Jump to content
unown006

Force Fields as a defense?

Force feilds  

27 members have voted

  1. 1. Should force Fields be allowed in DU

    • They are needed to protect the estate and well being of others defensively and offensively
      19
    • They are only needed defensively [static defense]
      6
    • They are only needed offensively [dynamic defense]
      2
    • They are not needed and will destroy the game entirly
      0
  2. 2. If Force Fields are added how expensive should they be? This is gauge in how much time per member

    • Only 1,000+ member orgs can aqire these beauty's static and 100+ orgs for dynamic Force fields
      2
    • Only 500+ member orgs can obtain static force Fields 50+ for dynamic
      2
    • Only 250+ member orgs can gain Static force Fields 25+ for dynamic
      2
    • Only 100+ member orgs can gain Static force Fields 10+ for dynamic
      1
    • Only 50+ member orgs can gain Static force Fields 5+ for dynamic
      1
    • Only 25+ member orgs can gain Static force Fields solo for dynamic
      5
    • anyone can achieve static or dynamic force Fields decently fast
      14
    • No one will have them
      0


Recommended Posts

Answers don't make sense too.

 

Shields/protection bubbles are ofc defensive and offensive. If you want to invade a tile, you want to put a shield in your forward Base too (offensive) to protect your assault force.

 

Maybe there are timers involved setting them up too, so you can't abuse it.

 

Dynamic constructs should have a shield as defense, but not a protection bubble Like TCUs. I don't want to see ships Standing around with an invulnerable 24h shield

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

How about a large but really powerful shield that pretty much needs to be built as static construct on the ground but projects shield around some other construct from the distance like space station. Think Return of the jedi / Endor. This could add new tactical/strategic points to consider. 

 

Shields for constructs if in game in general should not be something just for large organizations any more than thrusters or weapons. The amount of resources is more a question of how many of how large ships you can make with what quality of parts. One player can have fighter with possibly a shield that suits ship that size. Organization has super star destroyer that can take hammering from entire fleets of smaller ships before losing shield.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Don't confuse the tactical and strategic use of shields.

 

The proposed base defense shield in DU is a strategic application, it behaves in a specific way, and that mechanism is independent of how much weapon damage is applied. The "reinforced mode" works on a fixed timer, combat damage is irrelevant.

 

Things like construct shields are tactical uses, their effectiveness is directly proportional to the amount of damage they take. Hit them hard enough and they drop in a matter of seconds...

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

it doesnt make sense that static force fields have a higher member requirement than dynamic ones in your answers, static techs are always easier to archieve than mobile versions. 

Besides, I dont think there will be something like "org skill tree" Ultimately everyone will be able to build everything, if he's able to get the required tech and components, thats a different question.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Pool have quite vague questions. What kind of shield?

 

IMO: Base offline defence in form of shield is a must have, for everyone. Of course the area they protect should be proportional to their building and fuel cost, to avoid spamming them all around the place.

And only for static structures - travelling ships should be the target for ambushes, surprise attacks and pirates.

 

Shields that soak damage before ship builder engineering skill kicks in? No, please no. That's attempt to smuggle HP pool into game with (promissed) localised damage. So just dumbing it down.

There is EVE if you want simple numerical combat.

9 hours ago, Kuritho said:

This has already been decided in the form of shields.

Source? Such statements without them serve no purpose.
We know about FFU - that they'll be in game for static constructs. Nothing about their exact cost. And nothing about HP shields either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Thanks. But most of those are not sources - those are community guesses/ideas/suggestions.

Only the last quote contain any source. And Devblog about FFU. Both are only about "offline protection" kind of shield.

 

That's quite far from "already been decided", which sounds as if something is set in stone. Maybe you meant "already been discussed"?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
21 hours ago, vylqun said:

it doesnt make sense that static force fields have a higher member requirement than dynamic ones in your answers, static techs are always easier to archieve than mobile versions. 

Besides, I dont think there will be something like "org skill tree" Ultimately everyone will be able to build everything, if he's able to get the required tech and components, thats a different question.

Never thought of a org skill tree thats a goo idea however but Its not a hard limit because we dont know how much somthing curently cost at base and what it cost to maintain in this case a forcefeild I substitute player numbers and there "time"(in a sense) the higher the number the more it cost 

 

20 hours ago, CalenLoki said:

Pool have quite vague questions. What kind of shield?

 

IMO: Base offline defence in form of shield is a must have, for everyone. Of course the area they protect should be proportional to their building and fuel cost, to avoid spamming them all around the place.

And only for static structures - travelling ships should be the target for ambushes, surprise attacks and pirates.

 

Shields that soak damage before ship builder engineering skill kicks in? No, please no. That's attempt to smuggle HP pool into game with (promissed) localised damage. So just dumbing it down.

There is EVE if you want simple numerical combat.

Source? Such statements without them serve no purpose.
We know about FFU - that they'll be in game for static constructs. Nothing about their exact cost. And nothing about HP shields either.

