Damage Control or No Damage Control

Thanks, man. I don’t like to be a person who repeats himself, but it’s such a great piece of advice, I had to share again :slight_smile:

Hopefully my second post in this thread and the info the others have added add a bit more detail to explain why this is true.

3 Likes

yea that’s a good point, Incursions are high burst damage and hit all resists a damage control makes a lot of sense there, the rules are much different from the typical mission/anom.

5 Likes

As an explorer traveling all over the place, I usually fit the defensive tank on my ship for Omni Resists. Using a DC mod helps boost those Resistance stats and removes the need to carry different Resistance mods with me, thus I don’t have to do a lot of refitting and also have more cargo-hold room for loot.

5 Likes

Always fit damage control unless you have a specific fit that doesnt require it.

First reason: add resist to all resistances(shield, armour and hull)
Second reason (and the biggest reason): doesn’t and isnt effect to/by stacking penalty.

Note the only module that effects damage control bonus is reactive armour modules, and same in reverse.

Tanking with resist is an art, i personally try to avoid using more than 2 modules of the same resist bonus type, and tend to look for weak points to fix when setting up a tank fit.

2 Likes

For pve I generally don’t bother with one would rather have an extra damage or tracking mod.
This does depend on the type of pve though.
Level 4’s you should be using mission specific resistance mods anyway dcu is really not needed here.
And if you are worried your tank isn’t up to scratch kill the scrammers first and keep aligned.
You shouldn’t be relying on armour if u shield tank and vice versa in lvl 4’s
If you are running sites in null or low sec I would say fit one as you could get jumped by someone and it can make the difference here.
In pvp situations every second you can buy yourself matters and can mean the difference between loss and victory.
Forgot to mention incursions here they can make a big difference due to the high dps nature of the sites. I have saved many bs’s in Hull and armour that probably would have died otherwise.
Broadcast on time and this shouldn’t be an issue though if logi are awake and on the ball.

Great resource for missions for those that somehow don’t already know it.
https://eve-survival.org/wikka.php?wakka=HomePage

2 Likes

There’s a lot of good advice here, and the temptation to throw in my tuppenny worth is too great.

If this is for mission running - where there is a need to manage significant incoming DPS then you are looking at highest resistance in your chosen defence. Reducing the impact of the incoming damage improves the effectiveness of either the passive recharge, booster or repairer. Mission tanks are normally rely on some for of repair/regeneration rather than just pure buffer.
If you are active armour tanking, then you aren’t worrying about shields and vice versa.
If you’re hull tanking missions then you’ve got bigger questions about your life than “do I fit a DC?”.

So, if you are using a shield tank the the DC has the advantage of being a good shield resistance module that fits in the low power slots.

If you are armour tanking, then the 15% of the DC2 is beaten by many of the armour resistance modules, including passive resists. Noting of course the issues of stacking.
So saying, the Reactive hardener has 15% as it’s base resists, but responds to incoming damage - it’s an active DC2 in many respects - and an active armour tank is already cap dependant.

The general advice is sound though: if you don’t know when to not use it then you should be using it

2 Likes

I never fit a DC on my golem running L4 missions. You don’t need any more tank and I’d prefer the extra DPS from a fourth BCU.

99% of the ships that you come across will have a DCU fit. It’s standard fit that goes on most ships right away.

With it being a standard module perhaps the time has come to incorporate the resistances from the DCU into the ships bonuses. For example; all T1 ships would come with bonuses for resistances based on a T1 DCU. As you train to your ship skills that increases your ship based bonuses the DCU resist would go up as well.

The same with T2 and T3 along with Strat Crusiers as well. With the resistances being built into the ship and the DCU’s done away with except for Triglavian mutated versions and a few higher end DCU variants, a low slot opens up for other modules to increase the ability of the Capsuleer to enhance their style of game play.

Please no…

The smart(er) people that know when to use and when not to use a DC and instead take advantage of that slot for something more effective should be rewarded for their battle-IQ?

