Docked turrets get parent ships sheild coverage.

[NeonSturm]

How about redirecting always 50% of the damage to the ship itself?
And let turrets regenerate the parent's ship's shields with up to 50% of combat-repair excess.

Nothing would be invincible, but players would be more encouraged to not have everything under 1 shield.
Once a turret shield is brought down, it won't get help from the ship.

Docked ships could even receive 75% bonus if the fire arc gets restricted to maybe5°.


I am not against balance, but please see that in big ship fights, turrets can be brought down in <1 second from enemy ships if they have 1/10 of your main ship's shields.
Default-capacitors store about 10 seconds default-weapon fire.

 

[whiterhino16]

Also, if schema breaks shields or turrets and somebody comes in and says "shields/turrets need fixing" and this gets limitless praise despite being a much worse idea than "lets use the old system" I want you future people to know that I called it. It happened with an idea for spherical shields and it might happen again.

Also, future person, can I have a jet pack?

 

[NeonSturm]

I want to throw in a new part to consider:

If you dock hull plates with a few layers 50%-armour hull and beneath punch-through effect modules (provide armour) + maybe reactors, your enemy needs to use first non-ion, non-punch-through, non-emp and then his ion/emp to get your shields/power down, then punch-through or pierce to actually do damage.

Even pierce damaged is reduced by armour, leaving the core and effect cpu of your armour plate as sweet spots (though the enemy has to fire very accurate or get a lucky hit with a lot of pierce damage or hit enough effect modules to break this armour-plate with pierce equipped.

If the enemy is unable to use 4 effect systems effectively he has to use the effect selection - once to kill your docked armour, and again once he want to be effective vs the main ship.
(maybe armour plates also help against push/pull/stop if stopping docked does not affect your ship - dunno)

If it takes 1-2 seconds to choose effects, the enemy has 1-2 less time to fire at you.
If he tries to take the armour plates out first with overload or normal weapons, he does 1/2 the intended damage vs shields while he miss.

Though explosive effect is an effective counter, it is definitively worth considering it, as it renders most attackers useless.


(I am assuming that effects work on docked ships while you leave the core and do not count mother-ship mass into account)

 

[Lecic]

I want to throw in a new part to consider:

If you dock hull plates with a few layers 50%-armour hull and beneath punch-through effect modules (provide armour) + maybe reactors, your enemy needs to use first non-ion, non-punch-through, non-emp and then his ion/emp to get your shields/power down, then punch-through or pierce to actually do damage.

Even pierce damaged is reduced by armour, leaving the core and effect cpu of your armour plate as sweet spots (though the enemy has to fire very accurate or get a lucky hit with a lot of pierce damage or hit enough effect modules to break this armour-plate with pierce equipped.

If the enemy is unable to use 4 effect systems effectively he has to use the effect selection - once to kill your docked armour, and again once he want to be effective vs the main ship.
(maybe armour plates also help against push/pull/stop if stopping docked does not affect your ship - dunno)

If it takes 1-2 seconds to choose effects, the enemy has 1-2 less time to fire at you.
If he tries to take the armour plates out first with overload or normal weapons, he does 1/2 the intended damage vs shields while he miss.

Though explosive effect is an effective counter, it is definitively worth considering it, as it renders most attackers useless.


(I am assuming that effects work on docked ships while you leave the core and do not count mother-ship mass into account)

Effects stop working when you leave the core.

 

[NeonSturm]

That is bad.
At least for AI.
Maybe it works with logic or bobby
My math hates your argument

BTW: I tried armour once and it remained active while I was outside shooting at it.
Maybe it changed in the dev?

 

[Lecic]

That is bad.
At least for AI.
Maybe it works with logic or bobby
My math hates your argument

BTW: I tried armour once and it remained active while I was outside shooting at it.
Maybe it changed in the dev?

You can set up logic to a computer to keep it online, but it's actually rapidly turning on and off, so if an enemy has a rapid cannon they will have breach times where they can ignore the effect.

 

[Keptick]

Some ships might look like that, but should they?

That is literally the funniest typo I have ever seen XD. Even beats debri's numerous typos.

