Shield Reset Failure Rate

posted on December 26th, 2010, 5:57 pm

I was thinking that maybe the Descent's shield reset could have a 5 to 10% failure rate.  It is experimental technology.  And maybe for the super shield reset that the Veteran Descent gets could have a 5 to 10% failure rate to trigger the shield reset.

posted on December 26th, 2010, 6:06 pm

For what purpose?

posted on December 26th, 2010, 6:08 pm

Probably to give it some 'bugs' to emphasis the experimental nature of the tech. A veteran one should have all bugs worked out, though.

posted on December 26th, 2010, 9:03 pm

this idea isnt bad.

the problem i see with it is that it makes the descent a poor choice since there will be a chance of the descent losing a main use.

i would suggest giving it a variable recharge amount, like the way the meta disruptor works. make it so that 60% of the time it recharges as it does now, 20% of the time it recharges 30% less and 20% of the time it recharges 30% more (numbers for example only). that way it balances out. still experimental and not predictable, but still no chance of it being useless.

posted on December 26th, 2010, 9:40 pm

Not really starfleet is high on safety stuff so they wouldnt field something that didnt work, its experimental ship because it hasnt been field tested and this is why its only deployed in emergency, the tech works its just not battlefield tested. Adding a failure rate would most likely stop people from using it very often since it drops shields completely which would make the feature useless.

posted on December 26th, 2010, 11:04 pm

Not really starfleet is high on safety stuff so they wouldnt field something that didnt work, its experimental ship because it hasnt been field tested and this is why its only deployed in emergency, the tech works its just not battlefield tested. Adding a failure rate would most likely stop people from using it very often since it drops shields completely which would make the feature useless.

People don't use it often in MP anyways as far as I can tell.
Back to the topic however, I think the experimental aspect of ships like Descent and Bortas should somehow get into the game. May it be a subsystem-failure or something like system value reduced for xxx seconds or whatever else. Sure, federation experimental technology could be safer than klingon or dominion tech, but it also should include a gamble.

posted on December 27th, 2010, 3:00 pm

People don't use it often in MP anyways as far as I can tell.
Back to the topic however, I think the experimental aspect of ships like Descent and Bortas should somehow get into the game. May it be a subsystem-failure or something like system value reduced for xxx seconds or whatever else. Sure, federation experimental technology could be safer than klingon or dominion tech, but it also should include a gamble.

There is a gamble involved already when your shields are low you tend to micro your ships and move them off to repair, so while the decent is flee'ing the attacvking ships are likely to want to finish it, by clicking shield reset it stops the ships entirly this is the gamble because you are likely to die in this situation anyway adding the failure rate would be too much of a gamble that no would bother with it you wuld just keep running.

posted on December 27th, 2010, 4:19 pm

People don't use it often in MP anyways as far as I can tell.

I usually have it as my first or second warp-in.  Sometimes 2 in a row.  However, I tend to save the shield reset because of it's large cool-down time and I save my Veteran slots to rank-up the Descent first.  I think that the shield reset time should be cut down from 5 minutes to 2 minutes.  And why the supply cost?

posted on December 27th, 2010, 4:26 pm

I usually have it as my first or second warp-in.  Sometimes 2 in a row.

dont try that online, 3 ships are much more useful.

I think that the shield reset time should be cut down from 5 minutes to 2 minutes.  And why the supply cost?

thats a terrible suggestion, the descent would easily be op if it had a free special that could restore the shields of several ships every 2 minutes. imagine shield recharge but with 20 gensups allowed, and at long range. and can be used while cloaked. and costs no energy to use.

maybe shield reset requires overcharging a component or replacing a shield component or something, maybe its just good balance.

posted on December 27th, 2010, 4:47 pm

What you just said is completely irrelevant!  Stop trying to add to what I say.  All I asked for was a 3-minute time reduction for the reset!  I did not ask for a vessel that could cloak and do the reset at long-range!  And I did not ask for it to be able to use the shield reset without special energy usage!

posted on December 27th, 2010, 4:49 pm

He gave a comparison of something similar as an example of why it would be bad... way to completely miss the point.

[Anonymous]

posted on December 27th, 2010, 4:55 pm

Last edited by Anonymous on December 27th, 2010, 5:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.

What you just said is completely irrelevant!  Stop trying to add to what I say.  All I asked for was a 3-minute time reduction for the reset!  I did not ask for a vessel that could cloak and do the reset at long-range!  And I did not ask for it to be able to use the shield reset without special energy usage!

you said 2 minutes not 3.

and my example was pure exaggeration simply to point out how ridiculuous your suggestion is. its a common arguing technique called straw man. i actually dont like it as a technique, i only used it here for humour purposes.

the core part of my argument is that your suggestion would improve the descent, with no downside, making it overpowered in the extreme.

---

EDIT: misread 3 minute reduction as 3 minute cooldown.

posted on December 27th, 2010, 5:00 pm

you said 2 minutes not 3.

and my example was pure exaggeration simply to point out how ridiculuous your suggestion is. its a common arguing technique called straw man. i actually dont like it as a technique, i only used it here for humour purposes.

the core part of my argument is that your suggestion would improve the descent, with no downside, making it overpowered in the extreme.

Lol wrong again, way to miss read.

He said ruduce the time from 5 mins to 2 mins, how much is this a reduction of? yes 3 mins, he was correct.

But no this is a bad idea it would be very unbalanced, 2 of these ships restoring shields every 2 mins are you crazy? and for free? comon man seriously.

posted on December 27th, 2010, 5:05 pm

Lol wrong again, way to miss read.

He said ruduce the time from 5 mins to 2 mins, how much is this a reduction of? yes 3 mins, he was correct.

no, wrong for the first time (in this thread), i indeed misread. you really loved pointing out that mistake so theatrically savour it, you wont get the chance often

posted on December 27th, 2010, 5:39 pm

If you think a 2-minute cooldown time is "overpowered," just increase the supply cost to compensate.  Let's see, I'm suggesting the cooldown time to be reduced by a factor of 2.5, so just increase the supply cost by a factor of 2.5.  From 20 supply to 50 supply.  You'll run out of supply faster than you can buy it.