"non shielders".....you mean players right? Shields are incredibly over powered, they still have huge forcefields, dont slow weapon swing speed, and usually will also stop arrows from the sides.....they actually PULL projectiles OFF their flight, like a magnet, and a lot of the time throwing weapons hit THIN AIR and get stuck, not even touching the shield. Shields need removing 'till chdaz gets rid of whoever it is in the dev team boosting them up after each patch.
I mean, really, Ive seen arrows to 90% turns cause of the shield magnets, its stupid.
"non shielders".....you mean players right? Shields are incredibly over powered, they still have huge forcefields, dont slow weapon swing speed, and usually will also stop arrows from the sides.....they actually PULL projectiles OFF their flight, like a magnet, and a lot of the time throwing weapons hit THIN AIR and get stuck, not even touching the shield. Shields need removing 'till chdaz gets rid of whoever it is in the dev team boosting them up after each patch.
I mean, really, Ive seen arrows to 90% turns cause of the shield magnets, its stupid.
Wow, 100+ speed weapons almost the length of the average 2H sword that are not slowed down at all by using a shield or slightly shorter but do the damage of a bec de corbin. OP - needs nerfing.
But anyway the shield speed might only indicate how fast you can bring your shield from a resting position so a slower shield speed reduces your blocking speed, not that there is that much of a difference from what ive seen trying out different shields, but if there is a slight difference between shields it would probably be there. I thoroughly agree heavier/slower shields should make you swing slower, if not then the speed of weapons like military adn steel pick and warhammer that 2-shot almost everyone no matter your build should be slowed down to around 90 instead of 100/99/97 and side sword should be down to 98/99 rather than 101. My 2 cents.
A shields SPEED rating has always been to show how quickly you can pull the shields from "rest" to block position. I would like some kind of normalcy: "rest" shield blocks ranged, but not melee.......HOW?? Someone explain the logic. Shields should be slow, cumbersome, shithead crutches like they were IRL. Bucklers were the only shields used in the style the game shows, in melee swinging and blocking, all other shields would make you fucking piss easy kill, and should in the game too.
As for Knightly heater, it covers feet and face at the same time, reguardless of how well you aim, w/e the range.
Shields either need their size as the extreme limit of the "forcefield" area, and Im sorry to guys who have stacked 10 points into shields, but seriously, l2p.
Solutions would be: No consecutive blocks= If i hit the guys shield, and a second later a 2nd guy attacks, the shielder should not have time to bring his shield back up. OR, some kind of stamina system, holding up the shield uses a tiny bit over time, taking a hit or shot should use more stamina the harder the hit is, so no more "I can hold mouse2 and walk through the valley of the shadow of death, and I shall fear no dmg".
As it is now, shields have so many advantages and the ONLY disadvantage is a slight speed reduction when running......MASSIVE NERF NEEDED.
Have you checked the feint and pull-back speed? I'm not sure how you'd go about testing it, but there seems to be a big difference in feel to me between, say, the board shield and the elite cavalry shield.
I think people hate the huscarl because magic ghost through happens less with all the round shields. It's a problem with two sides, really.
That said, I don't see why the arrows shouldn't go through holes. It'd just be nice if they could allow that without turning it as vulnerable to angles as the other shields are. Or at least buff the other shields to protect against it somehow.
Shields should be shields: You can build a wall with your mates, and stop arrows, trying to use one in melee should instantly get you killed. Hollywood has A LOT to answer for, as it has made people believe shields were used in mixed melee combat:So?
THEY NEVER WHERE! Shields were formation weapons, BUCKLERS wre used in combat but NEVER shields.
If shielders are OP why do they rarley top the leader boards?
If shielders are OP why do they rarley top the leader boards?Bahaha they do, alot!
If shielders are OP why do they rarley top the leader boards?
The rason you get pissed off is because most of the remaining shielders CAN play to their style, much like Murmillius Prime for polearms and Bjord for 2h. Crappy shileders say "forget that" and go off to get a nice spammy polearm or 2h sword
I admit that the huscarl needs to be nerfed which is why I never use it
But nearly all the 2h and polearm weapons can out range a 1h
Even more of the time a shielder simply gets out spammed. I find it a lot easier to break a spammers chain with no-shield than with a shield. Nerfing all shield speeds would just increase this
I play as a shielder and I seriously don't think they are OP (not counting the huscarl shield and sidesword)
And what's wrong with the people who want to put 10 points into shield? It's their play style. If someone tried to stop you doing your 18/18 build because you played well/had fun with it you'd get pissed off!
