Engineers Ship Builds & Load Outs Shield and shield booster

Optimal positioning of shield boosters on warships depending on the effect applied to the main shield.

Instruction :
1. Choose the ship we need (any).
2. Place on it the shield we need, the class and type we need.
3. We'll apply the engineer's modification to this shield.
(Since the ship is designed without evading the battle, it will be one of the 2 main effects: the volume or heat resistance).
4. Select the required number of shield amplifiers from the table.
Shield / Booster12345678
RainforcedH/SCT/SCT/SCH/SCH/SCH/SCH/SCR/TB
ThermalH/SCH/SCR/FBR/FBH/SCR/FBK/FBH/SC
R - Resistance augmented
H - Heavy duty
K - Kinetic resistant
SC - Super capasitors
FB - Force block
TB - Thermal block


* If someone finds a more optimal arrangement, please inform this forum branch.
( original page before discussion )
Sorry for my impudence, but for some reason I always see assemblies of different ships with different shields and different effects on shield amplifiers. Why is that?

I remember before, engineering effects were random and each had an individual module. But now it's the same.

If there isn't such a table yet, I'll probably have to do something similar (with time), but I think there is such a table already and you just have to put it out and that's all.

In fact, there are only 2 variants of the shield with volume and thermal protection.
(and it doesn't matter which prism shield it is or not).
(for example)
Shield / Booster12345678EXPKINTHR
RainforcedH/SCT/SCT/SCH/SCH/SCH/SCH/SCR/TB56.948.340.0
H/SCT/SCT/SCH/SCH/SCH/SCH/SC-48.137.834.3
H/SCT/SCT/SCH/SCH/SCH/SC--49.139.034.9
H/SCT/SCT/SCH/SCH/SC---50.140.235.5
H/SCT/SCT/SCH/SC----51.141.336.0
H/SCT/SCT/SC-----52.142.536.6
H/SCT/SC------54.845.823.9
H/SC-------57.448.9-2.2
ThermalH/SCH/SCR/FBR/FBH/SCR/FBK/FBH/SC66.459.859.7
H/SCH/SCR/FBR/FBH/SCR/FBK/FB-66.760.160.1
H/SCH/SCR/FBR/FBH/SCR/FB--67.354.260.8
H/SCH/SCR/FBR/FBH/SC---63.449.456.1
H/SCH/SCR/FBR/FB----64.250.057.0
H/SCH/SCR/FB-----56.839.148.2
H/SCH/SC------48.025.137.6
H/SC-------49.026.638.8
R - Resistance augmented
H - Heavy duty
K - Kinetic resistant
SC - Super capasitors
FB - Force block

If we have made modules and removed variations, why do we have to make different assemblies ?

P.S. Since the guard shield reinforcements are then superimposed, they can be neglected.
P.P.S. I'm not sure if the same 2 lines will work when cutting off the top cells. If not then you can add 7 more rows with fewer amplifiers to each line and that's it.
 
Last edited:
I don't quite understand the question, but probably coriolis.io will mostly answer it.
Does Coriolis have 1 button after pressing on which he himself will add all the effects of engineers on shields and shield amplifiers - optimally ?
 
If we have made modules and removed variations, why do we have to make different assemblies ?
Because not all ships and not all combat scenarios are the same.

Does Coriolis have 1 button after pressing on which he himself will add all the effects of engineers on shields and shield amplifiers - optimally ?
It has some presets, but there is no single optimal booster loadout for all combat situations.
 
Does Coriolis have 1 button after pressing on which he himself will add all the effects of engineers on shields and shield amplifiers - optimally ?
Possibly not, but you could potentially use it to get all the data you need, then create a spreadsheet. Though I'm not really sure what you're asking for.
 
Because not all ships and not all combat scenarios are the same.
...
I agree that there are variations, but I still think that all this is not significant and there are only 2 base lines with the maximum resistance !
And all further variations will still proceed from these two lines.
 
I agree that there are variations, but I still think that all this is not significant and there are only 2 base lines with the maximum resistance !
And all further variations will still proceed from these two lines.
Resistance isn't everything, and not all resistances are equally useful all the time.

Plasma is 60% absolute damage. Collisions are 100% absolute damage. Frag boats will be mostly kinetic damage. Rails are mostly thermic, but have a significant kinetic component. MCs can either be all kinetic, overwhelmingly thermic, or anything in-between, depending on mods involved. Overload munitions (popular on packhounds) are half thermic half explosive. If one has an idea of what they are going against, they can equip for it, otherwise raw MJ, with modest resistances, is often a safe bet.

There are also power and/or mass considerations on some ships.
 
