Heat Management by Fitting Layout

To everyone who fits the Example Stabber’s highs with gun, gun, gun, gun, neut, neut (henceforth G/G/G/G/N/N) deserves to die a slow, burned-out death. It is obvious that fitting location matters in heat buildup, but it is entirely less common to see people who know how it works.

My question is this. For the XLASB solo Stabber with 180s and 2 small meta neuts, is it better for heat management in a lowsec environment to have G/G/N/N/G/G or G/N/G/G/N/G? I have always fit it the latter way, but I would like some input.
Also, go see Friendly Targets for a good guide on how not to fit modules, specifically the MWD Tornado video. Prop mod always goes on the outside.

1 Like

Maybe you could test both configs a couple of times, see how many cycles it takes for a gun to burn down, find an average from a few tests and compare averages. It’s going to be more accurate than any of my guesses. :stuck_out_tongue:

My guess is that the first config would hold a little longer due to all guns (I assume you’re only overheating those?) being closer to the edge of the rack, so the rack gains less damage as a whole. But I could be wrong.


Honestly, in my experience, it doesn’t matter all too much unless you fly a tech 3 ship with the heat-bonus or a purple-fit Tournament ship.
I used to obsess for hours on the fitting screen to really, carefully place the guns and after maybe 3 or 4 fights, it turns out to be a colossal waste of time to do so.

Proper heat-management however is mandatory but it requires a lot of practice.

I didn’t “accidentally” went from retarded noob to solo-pvp over night. I spend almost exclusively 2 years on the test-server, where none of my losses were subject to public record and making isk has 0 priority and you can keep practicing.
At some point, you can predict, how many second you can keep your modules save from offlining or if you can reactivate heat for one more cycle.

If you have the time and patience, I suggest you practice there. Even our beloved Tournament-teams need to practice for weeks before the tournament.

1 Like

That was the idea, but being short on time due to end of semester I was kinda hoping someone else would do it. :stuck_out_tongue:

You are wrong on three counts. First, I usually prioritize heat on the neuts rather than the guns, and aim for their damage to pretty equally affect all guns. I know I could do that with the neuts on the edge, but there are times where gun heat is the only heat you need. Hence why I go for the 1-2-1 configuration. Second, the rack as a whole does take less damage when mods are on the outside, but the actual heat of the rack is generated the same from all parts of the rack. Third, I think having two guns on each edge would really strain the inside guns, but maybe not as there is a 1-3-4 distance damage distribution to them, whereas the 1-2-1’s middle guns have 1-2-3, making them more damaged.

1-2-1 damage sources for guns: 0-2-3-5 outside 0-1-2-3 inside
for neuts: 1-1-2-4
2–2 damage sources for guns: 0-1-4-5 outside and 0-1-3-4 inside
for neuts: 1-2-2-3
-4- damage sources for guns: 0-1-2-3 outside and 0-1-1-2 inside
for neuts: 1-2-3-4

1-2-1 damage sources for guns: 1-4 outside 1-2 inside
for neuts: 0-3
2–2 damage sources for guns: 2-3 outside and 1-2 inside
for neuts: 0-1
-4- damage sources for guns: 1-4 outside and 2-3 inside
for neuts: 0-5

Also keep in mind that the guns cycle faster and are T2, so they generate heat and take damage much much faster than the neuts. From this comparison, it seems like the first two are about the same, with more reliability on the first iteration and less damage on the second. The third, however, is very clearly favorable to the neuts, at the cost of a ton of damage to the guns. 0-1-1-2 is pretty bad considering that the guns here are the dual 180s.

Yes. RIP a lot of destroyers.

no bad wrong incorrect

This is fine, but it gets old fast. I also do test server practice, usually with expensive or complicated things like cruisers (I am sad poor alpha clone. Stabber is big.). I like getting my experience by dying in a ball of fire against actual opponents. That’s how I have a 60% solo ratio (because other people kill my opponents after I die sometimes) and an absolutely awful kill/death ratio, but greater than even ISK value.

Yes, and I like to get out that one extra heated cycle wherever I can, even if that’s just the confidence to get one more in.

Well if my assumption that you’re only overheating the guns and use neuts as heat sink is wrong, it’s only logical that my advice based on that assumption is also wrong. :stuck_out_tongue:

Yep, about what I expected.

The first setup (1-2-1) has better spread for the heat damage from overheating guns, due to the neuts being nicely in between the guns, while the second (2-2) has less heat damage to the rack if you’re overheating the guns, due to the guns being closer to the edge of the rack. Reliability might be preferred though, and I think that setup might also be the better option if you’re also sometimes overheating the neuts, as the neuts are closer to the edge of the rack in that option and therefore cause less damage to the rack as a whole.

That -4- is the best option if you overheat neuts is no surprise either, since the heat sources are on the edge of the rack then. But if you sometimes heat neuts, sometimes heat guns your preferred option (1-2-1) might be the best compromise.

it’s actually wrong : your assumption is wrong, but your argument based on that wrong assumption is sound.