 

[Lecic]

Ithirahad OH come on. I fixed it. Why did you give me a bad spelling on something that doesn't even have any bad spelling? It's not even the post that had the bad spelling! It's a post from me saying I fixed it!

 

[Ithirahad]

Ithirahad OH come on. I fixed it. Why did you give me a bad spelling on something that doesn't even have any bad spelling? It's not even the post that had the bad spelling! It's a post from me saying I fixed it!

Wait, I did... Wat... May have been a mistap.

 

[ltmauve]

I came up with a formula for my idea above.
Damage to parent shield: (dmg * balancing factor / (turret mass/2 + ship mass)) or dmg, whichever is lower. (to prevent parent shield taking more damage than weapon can produce)
Damage to turret: dmg - parent shield dmg.
This only happens when turret shield < parent shield.

 

[NeonSturm]

I came up with a formula for my idea above.
Damage to parent shield: dmg * balancing factor / (turret mass/2 + ship mass) or dmg, whichever is lower.
Damage to turret: dmg - parent shield dmg.
This only happens when turret shield < parent shield.

more ship mass = more damage not to parent? why do you think peoples want their turrets protected?
assuming 10 mass (100 block) turrets with 1/3 weapon blocks counting toward dmg do approximately 33*15 = 500 damage every 3 seconds
assuming a ship is 6x as heavy as a turret (to have a turret facing each direction)

1. 1. 50dmg * 0.1 / lower( 10 mass + 60 mass OR 50dmg ) = 0.071 or 0.1 dmg
   2. 50dmg * 1 / lower( 10 mass + 60 mass OR 500dmg ) = 0.71 or 1 dmg
   3. 50dmg * 10 / lower( 10 mass + 60 mass OR 5000dmg ) = 7.1 or 10 dmg
2. 1. 500dmg * 0.1 / lower( 10 mass + 60 mass OR 50dmg ) = 0.71 or 0.1 dmg
   2. 500dmg * 1 / lower( 10 mass + 60 mass OR 500dmg ) = 7.1 or 1 dmg
   3. 500dmg * 10 / lower( 10 mass + 60 mass OR 5000dmg ) = 71 or 10 dmg
3. 1. 5000dmg * 0.1 / lower( 10 mass + 60 mass OR 50dmg ) = 7.1 or 0.1 dmg
   2. 5000dmg * 1 / lower( 10 mass + 60 mass OR 500dmg ) = 71 or 1 dmg
   3. 5000dmg * 10 / lower( 10 mass + 60 mass OR 5000dmg ) = 710 or 10 dmg

I think the balancing factor has to be the same as the percentage of weapons on an average turret - 33 or more - to consume about 1/2 damage with the parent ship in a fight with equal sizes.

The problem with this formula is that is does almost not matter if a turret is 1/6 of the ship size or 1/100.
if dmg < ship+turret mass, then the lower the damage (first part of result), the more is absorbed by the parent ship through minimum damage (second part) - which is a big error/fail because it nerfes small ships where 33 damage actually matters (or it buffs shotguns over other weapons).
Beam weapons will go after the parent shield, cannons balanced, missiles hit the turret. OMG

---

Please do not post random formula if you do not know what it does.

You need at least a formula which is not based on damage, but dps of a weapon, or it will restrict the balance options for weapons (dmg vs burst) too much. (what did you try to archive?)

EDIT: now as I got the disagree of who I disagreed I am a target of further disagrees? (like if a first disagree makes me being threatened as outlaw?)

 

[ltmauve]

Er, you read that wrong. It should be lower( (dmg/(turret mass/2 + ship mass)) , dmg ) The maximum amount that the ship's shields can absorb is the damage.

I came up with it to fulfill the following criteria:
small turret on small ship gets the best bonus.
small turret on a larger ship gets an okay bonus.
large turret on a larger ship gets the worst bonus.

 

[NeonSturm]

I know, but you wrote your formula wrong -> that is what I was trying to say/proof.
You should post some own examples to help others to see that it does what you want to archive.

The numbers in your examples also help others to understand
how you understand the situation which needs balance.