Brainstorm This Planetary Shield

[Valiant70]

This began as a discussion post on a thread about ground vehicles, but it really needs its own thread due to the scope and impact of the feature I suggested. It's been moved here, and a link has been placed on the other thread.

the only way that I think this could work within starmade is that special planetary shielding is added that either heavily or completely negates ship born weapons. Only weapons mounted to "Vehicle Cores" and astronaut weapons will deal damage to the planet

We do need something like that. Such a shield could motivate a ground attack. Once the shield were disabled, ships could fire on the planet to support ground troops, or ground troops could be evacuated and the planet blown apart. Before someone starts screaming about balance, remember that planets are really not very useful right now, and that such a shield is necessarily going to be severely (even brokenly) overpowered compared to ship weapons and shields in order to encourage ground warfare.

I haven't come up with any good numbers yet (too early in the morning!), but here's an idea of the shield's effect.

• Mechanics: A dodecahedronal shield encompassing the entire planet and providing absurd defense.
  • The shield is rather expensive per block, but uses grouping effects similar to power reactors.
  • There may be one shield grouping per plate. Groups across all plates contribute to a single, planet-wide shield pool.
  • The shield itself behaves similarly to planet HP. It regenerates rapidly even under fire, requiring a strong, sustained bombardment to break.
  • Rather than stopping shots when they hit the surface, the shield stops weapons fire high in the atmosphere to protect ground vehicles and troops.
  • It is possible for small craft to fly through the shield, although it has some harmful effects. The goal is to make it impossible for large ships to do anything of note inside the shield, while allowing fighter-bombers and dropships to pass through.
    • On contact with the shield, weapons are disabled for a few seconds. Scifi excuse: Shield energy briefly overloads targeting systems. This applies to hostile and friendly alike.
    • For enemy and (optionally) neutral: Shields are drained rapidly every tick a ship is in contact with the planetary shield (i.e. while passing through the shield or skimming its surface). It takes one second for a ship shield to fail completely regardless of size. A small craft can get through in a fraction of a second, but a larger one that tries to do the same may wreck into the planet or fail to get through in time.
    • An unshielded ship in contact with the shield takes armor and structure HP damage every tick. The magnitude of the damage scales with the max capacity of the planetary shield. Block destruction could happen but isn't necessary IMO. Battles are CPU-heavy enough without an energy field rapidly eating thousands of blocks.
    • For Pete's sake keep your Titan's nose OUT of the shield!!! It's overpowered for a reason.
• Balance: A planetary shield should be many times easier to build than a ship capable of overwhelming it.
  • Scenario: Newbies land on a planet. Within a matter of hours, they've built a mining ship, flown off, mined asteroids, and build a shield virtually impermeable to a 5000 mass ship.
  • Scenario: A mature faction lands on a planet to establish a forward base. In under an hour, they've installed a shield too strong for even a Titan to pierce.
  • An enemy faction launches a combined ground and space assault in attempt to take a fortified planet, but the ground troops fail to disable the shield so the space assault is useless.
  • An enemy faction assaults a planet with a ship comparable to the Death Star, nearly half the size of the planet under attack. The shield is gradually brought to its knees by the super-Titan's weapon system and finally fails after a 30 minute bombardment. Less than a minute later, the planet gets fragged. Hmm... might have been more fun to launch a ground assault.

A mechanic like this could eventually replace home base invulnerability, simply because a truly invulnerable base would no longer be needed.

This would also fix some complaints about small and large ships. Small ships could do something Titans will never be able to: fly in below a planetary shield to attack things.

Ground assault vehicles could be usable on the surface if only small ships could be used inside the shield.

 

[Vilab]

"A mechanic like this could eventually replace home base invulnerability, simply because a truly invulnerable base would no longer be needed."

players with low-end computer can't render full planets, and have a hard time when they land on them, it would make the game unplayable for them ( because they can't land, they won't use planet-base, and so are stuck with much weaker space-base )

moreover, the problem with destructible home base, is that the player/faction lose everything, they have no reason anymore to stay in the same server because they have to start again from scratch;



this idea is interresting as it would make secondary base less vulnerable. However, it would probably need bigger planets.

