| Galaxy Legion Forum http://galaxylegion.com/forum/ |
|
| hull vs shield... http://galaxylegion.com/forum/viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1158 |
Page 1 of 2 |
| Author: | obscenities [ Thu Jul 22, 2010 5:14 am ] |
| Post subject: | hull vs shield... |
which is better to upgrade more? |
|
| Author: | spacecowboy [ Thu Jul 22, 2010 5:24 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: hull vs shield... |
Andross gave a good synopsis abbout the merits of different choices... viewtopic.php?f=3&t=106 |
|
| Author: | Nocifer Deathblade [ Thu Jul 22, 2010 5:26 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: hull vs shield... |
If you rarely play, shield. If you play often, hull is best.. I love hull myself and maxed it out with 5 modules.. I do have 4 shield modules but it never ever went past 20% of shield unless I rank up.. Quite useless in my case.. I usually drop to 2-3 modules if I need decksize for any other module types. I rate shield module as last choice than any other modules.. Shield could become more useful if you got more shield recharges however.. But sad thing about shield recharge is that it's flat rate charge no matter if you have 100 shield or 10k shield. Recharge gets more useless as you rank up as you see more damage incoming to you per hit. I would think shield recharge should be % based not flat 1 shield point per tick.. |
|
| Author: | Cothordin [ Thu Jul 22, 2010 5:28 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: hull vs shield... |
depends, hull is generally more space efficient but costs money to repair and dosnt repair itself. Meanwhile shield is less space efficient but repairs itself and dosnt cost money. IMO have enough shield to deter people who arnt determined and then have alot more hull. This way the undetermined leave and your HP comes back, but you got tons of hull incase people do try to disable you. spacecowboy wrote: i believe you mean Aggross |
|
| Author: | Nocifer Deathblade [ Thu Jul 22, 2010 5:33 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: hull vs shield... |
Cothordin wrote: depends, hull is generally more space efficient but costs money to repair and dosnt repair itself. Meanwhile shield is less space efficient but repairs itself and dosnt cost money. IMO have enough shield to deter people who arnt determined and then have alot more hull. This way the undetermined leave and your HP comes back, but you got tons of hull incase people do try to disable you. Money even isn't an issue for me for example. Hull repair MAX is 1M credit no matter how big my hull is.. 1M is nothing at my rank.. I repair all the time and I still see my credit going up too fast.. Waiting on shield to recharge takes forever and almost always 0 in my case.. For my situation that plays often, hull is far far better.. shield is worthless. I can survive easily with no shield modules.. I definitely wouldn't survive well if I got no hull modules.. My hull is 2310 hp by the way. If it drops to easy 1,500 hull approx, the repair cost just hits the max 1M credit. I can continue to drop my hull to 200 and still pay same price: 1M credit.. The cost of repair becomes much more cost-efficient as hull gets bigger.. |
|
| Author: | Cothordin [ Thu Jul 22, 2010 5:45 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: hull vs shield... |
Nocifer Deathblade wrote: Cothordin wrote: depends, hull is generally more space efficient but costs money to repair and dosnt repair itself. Meanwhile shield is less space efficient but repairs itself and dosnt cost money. IMO have enough shield to deter people who arnt determined and then have alot more hull. This way the undetermined leave and your HP comes back, but you got tons of hull incase people do try to disable you. Money even isn't an issue for me for example. Hull repair MAX is 1M credit no matter how big my hull is.. 1M is nothing at my rank.. I repair all the time and I still see my credit going up too fast.. Waiting on shield to recharge takes forever and almost always 0 in my case.. For my situation that plays often, hull is far far better.. shield is worthless. I can survive easily with no shield modules.. I definitely wouldn't survive well if I got no hull modules.. My hull is 2310 hp by the way. If it drops to easy 1,500 hull approx, the repair cost just hits the max 1M credit. I can continue to drop my hull to 200 and still pay same price: 1M credit.. The cost of repair becomes much more cost-efficient as hull gets bigger.. Another reason I have 2580 hull and 235 shields. |
|
| Author: | spacecowboy [ Thu Jul 22, 2010 5:45 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: hull vs shield... |
Quote: i believe you mean Aggross yeah... my bad there... |
|
| Author: | Cothordin [ Thu Jul 22, 2010 5:47 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: hull vs shield... |
spacecowboy wrote: Quote: i believe you mean Aggross yeah... my bad there... Heh I got to admit though, its a funny slip up. Next well be mistaking Dan for Fox McCould and me for Wolf. |
|
| Author: | webguydan [ Thu Jul 22, 2010 5:40 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: hull vs shield... |
I agree about the fixed recharge comment - maybe shields would be better balanced if they would recharge a dynamic % of the overall total per tick. In some cases, however, this could make shields an incredible defensive option, preventing some ships from penetrating them altogether. Players should expect that the charge-per-tick will be increased, but I'm not yet sure if it will be a higher fixed rate or a dynamic rate. 
