Shields

[Jack_Miron]

So:

guns with projectile - bolter, railgun etc - damage do shields 20% and overpass shields and 80% damage to hull if no shields 100% to hull

energy guns - 100 % to  shields - 0% to hull if no shields 120 % damage to hull.

 

 

More realistic shields?

[Blaine]

Sci-fi energy shields aren't remotely realistic in the first place. What you're referring to are conventional ways in which the mechanics of shields are implemented in games, movies, and fiction, and that's really up to the designer's taste.

[Tsunamik]

Funny is, that it is probably more realistical to create field which repulses physical projectiles, than it is to create something which blocks coherent light...  Sooo, lasers do damage to hull, and projectiles to shield? :P

[Blaine]

Well, if we're talking about realism vs. sci-fi, I suppose I might as well take the plunge.

 

Often in sci-fi games especially, energy shields are set up to be good at blocking energy weapons like lasers, while armor is good at blocking projectiles. More plausibly (but still not very plausible), shields would be good at blocking projectiles, perhaps diverting their course magnetically or burning them up before they can reach the ship. Armor would be good at blocking both projectiles and energy weapons, because armor should be able to absorb certain amounts of both kinetic energy and EM/thermal energy.

 

You know what's funny? In Avorion, weapon-type lasers seem to be silent, which might seem like a nod to realism on the surface... except that there's no sound in space period (barring potential outlandish interactions between celestial bodies and the interstellar medium), yet we can hear chainguns, railguns, engines, etc. just fine, even if they're not affecting our current ship in any way. Also, while lasers themselves produce no sound in vacuum (in atmosphere very powerful lasers could superheat surrounding gases, creating sound in much the same way lightning does), the heavy equipment that produces high-powered lasers does produce sound. Within the logic of the game, lasers should make some kind of electronic whining buzz when fired.

[LoSboccacc]

weapon attached to the hull transmit vibration to your hull so you'd definitely hear your own weaponry shoot, in the same way you hear incoming enemy projectiles that impact on the hull, and as long as the hull is pressurized those vibrations will reach your ears. if the hull isn't then you'd still feel the vibrations trough feets etc, in the same way you feel bass trembling at concerts.

[Blaine]

weapon attached to the hull transmit vibration to your hull so you'd definitely hear your own weaponry shoot, in the same way you hear incoming enemy projectiles that impact on the hull, and as long as the hull is pressurized those vibrations will reach your ears. if the hull isn't then you'd still feel the vibrations trough feets etc, in the same way you feel bass trembling at concerts.

 

Absolutely. However, we can hear fleet battles we aren't participating in from dozen of kilometers away.

 

It's perfectly normal for a space game to have unrealistic sound in vacuum. I just think it's funny because lasers specifically have no sound.

 

I'm a big fan of beam lasers in general, and I'm really glad Avorion has beam lasers rather Star Wars-style "energy packet" lasers.

[Tsunamik]

yeah, those star wars lasers with their slow projectile speed should be called just blasters or plasma casters.. definitely not lasers :/

[LoSboccacc]

anyway one thing I don't really like about current shield implementation is that, with some rare exception, shield are just a huge pool of hp that gives no real depth to combat.

 

having shield leak under damage would be much more interesting in general, not just because would push armoring importance but mostly because would make combat more dramatic: currently if you have a better dps/shield ratio than the enemy you just win, even if the ship are almost matched in size and firepower the one which shield fails first get slaughtered and the other barely gets a scratch

[GrimJahk]

currently if you have a better dps/shield ratio than the enemy you just win, even if the ship are almost matched in size and firepower the one which shield fails first get slaughtered and the other barely gets a scratch

 

Which is not all that different than current warfare... each of these tech levels... materials as it were... are evolutions, we just get to do this on a very rapid time scale, and can go back down the chart to farm...

 

Imagine taking an M1A1-Abrahms back to WWII just to have fun with the noobs... ;)

 

Take an M4 Sherman to the Crusades...

 

One axiom of war: If it's a fair fight, you are doing it wrong.

 

[Ohm is Futile]

anyway one thing I don't really like about current shield implementation is that, with some rare exception, shield are just a huge pool of hp that gives no real depth to combat.

 

having shield leak under damage would be much more interesting in general, not just because would push armoring importance but mostly because would make combat more dramatic: currently if you have a better dps/shield ratio than the enemy you just win, even if the ship are almost matched in size and firepower the one which shield fails first get slaughtered and the other barely gets a scratch

The problem is that, currently, there is little incentive to build ships with superior profiles or ships that can somehow exploit speed and/or positioning in combat, because those values are rendered moot by mostly linear scaling of everything and turret accuracy.

 

So yeah, in that sense, moar HP and moar DPS is really all it boils down to. I just don't think the problem really stems from shield implementation.

[gblnk]

anyway one thing I don't really like about current shield implementation is that, with some rare exception, shield are just a huge pool of hp that gives no real depth to combat.

 

having shield leak under damage would be much more interesting in general, not just because would push armoring importance but mostly because would make combat more dramatic: currently if you have a better dps/shield ratio than the enemy you just win, even if the ship are almost matched in size and firepower the one which shield fails first get slaughtered and the other barely gets a scratch

The problem is that, currently, there is little incentive to build ships with superior profiles or ships that can somehow exploit speed and/or positioning in combat, because those values are rendered moot by mostly linear scaling of everything and turret accuracy.

 

So yeah, in that sense, moar HP and moar DPS is really all it boils down to. I just don't think the problem really stems from shield implementation.

 

You may be right, but I do think some changes to shield mechanics could be used to encourage the use of smaller ships.

 

One thought I've had is to tweak the balance so that shields are only practical on smaller ships and armor is only practical on larger ships. Somewhere in the middle you'd have a ship that would benefit from moderate amounts of both, and that would be the workhorse of the galaxy.

 

This could be done by changing a given shield block from having a certain hp pool to having a certain generated shield volume instead. The hp pool is determined by the difference between the volume of the ship and the volume of the shield. This way, for any given shield block, a smaller ship is going to benefit more than a larger ship. In addition, you fix the scaling problem by making the energy consumption grow exponentially in relation to shield block size, so that it's virtually impossible to shield ships beyond a certain volume.

 

This isn't meant to completely nerf large ships, so to compensate, you give armor significant hp buffs based on thickness, and also penalties for very thin armor. You also introduce point defense turrets and have the number scale linearly with ship size so that large ships have a fighting chance against close range attacks.

 

I'm sure there are plenty problems with this idea, but one major bonus I see in it is that it significantly raises the cost of running larger ships since they will require minor rapairs to their hull armor far more often. I also think there's a certain sense in the idea that a system that converts energy into protection is particularly suited to ships that need speed and agility, while using mass for protection (armor) would be the main defense of ships that can most afford to sacrifice in those areas.

[Gatt]

Deleted