Why the shields STILL don't recharge when docked?!

[Painbeaver]

Looks like some people are not well educated. Waiting till your Anacondas shield with 8SB recharge inside the station is DUMB. It has nothing to do with game mechanincs or realism. It's just plain stupid and annoying. It's a fact.
In real world, you know, REAL there is a thing, called, SURPRIZE:
Ground power units

A ground power unit (GPU) is a vehicle capable of supplying power to aircraft parked on the ground. Ground power units may also be built into the jetway, making it even easier to supply electrical power to aircraft.

In a real world it's operated by man.
So WHY in a goddamn future we can't have something like AGPU, that automatically connects to your ship, when you are docked inside the station ? That would be realistic.

I hope now you understand, that saying, that waiting full time for your shields recharge is realistic, or it has something to do with realism is the same as saying that Earth if flat and Unicorns are real.

 

[Cryptonomica]

Totally agree with the OP.

Shields should recharge instantly (or at least very fast) when you're docked, and should continue to recharge at their normal speed when you're offline.

I believe that the situation we're currently in is a consequence (possibly unintended) of the removal of shield recharge when entering supercruise. Alternatively, it could be an intended change to discourage PVPers camping in/near stations and quickly docking to insta-recharge their sheilds. If it's the latter, then I'm sure a much more elegant solution could be devised. Either way, I'm pretty sure this will fall on deaf ears at Frontier and we'll still be in exactly the same situation this time next year.

 

[Ydiss]

Totally agree with the OP.

Shields should recharge instantly (or at least very fast) when you're docked, and should continue to recharge at their normal speed when you're offline.

I believe that the situation we're currently in is a consequence (possibly unintended) of the removal of shield recharge when entering supercruise. Alternatively, it could be an intended change to discourage PVPers camping in/near stations and quickly docking to insta-recharge their sheilds. If it's the latter, then I'm sure a much more elegant solution could be devised. Either way, I'm pretty sure this will fall on deaf ears at Frontier and we'll still be in exactly the same situation this time next year.

It definitely is a side effect of the super cruise regeneration change and it's been this way since then. This was all posted back then but nothing has happened yet.

 

[Psycho Romeo]

Awesome.
.

Things should serve a gameplay purpose.

Having to earn ships (rather than being given all of them them right from the start) is a way to gate progress (in ED it's quite a "grindy" gate which is another bad no-no when it comes to design, but let's move on), which in turn is there to create a progression path for players and for balance reasons as well (if everyone could access all ships at their whim then small ships would probably be largely unused).

Having bigger shields is offset by them recharging longer, yes - which is fine outside of stations, when unexpected things can happen. It's during an engagement when you need the bigger buffer and having said buffer replenish slowly is the offset (albeit given the current state of shields, their prices, SCBs and general recharge times I'd say this entire aspect is in major need of an overhaul - but this is besides this point).

There's absolutely no reason for the shields to not recharge instantly when docked. You can refuel instantly, you can repair instantly, you can change armaments and reload instantly... But to ask for a shield recharge? Oh no! Tis mission impossible!

If you really can't see a difference (and aren't just plain trolling), then you really don't have a clue about game design.

My assessment of your assessment is that you're a child of post 2000 era gaming. Anyone with a head more mature than that wouldn't be asking for things like out of combat regeneration, or call currency acquisition a 'grindy gate nono' of player progression.
.
I feel that ED definitely aligns more strongly with pre 2000 era mentality, hence the need for CQC for the game to appeal at all to the xbone crowd. Many of ED's mechanics support this, most obvious one being failing to meet insurance. Also, this isn't a single player game - I wouldn't call it an MMO, but it's definitely a multiple player game, and the setting supports this perfectly. There is no hero's journey, there is no critical path, there are none of these things that operate as borders to shape the player's 'progression path'. All we have are goals and limitations, the two fundamental ingredients for a game. This is great. It's a throwback to older games that I absolutely love.
.
Let's break a moment to get something straight. The point you bring up about shield regen and mission timers is superb. However, I believe there's a technical limitation in this area. Also, outfit, refuel, repair, rearm, and commodity exchange instantly? I'd love to see these things removed. Shield recharge? I'd love to see this tightened and cleaned up a bit. Bringing these all these things into alignment would make the game more cohesive. The question is whether to bring shield recharge to meet the other ones and happen instantly, or to bring the other ones to meet shield recharge and be not instant.
.
I lean on the side of the latter. Why? Realization of time. Many things are realized pretty well in ED (though a lot of things aren't too, and the game modes are a huge cause of this). We have things like supercruise and jump range as limitations for movement. We have hubs like high tech systems and things like CGs pushing players around. We have to fly to stations to cash in bounties, turn in missions, etc etc etc. All of these things ask the player to decide: "Is this inconvenience worth it?" and this is a meaningful decision. Perhaps a cobra over the cheaper yet equally capable fighter, the viper. Maybe a python over the larger and faster but similarly capable trader, the clipper.
.
Time should be realized too, and time spent while docked is not a lesser form of time than time spent in a dogfight. This is really the keystone of my argument, and my issue with your post. Supercruise 10,000ly out of the bubble is still supercruise, you shouldn't get a maneuverability boost just because it's not as meaningful. Fuel is still fuel, and shouldn't get ignored just because you have a big scoop and a 128t capacity of it. A fight is still a fight, even if it is a stock sidewinder against your vastly superior FAS.
.
It comes back to that bolded decision up there: "Is this inconvenience worth it?". If you can't deal with the outfit costs, the speed and maneuverability, the size, or other limitations/drawbacks of an anaconda, you shouldn't be flying one. Shield recharge time is no different. If you see a difference, you don't know the first thing about game design.

