Nerf shield curves so that shields scale appropriately for Titans

[Planr]

But it is, and your lack for development vision is made clear here, Planr.

"Development visions" are only as good as the experience backing that vision. And mine is well-justified and crystal-clear. Yours, I don't think I can say the same for.

Your keep saying "unrelated features" And you are terribly wrong.

Then explain to me how changing thrusters fixes overpowered shields. The two issues are totally unrelated in terms of solutions. For thrusters, you change the way ships scale in relation to intertia and mass-vs-thruster strength. For shields, you go into the code and change the values in the equations for calculating shield returns.

You game experience also comes from an incomplete game, For Christs sake!

Oh, and where does your "experience" come from? Are you some sort of time traveler, who happens to have the future complete copy of the game that you're getting all your information from for the basis of your arguments in this thread? The fact that the game is incomplete is a key factor in the importance of this thread! The fact that it's still in development means that shields can be changed! I made this thread because this is an issue that desperately needs to be fixed now. I'm starting to doubt that this problem will ever get fixed. Honestly, I'm worried. We've been telling the devs about this for many weeks and very little has been done about it.

You are fractionating the game mechanics sorely in your experience of not being able to dodge things

FOR THE MILLIONTH TIME, this has NOTHING to do with dodging weapons fire! Stop bringing that up! That doesn't concern the issue at all here!

Also, your scaling experiment doesn't work. Seriously, Keep thinking a ships half the size of another can feasibly kill its enemy being 50% bigger then the said ship.

They should be able to, if they are engineered and built good enough! With the current system of the game's building mechanics regarding starships, the factory of craftsmanship plays very little value right now in how well ships of the same size perform in relation to how skilled-ly built they are. I want to see those titans that were crappily built in an hour by just using admin commmands and slapping down 10x10x10 chunks of power, thrusters and shields to be something that is a match for a smaller but well-built and high-effort-put-into-it destroyer design.

There isn't much incentive for me to build good anymore, considering that some 8-year-old who barely knows how to use a computer could just as easily kill my ship with his ugly boxcube of death. Maybe you've never had to deal with such humiliating circumstances, but I have, and I want my hard work in the ships I build to actually play off in terms of combat performance. Sadly, it doesn't. Being smart in this game doesn't help much any more. Maybe this move was made at the urging of higher-ups who were seeing a lot of badly-written complaints from people who didn't even know how to play the game complaining they couldn't kill an isanth. Social darwinism ought to play out in starmade, not in the manner of how big your ship is- but how good it was built. And the current shield mechanics are a massive roadblock to such a dream I have. Which is why Comr4de is making his own mod that makes combat actually work good, the way it should be.

 

[Admiral.Piett]

They should be able to, if they are engineered and built good enough! With the current system of the game's building mechanics regarding starships, the factory of craftsmanship plays very little value right now in how well ships of the same size perform in relation to how skilled-ly built they are. I want to see those titans that were crappily built in an hour by just using admin commmands and slapping down 10x10x10 chunks of power, thrusters and shields to be something that is a match for a smaller but well-built and high-effort-put-into-it destroyer design.

Only if the pilot is blind, deaf and dumb. Which is currently the case. It needs tweaks, I agree. Secondly, your knowledge, my dear, is EMPIRIC. Mine is based on in game engine testing, and though i wouldn't go as far and dare say it is scientific, it is far superior in any terms to empiric knowledge (Otherwsie we would still be stuck on pentium III's). With community based ships. And some ugly blocks, to try out things. You brought out the death cube issue, which I am attempting to balance in my other thread. Might look into it, as well, I also want to out rule cubes as the most efficient design. I agree they shouldn't rule. Even design meets its ruler, compared to sheer size and power, and you don't agree over that, but it is a reality you need to accept. The HMS Hood perished not by design flaws, but by superior skill in the Bismarck, and firepower capabilities, along with poor choices by the captain. Eventually, the Bismarck was brought down, to much effort, by the allies. I strongly recommend you to look how naval warfare works, as it is as close as we get in real life to this. If you disagree over that, look into Freelancer, and into Eve Online. Both will hopefully enlighten you about the actual size of this issue, other than just shields. I support Ship design and efficiency above all else! Hence all my suggestions! But in order to achieve so, we must complete the rest of the game mechanics! Also, you said it yourself. With the current system. which is compromised of much more parts than just shields.And it has everything to do with dodging. If you can stay alive, then you can kill it. Simple.

