Why cant shieldless warframes have overshield?

[_GoodLuck_]

 There are some abilities that gives you overshields. Like Condemn or Pillage. Why can't we have one on shieldless Warframes like Nidus or Inaros? I'd give them 0.5s of invulnerability after losing their (over)shields (just like Kullervo).

 

Discuss here

Edited March 29 by _GoodLuck_

[Jivy]

You said it yourself, you can’t have “Overshield” if there is no shield to begin with that would just make it shield

[NinjaZeku]

1 hour ago, Jivy said:

You said it yourself, you can’t have “Overshield” if there is no shield to begin with that would just make it shield

Don't really agree.

Overshield is not the same as regular Shields, it doesn't come back on its own or anything,
it's more like Overguard (minus the proc protection) which Shield-less Frames can gain no prob.

Maybe the Frames in question could get reduced max amount of OS or something,
also I guess same deal for the no-Shields Nightmare modifier while we're at it.

Edited March 29 by NinjaZeku

[WindShadow970]

2 minutes ago, NinjaZeku said:

Maybe the Frames in question could get reduced max amount of OS or something.

Nah, they need what shield frames got: defense improvements inline with what they do.

It wasn't that long ago when the inverse of this discussion was had about shields not benefiting from armor, the solution: make shields better at being shields instead of making them a copy of health.

[Jivy]

1 hour ago, NinjaZeku said:

Don't really agree.

Overshield is not the same as regular Shields, it doesn't come back on its own or anything,
it's more like Overguard (minus the proc protection) which Shield-less Frames can gain no prob.

Maybe the Frames in question could get reduced max amount of OS or something,
also I guess same deal for the no-Shields Nightmare modifier while we're at it.

But you get the idea I’m saying though

[NinjaZeku]

2 minutes ago, Jivy said:

But you get the idea I’m saying though

I guess, but I still disagree with it :P

Any Shield beyond your max is Overshield.

So what if your max is 0, why should that stop Overshield from applying?

[Jivy]

13 minutes ago, NinjaZeku said:

So what if your max is 0, why should that stop Overshield from applying?

Cause if you don't have shield to begin with then it shouldn't be called overshield and thus non shield warframes shouldn't have overshield as the definition would be incorrect then

[NinjaZeku]

1 hour ago, Jivy said:

Cause if you don't have shield to begin with then it shouldn't be called overshield and thus non shield warframes shouldn't have overshield as the definition would be incorrect then

What definition are you using that differs from the one I used?

"Any Shield beyond your max is Overshield."

[Pakaku]

Zero * any number = still zero

Overguard exists now, as some weird "shields but not shields" thing that health-only warframes can get, so the question seems moot at this point

[Jivy]

3 hours ago, NinjaZeku said:

What definition are you using that differs from the one I used?

"Any Shield beyond your max is Overshield."

I'm using the word definition you cant have "over" if you don't have the thing to begin with

[NinjaZeku]

7 hours ago, Pakaku said:

Zero * any number = still zero

But it's not a multiplication. Overshield simply gets added on top.

7 hours ago, Pakaku said:

Overguard exists now, as some weird "shields but not shields" thing that health-only warframes can get, so the question seems moot at this point

"B exists so let's just ignore A."

I don't agree with that logic.

When I bring e.g. my Crush spam Mag to a mission to protect my Squad with (Over)Shield generation,
and then I can't do anything to help non-Shield Frames in that regard ... feels bad man.

You can add so many different layers of (offensive as well as defensive) buffs to Frames, I don't see this one as breaking the camel's back.

4 hours ago, Jivy said:

I'm using the word definition you cant have "over" if you don't have the thing to begin with

You can have zero, then go over that.

Anyway, to clarify, beyond the name rubbing you the wrong way, do you actually have an issue with this proposal?

[_GoodLuck_]

13 hours ago, Jivy said:

You said it yourself, you can’t have “Overshield” if there is no shield to begin with that would just make it shield

Anyway you can call it whatever you want. I'm talking about of another layer of protection that some abilities give you

[Raarsi]

1 hour ago, _GoodLuck_ said:

Anyway you can call it whatever you want. I'm talking about of another layer of protection that some abilities give you

-Points to overguard- Ta da!  You're welcome.

The amount of overshield is determined based off of a frame's maximum shield capacity.  That's why shieldless frames can't have overshield: because there's nothing there to work off of in order to apply overshield.  So in order for a shieldless frame to have overshield, you're basically asking DE to not make those frames shieldless because that's exactly what's required to gain overshield.