SO STOP USING THEM WHEN TRYING TO BALANCE THE BLOODY GAME
One of the more interesting suggestions I read about a way to change shields was in an old taleworlds thread. The idea was to remove the melee forcefield from shields. And by that I don't mean just the 180 degrees coverage, but also the fact that you can't hit under a shield with a melee weapon. If hitting the legs of a shield user is a possibility it means the shield user has to actually worry about his shield positioning instead of just keeping it at chest height. This would require alot of rebalancing though, so I wonder if it's worth it. Overal the balance seems pretty ok.
P.S 2 In real life on a medieval battlefield if you did not use a shield, evolution would quickly take care of you.
"A 2 hander does not have to worry about timing or range or angles"
This is where you lost me and discredited your whole argument...or maybe I'm doing it wrong the more experienced 2handers can share some light on this.
"I'm also not saying that shielders are OP. I'm more saying there's a big problem with the huge, unbreakable shields as there is no negative for using one."
Couldn't have said it better myself rusty...Really I tried and got flamed by every shielder alive.
Also I can't take your post serious formless cause even I as a shielder can detect the huge bias behind your posts your just defending your class.
"I'm more saying there's a big problem with the huge, unbreakable shields as there is no negative for using one."
While delivering so many hits in a duel is fine, in a battlefield that is too much time wasted the more time you spend on an opponent the less control you have. As time goes by you leave more and more room for the unexpected and the uncontrolled to happen (aka he gets supported by friendlies, stray throwing, stray arrows, cav runs you over ets....). That is why being able to kill an opponent in 1 to 2 hits is a huge advantage that is not often talked about (its a major reason why 2 handers and polearms are so much better then shielders and why I am going back to polearm)
While delivering so many hits in a duel is fine, in a battlefield that is too much time wasted the more time you spend on an opponent the less control you have. As time goes by you leave more and more room for the unexpected and the uncontrolled to happen (aka he gets supported by friendlies, stray throwing, stray arrows, cav runs you over ets....). That is why being able to kill an opponent in 1 to 2 hits is a huge advantage that is not often talked about (its a major reason why 2 handers and polearms are so much better then shielders and why I am going back to polearm). That is why I consider a high agility build for a shielder more difficult to play and not less then an str build shielder.
Shields should be slow, cumbersome, shithead crutches like they were IRL.
Uh, back on topic.
Shields affect swing speed when blocking. With a slower speed rating shield, when you block it takes longer to fully put up a block and release it so you can then swing the next time, which gives an effective drop in weapon speed. Use the fur covered shield compared to a steel buckler, and you will see how much longer it takes to actually block attacks then attack again.
If you don't block? Then it is not going to lower your attack speed WITH 1handed weapons. It will lower it with a polearm by 30% though. Regardless of blocking.
^
Proof you're a fucking idiot. You obviously have no fucking idea how shields are/were used IRL combat, which btw was just as much as offensive weapons as they were defensive devices. You're just as likely to suffer fatal blows to the head from a shield bash/punch with the edge of the shield than you are with a sword, moreso if you're wearing a helmet. Shields were not slow, cumbersome, shithead crutches. Barring large tower shields like the roman's used, they were fast, mobile, deadly tools of warfare. FFS you can google videos of this shit all over the web from reenactor groups and duelist clubs nowadays even. :rolleyes:
Also: crushthrough weapons and 'bonus against shield' are everywhere. Man, even a regular 2h sword breaks shields in no time.
Huscarls are great delayers, imo. I don't like them because they're really annoying to fight, otherwise I don't have a problem.
This reminds me of the last siege I was in where three players brought a weapon and three Huscarl shields (each), and refused to do anything but huddle around the flag and block... That must have been mildly irritating for the attackers to deal with, as it certainly bought time for the defenders.
Shields are fine. Stop complaining. Learn to feint.
Better yet, learn to disengage and let them be someone else's problem. No one is forcing you to fight.
