Fuel name changes. Please don't do this.

[Oxlar]

<p>This is just a feedback post on the changing of the fuel names.  Please don't change all the fuel names to these homogenized generic descriptors.  Leave the character in the game.  Not only do these new names make the game more bland, the names are just stupid and don't even make sense.  Seriously, ethereal sandpaper?!?!?  Stupid.  Just stupid.  Leave the lore in the game.</p>

[Senya]

<p><cite>Oxlar wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p> ethereal sandpaper?!?!? </p></blockquote><p>Ethereal sandpaper is not a new name.  That's what the T9 sandpaper (and all T9 fuel - ethereal <insert fuel name>  ) has been called since SF went live.  If I misunderstood and you were using that as an example of what you don't like about the names that are coming I apologize. </p>

[Xalmat]

<p>They make perfect sense.</p><p>Basic = Tier 1 (1-9)Glowing = Tier 2 (10-19)Sparkling = Tier 3 (20-29)Glimmering = Tier 4 (30-39)Luminous = Tier 5 (40-49)Lambent = Tier 6 (50-59)Scintillating = Tier 7 (60-69)Smoldering = Tier 8 (70-79)Ethereal = Tier 9 (80-89)</p><p>It follows the same naming scheme that imbue materials and adornments use (except for tier 1 which is Flickering). And it's easier to remember. And most importantly, it keeps things standardized.</p><p>It's pretty much a done deal at this point.</p>

[PlaneCrazy]

<p><cite>Oxlar wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>This is just a feedback post on the changing of the fuel names.  Please don't change all the fuel names to these homogenized generic descriptors.  Leave the character in the game.  Not only do these new names make the game more bland, the names are just stupid and don't even make sense.  Seriously, ethereal sandpaper?!?!?  Stupid.  Just stupid.  Leave the lore in the game.</p></blockquote><p>Ethereal Sandpaper is, and always was that name....  since SF was released. </p><p>It's all the weird and disjointed names before T9 that they are changing and, as someone who has five T9 crafters, I welcome it.  Finally, the tiers will have a little sense... as in each tier has it's own title.  So, from now on when someone speaks about something Scintillating... then you will know right away that it has to do with a material in the 60-69 range.</p><p>Capice?</p>

[Seiffil]

<p>I'd have to agree with the others who say it makes complete sense.  It's easier to match up fuels with tiers since it's just matching the fuel with the imbue material from the same tier. </p><p>When people are looking for character in a game, I highly doubt they're looking at dark brown coal, lustrous coal, dull black coal for instance and going what wonderful character this game has.</p><p>This isn't removing lore, it's just making a sensible change.  Removing lore would be more like if they removed any quests or information regarding the history of Norrath, both from the past and what built up through each expansion.</p>

[TaleraRis]

<p><cite>Oxlar wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>This is just a feedback post on the changing of the fuel names.  Please don't change all the fuel names to these homogenized generic descriptors.  Leave the character in the game.  Not only do these new names make the game more bland, the names are just stupid and don't even make sense.  Seriously, ethereal sandpaper?!?!?  Stupid.  Just stupid.  Leave the lore in the game.</p></blockquote><p>A lot of the old ones don't make sense, either, especially the older tier sandpaper names.</p>

[Gladiolus]

<p>The new names are indeed sensible and logical. However, I agree with the OP that all this streamlining increases the feeling that EQ2 is just becoming just another homogenous MMORPG instead of the distinctive game it once was. Just changing fuel names on its own is fine but added with other little changes - for example, removing the need to speak Halasian to get the bridge quest in the Steppes, or silencing the Willow Wood banker asking about your livestock - one gets the feeling that things which make the game feel familiar and comfortable are going. It's like replacing a tasty meal with nutrient wafers because they're better for you.</p>

[Whilhelmina]

<p>I just wanted to  say that the change makes perfect sense for me. I'm always lost when I need T4 coal for exemple : is it dull black? dark brown? I always have to check the price so I'm all for this change</p>

[snowli]

<p>Fuel name changes. Please <span style="color: #ff0000;">do</span> do this. It makes lots of sense.</p>

