cRPG
cRPG => Suggestions Corner => Game Balance Discussion => Topic started by: Rumblood on November 03, 2013, 11:22:37 pm
-
Shields should be a more effective counter to ranged than they are currently.
-
Do you think the forcefield is currently too poor for shields? Interesting to see an archer's perspective.
I only have a problem when an archer shoots from a heightened elevation because the way your character holds a shield is awkward for such high angles, especially off center. Maybe something can be done for shield skill 6 and above. Even at 2 shield skill I can already block with a decent area in front of me (and don't really notice the difference in forcefield between 2 and 5).
I think shields should have more realistic weights so they could catch archers. 3.5kg for a buckler is ridiculous, for instance. That small weight difference matters a lot for their acceleration.
-
I don't really think the force field needs a buff. It's already pretty decent, and as a thrower I'm constantly hitting shields even if i aim over at their heads, or below at their feet. Only way I can hit a shielder is to get a large height advantage, or to get behind them.
That being said, I haven't touched my shielder in a while. Maybe I should see if I find the force field as useful when I'm using it rather than having it in my way.
-
A shield overhaul would be nice, but I think increasing force field is more of a sloppy way to combat the problem. It comes with its own inherent problems as well, like protecting players from hits from behind or hits on the horse. As long as the shield protects from head to foot and a bit to the sides thats ok. Maybe increase the Length on some.
Main thing for me is giving more players access to shields that don't gimp them in some way. Often the shear weight of the things make them unattractive to take as a backup unless your main role includes holding a shield. Its often a lot better to simply judge when players will release a shot and dodge to the side, and you need movement speed for that. Deploying the shield makes you a sitting duck if there are ranged on more than one side, they get destroyed too fast (especially if you have 1-2 skill shield, but still with better ones too), and there is a good chance a xbower will simply crush straight through it. If players take points away from their main role for a support item they should really get better protection from ranged with it rather than simply weaken their main role. Shields become more useful towards the end of the round though when you are forced to engaged ranged. Thats when i'll take a shield usually if i find one on the floor. Before then its just too much of a detraction from you fulfilling your main role imo.
Not sure of the best solution..I still think simply having fewer ranged would be better than forcing everyone to becoming like a turtle. Reducing ammo counts would help, or make it so you can't loot more ammo from the field
-
Not sure of the best solution..I still think simply having fewer ranged would be better than forcing everyone to becoming like a turtle. Reducing ammo counts would help, or make it so you can't loot more ammo from the field
Really? Well I think we have too many 2 handers and polearms in game. I think ranged is an excellent method of thinning their numbers, but there are still too many of them. How about we put in a stamina bar so they can only swing and block for so long before having to stop for awhile? Or maybe their weapons could have a chance of breaking, forcing them to pick up new weapons? That would give us fewer of them! :rolleyes:
/sarcasm off
Buffing the forcefield for shields is a great way to address the problems people have with ranged. It is a well known fact that shields just aren't as effective against it as it should be. However, if you touch any other aspect of the shielder, it will make them more effective against melee as well. That isn't what we are after. Keep the weight issue and speed issues it has against other types of melee. That is the price you pay for not needing to directional block. Even if a buff to the forcefield does block some attacks from the side that it didn't previously, nudge was introduced to counter such a situation. You can kick them. It won't make them suddenly overpowered. But it will help make them more effective at blocking ranged attacks.
-
Buff heavy towershields maybe? Smaller shields already have ridicilous force field compared to their size (especially the palm sized buckler).
-
Just lower the ammo count on Archers and Xbaws to that of throwers.
Forcefield is fine.
-
Forcefield is fine, people just needs to use kite/board shields if they don't want to invest heavily in shield skill OR have to turn the shield up or down depending on where the enemy is aiming, the issue with shields is bolts passing through them.
-
If someone's having problems with the force field I'd say to him to just invest more into shield skill, it's not like it requires a huge amount. 1-2 extra points are not that much to spend into something that increases the force field, durability and speed of the shields.
-
even with shield skill 12 or 13 archers are able to hit you with frontal attacks.
