I am coming to the conclusion shields are useless. If you are big, then you get hit by more damage. So basically the bigger you are, the more damage your shields take. Increasing your shields does no good because putting rank points into more room for larger shields only means you will take more damage, not get more protection.

Shields take a really long time to recharge. Dan is realy good about getting stuff worked out but currently it takes days (yes days) to fully charge my shields) so they are basically useless. I am big so I get more damage but my shields don't recharge proportionately to the damage I take.

So basically are shields useless? What do you guys think?

Shields are a big block that can slow you from dieing. Yes the recharge is slow (which could be better), but when fully charged they are worth having.

shields add to the base hp of your ship, defense modifies the damage you take.

shields regenerate on their own opposed to hull which can get really expensive to repair and only once every 5 min.

so basically if you have enough defense no one can break through your shields. you can let it autonomously regenerate and never have to shell out the millions of credits you must need to repair. unless someone really has it out for you and pulls out all the stops. in which case activate that calming amplifier and put more research into defense.

Heh. Read viewtopic.php?f=3&t=1158

Yes, as high rank player, I find shield quite useless as well.. Worst one than any other modules..

I am looking it more from the size vs usefulness part.

You increase your shields to take more hits but you need more decks for larger shields and currently the game is slanted so that the more decks you have the more damage you take. So basically having more shields negates any positive benefits because that larger area means you take more damage.

For example:
You increase your size by 15 decks to add shields that are 150 points stronger than than ones you currently have. Because you are now 15 decks larger you take 15% more damage (or whatever it really is). That extra 150 points of shield are now canceled out by the extra 150 damage you take from being bigger than you were.

I've always tried to use the defensive and population planet structures, but when I consider the fact that shields aren't the most useful modules in the world, I think it might just be easier to use minefields instead and just neglect shield research.

Perhaps the shields need a different calculation to hull?

Generally, people say that shield power reduces based on the area covered by a shield. The greater the area, the bigger the shield. Conversely, the smaller the area that is covered, the more effectively the area will be covered because the shields are more concentrated. You could then make your shields stronger by having more generators that cover a smaller area each, or by having the same number of shields but stronger generators.

Impact size also plays a part - the smaller the point of impact, the more concentrated the attack, so the more damage that is done. Conversely, the larger the point of impact, the less damage that is done, because the effect is spread over a wider area.

So when it comes to shields, perhaps the calculation should take this into account? Damage already includes a random number, and this could be said to represent the point of impact. But perhaps the number of shield generators that are installed should be taken into account, so as more generators are equipped, their effectiveness against a hit increases, and less damage is caused.

I have no idea how the calculations are currently done, so maybe they already take this into account, but if they don't, it's a potential area for improvement.

If I am not mistaken, the damage hull and shield takes is the same.

Yes, the damage rates are the same. I just read a post by Dan where he confirmed this.

So my post above is a suggestion on changing the current system. It could then reward players based on the tactics they use.

Why not make it that shield shields take a % less damage then hull.

The main issue why shield is useless is that shield recharge doesn't scale well with rank.. As your rank goes up that usually comes with bigger shield or facing bigger damage per round, shield recharging (1 shield point per tick) becomes less effective..

I think Dan has a good fix for this in the works. He may end up having each shield recharge tick be a percentage of your overall shield rating, so that it is fully recharged within a fixed amount of time.

But the recharge rate has nothing to do with the size/protection ratio. Shields take a LOT more decks than hull.

The more shields you have, the more decks you need. The more decks you have, the more damage you take. The more damage you take, the more shields you need. The more shields you have, the more decks you need. The more decks you have, the more damage you take. The more damage you take, the more shields you need. The more shields you have, the more decks you need. The more decks you have, the more damage you take. The more damage you take, the more shields you need.

See the cycle? I am saying shields are useless because you will never reach the point where they recharge fast enough to make up from the extra damage you take because the game is slanted to larger ships (with room for larger shields) taking more damage.

