Shield Improvements For Power 2.0

[Sven_The_Slayer]

With power 2.0 we see the removal of "fortress shields", it is doubtful that this mechanics will be removed so how can we improve the new limited range shield system we have?

First off I remember one of the stated goals of power 2.0 was to not limit creativity but the rigid shield system we have now does that. A perfect sphere that originates from a single shield recharger group may force players to use multiple shield bubbles to protect smaller ships simply based on the shape of it.

The biggest problem I have is that the system doesn't allow for creating multiple recharger banks powering a single shield but instead deactivates and makes additional banks inside the existing bubble dead weight. If multiple banks were allowed at the very least we would have more creative freedom and a slight ability to center the bubble to better protect our ships. This does create a problem if multiple banks could add to overlapping bubbles what one should it apply to so we would need a way to specify what rechargers belong to each group.

Additionally I believe a mechanic should be introduced to reshape and move the bubble (Shield Emiters or Shield Nodes). You may not have enough power to extend the bubble further to cover your whole ship or simply have a large amounts of interior space that doesn't allow for a large mass of rechargers in the exact center of your ship. The Volume of the bubbles would have to remain the same in order to be balanced.

Another change I would like to see is a station only chamber that would allow stations to keep the old style fortress/global shields in order to give them a much needed defense boost. Additionally larger ships docking to stations should not loose their shields.

Going to Make a TLDR List:

1. Disconnected Recharger banks acting as a single group inside the bubble instead of deactivating
2. Shield Emitters to change the shape of the bubble to allow creative freedom
3. Fortress Shield Chamber (Station Only) to give stations a much needed defense boost and ensure that docked entities will be protected

 

[YamiHikari]

I have two things to say about this post. One is a correction, the other a suggestion.

You are not limited to a single shield bubble on an entity. In fact, you can have any number of recharger groups on your ship as you want with one limitation: shield bubbles cannot overlap with recharger groups for other shield groups. This overlap will deactivate the smaller shield group (whether this affects its stored charge or its recharge rate, I don't know). This allows not only for localized shields to be constructed on a ship, but also for the creation of reinforced shielding by overlapping shield bubbles (being careful of the recharger groups).

What I do have to say is that I have some concerns involving shielding of docked entities. I've previously had confusion about how shields work for docked entities, but as I understand it, a docked entity's shields do not deactivate upon docking unless the recharger groups are deactivated by a shield bubble in an entity farther up in the docking chain. I think this lack of deactivation is a nice touch, but also feel that the interaction of shields between docker and dockee shouldn't happen. I feel that it would be more conducive to shield and strategic armor design (such as docked armor) if there was no shield interaction between different members of a docking chain at all.

Of course, after putting some thought into shielding mechanics while writing this comment out, if the one-way downward interaction of shields through docking chains still holds true, there is likely still room for the creation of docked armor if the system is kept as-is. So long as the shield bubbles of the above entity in the docking chain does not overlap with the rechargers of the lower entity in the docking chain, the shield recharger group, shield bubble, and shield recharge rate can all be increased to any desired amount without fear of interference with the shielding of the above entity in the docking chain. In other words, the shield bubble of the docked armor could overlap with every single recharger on the entity it is docked to and still not interfere with any of that entity's shields because of the lack of upward shielding in the docking chain (I can see some hefty exploits coming out of this, though).

 

[Sven_The_Slayer]

I have two things to say about this post. One is a correction, the other a suggestion.

You are not limited to a single shield bubble on an entity. In fact, you can have any number of recharger groups on your ship as you want with one limitation: shield bubbles cannot overlap with recharger groups for other shield groups. This overlap will deactivate the smaller shield group (whether this affects its stored charge or its recharge rate, I don't know). This allows not only for localized shields to be constructed on a ship, but also for the creation of reinforced shielding by overlapping shield bubbles (being careful of the recharger groups).

I am aware that you can make multiple bubbles, I stated that in the second paragraph. "A perfect sphere that originates from a single shield recharger group may force players to use multiple shield bubbles" My problem is that these spheres are a rigid construct in a free form game. Your ship may not be large enough to accommodate multiple shields but oddly shaped to not fit in the bubble provided by a single one.

 

[YamiHikari]

I am aware that you can make multiple bubbles, I stated that in the second paragraph. "A perfect sphere that originates from a single shield recharger group may force players to use multiple shield bubbles" My problem is that these spheres are a rigid construct in a free form game. Your ship may not be large enough to accommodate multiple shields but oddly shaped to not fit in the bubble provided by a single one.

