 4 and Meta 5.  Meta 1, 2, 3 items don’t retain their value for any significant amount of time.  I think Meta items should always have some “value”.  Actually it is rather surprising that of all the attributes each module has, often only a couple are changed when going from one meta version to another.  For example, between Meta 0 and Meta 4, powergrid usage is never changed.  It only gets changed at Meta 5.  For weapons, Rate of Fire is never changed, except on missiles.

So really, the naming issue is really only a minor issue in comparison to the entire problem that Meta faces currently.  In fact, I don’t think you can really rename most of these items until you figure out how the lore works on this.  In a way, perhaps instead of using terms like “Upgraded”, or “Limited” perhaps we could use ficitious company names?

Maybe.. do this for example, let’s use Pulse Lasers.  Create four “designer” corporations for weapons, let’s say:

  • Theoretical Insight (Amarrian Weapons Corp)
  • Heavy Impact (Minmatar Weapons Corp)
  • Graceful Designs (Gallente Weapons Corp)
  • Focused Intentions (Caldari Weapons Corp)

Each of these corporations are trying to steal each empires weapon designs and improve them.  Each have varying skill in improving those designs.  So, instead of a somewhat cryptic Mega Afocal Pulse Maser I or an overly bland Upgraded Mega Pulse Laser, you’d get Heavy Impact Mega Pulse Laser (which are Meta 1).  On the flip side, Heavy Impact’s 800mm Autocannons would be Meta 4, and Theoretical Insights’ 800mm Autocannon would be only Meta 1.  Meta 0 weapons would keep the same name and be pretty basic in design.  The inital phase could just be Lore based and be fairly simple.. but it would have significant potential that could even expand into Dust514 missions.

A second phase would be to vary the attributes of each meta version that highlights some improvements.  Say, maybe the Heavy Impacts Mega Pulse laser does terrible damage, but it uses less capacitor per shot.  A Graceful Designs Mega Pulse Laser might use less CPU than others.  Overall, the Meta 4 Theoretical Insight Mega Pulse Laser would be the most efficent, but all the other weapons would have certain attributes that were better.. but had bigger sacrifices too.

The third phase might entail allowing players to make particular meta items.. but only those faction-controlled regions.  For example, you could not make a Heavy Impacts Mega Pulse Laser in Domain space because the “parts” used to help put them together aren’t available, or something like that.

So, I guess the whine is a 3 out of a possible 5 now that I consider all the aspect of what it “could” be versus what it currently is and what is being suggested.

Advertisements