Fires Through Shields

[Draco18s]

     On the other hand, a broader audience with no military or wargames background won't know what the heck "ECM" is.  "Deflector" is descriptive in and of itself, as well as being a term with much wider cultural exposure.

     I think the change of shields->deflectors is a great idea; if that's done, I don't know that "force field" and "shield" really need to be differentiated, unless it would be desirable to reserve one for future use.

I also vote for this change.  I constantly refer to FF as "shield generators" when they're not.  Deflectors is an accurate name for how the stat works: it involves a "to-hit" roll, and if you deflect the shot, you make yourself harder to hit.

While a shield was historically used for that purpose, modern connotation has given it to mean an energy based "bubble" that absorbs damage and (eventually) regenerates its own hitpoints.

Then the Shield Booster z-tech could be renamed to "Zenith ECM Device" with proper descriptive text about how "this electronic countermeasures device interferes with enemy ships' targeting computers, making your ships harder to hit.  Mechanical effect: triples the Deflection value of your ships."

[Rod Serling]

I would prefer ECM. Why? Shots don't lose their potency when traveling through space (usually, certainly not missiles, shells, lasers, or most of the weaponry that AI war uses), so it would make no sense for shots to be decflected worse from close as from far. ECM makes sense: the farther you are away, the more ECM systems can jam your targeting sensors, making ships harder to hit successfully. it also fits in with "targeting systems" better Moreover, certain special buildings make more sense with ECM over deflectors (radar jammers).

Shells have a higher chance to miss the further away you are
Lasers diffuse and lose overall power over distance
Missiles, well this one requires a little "magic".

The further you are from an enemy missile launch the higher chance the ships computers have to prepare for, and therefore bat away a missile effectively.

Basically, distance does matter in two cases, and can be explained through lore on the last case. Distance affects proficiency with a weapon, even in a vacuum. Even more so with deflector shields.

Additionally a Zenith ECM booster makes no sense. Alien technology may or may not even use the same capable systems, additionally, a large part of Zenith ships are biological, making ECM almost completely illogical in this case. Afterall you can't really jam a targeting computer of a human, except by a large flash of light. In this case, we already have that, its called a laser.

[Draco18s]

Additionally a Zenith ECM booster makes no sense. Alien technology may or may not even use the same capable systems, additionally, a large part of Zenith ships are biological, making ECM almost completely illogical in this case. Afterall you can't really jam a targeting computer of a human, except by a large flash of light. In this case, we already have that, its called a laser.

And biological shield boosters do?
Biological energy reactors?  (With over 8 times the efficiency of a machine?)
A biological "time manipulator" that (effectively) increases the speed of units in a system?  Note how even though time is being altered, we don't get more resources from the system (measured in units per time), ships and engineers don't build faster (measured, again, in units per time), energy reactor costs don't go up (again, measured in units per time), and turrets don't fire faster (reload measured in time).

At some point you have to say, "look, it doesn't make sense, but it sounds frakking awesome."  Its why we have games like Robot Dinosuars that Shoot Lasers from their Mouth when they Roar.

[Rod Serling]

I believe we all have biological energy reactors in our possessions currently, who's to say they didn't synergise it with machines (as it appears by the graphics) up the scale, and improve efficiency?

We don't know exactly how the shield booster works anyway, why can't it be partly biological?

What about ships that do extra damage to high shielded targets? We'll have to find a way to play that off with ECM too.

In the end, as with any sci fi, it doesn't have to make 100% sense, but why intentionally make a larger, more difficult change thy makes less sense in the end, when we have perfectly good deflectors lined up?

[Draco18s]

I believe we all have biological energy reactors in our possessions currently, who's to say they didn't synergise it with machines (as it appears by the graphics) up the scale, and improve efficiency?

The electrochemical efficiency of living matter is very low wattage, very low amerage, and very low efficiency (didn't you take biology?  Metabolism is a six step chemical process!  Burning gasoline OTOH is a 1 step process).

What about ships that do extra damage to high shielded targets? We'll have to find a way to play that off with ECM too.

ECCM, look it up.

In the end, as with any sci fi, it doesn't have to make 100% sense, but why intentionally make a larger, more difficult change thy makes less sense in the end, when we have perfectly good deflectors lined up?

Uh?  Isn't that what I was advocating?  The use of the word "deflector" instead of "shield"?

[Rod Serling]

Actually I never did take biology, but I do know that our current evolved biological energy reactors are extremely inefficient, however, the Zenith used to rule an entire galaxy, and can create spaceships out of biological materials, I think their bioengineers are able to work up a little more than our nautral selection can.

I am a US Navy ET, I am very familiar with ECCM, and I can tell you for a fact that an Arleigh Burke class destroyer does not get a damage bonus when it burns through an enemy wide-spectrum radar jamming attempt.

Good that we're advocating the same thing, but the general introduction of ECM is generally unnecessary for an already existant feature. Implimented as a unique feature done by itself would be cool.

[Draco18s]

Good that we're advocating the same thing, but the general introduction of ECM is generally unnecessary for an already existant feature. Implimented as a unique feature done by itself would be cool.

I wasn't introducing ECM into the game at all, I was merely renaming a device that already exists.

[Rod Serling]

Exactly, introducing ECM by renaming something that already exists seems completely unnessary. It serves no beneficial purpose when we could introduce ECM later as a unique and developed feature, with its own pros and cons.

[Draco18s]

Then what would you call a Planetary Shield Booster when shields-by-name have been renamed?

[Rod Serling]

Planetary Deflector Booster   

[keith.lamothe]

Saw that coming

[Fleet]

Curious, have the people who are confused about FF and shields read the Faq/Manual page about it? Cause it really goes into detail...I don't think changing the name of a mechanic just because people have not or won't read some documentation is a good reason.

That being said, I do think the shields operate a little differently then I would expect, if I had not read any documentation. I usually think of shields that work similar to armor, in that they drain as they dissipate incoming energy/matter, and as their strength decreases more attacks are able to penetrate, damaging the hull. A name like deflector might be superficially more accurate in describing the mechanic.

[Draco18s]

I don't think changing the name of a mechanic just because people have not or won't read some documentation is a good reason.

This isn't to do with the documentation, but due to the confusing nature by which shields are one thing and force fields another, and sometimes the word "shield" is used interchangeably with both, heck the game itself has some confusion in that regard too (Riot Shield being a very notable example).

[keith.lamothe]

Yes, as I mentioned earlier, I need to change the Riot Shield name (and the Avenger Shield, though that one isn't as noticeable), that was a very recent addition by me and I made a mistake in the name... it was more a reference to the actual "Riot Shield" idea in modern police equipment, which of course functions more as a deflector in practice.

[Draco18s]

Yes, as I mentioned earlier, I need to change the Riot Shield name (and the Avenger Shield, though that one isn't as noticeable), that was a very recent addition by me and I made a mistake in the name... it was more a reference to the actual "Riot Shield" idea in modern police equipment, which of course functions more as a deflector in practice.

Oh, I recognize the reference, but I'd much rather that stay the same and change what is normally called shields to something else as I think of shield generators are, well, shield generators.