Also, look up the definition of feasibility. And the pointed out mod actually has NOTHING to do with this thread or the discussion in it.

I do urge for changes into how the game works, but it will take way more than just a little change in the code for shields to be balanced. That is the idea i am trying (and apparently, failing) to transmit here. We have more pressing issues, and I do believe i listed a fairly coherent order of how they should be pursued. Everything here however is futile if the devs don't read this. If event after changes on the rest of the mechanics, the issue of OP shields is still present, then a fix must be made.

Want testing background? How about WoT alpha tester, WoWp alpha tester, betas for all Men of war games, I hope to get into the alpha of WoWarships, beta for LoL, Dota2, Borderlands 1 and 2, Battlefield Hardline, BF4, Soldier front 2, MechWarriorOnline, Warthunder, Warframe, StarConflict and hopefully, Homeworld ship breakers soon. I know how to give feedback, and I try to be constructive. I admit i am a condescending jerk at times. So there is the testing experience ruled out.

Because, there must be a reason why the tester and developer group constantly "dismisses" your suggestions.

There is a Valve documentary, Free To Play. Check it out. Also revise how games are developed and balanced, the thinking process, and all those things. They are mighty important. Check out why LoL buffes and Nerf champions, Why MWO buffs or nerfs a gun or a mech chassis, and how WoT determines a change in tank mechanics is needed. Understading all those decisions will help you see the big picture.

 

[Commodore]

ANY ship big enough to really damage a million block ship, (in under 10 minutes) is going to be so big that dodging turret fire is not going to happen, unless near maximum weapons range. With missiles + beams on the turrets, you can't out snipe them, you can't dodge them, and the smaller ship will die even if the titan is unoccupied.

Unless you can hold range at 2000m, shoot at the titan with cannons + beams, orbit the titan quickly and take advantage of the curved path lockon missiles will take, you cannot avoid being hit.

 

[MrFURB]

Heyya folks. I'd like to remind you to please try your best to keep your personal grudges and arguments off of public channels and forums here.
I'm worried that the different people taking part in this discussion aren't paying attention to each other or are off-hand dismissing an excellent opportunity to combine their knowledge and address the issues brought up here with a bit more focus.

I'll admit that my primary calculations for the strength of weapons and shields did not take into account realistic accuracy; neither did it take into account the efficiency penalties for having more than one weapon on a computer.
It also didn't account for ion effects. Or the fact that vanilla shield regeneration is never above 10%, rendering in-combat regeneration a terrible thing to rely on. Neither did it account for turrets, with or without their own power supply... There are quite a few variables present in combat already, and I'm pretty sure we're not even halfway done with all of the game-play elements related to combat.
Perhaps it would be better to move on from 'this is broken' to something along the lines of 'this is the best way to fix it to where the most people possible like it.'

In my own opinion, I think that better audio and visual feedback on how strong an enemy's shields are and how damaged they are will go a long way towards making combat with capacity-oriented shielding feel better.
A change to the levels of speed and maneuverability between vessels of different sizes, making the difference larger and more gradual, would also help. Combine that with a reason to use smaller-mass turrets (turret turn speed based on mass, I like it!) as point defense guns.
The end result of that, as I see in my imagination, is similar to many Sci-fi franchises in a way that smaller vessels can't deal critical damage to a capital ship, but can destroy it's anti-fighter defenses. Think of fighters vs. capital ship more as fighters vs. turret arrays. Once the turrets are down, the capital ship will have quite a few minutes worth of shielding to run back to allies with it's tail between it's legs and put on better turrets; the fighters simply can't destroy it in time, don't have the guns. The capital ship could still try to brawl it out with the fighters, but it's low maneuverability will hamper it's larger anti-capital weapons and on-board weapons, leaving only pulse and scatter missiles as the only useful alternatives. You end up in a situation where neither can effectively destroy each other without specialized tools for the job, such as an ion bomber against a capital ship's shielding or interceptors launched from a hangar bay.

