Shield battery restores 50 shields per second instead of 36

The shield battery’s description indicates it restores 36 shields per second. But a battery is able to out-heal an immortal (48 dps).
Similarly, an overcharged battery can out-heal 2 immortals.
A battery cannot out-heal an immortal and one probe. (52.75 dps)

Through some testing, I determined the actual amount restored to be around 50 shields per second.


Maybe because its “Blizzard seconds” which are 5/7 of a real second?

1 Like

That’s not the case becase:

  1. “Blizzard seconds” were fixed in LotV and are now just normal seconds.

  2. The restoration rate is measured against the dps of an immortal (48, using in-game stats). Even if the blizzard time was actually faster, then the immortal would also attack faster and would be expected to out-dps the battery.

1 Like

But what if its just battery tooltip bugged?

Interesting. I just checked by reproducing your first example in LOTV online unit tester, and obtained the same results. :thinking:

And if was the same with a disruptor in hold position instead of a cannon, so it’s not due to a missing armored tag or something. :mag:

So it’s yet another bugged beam, it would seem. Nice find, it’ll have to be reported in the next balance update if they don’t react to it before that. Not sure something has to be changed though, as the game is currently balanced around those values. But still, it’ll have to be discussed.
Nice discovery !


1 Like

Just a tooltip error.
Shield battery suppose to restore 36 shield/second on normal speed, 50.4 on faster speed, and 21.6 on slower speed, but they forget to sync the number according to game speed.
If you create a new game with slower speed, or slow, normal and fast speed, you will find that the Battery always shows restore 36 shield per second regardless game speed.
Immortal’s attack speed tooltip is correct which shows 2.42 and slower speed, 1.45 at normal, and 1.04 at faster speed.

A tooltip error is still an error that need to fix anyway.
Edit: actually I reported this bug on June, but it seems they ignored it:

1 Like