Pages: [1] :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 0 post(s) |
Bastion Arzi
BioLith Industries Guild Alliance
10
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 13:03:00 -
[1] - Quote
Hi can anyone tell me why damage control is not for pve ships? I read this somewhere and i cant figure out why. The dc gives your ship a ton of ehp does it not count in pve? |
Herr Esiq
Dirt Nap Squad
21
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 13:05:00 -
[2] - Quote
It works in PVE, but im guessing you talk about mission running with people, and they suggest mission specific hardners instead of omni resist. |
Bastion Arzi
BioLith Industries Guild Alliance
10
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 13:12:00 -
[3] - Quote
but if it works pve then surely this module is too good to pass up. The increase in ehp is too significant |
Sexy Cakes
Have A Seat
173
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 13:16:00 -
[4] - Quote
PvE can be 'dps tanked' meaning you kill everything so fast you don't need to worry about actual tank.
A damage control will also add EHP to shield, armor and stucture. In PvE you are only tanking with 1 of those 3 so the other EHP is not as great as it seems.
If you are killing things so slowly that you need a damage control to increase your EHP then you are doing it wrong. Not today spaghetti. |
Chris Slayter
Cypher Mortalis Aureus Alae
10
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 13:19:00 -
[5] - Quote
Bastion Arzi wrote:but if it works pve then surely this module is too good to pass up. The increase in ehp is too significant
EHP is calculated by taking all of your resistances into account. Usually when running missions you don't need to tank more than 2 types of damage (exceptions are rogue drones for example). Since you can simply fit specific hardeners or more damage mods instead of the DC, it is just not as good to have it with you. There are some exceptions, for example missile ships, which sometimes use a DC instead of a 4th BCU due to stacking penalties and the added resists to shield from the DC. Anyway, if you don't like min/maxing and rather want some more emergency buffer, go ahead and fit a DC. |
Sergeant Acht Scultz
School of Applied Knowledge Caldari State
533
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 13:28:00 -
[6] - Quote
Bastion Arzi wrote:Hi can anyone tell me why damage control is not for pve ships? I read this somewhere and i cant figure out why. The dc gives your ship a ton of ehp does it not count in pve?
It's not a matter of "count" or "not count" it's a matter of efficiency.
If you know what you're doing and know exactly your rats dmg type you can most probably just fit 2 hardeners and add a DCU II just to help those hardeners a little bit, you can also not fit at all the DCU and rather add the reactive hardener (better), depends on you and your skills/game play
Now lets suppose you're using an armor ship with 7 low slots, this means you have already 3 slots gone and now you need to add the LAR, it's now 3 low slots left for dmg mods. Always remember that whatever can't hit you can't harm you so at some point "tanking" with gank (dps) is usually the best choice.
Gò¡Gê¬Gò«n+ên+¦n++n+¦n+ëGò¡Gê¬Gò«-á don't haten++ |
Jacob Holland
Weyland-Vulcan Industries
123
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 13:41:00 -
[7] - Quote
The reason the Damage Control is not generally recommended in PvE is down to the way PvE works.
The DPS from PvE is generally quite low (compared to PvP) but sustained and therefore EHP is not a significant stat - far more important is the damage reduction (in the form of resists and speed) and amount you can repair. The Damage Control does offer additional resists of course but on a single tanking layer they aren't all that significant compared to the value of other modules available for the fittings.
In PvP the non-stacking penalised resists of the damage control and its vast increase on structure HP makes a difference to how many volleys you can get off before your ship explodes, and provides a reasonable alternative to a third, stacking penalised, universal resist module (EANM or Invulnerability Field) but in PvE your resists can be more tailored and you can rely more heavily on an ongoing, repair-based tank which will keep you alive effectively indefinitely. |
Aeril Malkyre
Knights of the Ouroboros
148
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 14:59:00 -
[8] - Quote
I fly a shield Machariel, and my 7th low is always a DCUII. If you're running an armor setup I can see the argument about defensive efficiency. But I couldn't even begin to calculate the hundreds of thousands of points of damage that little briefcase has shrugged off my shields in the course of its career. Resists can always stand to be higher, even after mission hardeners. The shielded Machariel of course has an advantage with a low to spare after gyros and TEs. |
Daniel Plain
Science and Trade Institute Caldari State
809
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 16:55:00 -
[9] - Quote
EHP do not matter for a mission ship unless you get ganked. if you get ganked, your modules are probably too expensive which in turn means you could instead fit cheaper modules and skip the DCU.