 

[ToyotaSupra]

This thread:

Anyway, sorry Planr although gigantism is an issue I think that it is because most server admins want to feel big, and so allow people to have multiple capitals when in reality they would only have 1. If there was limited resources with no exceptions people would move away. But that isn't what your thread was about...so:

The game allows many tactical options for countering ship defense, and another block very soon will add even more. You can have a special 'shield breaker' ships that sacrifice vanilla damage to break through that capital's shields. You could go round the back and drain the ship's energy, leaving it defenseless by using EMP shot. Soon you'll be able to leave a little explosive present for any capital that dares move into your territory.

But I'm yapping, the way the game is balance so far is that for every defense there is a counter, and tweaks are being made to make this absolute. The trouble is (IMO) that when you give someone unlimited resources they're gonna use capitals only, naturally. It's the same reason why they limit speeds on GT3 cars, or else Ferrari would win every time.

 

[Stakhanov]

...vanilla shield regeneration is never above 10%, rendering in-combat regeneration a terrible thing to rely on.

People seem to miss an obvious element - linear scaling shield regeneration means a single capital ship can absorb exponentially more fire than its block equivalent in smaller ships. A capital ship with 9 times more shields than weapons could not destroy its own clone , but could destroy its block equivalent in ships fighting it in a perfectly coordinated fleet while remaining invulnerable to them.

Even infinite manpower is useless because of that rule.

 

[Commodore]

Stakhanov : The capital would need a LOT of power regen blocks to achieve that, with the amount of power shields are drawing. The smaller stuff can use the bonus million.

I really think the dimension bonus for power should be ^0.5 instead of a hard cap. That would let small ships get away with very few power blocks. But that's kind of a new topic.

 

[Admiral.Piett]

Any such ship Stakhanov shouldn't be able to deal any amount of important damage, making it a non priority target. The thing here is that we need to focus on the whole picture. It isn't the only ship in a fleet. And if the whole fleet where to be made of such ships, you should bring in some shield busters. I am not saying ,again, it is completely balanced, but I am sure we're close. That's why, right now there are more critical things to be taken into account before we change something as big and important as ship shielding.


Also, Linear, and exponential growth, or scaling, are completely different things, man. Linear... is linear, and exponential, well, then we would indeed have a problem. Linear is not exponential.

Exponential

Linear

Linear VS exponential

I think i made a point.

MrFURB I do get carried sometimes. But I want to nail that, into what is nothing more than mere opinion, shields should remain untouched until the game is nearer to completion.

 

[ResonKinetic]

MrFURB I do get carried sometimes. But I want to nail that, into what is nothing more than mere opinion, shields should remain untouched until the game is nearer to completion.

Now you're conflicting yourself. You say that shields should remain untouched until the game is nearer to completion, but the whole point of this topic is that shields were touched, changed and made worse.

Also, it will take longer for the game to get nearer to completion if core elements such as shielding are not implemented properly.

Oh, and

balance isn't Linear.

 

[Ithirahad]

Piett... What will even change as the game gets nearer to completion? New weapons and effects might be added, sure, but the basic dynamics seem to be in place, so the best time to change shield balancing would be NOW, while we're still focused on the topic of combat, so that other things are balanced to a properly-implemented standard and you don't end up having to "cascade rebalance" interrelated systems when you decide to change shield values later.

 

[Unnamed25]

It seems that fighters have the same problem as titans.
Right now my Lase fighter has around 380k shields, even if it used 100% of the damage to do damage (it uses 76% on the stop effect) it would take a long while for the shields to go down.
2k shield blocks = 1mil shields, and 2k shield blocks are only 3-5mil creds.

 

[Admiral.Piett]

I never said shields are perfect now, but combat is compromised of much more element that just shields, HP and damage. Right now shields look good on paper, and look good on repeated tests to see how much mass you need to kill a ship. If any nerfs are needed, right now it only to regen. Shields, as important as they are, need to wait a bit more. MrFURB already agreed that much of combat is movement, and yes, shields were touched this last time, but I think to good measure. I think it is closer to what needs to be than it was before. Unnamed25 Economy hasn't been balanced. Ithirahad Movement is too raw. The basic ideas are in place to represent the game's potential, but far from complete. The problem here, more than shields, is that that Titan ahead of you can turn fast enough to bring all its obviously up-scaled weaponry into your face, and that shouldn't be the case. In ships to close proximity in mass, or even 50% the mass of the bigger ship, the loser is obvious. It would take skill and luck, rather than all the amount of shields you want, to win that battle. A downgrading curve is not needed. The rest of the things must be in place, then you may say "Oh yeah, you know what? Shields are still OP"

 

[Unnamed25]

And if economy does get balanced, i don't want to have to use lots of 25k mass turrets that would cost EVEN more (and harder to get, harder to move.) to destroy that fighter.

