Dev-Thread: New Shielding System in devlopment

[Lecic]

I don't think that's the case here - to shield your hull you will either need a massive shield group that will shield the entire ship (i.e. same as no docked hull) or multiple small shields which will be much easier to take out.

Uh, what? You aren't shielding the hull. You only need to protect your systems. The hull is an ablative to absorb damage for ages before a ship can even think about damaging your shields, and let alone your systems. This is why docked hull is extremely effective. It's nearly impossible to damage the ship underneath it.

Also, docked hull worked because of the damage hand-off mechanic between entities - the hull got a chance to recharge while inner entities took some hits - have we we seen any evidence that anything like this is happening here? (Not a rhetorical question)

No, you have it backwards. The hull takes the hits so the inner shield takes no or almost no damage and floats at whatever the shield share percentage is until the hull is removed enough to consistently damage whatever is underneath it. In this case, there is no "shield share," so the ship still has 100% of its shields until it runs out of hull.

Damage progressing from Hull -> Shields -> Systems is substantially more powerful than Shields -> Hull -> Systems, because in SHS, there is bleed through the hull, so by the time you run out of armor, you've lost 5-15% of your systems, reducing your combat efficiency. Shields are so easy to alpha that it's barely worth mentioning them on a SHS ship. Meanwhile, a HSS ship still has its shields left once its armor has fallen, and probably all or almost all of them too, because ion alpha and alpha in general is worthless against one of these kinds of vessels as it will all be dumped into the expendable hull, leaving you with no choice but to slowly pick away at shields through dozens of layers of armor with block damage oriented weapons.

As for evidence it's happening? I don't need it for this specific system, because it's functionally identical. Just look at the ships of nearly every faction. They're all sporting docked hull, usually in the form of forcefields they can turn on and off on the nose of the ship. NFD, Thryn, FCM, Vaygr, NRE, they've all got docked hull rayshields on their ships. They're proven, effective systems. There is no reason they couldn't work exactly the same as they did before in this new system.

Docked Hull Example
​

Docked hulls are not as "meta" as spaghetti currently is, but it's probably the most powerful defense a conventional layout ship can use.

But hey, maybe this isn't actually a bad thing. Weapons are ridiculously overpowered at the moment, afterall. I just think this could have been done in a much better way and on purpose, instead of something that, knowing Schine, was almost certainly an accident.

​

 

[Lecic]

Antikristianos Master1398

Would you mind elaborating on why you disagree that this feature isn't just docked hull reborn? I am always open to hearing alternative interpretations of the meta and balance, but from what I've seen this seems like a pretty solid fact.

 

[Zerefette]

I'd have preferred a bubble shield.
It's sort of must on these kind of games.
Or a polyshield.

 

[Dire Venom]

Antikristianos Master1398

Would you mind elaborating on why you disagree that this feature isn't just docked hull reborn? I am always open to hearing alternative interpretations of the meta and balance, but from what I've seen this seems like a pretty solid fact.

Some intersting points. Tbh I would find going Hull-Shields-Systems rather painfull except in PvP duesl for normal ship use.
With previous docked hull you could go 50% Main shields-Docked shields and hull, then the remaining 50% and then a further layer if desired. Now unless you space the shields out from the ship you can't really have 2 shield layers inside each other. Having the bubbles being limited to increasing spheres could result in some intersting designs though.

I'm curious how the center of the bubble will be determined, e.g if I make a hollow sphere and cover the outside with shield will the center be from the first block placed or the aprox center of the sphere? Anyone able to test that:?

 

[Jojomo]

Damage progressing from Hull -> Shields -> Systems is substantially more powerful than Shields -> Hull -> Systems, because in SHS, there is bleed through the hull, so by the time you run out of armor, you've lost 5-15% of your systems, reducing your combat efficiency.

I see what you're saying - sorry, I was thinking of docked hull also with it's own shields for some reason.

