Ships & Modules

As long as it's working properly who gives a ****?

The nomenclature is consistent? Really?

An increase in the rate of something means a decrease of the time interval between each iteration of it happening. Frequency goes up, wavelength goes down. This is consistent.

Having the same effect (decreased deltaT, increased frequency) described by +5% and -5%, especially with -5% bonus and +5% bonus thrown in here or there, is rather stupid.


While it is on par with the level of info presentation and the false difficulty provided by obtuse wording and no Word-Of-God verification (also known as no manual), - for example, manually calculating the shield capacity and EHP of a Drake with 2 expanders, on invu running, one not running, and two passive resist amps is nasty business-, it is by no means streamlined, clear, or user friendly.

And user-unfriendliness is not difficulty, its being obtuse.

When every other ship in the game with a rate of fire bonus is measured as shots/second, arbitrarily having one that reads as seconds/shot with no distinction between the 2 is silly. When I can look at one ship, and see "5% Bonus to rate of fire per level", and another that reads "-5% Bonus to rate of fire per level" it makes little sense that these should be interpreted as being the same.

This is especially true when you look at destroyers before they got their most recent buff, the had a rate of fire PENALTY (and this I copy/paste directly from an older EFT):
"Penalty: -25% rate of fire for all turrets"

The solution would be to fix the description by using a double negative:

decrease the rate of fire by -5% per level

Posting in a OP beat down thread.

OMG this is more CCP hate for Caldari I can't take this anymore it is so ******* unfair

They mean -5% reload time. Even the bonuses that say +5% ROF mean -5% reload time. They're all misprints for the most part.

ROF is something you want to go up. Calling cycle time ROF on all ships doesn't make it not wrong. The main reason this is wrong is it's confusing when you try to compare +5% ROF to +5% damage, which should be exactly the same DPS increase, but they're not in this game because +25% ROF actually means -25% cycle time (or 1 / .75 extra ROF) or a little over 33%.

It took me awhile to notice that ROF bonuses were better than straight damage bonuses because of the incorrect terminology.

The issue is not the bonus, it is how they named the attribute. The attribute "rate of fire" is the amount of time between shots (as shown in show info), so -5% is a buff. People who decide to apply the actual meaning of the phrase (-5% rate of fire) rather than what actually happens (-5% to the attribute that ccp have called "rate of fire" but is actually time between shots) have always been confused by this since the early days of eve. Its really just down to ccps bad english when they first made the game and they have never bothered to fix it.

I believe that consistency needs to be addressed as well, but this thread really is pointless. In every case, it is safe to assume the 'bonuses' on the ship will always work in your favor, despite the + or -

This just in...


CCP need a Technical Writer to help them sort their ****. We need you to report for duty 8 years ago or some what!