EVE New Citizens Q&A

There are modules that are used either for PvP or PvE but are not effective in both. That is not a problem for anyone playing EVE. It is rather a choice of some sort each player makes. Think of it as choosing your class or specialization in other themepark mmos.

However the fact that some modules are useless / obsolete and can't be effectively used in any type of fit, is something you will encounter in several module groups. Even ships. Part of this is "linked" to the current meta and is a thing for any mmo, sandbox or not. This you can handle and adjust to. Those who are actually broken are getting fixed / rebalanced lately. Check some major patches back and you will get the idea.

Don't try to find real world logic behind every EVE mechanic however. i.e I tried to put logic behind how/why a single frigate can kill a battleship. It's like trying to destroy a tank with a revolver. Will you ever do it? Probably..Well if you don't get to finish your great-great-grandchildren will, but still.. You get the point

So simple advice : Use what most people use and find effective ..or.. experiment and find some unique fits to have fun with.

Sometimes one comes to the fitting question of, "I have everything I need, and I've got this slot left-over, along with a bit of power grid and CPU. What can I fit in there?"

There may be better choices, and some may state there are "always better" choices, but that's really subjective.

Sometimes the ignored modules allow for some inventive niche fits. Sometimes they are not used at all where you think they would be. Example: Industrials.

CCP is working on increasing the number of fitting choices too.

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=aqeUqRo0yto

There are plenty of real world examples of something small taking out something large. An airplane can sink a battleship and that fighter/bomber jet can be taken out by a guy with a shoulder launched stinger missile. In fact, using any technology we can currently envision, a large spacecraft is a terribly fragile thing and missiles or a railgun would tear it to shreds while such small craft would be difficult to target and hit from any distance or high transversal velocity very much like in Eve.

In what situation are you talking about?

In some cases... you want more agility than you want tank (ex. with fast-flying ships).
In some cases... you want more tank than you want agility (ex. with "brawling" ships).
In some cases... you want neither and will specialize in something completely unrelated (ex. Electronic Warfare).

The problem you are running into is that...
- some modules are from a bygone era and don't work well in today's environment. 50mm plates are an example of this.
- some modules are good for certain ships and inferior on other ships. For example;
------ Inertial Stabilizers are not that good on a frigate because Nanofibers are simply better. Nanos add speed, agility, and do not increase a ships' "sensor footprint" (which makes a ship easier to target and hit).
------ I-Stabs work well on large ships because they do not cut down on tank, give more agility than Nanos, and large ships don't care about speed or their "sensor footprint"... but then again... large ships generally don't care about agility unless they are trying to avoid confrontation in the first place.

And this isn't as big of an issue as you are making it.
Because while the bigger plates offer up a straight amount of raw HP... they also add a straight amount of mass that makes you slower (while consuming more PG and CPU that you need for other stuff that may be equally or more important).

And while I-Stabs are "useless" compared to Nanos at the frigate level... it doesn't mean they are useless across the board.

In older MMOs, there is always bound to be some measure of redundancy and/or obsolescence. But this isn't the thing that "narrows" fitting choices.... at least... not the way you are thinking.

Instead... it is ship type, tactics, and specialty that dictate the "narrowness" of fittings.



[Impel, Basic Tank Template]

Damage Control II
Energized EM Membrane II
Energized Thermic Membrane II
Energized Adaptive Nano Membrane II
Energized Armor Layering Membrane II
800mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
Inertial Stabilizers II

Experimental 10MN Microwarpdrive I
[empty med slot]

Improved Cloaking Device II
[empty high slot]

Medium Trimark Armor Pump I
Medium Trimark Armor Pump I


(with max skills)
- The I-Stab cuts the align time from ~19 seconds to 15 seconds

- you'll notice that I am using a combination of armor plating (gives a flat amount of raw HP) plus a Layering Membrane (% based amount of raw HP). For some ships that don't have enough CPU/PG to fit another plate, but already have high amounts of raw armor, it can work. Hell.. for capitals ships the flat HP boosts are meaningless... making the Layered Platings/Membranes superior in every way.
NOTE: Reinforced Bulkheads do something similar to Layered Platings/Membranes



IN WHAT SITUATION????

Your questions are simply too vague. Asking "can these mods be used for PvP? Why can't all mods be used for PvP" is like asking "is this food good for you? Why can't all food be good for you?"
You have to be specific with the tactic, ship, and situation.

