These forums have been archived and are now read-only.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

Away with empty Highslots - Introduce Heat Sinks

Author
Crynsos Cealion
Die By The Sword
The Obsidian Front - Reborn
#1 - 2015-01-08 16:48:28 UTC
Since a long time, empty highslots or offlined modules between your weapons have been called heat sinks, although that was always more of a workaround of the heat mechanics than anything else.

Personally I've been always a person who hates to see empty slots on ships, but I see their purpose, especially in high slots.
Low slots have other options for when you ran out of fitting the best possible primary priority mods to your ship, like Co-Processors, RCUs, PDS, passive armor mods, nanos, etc; although mid- and especially highslots have been lacking this for a long time.
The only real option to fill those up with something senseful nowadays when your fitting resources ran out is maybe an Automatic Targeting System I or trying to squeeze a small Neut or Nos in there somehow, as sadly the prototype highslot target painters never actually got released to fill this niche.


What about introducing proper heat sinks for highslots, possibly even mid and low slots, so that you can focus on fitting the best possible modules on your ships, without having to worry too much about having spare fitting left for that empty slot?
That empty slot could be still filled up with a useful mod that will do nothing by itself, but boosts the capabilities of the other fitted slots, by reducing their heat absorption in the same way that the (currently heavily underused) Supplemental Coolant Injector T3 Subsystems do.

This could be even tied into current lore, with the recent sleeper emergence in known space somehow adding this in as a possible loot BPC item similar to the other recent exploration-only items available in various meta variants.

As heat sinks are usually very simple objects (although improved by possible sleeper tech to be more efficient), they could be possibly even just one single item that is compatible with all 3 fitting slot types (no idea if that is even possible without heavily changing fitting mechanics) to widen their use and make them a very flexible item and cheap enough to make it worth to find a place everywhere, even on basic T1 frigates.

To expand their usefulness among ship types that may overheat a lot (think carriers that burn modules till the breaking point, then refit new ones), adding in some increased structure HP might also be a good idea, so that these heat sinks will be very hard to break (but not impossible like siege / triage modules) via overheating.


So, TL;DR:

Limited Supplemental Cooling Radiator
25% Reduction in the amount of heat damage absorbed by other modules in the same rack
Structure Hitpoints: 50 HP
0 TF / 1 PWG

Experimental Supplemental Cooling Radiator
33% Reduction in the amount of heat damage absorbed by other modules in the same rack
Structure Hitpoints: 60 HP
0 TF / 1 PWG

Prototype Supplemental Cooling Radiator
50% Reduction in the amount of heat damage absorbed by other modules in the same rack
Structure Hitpoints: 70 HP
0 TF / 1 PWG


OR if you want them to become much more widespread like I imagined how they would be most useful where they are really needed... (stuff like frigate 1v1, small scale primarily)

T1: Supplemental Cooling Radiator I
25% Reduction in the amount of heat damage absorbed by other modules in the same rack
Structure Hitpoints: 50 HP
0 TF / 1 PWG

Meta: Experimental Supplemental Cooling Radiator
33% Reduction in the amount of heat damage absorbed by other modules in the same rack
Structure Hitpoints: 60 HP
0 TF / 1 PWG

T2: Supplemental Cooling Radiator II
50% Reduction in the amount of heat damage absorbed by other modules in the same rack
Structure Hitpoints: 70 HP
0 TF / 1 PWG

Sleeper Faction!? Sleeper Supplemental Cooling Radiator
66% Reduction in the amount of heat damage absorbed by other modules in the same rack
Structure Hitpoints: 80 HP
0 TF / 1 PWG


Of course you could also add a small penalty to them to compensate the increased advantage they would give, though I couldn't think of a particulary good one that would make them worthwhile using, but not hurting the ship too much. It couldn't be a penalty to fitting as that would be the primary reason why they would be used in the first place and many other penalties make little sense as it is a passive module, just like a little bit of extra armor.

Perhaps a slight velocity penalty could be realistic and viable, although I will leave that part of thinking to the devs who may choose to implement this.

Thanks for reading and please give me feedback!
Stitch Kaneland
The Tuskers
The Tuskers Co.
#2 - 2015-01-08 17:02:33 UTC
Like the idea, but i think the bonuses you're listing are too high in terms of heat damage reduction. With the low fitting you are proposing, it would need to be a fairly low change, like 10-15%. Otherwise, people will be OH almost constantly with a 50-60% reduction in heat damage. Combined with T3's heat reduction bonus, it could be interesting, but possibly abused.
Anhenka
The New Federation
Sigma Grindset
#3 - 2015-01-08 17:11:09 UTC
In the current form, no.


But if you changed it to say..



"Absorbs 10/25/50% of the heat generated by other modules in the same rack" I would be cool with it.

Problem with flat % reduction is that fairly minor reduction in % values result in significantly longer overheat times.

If it were changed to an absorption factor, the heat sink would briefly leech away a large portion of the heat generated by the other modules, before it burnt itself out.


