Proof that higher default shield capacitor values would be a good thing

[Keptick]

Note: This is only about shield CAPACITORS. Rechargers should stay the exact same. Also, there's a TL;DR at the end.

I've recently seen some people claiming that increasing shield capacitor values wouldn't increase combat time because people would just use higher weapon ratios. This is false. Assuming that you have two ships of equal mass with a similar combined amount of shield and weapon blocks, the one with the higher shield ratio wins (if we look at pure damage per second figures). Funny enough, it's already the case (it's just hard to notice because shield capacitors don't have a high enough value to give a good buffer). Want proof? Let's get started:

Note: I am going to calculate the numbers in TTK (time to kill that ship with the other ship's guns). In other words, the amount of "seconds" of damage a ship needs to inflict to the other to win. The calculation with weapons like missiles which deal multiple "seconds" of damage instantly (albeit with the same overall damage per second when you take into account the reload) would be the same. I am also going to ignore the low block count bonus to make the calculation simpler (wouldn't really change anything at higher block counts).

Let's also start with the current numbers:

• 1 weapon block = 5 dps (damage per second)
• 1 shield block = 50 shields.

Let's assume that you have two different ships. Both have the same combined block count of offensive and defensive systems, so let's say 100 blocks. So:

• Ship #1: 50/50 weapon/shield block count.
  • 250 dps / 2500 shields
  • Time to kill an other similar ship: 10 seconds
• Ship #2: 75/25 weapon/shield block count.
  • 375 dps / 1250 shields
  • Time to kill an other similar ship: 3.33 seconds.

Now this gets interesting, let's see how both ships would fare against each other:

• Ship #1: 2500 shields VS 375 DPS of ship #2. TTK: 6.66 seconds.
• Ship #2: 1250 shields VS 250 DPS of ship #1. TTK: 5 seconds.

Oh, what do we have here? The ship with a higher shield ratio would actually win. HOWEVER, with current shield values this just doesn't matter. Why? Because weapons like the missile/beam combo can deal up to 45 seconds of damage instantly. As such, it doesn't matter what an equivalent mass ship is packing in shields; it'll still get obliterated instantly many times over.

Ok, so now that that's out of the way, let us see what would happen with higher shield capacitor values. New values (note: I'm just using the new shield value as an example, what it should be is entirely open for debate):

• 1 weapon block: 5 dps (no change).
• 1 shield block: 500 shields. (x10 the current amount).

Now let's do the exact same calculations as we did with the current values:

• Ship #1: 50/50 weapon/shield block count.
  • 250 dps / 25000 shields
  • Time to kill an other similar ship: 100 seconds.
• Ship #2: 75/25 weapon/shield block count.
  • 375 dps / 12500 shields
  • Time to kill an other similar ship: 33.33 seconds.
• Ship #3: 90/10 weapon / shield block count.
  • 450 dps/ 5000 shields
  • Time to kill an other similar ship: 11.11 seconds.

Now let's pit ship #1 and ship #3 against each other and see what happens.

• Ship #1: 25000 shields VS 450 DPS of ship #3. TTK: 55.55 seconds
• Ship #3: 5000 shields VS 250 DPS of ship #1. TTK: 20 seconds (get rekt)

Soooooo, if you actually read this it should be pretty obvious that the "but people would just use higher weapon ratios" argument is flawed. Sure, a person could use higher weapon ratios and kill others faster. However, they would themselves be exposed to extremely quick deaths. It'd come down to play style: Balanced ship or glass cannon? No matter how you slice it, higher shield ratios are just overall better (unless you take into account someone ambushing someone else, but that's just tactic, not balance). Giving shield capacitors a higher base value of shields per block will increase combat time and make the game overall more enjoyable. Also notice how the values in my example are now over the missile's 45 second burst damage? (in the 50/50 example). That's right, no more missile instagank.

