[jr2]

An option to allocate shielding with 100% shields, ie, dump more shields to the back.  You can do this now, but only if you shileds are down a bit, and it only brings the quadrant up to 100%.  IIRC, in SW, you can almost (or maybe you can) double your shields forward or rear, even at 100% total shield levels.

An option for shields' overlapping with fighters flying in close formation for increased strength, like in SW.

*shrugs*  Not sure if you've already asked for these, but I think you'll want them, right?

[brandx0]

The first I think we could use definitely.  The second I'm not too worried about, considering the only time it's used is in the EU

[jr2]

?  I'm pretty darn sure when they attacked the Death Star in ANH, it was mentioned... let me check.

EDIT: I just check the script from IMSDB , and I could not find what I was looking for... I coulda swore at one point some fighters were making an attack run and they said something like "stay close! maximum overlap!".  Darn. 

[Turambar]

i think the best way to handle fighter shield allocation is to have all the shields permanently at 50%.  when you allocate power to a quadrant, it pulls all the power off the opposite quadrant, and should also be harder to damage, in addition to having more shield hit points.

[jr2]

Ah, and just compensate by having 50% shields = 100% of normal shield strength... I get it.  So, problem(s) already solved, I guess... But, it would cause problems in FRED unless ppl were aware that the shields are normally at 50% (using SEXPs for if shields is lower than xx% then have something happen). 

Also, how would you prevent recharging above 50%?

[aRaven]

i personally think its a bad idea...the shields should be as they are in retail fs...only the shield hit effect should be changed...i.e. white flashes (like in TESB)

[chief1983]

I know the games are not a very good source, but they're my only source for how shields are handled on ships.  In the games, you'd start with 100%, but you could charge up to 200% full front/rear, and then not be able to go above that point on either end.  This required dumping extra energy to shields to go above the initial level, otherwise you could freely reallocate the 100% between front and back.  I don't know if that was based on references from the books, or a completely fabricated game mechanic, but the only real difference between that and FS default is that in FS you start with the full '200%'.  We could easily imitate the current behaviour by starting all ships at half shields and making it so that at default shield energy there's no recharge I think.  But, I'm not sure it's worth it, because FS already does a pretty good job of imitating the Star Wars feel, or I've always thought anyway.  In fact, I've always considered the freespace series a spiritual successor to the Lucasarts games, since the mechanics are so similar.

[brandx0]

I think one reference comes from ANH where Red Leader tells them to go full shields aft or somesuch

[jr2]

The difference being, basically, in FS you have full 200% aft, rear, and sides if you use FS default.  In SW, I believe, you have to drain a section to get full shields in a quadrant.  Leaving that section vulnerable, but if you know where the firepower is coming to bear on you (eg, Star Destroyer dead ahead), then it's useful.  In FS, you wait till you get shot a few times, and then dump energy.  In SW, you can dump energy before hand, the bonus being if you don't get hit, you have full shields after equalizing (SW term I think is "stabilizing").

BTW, these might prove useful:

IMSDB A New Hope script
IMSDB The Empire Strikes Back script
IMSDB Return of the Jedi script

[aRaven]

well it was with 100% aft 100% front in x-wing and tie fighter...and the first thing to do when a mission is started is to recharge to the full 200%

...it becomes really cumbersome and is not really needed. It would be a step back in this project if we went that way.

Totally Games learned from it: In XWA and XvsTIE you start with 200% shields.

Another issue is the AI: They will never allocated shield power to a quadrant...or at all when not using "smart shields" and then they only equalize the shield power... IMO we shouldn't be able to do what the AI can't to to maintain a certain amount of balance

[chief1983]

Yeah, I think whatever the max shields achievable, you should start a mission with that.  Whether it's full front and back, or only enough for one or the other, that could be decided.  I'd say have full all around, but no shield recharge without dumping energy to shields.

[brandx0]

Yeah, I like that idea.  Seems more starwarsey to me, and also makes more need for energy management.

[aRaven]

i would rather go for slow recharge rate, laser and shields instead of none! don't always want to adjust the energy allocation everytime i want to recharge only a small bit like in the x-wing series ^^

[jr2]

Ya, that would suck.  Start out with almost all energy directed to engines, only one click above zero for shields & weapons.