This would give you a fairly short, frontloaded extension to your overheating, without risking issues with excessively long overheats.
M1k3y Koontz
Speaker for the Dead
Stay Feral
#4 - 2015-01-08 17:21:57 UTC
Calling it now, if this is added, it will be in those Ghost sites like the warp speed lowslots, and Ascendency implants.

How much herp could a herp derp derp if a herp derp could herp derp.

Ix Method
Doomheim
#5 - 2015-01-08 17:24:00 UTC  |  Edited by: Ix Method
M1k3y Koontz wrote:
Calling it now, if this is added, it will be in those Ghost sites like the warp speed lowslots, and Ascendency implants.

You're a born genius.

The amounts are ridiculous and would obviously bias heavily towards ships with utility highs because DPS. If the concept it decided worthwhile it'd be better implemented through boosters/implants, surely?

Travelling at the speed of love.

Daichi Yamato
Jabbersnarks and Wonderglass
#6 - 2015-01-08 17:24:02 UTC
i like the idea, but agree with the others.

10-20% from T1 to faction or have the mod absorb the damage from other mods and make it like 30-50% from T1 to faction.

EVE FAQ "7.2 CAN I AVOID PVP COMPLETELY? No; there are no systems or locations in New Eden where PvP may be completely avoided"

Daichi Yamato's version of structure based decs

FireFrenzy
Cynosural Samurai
#7 - 2015-01-08 17:47:17 UTC
Would make utility highs HELLA more useful... Especially in a PVE context...
Ronny Hugo
KarmaFleet
Goonswarm Federation
#8 - 2015-01-08 18:07:27 UTC
10% or so bonus I think would be OK, anything over that it would make a swath of ships without empty highslots completely useless since everything with empty highslots could overheat pretty much 23/7.
It must be noted that such a module would make battleships even less used in 0.0 since t3 would be not only faster, battleship tank, lower sig, but also much much higher applied dps since they can overheat for large amounts of time at a time. Though perhaps marauders would see use by rich alliances in null-sec, imagine 4 weapons with 3 high-slot heatsinks (and not using the stupid bastion module and just buffer-tanking it like a normal battleship).
chaosgrimm
Synth Tech
#9 - 2015-01-08 19:36:59 UTC
FireFrenzy wrote:
Would make utility highs HELLA more useful... Especially in a PVE context...

Was thinking the same thing xD
Hopelesshobo
Hoboland
#10 - 2015-01-08 19:55:58 UTC
Stitch Kaneland wrote:
With the low fitting you are proposing, it would need to be a fairly low change


Keep in mind, an offline module will still act as a heat sink, and requires 0 fitting. So because of this, in order for people to utilize these mods, the heat sink would have to be more effective then a cheap random offline module.

Lowering the average to make you look better since 2012.

Lugh Crow-Slave
#11 - 2015-01-08 20:10:51 UTC
FireFrenzy wrote:
Would make utility highs HELLA more useful... Especially in a PVE context...


and force many ships with the utility highs to be re balanced and with a good chance many would lose them
FireFrenzy
Cynosural Samurai
#12 - 2015-01-08 22:47:12 UTC
that is true... I never said it'd be "fair" but they'd be more usefull...

I just wish they had an even SEMI usefull mod to put in those highs for PVEing...
Lienzo
Amanuensis
#13 - 2015-01-08 23:22:18 UTC
Although I am not a big fan of the gameplay based around fitting, and especially the associated sp grind and the strange backwards progression of most meta items, I would like to see "underfit" ships have some advantages as relates to overheating. A ship with spare CPU or PG should derive some benefits from them, and overheat mitigation could be one of those benefits.

In this context, ships that fit one function superlatively could overheat that one function for much longer. If you fit the biggest rack of guns or the biggest EHP possible, your overheat options would be more limited that a ship which took a more middle of the road path. A more lightly armed or lightly tanked ship might be able to burn around the battlefield for longer than other fits.

My understanding is that empty slots function just the same as offline or passive modules as regards to heat damage adjacency. I don't actually know if there is a wrap function for each row, but I assume it would have been mentioned somewhere if it existed.

While I am not opposed to non-laser related heatsinks as a specialized module per se, I am not thrilled by the idea of having to train yet another skill for them. However, at least it would be a specialized skill, and not yet another of the excessively generalist skills that currently plague the new player experience, and make this game such a hard sell.
Zan Shiro
Doomheim
#14 - 2015-01-09 00:55:10 UTC
Lugh Crow-Slave wrote:
FireFrenzy wrote:
Would make utility highs HELLA more useful... Especially in a PVE context...


and force many ships with the utility highs to be re balanced and with a good chance many would lose them



this would be the issue.

Higher mods are giving like 50%. Throw in thermo 5 for another 25. IIRC this doesn't stack penalty based on t3 cruisers all said and done having the ability to cook long and hard no issues with thermo, strat cruiser skill and the overheat sub if fit, some one please correct.


Tack on high paste skills.....and if the isk for paste costs works out I'd see at least marauders getting some boosts here. That spare slot ccp gave for bastion I'd see gone for starters. IF not some others since for the gains of cooking...well even I didn't fit wreck cleaning mods when I flew them, I saved up for noctis runs.