I started this thread to start a discussion about ship names. Right now there are some ship names that in my mind are in a weird place in terms of continuity.
T5 empire interceptors:
R15 recon “Jarl” changed into “Storm Viking”
R14 ECM “Storm Viking” changed into “Jarl”
#I think it is good to have ships with same name linked to eachother#
T5 federation frigates:
R13 engineer “Osprey” changed into “T-Rex”
R15 engineer “T-Rex” changed into “T-Rex Mk 2”
R14 guard “T-Rex mk2” changed into “Osprey”
T5 jericho interceptors:
R15 ECM “Wakizashi AE” changed into “Wakizashi Type S”
R14 Covert Ops “Wakizashi Type R” changed into “Wakizashi AE”
Maybe I’m crazy, but this sounds much better in terms of continuity to me.
Meh no offense but changing names of ships are the last thing devs should think about right now. They should first fix how good is the Singularity Cannon compared to any other weapon or to make more enjoyable the new and boring sinergy system.
Having 10 devs working on 1 weapon won’t work I know that patch 9.0 has Issues, it also had issues before that, but I put this suggestion here anyway so it might be looked at by a dev and changed or perhabs changed in the future.
No reactions beyond that?
The rank 14 ECM is a legion ship. It could be called the Jarl but I would rather have it called the Viking 2 to follow the pattern of other legion ships (but then again, many legion ships had their names changed to unique names…).
The rank 15 engineer is an armada ship. Therefore it cannot be called the T-Rex MkII as MkII is the naming convention for the Vanguard. It would have to be called the T-Rex M.
The Wakizashi AE is a Raid ship. Therefore it cannot be called the Wakizashi Type S as ‘Type S’ is the naming convention for the Techs. This ship should keep it’s name.
The Wakizashi Type R could change to ‘Type S’ as it is a Techs ship but I don’t think that’d be necessary.