I agree, it does pretty much let you replicate a docked hull outside your shielded systems if you want to (and if your ship isn't too small). If that means everyone can increase their defence and can do it without the risk of dislodged entities clipping and lagging then that's not a problem in itself - if defence is overpowered relative to offence (i.e. defence becomes cheaper/stronger while offence doesn't) ship designers will naturally start adjusting the ratio of masses they assign to offence and defence (consciously or not) until it's "right" again, and we'll still have a far more interesting and versatile shield design mechanic to enjoy.
[doublepost=1509098016,1509097954][/doublepost]

I'm curious how the center of the bubble will be determined, e.g if I make a hollow sphere and cover the outside with shield will the center be from the first block placed or the aprox center of the sphere? Anyone able to test that:?

It's the centroid of the shield group. (See that image of mine of the long shield stick - I forget which thread)

 

[Dire Venom]

I see what you're saying - sorry, I was thinking of docked hull also with it's own shields for some reason.

I agree, it does pretty much let you replicate a docked hull outside your shielded systems if you want to (and if your ship isn't too small). If that means everyone can increase their defence and can do it without the risk of dislodged entities clipping and lagging then that's not a problem in itself - if defence is overpowered relative to offence (i.e. defence becomes cheaper/stronger while offence doesn't) designers will naturally start adjusting the ratio of masses they assign to offence and defence (consciously or not) until it's "right" again, and we'll still have a far more interesting and versatile shield design mechanic to enjoy.
[doublepost=1509098016,1509097954][/doublepost]

It's the centroid of the shield group. (See that image of mine of the long shield stick - I forget which thread)

Thank goodness XD At least it won't be too difficult to move shield groups around then.
Good points as well, depending on the numbers we will likely see adjustment either way.

I'm still hoping for power capacity to play some role in the new system though, it feels kinda empty without it :/

 

[Scypio]

I agree, it does pretty much let you replicate a docked hull outside your shielded systems if you want to (and if your ship isn't too small). If that means everyone can increase their defence and can do it without the risk of dislodged entities clipping and lagging then that's not a problem in itself - if defence is overpowered relative to offence (i.e. defence becomes cheaper/stronger while offence doesn't) ship designers will naturally start adjusting the ratio of masses they assign to offence and defence (consciously or not) until it's "right" again, and we'll still have a far more interesting and versatile shield design mechanic to enjoy.

I though fights where you look at your opponent's shields being dropped little by little were boring.
Everytime i say that weapons should be scaling like the defensive systems i got this answer. It's legitimate here to ask it again.

 

[Jojomo]

Antikristianos Master1398

Would you mind elaborating on why you disagree that this feature isn't just docked hull reborn? I am always open to hearing alternative interpretations of the meta and balance, but from what I've seen this seems like a pretty solid fact.

Had some more thoughts on docked hull effect via the new system: although it's certainly possible I think it's probably going to be rare.

The reason is that your shields scale linearly as you add more shield blocks, but as you do the shield bubble that you need to put your hull outside of increases in diameter - so your required armour block s increase exponentially while shields only increase linearly.

The effect is that your shields will be very weak relative to the amount of armour blocks needed.

E.g. under the old shield system if you had a ship whose internal systems entity had X number of shield blocks and whose docked hull had Y blocks of armour, in the new system X shield blocks' range bubble would mean that to build armour enclosing it but not being inside the bubble would require 10xY armour blocks (no attempt to use accurate numbers here, just an example of the concept)

So I'm guessing that although it's possible it isn't likely to happen.

And of course for small ships it isn't possible because shield bubbles have a minimum diameter that's too large.


EDIT: the new shields system, as it currently is, is also likely to make traditional docked hull impractical: docked hull won't be able to ignore the shields of the internal entity it's protecting, unless it's all the way outside the shield bubble, which as above would result in massive hulls.

I have tested and confirmed that docked entities are protected by their parent's shields if inside the range bubble under the new shield system.

