cRPG

cRPG => Suggestions Corner => Game Balance Discussion => Topic started by: Spa_geh_tea on July 26, 2011, 04:30:31 am

Title: Perhaps were looking at shields the wrong way?
Post by: Spa_geh_tea on July 26, 2011, 04:30:31 am

Introduction

(click to show/hide)

The shield.........one of man's longest used and favored piece of armor in warfare....or was it?

Most folks see shields as being a less expensive defensive tool "armor" against ranged and melee opponents alike. However, the shield is very much underestimated as an offensive weapon. The weapon is often fairly heavy in weight with a hard metal edge to induce blunt trauma. Well documented in roman literature the shield was used to push over enemies, crush limbs, and severe body parts of downed enemies. We have often seen in films of documentaries and Hollywood alike where a shield is used like brass knuckles swung about to chop some head off.

So, where the hell is spaghetti going with this?

I want to make the shields purpose more defined. In doing so, more exciting  and more skill induced so it can no longer be the butt of all arguments, "Well, they have a shield and can autoblock"

Idea

(click to show/hide)

The shield will be adjusted to be used with two different kinds of blocking. The first type of blocking, which were familiar with, is to hold down the rmb bringing the shield up for a infinite time period. I suggest that once this block is released, there is a delay leaving the shield-er vulnerable for a period of time (something equivalent to the kick slash delay)

The second type of blocking is more dynamic and dangerous, but potentially yields rewards (depending on how OP this could be). A shield-er must aim in the direction the attack is coming and tap the rmb. This will block the attack and not penalize the shield-er with a delay, allowing them to attack back. Possibly, although maybe OP, is to count this maneuver as a chamber making it difficult to near impossible to block the counter attack. If that is too ridiculous, then instead dim down the effects of a shield on weapon speed.

Conclusion

(click to show/hide)

So,  for a bit of a recap. What would be expected from such a change? Shields will still be granted the ability to function as a defensive tool, and still give the chance to create shield walls and such. It will also force shielders to be more aggressive in battle, and with this aggression a small bonus and detriment. The bonus being they are using the shield for deflecting blows to gain an advantages but in doing so make themselves more vulnerable in melee because they cant block everything in every direction with this. It will all in all, make shields closer to the tool they truly were in history, fantasy, and hopefully the gaming community.

Title: Re: Perhaps were looking at shields the wrong way?
Post by: Huey Newton on July 26, 2011, 04:54:32 am

I love this idea.

Title: Re: Perhaps were looking at shields the wrong way?
Post by: Anti on July 26, 2011, 05:06:46 am

Meh, I believe the developers briefly experimented with this idea in native. I believe the "parry" animation is still left over from that.


Honestly, I don't like it. People don't seem to realize this, but a decent shield and board player can beat a great 2h/polearm user any day of the week. The problem is however, The amount of *decent* sword and board users isn't very high. Sword and board don't need a buff imo.

Title: Re: Perhaps were looking at shields the wrong way?
Post by: Seawied on July 26, 2011, 06:13:51 am

here's a less game-breaking suggestion


Instead of making it impossible to block, why not give a +50 wpf bonus on the next swing? It would be a clear advantage, but it wouldn't be spammable, and it would give shield users a new degree of skill.

Title: Re: Perhaps were looking at shields the wrong way?
Post by: Christo on July 26, 2011, 07:07:14 am

Quote from: Seawied on July 26, 2011, 06:13:51 am

here's a less game-breaking suggestion


Instead of making it impossible to block, why not give a +50 wpf bonus on the next swing? It would be a clear advantage, but it wouldn't be spammable, and it would give shield users a new degree of skill.

lol.

Imagine those lightspeed 1handers like that.

It would be at the certain polearms stun annoyance level , if not worse.

Title: Re: Perhaps were looking at shields the wrong way?
Post by: Seawied on July 26, 2011, 07:12:24 am

The problem with polestun is that if you get hit, the next one is coming at you at light speed and its a repetitive process. With this system, only 1 attack is very fast, and that's if they do a perfect block. All other rmb "autoblocks" would be slower, as the original post suggested.

On a side note, 50 wpf is noticible, but by no means game-breaking.