Not at all. I thought it was more flexible than it seems to be, with a reason and point for everything. Like I said, I was thinking I could use istabs to make a speed tanking brawl ship as another aspect of eve, but that doesn't eem to be a valid ship design. If an istab goes on it, it might just be bad, especially when istab and overclassed plate really fight each other. Like I said, it seems that damage and tank mods seem much too valuable for viable alternatives. If the choice was between 50mm plate for hp tanking as a brawler, or istab for speed tanking as a brawler, the choice could be more meaningful. When its between 200mm plate or an istab, there's really only one choice. Barring niche uses others have expounded on, there doesn't seem to be much variety. Even when they say "nuh uh", they link to fits that use nanofibers instead. Inertia stabs are all about maneuverability, maintaining high speed, and making faster turns. I'm asking if anyone really feels that a design meant to capitalize on that could have the same potential as 200mm plate/heat sink/heat sink.

*sigh*
No... it IS valid. It just isn't "optimal" in most situations. There is a difference.

Put it this way... if NanoFibers did not exist... then yes, the I-Stab would be a valid mod for smaller ships that are trying to be more maneuverable.

As it stands though, smaller ships gain more benefit from Nanofibers except in cases where speed and small "sensor footprint" are not really a consideration (which they are in direct ship on ship confrontations... at the frigate level)


Again...

What are you trying to do?

Brawl at point-blank range... or dance around the edge of a target's range?
Are you trying to be too fast for the opponent's guns to track?

You are looking at things too one-dimensionally.
You have to look at the ship, tactic, and specialty before you can decide what mods you want to fit!



Let me give you two fits here...

[Atron, DerpTron]
Micro Auxiliary Power Core I
Magnetic Field Stabilizer II
Damage Control II

Experimental 1MN Afterburner I
Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive I
J5b Phased Prototype Warp Scrambler I

Light Neutron Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter S
Light Neutron Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter S
Light Neutron Blaster II, Caldari Navy Antimatter S
[empty high slot]

Small Hybrid Burst Aerator I
Small Hybrid Collision Accelerator I
[empty rig slot]


[Punisher, FootSoldier]
Damage Control II
Small Ancillary Armor Repairer, Nanite Repair Paste
200mm Reinforced Rolled Tungsten Plates I
Heat Sink II

Limited 1MN Microwarpdrive I
Warp Scrambler II

Dual Light Pulse Laser II, Imperial Navy Multifrequency S
Dual Light Pulse Laser II, Imperial Navy Multifrequency S
Dual Light Pulse Laser II, Imperial Navy Multifrequency S
Small Diminishing Power System Drain I

Small Energy Collision Accelerator I
Small Trimark Armor Pump I
Small Processor Overclocking Unit I


Stats (with max skills)

Tank: ~2600 effective hp (Atron) vs. ~5000 ehp + 40 hp/sec repair rate (Punisher)
Max Speed: ~3500+ m/sec AND ~1300 m/sec (Atron) vs. ~2600 m/sec (Punisher)
Align time: ~2.8 seconds (Atron) vs. 3.5 seconds (Punisher)
Damage: ~200 damage per second (Atron) vs. 135 dps (Punisher)


In a straight fight... which would win?

If you think the Punisher would win... you would be wrong.

The Punisher has more tank... it can even repair some of it... but the Atron's damage simply overwhelms it.
Moreover, the Atron is fit for speed at very close range. That Afterburner? It keeps the Atron moving at very fast speeds (without the larger "sensor footprint" penalty that a Microwarpdrive has) around the Punisher... so fast that most of the damage from the Punisher's lasers will be mitigated.

I have seen packs of these things dismantle battleships and even capital ships.
larger tank =/= superior


But I should also add this:
That Punisher that lost to the Atron? Group it with a bunch of other ships with similar fittings and Logistics Ships (see: healing/repair ships) and you will have a very nasty ball of destruction that will see very few, if any, losses (even against ships bigger than it).

If a group of Atrons, equal in numbers, tried to take on a Punisher group... it would lose. Badly. Because the Atrons LACK the HP and damage resistance to make efficient use of remote repairs (see: healing).


Basically... EVE is more about asymmetrical warfare and tactical prowess... knowing what situations certain ship, fits, and tactics are good for... and when they are not.
Fitting is half the game. Knowing how to use it is the other half.

In addition to all that is being said. Acquired skills' point level should significantly impact the usefulness of a module in question to ship. Moreover Implants can tip the scale. That 's my two cents worth.

P1

necromancy - not even once