Forums » Suggestions
Ventral, dorsal, bow,stern shielding
I think it would be interesting if the shielding was separated somewhat into four areas of the capital ship. For general purpose ship use, nothing would change, but in battle, capital ship pilots could make decisions to double up on the shielding in one of the four areas. For example, someone assaulting another ship could focus their shielding forward, which means they could take a lot of fire before losing those shields.
As a trade off, when focusing the shields forward, they would take armor damage on the exposed portion of their capital ship.
Someone egressing from a battle might instead prefer to focus their shields to the rear. With the same trade off for their forward portion of their ship.
There would be a delay when the shielding focus is changed.
As a trade off, when focusing the shields forward, they would take armor damage on the exposed portion of their capital ship.
Someone egressing from a battle might instead prefer to focus their shields to the rear. With the same trade off for their forward portion of their ship.
There would be a delay when the shielding focus is changed.
ez +1
I would like to mention this is in Star Trek Online :) It would be pretty cool mechanic.
+1
Directional shields are of course an awesome idea.. how could I not upvote it?.. that being said, I can imagine how difficult this would be to implement in code :/
Directional shields are of course an awesome idea.. how could I not upvote it?.. that being said, I can imagine how difficult this would be to implement in code :/
I think front and back (halves of a sphere) are more appropriate given the situational awareness data available. The FOV really can obscure what is ahead with what is on the side such that it would be impossible to know which “shield” to amplify, whereas front/back is more straightforward.
Yah I have to agree while this sounds like a nice suggestion the amount of work to create a new UI + mechanics and all the other lovely stuff that's needed is a lot.
+1
So, as some may recollect, the actual damage model of the game is technically positional (for all ships). The little "damage indicator" thing on the HUD, showing your ship, is capable of showing different regions with different levels of damage.
This was, unfortunately, never really used to much effect. It was one of many things I intended in the early design (along with component failure, partially destructable ships, and other things), that basically fell prey to limited dev resources.
Anyway, I'll think about this positional shielding thing, and if it makes sense, we'll take a look.
But, as people say, it's not the most trivial thing to add (in terms of UIs and complexity), and the cost/benefit ratio probably isn't there, compared to other things we could add into the game with roughly the same amount of time.
Still, I'll keep it in mind.
This was, unfortunately, never really used to much effect. It was one of many things I intended in the early design (along with component failure, partially destructable ships, and other things), that basically fell prey to limited dev resources.
Anyway, I'll think about this positional shielding thing, and if it makes sense, we'll take a look.
But, as people say, it's not the most trivial thing to add (in terms of UIs and complexity), and the cost/benefit ratio probably isn't there, compared to other things we could add into the game with roughly the same amount of time.
Still, I'll keep it in mind.
+1
I'm reminded of X-Wing vs. Tie Fighter and balancing your shields for whatever operation your were running. If shields were at 25% on the rear and 75% on the front, you could balance them out to 50% all the way round. Or 100% to the front or back to cover an incoming missile. etc.
I'm reminded of X-Wing vs. Tie Fighter and balancing your shields for whatever operation your were running. If shields were at 25% on the rear and 75% on the front, you could balance them out to 50% all the way round. Or 100% to the front or back to cover an incoming missile. etc.