"I don't troll, I just give overly blunt responses that annoy people who are wrong but don't want to admit it. It's not my fault that people have sensitive feelings" -MXZF |
Caleidascope
Republic Military School Minmatar Republic
223
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 17:03:00 -
[10] - Quote
DC is fine in pve, the only problem is this: I have done this mission a hundred times, I know exactly what I am doing, I don't need DC. Another reason not to fit DC for pve is that you can warp out, repair and go back and finish the mission, again, no need for DC.
PVP, on the other hand, is much much riskier, so pretty much everyone fit DC.
Life is short and dinner time is chancy Eat dessert first! |
|
Bugsy VanHalen
Society of lost Souls
445
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 19:01:00 -
[11] - Quote
Bastion Arzi wrote:but if it works pve then surely this module is too good to pass up. The increase in ehp is too significant Most mission ships are shield fit.
Even those intended to be armor fit.
A good missions runner will very rarely get into armor let alone hull so all that extra ehp from armor/hull resists is wasted.
Generally it is believed to be better to fit a damage mod than a damage controller. More DPS beats ehp that is not used.
That being said however, I have several missions ships that use a damage controller. It only adds 15% shield resists but does not have the stacking penalties when paired with shield hardeners. With two of each mission specific resists plus a damage controller you can get those primary resists well over 80%, One of my fits gives me 84% Thermal / 86% Kinetic with a DC II but only 76%/78% without. I does make a big difference when pulsing an XL-SB or more so with a XL-ASB since you only have 7 charges.
I would recommend a Damage controller over a 4th damage mod, but only if you would benefit from the extra tank. A DC II can also help offset the loss of a hardener when dropping one to fit a TP or TC.
DC's have there use but not in all fits. |
Hakaimono
Stillwater Corporation
44
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 20:21:00 -
[12] - Quote
Often gank is tank so that extra dmg mod is also hard to pass up. |
hmskrecik
TransMine Group German Information Network Alliance
61
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 20:28:00 -
[13] - Quote
The main bonus the DC gives is hull resists. In PvE you DON'T hull tank. However, from time to time I use this module when I have totally new ship and fitting and I don't know how much can it stand. When I see that I can finish my job wihout taking hits on structure I replace it with something more useful, be it hardener, passive resist or dmg. upgrade. |
Paikis
Vapour Holdings
620
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 20:41:00 -
[14] - Quote
A Damage Control II is a flat 12.5% better shield tank, and a 15% better armour tank. It is a nice safety net if you haven't ran that particular mission, or you're worried about your tank for some reason.
Anyone telling you that it isn't useful because EHP is a useless stat is giving the wrong answer for the right reason. If your tank is enough to offset the incoming DPS, then buffer means nothing, because it will never be used. If your tank is NOT good enough to tank all the incoming damage forever, then buffer becomes important. More buffer means you have longer to either kill enough ships so that you can tank the damage, or to kill that scramming frig so you can get out.
But buffer isn't the whole story. The other half of the story is that 12.5% extra resistances means that you're reducing all incoming damage by 12.5%. This means that instead of having to repair 600 damage every second, you only have to repair 528 damage every second. Over the course of a 20 minute mission, that reduction adds up to 86,400 damage that you didn't have to tank. |
Skorpynekomimi
408
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 20:59:00 -
[15] - Quote
Because: - If you shield tank, you can get far better resists from an invuln or a mission-specific hardener without using up a low slot you could have a damage mod in. - PvE tends to rely on active tank, so you could fit another rep in that slot, for an armour tank.