On top of that, overshield doesn't grant shield gating in case that's why you're asking for it (base shielding does).  Besides, all three shieldless frames have better alternatives for shields between Inaros having considerable healing from kills, Nidus having passive healing and Kullervo having substantial armor along with on-demand heals and overguard.

[NinjaZeku]

On 2024-03-30 at 11:23 AM, Raarsi said:

-Points to overguard- Ta da!  You're welcome.

This would be a better argument if you could just instantly, during a mission, switch an ability or whatever
from giving (Over)Shield gains to giving Overguard. Alas, you cannot. So your "revelation" there really doesn't work.

Unless you're saying everyone should just stop using Shield-giving Frames entirely and only use Overguard-providing ones instead.

Please tell me you are not actually saying that.

On 2024-03-30 at 11:23 AM, Raarsi said:

The amount of overshield is determined based off of a frame's maximum shield capacity.

No, it's not.

It's simply a flat +1200 Overshield at max (ignoring special cases, like Harrow getting double that).

https://warframe.fandom.com/wiki/Shield#Overshield

Edited April 1 by NinjaZeku

[Zakkhar]

The definition of shieldless frame is not "max shield equals 0", but there is no shield or shield based mechanics. So not shield gate or overshield either.

[Agall]

On 2024-03-29 at 2:36 PM, NinjaZeku said:

Don't really agree.

Overshield is not the same as regular Shields, it doesn't come back on its own or anything,
it's more like Overguard (minus the proc protection) which Shield-less Frames can gain no prob.

Maybe the Frames in question could get reduced max amount of OS or something,
also I guess same deal for the no-Shields Nightmare modifier while we're at it.

Can't wear gloves if you don't have hands. Can't have an overshield without having a shield.

[Raarsi]

37 minutes ago, NinjaZeku said:

This would be a better argument if you could just instantly, during a mission, switch an ability or whatever
from giving (Over)Shield gains to giving Overguard. Alas, you cannot. So your "revelation" there really doesn't work.

I mean, at the end of the day, you're basically asking for a worse version of overguard since you don't get shield gating from overshields and overshields don't grant you the same benefits of overguard like anti-CC effects or the invincibility window you get for losing overguard.

37 minutes ago, NinjaZeku said:

Unless you're saying everyone should just stop using Shield-giving Frames entirely and only use Overguard-providing ones instead.

Please tell me you are not actually saying that.

Nope, definitely not saying that.  Not my fault that you're bringing a frame that doesn't benefit from a particular support function much like how certain frames actually gain a disadvantage for having overguard like Inaros or Chroma.

41 minutes ago, NinjaZeku said:

No, it's not.

It's simply a flat +1200 Overshield at max (ignoring special cases, like Harrow getting double that).

My mistake, although you still need to have a base shield value of more than zero to have overshields in the first place.

[NinjaZeku]

3 minutes ago, Raarsi said:

I mean, at the end of the day, you're basically asking for a worse version of overguard

Kinda, ye.

So why is it just a no-go to allow Overshields on all Frames, if a stronger version is perfectly fine?

1 minute ago, Raarsi said:

you still need to have a base shield value of more than zero to have overshields in the first place

I mean ... yes. I know. We all know.

This topic is about changing that :P

[Raarsi]

4 minutes ago, NinjaZeku said:

So why is it just a no-go to allow Overshields on all Frames, if a stronger version is perfectly fine?

Perhaps that's why we now have frames with access to overguard: because of the fact that overshield can't go on shieldless frames.

6 minutes ago, NinjaZeku said:

I mean ... yes. I know. We all know.

This topic is about changing that :P

So what you're suggesting then is that shieldless frames are no longer shieldless?  Maybe give them the Grendel treatment of having under 100 shield or something that's just enough to grant them overshields?

[NinjaZeku]

10 minutes ago, Raarsi said:

So what you're suggesting then is that shieldless frames are no longer shieldless?

No, simply to allow Overshields.

Again, it's not the same as actual, self-regenerating Shields or anything, it's more akin to (bad) Overguard like you said yourself.

[UnstarPrime]

I can see it both ways.  Overshields allow you to get shields beyond your default shield max.  For a frame with 300 shields, Overshields starts at 301, and for a frame with 0 shields, Overshields would start at 1.

But it also makes sense the current way it is: that frames without shields can't get any kind of shields.

Neither is more right than the other, it's just a matter of what the developers choose to do from a gameplay and balance perspective.