 

[Wolverines527]

Well to fix that stations could also use the same mechanic have like a deathstar effect thereby making your own planet in all technicality
[DOUBLEPOST=1439741267,1439741104][/DOUBLEPOST]Though planets will be the dominate factor with high resources and unlimited cover and build turret placement making it an impregnable fortress to anyone besides landing with ground forces
[DOUBLEPOST=1439741662][/DOUBLEPOST]But i also have an idea to keep the home base protection. As long as you have other Sectors under your control your home base will be safe from attack

 

[Valiant70]

players with low-end computer can't render full planets, and have a hard time when they land on them

This is a problem on a lot of levels, and it needs to be fixed with more efficient rendering mechanics. Loading the whole planet into memory at once is a bad idea and limits the size of planets. This is really a topic for another thread though.

"A mechanic like this could eventually replace home base invulnerability, simply because a truly invulnerable base would no longer be needed."

players with low-end computer can't render full planets, and have a hard time when they land on them, it would make the game unplayable for them ( because they can't land, they won't use planet-base, and so are stuck with much weaker space-base )

moreover, the problem with destructible home base, is that the player/faction lose everything, they have no reason anymore to stay in the same server because they have to start again from scratch;



this idea is interresting as it would make secondary base less vulnerable. However, it would probably need bigger planets.

In the current game, there is a config option that makes home bases vulnerable if a faction runs out of faction points. This is already an issue if servers choose that option. Turning off invulnerability in favor of planet bases would be another option and hopefully a popular one.

 

[Crimson-Artist]

awesome! though for the planetary shield computer I would make some changes. Give it some kind of unique context menu so players have a reason to keep it within access distances other wise players will just place it under one of the plates and a ground assault no matter how successful will never be able to get at it.

also i would just have it one planetary shield per planet instead of needing one for every plate. It might be a little annoying for a ground team to have to look through every nook and cranny to destroy 12 PSCs rather then one heavily guarded one

 

[EMC007]

This, this is an awesome idea, I love the idea of ground battles so I would LOVE it if this were implemented

+1

 

[Valiant70]

awesome! though for the planetary shield computer I would make some changes. Give it some kind of unique context menu so players have a reason to keep it within access distances other wise players will just place it under one of the plates and a ground assault no matter how successful will never be able to get at it.

also i would just have it one planetary shield per planet instead of needing one for every plate. It might be a little annoying for a ground team to have to look through every nook and cranny to destroy 12 PSCs rather then one heavily guarded one

If a computer block were used for this (I hadn't thought of that actually) I'd say only one per planet. Keeping the entire shield on one plate would be okay too, I suppose. It could be built within and beneath the main city or military installation. In addition, there needs to be a way to scan down both faction module and shield computer in order to blow them up.

 

[StormWing0]

hmm might be a bit OP but then again. A Starting player shouldn't be able to setup a base this strong through off the start but in theory we could use the existing shield blocks for this but change how they act on planets.

 

[Valiant70]

hmm might be a bit OP but then again.

I specifically said it's supposed to be to make it worthwhile. If it isn't severely overpowered, it will not encourage ground warfare. It will only encourage massive ships to bomb it out.
[DOUBLEPOST=1439758363,1439758286][/DOUBLEPOST]

in theory we could use the existing shield blocks for this but change how they act on planets.

You might still want normal shields on the surface to prevent accidental personal weapons fire from trashing stuff and to protect somewhat from fighter-bombers. I guess that's debatable though.

 

[StormWing0]

hmm if you want OP than why not instead channel the damage orbiting ships deal into generating more power to use on the planet? Why negate it when you can put it to use? The more damage they try and deal the more power you have. :P

 

[Crimson-Artist]

If a computer block were used for this (I hadn't thought of that actually) I'd say only one per planet. Keeping the entire shield on one plate would be okay too, I suppose. It could be built within and beneath the main city or military installation. In addition, there needs to be a way to scan down both faction module and shield computer in order to blow them up.

indeed but what i was referring to is players placing it underneath the plate and inside of the molten core. you can build underneath the plate and you can sink ships inside of the core using rails but to astronauts the core is totally solid. even if you ride a ship into the core the moment you get out you are stuck. A ground assault would be completely useless if they cant even attack something that is inside of a planet. So either you prevent all building under plates (which im on the fence about) or you make it so the planetary shield computer has to be accessed by players to prevent a set it and bury it meta from developing.