You are correct.

Lo siento. @Gerard_Amatin

I wonder how this metric would change with different guns or medium neuts… would it be better to have the slower cycling stuff in the middle? Or is the only valuable metric whether it is T2 or not?

The above reasons are why I like to use 1-2-1. I heat the neuts constantly for the beginning of the fight, starting them at the same time heating one and not the other until the increased cycle time of the heated one makes them staggered, then heat the other one too. Once I start to have good hits (and any ADCU is not on), I heat the guns. If I ever start to get glances or worse, I unheat guns. After a while I unheat neuts (or if they’re too far away, I unheat earlier). If I ever have to reload to a new ammo type, I leave the guns unheated upon reactivation for about 2 cycles to make sure they are hitting, unless the situation is dire.
For the mids, I organize it as AB, XLASB, Scram, Multispec. When I am taking any significant damage, I permaheat the multi until it is almost burned out. I heat AB to pull range, close range, or orbit when time or tank is of the essence. I heat scram to catch kitey cruisers or scram kite with Hail/Fusion/EMP/Phased. I always heat XLASB. I really should keep that module on “auto-repeat off”, but I never end up doing that.

I try to get in a few unheated gun cycles in the middle of a heated run because it a) allows me to better gauge my heat and b) allows a little cooldown time so I take a little less damage.

That’s about it for heat management on the Stabber for me.

Edit: Maybe since I heat only one neut at the start, I can actually get away with 1-1-2, heating the first neut. That’s a little goofy, though. I still aften manually stagger the neuts at the start, so it might just end up being a worst-of-both-worlds situation that only makes me want to rage at the asymmetry.

All that really matters is the modules you overheat the most are on the left most rack and the right most rack. That’s it. It doesn’t matter where exactly the modules are G/G/G/N/N/G spares the lone gun more than G/N/G/G/N?G.

No. Very no. Cycle time matters, versatility matters, and tech level matters.

Also very no. Asymmestric layouts have literally no benefits other than with asymmetrical use, like heating one neut over another. If I had one medium neut and one small, I would do G/G/M/G/S/G.
3–1 is almost as bad as 4–. The middle guns will get way too much heat, as will the inner neut. If you only heat neuts, they will burn each other out just as fast as with 2–2 or 4–, but they will damage the surrounding guns way more than in the 4-- config. It turns out to be exponentially worse than -4-, and even worse than 1-2-1, due to the neuts burning each other out quicker. Of course, -4- is the best option for permaheating the neuts and only the neuts, but no one does that. 2–2 is best for heating only guns.

The only scenario where I think 3–1 is even a possibility is when that one is a much faster cycling different module, like a dual 180mm autocannon on a HAM ship, which doesn’t meaningfully exist in the game. In addition, you’d have to only overheat the periphery one for a while with the express intent of heating all your 3s later, and want to minimize heat to them beforehand.
If you only heat guns, the middle one in slot 3 will burn out quicker than any of them would in either 1-2-1 or 2–2, meaning less overheat time, as the stack burns out with the gun. If you only heat the neuts, guns 3 and 6 will have a lot of damage on them, but not 1 and 2, leading to wasted heat potential in those two guns by the time 3 burns out.
If you are doing them both heated, number 3 will burn out exceedingly fast, and your ship will lose a ton of overheat value.

Another thing I’d like to point out, is that putting offline stuff in the highs is not good for heat.
It takes just as much damage as online stuff, and the heated stuff still takes the same amount of damage.
Heat damage in partially calculated using the percent of total slots you have fitted. In other words, empty slots actually make your ship take less damage (but not necessarily run cooler per se) than if they were filled with offline “heat sinking” modules.

Another point. Always keep the prop mod at the edge, unless it’s an MJD, in which case put it in the middle.
ABs but especially MWDs put out a lot of heat, and they can burn ouot mids really fast if you’re not careful. Add that to the huge damage per cycle of a prop mod and you can burn out your tackle or Multispec at an incredibly fast rate. Once the Prop(s) are on the edges, I like to put scrams/points as far away as possible and then nestle offline stuff right next to the prop.
AB, Shield Extender, web, web, scram is the safest configuration. If one of the webs is T2 and the other is T1, or if one is more valuable in some way, I’d put it closer to the AB, just because if I am heating web I am most likely heating scram too.

