Nerf shield curves so that shields scale appropriately for Titans

[Admiral.Piett]

I am terribly sorry you are confusing things here.

You see, right now, shields shouldn't be touched, because of the lack of features. Tweaks need to be made, for sure, but nowhere nearby what the OP suggests. If you lack that much lecture comprehension, I am afraid i can't do much else. They are in good shape right now, and tweaks can always help, but a decreasing curve the way OP suggests will only lead to a balancing nightmare fight. Somebody will later post to buff shields.
And so on. Recognizing the imperfection of the system doesn't means I agree the solution should be a direct nerf to shields. I am proposing and stating several other instances that will radically affect combat, that should be implement and tested before saying "Yeah, shields still kick everyone's butt"

 

[Lecic]

Please, do state where am I ignoring it. Because I assure you I am not. Cascade balancing that will come if you change shielding now will be a nightmare. I am sure devs know this, or they would give on your claims faster. In almost all my posts I've stated shields aren't perfect.

You know what'll cause even worse cascade balancing issues? Waiting until the game is nearing completion to balance shields.

 

[ResonKinetic]

I am terribly sorry you are confusing things here.

You see, right now, shields shouldn't be touched, because of the lack of features. Tweaks need to be made, for sure, but nowhere nearby what the OP suggests. If you lack that much lecture comprehension, I am afraid i can't do much else. They are in good shape right now, and tweaks can always help, but a decreasing curve the way OP suggests will only lead to a balancing nightmare fight. Somebody will later post to buff shields.
And so on. Recognizing the imperfection of the system doesn't means I agree the solution should be a direct nerf to shields. I am proposing and stating several other instances that will radically affect combat, that should be implement and tested before saying "Yeah, shields still kick everyone's butt"

you're so clueless it's funny

"shields shouldn't be touched" but they were and that's why this topic exists; i already said this.
also they should continue being "touched" until they get to a point where they are balanced, or at least close enough

"if you lack that much lecture comprehension" lol what the hell get off of your high horse you pretentious jerk

"they are in good shape right now" according to who? you. Planr, someone with experience and knows how the game works, is pointing out why the current shield system is bad and how it can be fixed and you're sitting here acting like everything is okay and denying everything. again, gg 11/10

 

[Admiral.Piett]

According to me, about 5 other people, and the devs that keep rejecting this suggestions. Denial has never occurred, and you are really being unhelpful with providing more solutions other than nerfing a number that is much to important to change right now when things are not complete yet. Shields are better than before, is that so hard to see? I've done testing in nearly every phase for almost a year now. I've done upscaled testing, and downscaled too. The previous Shield curve had no future once the new anti shield systems became to be. You are still thinking pre weapon changes and pre weapon effects. And you need to update that thinking.



Well, I'll leave this discussion as it has come pointless now. You refuse to actually view the whole balance cake, by looking into the 2 or 3 slices you want. Fine, it will simply lead nowhere, lads.
A shield can be balanced by way more things than just a little number, and that is a really narrow point of view.

I do support shield tweaking, but more systems need to be completed for the shields to actually show their full potential. After that, tweaking will be necessary. Balancing cascades do are a nightmare almost all F2P and MMO games have gone thru at least one time, and they have learned from their mistakes.

This process, take so much more time and thinking that what you all, with all your arguments, have said in here. If devs changed things based on this thread, they would be acting extremely in a premature fashion, and would lead to more issues. Their available work time is limited in man power, and in order to be more efficient, they need to focus on the whole cake, because it is a game. Because it must sell, and become to its full potential despite the limited manpower. And don't bring the "Oh it's been a year waiting for a fix". Because they've been working a full game for a year, not only on the combat part of it. You people need to understand what it takes to get a game into Alpha, and then into a beta, and in which stage feature adding is done, and in which stage balancing is made.

 

[MrFURB]

While you're... Discussing this in a friendly and productive manner, please try to keep in mind the idea that vessels of different scales have limited interaction options with each other. The trend towards this is apparent if one wishes to go through the latest couple of Q&A videos where a basic overview of the new thrust system was tossed to the public for consideration.

Having a high shield capacity on a capital ship isn't a problem to another capital ship. Having relatively low shields on a fighter isn't a problem to another fighter. It only becomes a problem when the two different sizes and powers of ships begin interacting in such a way as to be able to use their systems at 100% efficiency against another. As I recount, this was my major topic on my last post on this topic. The upcoming thrust changes as well as a few other planned things will help differentiate the play-style of ships based on their construction, hopefully shifting them into a place that feels better than it does now. Of course, I'm not saying that shields shouldn't be tweaked, I'm just saying to keep the big picture in mind when you do make tweaks, as things are still changing radically over the next few updates.