This.
Stop making problems while there isnt any.
Having played a shielder extensively, just my two cents.
Huscarl has a magical forcefield, period.
Swingspeed is definately not affected by shield speed, feinting and raising are. How much is hard to determine, given latency and whatnot, at least for me personally.
A steel shield is utterly useless in a random fight, axes and such will shred it. Bonus against shield equals the need for high hp, low armor, shields, not the other way around.
People whining over shielding being "easymode" and whatever clearly does not know how they are played "properly"; hold off four people at once, make them hit each other, strike at the guy behind the first one in the killtrain (let your teammates flank them as you draw their attention). Hold the door-/arch-/passageway against all comers (mind the silly kicks). Cover the team from missile troops and charge the same, nullifying them (main reason to use a huscarl, after all). And so on.
A shielder fighting a two-hander, "skill" being equal, the shielder will lose. Don't bother with the "but if... / you suck!" logic. One on one, the shielder is slower, has less reach and damage. That said, there are many ways for either to outsmart the other, using the surroundings and situation to tilt the outcome.
A shielder with support (stabbing 2her, piker, missile, whatever), or in a supporting role, can kill or aid in the killing half a dozen enemies at once (well, in a row, anyway) without more to show for it than a few dents in the shield and a silly grin on his face. Yes, those truly gifted blocking, chambering, plain insane 2hers can do the same, but I have been told it's hard to block in three directions at the same time...
@Rustyspoon (just since I saw the reply as I went to post); Shielder vs shielder is far from boring, unless you think block, strike, repeat will defeat anything but the greenest fellow. ;)
Shielder rushing headlong into battle and being swarmed under or dying in a "duel" off to the side is what is giving the whole "class" a shitty name. That goes for any build/class, I know, but imho it's just easy to spot the lone huscarl being raped, compared to the various 2her/pole/archer hybrid builds.
Edit: And yes, obviously shield speed/weight SHOULD affect the attacks, hopefully there's a way to emulate that properly.
Hmm, not entirely convinced regarding the feinting. Knightly heater certainly feels a wee bit faster when I release;block;new direction. Anything to do with the logic behind a smaller object having to travel faster to reach the same destination as a larger one, except you break off the momentum at the same early point?
Since this is a S&B thread I won't bother posting a new one, I'll just ask here for your opinion on this build:
I'm looking for something fast and speedy, but still dealing good damage:(click to show/hide)
What do you think of this build?
I'm thinking of using it with Warhammer (99 speed) + Knightly Heater Shield (100 speed). I believe the low range on Warhammer shouldn't be a problem because athlethics will be at 7 and I won't be using any heavy armor that might slow me down.
Build looks solid. But I would swap agility and strength to a 21/18 build. You're not going for max shieldskill and in my oppinion +1 PS far outweighs the benefits of 1 athletics and some wpf points. Especially with the warhammer, with 7 PS you're much more likely to kill enemies in 1-3 hits.
I'm playing with a 24/12 build atm using either a MW sidesword, warhammer or steelpick with my (no, not a huscarl) board shield and I have no trouble keeping enemies in range of my short weapons. Just keep pushing and force them to backpaddle. The only thing you have to be carefull about is 2h swinging at you and jumping back with a swing when you counter attack. They will jump out of reach and hit you if you don't block.
Personally, I've build my character to be a siege specialist. A tad slow, but a hard hitting tank with 8 IF/PS and if the multiplier allows it with heavy armour. It's great to break the lines at the top of the ladders when attacking and great to keep multiple enemies busy for quite some time, dropping them 1 by 1 (my hits and teamhits) until I finally go down. The only thing you don't want to be facing are guys with shieldbreakers (more than 1 at the same time) and people like Bjord, who are just insanely fast.
Thanks for the feedback Spawny, I have reconsidered my spec. I believe that 7 ATH would be overdoing it, considering that I won't be wearing heavy armor (or heavy shields for that matter) and 6 ATH should be far enough to catch a backpeddaler. I think I'm better of with 1 more PS.
