Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[Reshy]

From what I've seen in Starfarer ships that have high armor and weak shields are almost always at a massive disadvantage against ships with high shields and weak armor.  I personally believe this is because of how armor works, so here's the problems I think are in it.



First is that armor doesn't prevent turrets from failing, because of this effect trying to take something on your armor will result in weapons falling offline even if your ship is plated with indestructium.  I think this should be changed so that only EMP and Hull damage can disable weapon systems.  This has the effect of indirectly buffing EMP weapons as well.


Second is that armor is finite while shielding lasts until you ship explodes.  So one thought of mine is having armor slowly (and I mean slowly) repair over time as unlike hull it's simply fortified metal places and don't require as much finesse to repair as a hull breach.  The rate could be something like .5% armor restored to armor sectors per second, doubled with the Automated Repair Unit.  This helps make 'squishy' armor a lot less squishy.


If one or even both of those changes were to be implemented I could see low-tech ships being more valuable compared to their higher tech counterparts.

[HELMUT]

I have to say it depend from the playstyle of the faction.

Shields tends to produce a lot of flux when you shoot at them which can prevent the ships from using their guns to their full extent. An Onslaught armed to the teeth can charge straight on most ships and unleash hell on them.  With 1750 armor, he can tank quite a beating before starting to take hull damage (and i'm pretty sure armor protect the weapons and engine from being disabled).

But with his shields on, he will overload quickly and won't be able to deal enough damage to his opponent.

In an attrition warfare (Try Tachyon style), the ships with high tech shields are more likely to win by taking their time against their opponent. But something closer to the blitzkrieg would be to the advantage of the most armored one (Hegemony) who go trigger happy without having to care about the hardflux.

You should take a look at the Thule Legacy mod. The ships are all shield-less and very heavily armored and yet can take on most fleets.

[PCCL]

I don't like the idea of regenerating armor. If you want to buff then the best way IMO to do this will be to simply strengthen them.

I play on half damage everything, which is a huge buff to armor IMO, and that actually feels pretty good, so maybe something like that can be arranged

[MidnightSun]

I very much like the first idea, although I think it will be a bit too powerful. As a sort of compromise, perhaps ship armor could contribute to weapon durability (independent of the armored turrets hullmod): ships with thick armor would have turrets that have a much lower probability of failing under sustained damage. EMP weapons would bypass this resistance.

I don't think in-battle armor repair is necessary, though. At that point, armor and shielding would be made too similar, and it also encourages extending combat time to sit back and just wait for armor to self-repair, which I don't think is a desired dynamic.

[Silver Silence]

I have to say it depend from the playstyle of the faction.

Shields tends to produce a lot of flux when you shoot at them which can prevent the ships from using their guns to their full extent. An Onslaught armed to the teeth can charge straight on most ships and unleash hell on them.  With 1750 armor, he can tank quite a beating before starting to take hull damage (and i'm pretty sure armor protect the weapons and engine from being disabled).

But with his shields on, he will overload quickly and won't be able to deal enough damage to his opponent.

In an attrition warfare (Try Tachyon style), the ships with high tech shields are more likely to win by taking their time against their opponent. But something closer to the blitzkrieg would be to the advantage of the most armored one (Hegemony) who go trigger happy without having to care about the hardflux.

You should take a look at the Thule Legacy mod. The ships are all shield-less and very heavily armored and yet can take on most fleets.

As they're completely unshielded, they also have a unique hullmod that makes them effectively immune to being disabled. Their guns and engines don't go offline, no matter how many hellbore rounds you pump into them. Otherwise a couple solid Heavy Mauler hits would render them unable to do anything for quite a while.

I don't like the idea of regenerating armor. If you want to buff then the best way IMO to do this will be to simply strengthen them.

I play on half damage everything, which is a huge buff to armor IMO, and that actually feels pretty good, so maybe something like that can be arranged

I play Full Damage because Psiyon and Okim effectively said to man up while playing Ascendancy/Ironclads respectively to provide proper feedback. Means those reapers REALLY f**king hurt. So much owies.

As for armour, I can't provide any sort of suggestion. Maybe armour hardening of a sort. Skills do it to a limited degree, maybe Heavy Armour for more armour, something like Improved Armour to less damage taken on armour. That way, your EHP goes up quite a bit without unlimiting it.



PRE-POST EDIT: Ninja'd....


Extended battles in a heavily armoured ship is not what you're looking for anyway. Heavily armoured ships are typically low-tech ships and thus rely on ballistic weaponry with limited ammo, unlike high-tech ships which can literally take the stance of "I can do this all day!". That's why I personally always remove ammo from ballistic weapons. None of that retreating because no ammo nonsense, and if the AI retreats because of no missiles, well they weren't here to fight anyway. They were just hoping for a lucky kill.