Ah, but the same could be said about hull. The more hull you need, the more decks you need, the more hull, etc. It's just that hull takes up LESS space than shields, since it doesn't auto-repair. If Dan implements a set percentage recharge per tick, then you'll be guaranteed to have full shields, no matter how much shielding you have, in set period of time.

So, the question is, or rather might be, would you rather have 108 decks spent on Overcharged Q-Phased Plating for 1620 hull (must be repaired), or 108 decks spent on Heavy Disruption Shields for 573 shield (recharges to full every 90(?) minutes)?


The fallacy of this argument is that you're assuming you take more damage because you're bigger. That's not true, although the reverse is true. You take LESS damage if you're SMALLER. Super-giant ships just have no damage cap applied to them. You still can't take more damage than the other ship is capable of dealing. Stack a little defense, and you'll really kill their ability to damage you.

well right now the only reason to install shields would be if you already have 5 hulls installed. It probably makes more sense to install more defense rather than shields, but by then your decks will probably all be taken up anyways. Defensieve modules and shields both take up a lot of space. If you actually install a lot shields they can take more than 24 hours to refill at higher levels but it only takes someone of equal power maybe an hour's worth of energy to cut through them. I would basically think they aren't a good part of any strategy. Considering you can use minefields to defend a planet, there might not be much reason to even research shields. Shields are pretty useless if nobody is going to use them.

That is true right now. Read this thread, and see what is being discussed to fix them.

The bigger the ship is, the more powerful their shields are. This applies in just about any sci-fi universe that involves shields. A frigate won't be able to destroy a Star Destroyer or Death Star if it sat there and shot its lasers for weeks or even months non-stop. On the other hand, a Star Destroyer should be able to wipe out a frigate's shields in 2 or 3 volleys. Death Star? One shot (and kills hull too in the one shot, probably).

Ditto in Star Trek. A Borg Cube's shields probably can't be taken down by, say, a Federation Oberth science vessel or a Klingon Bird of Prey. Conversely, the same Borg Cube can take out multiple ships at once, punching through shields like tissue paper (like at Wolf 359, it killed 39 Federation warships in one battle, IIRC).

I guess what I'm trying to say is that shields and possibly hull damage need a bit of an overhaul. The % of your max shield strength per tick idea would work nicely. Also, there should be some mechanism in which shields or armor / hull is just too tough for weak weapons to damage or penetrate.

Think of shooting an elephant with a BB gun. The BB gun would do 0 or 1 damage to the elephant's thick skin (unless you get in like a thousand shots), but in the meanwhile, the elephant can easily gore or trample you.

My idea is this...

Weapon tech tier equal to shield, armor, or defense tech tier (level 5 weapons tier = level 5 tier shield / armor / defense) is standard damage at 100%.

Weapon tech 1 level lower than target's shield / armor / defense tech = your weapons do 85% damage.

2 tech levels lower = 70% damage
3 tech levels lower = 55% damage
4 tech levels lower = 40% damage (capped for fairness)

Something along these lines. Conversely, the more advanced a weapon is, the more effective it should be aganist "primitive" shields.

Weapons 1 tech higher = 115% damage
Weapons 2 techs higher = 130% damage
Weapons 3 techs higher = 145% damage
Weapons 4 techs higher = 160% damage (capped? or cap at 200% damage?)

And so on.

In the worlds you mentioned "shields" are equivalent to "shields + defenses" in Galaxy Legion.

If I remember correctly getting through the Borgs shields was not the problem. The problem was they had no delay on hull repair.

Slightly off topic here.

How much defense would itI need to render a Star Destroyer practically immune to a frigate's attack? 2000 defense VS 100 attack from the frigate?

Case in point: My ship has 440 attack and 350 defense. The Stryll Deep Tracker I killed had 290 ttack and 290 defense but I halved that defense to 145 with the Drannik Saboteur artifact. The result? I get hit for 30+ damage each time. What I don't understand is if I have defense that is HIGHER than the enemy's attack, then damage should be neligible, like 10 points or less damage per hit, not 1/3 of my hull per hit.

This holds true in any RPG or statistics game. In those RPG's, a hero with higher defense than the monster / enemy's attack would mean that he would take 0 or 1 damage a hit.