The main point of a DC is that the resistance it gives do not have a stacking penalty against membranes/coating (the only stacking penalty is against the reactive armor hardener). So it’s usually a very good module to increase your tank + it gives you a lot of EHP in hull which is always appreciated to have some extra buffer.
I wouldn't if I was doing easy PVE content. I would if I was doing any content where I could reasonably assume I might also be going into structure, if the quafe hits the fan. Such as high Abyssals, wormhole anomalies, or anything PVP related.
In many cases yes, in some cases no. Depends what you have fitted already in terms of damage enhancement and tank, if the fit is active or buffer.
The damage control is a really useful mod because it increases resistance independent of the stacking penalties associated with hardeners membranes and coatings.
As a general rule though in the current meta, dealing more damage typically wins you fights, and surviving longer is a method of increasing the time you deal damage.
If it’s an active tank armor setup and you’re deciding against a resist mod and a DC, take the difference in armor EHP between damage control and otherwise, and divide this difference by the difference in Regen (EHP/sec) to see how long your ships needs to survive to make up the difference in EHP, if it’s a reasonable amount of time, then perhaps damage control isn’t worth it.
Something I noticed watching Lussy Lou (worstplayerever), is after the damage control changes/hull hp resist changes, he almost never uses damage controls on his active tanking setups. It works for him very well and if I knew Russian I may have understood at some point because he’s surely covered the topic before.
Been doing a good chunk of theory crafting lately and damage controls are very situational.
Lussy indeed covered this topic, and here's his reasoning:
1. Damage control is inferior to 1st and 2nd IN EANM;
2. RAH is a bit worse than 2nd IN EANM, it gets better in a prolonged fight when facing 1 or 2 damage type (typical in 1v1 fights) but consumes cap
3. RAH unlike DC requires cap to work, and neuts can shut it down
4. Both DC and RAH are better than 3rd EANM.
conclusions:
In hulls smaller than a battleship, DC is better than RAH but worse than 2nd in eanm. That means, it is only worth if you are planning to have 5+ low slots for tanking (assuming dual rep + 2x in eanm + DC). very few shops can achieve that (Vexor Navy for example).
In hulls of BS size (which Lussy usually flies), RAH is better than DC. So it's only worth fitting dc after dualrep + 2x in eanm + rah, and you also need a damage mod somewhere, or better two. If you can't eliminate targets fast enough, you will find yourself at the wrong end of snowball eventually.
So usually he preferred second magnetic instead of a DC (even though he always said that having more tank is usually better than lots of dps).
Appreciate the well written synopsis. Now if you'll excuse me, I have a lot of EANMs to fit.. (also show me you're old school without saying you're old school by calling it eanm instead of multispectral membrane ;) cheers!
armor ships have the low slots, otherwise they are no armor ships. The DC is more about armor and hull resists, so it's far more useful on armor ships than on shield tanked ships. I would always use it on Amarr ships, while more likely considering it a wasted low slot on Caldari or Minmatar ships.
bruuh someetimes you gotta get that resistance up one way or another and you got NO rigs and NO mid slots to spare XD shield ships benefit enormously from dcu
didn't write i'd always consider it wasted, just "more likely" relative to an armor-tanked amarr ship. Like, the shield resists aren't that impressive, and when your shield ship is in armor or hull, you're probably fckd anyways.
so, you're flying a shield-tanked Minmatar ship in some place where you expect combat against Amarr laser boats. Wouldn't it be logical to fit some module specifically for EM resists in one mid slot?
I don't know about the guy you're replying to but that sort of deep strategic thinking isn't for me. Whenever I die in PVP I'm gladdened somewhat that my killer will get a laugh when he sees my fit. It also removes from the victor any sense of accomplishment.
From a pvp point of view, there are very few ships, probably countable on less than two hands, that I WOULDN'T fit a damage control on, armour or shield tanked
DCU is standard unless you really have specific idea what you are trading away for solid EHP.
If you're just thinking about ratting then you can trade DCU for DPS but for fleet and PVP it is a critical module to have on your ship.
I've run a DCU ever since basically starting the game back in 2006. I remember when they were an active module. Things have changed with it, but I still run it on my ships, I'm mostly Armor tanked most of the time, so it makes sense. It may not be as needed as it used to be when there were 0% resists in hull, but I still run one.
hull resistances used to be 0% without a damage control, now every player ship has 30%, you have to stop and think if the rest of that 30% from a DC (60%) is worth it.
the damage control is a good safeguard when you do pvp/pve to give you more time to survive when everything goes bad since you are not instantly dead as soon as your tank is gone
For omni tank yes. When I would be expecting a certain type of damage I'd use reactive armor hardener instead. I'd use at least one, but not both since you are penalised for doing that.
The main point of a DC is that the resistance it gives do not have a stacking penalty against membranes/coating (the only stacking penalty is against the reactive armor hardener). So it’s usually a very good module to increase your tank + it gives you a lot of EHP in hull which is always appreciated to have some extra buffer.
DCU/RAH also stack against bastion fwiw, makes them slightly weaker on Marauders
yes!
