Rig stacking penalties - Fitting window bug?


(Knowledgeminer) #1

Hello there.

A friend just showed me an active armor fit for PvE, asking for my opinion. It had 3x Nanobot Accelerator I rigs. Leaving cap considerations aside, I know an Auxiliary Nano Pump I rig instead of one of the nanobots would be better because those rigs are stack penalised, but she told me the repair stats were better with the 3 nanobots instead, so I checked the fit in the fitting window and she was right…

Now I know this cannot be, because the 15% reduction in repair cycle time that a Nanobot Accelerator I provides means a 1/0.85 = 1.17647 = 17.647% increase in repair rate, which is only slightly better than the 15% increase an Auxiliary Nano Pump I provides, so there is no way a 3rd (stack penalised) nanobot could give better repair rate than a not penalised nano pump.

So I made the math manually, adding one rig at a time, and it seems the fitting window doesn’t apply the stack penalty to those rigs at all, each additional Nanobot Accelerator I rig consistently increases the armor repair rate by 17.647%, no matter how many rigs of the same type are fitted already.

Is this a known bug? If it is, does the bug affect the fitting window only or also the game mechanics, i.e. are the fitting window stats consistent with what actually happens in game? Am I missing or misunderstanding something here?


(DeMichael Crimson) #2

Well, if it’s not including the stacking penalty then I suggest you file a Bug Report and let CCP figure it out.


(Wanda Fayne) #3

The same happens using a shield booster and 3x Core Defense Operational Solidifier I rigs. Each rig reduces the cycle time by 15% without a stacking penalty.


(Knowledgeminer) #4

Bug report has been submitted.


(Chainsaw Plankton) #5

In this case you rep faster so you also use more cap, I’d say in a way that’s a drawback so it might not need to be stacking penalized. With an aux nano pump you rep more and the cap stays the same, so the stacking penalty makes more sense. And both should have the PG drawback on the rig.

now a few questions:

  1. does it say stacking penalized on the module description?
  2. do you see the same result in a fitting tool?

(Knowledgeminer) #6

But this is not about whether it should or should not be stack penalised…

Yes, of course, that’s the whole point, I wouldn’t have posted this nor submitted a bug report otherwise…

No, I don’t use other fitting tools, nor do I see why would it matter, tbh. If it’s a bug, it’s a bug regardless of how widespread it is or isn’t…


(Chainsaw Plankton) #7

I’d say it is. if it is intended to be penalized then it’s a bug, if it’s not intended then the bit about stacking needs to be removed from the module description. Welcome to eve where the documentation isn’t always right. I’m saying it’s roughly 20/80 on it being stacking penalized or just a sloppy copy/paste module description.

I’m looking at an old EFT and it’s showing no stacking penalty. I trust the people that took the time to make fitting tools and get all the other math right would have checked this somewhere, and if in game is consistent with something from years ago I’m guessing that it’s the way it’s supposed to be.


(system) #8

This topic was automatically closed 90 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.