Now, I know that there's the mystical HP system that is in the works. But until we get it, simply temporarily editing the shield values to make them higher (takes about 10 seconds) would be a lot more enjoyable. It's not because it's "alpha" that we can just forgo making 10 second changes that make gameplay 10x more enjoyable until a proper feature is implemented.

TL;DR Higher base shield value for shield capacitors will increase combat lenght. The "but people would just use higher weapon ratios" argument is flawed, as demonstrated in the above post. Editing the shield config takes 10 seconds and would be a good thing until the HP system or other measure is implemented.

PS: Vanhelzing this one is for you.

 

[CyberTao]

The same could be done with reducing the weapon damage to 10% of what it is currently as well. So lets just nerf weapons! Would also give hull and the post-shield stage of a fight more time to show their worth.

Reducing weapons has the same effect as increasing shields, but also nets the bonus of giving more life to hull blocks. But people like big numbers, and that is the problem. People would rather have 10million of everything than a hundred even if they balanced out to about the same value.

You also admit to skipping over "burst" style DPS and first strike, which was the entire issue listed in that other thread btw, first strike carrying too much weight in the outcome. You fail to take into account that a person in a glass cannon knows they are in a glass cannon, and would prioritize a first strike over continued combat. While that can be chalked up as "tactics", the problem is that tactic is the only one that seems to be used, because it is the most effective, hence the problem.

It's gonna take more than changing a single value to make any meaningful change, though servers are welcome to try and see how it works out in the long run.
Also, a small nitpick, but shields are 55*, they were designed to be 11 times weapon damage per second, and recharge is 5.5.

 

[Keptick]

The same could be done with reducing the weapon damage to 10% of what it is currently as well. So lets just nerf weapons! Would also give hull and the post-shield stage of a fight more time to show their worth.

Reducing weapons has the same effect as increasing shields, but also nets the bonus of giving more life to hull blocks. But people like big numbers, and that is the problem. People would rather have 10million of everything than a hundred even if they balanced out to about the same value.

You also admit to skipping over "burst" style DPS and first strike, which was the entire issue listed in that other thread btw, first strike carrying too much weight in the outcome. You fail to take into account that a person in a glass cannon knows they are in a glass cannon, and would prioritize a first strike over continued combat. While that can be chalked up as "tactics", the problem is that tactic is the only one that seems to be used, because it is the most effective, hence the problem.

It's gonna take more than changing a single value to make any meaningful change, though servers are welcome to try and see how it works out in the long run.
Also, a small nitpick, but shields are 55*, they were designed to be 11 times weapon damage per second, and recharge is 5.5.

I actually adressed the problem of alpha strike. I just didn't do calculations with it (which are the same). I wasn't super clear on that, I'll edit to fix that. And I DO adress gank tactics at the end of the post... With high enough shields it becomes extremely risky to use gank tactics since in case of a miss the target will most likely survive. The reason it's so good atm is because of the huge margin of error.

I completely agree with you on the nerfing weapons thing. The only problem is that the damage of small enough weapons would be rounded down to zero. Not sure if that's a limitation or a bug though.

 

[Top 4ce]

The same could be done with reducing the weapon damage to 10% of what it is currently as well. So lets just nerf weapons! Would also give hull and the post-shield stage of a fight more time to show their worth.

Reducing weapons has the same effect as increasing shields, but also nets the bonus of giving more life to hull blocks. But people like big numbers, and that is the problem. People would rather have 10million of everything than a hundred even if they balanced out to about the same value.

You also admit to skipping over "burst" style DPS and first strike, which was the entire issue listed in that other thread btw, first strike carrying too much weight in the outcome. You fail to take into account that a person in a glass cannon knows they are in a glass cannon, and would prioritize a first strike over continued combat. While that can be chalked up as "tactics", the problem is that tactic is the only one that seems to be used, because it is the most effective, hence the problem.

