• Registered: 2006-05-21
  • Posts: 80

Topic: PDS verses shields

Am I missing something about how to use point defence systems?

As I read it they are effectively a 3 point shield that is not halfed or ignored by special weapons or fighters. Points for points it is a lot cheaper than a 3 point shield. Why not just have a PDS and no shileds?

The only 2 weaknesses it seems to have is it is destroyed by a Q hit but that is not too bad as you have several other Q hits to take usually. And Increased damage is calculated on shields not PDS so a ship with PDS and no shields would POP quickly when facing ID weapons.

Seems cheap or I am playing it wrong.

  • Registered: 2005-03-27
  • Posts: 811

Re: PDS verses shields

Nope, that's the thing.

Usually, there's not a ton of Qs on a ship, and the vulnerability of going from 3 shield to 0 shield in one hit is a biggie.

And point for point, they are cheaper than a 3 point shield.

Here's something Peter Drake put together to show that ratio:

http://www.lclark.edu/~drake/starmada/maxburn.html

a fine reference and the Man who brought us the Drake Notation(tm)

  • From: Denver, CO
  • Registered: 2005-03-27
  • Posts: 3,578

Re: PDS verses shields

Ironchicken wrote:

As I read it they are effectively a 3 point shield that is not halfed or ignored by special weapons or fighters. Points for points it is a lot cheaper than a 3 point shield.

I'm not sure what you mean by this... a PDS has a x2 multiplier, which is the same as the shields 3 multiplier... :?:

Daniel Kast
Majestic Twelve Games
cricket@mj12games.com

mj12games's Website

  • Registered: 2005-03-27
  • Posts: 811

Re: PDS verses shields

you get better coverage and cheaper defense with shield 2 and pds, that's what I meant.

  • From: Denver, CO
  • Registered: 2005-03-27
  • Posts: 3,578

Re: PDS verses shields

jimbeau wrote:

you get better coverage and cheaper defense with shield 2 and pds, that's what I meant.

Again, I don't know what you mean by this.

Shields 2 with PDS blocks 67% of shots that come in (1, 2, 3, and 5), for a combined multiplier of x3 (x1.5 and x2); this is the same as shields 4, which also has a multiplier of x3.

What do you mean by "cheaper"? And what about "better coverage"? Looks the same to me...

Daniel Kast
Majestic Twelve Games
cricket@mj12games.com

mj12games's Website

  • Registered: 2005-03-28
  • Posts: 26

Re: PDS verses shields

When a lot of people talk about "cheaper", they are not referring to the Combat Rating, they are referring to the SU cost as being cheaper.  It is not until you hit Hull Size 20 (assuming all TLs equal 0) that shields are cheaper than PDS by SU cost.

Jimmy

  • Registered: 2005-03-27
  • Posts: 811

Re: PDS verses shields

From the Max Burn Page

By Cheaper, I mean smaller wink

"""
A PDS is as effective (and has as much effect on DR) as 3 shields, although it can't take as many hits. As seen in the graph at right, it also takes less space, on ships up to size 19! For ships of size 4 or less, a PDS takes less space than even one shield -- a definite win.
"""

a little confused, but...

jim

  • Registered: 2005-03-28
  • Posts: 287

Re: PDS verses shields

Same great combat, but low fat.

lol

  • Registered: 2006-05-21
  • Posts: 80

Re: PDS verses shields

If you go to the SXCA Construction assistant (linked in the sticky) and build a 10 hull ship with PDS and nothing else it has a CV of 24 The same ship with 3 shields instead of the PDS has a CV of 27.

However if you do the same thing using the spreadsheet on the Starmarda website then they both cost the same (CV of 20)

Guess there must be an error in the Spreadsheet linked in the sticky from the forum, which is where I got the idea it was cheaper to use PDS.

  • Registered: 2005-03-27
  • Posts: 811

Re: PDS verses shields

ah, maybe some excel guru can look into that wink

  • From: Denver, CO
  • Registered: 2005-03-27
  • Posts: 3,578

Re: PDS verses shields

nimrodd wrote:

When a lot of people talk about "cheaper", they are not referring to the Combat Rating, they are referring to the SU cost as being cheaper.  It is not until you hit Hull Size 20 (assuming all TLs equal 0) that shields are cheaper than PDS by SU cost.

This is true... but then, SUs are merely a convenience to keep things "realistic" -- they have no bearing on the game itself, unlike the Combat Rating.

So when I hear "cheaper" or "more expensive", I always think in terms of point cost.

Daniel Kast
Majestic Twelve Games
cricket@mj12games.com

mj12games's Website

  • Registered: 2005-03-27
  • Posts: 811

Re: PDS verses shields

You are correct, Dan.  Cheaper means "costs less"

I get confused sometimes.

sorry

  • Registered: 2005-12-28
  • Posts: 195

Re: PDS verses shields

One thing about PDS vs shields: you can choose to take damage to the PDS, given you have several Qs that could be hit, as opposed to shields that have to be hit.  And, shields can never be repaired fully; it only takes one Q on the repair roll to bring your PDS defense back to full (or to repair another Q item that may protect your PDS from damage next turn).

This really helps vs fighters trying to soften up your defenses, namely shields, before the ships attack.

  • Registered: 2006-01-17
  • Posts: 740

Re: PDS verses shields

Hello from Jacksonville,

I have weapons that have "Increased damage" as one of their weapon special abilities.  After a weapon hits, I roll to penetrate.  Rolls of 1,3,5 are ignored.  rolls of 2,4,6 not only do damage, but do 2,4,6 points of damage respectively.  I have a friend who only takes PDS for his ships and no shields(!).  Needless to say, my ships, which all have expendible torpedoes with "Increased damage",  pulverize his ships.  I have even added "rerolls penetration" to these expendible torpedo weapons as well as "rerolls to hit".   

I have a different approach to ship protection.  My capital ships have level 3 shields and a PDS for protection.  This works well for me...

Steven Gilchrist; Jacksonville, Florida, USA