DEB shields

Development area for FreeAllegiance's Community Core.
Post Reply
DasSmiter
Posts: 3820
Joined: Mon May 23, 2005 7:00 am
Location: Stillwater, Oklahoma

Post by DasSmiter »

as a counter to tp2 xrm? thats a whole 'nother discussion about balance people
ImageImageImage
Get over yourselves, don't try to win arguments on the internet where the option of a punch in the mouth is unavailable
"It is not that I cannot create anything good, but that I will not." And to prove this, he created the peacock.
Psychosis
Posts: 4218
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2004 7:00 am
Location: California

Post by Psychosis »

sambasti wrote:QUOTE (sambasti @ Oct 4 2008, 03:06 PM) Will DEB shields be only for giga corp? They seem like a good tp2 defence everyone should have.
DEB shields are a GIGA only tech.

to clarify my request, bring DEB back, like they originally were, let us play with them a little, and see if we cant find a use, then we talk about changes
NightRychune
Posts: 3065
Joined: Tue Feb 17, 2004 8:00 am

Post by NightRychune »

These were disabled back on DN 4.xx or whatever because they just weren't being used. The only window of opportunity to properly deploy them was immediately upon launching from base, or immediately upon ripping into a sector on a TP. They were added and intended as a defensive measure against early-game dis runs and later-game galv runs to make Giga bases a bit stronger and to make them more defensible. Because of the mass, you couldn't maneuver anywhere in a reasonable amount of time to get one into position over an aleph or anything, and once you lost your initial window of opportunity to drop them upon launching they were useless. If I recall correctly, the barrier itself was destroyable by galvs/a solid galv run without any trouble, and it only took 1-2 AB missiles to get through it as well.

When they were first implemented, I commanded more than a few games as Giga and tried to effectively deploy them, but the biggest problem that we encountered in testing/implementing them was that it was too difficult to time the launch by the pilot with them vs. the incoming attack - bomb run, galv run, whatever - for maximum effectiveness, and then they were shelved and never revisited.
privateerm
Posts: 273
Joined: Sun Aug 05, 2007 2:17 am
Location: NB Canada

Post by privateerm »

This community and game never ceases to amaze me. Never heard of this thing before. Let's bring it back in some form!

Side note:
Is it possible to make a missile/gun that raises shields? Perhaps this could be a good counter for xrm/galv runs?
Blah blah blah blah (breath) blah blah blah blah (breath) oh, what was this thread about again......
zdude1994
Posts: 217
Joined: Sat Mar 08, 2008 7:19 pm
Location: Like hell if I know.

Post by zdude1994 »

Pkk, if you're listening, can you post one of the older cores here so that we may test out these DEB shields.
Image
TurkeyXIII
Posts: 1460
Joined: Thu Dec 06, 2007 3:18 am
Location: Melbourne, Aus

Post by TurkeyXIII »

For those unfamiliar with ICE:

DN 4.6 with DEB shields enabled



:cool:

Edit: Woo, 50 posts! I can vote in polls now!
Last edited by TurkeyXIII on Thu Oct 09, 2008 8:55 am, edited 1 time in total.
QUOTE (Randall Munroe)14.2: Turkey consumption rate of the average American in milligrams per minute[/quote]
Image
CronoDroid
Posts: 4606
Joined: Sun Nov 06, 2005 8:00 am
Contact:

Post by CronoDroid »

Wow! It looks kinda useless.
Arson_Fire
Posts: 98
Joined: Mon Apr 24, 2006 7:00 am
Location: NZ

Post by Arson_Fire »

Wouldn't call it useless, just needs some serious rebalancing. Make it a bit easier to deploy and it might go a long way to reducing effectiveness of tp2.

Another possible use could be to turn it into a missile screen. Give it the same model but allow ships to pass through. Then give it drone tower properties (so it prioritises missiles) and make it shoot fast invisible bullets from the center to max range at edge of shield. Not sure if there is a damage class that only effects missiles. Might add a new element to combat if ships could drop those.
Image
Psychosis
Posts: 4218
Joined: Wed Oct 27, 2004 7:00 am
Location: California

Post by Psychosis »

I think that we should just reduce the mass for the first implimentation, as night talked about and others have complained, its just damn heavy.

so bring it back, and reduce mass? honestly its been so long I don't remember that much
Andon
Posts: 5453
Joined: Sun Jun 03, 2007 8:29 pm
Location: Maryland, USA
Contact:

Post by Andon »

I would agree with a high mass, but not the ridiculously high mass that it has
Image
ImageImage
Post Reply