I know this module was supposed to be passive from the beginning, and now with the safe logoff it really needs to happen. If you have the DC active, you basically have a 30-60 sec logoff because it has such a long cycle time.

Edit: I'll make a short for/against list here

For:
- It's basically always on anyway
- It's more or less impossible to neut off, and if that happens, it only cost 1 cap to reactivate
- It's a hassle to turn it on all the time (depends on point of view I guess)
- It up to doubles the safe log-off time in space
- It was supposed to be passive to begin with (quote CCP Tuxford)
- You don't have to undock to check EHP. loleftnoob

Against:
- It gives a lot of resistance across the board
- It's not such a hassle to turn it on (depends on point of view I guess)
- Idiots can forget to switch it on = comedy

was going to say in before Tippia but I couldnt beat the queen of contrary.

we changed the functionality of damage controls

Do you really find it that much of a reward, having to activate this module so much? Or maybe you only stay in one system ever, and never jump? It's an extra click, and it's unnecessary. If a pilot forgets to activate it, he would have lost the fight none the less imo.

I don't always agree with Tippia but in no way does he/she qualify as a troll.

Do you really find it that much of a reward, having to activate this module so much?

It's an extra click, and it's unnecessary.

DC should quite obviously be a passive module. The test of whether a module should be passive or not is if there is any point in having the module switched off.

As for the argument that it is some kind of an elite skill to click a module on everytime,,, really?

Anyone remember the exact specifics of what the previous version was?

It appears that multiple damage controls were being used and it was deemed over powered. Thus they decided to limit it to only allow one to be fit and were forced to make it an active module to achieve that goal. But in order to function as close as possible to a passive module they gave it the long cycle time and using 1 unit of capacitor.

Or maybe I'm seeing what I want to see. Anyone have any previous stats and functionality? TUXFOOOOOOOOOORD!

There is a point in that it can be switched off: it makes the ship much weaker (especially when the ship least needs that to happen).

The only one making that argument is the OP. Apparently, the heroic effort required is nigh unbearable.

Do you really find it that much of a reward, having to activate this module so much? Or maybe you only stay in one system ever, and never jump? It's an extra click, and it's unnecessary. If a pilot forgets to activate it, he would have lost the fight none the less imo.

Yes, let's make all hardeners, sensor boosters, tracking computers and ECCM passive. Why not?

Hardeners and other such modules use quite a bit of capacitor and so there is a good reason to allow the pilot to choose to activate them or not. So a bit of a stupid suggestion there to be honest.

Hardeners and other such modules use quite a bit of capacitor and so there is a good reason to allow the pilot to choose to activate them or not. So a bit of a stupid suggestion there to be honest.

But turning them on is obviously such a chore given the complaints in this thread so why not have them automatically turn on when they're needed? Clearly we need to reward the dumbs and/or AFK.

Hardeners and other such modules use quite a bit of capacitor and so there is a good reason to allow the pilot to choose to activate them or not. So a bit of a stupid suggestion there to be honest.

Is this a serious argument?

But as others have said I think the actual module is a little badly implemented and would like to see it reworked someday.

Its not difficult, but it serves little purpose. Also it gets annoying if your doing multiple jumps and have to keep switching it on everytime.

Add a new passive module with 25% hull resists, I guess. (I don't see the point when you have reinforced bulkheads, honestly, but vOv)

Make the damage control use a nontrivial amount of cap?

The OP has convinced me that the dcu is in fact too good for how little cap it costs.

Add a new passive module with 25% hull resists, I guess. (I don't see the point when you have reinforced bulkheads, honestly, but vOv)

Make the damage control use a nontrivial amount of cap?

The OP has convinced me that the dcu is in fact too good for how little cap it costs.

So lets increase damage control cycle time and thus cap use. Fixed without buffing cloaked ships, success.

It's not an argument GÇö it's game mechanics. It is not about intention, but about effect: the difference a DC makes means there's a point to turning it on and point to trying to get it to turn off..

And so making the module properly active would aid these goals you are setting out above.

As luck would have it, it's already properly active GÇö no change needed.

Iidots can forget to switch it on = comedy
It can get neuted off = more combat variation (a very rare occurence to be fair).

As luck would have it, it's already properly active GÇö no change needed.

It's about as properly active as a passive module that draines 1 cap every 30 seconds is properly passive, lol.

Are you just trying to troll now or what?

Adding a noticeable amount of cap use to the DC and giving it a small cycle time should make you happy if and alleviate the problems of AFKing and not being able to nuet it off you were complaining about above?