It's gonna take more than changing a single value to make any meaningful change, though servers are welcome to try and see how it works out in the long run.
Also, a small nitpick, but shields are 55*, they were designed to be 11 times weapon damage per second, and recharge is 5.5.

I agree with Kep, but you have a point Cyber. Alfa damage needs to be looked at.

Taking that example:

• Ship #1: 25000 shields VS 450 DPS of ship #3. TTK: 55.55 seconds
• Ship #3: 5000 shields VS 250 DPS of ship #1. TTK: 20 seconds (get rekt)

A hulk missile (450 DPS) with 45s reload will do 20250 damage to a target (almost) instantly. In another 45s, it'll do another 20250 damage. So in reality it would only take 45s TTK. That's about a 20% decrease in time, but still over the 20 seconds.

However! Taking the 75/25 ratio:

• Ship #2: 75/25 weapon/shield block count.
  • 375 dps / 12500 shields
  • Time to kill an other similar ship: 33.33 seconds.

vs ship#1

Alfa damage: 375 DPS with 45s reload does 16875 instant damage with another 16875 damage 45s later. TTK is again 45s.

How long does ship#1 (250 DPS non-alfa) take to kill ship #2 (12500 shields)? 50 seconds.

Ship #1 would die to ship #2 Alfa damage. That being said this doesn't take any projectile traveling time into account. So in reality it's a lot closer to call.

 

[CyberTao]

The only problem is that the damage of small enough weapons would be rounded down to zero. Not sure if that's a limitation or a bug though.

Rounded to 0? The lowest damage weapon that I know of is the cannon-cannon combo, which requires 2 blocks to even function at 100%, giving it 10 dps, which is 1 damager per shot since it shots 10 times a second. Just increasing that to 4 blocks would give it 2 damage a shot, which is enough to damage even Advanced hulls.

Plus, systems have no armour, so using peirce on small ships become advantageous since you can bypass that hull that would take you forever to destroy. The only weapon I am not sure of is beam, because I just don't use beams, so no idea what it's lowest possible damage is. Ignore this


Also, try running those numbers again, with ships with a 25/75 weapon/shield ratio, just to see what happens.

 

[Criss]

Right. So let's get one major thing straight here. How much are you going to enjoy the experience of pounding down on an enemy with an invulnerability field? The entire community is crying out that shielding is the only meaningful defense, that hull is useless because we can cut through it like butter. People clearly want armor to mean something. Of course it will when health system comes out. The plan is to force the player to destroy the ship, and not just the core. That's great but it still doesn't solve our issues with the experience.

As for the shielding. Let's look at it as an experience and not just a balancing issue. How fun is it to fire at an invulnerable ship? The enemy is not taking damage, their shields are going down of course. Shields go offline. Anyone smart then uses a missile barrage. Target overheats. 90% of that fight took place while shields were up. I find that incredibly boring. Especially when we consider armor repairing, which at that point is useless. This is how most fights currently happen. Once shielding is down you can say you've got clear shots at killing the enemy.

Keptick, your solution only extends the period of time for the most dull aspect of combat; breaking through a shield. If shields mitigated damage instead of block it completely, my point would be less valid. If it solved the fact that weapons on ships are grossly disproportionate, then my point would be void. But it doesn't.

This game is made entirely of blocks. There is an awesomeness in physically breaking our ships apart. In graphical terms it is the most important part of the game; the fact that I have made any sized ship down to cubic meter details. I want to focus more of my time breaking those blocks, then breaking a shield. I couldn't give a damn about the shield.

I would rather see diminishing returns on weapon system after a certain percentage of a ships composition is made of weapon systems. Equal sized ships would not be able to nuke one-another without spending massive amounts of interior space for that weapon system. A true glass cannon.

 

[Jaaskinal]

I think another point to consider in this is the manufacturing costs of weapons vs shields. At the moment, weapons are fairly easy to make, (or at least that's my experience) and shields are a bit harder. Not only that, but the passive effect to make shields more efficient is expensive. I think this may be contributing to part of why ganking someone with missile-beam is the best option to kill someone right now. That being said, reducing the cost of shields doesn't solve the whole problem, because of what you said, the low shield values cause it to still be a game of whoever shoots first probably wins.