It's used for pvp because: - One slot, resists for shield AND armour AND structure, which usually has none. - BUFFER. Especially for an industrial ship, you need ALL the buffer you can get. - Active tanks and logistic ships mean alpha fleets are the way to go. No amount of active reps will stop you being popped instantly by being alphaed; you just don't get enough time to rep betwen cycles.
Generally, it's good for pve until you're SURE you don't need that low slot for something else. Even for a shield tank, it's good for if you screw up and end up taking armour or even hull damage before you can warp out. (On a similar note, ALWAYS have an armour rep and a hull rep for your ship size on hand. Not fitted, just in station or in your hold, in case you should need to rep after a brown-underwear moment. It'll save millions in repair bills.) |
Zaq Phelps
Ad idem
12
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 21:11:00 -
[16] - Quote
I wouldn't say useless in pve, but certainly not my first choice to eat up a low slot on my Caldari mission ships. It saved my golem once though. My rule of thumb, if it doesn't eat up a lot of dps, and I'm unfamiliar with the mission or the ship, then I'll use it. However, nowadays I use a 10mn afterburner ham tengu with 1000 dps and a 700 to 1000 dps rat specific tank... So no real need for it with more than enough tank to do high level complexes (let alone level 4 missions) and a 60 dps swing for the fourth bcu.
Outside of missions I could see its usefulness in 10/10 complexes, and wormholes since higher resists mean much more effective remote repping. Wormholes also have the issue of omni damage where a dcu would shine. |
Lost Greybeard
Drunken Yordles
278
|
Posted - 2013.02.05 23:01:00 -
[17] - Quote
Bastion Arzi wrote:but if it works pve then surely this module is too good to pass up. The increase in ehp is too significant
Except that you don't stick around to fight in hull in PvE, and that's where most of the EHP increase is.
It's good for people just starting PvE that don't really know how to fly yet, as it gives them some extra time with the alarm going "WOOT WOOT WOOT" to realize they're failing and warp out. For anyone with any clue what they're doing, though, they'll bail before armor (or shield, whichever their primary is) goes down. |
Chainsaw Plankton
IDLE GUNS IDLE EMPIRE
196
|
Posted - 2013.02.06 00:10:00 -
[18] - Quote
Paikis wrote:A Damage Control II is a flat 12.5% better shield tank, and a 15% better armour tank. It is a nice safety net if you haven't ran that particular mission, or you're worried about your tank for some reason.
safety net is probably the best way to say it! not the worst idea to fit a dcII to your mission ship when you are first starting.
on a few of my armor tanked ships (paladin/kronos) I use 2 IN ENAMs and a dcII as I omnitank them. Yes I could probably get away with 2 hardeners and hell get more specific tank. Also the price difference between 2 IN EANM and 2 b-type active hardeners isn't even all that much. but I like the laziness omnitanking affords me. Tthe tank difference between a third EANM and DCII is tiny but the ehp bonus is huge. Just watch out for that exp hole on the kronos, 20400 ehp to explosive with no shields! and kinetic (with explosive not being a bad choice either) on paladin |
Zhilia Mann
Tide Way Out Productions
983
|
Posted - 2013.02.06 00:13:00 -
[19] - Quote
Paikis wrote:A Damage Control II is a flat 12.5% better shield tank, and a 15% better armour tank. It is a nice safety net if you haven't ran that particular mission, or you're worried about your tank for some reason.
Anyone telling you that it isn't useful because EHP is a useless stat is giving the wrong answer for the right reason. If your tank is enough to offset the incoming DPS, then buffer means nothing, because it will never be used. If your tank is NOT good enough to tank all the incoming damage forever, then buffer becomes important. More buffer means you have longer to either kill enough ships so that you can tank the damage, or to kill that scramming frig so you can get out.
But buffer isn't the whole story. The other half of the story is that 12.5% extra resistances means that you're reducing all incoming damage by 12.5%. This means that instead of having to repair 600 damage every second, you only have to repair 528 damage every second. Over the course of a 20 minute mission, that reduction adds up to 86,400 damage that you didn't have to tank.
This. EHP is a relatively useless stat in PvE, but damage controls can still be useful under the right circumstances. Usually those circumstances involve choosing between fitting a DC or a fourth damage mod. This amounts to a choice between the aforementioned 12.5% increase to a shield tank versus a 5.6% increase in damage.
