The Shield discussion thread

[Shintai]

No relation.

You can see the values here:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...ES69Lc317U/pubhtml?gid=2011892275&single=true

 

[Cardos]

Original hull mass (as shown in shipyard stats). More info here.

 

[Bokugo]

No relation.

You can see the values here:
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...ES69Lc317U/pubhtml?gid=2011892275&single=true

Wow....so my Python with the crappy 3A shield has more than my clipper with it's "beast" 6A shield. Huh, that's interesting. I knew the Python had more shield power but wow what a difference. Any values for weapons to go along with this extremely useful info that should probably just be in the game

 

[Mike Evans]

Does the shield mass rating go off the original ship mass or the fully equipped ship mass? I.E the Anaconda has a mass of 400T and comes with a default class 6 shield but when equipped (without cargo) its mass is over 1000T, which would require a class 7 shield to be properly shielded

It;s based on the Hull Mass (what you called the original ship mass). The anaconda is indeed 400t of hull before any modules are fitted and that is what the generator uses to determine shield strength. If that number could be lowered the strength would go up given the same generator but you can't do that. In future it might be possible to fit modules that can decrease the hull mass for the purposes of shield strength calculation (think shield boosters or something).

 

[I_am_Jon]

Wow....so my Python with the crappy 3A shield has more than my clipper with it's "beast" 6A shield. Huh, that's interesting. I knew the Python had more shield power but wow what a difference. Any values for weapons to go along with this extremely useful info that should probably just be in the game

Not sure I trust that spreadsheet, the numbers look pretty skewed to me. The Clipper A7 shield number looks way too low compared to the Python A6 and Anaconda A7.

Mike's post seems to suggest lower hull mass = stronger shields for same shield module.
Clipper = 400t
Python = 350t
Anaconda = 400t

So would expect the python shield to be slightly stronger with same class shield generator but not twice as strong? and the Clipper and Anaconda to be about the same?

It;s based on the Hull Mass (what you called the original ship mass). The anaconda is indeed 400t of hull before any modules are fitted and that is what the generator uses to determine shield strength. If that number could be lowered the strength would go up given the same generator but you can't do that. In future it might be possible to fit modules that can decrease the hull mass for the purposes of shield strength calculation (think shield boosters or something).

Think the spreadsheet was based on shield charge times, not sure if this is a accurate measure of strength? Maybe other factors also effect charge time?

 

[Mike Evans]

Not sure I trust that spreadsheet, the numbers look pretty skewed to me.

Mike's post seems to suggest lower hull mass = stronger shields for same shield module.

The ship itself defines the base shield strength however so typically as ships get bigger there base strength goes up. Also a larger ship might end up with a lower total shield strength than a smaller ship but when receiving damage the larger ship will nullify a lot of the damage from smaller weapons where as the smaller ship wouldn't.

 

[I_am_Jon]

The ship itself defines the base shield strength however so typically as ships get bigger there base strength goes up. Also a larger ship might end up with a lower total shield strength than a smaller ship but when receiving damage the larger ship will nullify a lot of the damage from smaller weapons where as the smaller ship wouldn't.

Looking back at that spreadsheet, the numbers that look out of place are the Python and Anaconda which appear to have much stronger (in MJ) shields than an equivalent or smaller ship with the same shield module.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...ES69Lc317U/pubhtml?gid=2011892275&single=true

Hence why I don't trust it, but would be nice to have official confirmation. Is A5 Python shields really twice as strong as A5 Asp shields?

 

[Derath]

I can#t verify it with anything other than personal experience but an A5 shield on an asp doesn't touch an A5 on a python, if you fly both ships you'll see what I mean the pythons shield strength is frankly amazing with almost any sized shield.

 

[I_am_Jon]

I can#t verify it with anything other than personal experience but an A5 shield on an asp doesn't touch an A5 on a python, if you fly both ships you'll see what I mean the pythons shield strength is frankly amazing with almost any sized shield.

Sounds like it may be a bug then?