-
If someone's having problems with the force field I'd say to him to just invest more into shield skill, it's not like it requires a huge amount. 1-2 extra points are not that much to spend into something that increases the force field, durability and speed of the shields.
I've seen no evidence that shield skill affects forcefield size anymore. I have 7 skill and a +3 Knightly Heater, and coveraged against ranged is awful. Archers shoot over/under/around my shield more often than it catches arrows.
That said, I think shield weight is a much bigger issue than coverage against ranged. Dedicated shielders are severely gimped by the weight, and 2h/pole players don't bother with a cheap shield for use against archers because of the huge weight penalty.
-
I'm pretty sure phantasmal found a spot to shoot at shields where it will almost always penetrate.
-
I like force field as it is (as a shielder with 5 shield using knightly heater shield). If anything, I think shields should weigh less than they currently do. I think all the current 2 slot shields should stay the same, but weights should be much closer to native shield weights.
-
Weight is indeed a problem. Maybe if shields also increase the armor value when equipped, well that would be another story :P
-
Shields need to be buffed against ranged while at the same time not buffed in melee. A blanket weight reduction without nerfs to 1 handers would present its own problems.
-
Shields need to be buffed against ranged while at the same time not buffed in melee. A blanket weight reduction without nerfs to 1 handers would present its own problems.
If a player is even remotely capable of manual blocking, using a shield is a serious liability in 1v1 (less lateral coverage than weapon blocking, weight penalty, and slower than weapon blocking even with 100+ speed shields). Not to mention 1h without a shield gets the extremely potent attack nudge that renders a free hit (shield shove has no utility in a 1v1, unless you are standing near a ledge or something).
I think most shielders would be OK with the crappy coverage against ranged if shield skill reduced the effective weight of shields. This would also encourage non-shielders to carry shields, reducing whines about ranged. Win-win
-
Good discussion. While my focus is on creating an effective counter to ranged, the melee portion has merit as well. How has the new one hand stab affected the 1h/shielders? Better I would think, but I haven't played one since the change.
-
Good discussion. While my focus is on creating an effective counter to ranged, the melee portion has merit as well. How has the new one hand stab affected the 1h/shielders? Better I would think, but I haven't played one since the change.
Shields are already a good but not great deterrent against ranged. The problem is that shields have so many other drawbacks (primarily weight, but also the issues I mentioned above) that most people would rather deal with getting shot than accept the penalties associated with using a shield. Make these penalties less severe, and more people (1h/2h/pole) would decide to carry a shield.
1h balance really has nothing to do with shield balance, because the decision about whether to carry a shield typically has nothing to do with the decision about whether to use 1h vs. 2h vs. pole.
-
1h stab buff greatly assists shielders in melee fights, but for obvious reasons does little to help them against ranged. As of now, shielders are quite capable of blocking almost all projectiles from the front *ahem, crossbows* but the problem with being so slow / having reduced turn radius is that any ranged from your left/right can easily hit you... lets say you are slowly climbing up a ladder in siege, and archer on either side of you (at your 10 and 2 oclock, not 9 and 3). A highly skilled shielder should be able to look back and forth to block most of the arrows, but as of now you turn too slowly for that to ever happen... and the forcefield isn't strong enough on the sides. Granted, the forcefield is sometimes TOO strong on the sides (and the back, oddly enough) in melee... it is far weaker against ranged.
While a weight reduction would be great, I fear that the all too common agi shielder build would become even more of a plague. Freakin rondel daggers...
-
I think shield vs ranged attacks is fine as it is, moving your shield towards the ranged attacker isnt asked too much imo :D
The only thing that makes me rage a lot as a shielder is the 2h hold->hiltslash nonsene, as there is no counter to, can't chamber, can't faint, can't nudge/kick, can't run away - can only wait for a teamate or take a hit..
btw 1h stab is still borked and should be reverted^^
-
The problem is that shields have so many other drawbacks (primarily weight, but also the issues I mentioned above)
The one thing which I am unable to understand is why are you carrying shield if, as you say, "shields have so many drawbacks"? Go 1h without shield and stop whinning how bad are shields.
