Secondary generators and shield regeneration?

[Bat66wat6]

I've created this thread to help me decide on the way a part of my secondary shield generators script should work in Bridge Commander.

In this thread http://bc-central.net/forums/index.php/topic,9339.0.html I went after trying to imitate what Bridge Commander does when you power shields to 0%; they recharge. I was successful but now i'm beginning to wonder if this reflects on the Trek universe...

Here's my scenario and question:
Given a ship, such as the Reman Scimitar from Nemesis, that has two shield generators (one primary and one backup secondary). Do you think that the unused (but functional, undamaged) generator would repair (heal, recover) its shields if damaged? To elaborate, if say your primary shields were damaged and you switched to secondary; would your primary shields slowly repair?

How my script works now:
Currently, the unused generators shields repair at the same rate as they would if they were active; however they only repair when the generator is not disabled. In addition, only the current active generator draws power despite the unused generators shields repairing; essentially saying that the healing of the unused generators shields draws no power.

Before you post a reply consider that:

• Bridge Commander currently recharges your shields of your chosen generator when you power the shield system to 0%. This functionality is hardcoded and unchangable.
• To facilitate manual swapping of generators there is a button on the players tactical menu.
• IF the unused generators shields didn't recharge when not active the player would have to switch between the two just for them to both heal. After a big battle where both generators were used this would be cumbersome and frustrating.

So...  

[KrrKs]

I'd say keep it as it is now.
It is the easiest and gameplay -wise best solution

[Bat66wat6]

I'd say keep it as it is now.
It is the easiest and gameplay -wise best solution

I agree that gameplay wise there should be some form of automatic regeneration on the part of the unused generator.

However, given the huge advantage provided by having a completely seperate generator to fall back on when the other is damaged. Does it seem right that the unused generators shields should repair at the same rate they do when active and not incur any form of power drain for doing so?

Bridge Commander believes 0% power put into a system still allows it to repair. Whether this is true to the Trek world is irrelevant because it's hardcoded and can't be changed.

Given, because of BCs programming, the option for the generator to drain power when repairing is out I guess the real question that remains is: should the unused generator really repair at its full rate?

 

[KrrKs]

That is a Question of what YOU like better.
I guess I would let both repair at the same rate, but that rather slowly.

If you want to add that to more ships, you could also alter that on a per Ship basis.

[Bat66wat6]

That is a Question of what YOU like better.

Although when I started this script I intended it only for my Scimitar but now it's evolved so far. Although i'm making it and therfor decide how it works i'd like to have some community input as not everything from the scif-fi universe is clear cut.

I'm not dellusional and don't expect my work to be used by very many people (how many ships/bases really have two shields?) but the few people that choose to use it should be satisfied.

I guess I would let both repair at the same rate, but that rather slowly.

That statement is a literal contradiction.

Look, given i've got like two replies in almost three days i'm gonna have to use best judgement here.

So:

• Since BC recharges whatever shields you had active when you set power to 0% and this functionality can't be changed.
• The unused generators shields not repairing after a battle would be frustrating for the player as they'd have to swap between them manually just for them to heal.
• Given the advantage of having two generators that can be switched instantly on the press of a button, it'd be wrong to have the unused generator recharge at full rate without at least drawing some power.

I've decided that the recharging process of the generator accounts for half of the power it draws whilst the other half is generator (projecting) the shields. This means that the unused generator will, as long as all shields aren't at full strength, drain + half of its usual power.

So when an unused generator shields are repairing the drain = current active generator + 1/2 unused generator power consumption. Not the easiest thing to code but it makes the most sense.

If you want to add that to more ships, you could also alter that on a per Ship basis.

The script has been designed to work on any ship or starbase that has been configured to work with it.

>Configuration for the script requires that you add two generators to the ship, set them to non-primary and targetable.
>The original real generator doesn't need to be modified with exception of setting it to non-targetable.
>The script needs to know the names of the generators to distinguish between them. So a line is added to Scripts\Custom\Ships\shipname.py

[Mario]

If you're unsure what to do, how about making it configurable and allowing the user to choose what he wants?

[Bat66wat6]

If you're unsure what to do, how about making it configurable and allowing the user to choose what he wants?

The user shouldn't be burdened with my indecision. Somethings are good to be left open to the user but the minutia of small details like how much power an unused generator draws when repairing isn't one of them. There has to be a certain degree of rigidness.

Besides, making it optional would only add even more complexity both on the programming and the testing side. Frankly, i've spent an absolutely ridiculous amount of time on this script and i'm right at the end of my patience. At this point it's smoothing some edges, making the documentation (how to use it, what it does) and getting it on the forum for testing then BC files for anyone interested.

[Mario]

Besides, making it optional would only add even more complexity both on the programming and the testing side. Frankly, i've spent an absolutely ridiculous amount of time on this script and i'm right at the end of my patience. At this point it's smoothing some edges, making the documentation (how to use it, what it does) and getting it on the forum for testing then BC files for anyone interested.

I speak from experience when I say that it wouldn't (programming and testing wise). However it's your decision in the end since this is your mod

[Bat66wat6]

I speak from experience when I say that it wouldn't (programming and testing wise). However it's your decision in the end since this is your mod

Your experience is far greater than mine and as such it'd take you (at most) half the time it takes me to do anything in code and probably twice as good. That's just how it goes, as with being inexperienced or experienced in many things. Something that's trivial for you can seem complex to me and so on.

Bottom line, with my level of knowledge the time i'd put in for this litte bit of customisability wouldn't be worth the small outcome.

 

[CyAn1d3]

Your experience is far greater than mine and as such it'd take you (at most) half the time it takes me to do anything in code and probably twice as good. That's just how it goes, as with being inexperienced or experienced in many things. Something that's trivial for you can seem complex to me and so on.

Bottom line, with my level of knowledge the time i'd put in for this litte bit of customisability wouldn't be worth the small outcome.

 

i would actually be VERY interested in implementing this on my ships. my MKII Sovereign (that i plan on redoing) has two shield generators, what would be GREAT is having the effect of a second layer of shielding.. but i thinks that be crackpot theories.

i encourage you to press onward, finding new ways to pull things off on the scripting end gives us modders something to implement to make the game better. cuz thats the damn point.