 

[Mike Evans]

Looking back at that spreadsheet, the numbers that look out of place are the Python and Anaconda which appear to have much stronger (in MJ) shields than an equivalent or smaller ship with the same shield module.
https://docs.google.com/spreadsheet...ES69Lc317U/pubhtml?gid=2011892275&single=true

Hence why I don't trust it, but would be nice to have official confirmation. Is A5 Python shields really twice as strong as A5 Asp shields?

The shields just modify the base shield strength defined by the ship itself. A Python has a base strength nearly 3 times as high as an Asp's. The difference in optimised mass and actual hull mass will alter the modifier that is applied to this base strength. If the optimised mass and hull mass are the same you get the base ship's shield strength. Higher rated modules will allow the modifier to shift more favourably in both cases of hull mass being lower or higher than optimised mass.

 

[I_am_Jon]

The shields just modify the base shield strength defined by the ship itself. A Python has a base strength nearly 3 times as high as an Asp's. The difference in optimised mass and actual hull mass will alter the modifier that is applied to this base strength. If the optimised mass and hull mass are the same you get the base ship's shield strength. Higher rated modules will allow the modifier to shift more favourably in both cases of hull mass being lower or higher than optimised mass.

Makes sense now, thanks for clarifying.

 

[Adaris]

I'd prefer no ammo, single-charge shield cell, charged by SYS pips when shields are at 100%.

It has limited use, and requires energy management and avoiding fire to use it again.

I like this idea on principle; however, it doesn't solve the core problem with shield cells. That is, why wouldn't you want this hypothetical module on your combat vessel? It's less powerful and requires a lot more skill than what we have now, but there still is little tradeoff in not carrying one into combat. Module balance is more than just the raw power or utility of each module type; It's about giving the player interesting choices on how to outfit their vessel.

Any viable solution to module balancing needs to take both factors into consideration.

 

[BrewerGeorge]

I think the only change should be that you're limited to one of them. Then you get more effective ones be buying better (more expensive) ones rather than just buying more cheap ones. This has the added advantage of bringing them in line with every other ship internal. I can't buy a second fuel scoop to get twice the fuel, why can I buy a second (or third or fourth) shield cell bank?

 

[JonathanVB]

If the optimised mass and hull mass are the same you get the base ship's shield strength.

Are you referring to shield strength in MJ. Because my testing (I complied the spreadsheet) suggests that this is true for when the optimal mass is around 1.5-1.6 times the hull mass for the A module. (Unless there are inefficiencies from the transfer from the SYS capacitor to the shields.

 

[Steve72]

Quick question. I bought and used one for the first time. Used it twice and it says 1/3 in modules. I assumed this was how many times left. Used 2 times more. Now shows 1/1. I assumed after next use it would be redundant so tried changing at station but still says 1/1. Am I suppose use it up totally first or are they reusable.

 

[medwyn]

Great thread, lots of important information to be found here!

 

[Frenotx]

The shields just modify the base shield strength defined by the ship itself. A Python has a base strength nearly 3 times as high as an Asp's. The difference in optimised mass and actual hull mass will alter the modifier that is applied to this base strength. If the optimised mass and hull mass are the same you get the base ship's shield strength. Higher rated modules will allow the modifier to shift more favourably in both cases of hull mass being lower or higher than optimised mass.

Thank you very much for the insight into how shield strength is determined. I did a lot of testing a bit ago trying to figure out the specifics of shields, but was unable to come up with a formula to reliably determine shield capacity for any given ship/generator combo. Do you think you could provide the formula used? The fact that I couldn't quite figure it out bugs me. I (and I'm sure many others) would be eternally grateful.

My shield research thread, if you're interested in seeing what we (at least think we) were able to piece together: https://forums.frontier.co.uk/showthread.php?t=89770

 

[Zplintz]

One of the most constructive threads I have seen for a very long time.

More useful information like this please.

 

[BishopC]

Quick question. I bought and used one for the first time. Used it twice and it says 1/3 in modules. I assumed this was how many times left. Used 2 times more. Now shows 1/1. I assumed after next use it would be redundant so tried changing at station but still says 1/1. Am I suppose use it up totally first or are they reusable.

You don't have to change it, just clock "Reload" in the home screen of the station or go to the "Munitions" menu and refill there.

 

[Steve72]

Cheers. Thats makes sense.