Spring RTS Engine

Big tank still has big shield.

CarRepairer wrote:Two shields are twice as good as one with or without shield linking.

nah. Without linking you could focus fire on one shield before and bring its charge down and kill it. The way to stop that was to place the aegis close enough together that they were under each other. But that was the less space for more effectiveness trade-off the shields used to have.

But you're complaining about having many shields, where you could have one spare and put them all in a complicated movement pattern with enough effort to get the same effect as linking. They're slightly better, but it's a small amount that gets smaller as you have a denser group of shields.

luckywaldo7 wrote:Ok, so im not sure exactly how it works. But when it comes down to it, two shields are twice and good as one, and cover twice as much area. So two are really 4x as good as one. Or something like that. Whatever it is shield spam is annoyingly effective.

But it isnt the only unit that gets stronger kind of exponentially. 2 tanks together are more powerful than 2 single tanks.

Hrrm, if a shielded crabe-style unit shared charge... might be cool or OP.

The real problem with shields is that AA does 1/10th damage to them. Krow under shields = O_O.

rapier shield crawl stat i made is epic win but abuse

lurker wrote:They're slightly better, but it's a small amount that gets smaller as you have a denser group of shields.

Exactly. You can choose to spread your shields out for more area coverage but less effectiveness, or you can group them closer together for less area but more effectiveness.

JohannesH wrote:

luckywaldo7 wrote:Ok, so im not sure exactly how it works. But when it comes down to it, two shields are twice and good as one, and cover twice as much area. So two are really 4x as good as one. Or something like that. Whatever it is shield spam is annoyingly effective.

But it isnt the only unit that gets stronger kind of exponentially. 2 tanks together are more powerful than 2 single tanks.

But if you're attacking, say at a chokepoint, would it be twice as good to have 100 tanks instead of 50? Absolutely not. Only some of the tanks will be able to attack at one time, while the rest of the tanks are hang back being useless. So usefulness only increases linearly for a bit before it levels off. And it is linearly, 3 tanks are not 9x as good as 1.

It just goes are part of the fundamentals of the design that "just spam more of it" should not be the best option. Don't get me wrong, I really like shield linking, I just was throwing out an idea that their should be some trade-offs because shield spam is just so good.

Saktoth wrote:Hrrm, if a shielded crabe-style unit shared charge... might be cool or OP.


The real problem with shields is that AA does 1/10th damage to them. Krow under shields = O_O.

Aaah that explains it! We were having a nice 3v3v3v3, I had a beautiful start; reclaimed the huge middle rock, killed two coms with precision bombers and reclaimed them; had plenty of eco and aa, then det raped me with krow/aegis mix. Although now that Otherside mentions it I do remember his rapier/aegis raping hawks with no losses. I will have to abuse this

luckywaldo7 wrote:Exactly. You can choose to spread your shields out for more area coverage but less effectiveness, or you can group them closer together for less area but more effectiveness.

Let me try again. The boost from current shield linking is small and the more shields you have the less it helps, if you're willing to do a little bit of micro to unlinked shields.

luckywaldo7 wrote:shield spam is just so good.

No, it's not. Fusions aren't free; they can't just make dozens of them without crippling their base.

Saktoth wrote:The real problem with shields is that AA does 1/10th damage to them. Krow under shields = O_O.

People are abusing it, and you don't bother to fix it? What are you thinking?

lurker wrote:

luckywaldo7 wrote:Exactly. You can choose to spread your shields out for more area coverage but less effectiveness, or you can group them closer together for less area but more effectiveness.

Let me try again. The boost from current shield linking is small and the more shields you have the less it helps, if you're willing to do a little bit of micro to unlinked shields.

Ok, I guess I am the fool here because I didn't realize that the boost was less effective with more shields so what I have been arguing for has already been implemented

I guess part of my impression of the uberness of shields came from the one game my spam off aa was barely scratching the shields. But I didn't realize it was only doing 10% damage. Thank you for fixing.

lurker wrote:

Saktoth wrote:The real problem with shields is that AA does 1/10th damage to them. Krow under shields = O_O.

People are abusing it, and you don't bother to fix it? What are you thinking?

I remember this coming up once months ago but its something I never remember seeing intentionally abused in a game before.

luckywaldo7 wrote:never remember seeing intentionally abused

luckywaldo7 wrote:det raped me with krow/aegis mix.

Riiiiight.

luckywaldo7 wrote:Ok, I guess I am the fool here because I didn't realize that the boost was less effective with more shields so what I have been arguing for has already been implemented

It hasn't been. Did you not read my explanation? Shield linking only has a small benefit over constant swapping of full shields and drained shields. And swapping out shields gets easier when you increase the numbers, so shields linking has even less of a benefit then.

Wait. Linked shields just even out charge amongst themselves with no losses don't they?

Evening out change could even be seen as worse than shield swapping in some situations. Shields only stop weapons if they have enough charge. For example you've got 5 4k charge shields. Once the shields take 5k damage(disregarding regen) they will be unable to stop weapons that do 3k damage.

I actually plan to remedy that now that the shield call supports weapon numbers, making each shield act as having the entire charge of the group available.

lurker wrote:I actually plan to remedy that now that the shield call supports weapon numbers, making each shield act as having the entire charge of the group available.

I foresee nuke blocking shield spires. Only in FFA of course.

Go ahead. Shields would make a bit more sense that way.

But it still explodes. You could just make a terra wall with some cons.

My only really serious issue with the shield is that the only really really effective counter for them is EMP. So if you're fighting a shield spammer and you're not ARM, I don't see an effective way of dealing with them. Tremmors are fail, Airstrikes are Fail, Tac Nukes are Fail, can someone give me some insight on how a Logo player can deal with another logo without massive tactical number superiority please.

i beat 5-6 shield bots easilly with tremor and lugar supression

but i still think they are a tad OP

Raxxman wrote:My only really serious issue with the shield is that the only really really effective counter for them is EMP. So if you're fighting a shield spammer and you're not ARM, I don't see an effective way of dealing with them. Tremmors are fail, Airstrikes are Fail, Tac Nukes are Fail, can someone give me some insight on how a Logo player can deal with another logo without massive tactical number superiority please.

Shields can be like a big sign yelling STALL ME! If they're not really doing anything with their shields just force fire right at the edge of them, chances are more units will be able to reach them without entering the enemy units range than if you targeted the shielded units.

a widget that allows you to set how much E you want allocated to your cloaking/shielding would be nice

lurker wrote:it takes slightly more than 7 shields and 3 fusions to block a single tremor.

Raxxman wrote:Tremmors are fail

Can you elaborate on this? Even if you target the edge and only some of the shots hit you're getting much more out than you put in.