"Shields that soak damage before ship builder engineering skill kicks in? No, please no. That's attempt to smuggle HP pool into game with (promissed) localised damage. So just dumbing it down." I dont see a valid reason why not? unless you are saying it should be needed to reserch in the skill tree 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
17 minutes ago, CalenLoki said:

I'm saying that localised damage is a lot better than health pool.

And shields are the later.

You could very easily have bolth by you shoot ship shields either absorbs fully or absorbs then breaks then localized damage is applied

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

There is a mechanic from a different base building game that was always online. In order to destroy a base of a player online or not, the attackers had a limited number of attacks to destroy all defenses (which auto regenerated over time) and destroy the command center. Attackers would take damage from defenses also. Movement was limited, so if attacks failed, a player would have time to retaliate and backup could also come and help. If the base was destroyed, it would be moved and slowly recover from damage, losing functionality and resources for a time. I don't know if something like that could be a good compromise, but kinda seems like a possible solution all-around. Would make for a fair and extended battle mechanic.

What do you think guys?

Apologies, this is off topic.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, dw_ace_918 said:

There is a mechanic from a different base building game that was always online. In order to destroy a base of a player online or not, the attackers had a limited number of attacks to destroy all defenses (which auto regenerated over time) and destroy the command center. Attackers would take damage from defenses also. Movement was limited, so if attacks failed, a player would have time to retaliate and backup could also come and help. If the base was destroyed, it would be moved and slowly recover from damage, losing functionality and resources for a time. I don't know if something like that could be a good compromise, but kinda seems like a possible solution all-around. Would make for a fair and extended battle mechanic.

What do you think guys?

Apologies, this is off topic.

This sounds like a phone game called clash of kings? And it inst necessarily off topic 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, unown006 said:

This sounds like a phone game called clash of kings? And it inst necessarily off topic 

It's from command & conquer alliance's (or something like that), it used a shield mechanic on new game start and after destruction. The focus was heavily on defence, and strategic attack patterns based on opponents defensive design. Attacks where limited by command points that had a cool down period to regenerate. Many times I would log in with my base destroyed, have to move (an allowed distance), and for a short time have a shield. We would use this time to gather alliance members to retaliate. I'm sure many games use mechanics like this for always online play.  The point is that it makes base building strategy and attack strategy more challenging and in turn rewarding. It also had a focus on holding resources that benefit the alliance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/1/2018 at 12:15 PM, dw_ace_918 said:

It's from command & conquer alliance's (or something like that), it used a shield mechanic on new game start and after destruction. The focus was heavily on defence, and strategic attack patterns based on opponents defensive design. Attacks where limited by command points that had a cool down period to regenerate. Many times I would log in with my base destroyed, have to move (an allowed distance), and for a short time have a shield. We would use this time to gather alliance members to retaliate. I'm sure many games use mechanics like this for always online play.  The point is that it makes base building strategy and attack strategy more challenging and in turn rewarding. It also had a focus on holding resources that benefit the alliance.

Yes but you also have a survival aspect added to it so in this case I dont believe this is the best soultion

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, unown006 said:

Yes but you also have a survival aspect added to it so in this case I dont believe this is the best soultion

No, I wouldn't suggest using this as a blueprint, just came to mind because of the force field.  I'm also not sure how much I like the idea of force fields, seems cheap in terms of an idea, the concept has been around for a long time.  Also, how much science is there for its feasibility (how realistic is it). I think it would be awesome if there was a more "outside of the box" solution that could play on real technology or based in science. That said, I'm not a scientist, so maybe I'm wrong. Maybe something to do with magnetic repulsion and well designated base defenses.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, dw_ace_918 said:

No, I wouldn't suggest using this as a blueprint, just came to mind because of the force field.  I'm also not sure how much I like the idea of force fields, seems cheap in terms of an idea, the concept has been around for a long time.  Also, how much science is there for its feasibility (how realistic is it). I think it would be awesome if there was a more "outside of the box" solution that could play on real technology or based in science. That said, I'm not a scientist, so maybe I'm wrong. Maybe something to do with magnetic repulsion and well designated base defenses.

If you are asking for science please watch the video above There will be many outside the box solutions some are already here And force fields may be cheap but so are many other metas out there but I really like it to give one more atvatage to a defender if it puts the time into it 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, unown006 said:

If you are asking for science please watch the video above There will be many outside the box solutions some are already here And force fields may be cheap but so are many other metas out there but I really like it to give one more atvatage to a defender if it puts the time into it 

Sure, shield are a si-fi staple right, there's no reason not to use them.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 5/2/2018 at 11:35 PM, dw_ace_918 said:

Sure, shield are a si-fi staple right, there's no reason not to use them.

There fun why not everywhere else has them

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Shields (the si-fi kind) vs force field.

Uses, cost, power consumption. How much damage do they prevent? Do they degrade in effectiveness against damage over time or do they supply constant levels of protection? Is there a variety of protection and color?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
6 hours ago, dw_ace_918 said:

Shields (the si-fi kind) vs force field.

Uses, cost, power consumption. How much damage do they prevent? Do they degrade in effectiveness against damage over time or do they supply constant levels of protection? Is there a variety of protection and color?

I think they both should be added in the end

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now

×