You might still want normal shields on the surface to prevent accidental personal weapons fire from trashing stuff and to protect somewhat from fighter-bombers. I guess that's debatable though.

if anything the planetary shield would be the third tier of defense and once its gone the invading force's orbiting fleet can open up on the planet clearing a path. Thats where regular shields will help.

 

[lupoCani]

Planetary shields in sci-fi is something I've been thinking about a lot. Mostly, I've been trying to create mechanics that would allow for interesting stories, but I think some of my thoughts would be applicable to gameplay as well.

To create the system, I think the two goals to be pursued are

• That the average invasion of a planet is to include a dominant, and largely critical, phase of ground-to-ground combat with little to no interference from above.
• That millitary presence in space around the planet remains relevant, and by extension, that suborbital warfare equipment alone is not able to conquer a moderately fortified planet.

So, as for the first point, what conditions are needed for ground combat somewhat similar to the real thing to take place? First, of course, there needs to be a two-dimensional environment, which planets fortunately provide.

Second, there needs to be some notion of territory. That is, both parties must a have a limited space they can deploy from, to create fronts and controlled areas, lest all planetary combat immediately become a massive, planet-wide melee. For the defending party, this limitation is imposed by their infrastructure- where they can't safely travel from one of their hangars, they can't put vehicles. For the attacking party, on the other hand, the limitation on where they can drop their resources must probably come from the second goal, keeping the ships relevant:

For the second point, if an orbital bombardment will not be a practical means of breaking the shield, what purpose will the presence of ships serve? What immediately comes to mind is getting the ground forces through the shield. If we suppose that bombardment would still be largely ineffective at breaching the shield, but capable of locally weakening it so that smaller vessels can get through, orbital firepower would still be a vital part of the invasion.
Additionally, the ability to pass through the shield would be limited to a small, weakened areas, meaning the attackers can't drop their tanks right into the defending army. The choice in where to weaken the shield would add an element of stratergy, one that could be expanded farther by giving the defending party the ability to divert more shielding to particular areas.

I have no idea how to end this post.

 

[Lecic]

Planetary shields in sci-fi is something I've been thinking about a lot. Mostly, I've been trying to create mechanics that would allow for interesting stories, but I think some of my thoughts would be applicable to gameplay as well.

To create the system, I think the two goals to be pursued are

• That the average invasion of a planet is to include a dominant, and largely critical, phase of ground-to-ground combat with little to no interference from above.
• That millitary presence in space around the planet remains relevant, and by extension, that suborbital warfare equipment alone is not able to conquer a moderately fortified planet.

So, as for the first point, what conditions are needed for ground combat somewhat similar to the real thing to take place? First, of course, there needs to be a two-dimensional environment, which planets fortunately provide.

Second, there needs to be some notion of territory. That is, both parties must a have a limited space they can deploy from, to create fronts and controlled areas, lest all planetary combat immediately become a massive, planet-wide melee. For the defending party, this limitation is imposed by their infrastructure- where they can't safely travel from one of their hangars, they can't put vehicles. For the attacking party, on the other hand, the limitation on where they can drop their resources must probably come from the second goal, keeping the ships relevant:

For the second point, if an orbital bombardment will not be a practical means of breaking the shield, what purpose will the presence of ships serve? What immediately comes to mind is getting the ground forces through the shield. If we suppose that bombardment would still be largely ineffective at breaching the shield, but capable of locally weakening it so that smaller vessels can get through, orbital firepower would still be a vital part of the invasion.
Additionally, the ability to pass through the shield would be limited to a small, weakened areas, meaning the attackers can't drop their tanks right into the defending army. The choice in where to weaken the shield would add an element of stratergy, one that could be expanded farther by giving the defending party the ability to divert more shielding to particular areas.

I have no idea how to end this post.

A good way to keep orbital ships relevant would be as a launch pad for small craft and as a place to respawn, once that becomes a system. Additionally, you'd need orbital ships to prevent enemy reinforcements from arriving.

 

[Wolverines527]

A good way to keep orbital ships relevant would be as a launch pad for small craft and as a place to respawn, once that becomes a system. Additionally, you'd need orbital ships to prevent enemy reinforcements from arriving.

