These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

Player Features and Ideas Discussion

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
123Next pageLast page
 

would the world end if modules automatically stopped overheat at 99%

First post
Author
TheExtruder
TheExtruder Corporation
#1 - 2014-11-19 22:20:23 UTC
or at least a new rig that cools down the overheated stuff, a fail safe mechanic of some kind
Ama Scelesta
#2 - 2014-11-19 22:22:39 UTC
Wouldn't that take out all the skill, knowledge and risk from using overheating?
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
Infinite Pew
#3 - 2014-11-19 22:30:59 UTC
So you want to add a "safety" after you have clearly turned off the "safeties." An override to stop an override. Limit things when you are clearly trying to go past your limits in the first place.

Part of the idea behind overheat is that you are disabling the "safe" operation of modules for better performance... at the risk that they might burn out and leave you more helpless than if you did not.
TheExtruder
TheExtruder Corporation
#4 - 2014-11-19 22:42:38 UTC  |  Edited by: TheExtruder
ShahFluffers wrote:
So you want to add a "safety" after you have clearly turned off the "safeties." An override to stop an override. Limit things when you are clearly trying to go past your limits in the first place.

Part of the idea behind overheat is that you are disabling the "safe" operation of modules for better performance... at the risk that they might burn out and leave you more helpless than if you did not.


dont understand why we are still stuck with the idea that there is nothing you can do about cooling down systems when they are overheated. like not being able to put water over a flame, doesnt add up

in real life cooling is a big deal, it would be illogical if ccp didnt continue building on and evolving the overheat mechanic. because if overheat exists then cooling needs to exist too, there is simply no logic and no depth to a mechanic which has now become so commonly used
Goochan derp
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#5 - 2014-11-19 22:46:20 UTC
its a game mechanic, not a real life scenario.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#6 - 2014-11-19 22:46:43 UTC
TheExtruder wrote:
ShahFluffers wrote:
So you want to add a "safety" after you have clearly turned off the "safeties." An override to stop an override. Limit things when you are clearly trying to go past your limits in the first place.

Part of the idea behind overheat is that you are disabling the "safe" operation of modules for better performance... at the risk that they might burn out and leave you more helpless than if you did not.


dont understand why we are still stuck with the idea that there is nothing you can do about cooling down systems when they are overheated. like not being able to put water over a flame, doesnt add up

in real life cooling is a big deal, it would be illogical if ccp didnt continue building on and evolving the overheat mechanic. because if overheat exists then cooling needs to exist too, there is simply no logic and no depth to a mechanic which has now become so commonly used



You are able to cool them down by disabling the overload and letting the rack cool however damage already done by the heat cant just go away by adding water. and considering we are in space the rate at which the rack cools is extremely fast so there is some pretty high level tech involved
TheExtruder
TheExtruder Corporation
#7 - 2014-11-19 22:51:25 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
TheExtruder wrote:
ShahFluffers wrote:
So you want to add a "safety" after you have clearly turned off the "safeties." An override to stop an override. Limit things when you are clearly trying to go past your limits in the first place.

Part of the idea behind overheat is that you are disabling the "safe" operation of modules for better performance... at the risk that they might burn out and leave you more helpless than if you did not.


dont understand why we are still stuck with the idea that there is nothing you can do about cooling down systems when they are overheated. like not being able to put water over a flame, doesnt add up

in real life cooling is a big deal, it would be illogical if ccp didnt continue building on and evolving the overheat mechanic. because if overheat exists then cooling needs to exist too, there is simply no logic and no depth to a mechanic which has now become so commonly used



You are able to cool them down by disabling the overload and letting the rack cool however damage already done by the heat cant just go away by adding water. and considering we are in space the rate at which the rack cools is extremely fast so there is some pretty high level tech involved


makes sense yeah, but what about stopping at 99% and why isnt it an option if there is high level tech involved? at least the option to put a rig would be a start
Sugar Kyle
Middle Ground
#8 - 2014-11-19 23:02:00 UTC
Considering the variable rate of overheating it seems not turning it off at 99% is pilot error. The whole reason you overheat is to push the weapon past all of its inherent safeties as it destroys itself. If you could juset set it to turn itself off at 99% and send you back to 'regular' mode, what is the point? A module might as well have an OP button at that point. At least overheating lets you, the pilot, error and burn out your module leaving you high and dry and often dead.

Member of CSM9 and CSM10.

Zan Shiro
Alternative Enterprises
#9 - 2014-11-19 23:40:23 UTC
TheExtruder wrote:
ShahFluffers wrote:
So you want to add a "safety" after you have clearly turned off the "safeties." An override to stop an override. Limit things when you are clearly trying to go past your limits in the first place.

