These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Why is Damage Control an Active module?
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Narku Bourgeoisie Tonisilitis
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#1 - 2014-12-18 16:52:31 UTC
Since getting into Eve, this has confused me more than most things. I've got all these active and passive module choices, but the one that I always fit by default is an active module that A) should never be turned off and B) costs essentially nothing while turned on. So basically, it's just another thing for me to do while playing that isn't actually a player choice, and I've forgotten about it before. So, unless someone can tell me how its being an active module is somehow strategic, CCP, would you kindly improve the quality of life for everyone and make it passive?

Think of all the man-hours wasted clicking the thing. CCP pls.
Sobic
Worthless Carebears
The Initiative.
#2 - 2014-12-18 16:56:14 UTC
Narku Bourgeoisie Tonisilitis wrote:
Since getting into Eve, this has confused me more than most things. I've got all these active and passive module choices, but the one that I always fit by default is an active module that A) should never be turned off and B) costs essentially nothing while turned on. So basically, it's just another thing for me to do while playing that isn't actually a player choice, and I've forgotten about it before. So, unless someone can tell me how its being an active module is somehow strategic, CCP, would you kindly improve the quality of life for everyone and make it passive?

Think of all the man-hours wasted clicking the thing. CCP pls.


its another thing that someone can screw up.
Which is good, fights should be just like RL where mistakes can make the on paper superior still lose because of some misstep.
Narku Bourgeoisie Tonisilitis
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#3 - 2014-12-18 17:15:05 UTC
Sobic wrote:
Narku Bourgeoisie Tonisilitis wrote:
Since getting into Eve, this has confused me more than most things. I've got all these active and passive module choices, but the one that I always fit by default is an active module that A) should never be turned off and B) costs essentially nothing while turned on. So basically, it's just another thing for me to do while playing that isn't actually a player choice, and I've forgotten about it before. So, unless someone can tell me how its being an active module is somehow strategic, CCP, would you kindly improve the quality of life for everyone and make it passive?

Think of all the man-hours wasted clicking the thing. CCP pls.


its another thing that someone can screw up.
Which is good, fights should be just like RL where mistakes can make the on paper superior still lose because of some misstep.

That's the only thing I could think of, but screwing up should consist of clicking the wrong button at the wrong time in the middle of a fight, or making a bad strategic decision/jump. It shouldn't consist of not having muscle memory to activate a module every time you leave a station.
For the metaphor's sake, it's like winning a fight because the other guy forgot to tie his shoelaces when he woke up that morning, not because he timed an attack wrong.
And hey, lorewise, we're capsuleer pilots--we simply think to move a billion-ton ship. Automating all of the tasks except for the strategic ones is the whole idea.
Kale Freeman
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#4 - 2014-12-18 17:24:19 UTC
It adds danger to autopilot
Bronson Hughes
The Knights of the Blessed Mother of Acceleration
#5 - 2014-12-18 17:29:50 UTC
The original motivation behind Damage Controls being an active module stemmed from how EvE was coded. CCP wanted only one to apply its bonuses, and at the time they could only do that with active modules.

Fast forward to today, and now Damage Controls have become a critical balance issue. While the original motivation has long been overcome, the fact that the game is balanced around DCs being active is motivation in and of itself. Specifically, CCP doesn't want autopiloting ships to gain that level of protection, and, while the cap usage of DCs is miniscule, it is possible to shut one down with neuts if you get lucky.

Relatively Notorious By Association

My Many Misadventures

I predicted FAUXs
Narku Bourgeoisie Tonisilitis
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#6 - 2014-12-18 17:52:23 UTC
Bronson Hughes wrote:
The original motivation behind Damage Controls being an active module stemmed from how EvE was coded. CCP wanted only one to apply its bonuses, and at the time they could only do that with active modules.

Fast forward to today, and now Damage Controls have become a critical balance issue. While the original motivation has long been overcome, the fact that the game is balanced around DCs being active is motivation in and of itself. Specifically, CCP doesn't want autopiloting ships to gain that level of protection, and, while the cap usage of DCs is miniscule, it is possible to shut one down with neuts if you get lucky.

Thank you for the explanation. I figured that neuts could shut down a DC, but the speed of cap recharging vs. the cycle time of a neut tells me that's so unlikely it can reasonably be ignored (except for, you know, really clutch fights).
The autopilot ship thing... I hadn't considered that. I wasn't aware autopilot got that much real use since it's so slow, but surely there's a better way to balance it.
Frostys Virpio
State War Academy
Caldari State
#7 - 2014-12-18 17:57:42 UTC
Narku Bourgeoisie Tonisilitis wrote:
Bronson Hughes wrote:
The original motivation behind Damage Controls being an active module stemmed from how EvE was coded. CCP wanted only one to apply its bonuses, and at the time they could only do that with active modules.

Fast forward to today, and now Damage Controls have become a critical balance issue. While the original motivation has long been overcome, the fact that the game is balanced around DCs being active is motivation in and of itself. Specifically, CCP doesn't want autopiloting ships to gain that level of protection, and, while the cap usage of DCs is miniscule, it is possible to shut one down with neuts if you get lucky.

Thank you for the explanation. I figured that neuts could shut down a DC, but the speed of cap recharging vs. the cycle time of a neut tells me that's so unlikely it can reasonably be ignored (except for, you know, really clutch fights).
The autopilot ship thing... I hadn't considered that. I wasn't aware autopilot got that much real use since it's so slow, but surely there's a better way to balance it.


With the power it has, it has no reason to be passive. Hell the first time I saw one, I asked where I could find the cooldown stat on it because I didn't even belive it was a module that could perma run...
Rivr Luzade
Coreli Corporation
Pandemic Legion
#8 - 2014-12-18 18:19:06 UTC  |  Edited by: Rivr Luzade
Do you want to see the DCU resistance values reduced by 50%? Because this is how you get them reduced by 50%.

UI Improvement Collective

My ridicule, heavy criticism and general pale outlook about your or CCP's ideas is nothing but an encouragement to prove me wrong. Give it a try.
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#9 - 2014-12-18 19:09:01 UTC  |  Edited by: ShahFluffers
Once upon a time I blindly warped to a gate in a frigate. On that gate was a smartbombing battleship.
How I wish I had remembered to turn on my Damage Control before I warped. Sad

Narku Bourgeoisie Tonisilitis wrote:
For the metaphor's sake, it's like winning a fight because the other guy forgot to tie his shoelaces when he woke up that morning, not because he timed an attack wrong.

Whole alliances containing thousands of players have imploded and been overrun because someone forgot to pay the administrative bills.

In EVE... always tie your shoelace. Because that CAN mean the difference between winning and losing.

How did you Veterans start?
Esmanpir
Raccoon's with LightSabers
#10 - 2014-12-18 22:14:00 UTC
Narku Bourgeoisie Tonisilitis wrote:
Bronson Hughes wrote:
The original motivation behind Damage Controls being an active module stemmed from how EvE was coded. CCP wanted only one to apply its bonuses, and at the time they could only do that with active modules.

Fast forward to today, and now Damage Controls have become a critical balance issue. While the original motivation has long been overcome, the fact that the game is balanced around DCs being active is motivation in and of itself. Specifically, CCP doesn't want autopiloting ships to gain that level of protection, and, while the cap usage of DCs is miniscule, it is possible to shut one down with neuts if you get lucky.

Thank you for the explanation. I figured that neuts could shut down a DC, but the speed of cap recharging vs. the cycle time of a neut tells me that's so unlikely it can reasonably be ignored (except for, you know, really clutch fights).
The autopilot ship thing... I hadn't considered that. I wasn't aware autopilot got that much real use since it's so slow, but surely there's a better way to balance it.


Change the game so that when you're in autopilot none of your mods function.
Rawketsled
Generic Corp Name
#11 - 2014-12-18 22:19:30 UTC
It also affects how tanky you are while cloaked. This really only is relevant while evading smartbombs, though.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#12 - 2014-12-20 07:16:15 UTC
Why do people still not do a little looking around before posting.

why is it an active mod: legacy code

is CCP trying to make it passive: yes

BLOPS Hauler
The 16.8km Bubble
Narku Bourgeoisie Tonisilitis
Pandemic Horde Inc.
Pandemic Horde
#13 - 2014-12-20 07:39:42 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
Why do people still not do a little looking around before posting.

why is it an active mod: legacy code

is CCP trying to make it passive: yes

I looked around. Didn't see anything about it. I still don't know where to get reliable info in the EVE world since there doesn't seem to be a many comprehensive websites on modules etc.
Nevyn Auscent
Broke Sauce
#14 - 2014-12-20 08:09:11 UTC
Bronson Hughes wrote:
The original motivation behind Damage Controls being an active module stemmed from how EvE was coded. CCP wanted only one to apply its bonuses, and at the time they could only do that with active modules.

