Welcome aboard Visitor...

Daily Screenshot

Server Costs Target


9% of target met.

Latest Topics

- Getting our Player Base back »
- What's with the new Metaverse? »
- Carrier default loadouts - ships w/interceptors only? »
- Holly Cow Its alive!! »
- 01001000 01100101 01101100 01101100 01101111 »
- the mi type ships cheat »
- First Person view is possible in DS! »
- Latency Issues »
- missing dll. »
- 1.741 »

Development Blog

- Roadmap »
- Hello strangers, it’s been a while... »
- State of DarkSpace Development »
- Potential planetary interdictor changes! »
- The Silent Cartographer »
- Cloaking update... »
- Tools for tips »
- Fleet levels and more! »
- Game Mechanics Question and Answer Thread »
- Under Construction »

Combat Kills

Combat kills in last 24 hours:
Kills chart
Killboard

Upcoming Events

- International Talk like a Pirate Day!
09/19/19 +95.1 Days
- Towel Day
05/25/20 +344.1 Days

Search

 

Anniversaries

No anniversaries today.

Facebook & Twitter

Why not follow us on Twitter or Facebook for more information and fan updates?

[FAQ
Forum Index » » Beta Testing Discussion » » New Shield Changes 2: Electric Boogaloo
Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 Next Page )
 Author New Shield Changes 2: Electric Boogaloo
Pantheon
Marshal
Palestar


Joined: May 29, 2001
Posts: 1742
Posted: 2012-02-26 13:57   
Quote:

On 2012-02-26 13:02, Critus wrote:
Quote:

On 2012-02-26 12:55, Defiance{CM7} wrote:
so.. me and gejah are the only ones that think shields are being over done?

Well then go with the masses. Id rather see icc come back than my wants met.

Again, thanks frob for working so hard on them.
[ This Message was edited by: Defiance{CM7} on 2012-02-26 12:56 ]



I agree the new type of shield is unnecesary it should be a standar buff, increase def 5% regen 7% , but i like the new aux shields def x3 and no power consuption...
To summerize what are the changes in icc?



Dev log much?
_________________


CM7
Midshipman
Faster than Light


Joined: October 15, 2009
Posts: 1812
Posted: 2012-02-26 14:08   
ICC

* Gauss Cannon projectile speed increased significantly.
* Defence Mode removed.
* Active Shields: 5% hp increase.
* Reactive Shields : 5% regen increase.
* Shield regen increased by 400% when out of combat.
* Skirmish Shields added. These shields are equipped with the most up to date shield regeneration and kinetic deflection technology at the cost of a weakness to beams and raw strength.

Frobs shield chart flolows;

http://dl.dropbox.com/u/2042421/DefenseTest.PNG
(Upper two are old values, lower two are new values, Numbers in paranethesis are multiplied by the gadget level)

Ablative and Reflective now carry a heavier penalty for occuring damage of its weakness. Ablative is slightly stronger overall (in resists) to reflect its lack of regen

Organic armor had its regen nerfed.
Chitin armor might actually be useful now, with the highest base health in the game. Give it a try.

Changes to Shields:

Active shields now take a bit more energy for its tankiness. Their regen was buffed slightly

Reactive shields regen quite well now but have lower overall hp. However, they don't give out any signature when activate and actually decrease signature while inactive. Reactive is now submarine mode

Skirmish shields are the new shield. They're meant for skirmishing - great against ranged weapons, good regen. It just sucks up a lot of energy so energy management is critical here

Aux shields haven't changed since the last shield test, but they give slightly less signature.

Changes to Weapons (SURPRISE):

QST is now Kinetic and Energy instead of just Energy because it was screwing up the balancing.


Also, please take note of the dev log Its vital.


--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

What i was getting at, and you missed, was that now icc has shields like ugto has armor.

X shield for energy weapons (reactive)
Y Shield for kinetic weapons (Skirmish)
Z Shield for general use (active)

(yes i know they are not carbon copies of their ugto counterparts.)

and a bonus;

XZ shield for an added layer of protection (AUX)


I just was asserting that specialized defense per situation is UGTO's "hats", and that historicly in these types of games you have two types of shields;
The ones that take one hell of a beating at once (high hp/low regen)
The ones that take huge ammounts of DOT. (high regen/low HP)

I feel that is all that is needed here. I believe it would be easier to balance as a bonus as well.

But, few share this idea, so im willing to let it go FGG.


