Balance of power

[Nigel_Strange]

Note: this is not a suggestion for any current games, but perhaps for a future game.

It might not apply because of how the shield system works, but it occurred to me that shields and weapons use the same power source, and you can direct that power back and forth as needed.

However, when making builds, we do not need to balance shield multiplier with weapon power. Here is what I was thinking:

First, you have a powerplant component. It could be part of the frame, or it could be an upgradable component. It supplies the power for ship systems (shield, weapons).

Then, you have weaponst hat use more or less power.

Then, you have shields that use more or less power.

Now you see possibilities for balancing during ship building. You might have a level 5 power plant, which can effectively power a level 5 shield and a level 5 weapon. HOwever, if you use a level 2 shield, then you can power a level 6 or level 7 weapon.

I'm not even saying that the game would limit you while building. It wouldn't restrict you. However, the total amount of power that is available would somehow factor into it. So, if you have high shields and high weapons, you will find that the weapons run out of energy quickly, so you only get a few shots, or that your shield recharges slowly because there is not much juice going into them. YOu can still balance them as you do now, but the total amount of power availble for balancing depends on the level of the power generator.

I could see using under-powered shields if it meant that I would be able to shoot continuously without running out of energy. Conversely, I might go with a light-end weapon if I could maintain strong shield strength by having more power available for keeping the shields up.

One thing though: the way the shield multiplier works might obviate the need for more power. If they work by power capacitance, then maybe you can keep storing energy in them as much as you want, so weapon power is always available. It depends on how the shields "work" in the simulation.

[Busch]

Nigel, If I think that I'm on the right track, here's the descriptor for shield boosters: "They are a series of capacitors that store energy for each shield array. A single shield booster cell provides basic storage capacity for the shield system." With C5 level shield boosters providing 5 times the storage capacity. (sic) And don't forget the shield array recharger.
Also, your discussion of mixing/matching engines, shield cores, and various weapons combinations is already extant in the game/sim.
Is it that you're suggesting a form of "power booster" for the engine classes ? Admittedly, the afterburner drive has its' specific benefits and down-side. Like any other equipment combination, be it frame, engines, weapons, wings, and etc. And please bear in mind that with each increase/step-up in frame design, (either civ or mil) carries with it a corresponding increase in the "power and shield cores". It's that ability to swap around all of these various and sundry items that allows what you may already have suggested to happen.

Sorry if preaching to the converted.

[Edited on 9-3-2011 by FADM Busch]

[Edited on 9-3-2011 by FADM Busch]

[Nigel_Strange]

The shield core is part of the frame itself, but what if you could choose a lower-power shield core for your frame than is standard? I would imagine that would give you more power available to weapons.

Or, if you have a level 1 shield, I would imagine that it would recharge much faster than a level 5 shield, so that, for instance, if you are using a cloak generator, having a level 1 shield would be preferable because it would reduce the recharge time.

I guess what I am suggesting is a kind of overall transparency into power management, and in particular, decisions about how to build a ship. I think it might relate more to the enigmatic "construction resource" points.

What if, for example, instead of resource points, you had to think about things like mass, volume, and power consumption.

Let's say you have a small frame, like a raven. You want big weapons, but big weapons require a lot of power, so you buy a big power generator, but big power generators have a lot of mass, so you sacrifice agility because the thrusters are not very big, so you get bigger engines and bigger thrusters.

OK, but your ship only has so much space on it. If you keep adding big components, you will eventually run out of space, so you have to decide how to build your ship.

The system we have now is like that, but it is simplified, and although it makes it easier for people to construct ships without worrying about those details, it seems opaque.

If I got a medium frame, but wanted unending firepower, I would get a big powerplant and a small shield core. The shields would not be powerful, but I would never run out of weapon energy.

So, what I'm suggesting is not a huge departure from how it works, but more tweakable. I imagine some people just like to tinker with their ship configuration, and being able to get into the details might interest some players.

Also, a leve 5 shield battery would take 5 times the hits, but also recharge 5 times as long, given the same shield core.

Of course a bigger shield core would reduce those recharge times, so a level 5 shield would recharge faster on a Starmaster with level 10 shield core than it would on a raven with a level 2 shield core, but you could offset that recharge time by using lower-level shield on the raven. OR, you could suck it up and accept the long recharge time as the price for having a lot of shielding.

[Edited on 9-3-2011 by Nigel_Strange]

[MMaggio]

I can tell you that a Starmaster with class 5 shields and a level 10 shield booster is not a powerful defence and is easily damaged. A leviathon with the same set up has considerably more shield strength/armor protection and I don't care what the charts say!
I can offer proof via U2U.

[Dingo]

Its true what MM says. extensive tests run with Powell on alliance, federation, and military frames confirms this. The stramaster has great shields but is actually squishier than many think once breached.

[Busch]

Okay, got it now. Your suggestion about giving regards to mass/cubeage vs power requirements/consumption rates vs weapons load-outs is right on the mark. And frame crafting (to a point) becoming more "tweakable" would permit more latitude in available options. Not sure about the re-charge times on the various shield levels and boosters, at least how they compare. The shield array recharger is also beneficial, but not when used in conjunction with a stealth generator. Have used a level 10 shield, level 5 shield booster, and the stealth generator to good advantage. Left the shield recharger hangared. Prefer the "strength" of level 10 shields and level 5 power boosters over the lesser options. But an engine power generator/booster might be the ticket for any of the space frames. Especially for those pilots who engage in combat missions most regularly, where weapons/shields power management is crucial to survival. Also, having an Engineer along as crew on civ frames, helps tweak the power management equation; because the engineer is tasked with the ships' systems operations. Mil frames aren't crewed, yet; and come with their frame/system resources purpose-built, and so must take the benefits of their alleged military AI for all power management requirements. Good points, Nigel.

[Edited on 9-3-2011 by FADM Busch]

[Edited on 9-3-2011 by FADM Busch]

[DaveK]

I can tell you that a Starmaster with class 5 shields and a level 10 shield booster is not a powerful defence and is easily damaged. A leviathon with the same set up has considerably more shield strength/armor protection and I don't care what the charts say!
I can offer proof via U2U.

Yes please! I would love to see the data. I've learned my lesson with the "theoretical" power of particle weapons vs the actual damage they deliver! Hence I now use an C2 IceSpear and will be experimenting with a C1 FlareBeam (better range!)

[DaveK]

Nigel - I'm still trying get my head aroud the permutations but I like the idea of less opaque tweaking options.