Some people say to put props in between stuff, like going SE, AB, SE, other stuff, but that is very bad. Not necessarily bad for the SEs, but the other stuff is going to take a lot of unnecessary damage. On a ship with a prop, 2x SEs, and three tackle mods (say 2x web + point), I do the mids in exactly that order.
ASBs are tricky, but I usually put them in the same place as the extender, because they aren’t (hopefully) going to suffer much heat damage on their own.
Armor reps are easy. Just put the reps on the outside, (using a dual rep example) with the RAH or active hardener smack dab in the middle, or closer to the ancillary rep if you have one.
If you only have one rep, put whatever next to it. I usually do speed stuff, then armor stuff, then damage, then DCU, but I get lazy. I have been known to even run DCU, SAAR, damage on frigs.
AR, damage, DCU, Reactive, multispec, AAR
AAR, DCU, multispec, damage, AR
AAR, overdrive, damage, DCU
AR, damage, hardener (tertiary), damage, hardener (secondary), DCU, hardener (weakness)

Shield Boosts are a pain. Midslots are very different in use so organizing them can be difficult.
On my frigates, I do:
AB, web, cap booster, booster, scram
…or a variation.
When it comes to larger ships, I have no idea, because the largest shield boosts I use are mediums, and those are super rare for me. I’d guess…
Booster, MJD, grapple, boost amp, scram/point, multispec
…but I have no idea.

Hold on, it’s not obvious to me.

You’re saying that if I have 2 fits next to each other and overheat one of them, the heat will effect/damage the other?

Overheat damage isn’t per module by itself? :dizzy_face:

1 Like

If I understood correctly, every module that’s overheating while there’s heat on the rack has a chance (based on amount of heat) to get damaged. When it gets damaged, it has a chance to also damage the module next to it, which then has a chance to damage the module next to that, etc.

This is how you can burn out passive modules like shield extenders.

This is why it’s a good idea to put modules you overheat often on the edge of the rack, so it has fewer neighboring modules to damage.

every time a heated cycle ends, an amount of heat is added to that rack’s heat. Then there is a % chance = the rack heat % that each module on the rack takes damage, with the chance target module received damage from source module being multiplied by 1/2^(distance) with distance being the number of slots between target and source .

Or something like that, not so sure about the actual formula.

Yes. There is a range calculation involved. The full explanation of overheating mechanics can be found at this website. Overheating - EVE University Wiki

It is, but that module also has a chance to damage modules around it. Each chance is independent, so you could have three mods take damage from a cycle or none. You could even have a module away from the heated one get damaged while the heated one doesn’t!

Yes. The amount of heat in the rack (those three little bars between Hull and Capacitor), the percentage of total slots filled on the ship, the tech level all have effects on module damage.

Not necessarily. A module can take heat damage on the first cycle if you are very unlucky. It is calculated using the heat at the end of the cycle (I am pretty sure). MWD frigates will notice this the most.

No. It is not procedural. The only factors are the range.

Yes. Heat damage does not “wrap around” a rack, despite many players claiming this to be the case. You will simply be venting the heat into nothing.

No. It increases at a set rate depending on which modules are active. Halfway through a 10-second Afterburner cycle at 4%/s heat, the rack will have a little less than 20% heat. This is inexact because of the logarithmic nature of heat generation, and NOT because of heat dissipation. Heat does not dissipate when modules are active and heated.

Damage Chance = Rack Heat ⋅ (Online Hi+Mid+Low Modules/Total High+Mid+Low+Rig Slots) ⋅ heatAttenuation^(Distance)
Turns out I was wrong before. Offline mods are indeed just as good as empty slots.

Heat attenuation is a value that is basically dependent on the number of slots in the rack.
It is approximately equal to (2 ^(n - 1) - 3) / 2 ^(n - 1), where n is the number of slots in the rack.
So for a 4-high ship the heat attenuation value would be (2³ - 3) / 2³, or 5/8, which rounds to 0.63.

EVE Uni also tells me that it takes 69 seconds to halve your rack heat. Nice!


the used/total slot can be removed . It has no effect on the placement of modules and is generally 1.
And heat attenuation is generally 0.5 . can be more, can be less… Still has no effect on the placement of modules.
So that makes it what I wrote.

Yes, but it makes certain ships better, like survey ships, that only operate with MWD and speed mods. It also never goes to one, because those extra rig slots in the denominator make smaller ships take a little less damage than bigger ships.
The only time it can go to one are on rookie ships, which have no rig slots.

Heat attenuation commonly varies from 0 to about 0.8. There are huge variations. Also, my above formula was way off. Disregard the heat attenuation equation.

no ?
typically T2 ships are always 1.
The only cases where it is lower than 1 is when

  • you have a spare high and no fit to add a module
  • you lack the calibration to add a third rig.

Notice the lack of rigs in the numerator. Say you have a 3-4-3 ship with three rigs, and have all modules fitted. Your value would be 10/13. Shuttles and Freighters don’t have rigs, but they also can’t have active modules, so the point is moot. You can, however, overheat stuff on rookie ships, and of you have all six slots filled you can get that value to 1.

Ho my ! You’re right, the fitted rigs don’t count

That’s a nice video. I’ve never thought about offlining stuff mid-fight. I only did that with MWDs and Shield Extenders previously, to increase capacitor capacity and decrease sig radius, respectively. I should have realized that I could also offline damage mods or neuts or guns to heat prop longer. That’s really cool.