B rated modules

Thank you William, for saving me the trouble...

My one fully engineered ship - used for PvP regulaly - has one extra h/s ammo & I fire two 5A SCBs using one h/s....trying to fire two without a h/s would be catastrophic & I can't spare another utility. Hence 'A rated' SCBs are the optimal choice for me.

<Amended Morgan Freeman meme: 'He's right in certain circumstances, you know!'>

The weight penalty with all B modules can be a significant factor too, especially since RNGineers, when you get a poor roll (as is usually the case) on the thruster optimal mass stat from grade 5 DD upgrades.
 
Stock ships come with a bunch of E modules to make the purchase look like a good deal, but needing 50-100% added to get it up to spec. Sounds just like a real car sale.

But what about the B rated core modules; does anyone actually use them?
I avoid B-grade modules for everything except SCBs. I've found that they add too much weight and expense compared to C-grade modules so when I was going through my ship progression I generally went from D-grade to C-grade then to A-grade, skipping B-grade entirely.

There is a rather unique niche for B-grade SCBs however as they have more charges than any other SCB grades. The weight is substantial but I can get more SCB uses out of a B-grade module than an A-grade module which is why I always use B-grade SCBs. I find it's more useful having a larger number of SCB uses available as I use SCBs most often for emergency use to keep a shield from collapsing rather than to simply maximize the MJ restoration available with a single use. Interestingly enough however B-grade SCBs also have the highest total MJ reserve as well so they are also the best use of a slot in terms of effective MJ "storage" for your shields. The advantages of an A-grade SCB are more MJ restoration per use (which can be useful when under heavy fire if you only have time to use a single SCB) and much better weight but generally I find the B-grade SCB advantages to be well worth the weight increase.
 
Last edited:
My FAS is almost entirely B-rated and engineered for maimum integrity. Its jump range is only 7.6ly, but It's a tough little ship.
I could actually see that being useful as a hull-tank ramming build with the massive integrity increases. I could never put up with that jump range though. My FDL, FGS and Corvette can each barely make 18 ly jump range and I refuse to add any more weight to them at this point even though I have cargo space that I could use for more modules. Part of that is because I want to keep at least some multi-role cargo capacity in all of my ships and part of that is because I try to keep my ships relatively "lean" in terms of not adding too much extra weight which also affects maneuverability in addition to jump range.
 
Last edited:
I prefer to use B-rated power plants when I can get away with it.
I used to have an armored PP on my Python but have subsequently replaced it with a low emissions PP for better heat management. I would think that an A-rated armored PP would overall perform better than a B-rated PP although I'm not sure what the comparison would be if you added an overcharged PP mod to a B-grade PP.
 
I used to have an armored PP on my Python but have subsequently replaced it with a low emissions PP for better heat management. I would think that an A-rated armored PP would overall perform better than a B-rated PP although I'm not sure what the comparison would be if you added an overcharged PP mod to a B-grade PP.
It's a toss-up between a shielded A rated and a G1/G2 overcharged B rated; it will depend a lot on what rolls you get, especially secondary effects.
 
B-Modules work most effectively for defending and survival. The Type-10 can become the ultimate tank with B-Modules engineered for sturdiness.

Most people concentrate on maxing/attack vehicles, or light/exploration vehicles - A or D. But E is fantastic for low-power, especially if you want to have a low heat signature for some sneakiness.

I admit to not often finding a use for C-modules though, except where: (i) its all that is available, or (ii) an engineered version is just big enough to allow you to downgrade a further step. I may be missing a trick here?
 
B-Modules work most effectively for defending and survival. The Type-10 can become the ultimate tank with B-Modules engineered for sturdiness.

Most people concentrate on maxing/attack vehicles, or light/exploration vehicles - A or D. But E is fantastic for low-power, especially if you want to have a low heat signature for some sneakiness.

I admit to not often finding a use for C-modules though, except where: (i) its all that is available, or (ii) an engineered version is just big enough to allow you to downgrade a further step. I may be missing a trick here?
The biggest advantage of C-rated modules is that they tend to be the best "value" in terms of cost/weight/performance. I've created some C-rated versions of my A-rated ships and they perform within 10-20% of the A-rated versions for about half of the total ship cost. There is also the issue that the C-rated modules are the same weight as A-rated which makes them good "placeholders" until you can afford A-rated modules, i.e., you don't have to adjust them for jump range, maneuverability and so on. You just upgrade from C-rated to A-rated and only notice benefits from the module performance with otherwise identical total weight (or rather nearly identical weight if you've Engineered the modules and they have secondary effects that change weight).

For Engineering however I always use A-rated modules. I had used an Engineered D-rated class 7 thruster on my Type 9 to reduce cost but have now replaced that with an Engineered A-rated thruster and the difference is substantial. In most cases the time and expense of Engineering will mean it's not worthwhile to bother with on a module that isn't A-rated.
 
Last edited:
You make some really good points!
Before I became space rich (Thanks, Pailn!) I tried to design effective C-grade builds to reduce my rebuys substantially. The idea was to use them for CGs or other high-threat areas where the risk of ship loss was high. I was surprized at how close the C-grade ships came to A-grade performance. Now that I fly Engineered A-grade ships I don't actually need my C-grade loadouts but I keep them in my fleet to remind me that it's still possible to build an efficient ship loadout that doesn't require A-grade modules.
 
As others mentioned... B-rate are more cost effective than an A if you're on a budget,,, and B-rate are more armoured (higher integrity), which is important for hulltanking fits.
 
Top Bottom