Fast forward to today, and now Damage Controls have become a critical balance issue. While the original motivation has long been overcome, the fact that the game is balanced around DCs being active is motivation in and of itself. Specifically, CCP doesn't want autopiloting ships to gain that level of protection, and, while the cap usage of DCs is miniscule, it is possible to shut one down with neuts if you get lucky.

Second half is complete rubbish sorry.
CCP have nowhere said that they actually have balanced the game around it being active and have not said anything about autopilot ships not getting it's benefits.

It's a pure legacy code issue that they haven't gotten onto yet because of higher priority projects (presumably it's actually a touch more complex than flipping a 1 to a 0 in the DB). I strongly imagine we may see this when Tiericide hits damage controls.
Celthric Kanerian
Viziam
Amarr Empire
#15 - 2014-12-20 11:59:11 UTC
Narku Bourgeoisie Tonisilitis wrote:
CCP pls.


Just by saying "pls" instead of please, is a no from me.
Aqriue
Center for Advanced Studies
Gallente Federation
#16 - 2014-12-20 13:05:45 UTC
Damage Control Mod already needs a nerf, anything that is massively popular becomes unbalanced as perceived by the game population so they become whiney but the entire game population has by silent agreement not said a word because they are so dependent on it. Massive number of titans and AoE DD, XL cap guns with a lot of tracking popping smaller ships (that was an adaptation BTW, learned about Slippery Pete Tengus with not much tank which XL gun+lots of tracking Titans where doing back in the day without the unprobable part, enemy just lacked ability to kill basic buffer), cap ship drops and jump fatigue, double nut punch with limited jump range....weird how one "OP class" of ships that capitals had become was nerfed yet the extra buffer provided by the damage control was not touched in years.

Not talking about overly nerfing it, just droping the hull bonus down to like 30% so things go boom and explode more often, which results in more killmails (plus for the killers), more mineral and mining (plus for the miners), more taxes and marketing (plus for the traders, more isk taken out of game so plus for CCP), and generally all around more whining as things just die faster. The extra hull bonus is 50% to all resists, low cap, long cycle time, and its one mode....can't do that with armor or shield....so reducing the buffer makes things go around a lot faster resulting in good times for everybody with tears to lubricate those bent over the barrel Twisted
Shivanthar
#17 - 2014-12-20 13:57:12 UTC  |  Edited by: Shivanthar
Narku Bourgeoisie Tonisilitis wrote:
Since getting into Eve, this has confused me more than most things. I've got all these active and passive module choices, but the one that I always fit by default is an active module that A) should never be turned off and B) costs essentially nothing while turned on. So basically, it's just another thing for me to do while playing that isn't actually a player choice, and I've forgotten about it before. So, unless someone can tell me how its being an active module is somehow strategic, CCP, would you kindly improve the quality of life for everyone and make it passive?

Think of all the man-hours wasted clicking the thing. CCP pls.


If you ask me, I've two answers for this.
1- I experienced numerous times it is turned off because of the neut pressure I received. So, making it an active mod is important.
2- It should have its activation cost completely removedincreased. Simply because there no other defensive mods doing so much thing at single time like this one.

Edit: Forum tag system has a bug: {b} tag followed by a {s} tag negates all spaces before it despite the number of spaces between /s and b.

_Half _the lies they tell about me **aren't **true.
Barrogh Habalu
Imperial Shipment
Amarr Empire
#18 - 2014-12-20 14:31:27 UTC
Aqriue wrote:
Not talking about overly nerfing it, just droping the hull bonus down to like 30% so things go boom and explode more often, which results in more killmails (plus for the killers), more mineral and mining (plus for the miners), more taxes and marketing (plus for the traders, more isk taken out of game so plus for CCP), and generally all around more whining as things just die faster.

And also make sure that alpha fests start on much lower scale.

Future of T3 cruisers - multi-tool they aspired to be instead of sledgehammer they have become
Rain6637
GoonWaffe
Goonswarm Federation
#19 - 2014-12-20 15:31:39 UTC
Celthric Kanerian wrote:
Narku Bourgeoisie Tonisilitis wrote:
CCP pls.


Just by saying "pls" instead of please, is a no from me.

why? the man is all about efficiency, obviously.

Help, I can't download EVE

President of the Commissar Kate Fanclub

PLEX: A Giffen good? (It's 1B?)