I get where you're going with that. I had a bit of a problem with that at one point, too. Really you just need to play with the recharger group and its placement. Sometimes shifting the shape or adding a few rechargers can just barely get the shields to cover the whole ship (or at least the important parts). But that really isn't much of a concern for me because the problem is most significant in small ships which really don't use much shielding anyway. What is useful, as I've found, is the fact that capacitors (I think) can be used for multiple shield groups due to the fact that they only need to be included in the shield bubble to be included in that shield.

 

[MacThule]

I agree that permitting multiple active recharger groups per shield would be very nice - and probably viable - but also probably rather tricky to implement and employ. Multiple active generators for a single bubble would improve ship resiliance. Not sure if it would be enough of an improvement to be worth the mess of tying together multiple rechargers as a single bubble.

 

[Captain Fortius]

The solution is dead simple. Area based shields were a mistake, and should be corrected by rolling back to the previous, global shielding.

 

[MacThule]

I get where you're going with that. I had a bit of a problem with that at one point, too. Really you just need to play with the recharger group and its placement. Sometimes shifting the shape or adding a few rechargers can just barely get the shields to cover the whole ship (or at least the important parts). But that really isn't much of a concern for me because the problem is most significant in small ships which really don't use much shielding anyway. What is useful, as I've found, is the fact that capacitors (I think) can be used for multiple shield groups due to the fact that they only need to be included in the shield bubble to be included in that shield.

Does this allow locating a cap bank within the vesica (the zone where the two spheres overlap) to obtain double capacity, or is the capacity simply shared between the two generators?

 

[YamiHikari]

Does this allow locating a cap bank within the vesica (the zone where the two spheres overlap) to obtain double capacity, or is the capacity simply shared between the two generators?

That I don't know, as I haven't done much in actual combat since the update. I haven't tried that yet. I do know that if you damage a space that falls under two shields' influence, the damage will be distributed to both shields.

 

[Sven_The_Slayer]

I did some test on shields today.
Docked entities do loose their own shields, only blocks covered by the bubble are protected.
Capacitors contained in multiple bubbles will only give capacity to a single recharger and will indicate it with an arrow. I was placing capacitators almost directly next to a recharger and it was still giving the capacity to the wrong charger so we need a way to specify where we want stats to be directed.

The solution is dead simple. Area based shields were a mistake, and should be corrected by rolling back to the previous, global shielding.

I would be fine with that solution but unfortunately that is unlikely as they switched to the new system for a reason so the best thing I can do is provide feedback on what we have in hopes of fixing it.

I do however think that global shields should be an option for stations as part of the shield defense chamber as stations really need a way to boost defense.

 

[Crimson-Artist]

I do however think that global shields should be an option for stations as part of the shield defense chamber as stations really need a way to boost defense.

Maybe make it a universal option if you invest enough RC. Or perhaps balance it out so theres some draw backs to having it to prevent exploitation like -25% shield capacity or something.

 

[Coyote27]

While getting rid of the shield bubbles and going back to the old style of shield coverage would certainly be helpful, in my opinion the biggest failing of new shields is that they don't recharge under fire. This makes shield recharge no longer a viable defensive option, and it means that you can kill anything with a laser pistol if you're patient enough. Or more generally, it means that everything is vulnerable to attritive wearing-down, no matter how big and tough it is, if it's not able to kill whatever is attacking it first. This is really not good, especially for station survivability as they can't run away, but also can detriment any other ship as well. We need to bring back combat shield recharge to at least the same level that it was previously, and there's a good argument to make it faster and stronger (charge at full speed while under fire?) due to the increased power consumption of rechargers.

 

[GnomeKing]

These are good points - of course we need to see how new 2.0 weapons interact before final assessment, but some re-charge under fire seems necessary. The 1.0 system could easily lead to virtually (in context) invulnerable ships - and 2.0 shield-attrition seems to address that > but maybe it has gone too far currently :/ ? ....

However, presumably the underlying configs can be tweaked further so there should be chance to balance shields much better in context of 2.0 weapons as-well.