 

[ResonKinetic]

According to me, about 5 other people, and the devs that keep rejecting this suggestions. Denial has never occurred, and you are really being unhelpful with providing more solutions other than nerfing a number that is much to important to change right now when things are not complete yet. Shields are better than before, is that so hard to see? I've done testing in nearly every phase for almost a year now. I've done upscaled testing, and downscaled too. The previous Shield curve had no future once the new anti shield systems became to be. You are still thinking pre weapon changes and pre weapon effects. And you need to update that thinking.

Christ you're obstinate; you've ignored almost everything I brought up and implemented your own whimsical fantasies.

If shields were better than before, none of this would be being discussed right now.

The FACTS are that shields aren't better than before and it's "so hard to see" because there's nothing to see.

Also it's funny how you're implying that you've done all the testing and Planr hasn't.

also, 6-7 people disagree with you sooooooo

 

[Sven_The_Slayer]

Having a high shield capacity on a capital ship isn't a problem to another capital ship. Having relatively low shields on a fighter isn't a problem to another fighter. It only becomes a problem when the two different sizes and powers of ships begin interacting in such a way as to be able to use their systems at 100% efficiency against another. As I recount, this was my major topic on my last post on this topic. The upcoming thrust changes as well as a few other planned things will help differentiate the play-style of ships based on their construction, hopefully shifting them into a place that feels better than it does now. Of course, I'm not saying that shields shouldn't be tweaked, I'm just saying to keep the big picture in mind when you do make tweaks, as things are still changing radically over the next few updates.

Actually that is exactly the issue I am discussing, it is far too easy to create an unwinnable situation where both ships do not have the firepower to overcome the combat regen of the shields. Thrust changes will not fix the fact two identical ships can be built incapable of killing each other. I can't say this enough, ships will never be built to an ideal balance unless a lot of changes force it to happen. Shields are spammable while weapons need to be in arrays.

I also really don't like this idea of rock paper scissors in the game. If your opponent has a rock and you have a rock, both of you just go home because there is no point in fighting. Smash those rocks together long enough one will break, then it will be a matter of who is bigger. The idea of a lone titan being vulnerable to hit and run attacks from a bomber that can wipe out the defence turrets is an exciting one, but if the titans shields combat regen is more than the bomber can overcome than no worries, the titan can just ignore the attack and replace turrets later. Of course you could load your bomber with Ion hulk missiles and possibly take it down but that is just a paper covers rock situation which the game should not be balanced.

 

[Lecic]

While you're... Discussing this in a friendly and productive manner, please try to keep in mind the idea that vessels of different scales have limited interaction options with each other. The trend towards this is apparent if one wishes to go through the latest couple of Q&A videos where a basic overview of the new thrust system was tossed to the public for consideration.

Having a high shield capacity on a capital ship isn't a problem to another capital ship. Having relatively low shields on a fighter isn't a problem to another fighter. It only becomes a problem when the two different sizes and powers of ships begin interacting in such a way as to be able to use their systems at 100% efficiency against another. As I recount, this was my major topic on my last post on this topic. The upcoming thrust changes as well as a few other planned things will help differentiate the play-style of ships based on their construction, hopefully shifting them into a place that feels better than it does now. Of course, I'm not saying that shields shouldn't be tweaked, I'm just saying to keep the big picture in mind when you do make tweaks, as things are still changing radically over the next few updates.

MrFURB, the issue here is that ships that should be able to take down another ship, like in the OP, are unable to. The situation is ridiculous.

 

[Stakhanov]

I also really don't like this idea of rock paper scissors in the game. If your opponent has a rock and you have a rock, both of you just go home because there is no point in fighting. Smash those rocks together long enough one will break, then it will be a matter of who is bigger.

It's another thing few people realize. Rock/paper/scissors mechanics do not improve any game unless they require strategic or tactical finesse to leverage. And in a game of freeform ship building like starmade , there's nothing preventing you from simply bringing tons of rocks , papers and scissors to a fight you want to win.

 

[Ithirahad]

Actually...

Turn Combat Shield Regen to 0% and all these problems are magically fixed. BOOM.


Actual shield capacity and shield regeneration rate balancing can occur after the split.

 

[ltmauve]

No one builds one weapon per one shield. Also, given that many ships have multiple weapons systems, so the ships need to have more weapons in the primary systems for a player to take down the same ship, and also meaning that an AI of that ship would be over-weaponed against a player vessel.

 

[CyberTao]

A thought Came to mind, involving my Earlier Example and Some people's claims of "Maneuverability" Being a Key factor. All you would need is a Webbing Rapid Fire AMC u: and then that point is irrelevant, since its not hard to hit with a Spray.

And like Furb Said, it may be balance when Fighting Ships of the same tier/size (Which the exception that fighter battles may be too forgiving)

Having a high shield capacity on a capital ship isn't a problem to another capital ship. Having relatively low shields on a fighter isn't a problem to another fighter. It only becomes a problem when the two different sizes and powers of ships begin interacting in such a way as to be able to use their systems at 100% efficiency against another.