To be honest, I usually choose the (fairly small) increase in damage because that's what's going to complete a mission faster and actually make you money. But there are times (usually not in missions, but still PvE) where I know a DC is a much better choice. This includes instances where I know I can't tank the incoming damage but just need to live long enough to finish a blitz (hull resists have saved me more than once here) and times when I know I'm going to be neuted to hell and back (in which case a DC can usually stay on long after everything else has shut down).
For normal, everyday use DCs can be nice for new setups when you don't know what a ship is capable of doing but otherwise tend to take a slot away from increased damage (or targeting range/scan resolution in the case of a Raven). |
Amarant'h
Fistful of Finns
6
|
Posted - 2013.02.06 09:55:00 -
[20] - Quote
Example about ratting:
You trade your low slot on cap recharge module, and you can keep your repair/shield booster on unlimited time, that will grant you unlimited hitpoints under certain conditions. Its way better than having more resists and unstable capacitor. |
|
Paikis
Vapour Holdings
623
|
Posted - 2013.02.06 12:32:00 -
[21] - Quote
Amarant'h wrote:Example about ratting:
You trade your low slot on cap recharge module, and you can keep your repair/shield booster on unlimited time, that will grant you unlimited hitpoints under certain conditions. Its way better than having more resists and unstable capacitor.
More resists means that you need less tank. Cap stability is another safety blanket. It is absolutely not required, but a lot of people like to easy-mode missions by having a perma-tank. The down side to this approach is that your missions will take longer. Much longer, because cap stability will take a lot more than just 1 low slot. |
sandamar
Epsilon Lyr Nulli Secunda
0
|
Posted - 2013.02.06 15:16:00 -
[22] - Quote
Or you can toss in a deadspace shield booster and there you go :) |
Predator989
Garoun Investment Bank Gallente Federation
0
|
Posted - 2013.02.06 15:23:00 -
[23] - Quote
Aeril Malkyre wrote:I fly a shield Machariel, and my 7th low is always a DCUII. If you're running an armor setup I can see the argument about defensive efficiency. But I couldn't even begin to calculate the hundreds of thousands of points of damage that little briefcase has shrugged off my shields in the course of its career. Resists can always stand to be higher, even after mission hardeners. The shielded Machariel of course has an advantage with a low to spare after gyros and TEs.
I've never needed a DCU tech 2 on my mach.....ever in standard level 4s. Most missions I won't even run the booster for more than 2-3 cycles.
All you need for level 4s if you know you won't get ganked or are paying even the slightest attention:
4x faction gyro and 3x faction(or non-faction) TE deadspace micro, deadspace booster, 2x whatever hardeners (mostly invuls...sometimes em/therm) and 1x tracking computer (faction if you want a bit more tracking) 7x 800mm's, 1x tractor
1k dps (falloff changes this but w/e) 490 dps tank without crystals 731 overheated (729 with and over 1k overheated) 1.5km/s
Most level 4s are laughable compared to it. Sadly, the next ship I like to fly besides it would be the kronos, and its only worth it against npc's weak to kinetic that like to sit at range.
|
Salpad
Carebears with Attitude
310
|
Posted - 2013.02.06 17:06:00 -
[24] - Quote
Sexy Cakes wrote:PvE can be 'dps tanked' meaning you kill everything so fast you don't need to worry about actual tank.
A damage control will also add EHP to shield, armor and stucture. In PvE you are only tanking with 1 of those 3 so the other EHP is not as great as it seems.
If you are killing things so slowly that you need a damage control to increase your EHP then you are doing it wrong.
In particular, a Damage Control gives only a small boost to shield EHP, a larger boost to armour EHP, and an even larger boost to hull EHP.
This means that it's not too useful for shield tankers. I'll still fit one, if I'm not quite sure what I'm doing with my ship, or if I'm entering a new kind of PVE. But I do think Damage Control modules are more useful for armour tankers (and even more so for hull tankers, although I believe that's quite hypothetical).
