Shield Range Upgrade

[burguertime]

I really think that shields should benefit from range upgrades from the forge.

You can see that they fall behind a blaster when the blaster gets some upgrades, specially inside a power zone. A fully upgraded PZ blaster is better at keeping a larger area without creeper than a shield in the same PZ, in most cases. (yeah, elevation, creeper surrouding amounts, etc can tip the scale), but in most cases IMHO the upgraded blaster is a better candidate for the PZ than the shield.

what is your opinion?

[Grauniad]

Frankly, now, at this stage of the game, I feel that (as an American Secretary of Defense once remarked) "we fight with the army we have, not the one we wish we had."

[NFITC1]

More than shield range upgrade I'd like a nullifier range upgrade. That would probably break most maps though so probably not.

Can range be changed in CRPL?

[MizInIA]

I really think that shields should benefit from range upgrades from the forge.

how much more energy would a shield require to produce a larger area of protection? it is more the same as giving a mortar or blaster a fire speed upgrade.

but in most cases IMHO the upgraded blaster is a better candidate for the PZ than the shield.

than you should put a blaster on the power zone instead of a shield. I believe the Mortar is a better choice for the power zone than the blaster. and an upgraded mortar is a better choice than a stock mortar.  ;)

[Grayzzur]

My opinion is that the game is already released, the balance is pretty good, and changes to the core units at this point would effectively invalidate all the map scores already out there. They're fine as they are.

I'd like to see CRPL ugpraded to allow such changes for custom maps, but not the base game.

[pawel345]

And not to add that shields are OP anyway, and PZ shields even more so a range upgrade would be too much.

[Grabarz19]

Shields seem good enough as they are. I disagree with your opinion that Blasters are just better, you're forgetting that your PZ won't always be on a high ground, which means your Blaster might not reach everywhere. A Shield, however, wouldn't have a problem. The fact that Blasters also have to turn constantly would make me feel uneasy if that one Blaster was what the entire area was depending on, so I would just use a Shield...

[4xC]

If shields had a range upgrade, I would have been almost stark raving furious that there was no range boost for the CW2 repulsor. Since there is none for both, I am satisfied enough. I once thought they should be cheaper, but not so much now because shields do more than repulsors anyway.

By that, I refer to the cost:output ratio for each unit. This ratio applies to the costs of the units, the areas they cover, and the fraction of the map covered by each unit. One must also consider the gradual energy drain of both.

All things considered, I am as satisfied as I can be with the shield.

BTW, blasters v. mortars on PZ's? Is it really a question of whether which is better? ::) ::) ::) Sorry, but it sounds as silly as a superiority debate between a machine gun and a bazooka. Machine guns shoot weaker shots that can't penetrate armor, but shoot faster than your reflexes have time to pick them up. Bazookas hit hard enough to down ground vehicles, but require more resources per shot and move at a visible pace meaning they are not that quick.

Getting back to CW3: PC's on PZ's are good for clearing out shallower fields of creeper in a medium-sized radius. Mortars using PZ's are meant to clear out dense pools of rapidly-resupplying creeper. All things considered, neither is ultimately better than the other.

[Nephthys]

Frankly, now, at this stage of the game, I feel that (as an American Secretary of Defense once remarked) "we fight with the army we have, not the one we wish we had."

Hear, Hear!  ;)   ;)

[cecel123]

the use of shields varies from the current situation. if you only have to fight on one front, then you may not need shields. But say you are surrounded. shields can buy you necessary time to maintain an acceptable defense. shields have a perfect range because any further and the repulsion would begin to lose any force behind it. it just adds realism.

[Lord_Farin]

Getting back to CW3: PC's on PZ's are good for clearing out shallower fields of creeper in a medium-sized radius. Mortars using PZ's are meant to clear out dense pools of rapidly-resupplying creeper. All things considered, neither is ultimately better than the other.

Nothing like a PZ cannon to counter the dreaded digitalis!

[Amram]

if shields were to be upgradable in any way, i'd rather it either be that they become cheaper to operate, can push back more/denser/deeper creeper, or both.

Having shields become half as expensive, and/ able to hold back twice the creeper is like having 2 shields in one spot and getting 4 times the shielding for the same power cost, a very significant upgrade.

I also wouldn't make their upgrades cheap.  Shields are very powerful already.  When I was curious what shields could do, I continued playing past the victory, and destroyed my weapons.  I then used only shields to push all of the remaining creeper into a smaller and smaller area trying to find the point at which shields could no longer push it any further.  around 28 tall its essentially impossible to make headway, but still possible to contain using layered shielding.  Note that the creeper was at terrain 1 while the shields were on an advancing plateau at 10, as shields cleared a tile, Terps made it level 10. so if creeper below you doesn't affect how much more creeper the shields can push back, then the limit is actually 20 tall, and not 30  Haven't explored what PZ shielding can do in a similar test.

So im not really sure they need to be any stronger, though that could be useful.

Cheaper is about the only thing I could see, and that would shift the economics of using shields by quite a bit.