[ This Message was edited by: Defiance{CM7} on 2012-02-26 14:23 ]





_________________
Defiance and Opposition, a tribute to teamwork. I will remember always
339,144

Pantheon
Marshal
Palestar


Joined: May 29, 2001
Posts: 1742
Posted: 2012-02-26 15:33   
How can you historically have two types of shields when every game has their own idea of them (I can name three games off the top of my head which don't conform to your idea of shields), and they don't actually exist?

It's called science fiction for a reason.

Doesn't make it difficult to balance at all. If one shield type is too strong, we'll address that one type.

You complain if we make things too simple, and complain if we add more depth and give more choices. We're damned if we do, and damned if we don't. Let us make the game, and give us feedback on the stuff we add and the changes we make - that's all we want.

We're only interested on if the shields are too strong or too weak, or what areas they could be made more useful in.
_________________


Talien
Marshal
Templar Knights


Joined: May 11, 2010
Posts: 2039
From: Michigan
Posted: 2012-02-26 15:49   
I've already said I think all the shield changes make it needlessly complex, ICC already has enough to consider when going into battle without also needing to worry about which type of shields to use to counter what type of damage the opponent will be most likely to be using.

But now there's Actives with high energy use but high HP and no resistances.

Reactive with low energy use but low HP, lower regen, low sig, and now higher resistance to energy but weakness to kinetic.

Aux which have been buffed but are still bad as they only cover one arc.

And the new Skirmish which use the most energy even though they have the same lower HP as Reactive but much higher regen rate, and the opposite resistance/weakness.

Overall it seems like one step forward, 3 steps back to me. Personally I think it'd be better to just leave it with Active and Reactive, with Active having higher HP but lower resistances and regen rate, and Reactive with lower HP but better resistances and regen rate, with Aux just buffing the regen rate or max HP of whatever shields are equipped instead of being a shield type of their own.

Not hating, just giving my honest assessment.
_________________
Adapt or die.

CM7
Midshipman
Faster than Light


Joined: October 15, 2009
Posts: 1812
Posted: 2012-02-26 17:29   
(sent in pm)

disregard/

I can name many many games that do have DPS or DOT defenses.....



[ This Message was edited by: Defiance{CM7} on 2012-02-26 17:46 ]



_________________
Defiance and Opposition, a tribute to teamwork. I will remember always
339,144

Fattierob
Vice Admiral

Joined: April 25, 2003
Posts: 4058
Posted: 2012-02-26 22:02   
Quote:

On 2012-02-26 15:49, Talien wrote:
I've already said I think all the shield changes make it needlessly complex, ICC already has enough to consider when going into battle without also needing to worry about which type of shields to use to counter what type of damage the opponent will be most likely to be using.



Use actives if you don't want to think. They have flat resists across the board, the best raw health and decent regen.

Before this change, reactives were utter garbage. They had the same energy cost while charging for like 70% of the health <including the less damage from resists!>.

Changing aux gens from one arc type to full is something that needs to be discussed more before doing so. Most ICC ships have at least two aux gens, so that'd be giving them two full shields
_________________


Kenny_Naboo
Marshal
Pitch Black


Joined: January 11, 2010
Posts: 3821
From: LobsterTown
Posted: 2012-02-26 22:11   
Quote:

On 2012-02-26 15:49, Talien wrote:
I've already said I think all the shield changes make it needlessly complex, ICC already has enough to consider when going into battle without also needing to worry about which type of shields to use to counter what type of damage the opponent will be most likely to be using.

But now there's Actives with high energy use but high HP and no resistances.

Reactive with low energy use but low HP, lower regen, low sig, and now higher resistance to energy but weakness to kinetic.

Aux which have been buffed but are still bad as they only cover one arc.

And the new Skirmish which use the most energy even though they have the same lower HP as Reactive but much higher regen rate, and the opposite resistance/weakness.

Overall it seems like one step forward, 3 steps back to me. Personally I think it'd be better to just leave it with Active and Reactive, with Active having higher HP but lower resistances and regen rate, and Reactive with lower HP but better resistances and regen rate, with Aux just buffing the regen rate or max HP of whatever shields are equipped instead of being a shield type of their own.

Not hating, just giving my honest assessment.




I wonder. How could you guys possibly be unhappy about having MORE choices??

I mean... if Jack gave K'luth 4 types of armor to choose from, I'd be personally happy. This patch, K'luth is being given a sort of nerf (with compensation) of the Cloak. Our very nasty Elite, Escapooper is being clubbed to death with the Nerf bat.

Yeah, there are some gripes going around, expectedly... but at least it's sorta justified.

U guys are being handed boosts. And still you QQ about it.

ROFL...




[ This Message was edited by: Kenny_Naboo[+R] on 2012-02-26 22:13 ]
_________________
... in space, no one can hear you scream.....


