I’m not sure what you’d be running as the “utility mid”, but it’s a good breakdown for options.
1 Like
Whatever you want. In the fit i was using it was a scram. But it could be a web a point hell toss a damp or td for all i care lol.
I don’t understand what you’re saying.
The resists of the DCU don’t stack with anything else? It’s 12.5% raw resist value (or 14 with faction)
I have had big success adding a DCU into a 4th low slot of a shield tanked ship, you get buffer AND resists for an active tank, what more could you want? A PDS isn’t giving you resists, and the shield recharge rate is wasted unless you have a passive tanked ship.
A shield tanked Loki for instance goes from 20k to 25k EHP and 1510 to 1760 EHP/s with a faction DCU. thats 5k ehp additional buffer + 250 additional ehp/s in gains from a low slot that would otherwise have held a nano.
Not saying this is a good fit, just experimenting. (No idea how to fly or fit a loki)
So while yes it is “easier” to plug a dcu into a shield ship than it is an armor ship it’s benefits are also less than on an armor ship.
I Disagree, with an armor ship, you don’t get the buffer the shield provides to give you more time for reps whilst you’re getting shot. On a shield ship, you’ve got 15/16.5 additional resisted Armor to buffer you whilst you try to rep up. The DCU on an armor ship also has to compete with a Reactive Armor Hardener, and the resists give you diminishing returns, they do not stack without penalty. I’d like to give the RAH the 40% structure resist bonus and make it so that you can’t have both on your ship at once. Now shield and armor both have a structure buffer mod for their respective tanks.
just wanted to remind you of a lore-issue: The module you talk about was implemented after capsuleers explored WHs and sleeper technology. Alongside Ancillary Reppers, Ancillary Shield Boosters, Ancillary Remote modules and, if I am not mistaken, the technology for Micro Jump Drives and Jump Field Generators (not a 100% sure on the last ones…).
All of these only offer a T1 variant. For the sake of having as few as possible exceptions in the game I’d either like to see a complet T2-line for all sleeper-tech based modules or none. And the mechanics behind the T2 variants should work exactly like the T1 variants, just with increased stats at the cost of increased fitting requirements. EVE already is overcomplex and even more exceptions are a bad idea.
I propose changing the T1 RAH also. (Or just remake the T1 RAH into this updated module)
The earlier resist shifts should happen quicker and the later resist shifts should happen slower.
Shield tanks get a huge buffer with the DCU + resists, I’d like to see the RAH grant buffer also (Else how is it going to have time to cycle? It basically necessitates a plate, or a DCU, and as i mentioned the resist bonus’s don’t stack well so it’s a low value option as far as it’s armor resists go.
Nah.
the resists of the RAH and DCU are the same effect, so they are stacking penalized together.
https://wiki.eveuniversity.org/Stacking_penalties
Other modules that give armor resistance and are the same effect are also stacking penalized together. like energized membrane and armor resist rig.
1 Like
And this is what i mean by you not understanding fitting theory.
Go put a dcu and only a dcu onto a standard T1 ship. You will only get the full 12.5% in your em resist. This is because resistance isn’t just added you only gain the % based on the missing % in the resist. So the closer you are to 100% the less you get. This is also why it’s impossible to get 100% resist.
Yes as i pointed out there are times where it’s worth using. They are however least helpful in shields than armor or structure tanks. You don’t get resists and buffer. You get buffer in the form of resists and that decreases the higher your resists already are. For instance you can get many T2 shield fits to burst +90% resists a damage control in this case is only adding 1.25% if i remember the calculation correctly.
No but it does give you raw hp, extra recharge, and the ability to fit larger/more extenders.
Passive recharge is also a very important aspect to a shield ship even when you’re not going for a full passive set up. Depending on the size of the fight it can add a few hundred to a couple thousand ehp in ships not built into it.
Right, and again i never said there weren’t fits that benefited from a dcu only that shield benefited the least despite it being a low slot mod. Faction dcu open up far more fits but are very hard to justify the cost on most things. T3c are pretty much the only ships smaller than a BB that they are worth fitting to.
