These forums have been archived and are now read-only.

The new forums are live and can be found at https://forums.eveonline.com/

EVE New Citizens Q&A

 
  • Topic is locked indefinitely.
 

Modules with diminishing return
Author
Previous Topic Next Topic
Melkan Krow
Uuurs
#1 - 2014-08-11 04:57:28 UTC
Hi,

I'm at loss here. Many modules indicate that stacking them incurs a penalty, like Magnetic Field Stabilizers. And yet, both the fits in EVE university, and more important even, the DPS indicated in the fit window, in EVE online itself, indicates quite the contrary, instead of providing a diminishing return, they provide an increased return!!

So I don't get it. Explain to me why all these damages boosters can be piled whereas the informations provided in their description indicate they should not.
Lady Naween
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#2 - 2014-08-11 05:00:06 UTC
http://www.eve-wiki.net/index.php?title=Stacking_penalty

that it is what it means, you still get the bonus but the second and third etc isnt as effective but they still give a bonus
ShahFluffers
Ice Fire Warriors
#3 - 2014-08-11 05:12:32 UTC  |  Edited by: ShahFluffers
For those of you who do not like following links...

The first module provides 100% of its stat bonuses.
The second module provides ~87% of its stat bonuses.
The third module provides ~57% of its stat bonuses.

After the third module/rig affecting that particular stat it stops being worthwhile to fit more that do the same thing... unless you REALLY want that extra 2 or 3% cumulative bonus.


edit: for those who are curious... the reason some modules stack this way is because there used to be a time in EVE's history where modules did not have stacking penalties... and it was very possible to create a battleship that could fire its weapons every half second.

How did you Veterans start?
Melkan Krow
Uuurs
#4 - 2014-08-11 06:23:42 UTC
I understand the theory here, but what I'm saying is that if you check the DPS provided in the fit window, you'll see that the second module provides compared to the first. So this is quite misleading.
Lady Naween
Ministry of War
Amarr Empire
#5 - 2014-08-11 07:28:35 UTC
Melkan Krow wrote:
I understand the theory here, but what I'm saying is that if you check the DPS provided in the fit window, you'll see that the second module provides compared to the first. So this is quite misleading.


if you mean when you check info on modules in the fitting window in EVE then yes that doesnt show the result of diminishing returns. *shrugs* use PYFA/EFT
Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#6 - 2014-08-11 07:39:02 UTC
The fittings window is indeed correct.

Diminishing returns exist alongside multiplicative stacking.

Take Drone Damage Amplifier II for an example:

No DDA2s: 100% baseline effect

One DDA2: 123% baseline effect (100% * 1.23)

Two DDA2s: 100% * 1.23 * (1+.23*.87)
= 100% * 1.23 * 1.20
= 147.6%

Three DDA2s (here the diminishing returns of the stacking penalty wins out over the escalating returns of multiplicative stacking)
147.6% * (1+.23*.57)
= 147.6% * 1.1311
= 164.3%

4th and subsequent DDA2s are about as useful as a dead cat nailed to your door.

I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com
Tau Cabalander
Retirement Retreat
Working Stiffs
#7 - 2014-08-11 10:19:56 UTC
Here's what it looks like with resists: Calculating Resists
The fourth module and beyond provides very little benefit.

THE magnum opus on stacking penalty (skip to chapter 3):
Aenigma's Stacking Penalty Guide
Jur Tissant
Garoun Investment Bank
Gallente Federation
#8 - 2014-08-11 20:01:59 UTC
All percentage-based bonuses on modules stack via multiplication, not addition. So two 25% boosts (without diminishing returns) would give you 1.25*1.25=1.56 or a 56% boost which is slightly more than 25%+25%=50%.

So you may be expecting your result to be less than an X%+X% increase with the stacking penalty, but you should be expecting it to be less than a 1.X*1.X multiplier, if that makes sense.
Melkan Krow
Uuurs
#9 - 2014-08-11 20:17:19 UTC
Well, thanks... What I expected is that diminishing return was not compensated for 2nd module by a counter mechanism somehow... But that's my idea :)
Sabriz Adoudel
Move along there is nothing here
#10 - 2014-08-11 23:57:13 UTC
Melkan Krow wrote:
Well, thanks... What I expected is that diminishing return was not compensated for 2nd module by a counter mechanism somehow... But that's my idea :)



It's not really a hidden mechanism so much as the fact that in EVE most bonuses multiply, rather than adding.

If you have $10 in your wallet and double it three times, the first time you gain $10, the second time $20 and the third time $40.

I support the New Order and CODE. alliance. www.minerbumping.com