Title: Re: Perhaps were looking at shields the wrong way?
Post by: Kenji on July 26, 2011, 07:36:17 am

Really nice, interesting Topic Name and Introduction there, OP.

Sadly, I don't like your suggested ideas and think it'd just complicate the already-there-and-tweaked shield system.

But I'm sure the creative community will always come up with something good.

Title: Re: Perhaps were looking at shields the wrong way?
Post by: Digglez on July 26, 2011, 08:31:18 am

would be nice, but too complicated for this game.

shield bash would accomplish basically the same thing, a well timed interrupt that enables you to get a hit on enemy...but also leaves you open for attack

Title: Re: Perhaps were looking at shields the wrong way?
Post by: Vibe on July 26, 2011, 10:13:55 am

All this is too gamebreaking.

Title: Re: Perhaps were looking at shields the wrong way?
Post by: Everkistus on July 26, 2011, 10:58:16 am

Quote from: Vibe on July 26, 2011, 10:13:55 am

All this is too gamebreaking.

You are gamebreaking, this idea is good if implemented with Urists addon.

Title: Re: Perhaps were looking at shields the wrong way?
Post by: MouthnHoof on July 26, 2011, 11:43:04 am

I suggested directional shield blocks in warband beta. Taleworlds did not like it.
I doubt that what the OP suggests can be implemented within the module system.

Title: Re: Perhaps were looking at shields the wrong way?
Post by: Vibe on July 26, 2011, 01:16:37 pm

Quote from: Everkistus on July 26, 2011, 10:58:16 am

You are gamebreaking, this idea is good if implemented with Urists addon.

What addon?

Tbh, from this idea better shielders would be even more OP and worse shielders (or bad blockers) would suck.

Title: Re: Perhaps were looking at shields the wrong way?
Post by: rustyspoon on July 26, 2011, 03:25:20 pm

Quote from: Vibe on July 26, 2011, 01:16:37 pm

Tbh, from this idea better shielders would be even more OP and worse shielders (or bad blockers) would suck.

My thoughts exactly. All the good shielders already know how to manually block and this would give them a big bonus.

Title: Re: Perhaps were looking at shields the wrong way?
Post by: indigocylinder on July 26, 2011, 03:29:37 pm

the problem.

Suppose I use a held attack against a shielder.

1. If they hold block, they cant swing back, so I can attack again once they release.
2. If they mistime a tap block then my held attack will pass through.
3. If they are good enough to time tap blocks against my held attacks then why don't they just tap attack instead and get a riposte? Why even have a shield at all?

Title: Re: Perhaps were looking at shields the wrong way?
Post by: ArchonAlarion on July 26, 2011, 04:24:27 pm

Quote from: MouthnHoof on July 26, 2011, 11:43:04 am

I suggested directional shield blocks in warband beta. Taleworlds did not like it.
I doubt that what the OP suggests can be implemented within the module system.

That's too bad; I'd really prefer directional shield blocking. It would kind of suck though, unless the shield counted as a solid physical object against melee weapons. That way, blocking to the left with a large shield would also somewhat block overheads and thrusts, but be vulnerable to attack coming from the right.

Even better would be if the non-blocking shield animation had the arm raised up a bit, so that attacks would still be blocked when "dropping" the shield. Back peddling speed would need to be reduced as well.

Title: Re: Perhaps were looking at shields the wrong way?
Post by: _JoG_ on July 26, 2011, 04:29:04 pm

Quote from: indigocylinder on July 26, 2011, 03:29:37 pm

the problem.

Suppose I use a held attack against a shielder.

1. If they hold block, they cant swing back, so I can attack again once they release.
2. If they mistime a tap block then my held attack will pass through.
3. If they are good enough to time tap blocks against my held attacks then why don't they just tap attack instead and get a riposte? Why even have a shield at all?

My thoughts exactly.

Title: Re: Perhaps were looking at shields the wrong way?
Post by: Panoply on July 26, 2011, 10:43:49 pm

Sounds like the same effect could be achieved by changing chamberblock animations to one where you block the attack with your shield while attacking with your weapon. If so, then this is just cosmetics?