4 Likes

The people that know when to use and when not to use a DC and instead take advantage of that slot for something more effective should be rewarded for their battle-IQ?

Please stop trying to hit the easy button…

1 Like

source ?

Plus, how comes that if 99% ppl say something, then this hing makes sense ?

DC is a bad module in most cases.

Uh no? It shows up a lot in certain brick tanks where every HP matters in frigate PvP or null BC fleets relying on logi to actually heal and its extra buffer to let them catch you in time.

As for PvE the answer is a resounding no for it being a absolute standard. Passive shield tanks get far more out of enhancing regen rate than some extra resists from a low slot. Active armor tanks that can spare the capacitor are far more interested in a reactive hardener for the much superior 30/30 or in some cases pure 60% resist they can get to their armor tank from a single slot. Beyond that a EANM 2 gives more resists from a single slot for armor and is more efficient from the standpoint of making the armor you recover from your active tank go further.

Outside of certain edge cases where a DCU is the difference between an indy vessel being able to take a suicide catalyst or two or a drive-by hurricane on the undock it isn’t a required fitting. It isn’t even optimal for a lot of cases because on smaller ships that thing eats a nice chunk of CPU.

Source?

1 Like

The stat of the module.

And I made a complete detailed listing in that thread.

DC is most of the case just plainly bad and only people with a bad understanding of the game advice it in the general case.

That’s just your opinion, please link an official posting to back up your claim.

CCP recommends Uniwiki for Eve related info. According to Uniwiki:

The drawback to Passive Shield tanking is the number of modules required to pull it off, which leaves very little room to fit other useful modules such as damage improvement and tackling equipment.

While this fitting is more about raw hit points than it is damage resistance, adding resit modules will greatly increase the effectiveness of passive recharge. Shield resistance amplifiers can be added to provide a little damage reduction. Some people use Adaptive Invulnerability Fields and Shield Hardeners to improve damage resistance, but these are active modules that require capacitor, thus making your Passive Shield tank not quite passive any more. This can be problematic because the Shield Power Relays you depend on to increase your shield recharge rate also totally gimp your capacitor recharge rate.

1 Like

The bit you keep glossing over here and that we’ve told you multiple times… shield regen rate from low slots has no stacking penalty. Thus the more slots you can throw at regen rate the better off you are.

That stacking penalty statement is irrelevant since there is none on a Damage Control Unit. But hey, go ahead and keep glossing over the fact that when you do a passive shield tank, you gimp the fit and effectively fill slots that can be used for more useful modules such as Damage, Tracking, Web, etc.

No, that’s math. Just because you don’t understand math does not mean it’s not a thing.

please link an official posting that says DCU is better ? None. Uniwiki is not an official analysis of the modules.

The only official source is the one you can find ingame. Which I used to make the comparison. Which clearly establishes that DC is worse than other modules in the general case.

Where is your argument ? there is NONE.
You have NOT A SINGLE ARGUMENT in favor of the DC. It’s not a matter of opinion : it’s a matter of you not wanting to accept you are completely wrong - again.

If it was really better, you’d have at least one argument that objectively establishes why and under which circumstances it’s better. You have NONE, again. You just repeat your baseless opinion without any single room for discussion, you are just “believe me I am the word of god”.

Only when you use a DC.

One thing everyone has not talked about, is the DC and ADC are the only items that increase hull resist.

And when you think about it no matter how you tank, what’s you last line of defense once your tank fails, that last lifeline to give you a chance to warp away?

Hull resist and HP.

But as every says, depends on your fit and your playstyle.

You’re a tanker or defensive player you try to get everything you can out of tank resist and HP.
Nuker or glasscannon, everything goes towards alpha damage, and defense is an second thought.
Ninja strikers or kiter focus on speed and damage first, then a small amount of resistance.

But as said before player playstyle and fit govern the use of DCs.

3 Likes

If you already are in hull on a shield fit, your ship was definitively not correct.
And if your fit is correct the buffer bonus is useless.