Talien
Marshal
Templar Knights


Joined: May 11, 2010
Posts: 2039
From: Michigan
Posted: 2012-02-26 22:21   
I don't see making shields into the equivalent of UGTO style armor as a boost.
_________________
Adapt or die.

Kenny_Naboo
Marshal
Pitch Black


Joined: January 11, 2010
Posts: 3821
From: LobsterTown
Posted: 2012-02-26 22:31   
Quote:

On 2012-02-26 22:21, Talien wrote:
I don't see making shields into the equivalent of UGTO style armor as a boost.



U have got to be kidding me.

Active shields + Composite armor, together with the regen rate now far outstrips UGTO armor.
_________________
... in space, no one can hear you scream.....


CM7
Midshipman
Faster than Light


Joined: October 15, 2009
Posts: 1812
Posted: 2012-02-26 22:57   
no one said the shield changes were not good.

No one is complaining because shields are to weak.

Just because we three have a difference in openion to the rest of you dont mean bash us. Damn.

We are saying, we are becoming UGTO. We dont want to become ugto. But hey its just us 3 that have a problem with it. So whatever, id rather see the rest of ICC happy than my wants met.

[ This Message was edited by: Defiance{CM7} on 2012-02-26 22:57 ]
_________________
Defiance and Opposition, a tribute to teamwork. I will remember always
339,144

Talien
Marshal
Templar Knights


Joined: May 11, 2010
Posts: 2039
From: Michigan
Posted: 2012-02-26 23:23   
[quote]
On 2012-02-26 22:02, Fattierob wrote:
Quote:

Use actives if you don't want to think. They have flat resists across the board, the best raw health and decent regen.

Before this change, reactives were utter garbage. They had the same energy cost while charging for like 70% of the health <including the less damage from resists!>.

Changing aux gens from one arc type to full is something that needs to be discussed more before doing so. Most ICC ships have at least two aux gens, so that'd be giving them two full shields




Reactives were a far superior choice on smaller ships, and you could even get away with using them on Cruisers if you did it right.

For Aux you're sacrificing a good chunk of power generation for that extra shielding, it's just not worth it for only one arc. Even full arc may not be worth it because of their low HP and regen, is there an issue with the idea of having aux shields boost HP or regen of actual shields?

And again, I'm not hating, I'm just giving my own assessment of the current beta setup. I DO appreciate that you're wanting to do something new, and who knows, maybe more people will like it than not. Just on a personal level I never want it to be said that someone doesn't understand my position on something, so yeah, it may seem like I go overboard.
_________________
Adapt or die.

Fattierob
Vice Admiral

Joined: April 25, 2003
Posts: 4058
Posted: 2012-02-27 02:18   
Quote:

On 2012-02-26 23:23, Talien wrote:

Reactives were a far superior choice on smaller ships, and you could even get away with using them on Cruisers if you did it right.




I have no idea how you believe this. What makes you believe that reactives were ever useful? Like, with numbers.

Quote:

For Aux you're sacrificing a good chunk of power generation for that extra shielding, it's just not worth it for only one arc. Even full arc may not be worth it because of their low HP and regen, is there an issue with the idea of having aux shields boost HP or regen of actual shields?



Aux got a huge buff from "utterly useless" to "actually might be something". I don't know want to boost HP or regen of actual shields because it'd be a balancing nightmare.


Quote:

And again, I'm not hating, I'm just giving my own assessment of the current beta setup. I DO appreciate that you're wanting to do something new, and who knows, maybe more people will like it than not. Just on a personal level I never want it to be said that someone doesn't understand my position on something, so yeah, it may seem like I go overboard.



Nobody's angry at you, yo.
_________________


Died~2000~Deaths[+R]*CC*
Chief Marshal
Army Of Darkness


Joined: February 08, 2010
Posts: 540
From: Spokane WA.
Posted: 2012-02-27 02:22   
my concern is the power issue kluth have been plauged with for a while.


All weapon damage (minus missiles and fighters) have had their damage reduced by 10%. Falloff on cannons has not been reduced by 10%, so as a result, UGTO and K'Luth cannons will not be as effective at long ranges

now weapons have more of a fall off this means more power usage for less damage. we allready have to fight in pacs cause we dont have the energy to stay in battle long and our armour is paper thin and yes i do know how to manage power.

our weapons are not that much stronger than the other factions as some might think and besides what good are stronger weapons if you cant fire them but a few times.

now we are plauged with more power usage when will it end.
not trying to sound unapreciated by all the work you devs have put in the game just real frustrated after testing ugto and icc power usage and seeing that you can pretty much go any speed you choose in combat with hardly any power loss.