 

[Roybe]

Awesome.
.

My assessment of your assessment is that you're a child of post 2000 era gaming. Anyone with a head more mature than that wouldn't be asking for things like out of combat regeneration, or call currency acquisition a 'grindy gate nono' of player progression.
.
I feel that ED definitely aligns more strongly with pre 2000 era mentality, hence the need for CQC for the game to appeal at all to the xbone crowd. Many of ED's mechanics support this, most obvious one being failing to meet insurance. Also, this isn't a single player game - I wouldn't call it an MMO, but it's definitely a multiple player game, and the setting supports this perfectly. There is no hero's journey, there is no critical path, there are none of these things that operate as borders to shape the player's 'progression path'. All we have are goals and limitations, the two fundamental ingredients for a game. This is great. It's a throwback to older games that I absolutely love.
.
Let's break a moment to get something straight. The point you bring up about shield regen and mission timers is superb. However, I believe there's a technical limitation in this area. Also, outfit, refuel, repair, rearm, and commodity exchange instantly? I'd love to see these things removed. Shield recharge? I'd love to see this tightened and cleaned up a bit. Bringing these all these things into alignment would make the game more cohesive. The question is whether to bring shield recharge to meet the other ones and happen instantly, or to bring the other ones to meet shield recharge and be not instant.
.
I lean on the side of the latter. Why? Realization of time. Many things are realized pretty well in ED (though a lot of things aren't too, and the game modes are a huge cause of this). We have things like supercruise and jump range as limitations for movement. We have hubs like high tech systems and things like CGs pushing players around. We have to fly to stations to cash in bounties, turn in missions, etc etc etc. All of these things ask the player to decide: "Is this inconvenience worth it?" and this is a meaningful decision. Perhaps a cobra over the cheaper yet equally capable fighter, the viper. Maybe a python over the larger and faster but similarly capable trader, the clipper.
.
Time should be realized too, and time spent while docked is not a lesser form of time than time spent in a dogfight. This is really the keystone of my argument, and my issue with your post. Supercruise 10,000ly out of the bubble is still supercruise, you shouldn't get a maneuverability boost just because it's not as meaningful. Fuel is still fuel, and shouldn't get ignored just because you have a big scoop and a 128t capacity of it. A fight is still a fight, even if it is a stock sidewinder against your vastly superior FAS.
.
It comes back to that bolded decision up there: "Is this inconvenience worth it?". If you can't deal with the outfit costs, the speed and maneuverability, the size, or other limitations/drawbacks of an anaconda, you shouldn't be flying one. Shield recharge time is no different. If you see a difference, you don't know the first thing about game design.

You missed one point in game design...Quality of Life. If the QoL in the game is to poor...people will stop playing as the annoyances build up. Should it take longer for an Anaconda to recharge sheilds than a Sidewinder...absolutely. Should an Anaconda owner have to sit 20 minutes on a pad to load shields? <shrug> This is a huge time sink that is a punishment...and needs to be adjusted down.

 

[Trickle]

How would instant recharge at a station dumb down the game?

Because in real life things don't instantly recharge. Of'c things don't instantly repair either. Don't get me started on how much that disappointed, but tbh that was always going to be the way.

 

[Psycho Romeo]

You missed one point in game design...Quality of Life. If the QoL in the game is to poor...people will stop playing as the annoyances build up. Should it take longer for an Anaconda to recharge sheilds than a Sidewinder...absolutely. Should an Anaconda owner have to sit 20 minutes on a pad to load shields? <shrug> This is a huge time sink that is a punishment...and needs to be adjusted down.