 

[YamiHikari]

I did some test on shields today.
Docked entities do loose their own shields, only blocks covered by the bubble are protected.
Capacitors contained in multiple bubbles will only give capacity to a single recharger and will indicate it with an arrow. I was placing capacitators almost directly next to a recharger and it was still giving the capacity to the wrong charger so we need a way to specify where we want stats to be directed.



I would be fine with that solution but unfortunately that is unlikely as they switched to the new system for a reason so the best thing I can do is provide feedback on what we have in hopes of fixing it.

I do however think that global shields should be an option for stations as part of the shield defense chamber as stations really need a way to boost defense.

Is that so? Well, sorry for the misinformation, then. It's a good thing someone tested that before I decided to fill out a ship with systems and found it didn't work.
[doublepost=1518372610,1518372190][/doublepost]

These are good points - of course we need to see how new 2.0 weapons interact before final assessment, but some re-charge under fire seems necessary. The 1.0 system could easily lead to virtually (in context) invulnerable ships - and 2.0 shield-attrition seems to address that > but maybe it has gone too far currently :/ ? ....

However, presumably the underlying configs can be tweaked further so there should be chance to balance shields much better in context of 2.0 weapons as-well.

If I remember correctly, Lancake did make a few comments in a different thread about his thoughts on shielding. The big concern he voiced was in the fact that shield recharge rates were constantly changing in the old shields (the other being a more minor concern about the major regeneration drop upon taking damage). What really needs to be done is we need to find a nice balance.
Returning player feedback on power 2.0

 

[Sven_The_Slayer]

I was one of the people against combat regen the last time our shields were updated as it created potential stalemates. It is something that needs to be addressed though as you don't want a pistol to be able to take out anything given enough time. This current shield system does seem to help prevent over installing shield regenerators so combat regen might not even be as bad as a thing.

One other thing I am not clear on is the shield defense and how it classifies between Alpha and DPS guns this may just be based on the modules used. Basically a shield that protects against cannot+cannon while being weaker against cannon + beam and vice versa?

 

[MacThule]

While getting rid of the shield bubbles and going back to the old style of shield coverage would certainly be helpful, in my opinion the biggest failing of new shields is that they don't recharge under fire. This makes shield recharge no longer a viable defensive option, and it means that you can kill anything with a laser pistol if you're patient enough. Or more generally, it means that everything is vulnerable to attritive wearing-down, no matter how big and tough it is, if it's not able to kill whatever is attacking it first. This is really not good, especially for station survivability as they can't run away, but also can detriment any other ship as well. We need to bring back combat shield recharge to at least the same level that it was previously, and there's a good argument to make it faster and stronger (charge at full speed while under fire?) due to the increased power consumption of rechargers.

Personally, shield recharge delay is probably my favorite change of the new updates, and the most likely to create more balance between shields and armor in combat. A great many of the best MP combat games have a delay on healing/regen, because otherwise you get what Starmade used to have - OP regeneration as the de facto defense.

I like that the delay can be reduced, and I would very much like to see an ability for specialized shield tank ships that use chambers to permit 10% or 25% or 50% shield recharge under fire because being able to have effective shield tanks is an awesome option for fun and tactical complexity, but I do think that the default should remain delayed recharge.

OP shields actually reduce choice - you MUST have massive shields with heavy regen because it is so powerful that to make any different choice (ie armor tank or mixed def) it is foolish and suicidal.

They just need to permit shield tank specializations that can regen under fire at the cost of adding more chambers

 

[GnomeKing]

Agreed that recharge-delay is also necessary for depleted shields. Maybe a buffer is needed, so that real-time combat calculation can be sufficiently coarser grained to allow an entity to flip from 'minimum' to 'depleted' states without causing significant overall-cascading calculation load (eg AI behavior)...

But : If the current 'ablative' system is the only one that reduces combat calculation load to a minimum, then that should be the basis used moving forward. Chambers or other tweaks to the system are clearly possible.

 

[Coyote27]

One other thing I am not clear on is the shield defense and how it classifies between Alpha and DPS guns this may just be based on the modules used. Basically a shield that protects against cannot+cannon while being weaker against cannon + beam and vice versa?

It's proportional to your shield capacity - "dps" is somehting like any hits worth 25% or less of your shield capacity with each hit, while "alpha" is 50% and up. Something like that. From what I can gather, anything that qualifies as "alpha" can easily kill you anyway so hardening against it is a little pointless, while "dps" is situationally useful to an extend but other chambers are probably going to be more desirable for the chamber capacity.