Good idea

 

[Wolverines527]

Destroyers, Frigates and corvettes could be able to make atmospheric bombardments within the shield which would make you want to armor and set up defense turrets around the perimeter of your shield generator and make it very well defended

 

[Lecic]

Destroyers, Frigates and corvettes could be able to make atmospheric bombardments within the shield which would make you want to armor and set up defense turrets around the perimeter of your shield generator and make it very well defended

I think just fighters would be able to cause enough havok on a planet.

 

[Wolverines527]

I think just fighters would be able to cause enough havok on a planet.

True enough though the larger the ship the more vulnerable it is to the shield which would ether
A cause crippling damage
B wreck havoc on shielding making the ship susceptible to ground fire from turrets, ground vehicles and rocket launchers which would mean the any of the 4 or five classes escort, troopship, supply ship bomber and fighters of any opposing faction has a disadvantage which would be immediately noticeable

 

[Valiant70]

True enough though the larger the ship the more vulnerable it is to the shield which would ether
A cause crippling damage
B wreck havoc on shielding making the ship susceptible to ground fire from turrets, ground vehicles and rocket launchers which would mean the any of the 4 or five classes escort, troopship, supply ship bomber and fighters of any opposing faction has a disadvantage which would be immediately noticeable

Exactly. There are two difficulties. First, the ship must fit UNDER the shield, which is harder the smaller the planet is. The other difficulty is getting through the shield fast enough to prevent the shields from being crippled or dropped, and if you don't have enough thrust to stop underneath, you'll hit the planet. I expect corvettes will be the only ships regularly seen underneath planetary shields if they're implemented as described in the OP. I'll have to do some fine-tuning to the idea.

 

[Wolverines527]

Exactly. There are two difficulties. First, the ship must fit UNDER the shield, which is harder the smaller the planet is. The other difficulty is getting through the shield fast enough to prevent the shields from being crippled or dropped, and if you don't have enough thrust to stop underneath, you'll hit the planet. I expect corvettes will be the only ships regularly seen underneath planetary shields if they're implemented as described in the OP. I'll have to do some fine-tuning to the idea.

Good point and with the new antigravity plate which will allow a ship to hover in a planets gravity

 

[Parameter]

I like this idea.

Maybe you force the Shield Generator Computer to be assaultable by requiring it have an unobstructed view of the sky. The lore could be that the generator itself produces the shielding effect, and anything permanently between it and the sky disrupts the effect. Then, you have this small vulnerable block (or chimney that you have to defend against atmospheric fighters or ground troops. Presumably you'll be using the planetary girth to hide some utterly massive conventional shields protecting the defense computer, so fighters won't be as effective at securing the system as grunts with torches.

Also, maybe have the planetary shield just zero out the shields AND power of any ship as long as it's in contact with them, good guys or bad guys. This adds some interesting strategic decisions. The computer is probably heavily defended, so bad guys don't want to drop essentially shut-down fighters right into the battle. It's more advantageous for them to drop away from the defense computer in a more lightly defended area, to establish a beachhead where they can regenerate their reserves. Small craft can regenerate energy quickly, forego shielding in favor of armor, and still have a high-enough thrust-to-mass they aren't screwed if they can't power their anti-gravity system for a little bit.

Larger ships, however, spend longer in contact with the planetary shields, are hurt more by total power/shield loss, and should have a very difficult time maneuvering in atmosphere due to lower thrust to mass ratios.

In general, I think the way you balance planetary combats vs. titans is to make it more power efficient to build on the planet vs. a spacecraft. The death star was fearsome because it was large enough to employ a planet-shattering artillery laser in a mobile package. There's no reason Alderaan couldn't have had a dozen death-star-size defense lasers scattered across the planet's surface - a planet is very much bigger than a moon, and should be able to support heavier weaponry than a moon-sized ship. The planetary rock-paper-scissors then becomes: take out the planetary shield generators so you can actually damage the massive planetary lasers that threaten your ships, so that you can commence orbital bombardment from the hole you've punched in the defensive line.

I think capital ship v. planet combat should be viewed almost as small ship v. capital combat. A single small fighter may only annoy a fighting capital ship, but may genuinely threaten a space miner if it plays its cards right. Similarly, a titan might only annoy the planetary headquarters of Cannons, Cannons, Cannons, LLC, but may have free reign to annihilate the planet that's trying to recreate Minecraft survival.