These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

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

First post
Author
TheExtruder
TheExtruder Corporation
#61 - 2014-11-25 11:34:21 UTC
Doddy wrote:
Rain6637 wrote:
lots of naysayers, no alternatives. this is so productive.


The alternative is the completely fine mechanic we currently have....


No. The alternative is a continuation of building upon a very useful mechanic which decides the fate of thousands of pilots everyday.
TheExtruder
TheExtruder Corporation
#62 - 2014-11-25 11:42:19 UTC
uppo nalle wrote:
I can't help but to shake my head... the amount of lazy, ignorant, stupid and incapable people there are playing eve these days. X If you want to be spoonfed the whole way trough there are other games. Meanwhile let the ones actually capable of playing this wonderful game keep enjoying what is left instead of turning it more into hello kitty island adventure. End of rant.


Being spoonfed and making the game 'hard to play' are the two sides of the coin. Who are you to say that balancing the overheat mechanic is currently the wrong thing to do without even presenting a good argument. New Player Experience is equally as important as the bitter vets and their hard earned wisdom
Rain6637
Simulacra and Simulation
Dracarys.
#63 - 2014-11-25 11:58:09 UTC
New player experience is a compelling reason for making a kid-safe version of heat. It doesn't need to approach the effectiveness of binary, on/off heat. The benefit would be the introduction to the concept of pushing the envelope of modules. Let them take it for granted, and habitually use 'baby heat' for everything--mining, missions, starting from an ibis.

The more I think about this suggestion, it sounds like a great idea, and a solid example of a paradigm in EVE that needs to be updated / made "smarter."

Just for making new players aware of the mechanic, and the concept, it's a huge step forward.

uppo nalle wrote:
I can't help but to shake my head... the amount of lazy, ignorant, stupid and incapable people there are playing eve these days. X If you want to be spoonfed the whole way trough there are other games. Meanwhile let the ones actually capable of playing this wonderful game keep enjoying what is left instead of turning it more into hello kitty island adventure. End of rant.

wow dude. I have a similar opinion in this thread, though not as harsh.

Heat is important, and affects a lot in EVE. Just for being such a broad mechanic, possibilities should be considered with an open mind... not shut down with insults and negativity.

Your comment is a failure to do so. Several other comments in this thread are examples of failure. One of them from a CSM, so don't feel bad. You're normal, apparently.
Tchulen
Trumpets and Bookmarks
#64 - 2014-11-25 12:01:55 UTC
Personally, I think making overheating so that it doesn't break modules is a bad idea. There is a risk associated with overheating and that is the possibility of burning out modules if you're not paying attention to them. This is good as it's the risk for getting the reward of increased power.

If overheating ceases to have a risk associated with it, it would need balancing so that the benefits are significantly reduced to the point of not being worthwhile to use.

The easiest and fairest thing to do is nothing, in this instance. Overheating is working well at the moment.
Major Trant
Brutor Tribe
Minmatar Republic
#65 - 2014-11-25 12:31:29 UTC
TheExtruder wrote:
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%...

Yeah and can we also have an option to override the stop at 99% for when things are really desperate when you are both in structure and one extra / faster shot could make all the difference.

...but obviously that would need an override to stop at 99.9999%... unless you really need just one more big shot.
Frostys Virpio
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#66 - 2014-11-25 13:24:18 UTC
Rain6637 wrote:
hey, what about an alpha strike that is so violent it makes your ship explode.


You already consider your ship lost on a gank so it end up being more alpha for the sake of more alpha. It could work but you never know how CCP would balance new options like that.
Rain6637
Simulacra and Simulation
Dracarys.
#67 - 2014-11-28 15:06:46 UTC
reduced bonus for a heat mode that immediately pegs damage at 99% isn't so crazy.
CW Itovuo
The Executioners
#68 - 2014-11-29 23:19:14 UTC
Sugar Kyle wrote:
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.


Logic.


That's what I like in a CSM.


Now fix my HML missile drake Sugar.
Lugh Crow-Slave
#69 - 2014-11-29 23:24:47 UTC
I have an idea how about when a ship gets to 01% hull it becomes invulnerable that way there is less risk in PvP so more people can feel free doing it
Vapor Ventrillian
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#70 - 2014-11-29 23:33:26 UTC
BWAHAHA Well considering how many post you got...yes, yes it would Lol

link it to the safety on 50%(green)80%(orange) and "holy **** he going all the way" (red)

Plus one for LOLs Smile

The Evil Overlord of Scope, self elected as all good overlords should be

Reaver Glitterstim
The Scope
Gallente Federation
#71 - 2014-11-30 03:48:05 UTC  |  Edited by: Reaver Glitterstim
I don't see anything wrong with adding a module or rig to the game that turns off overheat automatically at a high amount. It should probably turn it off at 80%, any higher and you risk jumping right from an allowed amount straight past 100% in one cycle.

The module could fit into a high power slot and run passively, costing little CPU and 1MW powergrid while also providing a small reduction in heat accumulation as well. It would give more people a use for that utility high that often goes unfilled.

FT Diomedes: "Reaver, sometimes I wonder what you are thinking when you sit down to post."

Frostys Virpio: "We have to give it to him that he does put more effort than the vast majority in his idea but damn does it sometime come out of nowhere."

Desvath Benepeth
Einherjar Yggdrasils
Ankle Biter's
#72 - 2015-02-24 11:07:57 UTC
i guess we would be taking the risk out of everything ... if there is not the risk to turn your turret to crisp in the middle of warp bubbled no-where... dunno.. maybe

i'll give you a neutral on that
Anthar Thebess
#73 - 2015-02-24 11:18:00 UTC
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.

This