[Valdaglerion]

<p>+1 for the "this is a good change" crowd. The more tiers we have added the more difficult it has gotten to remember which fuel is for which tier, etc. This is a great change, go Domino go <img src="/eq2/images/smilies/e8a506dc4ad763aca51bec4ca7dc8560.gif" border="0" /></p>

[Cusashorn]

<p>Walnut, Charcoal, Mulberry, Hickory, Cherry, Mesquite... Without looking them up online or in-game, tell me exactly what teirs these provisioner fuels are.</p><p>Anthracite, Bituminous, Lustrous, Dull Black, Dark Brown Coal.. What teirs are these?</p><p>Do I want to see these names go? No, I don't. Do they NEED to go? Yes. The fuels should be organized so everything is relatable by a common theme for each tier.</p>

[Faeward]

<p>Every time I buy Masala incense it makes me want to get Indian food <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p>

[Lera]

<p><cite>Cusashorn wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>Walnut, Charcoal, Mulberry, Hickory, Cherry, Mesquite... Without looking them up online or in-game, tell me exactly what teirs these provisioner fuels are.</p><p>Anthracite, Bituminous, Lustrous, Dull Black, Dark Brown Coal.. What teirs are these?</p><p>Do I want to see these names go? No, I don't. Do they NEED to go? Yes. The fuels should be organized so everything is relatable by a common theme for each tier.</p></blockquote><p>Why? Is there a problem with the recipe book that prevents people from looking up the recipe and seeing what fuel it needs? Are we really becoming that lazy?</p><p>Glowing sandpaper? Glimmering coal? Really?</p><p>What's next? Changing all the harvestables to generic names? Shrubs can give Basic Food, Glowing Food, Sparkling Food... which would be just one more change making the world of Norrath a little bit more dull.</p>

[Xalmat]

<p><cite>Lera@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>What's next? Changing all the harvestables to generic names?</p></blockquote><p>You're about five years too late in that department, actually.</p>

[TaleraRis]

<p><cite>Lera@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Cusashorn wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>Walnut, Charcoal, Mulberry, Hickory, Cherry, Mesquite... Without looking them up online or in-game, tell me exactly what teirs these provisioner fuels are.</p><p>Anthracite, Bituminous, Lustrous, Dull Black, Dark Brown Coal.. What teirs are these?</p><p>Do I want to see these names go? No, I don't. Do they NEED to go? Yes. The fuels should be organized so everything is relatable by a common theme for each tier.</p></blockquote><p>Why? Is there a problem with the recipe book that prevents people from looking up the recipe and seeing what fuel it needs? Are we really becoming that lazy?</p><p>Glowing sandpaper? Glimmering coal? Really?</p><p>What's next? Changing all the harvestables to generic names? Shrubs can give Basic Food, Glowing Food, Sparkling Food... which would be just one more change making the world of Norrath a little bit more dull.</p></blockquote><p>There used to be a wide variety of things that came out of the fungi nodes. While it was interesting, it could really be a pain sometimes, too.  Then they streamlined, and it made things more accessible.</p><p>I loved the variety of the fungi nodes. I do miss them sometimes. But I also like not needing to keep charts and graphs to keep my tradeskilling straight.</p><p>There has to be a good balance with making things interesting and keeping them accessible. If they slide too far in either direction, they either go into oversimplicity or a niche viewpoint. This is a moderate change to help maintain that necessary balance.</p>

[Lera]

<p><cite>Xalmat wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p><cite>Lera@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite></p><blockquote><p>What's next? Changing all the harvestables to generic names?</p></blockquote><p>You're about five years too late in that department, actually.</p></blockquote><p>True, we lost all the fungus nodes, but that really was too much to harvest. They removed stuff, but they didn't change the name - all the ingredients have actual names - carrots, flounder, maple, tussah roots - not just "food", "wood", etc.</p><p>How hard is it to look up the fuel in the recipe book? And if you craft regularly, you already know what you need for each tier, and if you don't, then having to look it up isn't that big a deal.</p>