G5 Thermal-resistant Reactive Surface Composite hull vs G5 Heavy Duty Militrary Grade one.
Which is better?
Which is better?
Last edited:
Thermal resistant Reactive Surface vs Heavy duty Military-grade?
- Thread starter CMDR EDGEL0RD
- Start date
There is only one armour option that is only short on one resistance: Reactive.
There is only one blueprint that fills that armours resistance shortfall: Thermal.
There is no blueprint that rectifies the resistance shortfall on Military or Mirror.
Should be fairly obvious if you actually read the stats on the armour and mods.
[Edit: HRP and experimental options weren't discussed in the original question.]
There is only one blueprint that fills that armours resistance shortfall: Thermal.
There is no blueprint that rectifies the resistance shortfall on Military or Mirror.
Should be fairly obvious if you actually read the stats on the armour and mods.
[Edit: HRP and experimental options weren't discussed in the original question.]
Last edited:
Bob Lighthouse
Banned
Thermal resistant reactive with explosive experimental gives you near perfectly balanced resistances. This means you can make all of your HRP's heavy duty with deep plating and still get balanced resistances. If you plan on using more than a few HRP's then you should go this route as making them heavy duty will more than make up for the loss in integrity you get from using thermal resistance on the main armor.
Heavy duty Military-grade with an HP experimental will have pretty bad resistances but really high integrity from the hull It's also a lot cheaper. You can make up for this with a blast and a heavy duty modded HRP, both with a kinetic experimental. You still won't get balanced out resistances, but you will have alright resistances. This is the best route to go if you only plan on using 1 or 2 small HRP.
Heavy duty Military-grade with an HP experimental will have pretty bad resistances but really high integrity from the hull It's also a lot cheaper. You can make up for this with a blast and a heavy duty modded HRP, both with a kinetic experimental. You still won't get balanced out resistances, but you will have alright resistances. This is the best route to go if you only plan on using 1 or 2 small HRP.
Last edited:
Thank you, thats the way I will go.
By the way, it seems like there is only one Li-Yong Rui controlled system left which have Cutters and their hulls in stock. I'll better get reactive now as he is not the most popular dude
.
Last edited:
good info. tyvm.
sounds like small ships that can realistically only fit 1 or 2 hrp's are best with military armor and resistance-based hrp's while bigger ships that can dedicate a few slots to HRPs are better off with reactive armor and heavy duty hrp's.
Reactive with thermal. No weight gain, keeps all resistances positive; heavy duty HRP then can provide resistances over 50% across the board.
Military Hull is awful, expensive, same as stock resist and only offer base armour. Resistances end up lower and engineered weapons will chew through it like butter.
Reactive on small as well. It only takes 2 HRP to hit 40% resistances at g5. Practically anything small can take 2 HRP.
Military Hull is awful, expensive, same as stock resist and only offer base armour. Resistances end up lower and engineered weapons will chew through it like butter.
Reactive on small as well. It only takes 2 HRP to hit 40% resistances at g5. Practically anything small can take 2 HRP.
Last edited:
If I'm running a multi-role, I use heavy duty lightweight alloys.
If I'm running a combat hull tank, I look at how important mass is. If it's unimportant, I use reactive composite with heavy duty and 1 thermal resist HRP. Best overall.
If I do care about mass, I swap the above. Both give you good thermal resist and hull reinforcement.
These were considered before 3.0, so things may have changed.
If I'm running a combat hull tank, I look at how important mass is. If it's unimportant, I use reactive composite with heavy duty and 1 thermal resist HRP. Best overall.
If I do care about mass, I swap the above. Both give you good thermal resist and hull reinforcement.
These were considered before 3.0, so things may have changed.
If you're going up against Thargoids, or Plasmas and other absolute damage sources, then just sheer armour HP may be the preference over the resistances.
Against most players and normal play, you can't beat Reactive with Thermal. No, strike that, you can't beat being able to fly well and avoiding getting hit in the first place... ;-)
Against most players and normal play, you can't beat Reactive with Thermal. No, strike that, you can't beat being able to fly well and avoiding getting hit in the first place... ;-)
Example: FDL (Not as bad in ships with military slots)
Deploying to a CG system it has a fuel scoop in it, then I transfer the HRP via module storage.
I'd prefer a balanced armour setup and module options without feeling stuck needing the HRP
Oh wow. I looked into it more any you're right, the terrible resistances just can't be made up for by the extra integrity from heavy duty.
I guess I need to stop assuming that there is any semblance of balance or trade offs in this game.
And that's the primary reason I put heavy duty on the HRP instead, lower base weight.
what experimental mods are you guys liking on these reactive armor + thermal setups? Reflective plating for even more thermal resistance? Or Deep plating for more overall hp? Or, in which situations would you tend to choose one over the other? I was thinking Deep Plating for any ships that I expect will actually have to hull tank for a period of time on purpose and has a high number of hull HP by design/default, and maybe Reflective plating for smaller ships or those that are taking hull damage in an emergency and have generally lower HP?
And ty again. This thread saved me from making some mistakes today.
And ty again. This thread saved me from making some mistakes today.
Last edited: