Give us Shields! Come on!

Oh wow. I dig the comparison between PA and Starcraft. That is the business right there. I feel like 200 units is very comparable to the thousands of odd units. I feel that one level of zoom on a flat map is comparable to nigh infinite zoom on multiple planets.

Like the others have said - Shields are just delay mechanisms, they don't do anything meaningful. For example - if you are going to build an entire shield cluster around your base and I build units with an equal amount of res that you spent on shields (barring your constant energy drain) I can guarantee I will still get in and cause problems. God, I can even get a gunship under a shield and start sniping ****.

I played Supcom, FA and Supcom 2 and Starcraft. As did plus 70% of the forums. We have top 20 players from all 3 games here and they don't want shields.
Shields are not important, they only look quite cool when you're trying to line up a picture. It's like selfies. Lame.

TL;DR - What the **** are you talking about?

Also, calling everyone else trolls when you are trolling is a bit off.

As an addendum:

My stance on this has always been (well, "always" meaning for as long as i'm on this forum) that bubbleshields are bad.

I do not oppose personal shields, as it is effectively a layer of self-repairing HP that increases the damage threshold to kill something. Simultaneously, it can be used to enforce weapon types (e.g. EMP) or create high-shield, low-HP units that can take a short beating, but can't risk it's shield failing or it dies fast. Quick-regeneration, low-strength shields, large shield pools with slow regen, etc.

In any case, i like my shields like i like my HP: per unit, balanced and functional.

I wish I could like this twice.

If i quote you both and like your post, does that count as a double like?

likeception!

NOOO IT'S STILL SPINNING AHHH!!

Are you implying that PA and Starcraft are different in scale, gameplay AND mechanics?

Surely you jest. Clearly they are carbon copies of one another #bubble-shields-for-PA-2014 #refund-if-no-shields #like-starcraft-with-planets.

Yes I am! Look at me, swimming against the stream.
#FtheShields#Individuality

P.S First time I've ever used a hashtag. MEH

A textbook example of a circlejerk right there, well done to everyone involved!

I dont think we need shields to be in the game nor do I think the game loses some depth because of the decision to not have shields included.

That being said I would still like to see the much hated bubble shield to be in the game. The problem everyone seems to have with those shields seems to be that they are unbalanced in other games and thus they will be unbalanced in this game as well. The best (only?) way to implement shields of any kind would be to include them right now as the game is still in its testphase to try and balance them. Adding them later will highten the risk of the the shield being unbalaced.

My proposal would be to include the shield as soon as possible into an experimental build and see how it actually plays out ingame. Only then can we actually discuss if we want or dont want to have shields ingame since we then know how they behave in the games ecosystem.

The problem is, bubble shields aren't something that can be quickly implemented. The large time involved would mean a high financial cost to Uber.

Also, it's not like they haven't tried bubble shields. Some of the team members built SupCom after all.

There are things that are a much higher priority than trying something that the developers and community are already against.

And for that matter, if you want to try bubble shields, go play SupCom. It's pretty different, but still gives a good idea. Now imagine playing SupCom, but if you build a bubble shield, I can just go around them.

It's also by concept, something that can't be balanced. Giving a large amount of regenerating health for a bunch of buildings for the extremely cheap cost of energy simply isn't balanced. Someone on another thread went into the math in an extremely detailed manner and it was very insightful.

It's just rather simple, 1 structure granting a hp bonus to a bunch of things only for the cost of energy, while all other health and repairing requires metal and energy doesn't work.

Having an auto repair tower would be a better way to have shields.

...

Oh wait, we already have auto repair towers in the form of combat fabbers.

That being said, a single combat fabber, let alone multiple combat fabbers, are incredibly effective at keeping defensive structures (especially with walls) alive.

If you want bubble shields, just use combat fabbers.

I think creating a shield wouldnt be that much work. The main problem would be the balancing, wich is why the shield should be added now and not later.

I dont think you can compare SupCom with Planetary Annihilation since the nature of the battlefield in both games behaves quite different.

I cant comment on the developers stance, the only thing I know is that Jon Mavor is unsure if they will be added.

The community itself seems to be split between liking and disliking them, with neither side being able to effectivly argue their cause since there is no hard data attainable on wich you could construct an argument.

Are you making an argument FOR the shield now? In my opinion the Shield in SupCom was mainly as strong as it was because you could plaster chokepoints with them. Since in Planetary Annihilation chokepoints are not that common shields should be a lot easier to balance.

If you could link me to the equation I would be very grateful. For now my stance is that it is possible to actually balance shields, given that we have a huge crowd of people who can test their implementation.

Maybe this time the shield coud actually eat up a stream of metal to function. We can only see what is feasible once we tested it.

A shield does not compare with a repair tower. Once the damage threshold of a shield is broken additional damage done to things protected by the shield would take that damage and keep it, without regaining any health.

I also dislike the attitude that once a unit fills a role no other unit is allowed to even remotly come close to that one units role. If that kind of thinking would be the design directive of Uber we would only have a single gun unit crawling around on one leg trying to shoot at the other gun crawler.

Nah, I like bubble shields and not some single unit healing thingy.

No, what brian brought up about bubbleshields IS their problem. It's a building that changes the effective health of other units. However, many buildings and units are balanced by their health. E.g walls and turrets. Adding a bubbleshield inevitably throws that balance right out the window.

So either stuff is going to be crap without shields and needs them, or stuff is going to be powerful without shields and downright OP with. There's no middleground with it being a reasonable tactic. With Supcom's 3 races, it would've been a solution route that could be taken. PA only has one, so either a bubbleshield is a necessity or an unbalanced feature.

Of course, there's the possibility to add further arbitrary rules to enforce such gameplay, but this is just gonna lead to "y my buckets no work" on the forum and further hate and frustration.

That would be true if shields would buff every unit everywhere and had no cost to themselfs whatsoever. Including shields would only mean you coudnt simply throw your deathblob army against the defense of someone and simply grind them down.

I disagree with there beeing no reasonable middleground. Again, shields only make some units locally stronger and not every unit everywhere.

I am of the opinion that shields can and will function without arbitrary rules that are so complex that they cant be understood.

Then go apply for a job at Uber (I'm pretty sure they're still hiring) or mod it yourself.

If you can't code it, then you have absolutely no position to comment on the difficulty of coding it.

I'd vehemently disagree with you on this one. The majority of the community is against shields. There are many threads on this topic and the majority of the community members on this topic are opposed to shields. I've been around for a lot longer than you have. If you want to comment on the community interest levels, then go read the other threads.

And there's plenty of hard data pointing to why bubble shields simply cannot be balanced. Investing X metal to greatly increase the HP of as many units as I can fit under there is simply unbalanced and cannot be balanced. It's simple math.

Go search.

You're quite wrong on this, just as a general note.

I am living and working as a software engineer in germany. I do not think uber has any interest in hiring me. I also dont want to move to the USA so thats that.

Also for me to mod a shield would require much more work on my part then someone from Uber implementing it, since I woulde first have to learn how to handle the games engine and avoid any pitfalls uber might have already figured out. Also after a workday of coding a day I dont want to come home and startup the next compiler just to hammer away at a keyboard for the next few hours.

I dont care how much longer you have been around. For all I care you could have lived a thousand lives on this forum, it doesnt affect the validity of your argument. From my observation there are as many people pro shield as there are against shields.

Then please provide me with all that hard data you keep going on about. I dont need to search. My position is to try and find out. You say there already is Information - show it to me.

It's true when such units are under shields. E.g Gillys. Glass cannon units like we have now aren't glass cannons anymore, they become regularly HP'd units with their original firepower. Meaning they become significantly more powerful.

Similar things occur for, say, kestrels.

Furthermore, cost isn't a real balance mechanism when it can save you tons of resources in the first place.

this is the 3rd thread on shields at the very least, and so far no news. you're just echoing a ton of stuff and brian and me are too. This thread is just a replay of other threads.


To prove:

https://forums.uberent.com/search/3...y]=1&c[node]=60 61 85 62 81 84 64 80 72 71 73

This thread. There are many more threads that you haven't read, which is why your estimate is wrong.

If your position is to try and find out, then go find out.

I have no obligation or desire to spend my time searching for something that you won't find yourself. If you don't want to spend your time looking for it, why should I spend my time looking for something that you won't look for?

And with that, you've demonstrated that you have your stance and won't bother looking for anything that opposes your stance. So I'm gonna stop wasting my time on this thread.

Third? Try at least a dozen. If not several dozen. heh.

He meant third dozen. Probably.