I love the buzzterm QoL. It's like its own self defeating fallacy. Nine times out of ten, someone asking for a QoL upgraded is asking for a win button. The tenth time, someone's asking for something that really has little to do with their quality of life.
.
What you are referencing with your quip about missing the point of game design are games made by marketing departments targeting the most shallow and primordial instincts of their audience. You know, like mobile games, and evony ads. Annoyances building up is present in any game, and is by no means a bad thing. Your HUD going haywire is an annoyance. You don't care that it's annoying you. The quality of your life would improve if you could see when you got shot at. Ammo is annoying. The quality of life would improve if you had infinite ammo and missiles and they were all free. Waiting for shield recharge is annoying. The quality of your life would improve if it was instant.
.
Well, you pay for those torpedoes and frags with their ammo constraints. Getting shot at is enhanced by the visual effects it imparts on the ship. This is no different than fielding 1800Mjs of shielding then needing to wait ten minutes if you lose them.
,
And for the record, I too think ten minutes is a little long. Could it be tightened down? Absolutely. Should it be instant? Absolutely not. I've said this.
.
The last thing a game wants to do is give the players what they want. The entire point of the game is to take what the players want and make them work for it. This is literally how you create meaningful experiences. If you wanted the former, watch a slideshow of win jingles and splashes of complimentary colors. Or you know, go play a mobile game.

 

[Trickle]

So WHY in a goddamn future we can't have something like AGPU, that automatically connects to your ship, when you are docked inside the station ? That would be realistic.

Erm, there is? You don't use any fuel to run your systems whilst in dock. Its on the house.

No matter how many 'ground power' units and WATS I throw at my android phone, it won't charge any faster in the morning.

 

[Painbeaver]

Erm, there is? You don't use any fuel to run your systems whilst in dock. Its on the house.
No matter how many 'ground power' units and WATS I throw at my android phone, it won't charge any faster in the morning.

Really ? So if we have a 850Ah battery, there will be no difference between charging it with 1A charger, 2A charger and 500mA USB ? Ok, looks like we live at different worlds.

 

[Zplintz]

It should be possible to have a grown up discussion and put opinions forward without making the discussions personal or taking snipes at each other.

At the end of the day (no matter your opinion) the reason the shields to not-insta charge or charge more quickly than they do at present is because FD have decided on the current model. It has absolutely nothing to with any science (real or imaginary) - nothing at all.

If you have a case for why it would improve the game/gameplay then state it. If you think otherwise then state that.

Please leave the personal sniping out of the thread.

 

[KaizoMK]

I'm confused though. I'm looking for a gameplay reason why the shield recharge should not be accelerated or instant while at a station, but there just isn't one..

 

[Zplintz]

There isn't one - it's a game mechanic decision.

 

[Psycho Romeo]

There isn't one - it's a game mechanic decision.

Is the intentional absence of gameplay still gameplay? I think it could go either way.
.
The reason is so you can curse your shields every time they're down, yet love them when your enemy has to shoot them for hours to break them. It's very purpose is to be frustrating, not at all unlike when you hear that final 'tat' from the last round in your multicannons.

 

[Zplintz]

I do not know why FD have chosen not to insta-charge or charge at an increased rate. (Even letting you pay to charge quicker by letting you use your shield cells would have been nice).

 

[KaizoMK]

There isn't one - it's a game mechanic decision.

Okay - so can we agree that "that's the status quo" is not an applicable reason to do something? It's not to say that FD is obliged to change a gameplay mechanic based on reasoning, but I've seen people use "that's how it is" as a reason *not* to change something, and logically that's a terrible way to look at something.

So for those that want to logically refute any sort of change to this mechanic, I ask that you tell me what is functionally lost or diminished by such a change. Specifically, some seem to think it'd dumb down the game or make it too easy, but no one can actually explain why.

- - - Updated - - -

Is the intentional absence of gameplay still gameplay? I think it could go either way.
.
The reason is so you can curse your shields every time they're down, yet love them when your enemy has to shoot them for hours to break them. It's very purpose is to be frustrating, not at all unlike when you hear that final 'tat' from the last round in your multicannons.

That is a very meaningful experience in the field when it matters, but that experience does not carry weight outside of a threatening situation. That said, space is an inherently dangerous place, which is why the fix to the charge-on-jump was important and needed (although painful.)

A space station is inherently safe, so those issues no longer become considerations, but rather useless annoyances.

Edit: as a note, even the travel to a space station is meaningful even if you've done it thousands of times. Think about any time you've begged every deity not to be interdicted as you slink back with 3% hull, or any time you lost your canopy. That time is frustrating but has the potential to have that impact. I won't even mention how it's a factor to those who wish to challenge themselves in the ways of haste, or the fact that travel time is a balancing factor against income.

 

[Shaamaan]

There isn't one - it's a game mechanic decision.

Wait... wait wait wait wait a damn second... So... someone really, deliberately, made the decision to have shield's not recharge at stations (thus damning everyone in a larger ship to wasting time)? I mean, this is what is a "game mechanic decision".