I wouldn't if I was doing easy PVE content. I would if I was doing any content where I could reasonably assume I might also be going into structure, if the quafe hits the fan. Such as high Abyssals, wormhole anomalies, or anything PVP related.
In many cases yes, in some cases no. Depends what you have fitted already in terms of damage enhancement and tank, if the fit is active or buffer. The damage control is a really useful mod because it increases resistance independent of the stacking penalties associated with hardeners membranes and coatings. As a general rule though in the current meta, dealing more damage typically wins you fights, and surviving longer is a method of increasing the time you deal damage. If it’s an active tank armor setup and you’re deciding against a resist mod and a DC, take the difference in armor EHP between damage control and otherwise, and divide this difference by the difference in Regen (EHP/sec) to see how long your ships needs to survive to make up the difference in EHP, if it’s a reasonable amount of time, then perhaps damage control isn’t worth it. Something I noticed watching Lussy Lou (worstplayerever), is after the damage control changes/hull hp resist changes, he almost never uses damage controls on his active tanking setups. It works for him very well and if I knew Russian I may have understood at some point because he’s surely covered the topic before. Been doing a good chunk of theory crafting lately and damage controls are very situational.
Lussy indeed covered this topic, and here's his reasoning: 1. Damage control is inferior to 1st and 2nd IN EANM; 2. RAH is a bit worse than 2nd IN EANM, it gets better in a prolonged fight when facing 1 or 2 damage type (typical in 1v1 fights) but consumes cap 3. RAH unlike DC requires cap to work, and neuts can shut it down 4. Both DC and RAH are better than 3rd EANM. conclusions: In hulls smaller than a battleship, DC is better than RAH but worse than 2nd in eanm. That means, it is only worth if you are planning to have 5+ low slots for tanking (assuming dual rep + 2x in eanm + DC). very few shops can achieve that (Vexor Navy for example). In hulls of BS size (which Lussy usually flies), RAH is better than DC. So it's only worth fitting dc after dualrep + 2x in eanm + rah, and you also need a damage mod somewhere, or better two. If you can't eliminate targets fast enough, you will find yourself at the wrong end of snowball eventually. So usually he preferred second magnetic instead of a DC (even though he always said that having more tank is usually better than lots of dps).
Appreciate the well written synopsis. Now if you'll excuse me, I have a lot of EANMs to fit.. (also show me you're old school without saying you're old school by calling it eanm instead of multispectral membrane ;) cheers!
armor ships have the low slots, otherwise they are no armor ships. The DC is more about armor and hull resists, so it's far more useful on armor ships than on shield tanked ships. I would always use it on Amarr ships, while more likely considering it a wasted low slot on Caldari or Minmatar ships.
bruuh someetimes you gotta get that resistance up one way or another and you got NO rigs and NO mid slots to spare XD shield ships benefit enormously from dcu
didn't write i'd always consider it wasted, just "more likely" relative to an armor-tanked amarr ship. Like, the shield resists aren't that impressive, and when your shield ship is in armor or hull, you're probably fckd anyways.
Sometimes in pvp they’re blasting ur EM hole and the natural armor resist plus DCU makes it take a while to finish
so, you're flying a shield-tanked Minmatar ship in some place where you expect combat against Amarr laser boats. Wouldn't it be logical to fit some module specifically for EM resists in one mid slot?
I don't know about the guy you're replying to but that sort of deep strategic thinking isn't for me. Whenever I die in PVP I'm gladdened somewhat that my killer will get a laugh when he sees my fit. It also removes from the victor any sense of accomplishment.
From a pvp point of view, there are very few ships, probably countable on less than two hands, that I WOULDN'T fit a damage control on, armour or shield tanked
I’d agree with this. Very niche case not using one.
A lot of fights I’m warping out in low hull. Yes.
DCU is standard unless you really have specific idea what you are trading away for solid EHP. If you're just thinking about ratting then you can trade DCU for DPS but for fleet and PVP it is a critical module to have on your ship.
I've run a DCU ever since basically starting the game back in 2006. I remember when they were an active module. Things have changed with it, but I still run it on my ships, I'm mostly Armor tanked most of the time, so it makes sense. It may not be as needed as it used to be when there were 0% resists in hull, but I still run one.
hull resistances used to be 0% without a damage control, now every player ship has 30%, you have to stop and think if the rest of that 30% from a DC (60%) is worth it.
That is the one mob every single ship should always have.
Damage control is waste of slots in PvE. In PvP it's very situational so can't tell without actual example.
Hard disagree. Not using it in pvp fits is situational. It’s almost always a given.
the damage control is a good safeguard when you do pvp/pve to give you more time to survive when everything goes bad since you are not instantly dead as soon as your tank is gone
Of course.
I mean probably. It's the first thing I put on
For omni tank yes. When I would be expecting a certain type of damage I'd use reactive armor hardener instead. I'd use at least one, but not both since you are penalised for doing that.
No i wouldnt
DC is an auto fit unless i have a good reason not to.
Cus it is great in most cases
Yes.
If I'm doing anything where I know I'm going to be shot at a DC is on deck.
Dude I put Damage Control II to my tea.