1h without a shield gets the extremely potent attack nudge that renders a free hit
I think it's not true any more. Some time ago Paul said he would make nudge animation taking more time and after last patch, when a few times I tried to make nudge-left attack combo, I was unable to land a hit. Dunno, maybe I did sth wrong, my opponent was lucky and managed to block, weapon was too slow, but maybe it's no longer possible to get free hit after nudge.
-
Pretty sure Paul or Tedious said that it's not possible to land 1h nudge and hit in still.
-
Pretty sure Paul or Tedious said that it's not possible to land 1h nudge and hit in still.
It is, however only if your opponent is in the process of an attack, and if you're also in the process of an attack AND facehugging them, but besides that, yeah.
-
The one thing which I am unable to understand is why are you carrying shield if, as you say, "shields have so many drawbacks"? Go 1h without shield and stop whinning how bad are shields.
I think it's not true any more. Some time ago Paul said he would make nudge animation taking more time and after last patch, when a few times I tried to make nudge-left attack combo, I was unable to land a hit. Dunno, maybe I did sth wrong, my opponent was lucky and managed to block, weapon was too slow, but maybe it's no longer possible to get free hit after nudge.
1h no shield and 1h+shield are roughly balanced with each other right now, as are pole and pole+shield (for hoplites). What is not balanced is say the 2h player who chooses to bring a 2 requirement shield for use against archers. He is significantly slower, bolts penetrate his shield, arrows just go around it, throwing weapon break it in 1-2 hits; and he paid 2+ skill points, extra upkeep, and extra weight for these privileges.
Dedicated shielders need an incentive to spec points beyond the shield requirement, and non-dedicated players need an incentive to carry a shield period.
-
even with shield skill 12 or 13 archers are able to hit you with frontal attacks.
That is bullshit. I can hardly ever shot some in his hight foot wich is most exposed to attacks from range. Giving headshots to shielder is impossible if we are standing on seme levels (and shielder have about 4 shield skill and proper shield).
You are also talking about that force fields are to small. You only forgot that most of round and triangle shields were made for not stopping arrows, but frome taking hits from melee. And force fields on horseback is hilarious. Shield is also covering sides and frontal part of horse, sometimes it's impessible to slash HORSE bacause shield is getting all hits.
As someone said force fields on small shields is ridicilous big. For bigger shields they are good.
You are also whining about weight of shields, and that they are too heavy. Shields were made of wood, steel and leather, and they were preety massive to be strong enought to be able to take hits.
In this game Long Bow is 4 kilos what makes it heavier than morningstar and same weight as Flamberge, and one stack of arrows is 10 what is equal to weight of Heavy Board Shield.
So if I would like to make shielder and have same equipment weight as an archer (as an example I'm taking myself) i should take 2 Heavy Board Shield, morningstar and a Broad Short Sword, but I can't do that because of slot system. So Shielders argument that shields are too heavy have no sence.
If you are a shielder and want to catch an arrow with your shield you have to face an archer and do not show him his side and back, it's simple.
Amount of archers is preety high, and archers are able to cooperate and help each other, maybe shielders and other melee should start also cooperating?
-
Buff heavy towershields maybe? Smaller shields already have ridicilous force field compared to their size (especially the palm sized buckler).
^this
Board & larger shields really need a buff compared to the smaller ones, theres no point using them because the forcefield stays the same, so why go for the slow & heavy shield when u can have the lighter, smaller, faster & cheaper one which does the same job more effectively. Maybe shield skill is too abusable/effective?
-
Amount of archers is preety high, and archers are able to cooperate and help each other, maybe shielders and other melee should start also cooperating?
There is already the "Shield wall" feature that gives a bonus to the shields and I think it is the forcefield that gets the buff. How about if we give a massive buff to the floor of the bonus when 2 shielders get together and then give a small +1 bonus as each additional shielder up to 5 is added to the wall?