 

[Keptick]

Vanhelzing what part of "SHORT TERM SOLUTION UNTIL THE HP SYSTEM IS IMPLEMENTED" do you not understand? Of course breaking blocks and ripping a ship apart would be more fun.

You obviously have a solution that can be implemented almost instantly and that can temporarily fix the instakill fest that is currently PvP (not PvE) combat. I'm listening.

 

[Criss]

Vanhelzing what part of "SHORT TERM SOLUTION UNTIL THE HP SYSTEM IS IMPLEMENTED" do you not understand? Of course breaking blocks and ripping a ship apart would be more fun.

You obviously have a solution that can be implemented almost instantly and that can temporarily fix the instakill fest that is currently PvP (not PvE) combat. I'm listening.

I gave an idea. Weapons give diminishing returns after a certain percentage of the ship is comprised of weapon systems. This leads to smaller weapons due to an actual efficiency to achieve. It would also allow people to equip a more modules in any other system, allowing a push in specialized ship roles. Less weaponry leads to longer engagements. Less weaponry means less of a ship is taken out instantly. If the hull HP system focuses on the actual destruction of ship components in order to kill it then we should focus on balancing that process. It has nothing to do with shields. This isn't temporary solution. This is something that could take effect now and benefit all combat until we get the HP system. If at that point values need to be altered, then we can do so.

Let's not create temporary solutions. Lets find actual long term ones. Temporary changes to an entire system will just agitate the players. They already complain about being forced to refit ships, even though we are alpha testers.

Also, let's not tag me in a post, for a change that I already stated I was against, and then capslock on me when I disagree with the thread.

 

[MossyStone48]

You know that boilerplate friendly reminder to keep things civil? It goes right here. You're soaking in it. I hope you enjoyed reading this as much as I did typing it. See you around, starmates.

To get back on topic...
Needs moar armor.

 

[Sven_The_Slayer]

The problem is everybody builds breadnaughts designed for one hit kills. Every one of my ships can take a pounding from each other after shields are lost because they are designed as RP ships. With full interiors there is a lot of space to jam shields but not large weapon systems. Can I PVP in these ships against battleboxes? No. Would I suffer from these proposed changes? Yes. All my ships are perfectly balanced against each other, a 10x flat increase in shields would make the game unplayable for me. I did like it when the core shields were fairly strong though. This gave a huge bonus to small ships but effectively nothing to larger ones.

Plus, systems have no armour, so using peirce on small ships become advantageous since you can bypass that hull that would take you forever to destroy. The only weapon I am not sure of is beam, because I just don't use beams, so no idea what it's lowest possible damage is.

You are using outdated information. The old pierce ability has been dropped. Both peirce and punch use "puncture" which transfers excess damage to the next block when the hit block is destroyed. Essentially the original punch effect, however pierce gets 2x damage to systems and hull at 1:1 and 0% against shields. Punch does normal shield damage but is supposed to be less effective against hull and systems, (but doesn't). I laugh when I see people still using pierce as punch is the clearly better option currently.

 

[CyberTao]

You are using outdated information. The old pierce ability has been dropped. Both peirce and punch use "puncture" which transfers excess damage to the next block when the hit block is destroyed. Essentially the original punch effect, however pierce gets 2x damage to systems and hull at 1:1 and 0% against shields. Punch does normal shield damage but is supposed to be less effective against hull and systems, (but doesn't). I laugh when I see people still using pierce as punch is the clearly better option currently.

A quick look through the config tells me that "piercing" is still a valid option for effects;

We were already talking about changing the configs anyways, so switching it back to what it was shouldn't be too hard, would require some number play though.