Died~2000~Deaths[+R]*CO*

[ This Message was edited by: Died~2000~Deaths[+R]*CO* on 2012-02-27 02:38 ]
_________________


  Email Died~2000~Deaths[+R]*CC*
Kenny_Naboo
Marshal
Pitch Black


Joined: January 11, 2010
Posts: 3821
From: LobsterTown
Posted: 2012-02-27 02:50   
Quote:

On 2012-02-27 02:22, Died~2000~Deaths[+R]*CO* wrote:
my concern is the power issue kluth have been plauged with for a while.


All weapon damage (minus missiles and fighters) have had their damage reduced by 10%. Falloff on cannons has not been reduced by 10%, so as a result, UGTO and K'Luth cannons will not be as effective at long ranges

now weapons have more of a fall off this means more power usage for less damage. we allready have to fight in pacs cause we dont have the energy to stay in battle long and our armour is paper thin and yes i do know how to manage power.

our weapons are not that much stronger than the other factions as some might think and besides what good are stronger weapons if you cant fire them but a few times.

now we are plauged with more power usage when will it end.
not trying to sound unapreciated by all the work you devs have put in the game just real frustrated after testing ugto and icc power usage and seeing that you can pretty much go any speed you choose in combat with hardly any power loss.


Died~2000~Deaths[+R]*CO*

[ This Message was edited by: Kenny_Naboo[+R] on 2012-02-27 02:53 ]




I was worried about that too.

Then I looked at how battles are fought. If you're talking about 1 on 1 scenarios, then worry not. Because 1 to 1, human ships just won't have enough ECCM effect to even bother us in terms of energy.

With the revised OOC energy use reduction, you can still travel up to about 2/3 of max speed in cloak with no energy penalty. In a Siphon (an energy hungry example) I could run at 11 gu/s without problems. That combined with perfect cloak, you can probably approach enemy ships with relative impunity (blind fire excepted) and open up once you're in optimal ruptor range.

Of course, you'll now have to save the last 15% of your energy for a quick escape.

Next, fitting on Chitin armor will also ensure a bit more survivability at the cost of regen. But that won't be a problem if we continue to use our sneaky deep space plats. Just put a few in every human system and we have our logistics covered.


In equal fleet situations, I don't think it'll make a diff. Yes, using cloak will definitely burn energy because of cumalative ECCM effects.

But, with numbers on numbers, we usually just mass jump in at point blank range and focus on one target at a time. Remember what our old pal here, Defiance once analyzed. The magic number of Kluth dreads is 7. Seven dreads unleashing alpha hell on a single target is a near instagib. With that you can still reduce enemy numbers relatively fast. The new Chitin armor will help in combat endurance.



The only thing is that one of us will have to fly the dico since Escapor got clubbed in the head. LOL.....


_________________
... in space, no one can hear you scream.....


Talien
Marshal
Templar Knights


Joined: May 11, 2010
Posts: 2039
From: Michigan
Posted: 2012-02-27 12:53   
Quote:

On 2012-02-27 02:18, Fattierob wrote:
I have no idea how you believe this. What makes you believe that reactives were ever useful? Like, with numbers.



It's not something you can define with numbers since we had no numbers to work with, values were kept secret, but pretty much anyone who who used smaller ships extensively used them and they worked better than Actives on anything smaller than a Cruiser. Scouts and Frigates rarely get hit unless it's point blank so the lower power use when not charging was good, and the faster regen made up for the higher power drain while charging, it was rare for a Scout or Frigate to run out of power with Reactives, even Destroyers for the people who took a slight bit of risk and used them instead of Actives.


Quote:

Aux got a huge buff from "utterly useless" to "actually might be something". I don't know want to boost HP or regen of actual shields because it'd be a balancing nightmare.



The buff to HP was rather sizeable, yes, but the usefulness of 1 arc that the facing can't be chosen for is questionable. If they were full arc and closest to the hull then they might be worth using.

But here's something you may not have considered, setting all shield facings to the same number key with an aux shield in use that's NOT set to any number key will drain it and add to the other shields when that key is pressed, which is basically the same thing as adding it's regen rate to the actual shields. When you look at it that way it's basically the same thing as having the aux shield boost regen rate for the actual shields, which is why I brought it up.

Quote:

Nobody's angry at you, yo.



Just being thorough.
_________________
Adapt or die.

Goto page ( Previous Page 1 | 2 | 3 | 4 | 5 | 6 Next Page )
Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group
Page created in 0.028410 seconds.


Copyright © 2000 - 2019 Palestar Inc. All rights reserved worldwide.
Terms of use - DarkSpace is a Registered Trademark of PALESTAR