[PCCL]

in case there was a misunderstanding, I don't mean I play half damage on the options menu, I modded everything to deal half the damage they usually do. To lengthen battles and stuff

also, maybe another thing we could have is a separate stat of EMP resistance, lower tech ships will have higher resistance, since their hulls are thicker and their machines are simpler, that could work

[BillyRueben]

I don't see any need for the armor mechanics to be changed. I actually prefer the low-tech ships to their high-tech counterparts.

[Reshy]

I have to say it depend from the playstyle of the faction.

Shields tends to produce a lot of flux when you shoot at them which can prevent the ships from using their guns to their full extent. An Onslaught armed to the teeth can charge straight on most ships and unleash hell on them.  With 1750 armor, he can tank quite a beating before starting to take hull damage (and i'm pretty sure armor protect the weapons and engine from being disabled).

But with his shields on, he will overload quickly and won't be able to deal enough damage to his opponent.

In an attrition warfare (Try Tachyon style), the ships with high tech shields are more likely to win by taking their time against their opponent. But something closer to the blitzkrieg would be to the advantage of the most armored one (Hegemony) who go trigger happy without having to care about the hardflux.

You should take a look at the Thule Legacy mod. The ships are all shield-less and very heavily armored and yet can take on most fleets.

Armor DOES NOT prevent weapons or engines from being knocked offline, that's part of the problem.  This can easily be rested by giving a ship an ungodly amount of armor and fighting enemies without EMP.  Thule Legacy's ships have 'RUNE' hullmod installed that prevents engine and subsystem failures, a better example would be the weirdly named Atlantians that have no shielding and are kind of a joke because their weapons go offline when you so much as look at them funny.

I very much like the first idea, although I think it will be a bit too powerful. As a sort of compromise, perhaps ship armor could contribute to weapon durability (independent of the armored turrets hullmod): ships with thick armor would have turrets that have a much lower probability of failing under sustained damage. EMP weapons would bypass this resistance.

I don't think in-battle armor repair is necessary, though. At that point, armor and shielding would be made too similar, and it also encourages extending combat time to sit back and just wait for armor to self-repair, which I don't think is a desired dynamic.
I don't like the idea of regenerating armor. If you want to buff then the best way IMO to do this will be to simply strengthen them.

I play on half damage everything, which is a huge buff to armor IMO, and that actually feels pretty good, so maybe something like that can be arranged

The main difference is that armor while regenerating would not regenerate nearly the rate of shielding, but it's passive and is beneficial to low-tech ships that lack shielding.  It's also vulnerable to explosives but strong against kinetics, opposite of shields.  Furthermore lower-tech ships generally CAN'T run away in battle, they're simply too slow.  So extending battle really isn't possible, when combined with the VERY slow rate of regeneration.

[Alex]

For the sake of clarity: armor does help weapons/engines avoid being disabled. While armor damage does count for the purpose of these being disabled, having armor in the first place reduces the damage taken, and it's this reduced damage that's applied to weapons and engines.

[PCCL]

fair enough.

it does nothing for emp though, right?

[Alex]

it does nothing for emp though, right?

Correct.

[Nanostrike]

Armor is fine as-is.  Without the proper weapons, it's a HUGE pain to get through.  But it's a finite resource for your ship.  You have to manage it.  Is it worth taking a hit to the armor vs risking an overload?  Stuff like that.

Besides, if I read up on it properly, even when armor is "Destroyed", it still passively reduces damage to the hull.  Thus low-tech stuff is more durable even when it's armor is breached.

[Silver Silence]

Once armour is gone, it's gone. It only reduces damage so long as you still have armour left. If you have a gaping hole in your armour, like from a successful torpedo hit or from a couple solid Hellbore rounds, then hits in that armourless area will do full damage. Frag weapons will also deal double damage, which means a Talon Wing strafing a weakspot will do terrifying amounts of damage.

[Gothars]

Frag weapons will also deal double damage, which means a Talon Wing strafing a weakspot will do terrifying amounts of damage.

They deal normal damage against hull, but only 25% damage against armor and shields.


Armor is fine as it i, but if it ever needs an improvement I'd like it to deflect shots from high angles.

[ValkyriaL]

Frag weapons will also deal double damage, which means a Talon Wing strafing a weakspot will do terrifying amounts of damage.

They deal normal damage against hull, but only 25% damage against armor and shields.


Armor is fine as it i, but if it ever needs an improvement I'd like it to deflect shots from high angles.

Im all up for armor deflecting shots at high angles.. because as observed..



Yeah..hahahah..