|
|
| Author: | Kaos [ Thu Jul 22, 2010 6:22 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: hull vs shield... |
webguydan wrote: I agree about the fixed recharge comment - maybe shields would be better balanced if they would recharge a dynamic % of the overall total per tick. In some cases, however, this could make shields an incredible defensive option, preventing some ships from penetrating them altogether. Players should expect that the charge-per-tick will be increased, but I'm not yet sure if it will be a higher fixed rate or a dynamic rate. I like the fixed percentage idea. Something like 5%. Even someone with 3000 shield could have their shields penetrated if their recharge rate was only 150 a tick because their recharge rate is at around 90-120 seconds at best. |
|
| Author: | ODragon [ Thu Jul 22, 2010 6:27 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: hull vs shield... |
At the moment, I have only the shields I've gotten from artifacts and tier items. I play enough that they are almost never charged. I decided it made more sense to me, because of how long it takes to recharge them, to not spend space on anymore of them. That being said, I might change out some of my defenses on level up to max out the shield, use it up, then put defenses back on. Yes, it takes too long for the shields to recharge to be useful for most people (I think). |
|
| Author: | Redlaw [ Thu Jul 22, 2010 6:35 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: hull vs shield... |
Though I can see shield recharge modules like the energy recharge relays. Shield nodes or relays that speed up the recharge timein the same way as the energy relays wont hurt, just make thinbgs fallow the same pattern more. Though if these are added as a tree or part of a tree, both systems might as well go threw a a change to help them both go on for ever. |
|
| Author: | Barracuda [ Thu Jul 22, 2010 7:15 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: hull vs shield... |
What about a 2 % shield recharge per tick? That way it would take 100 minutes for a normal player to fully recharge his shields (baseline 120 seconds). 5% is a bit too high. |
|
| Author: | Nocifer Deathblade [ Thu Jul 22, 2010 7:21 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: hull vs shield... |
Yeah, dymanic % would work good because most fights are done within a minute anyway due to 0 sec wait time for repeated attacks. If player don't end the fight within a minute cuz of energy ran out or whatever then that's his/her fault.. Really.. Just like Star Trek, in order to take a starship down is to continously attacking til wearing down the shield then damage hull then kill it.. If enemy ran away while starship shield was almost down, it certainly would be recharged back probably to full quickly when enemy came back trying to finish the job.. Fixed shield recharge will work well if repeated attacks has inherent wait time like 30 seconds per attack for example.. It simply doesn't work or scale well against zero wait time attacks.. As we rank up, our shield gets bigger, yet, the recharge is still 1 per tick that effectively gives reduced % per tick as shield gets bigger making it LESS attractive.. Shield actually was useful when I was at rank 1 cuz 1 shield per tick was "wowish" but now I have 828 shield points and 1 shield per tick is at best "meh".. I like to see shield to retain its usefulness REGARDLESS of what rank we are in.. Hull is perfect for ANY rank.. and highly recommended to get bigger hull as deck size goes up.. Great balance there.. Shield is not.. If dymanic % got introduced then shield technology research and going for max shield modules will finally become attractive just like hulls do.. Players who play often will still go after hull over shield with % recharge however.. But casual players would finally go after shield % over hull . Good balance there I believe.. |
|
| Author: | spacecowboy [ Fri Jul 23, 2010 6:22 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: hull vs shield... |