-
Talking about stupid ideas: how about a feature that allows a sizeable infantry mop to intimidate ranged within a 50m cone? Inf can trigger(with a cooldown) a point and shout(banging weapon against shield for shielders) anim and if enough are doing it at the same time while being close to each other; all enemy ranged within the cone will be affected, make a shit their pants anim and lose all wpf for some time.
-
even with shield skill 12 or 13 archers are able to hit you with frontal attacks.
No. Not even once.
If you want to FIX shields, remove all forcefields. I carry a round cav shield on my back. Thats shield skill TWO. When I am being shot at, I pull it out, place it between myself and the person shooting me AND AM NOT SHOT AT ALL UNTILL IT BREAKS MY SHIELD. Unless it crossbows, but they go thru any shield pretty much. Once I was even shot in the face thru someone else's shield. It penetrated and high angle, and since I was behind the guy a little laterally places on a ladder, it went thru his board shield and killed me. But so what? Thats an issue with the fucking ridiculously overpowered crossbows in crpg, not a shield problem.
If we could get crossbows to be what they were historically (not very fucking good unless you could afford a nice one, so 0.000001% of the population of most battlefields) a nuisance. Their advantage came from ease of use, not effectiveness: They were never effective as a weapon of precision or armor penetration, they were just there to spam bolts from many noobs.
If you dont know how to use it, the tool is useless, true. Making a better tool will not teach you to use it. So stop stupid posts like this. Sure, shield is not a "hold rmb and do w/e I want" item like it used to be, but they are still MORE than good enough to stop archers and throwers. But you have to use it properly. Also, using a shield in melee is retarded. This isnt a game set before the 12th century anymore. Its renaissance. If you want to argue with this, look in the shop: almost all top tier weapons are based on imaginary renaissance weaponry. The flamberge was never used in battle. Its an ornament. The arbalest never excisted: it is the wet dream of renaissance engineers. The sidesword, long espada, the larger greatswords: renaissance weapons.
Instead of talking shields: can we talk about picking ONE period of history for our gear? Cause round shields and war spears are LITERALLY ONE THOUSAND YEARS removed from sideswords.
-
Talking about stupid ideas: how about a feature that allows a sizeable infantry mop to intimidate ranged within a 50m cone? Inf can trigger(with a cooldown) a point and shout(banging weapon against shield for shielders) anim and if enough are doing it at the same time while being close to each other; all enemy ranged within the cone will be affected, make a shit their pants anim and lose all wpf for some time.
I like this stupid idea.
-
Talking about stupid ideas: how about a feature that allows a sizeable infantry mop to intimidate ranged within a 50m cone? Inf can trigger(with a cooldown) a point and shout(banging weapon against shield for shielders) anim and if enough are doing it at the same time while being close to each other; all enemy ranged within the cone will be affected, make a shit their pants anim and lose all wpf for some time.
Well, we need a proper archery/xbow counter class, otherwise the ranged population will continue its positive feedback cycle.
-
Well, we need a proper archery/xbow counter class, otherwise the ranged population will continue its positive feedback cycle.
Cavalry, shielders, other archers/xbow, throwers, melee in overwhelming numbers (or melee with other classes assisting).
-
Cavalry, shielders, other archers/xbow, throwers, melee in overwhelming numbers (or melee with other classes assisting).
+ Fast moving infantry
-
Cavalry, shielders
Neither acheive the goal of killing outnumbering ranged, and cav is better countered by range than range is countered by cav.
, other archers/xbow
Which is exactly my point. Positive feedback means more ranged will cause more ranged.
, throwers
Yeah, not really. Throwers are either too slow or too weak and remain extremely vulnerable to crossfire while throwing. The only advantage they have over melee is to be able to damage archers from slightly further away which can be just enough in some cases where melee would not be able to do jack shit (roofcamping for example). Any head-on approach will be very inefficient due to constant dodging between the two parties.
, melee in overwhelming numbers (or melee with other classes assisting).
Anything in overwhelming numbers is always going to beat anything. That isn't what a counter is.
A counter is when you are fewer than the enemy yet the combination of your class and their class makes killing them much easier, like ranged against shieldless infantry. What a counter is not is for example being able to resist the attacks of a given class (shielders don't counter ranged, they resist it).