 

[MossyStone48]

everybody builds breadnaughts

ALL HAIL the mighty breadnought.

 

[молоток]

I have to agree with Vanhelzing: Diminishing returns for weapons to point the weapons toward their intended roles is the best solution to the whole "shields vs hull vs weapons" conundrum.

 

[aceface]

Note: This is only about shield CAPACITORS. Rechargers should stay the exact same. Also, there's a TL;DR at the end.

I've recently seen some people claiming that increasing shield capacitor values wouldn't increase combat time because people would just use higher weapon ratios. This is false. Assuming that you have two ships of equal mass with a similar combined amount of shield and weapon blocks, the one with the higher shield ratio wins (if we look at pure damage per second figures). Funny enough, it's already the case (it's just hard to notice because shield capacitors don't have a high enough value to give a good buffer). Want proof? Let's get started:

Note: I am going to calculate the numbers in TTK (time to kill). In other words, the amount of "seconds" of damage a ship needs to inflict to the other to win. The calculation with weapons like missiles which deal multiple "seconds" of damage instantly (albeit with the same overall damage per second when you take into account the reload) would be the same. I am also going to ignore the low block count bonus to make the calculation simpler (wouldn't really change anything at higher block counts).

Let's also start with the current numbers:

• 1 weapon block = 5 dps (damage per second)
• 1 shield block = 50 shields.

Let's assume that you have two different ships. Both have the same combined block count of offensive and defensive systems, so let's say 100 blocks. So:

• Ship #1: 50/50 weapon/shield block count.
  • 250 dps / 2500 shields
  • Time to kill an other similar ship: 10 seconds
• Ship #2: 75/25 weapon/shield block count.
  • 375 dps / 1250 shields
  • Time to kill an other similar ship: 3.33 seconds.

Now this gets interesting, let's see how both ships would fare against each other:

• Ship #1: 2500 shields VS 375 DPS of ship #2. TTK: 6.66 seconds.
• Ship #2: 1250 shields VS 250 DPS of ship #1. TTK: 5 seconds.

Oh, what do we have here? The ship with a higher shield ratio would actually win. HOWEVER, with current shield values this just doesn't matter. Why? Because weapons like the missile/beam combo can deal up to 45 seconds of damage instantly. As such, it doesn't matter what an equivalent mass ship is packing in shields; it'll still get obliterated instantly many times over.

Ok, so now that that's out of the way, let us see what would happen with higher shield capacitor values. New values (note: I'm just using the new shield value as an example, what it should be is entirely open for debate):

• 1 weapon block: 5 dps (no change).
• 1 shield block: 500 shields. (x10 the current amount).

Now let's do the exact same calculations as we did with the current values:

• Ship #1: 50/50 weapon/shield block count.
  • 250 dps / 25000 shields
  • Time to kill an other similar ship: 100 seconds.
• Ship #2: 75/25 weapon/shield block count.
  • 375 dps / 12500 shields
  • Time to kill an other similar ship: 33.33 seconds.
• Ship #3: 90/10 weapon / shield block count.
  • 450 dps/ 5000 shields
  • Time to kill an other similar ship: 11.11 seconds.

Now let's pit ship #1 and ship #3 against each other and see what happens.

• Ship #1: 25000 shields VS 450 DPS of ship #3. TTK: 55.55 seconds
• Ship #3: 5000 shields VS 250 DPS of ship #1. TTK: 20 seconds (get rekt)

Soooooo, if you actually read this it should be pretty obvious that the "but people would just use higher weapon ratios" argument is flawed. Sure, a person could use higher weapon ratios and kill others faster. However, they would themselves be exposed to extremely quick deaths. It'd come down to play style: Balanced ship or glass cannon? No matter how you slice it, higher shield ratios are just overall better (unless you take into account someone ambushing someone else, but that's just tactic, not balance). Giving shield capacitors a higher base value of shields per block will increase combat time and make the game overall more enjoyable. Also notice how the values in my example are now over the missile's 45 second burst damage? (in the 50/50 example). That's right, no more missile instagank.