Even with a reactive armor hardener a dcu will add more to an armor tanks ehp than to a shield tanked ship. Rah and dcu are also only semi penalized they interact with each other but aren’t penalized by anything else. A neutral rac causes the armor resists from a dcu to become 13% still higher than what they would be on a shield and being applied to on average lower resists further increasing the return over using them for a shield tank. It reverts back to the full 15% on any resist the rah spools down below 15% on.
For both armor and shield you won’t see a dcu used unless there is either fitting space left over or you’re going for maximum tank. Shield ships generally need at least 4 lows to have fitting space left over but even then many can’t fit the dcu do to cpu bottle necks. When it comes to max tank you will almost always fit one to an armor ship but shields will still vary as it has more options to tank in the lows that can often give better results.
Your idea for a rah simply isn’t necessary the one we have is already extremely powerful edging on a bit too powerful as nearly every fit especially cruiser and larger has one. It’s basically in the same spot dcu were in before they were nerfed.
1 Like
I thought that’s what you were saying, your not getting this right. You’re implying diminishing returns as you get less and less total percent resist as you add more. This is incorrect, you don’t get less resisted over time the more you add if the resist in question isn’t stacking penalized (Which is what makes the low slot shield module DCU so juicy). With a DCU there are no stacking penalties so it is a golden module to add. Take for example adding a dread guristas drone damage amp to a 10% damage bonused ship carrying Hornet II’s. The first one causes a 33 dps gain, the second one is stacking penalised but causes a 36 dps gain. as the total resistance approaches 100% the EHP and EHP/s gained rises exponentially so whilst it may only appear as though your DCU only added 2.5% unpenalized to your explosive resistance, your still getting the full benefits reflected in your EHP gain because as the resistance approaches 100% the EHP approaches infinity.
The more you add to the resist when it’s only ticking up slowly, actually, the BETTER your returns on investment, which is why a DCU is so important to shield tanks.
Example Loki,
Syndicate damage control adds 135 EHP/s to your active tank. it adds 5.5% resist to the thermal profile.
remove it and add pithum b-type multispectrum shield hardener, overheat it.
add syndicate damage control back in. it only adds 3.1% total resistance to your thermal resist profile, however it has added 250 ehp/s to your reps.
I’m too tired to convert into words exactly why this is the case, I might be able to do it after i sleep if I can be bothered thinking about it. But yes, download a program called pyfa and have a play around with finding the best possible active shield tanked cruiser-or-bigger fits. I think you’ll find the DCU’s are worth alot more then you are giving them credit for in an active shield tanked setup. DCU’s aren’t half as good in an armor fit due to having to use the same slots as the rest of the tank and having it stacking penalized with the RAH. The DCU is a frig/Shield tank module.
A DCU is far better than a plate in an armor rep setup in terms of bang for buck, plates are really PG hungry and they don’t offer any passive resist bonus.
I meant with shield tanking modules
You do have the basic theory correct you get more out of 90-91 than from 0-10 however you’re looking at it in a vacuum as you’re also getting far more out of each additional hp you add. Especially when you look at cases where a pdu can added several thousand additional hp or double your hp/s from the active tank.
active
passive
From the Wiki:
Damage Control modules, the Reactive Armor Hardener module and Bastion module work slightly differently.
If you only fit only one of them (one Damage Control or one Reactive Hardener or one Bastion module), then they are never stacking penalized. They will always give their full damage resistance effect, along with your most effective module that also gives it’s full effect as explained above, followed by any other modules that will be stacking penalized. This is one reason why the Damage Control module is so popular; because it is always 100% effective.
If, however, you fit two of them, then one of them (whichever is less effective) will count as a second module and be stacking penalized accordingly (so, 86.9% effective). This is in addition to your normal resistance modules, of which one will give its full effect and the rest stacking penalized as explained above.
As an example, consider the following five modules all fitted to your ship and their resulting effectiveness: one Damage Control (100% effective), and one Reactive Armor Hardener (86.9% effective); one EM Armor Hardener (100% effective), one Multispectrum Energized Membrane (EM resistance 86.9% effective, other resistances 100% effective), and one Multispectrum Coating (EM resistance 57.1% effective, other resistances 86.9% effective).
Right, i was explaining how it benefits both types of tank