Also that turret was built for total effectiveness, not looks.

 

[Lecic]

Not at all, please, remind yourself this @ReasonKinetic : It is an ALPHA game. And some many mechanics incomplete. Also, why the fuck should a 500 meter ship defeat a 800 meter one? Just hear the thought, it makes NO SENSE. He said it himself, titans need swarms of enemies to be defeated, or another titan. That IS the way it works everywhere else (Eve online, anyone?) Why not here? I do agree shield need tweaks, but the flat rate he is suggesting is beyond madness. Commodore I agree, turrets are another issue. But that is why i am pushing heavily on the aspect that
a) turrets should have their AI settings better defined to target intended objetives
b) They should share a % of the motherships shields, dependent on turret mass, and either "withdrawing" these shields fomr the motherships pool, or nerfing its regen equal to the regen the turret should get based on the amount of shields it has.
c) Turrets should move slower according to mass.

That way, we are almost making sure fights get enough tactical depth. Many more things need to be implemented, and mechanics polished. Shields certainly isn't the one that needs that right now.

Into my sincere opinion, this game will strike balance when ships is similar mass are comparable on performance, and only differ by it based on the ships design. AKA the biggest and better designed ship wins. It simply should be that way. if 2 Ships equal in mass to a titan defeat it, it is balanced slightly towards smaller ships, but people seem to like that idea, and i do, too. And yeah, we totally skipped the energy calculations here, which are very important, into achieving a ships size, defensive and offensive capabilities.

I don't think turrets should share any mothership shields. That would just give them a huge buff, because they could be packed with even more weapons.

 

[Admiral.Piett]

Unnamed25 then you don't know how to build anti fighter weaponry. And if the idea that turrets movements depend on mass kicks in, you can make turrets that kill fighter in reasonable time, without making 25k mass turrets. Your hyperbolic statement makes no sense. I also believe that in this game, the last thing that should be balanced is combat. Once all other systems are in play, then combat may start getting real balance. Both offensive and defensive. And again, now there are shield busters. Allow for the rest of the systems to be in place. I won't continue to comment here, I believe I've made my final opinion. Shields aren't perfect. Decreasing shields curves are not needed "yet". And the game needs to achieve further development milestones so we can actually get a feel of everything this game has to offer. Lecic more flexible design is allowed. And the percentage should be tuned so you can kill the turret. Small turrets would be a feasible thing, without having to use space in shielding. And big designs keep being just as powerful, albeit more efficient. More damage means more power usage, too, that is not guaranteed damage, because accuracy is never 100%. If we fine tune a number of shields being inherited, effectively nerfing the motherships shields, and not making the turret OP, we have a different approach to the issue as well. Also, you should still be able to get shielding into it if you want. My idea here is to allow flexibility in design.

 

[ResonKinetic]

Decreasing shields curves are not needed "yet".

no they are needed "yet" because they are important now

 

[Admiral.Piett]

ResonKinetic Your ability to stay out of context is astonishing.


Also, at some point people said they no longer use coaxials to hit peoplem but turrets. Turrets need balacing!!! Make them slower dependant on mass, and we are nerfing super shielded ships with super big turrets even more. Also, right now, turret mass is not added to the ships mass, nor taken to calculate the thrust of a ship. Once that changes, we should see if all this issues still rise. Bare with me, this is a perfectly valid reason to push over other mechanics to fight giganticism. And if they manage to make them collide with the mothership, blindspot are bigger and more exploitable.

 

[ResonKinetic]

as is your ability to ignore the issue at hand gg 10/10

 

[Admiral.Piett]

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.

 

[ResonKinetic]

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. I almost all my posts I've stated shields aren't perfect.

Again, conflicting yourself. You say shields aren't perfect, and then you say that they need to be held off until "other features" are implemented or whatever.

seriously man wtf shields are an integral part of the game; they should be the first thing taken care of