Resistance isn't everything, and not all resistances are equally useful all the time.

Plasma is 60% absolute damage. Collisions are 100% absolute damage. Frag boats will be mostly kinetic damage. Rails are mostly thermic, but have a significant kinetic component. MCs can either be all kinetic, overwhelmingly thermic, or anything in-between, depending on mods involved. Overload munitions (popular on packhounds) are half thermic half explosive. If one has an idea of what they are going against, they can equip for it, otherwise raw MJ, with modest resistances, is often a safe bet.

There are also power and/or mass considerations on some ships.
I'm surprised. How can YOU know what YOU will be shot at?
 
I'm surprised. How can YOU know what YOU will be shot at?
If I know RoA is around, I know my CMDR is going to be shot at with craploads of rail guns.

If I know certain other gank wings are around, I know they'll come at me with mostly OC or double shot screening shell frags.

If I don't know any specifics, I'll just assume a lot of ramming and PA fire, because that's statistically what I'm most likely to face in meaningful attacks.

If I'm mostly fighting NPCs, I'll assume it's mostly going to be lasers.
 
If I know RoA is around, I know my CMDR is going to be shot at with craploads of rail guns.

If I know certain other gank wings are around, I know they'll come at me with mostly OC or double shot screening shell frags.

If I don't know any specifics, I'll just assume a lot of ramming and PA fire, because that's statistically what I'm most likely to face in meaningful attacks.

If I'm mostly fighting NPCs, I'll assume it's mostly going to be lasers.
Excuse me. But what you've written, I understand. I don't understand how this knowledge cancels this table ?
That there are options to use the worst resistors?
I think all your actions are most likely tactical moves.
( PVT option I'm not looking at here)
 
Last edited:
And I also do not quite understand how to reflect in the table that if you put all 8 amplifiers on a common resistor and there will be resistors for 70 that will actually be worse ...
 
Excuse me. But what you've written, I understand. I don't understand how this knowledge cancels this table ?
The table is fine, from a quick glance, but the applicability of the load outs it depicts are not universal.

If I've got an eight booster ship (which would itself be rare as I'd probably want room for at least a heatsink launcher) that I'm trying to get through hostile territory, I'm far more likely to make six of those boosters HD/SC, leaving two left over to get passable resistances.

Such a chart could be a useful starting place, but there will be cases where different loadouts will be more useful.
 
The table is fine, from a quick glance, but the applicability of the load outs it depicts are not universal.

If I've got an eight booster ship (which would itself be rare as I'd probably want room for at least a heatsink launcher) that I'm trying to get through hostile territory, I'm far more likely to make six of those boosters HD/SC, leaving two left over to get passable resistances.

Such a chart could be a useful starting place, but there will be cases where different loadouts will be more useful.
I understand YOU. (see PPS in first message)
Unfortunately, the translation makes me difficult to understand. I have already described above that I do not know if these 2 lines are enough for all options. And in case of reducing the slots for amplifiers, just throw the last one away. (close the right side with your hand)
(It's not for nothing that I have all the HD/SC slots).

Or still it will not be optimal and for each of the 2 lines should be attributed to the bottom 7 more lines with fewer slots.
 
After playing with Coriolis, I filled the table to the end. As you can see, as I assumed this table is easy to reduce to 2 lines.
 
Sorry for my impudence, but for some reason I always see assemblies of different ships with different shields and different effects on shield amplifiers. Why is that?
I find that your table is somewhat unrelated to this question and that there are already very good answers to it in this thread.
After playing with Coriolis, I filled the table to the end. As you can see, as I assumed this table is easy to reduce to 2 lines.
Your table lacks one important column, which is shield boost. If you have it in % then divide it through 100% and add 1 to get the shield strength multiplicator. This will give you the raw shield strength multiplier. Different sips have different base shield strength with the same shield generator. Coriolis is your friend here, too.
 
Last edited:
I find that your table is somewhat unrelated to this question and that there are already very good answers to it in this thread.

Your table lacks one important column, which is shield boost. If you have it in % then divide it through 100% and add 1 to get the shield strength multiplicator. This will give you the raw shield strength multiplier. Different sips have different base shield strength with the same shield generator. Coriolis is your friend here, too.
Maybe I didn't really understand you.
I still want to throw all other rows out of the table and leave only 2, but I'm afraid it will not be clear to everyone.

There are also some resistors in the table that aren't needed here either. Why do you need to see them? The table gives an optimal configuration.

The whole point of the table is that depending on the modification of the shield to add the desired (you) number of amplifiers left to right and not thinking about the effects that should be there.