Quote: I agree about the fixed recharge comment - maybe shields would be better balanced if they would recharge a dynamic % of the overall total per tick. In some cases, however, this could make shields an incredible defensive option, preventing some ships from penetrating them altogether. Players should expect that the charge-per-tick will be increased, but I'm not yet sure if it will be a higher fixed rate or a dynamic rate. well, if i understand properly, shields were designed to be a balanced part of the game, but if you look at the higher level player posts, they all diss shields as being useless at higher levels. The other aspect I see is for passive players. it gives them a chance to play the game their way. I forget where i read the post, but basically, the post said that good shields help weed out the undetermined from the determined attackers. i thought that was a good way of putting it. No need to make them completely inpenetrable. likewise, they are also bulky enough that the # per ship likely could also be increased without throwing off the game balance. I'm all for a dynamic rate, but also for more common shield recharge artifacts. You could also have some new ones that double your recharge rate for 30 minutes or something like that. |
|
| Author: | tk3 [ Fri Jul 23, 2010 6:51 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: hull vs shield... |
webguydan wrote: I agree about the fixed recharge comment - maybe shields would be better balanced if they would recharge a dynamic % of the overall total per tick. In some cases, however, this could make shields an incredible defensive option, preventing some ships from penetrating them altogether. Players should expect that the charge-per-tick will be increased, but I'm not yet sure if it will be a higher fixed rate or a dynamic rate. I'm all for the dynamic rate. Like Nocifer said, most fights are over before the recharge tick comes around. And at around 2-3% per tick, someone with 800 shield would gain 16-24 shield strength every couple of minutes - not too hard to overcome in a battle. |
|
| Author: | Nocifer Deathblade [ Fri Jul 23, 2010 7:54 pm ] |
| Post subject: | Re: hull vs shield... |
What I would like to see.. The time it takes to recharge shield to the fullest without any modifications should be equal regardless of rank. Rank 1 vs rank 1000.. Should take about same time to recharge shield to full.. Right now under current system, it is so much faster to recharge shield to fullest at rank 1 than at rank 1000. It would take forever to hit the max value of huge shield for rank 1000 player. Only way to achieve that is via rank up or shield restore artifact.. Once shield recharge to max becomes equal no matter what rank you are in then I would consider that balanced.. |
|
| Author: | Barracuda [ Sun Jul 25, 2010 12:27 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: hull vs shield... |
I'll still say 0.5-2% per tick (at a minimum of 1 shield per tick). At 2%, a shield of 50 (rank 1 baseline) would recharge at 50 ticks. Hopefully High levels have that 50 ticks too. If it is at 0.5% per tick, low levels will have 1 shield per tick, but no one would need more than 200 ticks to recharge their shields (400 minutes if 2 minutes per tick) |
|
| Author: | Veristek [ Sun Jul 25, 2010 12:37 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: hull vs shield... |
Some sci-fi shows have shields that are much stronger than the ship hulls, like Star Trek. In some Star Trek battles I've seen, ships take like 20 shots to take down their shields, then only 2 or 3 to cause warp core breach (or their equalivent), and boom, bye bye ship. Other sci-fi shows have stronger hulls than shields, like Star Wars. Although in Star Wars, some ships shields are just too powerful to be taken down- like the Rebels couldn't take down a Super Star Destroyer, Death Star, or Planetary shields with their own capital ships. In game terms, a frigate shouldn't be able to take down a Titan or Star Destroyer sized ship's shields. Peashooter aganist an elephant. |
|
| Author: | LT Smash [ Tue Jul 27, 2010 4:12 am ] |
| Post subject: | Re: hull vs shield... |
Both are need to survive harsh combat. |
|
| Page 1 of 2 | All times are UTC |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|