Part of the idea behind overheat is that you are disabling the "safe" operation of modules for better performance... at the risk that they might burn out and leave you more helpless than if you did not.


dont understand why we are still stuck with the idea that there is nothing you can do about cooling down systems when they are overheated. like not being able to put water over a flame, doesnt add up

in real life cooling is a big deal, it would be illogical if ccp didnt continue building on and evolving the overheat mechanic. because if overheat exists then cooling needs to exist too, there is simply no logic and no depth to a mechanic which has now become so commonly used




Cooking mods an area in eve that reinforces actual player skill. Why do you want to lose that? Its actually something that isn't press a button....I win.


2 players
same skills
same ship
same fit
same actual flying skills roughly (ie, knows how to work traversal, manual flight control, etc)

One player knows when to say when and stops the overheat
Other player doesn't, blows up mods, and is now at the mercy of the other guy.
Moral of that story, better discipline in overheat won a close fight. As it should be.


Also you do know in real life you too can bypass overheat controls or they do fail. Used to be heavy into hobbyist photography. I have external flashes that do have thermal cutoffs. And if that last few pops is variable enough in heat....that thermal cutoff comes too little too late if that overzealous.

Now some gear addresses this issue. You won't like how they do it. They make the thermal cutoff way more conservative. As in it trips way too low. This would be why I keep an "old faithful" flash over a later model. The newer model shuts off way too soon while my old faithful I know gets a few more bursts off.

Doddy
Excidium.
#10 - 2014-11-19 23:42:48 UTC
In all the ways people ask for the game to be dumbed down this is one of the lamest.
Rroff
Antagonistic Tendencies
#11 - 2014-11-20 00:04:50 UTC
^^ Slight mitigating factor IMO in that overheating and syncing up with the server seems to be somewhat unreliable at times*, it would remove a huge player dependant skill aspect from the game however.



* Lost count of the times I've been unable to stop a module overheating for several cycles or stopped it (all) overheating several cycles short of stuff being destroyed but still had the ping and modules destroyed 20-30 seconds later, etc. and I'm on a 80Mbit connection with a 10ms ping to eve so its not like I've a bad connection.
elitatwo
Zansha Expansion
Brave Collective
#12 - 2014-11-20 00:10:04 UTC
Yes!

Eve Minions is recruiting.

This is the law of ship progression!

Aura sound-clips: Aura forever

Rain6637
Simulacra and Simulation
Goonswarm Federation
#13 - 2014-11-20 01:09:07 UTC
something tells me it would result in an extra heat cycle, a lot like unnecessary missile volleys whose target disappears before they land. imo one extra heat cycle isn't so important compared to the best argument, which is the danger of overuse.

removing the 100% failure condition isn't suddenly OP, though. it is what it is, basically a temporary officer mod.

what would be fair is a lower heat damage, lower bonus mode that does feature a failsafe.
Eldwinn
Deep Core Mining Inc.
Caldari State
#14 - 2014-11-20 01:29:07 UTC
TheExtruder wrote:
or at least a new rig that cools down the overheated stuff, a fail safe mechanic of some kind


When then. 0/10 sir.
Bullet Therapist
Caldari Provisions
Caldari State
#15 - 2014-11-20 02:29:12 UTC
Module burnout is a perfectly fine balancing penalty to the power that overheating gives you, so I don't support a safety that turns off overheat when it reaches a certain threshold. That said, I do think that an expansion of the overheating mechanic in some way could be interesting, and I rather hope that it happens some day.
Derath Ellecon
Lotek Academy
#16 - 2014-11-20 03:52:01 UTC
Overheating your mods in an attempt to burn that guy down before you burn out your mods is a quintessential part of EVE
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#17 - 2014-11-20 04:17:18 UTC
TheExtruder wrote:
Would the world end if modules automatically stopped overheating at 99% damage?


Yes.

Additionally, I fixed your scrub-tier title for you.
Rain6637
Simulacra and Simulation
Goonswarm Federation
#18 - 2014-11-20 05:21:08 UTC
Alvatore DiMarco
Capricious Endeavours Ltd
#19 - 2014-11-20 05:33:50 UTC
Rain6637 wrote:
lots of naysayers, no alternatives. this is so productive.


The lack of an alternative is because we don't see any need for a change in the first place. Why propose an alternative change when you don't want a change at all?
Rain6637
Simulacra and Simulation
Goonswarm Federation
#20 - 2014-11-20 05:56:00 UTC
that's a likely story. but I'll humor you. why is because it's a features and ideas discussion on a topic.
123Next pageLast page