That is part of the Problem :u if it takes a similar sized ships to Take down a larger ship, then factions will just take turns 1-upping each other. Ships getting bigger and bigger until no one can have fun due to Lag.

Another Thought is that this system is to Promote 1:1 Shield:weapons ratios, but It seems to be that Based on a ship Having -One- Weapon. Once you set up a different computer and give it an effect, you end up with a Ratio of like 1:0.5:0.5, because the weapons space is divided among different weapons that may not be firing together (Like an Ion for shields and Punch for hull), not to mention effects dont get counted into weapon groups.
Weapons Just seem Massive in comparison now, so It would seem to be Ships are meant to use less shields? I'm kind of worried what that will do to RP-combat ships o -o

But there needs to be some form of Curve in Shields. Something that tells people "This is big enough". You can say "update this" and "revamp that" and how hard it would be to change Shields, but Who knows when those updates will come out? What is so hard about changing a formula? Isn't that Calbiri's job? Testing the equations and adjusting them?

Hell, just put it in the Block config like weapons; Set the Constant (Minimum shields can give, like we have) And give us the option to choose a Linear or Inverse shield increase :u (Yes Linear is the wrong word, but I cant think of the right one * ^*)

 

[Admiral.Piett]

If 1-upping is the problem, add a server sided maximum value for a ships mass. There, almost fixed. Now they must have 2 ships of the same size to out gun you, increasing costs x2, manpower also by 2. That way, you do have an actual threshold that can be used right now, in the game, although having the option of setting your own shield values and curves in your server is something anyone would go for, including myself.

 

[Sven_The_Slayer]

Actually...

Turn Combat Shield Regen to 0% and all these problems are magically fixed. BOOM.


Actual shield capacity and shield regeneration rate balancing can occur after the split.

I'm still partial to the three tier system I proposed earlier

• Under fire - no regen
• in combat - slight regen
• out of combat - full regen

With the shield strength and damage being dealt determining how long your shields are in each phase.

 

[ltmauve]

Hard limits are a bad idea. Then you just encourage people to build deathcubes instead.

 

[Sven_The_Slayer]

If 1-upping is the problem, add a server sided maximum value for a ships mass. There, almost fixed. Now they must have 2 ships of the same size to out gun you, increasing costs x2, manpower also by 2. That way, you do have an actual threshold that can be used right now, in the game, although having the option of setting your own shield values and curves in your server is something anyone would go for, including myself.

A ship size cap is a bad solution as there will be no reason to build anything but the max size ship, thus destroying all creative potential.

 

[CyberTao]

If 1-upping is the problem, add a server sided maximum value for a ships mass. There, almost fixed. Now they must have 2 ships of the same size to out gun you, increasing costs x2, manpower also by 2. That way, you do have an actual threshold that can be used right now, in the game, although having the option of setting your own shield values and curves in your server is something anyone would go for, including myself.

I do believe there is no server-setting to set maximum, or else Gigantic-ism wouldn't be a thing o -o It would rely on Admins flying around, Checking blueprints as-well as builds that were made server :u

We need more options :/

 

[Sven_The_Slayer]

I do believe there is no server-setting to set maximum, or else Gigantic-ism wouldn't be a thing o -o It would rely on Admins flying around, Checking blueprints as-well as builds that were made server :u

We need more options :/

As an option for servers, yes, most definitely. As the solution for shield balance, no.

 

[Admiral.Piett]

It was meant as a temporary balance measure, and should be an option to be set for everyone if they so desire on their own servers. Hard limits, in all other game I've played, have never limited creativity. And there are already limits for this, albeit not "hardcoded". All server crashing ships are the limit to everyone right now. As Schema removes bottlenecks and bugs, this limits begin to disappear, and people can actually go for even bigger ships. Adding the option adds flexibility, game play style preference and the simple joy of having a limit for something. Humanity has very rarely been limited in creativity by the size of this they can make. Fact.

And death cubes are an entirely different issue that needs balance. Making all ships closer in term of mass efficiency, is the way to go to stop making them king amongst men.

 

[Sven_The_Slayer]

It was meant as a temporary balance measure, and an option to be set for everyone if they so desire on their own servers. Hard limits, in all other game I've played, have never limited creativity. And there are already limits for this, albeit not "hardcoded". All server crashing ships are the limit to everyone right now. As Schema removes bottlenecks and bugs, this limits begin to disappear, and people can actually go for even bigger ships. Adding the option adds flexibility, game play style preference and the simple joy of having a limit for something. Humanity has very rarely been limited in creativity by the size of this they can make. Fact.

We don't need stop gap solutions and "I'll fix this later" for real and current problems. That will do nothing but make development time increase as Schema will have to dedicate time implementing this "temporary balance measure" when he could spend that time actually fixing it in the first place even if it may need tweaked down the line.