As for the "DPS tanking" you refer to, I prefer to call that "active ganking".
|
Selw kotsidakia
Three Deep Cuts
11
|
Posted - 2013.02.06 20:24:00 -
[25] - Quote
Most of the incoming damage in pve is spread among 2 types. On which you will focus your defences either on armor or shield. A damage control gives all resistances on hull shield and armor. So from the 12 resistances it gives, only 2 are used. Now you want a slight increase on resistances or more dps/dmg prejection/cap/etc? While in some specific circumstances a dcII is a pretty good idea(incursions, trying a new ship, expecting heavy damage) especially in solo mission/ratting content, there are better choises for that low slot. |
GreenSeed
179
|
Posted - 2013.02.06 21:21:00 -
[26] - Quote
Bastion Arzi wrote:Hi can anyone tell me why damage control is not for pve ships? I read this somewhere and i cant figure out why. The dc gives your ship a ton of ehp does it not count in pve?
a DCUII offers tank in all 3 layers, hull, armor and shield, on PVE you will want to specialize in only one layer and you will stay in that layer alone by using "reppers" either armor or shield. so the resists offered in the other two layers are moot.
it is still a good module and all mission runners should consider it, should a low slot become available. the resists a DCU can provide wont be stack penalized, they will whoever receive the penalty for total % of resists. so if you have a resist at 90% a DCU will give you something like 3%, that 3% will still be WAY better than what any other module could provide at that point. not to mention the 60% on hull will eventually save your ship should you draw wife agro.
another reason is to offer "cheap tank" to expensive ships, a good example is a Tengu, usually mission runners will plug the EM hole and move on, but non stack penalized resists over 85% and 70% are too good to pass. and a fourth BCUII is usually overkill. given that laughable 10k EHP a full passive tengu has, a DCUII becomes the best choice, more so considering all the 3bill+ Tengus out there...
personally i drop the Amp nodes in exchange for Supplemental screening and fit one LSEII (45k ehp) + 2 pasive EM Amps and use the low for a nano instead of a DCUII, but thats just me. (i also limit all ships to T2 on principle.) |
Kusum Fawn
State War Academy Caldari State
289
|
Posted - 2013.02.07 00:13:00 -
[27] - Quote
As an armor tanker, i like to carry the DCU II, it makes things a lot safer when im scramed and the socket closes. Ive had ships die to lag or distraction, and ive saved myself with single digit hull from connection issues multiple times.
I can and often do plan my fittings for perfect scenarios where i never have any issues with the game , my machine or anything else that could possibly go wrong, but i know that things can go sideways real fast and for not a whole lot of reason.
I mean, comon, im running an ati card i know stupid issues.
either way i always suggest using a DCU to beginner mission runners, when they know what they are doing they can make their own choices concerning DCU and their own situation.
(this onetime a corpmate had a child emergency and i was ~3 jumps away, he fleeted me before he went afk but couldnt leave the mission area because of scrams, I got to him while he was in hull, without the DCU he wouldnt have survived.
I got many of those kinds of stories) Its not possible to please all the people all the time, but it sure as hell is possible to Displease all the people, most of the time.
|
Debir Achen
The Red Circle Inc.
48
|
Posted - 2013.02.07 01:49:00 -
[28] - Quote
One setup where you emphatically do not want a DC-II is passive shield tanking. Another Shield Power Relay will improve your shield tank much more than a damage control will, and I think that even a Power Diagnostic II will provide a bigger benefit (as well as using less CPU, adding significant PG, and giving back some of the cap recharge that the SPRs steal). Sure, you lose hull EHP, but a passive tanker should be getting out of there as soon as it can't maintain 25% shields, so you shouldn't need hull EHP anyway.
In fact, you can probably do better than a DC-II on most shield PvE ships (incursion or mission running). If your shield tank can hold without the DC-II (and it should), then another weapon upgrade is probably a better choice. The exceptions, IMO, are high-end incursions (where you are at risk of being alpha-ed) or low/null sec ops (where it is there to buy more time for your allies to rescue you in case of a gank). Aren't Caldari supposed to have a large signature? |
|
|
|
Pages: [1] :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |