Give us Shields! Come on!

You want someone who isn't a troll?

Fine. I've had a few years of experience, and I'm among the better players of the PA community.

Here's why shields wouldn't work:
It creates stalemates where there shouldn't be any. You shouldn't be able to just throw up a single building and be able to protect your front line with ease. The front is where most of the action takes place, and is the most fluid part of the fight. It lowers the skill ceiling - throw up shield, send army forward. Oh wait! that makes an incredibly unstoppable combo - I should do that all the time!

No.

Also, in SC, maps were flat. In PA, maps are globes. You can be attacked from any side. Having a shield is just another way to waste resources on something that isn't units attacking your enemy.

Have I played SupCom?
No. Did I research the game, along with TA, before I bought this one?

Yes I did. I've been further educated by some of the Planetary Vanguards who have extensive experience in each game. Believe me when I say that shields will not improve gameplay because they will limit the number of strategic options available to you at any given time.

Watch from 3 minutes 30 seconds for neutrino saying spiritual successor to Total Annihilation.

There are only 2 RTS/strat game had shields that I played, SupCom and Star Wars: Empire at War, and the ground combat in SW:EaW was terrible, and the base shields were useless. There were no base shields in CoH, AoE 1-3, the Empires series, and the list goes on. The point is games with shields like that are the exception not the rule. Not all play like Starcraft, and why is your only comparison Starcraft. Whenever someone disagrees with you stated that unless there are shields then it will be like Starcraft. For the record, I am fairly certain there has never been, and never will be, crash-able planets in Starcraft and I am fairly certain Starcraft has a unit cap while Planetary Annihilation does not have a unit cap (as Sir. Tuxedo often proves), QED, this game will NEVER be like Starcraft.


tl;dr
Your best bet for shields its to mod it into the game, no one is going to stop you.

I had an idea on an acceptable shield : when it is destroyed everything under its cover explode with him

Why batman, why you eat Pinkie Pie?

Wut?

The signature

Oh. On mobile, can't see

@any-uber-employee-or-mod please close this thread before it gets out of hand

If you tilt your screen you should be able to, I can on my Note S3. (Though it may depend, idk.)

Another supporter of shields here, I should mention I was a devout Supreme commander player hence a bit of bias ofcourse (however I do enjoy the game as it stands).

Personally if shields are balanced well they can add allot to the depth of base design (which I feel is not very important in planetary annihilation right now). To my mind shield generators would be a tech 2 building with very low health that would require a huge amount of power to run offering a trade off for their defensive ability with a large power drain that could be put into say... Building an army. This leads to interesting target prioritisation when bombing bases, as destroying any power generators will cause shield generators to fail severely weakening a shield based defence strategy. If bubble shields are too effective then perhaps there is another way energy shields could be implemented. They could be a means to only block indirect fire, artillery, orbital satellites and bombers, whilst still leaving bases vulnerable to ground assault (I'm thinking from a battle of hoth-esque situation).

As someone who has but in over 90(Over 100 if you count SupCom2) hours of gameplay in SupCom I think I have a right to reply(also about 5-6 hours of StarCraft 2(Meh)).

I was actually happy when told shields would not be added. What made it better was that it was Mavor(lead programmer of SupCom/FA) was saying it. He knows what he's talking about.

Why do I not like shields? Because PA is about finding and destroying the enemy. It has been proven that turtles fall in long term engagements, so what's the point of encouraging something that fails?

When I play SupCom like PA I don't use shields(at all). So why force Uber to add in something that will ultimately get people to use a flawed and failed strategy.

Also, I ask that you please be respectful and civil.

...reasons...

It's already out of hand. All we can do now is wait for the OP to reply with even MORE bait. And then a conspiracy will start and Brad will lock the thread.
Such is the way of PA threads.

Best Gift Ever....... ever
(Although the first I've seen it was what the...)

I should make a random discussion forum topic asking about who's a pony fan for the lols.

Already did, a while ago

These are older(er) forums. That is hardly the first thread on that topic. Besides that's more of a ridicule thread anyways.

Who loves Off-Topic in threads like these? #Kappa

I wouldn't call it a ridicule thread, it was pretty positive.
Somewhat for the most part.

Not to ummm point the obvious out here but what you said there "There were no base shields in CoH, AoE 1-3, the Empires series, and the list goes on" was completely ridiculous. Of course there isn't shields in world war 2 and Medievil aged RTS, what planet are you on? shields would only appear on futuristic RTS games that are based on sci-fi related themes, not what you're discussing. As for games that actually did have shields in the game granted may not be many but to list a few that did: Earth 2160 (shield walls) / Supreme Command 1&2 / Imperium Galactica II / Star Wars empire at war / Star Craft / Command & Conquer.

It wouldn't hurt to have shields in the game as an option and for those that are completely against it don't have to play with it. It doesn't bother me too much that there isn't shields in the game but I do think the game is missing something without them. As for the sphere maps argument, it doesn't really matter because a lot of the supcom maps you could still get attacked from any side anyway there was never a 1-one-way-only approach to that game and the AEON would absolutely demolish the shields anyway with the EMP cannon so stacking shields to be inpenteratble is another usless argument. The wasting of resourses though is a very real argument, because you really ought to be spending all your resources on units and defense when you need them otherwise you are seriously going to get over-run very fast, but I am still for the players to have options, if they still opt for the shields that should still be their choice.

Shields was one of the main things that drew me to the Supcom games in the first place, they just looked absolutely awesome. Right now PA's base construction looks like a real mess, there is no organization to them, no central points you just spread out and out and out. Its sort of ugly. The shields in supcom at least gave your base some sort of meaning and central point of origin. The speed of PA don't think it would allow enough time for people to turtle anyway but it could be a problem with how PA's gameplay currently is. There is also a ton of things you can do to counter balance them as well, 1 shield per planet for example, weapons that can counter shields, a unit that can shoot through shields, directional shields, walls upgradeable to shield walls, directional shields only. Plenty of options.

I only ever see shields being implemented in any sort of way as a mod only, as someone already mentioned since the kickstarter really was already known to never have shields in the first place, its only because there was an outcry from many gamers that has made them think about possibly adding them post release but I wouldn't count on it. At the end of the day there is a lot of people in the PA community that want shields, and there are plenty of people that don't, maybe more than people that do actually want them, so is a happy medium really that much of a bad idea? especially if you could just simply turn shields off in the lobby when making a match anyway?