Player Features and Ideas Discussion

Simple but interesting change - when you burn out a module - rather than being able to repair it you have to buy a new one.

Nano paste works as normal.
Repair will work as normal up to 99%, but once the module is burned out completely and stops working - it's dead. and to the markets for a replacement.

This would be very good for industry demand, make production of units as replacement parts as a real part of EVE and start moving things around, more people would get into production as there would then be demand for things.

I also think that all ammo and charges should be consumable items (be a at different rates for balance) as well for the same reason, more demand in the markets makes for a more vibrant economy.

- Everything should be able to be player destroyed... even if it's just by using it up...

Yes!...

why not.

Think about this:

1. you pay an ISK sink repair cost to rep a module you burn out. - this doesn't do anything for the game economy, but you pay it anyway.

2. if you paid for a replacement module instead, you would also be able to make a profit from making modules, and that ISK would flow around the economy not be taken out of the game... which is why I feel that this is a good change, it gets both items and ISK moving, and removes an old mechanic that doesn't really do much - lets face it how often do people really hit "repair" in a station, most of the time it's done with reps from other ships, and so burned out modules from the small number of them that do burn out are simply adding to the game play in a way that is meaningful and useful.

IDK, I think people with such modules would (or should) be able to manage their heat or they kind of deserve to have a burnout... doesn't that mean that skill and thinking come to the fore while F1-warriors suffer what they must due to say, being stupid.

also...

Hi Hobo, why aren't you running HQs now... being lazy? - hehe.

I'm in support of this. It might give an actual meaning to the Thermodynamics skill. Nobody in the history of ever had to learn special skills to cause something to overheat, they simply need to know how to use the object (hell, even that much is debatable). I think that OH should be possible without Thermodynamics being trained. Not injected/lvl 0 would give a -0% heat damage modifier and a 25% chance that the module will be destroyed when it is burned out. The chance that the module will be destroyed decreases by 5% per level, just like the heat damage modifier, with lvl 5 having a 0% chance for the module to be destroyed when it is burned out.

It's not like lvl 5 having a 0% mod destruction chance would make it a pointless change. Sure, it won't have much of an effect on players who already have Thermo trained to 5. But for younger players like myself who only have it trained to lvl 2 or 3, this change would have more of an effect. For starters, I see OHing as kind of a last resort, something that shouldn't be used unless you REALLY need it. Players shouldn't be relying on OHing and nanite paste to get the damage that they want out of their ships. OHing should be used to get the damage that you NEED in a tight situation, at a price, by pushing your modules to their limits. I don't see a problem with the possibility of destroying a module with improper heat management. The same thing will happen to a car. Not having enough coolant and/or oil to keep the parts of an engine below a certain temperature (among other functions) can cause serious damage to several parts of the engine, and can VERY definitely render that engine 100% beyond repair. At that point, you just have to salvage what you can (hmm...recovering components from modules that you have destroyed with OH?).

I typed "For starters..." like 15 minutes ago, but I spent a lot of time re-reading and re-typing that last paragraph, so I completely forgot what my second point was. My bad. If anyone has anything to add, feel free. If what I said sounds r-tarded, what ever. I'll live.

+1 to OP.

If there was higher degree of reliability with overheating I might be for it - but waaaay too many times I've overheated - stopped heating a good 2 cycles short of burning a module out and then 20-30 seconds later (and several non heated cycles) heard the ping! as it burns out :| or as above had lag where it won't respond to commands to stop overheating until too late.

Overheating modules has saved my ships on numerous occasions in PvE (often because I was bad and did something stupid, but still), and has resulted in the untimely death of many targets in PvP that otherwise would have escaped (see MWDs and Points).

I recommend a compromise that, as part of being > meta 4, modules are not destroyed by heat. But, I like the concept.

I think that the module burnout is penalty enough for poor heat management and server lag etc. That's not to say I wouldn't like to see an expansion of overheating as a whole, just not this particular feature.

This would hit some modules pretty hard.

1mn MWDs burn out in like 2-3 cycles some times, Other modules heat for ages.

Also roaming Gangs would get a hit, Survive a fight in null but with a burnt prop and have to travel 20j to find a replacement mod.

I might support something like this if we had a finer degree of data regarding our heat status and a bit better granularity of control, but as the system sits now I just cannot.

Additionally, the "events outside user control" aspect comes to mind.

I could agree with this if overheat was reworked. Like mods burn no where the same rate. I had 7 cannon at stopped the burn at 89% but the modules were at different levels and 1 wasn't even burnt out