+ Fast moving infantry
That's honestly the closest we have to a ranged counter. But it only works against one ranged at a time given absolutely perfect conditions (flat terrain being the most unlikely one). And even when you do get to an archer or xbow alive this way, chances are you are going to spend a couple of seconds fighting them which is plenty enough time for you to get shot down, run down, backstabbed or anything else. And no, bringing other people isn't unfair at all because due to the nature of ranged you always have to go deep into enemy controlled zones in order to kill them unless if your side already won.
-
Kafein is right, there is no proper counter.
Not even the fast moving infantry. I stopped counting the times I ran into range to hit an archer just to get headshot with a hold arrow and a reticule probably as big as a truck.
-
You have a point Molly. Shotgunning with Archers is really easy. Problem is, you remove that, they stack Athletics and run away, it's a tough situation.
In regards to force fields, I've been playing archer for around 10m xp so far and I have never once hit through a player's shield. I've hit players in the back around the shield, above it if I'm on an upper level and the shielder isn't looking at me, none of these looked off.
I will say however I find it nearly impossible to run out of arrows, I use 2 stacks of +3 bodkins which is 40 arrows and finding ammo is not difficult at all. This is a bad thing because it means archers don't need to worry about their shots, if they miss it doesn't matter. This is also why the lighter bows seem to be very effective. More shots = more chance to hit whereas long bow users have to aim a bit better but don't actually get much of an improvement for the higher skill level. (Except Steevee who hits like a fucking tank)
I think the best thing to do is to reduce ammo for ranged. As has been said there's plenty of ammo on the floor and walls but collecting this can often be risky which is a good thing. Lack of ammo = less kiting for archers because the arrows will be amongst the melee where they don't want to go. It also means people will be less inclined to try these shield shots because each shot is more valuable.
It will also finally nerf horse archers somewhat because they just shoot forever.
Oh I forgot to mention. Each stack of arrows should be classified as it's own weapon so being able to switch between different types of ammo. This would mean you wouldn't need to fish through the sea of used arrows to find a specific type, would also be nice to get rid of that stupid pick up ammo, drop melee weapon thing. I'd also like to see infantry being able to pick up and drop arrows for their archers. Would promote teamwork and they obviously can't use them so I don't see a problem there. It's easy for infantry to do it for crossbows in strat battles so why not archers?
-
I think the best thing to do is to reduce ammo for ranged.
That may be a good solution. Reverting ammounts of ammo from before patch can be good.
Also idea with bringing arrows by your teammates is good :)
-
That's honestly the closest we have to a ranged counter. But it only works against one ranged at a time given absolutely perfect conditions (flat terrain being the most unlikely one). And even when you do get to an archer or xbow alive this way, chances are you are going to spend a couple of seconds fighting them which is plenty enough time for you to get shot down, run down, backstabbed or anything else. And no, bringing other people isn't unfair at all because due to the nature of ranged you always have to go deep into enemy controlled zones in order to kill them unless if your side already won.
Tried to suggest a few crazy ideas like shield skill reducing shield weight, additional run tier when holding block (since blocking when moving is so damn slow, barely faster than backpedaling, even with a lot of athletics), etc. so ranged wouldn't need a nerf and make it more fun for those classes without making them overpowered against other classes. Won't make a single shielder too good against ranged since every time a shielder lets go of his block to attack, he's vulnerable at almost any angle to other ranged attacks. The plan is to help a small group of shielders approach and keep up with ranged once they scatter.
-
Buff Heavy Lance.
-
Don't think the force fields need a change, but xbows being able to shoot through through my shield, not even breaking it. Not sure if that is even an intended mechanic but how does a bolt go straight through a shield? I'm not talking about foot shots or whatever, I'm talking about when someone shoots a bolt straight at my shield and it goes through it. What even counters xbows honestly?