So not only is this not going to promote something similar to docked hull, it's likely to reduce use of docked hull (at least of the configuration described in this thread)!

EDIT ABOUT EDIT: now correct again, @200.145

 

[Mork2]

The size of the bubble seems to be determined by the number of the shield rechargers with a minimum radius of around 50m. The number of shield capacitors doesn't seem to effect the bubble size. I'm having trouble getting the shields to actually charge so I can test the if the docked entities are protected.

 

[Snowtiger256]

The size of the bubble seems to be determined by the number of the shield rechargers with a minimum radius of around 50m. The number of shield capacitors doesn't seem to effect the bubble size. I'm having trouble getting the shields to actually charge so I can test the if the docked entities are protected.

The shields are charged just like old shields are, it's just that there is no real-time data being passed to the UI about it (meaning that it either shows zero or an arbitrary number, where it's supposed to tell the current state of the shields). If you can see the shield bubble, it should be working and ready to test.

Also, the new shield mechanics seem to not be working on stations, so make sure you set up a test ship.

 

[StormWing0]

They should really show shields and power in the GUI somehow, it's very annoying not being able to see either.

 

[Snowtiger256]

They should really show shields and power in the GUI somehow, it's very annoying not being able to see either.

Power has a power indicator in Flight Mode, showing both power stability and power consumption in real-time. Unfortunately this only applies for ships in flight mode. It would be nice to have both of these indiactors in build mode also, for any powered entity. The new build mode info tab stack only shows calculated values that update, when you place power and shield blocks, instead of real-time data (like the old info window did).

We can only hope that this gets fixed once the systems are properly integrated. I would also like to be able to collapse both build mode tab stacks into slim bars at the edges of the screen, to allow for more screen space for building. At the moment 40% of my available screen space is taken over by these tab stacks, due to them being so large. Here's a screenshot of the problem...

 

[lupoCani]

Would you at least agree that 'Area-Group-shields' are better gameplay concept than 'plonk-anywhere-and-forget-shields' ?
What do you think about 'All-or -nothing' vs 'Progressively-weakened' damage mitigation for shields ?

I'd just like to note I'm strongly in favor of progressively weakened shields, for a couple of reasons.

• It is how fiction generally has us expect shields to work.
• It means there's some point to aiming when shields are still up. This would allow for balancing where shields last much longer than they do now, without being terribly boring.
• It would add a new balancing parameter with many potential uses. We could get actual weak spots on ships, not just semi-vulnerable turrets, and in return get better shielding for turrets.
• It would force armor and shields to fulfill different purposes. We argue back and forth about how useful armor is, and I think we all agree it's gotten a lot better over the years. But in a sense, and I think this is a problem, they still do the same thing- protect the ship from damage. As it is, they're just taking turns doing it. If shields were to leak damage, things would be rather different. Shield would prolong the overall survival of the ship, while armor would protect its performance during that lifespan.
• Since any battle would then result in some damage, there would be an actual concept of maintenance involved in gameplay.

As for the last point, I realize it might cause some annoyance. Fixing shipyards is kind of a condition for putting this in the game, at the very least.

 

[Non]

I'd just like to note I'm strongly in favor of progressively weakened shields, for a couple of reasons.

• It is how fiction generally has us expect shields to work.
• It means there's some point to aiming when shields are still up. This would allow for balancing where shields last much longer than they do now, without being terribly boring.
• It would add a new balancing parameter with many potential uses. We could get actual weak spots on ships, not just semi-vulnerable turrets, and in return get better shielding for turrets.
• It would force armor and shields to fulfill different purposes. We argue back and forth about how useful armor is, and I think we all agree it's gotten a lot better over the years. But in a sense, and I think this is a problem, they still do the same thing- protect the ship from damage. As it is, they're just taking turns doing it. If shields were to leak damage, things would be rather different. Shield would prolong the overall survival of the ship, while armor would protect its performance during that lifespan.
• Since any battle would then result in some damage, there would be an actual concept of maintenance involved in gameplay.