If someone lacks energy, he simply changes the amplifier from 0A to 0E without changing the effects.

P.S. It's too bad Coriolis doesn't have a button like that.
Installed a shield, picked the effect. Then I filled in the required utility slots and pressed the button.
And all other free slots were immediately filled with the right amplifiers with the right effects, as in this table.
 
Last edited:
Maybe I didn't really understand you.
I still want to throw all other rows out of the table and leave only 2, but I'm afraid it will not be clear to everyone.
Likely the most important figure for all shields is the raw shield strength (before resistances).
A Type-7 Transporter with an off the shelf 6A Shield Generator has 237 MJ absolute or raw shield strength.
An Imperial Cutter with the same off the shelf 6A Shield Generator has 438 MJ absolute or raw shield strength (but it can fit up to class 8).
The resistances reduce incoming damage, which is then subtracted from the current charge left on the shield. For the 60% absolute damage from Plasma Accelerators, collision damage (ramming) and some experimental effects that turn part of the damage in to absoulte damage, Thargoid attacks etc. there are no resistances.
The Shield Booster's Shield Boost figure is a multiplier for the absolute shield strength of the generator.

Absolute shield strength (fully charged) = Absolute shield strength of the Shield Generator in the ship including engineering * ( Sum (Shield Boost %) /100% + 1) + Sum (Guardian Shield boost).

The resistances follow a more complicate calculation, with diminishing results and with the Shield Generator (including engineering) having a big impact on the attainable limits.
This makes it less useful to use the boosters alone for calculation, because the resistances of the Shield Generator alone have such a big impact on the final result of all resistances.

How much damage the shield can absorb from a damage source is
Absolute Shield Strength * Resistance from Pips on Shields * Resistance for the damage type.
(50% resistance means 1.5 times damage capacity or damage reduction by a factor of 0.667)
 
Last edited:
Likely the most important figure for all shields is the raw shield strength (before resistances).
A Type-7 Transporter with an off the shelf 6A Shield Generator has 237 MJ absolute or raw shield strength.
An Imperial Cutter with the same off the shelf 6A Shield Generator has 438 MJ absolute or raw shield strength (but it can fit up to class 8).
The resistances reduce incoming damage, which is then subtracted from the current Charge left on the shield. For the 60% absolute damage from Plasma Accelrators, collision damage (ramming) and some experimental effects that turn part of the damage in to absoulte damage, thargoid attacks etc. there are no resistances.
The Shield Booster's Shield Boost figure is a multilplier for the absolute shield strength of the generator.

Absolute shield strength (fully charged) = Absolute shield strength of the Shield Generator in the ship including engineering * ( Sum (Shield Boost %) /100% + 1) + Sum (Guardian Shield boost).

The resistances follow a more complicate calculation, with diminishing results and with the Shield Generator (including engineering) having a big impact on the attainable limits.
This makes it less useful to use the boosters alone for calculation, because the resistances of the Shield Generator have such a big impact on the final result of all 4 figures.

How much damage the shield can absorb from a damage source is
Absolute Shield Strength * Resistance from Pips on Shields * Resistance for the damage type.
(50% resistance means 1.5 times damage capacity or damage reduction by a factor of 0.667)
I'm sorry.
The table's not about that. It is necessary to show what amplifiers and what effect you should put on your ship if you use a shield with this effect.

Can you give a real example where the table would not be correct?

P.S. It doesn't matter what ship, what class of shield or what type of shield.
 
The table's not about that. It is necessary to show what amplifiers and what effect you should put on your ship if you use a shield with this effect.
Your original post started with why others are not doing that. Not with the table. I tried to explain this to you.
Can you give a real example where the table would not be correct?
P.S. It doesn't matter what ship, what class of shield or what type of shield.
Too lazy...
Your table is probably correct, but incomplete. It has resistances, but not boost and resistances * boost, which makes it less suited for selection.
Edit: Boost is also very much dependent on the Shield Booster class, therefore you cannot simply exchange a 0A with a 0E.
The resistances alone are only important for recharge (the higher the resistance, the more worth is recharge), but for upfront shield strength and to absorb incoming damage the result of boost times resistance is relevant.
 
Last edited:
Your original post started with why others are not doing that. Not with the table. I tried to explain this to you.

Too lazy...
Your table is probably correct, but incomplete. It has resistances, but not boost and resistances * boost, which makes it less suited for selection.
When I started this post, there was no table. I was just trying to get it from the community.

I can rewrite all the messages in the first post and redo the table correctly, but I don't know if it's correct because there were responses to the initial post underneath.
 
Top Bottom