So I'm going with 21/18, which is more or less the same as 18/21 build, but 1 less ATH and 1 more PS:(click to show/hide)
One thing I would like to mention, since people are speaking about onehanders as if they have no advantages, is that they have extremely high speed. That is all, just pointing out something that somehow never got mentioned. Also, with a few onehanders *cough* Steel Pick *cough* your damage is pretty much comparable to a two hander. Yes, reach is the big issue with that weapon, I know, I know. I didn't find it all that hard to counter the reach issue on my shielder, but it certainly forced a different playstyle.
The damage on a steel pick is awesome, I agree on that. I've used it all night yesterday and the most hits I needed to kill someone was 3. 90% dropped in 2 or less hits. I can't imagine the hurting a MW steel pick would do when used with 7 or 8 powerstrike. I'm going to test the warhammer tonight to see if it's worth trading 2 damage and some speed for knockdown, a 4th attack direction and a tiny bit more reach.
Hm I'm interested in this too, as I have not yet completely decided if I'll use the pick or warhammer. 33 pierce damage is deadly, but 31 blunt (which is just a bit more than pierce) with a chance to knockdown seems like a tasty choice too. The speed difference between the two is only 1.
Hm I'm interested in this too, as I have not yet completely decided if I'll use the pick or warhammer. 33 pierce damage is deadly, but 31 blunt (which is just a bit more than pierce) with a chance to knockdown seems like a tasty choice too. The speed difference between the two is only 1.If you are good at hitting heads in melee, choose the pick.
swing from left while fighting with 1h weapon, unless your looking at your opponents groin im not sure how you can miss head.
Formless needs to gripe less about things he doesnt understand...
Shielder with STR : Needs to be very clever with his positioning, and save his shields HP. He can 1hit everyone all the time in 1v1 melee.
This is a fairly difficult class.
Shielder with AGI (seems logical since shieldskill feeds off AGI): Stack athletics, 1h wpf, shieldskill, run around blocking everything in the 180 degrees you are facing, spam toptier (sidesword, wh, etc), one headshot at PS 4 (12 STR is minimun I would recommend, unless making dedicated javchucker) will kill most everything upto head armour 35-40 unless your timing and position sux.
Im sry to all of you who think its not, but shielding IS easier, and doesnt have enough drawbacks... I would like to see 2h swords nerfed a little, polearm swingspeed on the majority of large ones nerfed LOADS, to account for physics, since swingspeed is handspeed and animation runspeed, not weapontip speed, polearms are ridiculously overpowered. I would like to see 1h swingspeeds be significantly faster than 2h, especially "useless" items like Fighting Axe, but shields are very overpowered too. Saying "Shields are NOT overpowered, I find it hard" or "Shields are NOT overpowered, look at TWOHANDED!!!" is just changing the subject.
RIGHT NOW IN THE GAME: Easiest way to KILL in mixed melee (where many opponents from both factions are swirling around each other):
1st: Polearms
2nd: 2h
3rd: 1h
But easiest to survive reguardless of skill: shield
And to steal: shield
And to ignore half the weapon classes (3 ranged types): shield
Easiest to fight multiple enemies without worrying about your timing or position too much: shield
So you think ranged classes should not have a "counter" (very poor actually since most shields don't cover well and a few throwing shit can crush any shield to pieces) ? The only way to play safe with a shield is to use a throwing weapon. You can't be safe if you don't have ranged weapons, period.
To the funny part now, when a shielder looses his shield. Option one is to loose all your time seeking another shield. You have some luck if you find a proper one. But often you don't have time to do that because your shield was destroyed by a big 2h axe. In melee, 1h without shield seems just like a fast and very short 2h, before you encounter someone with an heavy weapon. If you have to fight bardiches and the like, you are as good as dead. The stun makes it virtually impossible to fight.
Hm I'm interested in this too, as I have not yet completely decided if I'll use the pick or warhammer. 33 pierce damage is deadly, but 31 blunt (which is just a bit more than pierce) with a chance to knockdown seems like a tasty choice too. The speed difference between the two is only 1.
Hm I've been testing Warhammer vs Steel pick quite much and it just seems to me that Steel pick kills faster. Not sure whether it was just luck/right enemies.
It's what I've been experiencing. My enemies seem to have an easier time blocking the warhammer than the steel pick.
The better fighters are easier to kill with my sidesword though. They will use the range of the steel pick against me, while the average players don't.