Now, I know that there's the mystical HP system that is in the works. But until we get it, simply temporarily editing the shield values to make them higher (takes about 10 seconds) would be a lot more enjoyable. It's not because it's "alpha" that we can just forgo making 10 second changes that make gameplay 10x more enjoyable until a proper feature is implemented.

TL;DR Higher base shield value for shield capacitors will increase combat lenght. The "but people would just use higher weapon ratios" argument is flawed, as demonstrated in the above post. Editing the shield config takes 10 seconds and would be a good thing until the HP system or other measure is implemented.

PS: Vanhelzing this one is for you.

Well said Keptick
[DOUBLEPOST=1423774795,1423774518][/DOUBLEPOST]

Weapons give diminishing returns after a certain percentage of the ship is comprised of weapon systems.

This, in my opinion is an excellent idea too. Combining it with a hinch of shield buffing to counter insta missile kills and pvp would be great :D

 

[Drakkart]

Actually i like as the situation is right now. it is not as the alpha damage would be that big of a deal. looking forward to the hp system but i kinda like the balance as it is i mean i saw released games doing worse so.

 

[Keptick]

I gave an idea. Weapons give diminishing returns after a certain percentage of the ship is comprised of weapon systems. This leads to smaller weapons due to an actual efficiency to achieve. It would also allow people to equip a more modules in any other system, allowing a push in specialized ship roles. Less weaponry leads to longer engagements. Less weaponry means less of a ship is taken out instantly. If the hull HP system focuses on the actual destruction of ship components in order to kill it then we should focus on balancing that process. It has nothing to do with shields. This isn't temporary solution. This is something that could take effect now and benefit all combat until we get the HP system. If at that point values need to be altered, then we can do so.

Let's not create temporary solutions. Lets find actual long term ones. Temporary changes to an entire system will just agitate the players. They already complain about being forced to refit ships, even though we are alpha testers.

Also, let's not tag me in a post, for a change that I already stated I was against, and then capslock on me when I disagree with the thread.

Sorry for being aggressive, I was actually annoyed at something irl and passed it out on you.

I actually quite like your idea. Not sure if it'd be applicable ingame though.

And the entire point here is to get something at least half decent until we get the long term change. It wouldn't divert any energy from main development at all... Some of us actually like PvP combat. People are impatient, waiting 4 months for the HP system will drive them away from the game.

An example of temp fix until we get the HP system is power consumption for jammers. Seems to work pretty well, yes?

Sven_The_Slayer x10 was an example. x4 would probably be much better.

 

[CyberTao]

I actually quite like your idea. Not sure if it'd be applicable ingame though.

Apparently someone managed to get a power curve on weapons (more power costs for larger groups) using the configs, or I think that's what Zyrr said. I feel like there are a lot of possibilities hidden in that config really, we just need it explained and the options presented. If the blocks were hardcoded to be linear, then why do all weapons contain ' Linear="True" '?

 

[Sven_The_Slayer]

Another way to balance out the alpha damage VS shield problem is better anti missile systems. If your AMS turrets are accurate, quick, and smart enough to actually hit missiles then there will be less chance to instantly take down a ships shields. Missiles are also currently bugged and deal more damage then they should against hull, even small missiles create craters much larger than their damage value would allow for.

 

[Lecic]

Assuming that you have two ships of equal mass with a similar combined amount of shield and weapon blocks, the one with the higher shield ratio wins

Well, you know what they say about assuming things.

Your entire thread seems to rely on this. If you multiply the shield count by ten, I'm going to cut down my shield blocks by ten, increase my weapon blocks and power storage, and annihilate things with alpha damage, just like people already do. A glass cannon isn't going to get into prolonged combat, so TTK doesn't matter for them.

We need to wait until the HP system before trying to balance heavily. No bandaid solutions.