I was under the impression that the developers simply forgot that larger / stronger shields might be a pain in the backside to regenerate when they implemented persistent shields. Are you telling me that my little re-enactment story, from a few pages back, is REALLY how things went down?! O_O

 

[Hurricane Moon]

i have not ever noticed my shields go down in the station....they probably do though lol

 

[Para Handy]

I don't really see the problem here - your shields recharge as normal. In fact when buying a new shield generator or power generator the shields don't go down do they? (It is so long since I did that I can't remember for sure.)

The only issue could be when you have not considered the fact that your shields will become un-powered as a result of your module change. All you have to do is power-down other modules before you go into outfitting. It's not hard - just turn off your FSD, Cargo Hatch, Thrusters and any weapons - there you go add, sell modify do what you like.

 

[Lowievisser]

Wait... wait wait wait wait a damn second... So... someone really, deliberately, made the decision to have shield's not recharge at stations (thus damning everyone in a larger ship to wasting time)? I mean, this is what is a "game mechanic decision".

I was under the impression that the developers simply forgot that larger / stronger shields might be a pain in the backside to regenerate when they implemented persistent shields. Are you telling me that my little re-enactment story, from a few pages back, is REALLY how things went down?! O_O

im happy that the conda pilot who barely escaped the wrath of my vulture is not back within 2,5min.

They need to change the hull repair too , its stupid that it fixed instantly , same with refeuling even with 99A feul scoop it take time.
if you go badly damage into a station or from a long haul it should take more time to be fly ready again.

But i geuss thats a "second" job these days. But hey , keep screaming like child I WANT MY 3MIN BACK FD!

 

[Shaamaan]

My assessment of your assessment is that you're a child of post 2000 era gaming. Anyone with a head more mature than that wouldn't be asking for things like out of combat regeneration, or call currency acquisition a 'grindy gate nono' of player progression. [SNIP]

You don't know me, so your assessment has missed it's mark by... heck, you weren't even aiming in the right direction.

While my first gaming system was indeed the PC, it was a 486. I played all the old classics, some on the ol' GameBoy, some with my friend on his SNES.

There's a reason we're moving away from old mechanics into new ones. Like, say, lives - fewer and fewer games have those. People realized that having a lives system in games is pointless, when originally their purpose was to suck quarters out of the pockets of unsuspecting children (I've played the old arcades too, mind you). There's no reason to have them once you have a PC or a home console. But this is just an example. You also mentioned regenerating health. This tends to be done very poorly (hide behind a chest-high wall, and your wounds will magically heal). But it too serves a purpose - albeit it's more of a crutch for developers than a mechanic for players. With a regenerating health mechanic a developer or level designer has the certainty that a player will enter a room where an encounter is about to take place with full HP - and can design said room and said encounter around that fact. It also makes it easier to test the overall difficulty of a level (you can go through rooms rather than entire levels). But then this ties with something else entirely - someone, somewhere, found out that the old "game over" screen is, in fact, not fun. And people generally buy games in order to have fun. Few games these days have the old "game over" - it's a lot better to let the player keep going. Even the Souls series has replaced the "game over" with "you have died", with the latter not really being the end of the world.

I didn't call the progression in ED as a mechanic bad. It's the fact that it's an extremely slow progression which requires a lot of grind (doing the same things over and over and over again with little to no variety) that's bad, and I stand by my assessment. While I agree that quite a few of the design decisions in ED seemed to be made with the old original in mind, that doesn't necessarily mean it's good (or bad) design. One should take the good design decisions, scrap the bad ones, and generally improve.

As such, pointlessly wasting a players time (when it's more beneficial to watch YT instead of playing) is something seriously wrong. It's a seriously bad "downside" - not bad as in "imbalanced", but bad as in "who the hell designed this?".

On a side note: I think CQC was a wasted effort. I would be more happy if the devs put that time and work into making the core game better so it's not as grindy (more variety == less grind) and making the game feel more alive (at least the civilised part of space). Not that the idea of CQC is bad - it's just that it's not what ED was missing.

PS. What the hell's with those dots in between paragraphs in your posts?

im happy that the conda pilot who barely escaped the wrath of my vulture is not back within 2,5min.

They need to change the hull repair too , its stupid that it fixed instantly , same with refeuling even with 99A feul scoop it take time.
if you go badly damage into a station or from a long haul it should take more time to be fly ready again.

But i geuss thats a "second" job these days. But hey , keep screaming like child I WANT MY 3MIN BACK FD!

I find it ironic that this whole thing was brought up by people like you (PvPers) whining and crying like spoiled brats that your targets get shields back when they enter cruise and you need to interdict them more often. Oh, the horrors.