As for the last point, I realize it might cause some annoyance. Fixing shipyards is kind of a condition for putting this in the game, at the very least.

It isn't a terrible idea on its own, but missile alpha as it is makes mitigation a pretty bad idea, damage values are just too high in comparison to ship durability for this to be a good addition. Weakening weapons is a bad idea because it really screws things at small scale, and I don't see any plans to significantly change how much damage a ship can take, so I am strongly against this until ship durability goes up.

 

[TheDerpGamerX]

I'd just like to note I'm strongly in favor of progressively weakened shields, for a couple of reasons.

• It is how fiction generally has us expect shields to work.
• It means there's some point to aiming when shields are still up. This would allow for balancing where shields last much longer than they do now, without being terribly boring.
• It would add a new balancing parameter with many potential uses. We could get actual weak spots on ships, not just semi-vulnerable turrets, and in return get better shielding for turrets.
• It would force armor and shields to fulfill different purposes. We argue back and forth about how useful armor is, and I think we all agree it's gotten a lot better over the years. But in a sense, and I think this is a problem, they still do the same thing- protect the ship from damage. As it is, they're just taking turns doing it. If shields were to leak damage, things would be rather different. Shield would prolong the overall survival of the ship, while armor would protect its performance during that lifespan.
• Since any battle would then result in some damage, there would be an actual concept of maintenance involved in gameplay.

As for the last point, I realize it might cause some annoyance. Fixing shipyards is kind of a condition for putting this in the game, at the very least.

I like this, but it just won't work with the current system.
A) Weapons are still too op, shields should at least be able to take some hits
B) This would be a massive hassle until shipyards are fixed and ai can gather resources for players efficiently (better ai fleet mining/trading)

As I said in my other thread, I think it would be much better if instead of shields taking all damage, they take most of it, and players would be able to choose what areas of their ships would take the least amount of damage (basically decide where they want the most shielding). That, and some way to control where fleets can focus their attack on an enemy capital, so basically you could have bombers fire weapons to take out enemy systems. Ideally, a titan would need support from smaller ai ships, fighters, and bombers to kill another titan. Otherwise it becomes a situation of who gets the first shot wins (AKA the current system). Titan fights should be long and epic, with other smaller ai ships actually playing a role. Sorta like space battles in Star Wars.

 

[Cluwne]

HURR shields leaking damage DURR

What's the bloody point in using shields then? Fancy shield hit effects?
It's bad enough we have this "fuck anything bigger than a corvette and fuck stations with extreme prejudice" system looming over us, you want to kill every design that doesn't have meters upon meters of armor too?
If you hate shields so much why don't you remove them from your ships and fly around with only armor standing between you and the enemy, like a bunch of rеtаrds.

PS: And fuck whoever thought it was a good idea to put this goddamn wordfilter.
The word "rеtаrd" has a variety of meanings, not all of them are meant to be insulting, you goddamn rеtаrds.

 

[GnomeKing]

progressively letting in damage for shields seems the idea > perhaps as they get weakened, or perhaps when total shield size gets 'very big' (ie 'small ships' still have 100% protection).

nobody is trying to nerf 'large ships' simply for the sake of it - but make game-play with larger vs smaller ships more interesting.

 

[StormWing0]

I think the main issue here is assassin ships built to be 99% gun and 1% everything else.

 

[JumpSuit]

It isn't a terrible idea on its own, but missile alpha as it is makes mitigation a pretty bad idea, damage values are just too high in comparison to ship durability for this to be a good addition. Weakening weapons is a bad idea because it really screws things at small scale, and I don't see any plans to significantly change how much damage a ship can take, so I am strongly against this until ship durability goes up.

I do hope that you are aware the Power Update is BEFORE the Weapons Update? So, in Layamon terms: After this update Weapons are changing too, then Universe.

 

[kulbolen]

you can build a fully covered ship with fully separated systems and fully efficient power. =D