They get 12 shots +1 (i think) 12 of those shots have a chance of one hitting most people if they hit depending on the persons build (granted a 24+ str build probably wont get 1 hit with full armor). So that's over 9 kills a round granted if you are decent shot; it isnt like the bolt curves in random directions like archery. Then Arbs are 2 slot so you can hold another weapon, say a one hand and fight in melee quite decently since you only need 15 str for an arb you have hella agi for footwork and wpf points.
-
Don't think the force fields need a change, but xbows being able to shoot through through my shield, not even breaking it. Not sure if that is even an intended mechanic but how does a bolt go straight through a shield? I'm not talking about foot shots or whatever, I'm talking about when someone shoots a bolt straight at my shield and it goes through it. What even counters xbows honestly?
They get 12 shots +1 (i think) 12 of those shots have a chance of one hitting most people if they hit depending on the persons build (granted a 24+ str build probably wont get 1 hit with full armor). So that's over 9 kills a round granted if you are decent shot; it isnt like the bolt curves in random directions like archery. Then Arbs are 2 slot so you can hold another weapon, say a one hand and fight in melee quite decently since you only need 15 str for an arb you have hella agi for footwork and wpf points.
Get a shield with higher armor or high damage bolts will penetrate them.
#missiles with damage > shield_penetration_offset + shield_penetration_factor * shield(armor)
#will penetrate.
shield_penetration_offset = 30.0
shield_penetration_factor = 3.0
-
Don't think the force fields need a change, but xbows being able to shoot through through my shield, not even breaking it. Not sure if that is even an intended mechanic but how does a bolt go straight through a shield? I'm not talking about foot shots or whatever, I'm talking about when someone shoots a bolt straight at my shield and it goes through it. What even counters xbows honestly?
They get 12 shots +1 (i think) 12 of those shots have a chance of one hitting most people if they hit depending on the persons build (granted a 24+ str build probably wont get 1 hit with full armor). So that's over 9 kills a round granted if you are decent shot; it isnt like the bolt curves in random directions like archery. Then Arbs are 2 slot so you can hold another weapon, say a one hand and fight in melee quite decently since you only need 15 str for an arb you have hella agi for footwork and wpf points.
Other arbalests.
Nah, but really mano y mano I can't think of something that can easily or efficiently counter a good arbalest player. Did 3-4 gens of it and it was the easiest time I ever had. It's difficult to get valour as an arbalest or heavy xbow player, but not impossible. Still, it was never as easy to take an amazing player out of the game without retaliation. Shooting through shields didn't need any special technique as an arb player either, just point n' click.
Multiple cavalry players can take an arbalest player out of the game efficiently at times, but if the terrain is unforgiving, it probably ain't gonna happen. Those nice neck-high stone ruins that they can jump on usually make it so cavalry aren't going to be able to get 'em, not to mention a god teamplayer worth his neckbeard will protect the arbalests especially at the start of the round.
I can't think of a way to make crossbows, mostly arbalests or heavy crossbows less infuriating for other players. They're not ridiculously unbalanced or overpowered, but they are probably the most maddening thing to get killed by. 6 cav coming at you? You can probably dodge them all if you're a good player, and your teammates can help you. Multiple melee coming at you? You could block them all or refrain from getting in that situation as a good player. As infantry, if a good arbalest player gets his sights on you, you're rather dicked. God forbid you're a cavalry player trying to eliminate them for your team. A good arbalest guy can just blast you for most or all of your health as you're about to hit them.
-
Get a shield with higher armor or high damage bolts will penetrate them.
Using an Elite Cav Shield with one of the 'higher' armors. If everyone where to use the steel shields what would be the point of having other shields?? The whole point of a shield is to counter RANGED if 96% of the shields are useless against one type of ranged they might as all be useless imo.
Coming from an arb player for 1 gen and tried multiple other times I one hit most cav with my bolts and i could block with my weapon. See a guy who's better at melee than you? Run away and reload to shoot him!
I think arbs + heavy should be 3 slots, you can still use a 0 slot 1hand 12 bolts are MORE than enough for one round on battle that's for sure. Also think they should up the weight of bolts or xbows since you can just avoid combat and reload you can pick and choose who you fight.