Title: Re: Perhaps were looking at shields the wrong way?
Post by: Spa_geh_tea on July 26, 2011, 11:45:05 pm

I would agree with that statement, however with my extensive shield use...........(very extensive) I have found that I can simply click the rmb just before the enemy strikes(taking into account the raising shield delay) and it will block. I do not know why, but for some reason this is very easy to pull off compared to chambers. Try it yourselves and repost your findings.

Title: Re: Perhaps were looking at shields the wrong way?
Post by: rustyspoon on July 27, 2011, 12:37:37 am

Quote from: Spa_geh_tea on July 26, 2011, 11:45:05 pm

I would agree with that statement, however with my extensive shield use...........(very extensive) I have found that I can simply click the rmb just before the enemy strikes(taking into account the raising shield delay) and it will block. I do not know why, but for some reason this is very easy to pull off compared to chambers. Try it yourselves and repost your findings.

That is due to shield speed. Fast shields (100 speed) block before the shield is even raised, so you can tap blocks with them. Slow shields (like the steel shield) block AFTER the shield is fully raised. The shield animation has nothing to do with whether it is blocking or not.

Title: Re: Perhaps were looking at shields the wrong way?
Post by: Spa_geh_tea on July 27, 2011, 02:01:29 am

^ So, you agree that it would be easier to tap block instead of chamber?

Title: Re: Perhaps were looking at shields the wrong way?
Post by: rustyspoon on July 27, 2011, 02:23:03 am

Quote from: Spa_geh_tea on July 27, 2011, 02:01:29 am

^ So, you agree that it would be easier to tap block instead of chamber?

Oh, it is WAY the hell easier to tap block instead of chamber. Fortunately, the masses will probably never catch on to that fact.  :D

Title: Re: Perhaps were looking at shields the wrong way?
Post by: Spa_geh_tea on July 27, 2011, 02:38:18 am

So, then it is a good idea to allow shielders this tap block. And it is not the same as chambering, but in fact easier.

Title: Re: Perhaps were looking at shields the wrong way?
Post by: rustyspoon on July 27, 2011, 02:40:34 am

Quote from: Spa_geh_tea on July 27, 2011, 02:38:18 am

So, then it is a good idea to allow shielders this tap block. And it is not the same as chambering, but in fact easier.

Therein lies the problem. Your idea above would make it too good.

Title: Re: Perhaps were looking at shields the wrong way?
Post by: Spa_geh_tea on July 27, 2011, 03:30:13 am

Quote from: rustyspoon on July 27, 2011, 02:40:34 am

Therein lies the problem. Your idea above would make it too good.

But it comes with the price of not being able to block every direction, and to have to pick the correct direction.....ie, screwed when the enemy feints. I made two suggestions for the bonus, either a mini stun on the enemy, or the speed penalty of a 1h with a shield is reduced in general.

Title: Re: Perhaps were looking at shields the wrong way?
Post by: cmp on July 27, 2011, 03:56:12 am

Hate to break it to you, but shield mechanics are impossible to change.

Title: Re: Perhaps were looking at shields the wrong way?
Post by: Digglez on July 27, 2011, 04:03:01 am

Quote from: cmpxchg8b on July 27, 2011, 03:56:12 am

Hate to break it to you, but shield mechanics are impossible to change.

That is why you fail

Title: Re: Perhaps were looking at shields the wrong way?
Post by: Cyclopsided on July 27, 2011, 05:04:17 am

Quote from: Digglez on July 27, 2011, 04:03:01 am

That is why you fail

I don't always make personal insults, but when I do, they are when it isn't their fault.

Title: Re: Perhaps were looking at shields the wrong way?
Post by: Seawied on July 27, 2011, 05:31:56 am

Quote from: Marathon on July 27, 2011, 05:04:17 am

I don't always make personal insults, but when I do, they are when it isn't their fault.

visitors can't see pics , please register or login

Title: Re: Perhaps were looking at shields the wrong way?
Post by: Digglez on July 27, 2011, 04:15:32 pm

Quoting Yoda isnt a personal insult, more like advice.  If you say something is impossible you've already been defeated.