Bloody hell, tell me you aren't like this in real life. The amount of logical fallacies and arrogance are amazing.
You obviously don't play on the NA servers at all, but that's ok we can keep making pointless assumptions.
Yep, that's exactly what I did. I assumed you've never played a 2H, despite you saying previously that you do and despite having seen you on NA once (I only play on NA if it's late at night an no ones on Aus, so not very often) as a 2H [note: this is sarcasm]. Never mind that I said that "I find it difficult to believe you've ever even played a 2H" (implying that I am astounded that you would make such statements despite having played a 2H) and not "I don't believe you've ever played a 2H". But yes, let's continue making pointless assumptions
So you're saying shielders need a buff? Or archers need a nerf?
Sorry, I'll try to make my posts clearer for you. A shield with a requirement of 0 or 1 (and with a character with 0 or 1 shield skill) is near useless against an archer. I'm saying that for your argument to make any sense, the coverage of shields would need to be increased so that an archer can't shoot through the model of a board shield to hit the player's feet. Besides that, a low level shield takes a very small number of arrows to break (though I'd be OK with that - just so long as arrows don't go through the shield).
Besides that, when were we talking about a nerf? I was addressing your claim that 2H users have a way to counter archers reasonably effectively.
If they keep the bow out the 30% malus doesn't matter, you stab, they can't block, they die. They put the bow away for a melee weapon, you put the shield away because you're not facing ranged anymore. These are simple concepts. 
Oh, of course, how silly of me to assume that someone wouldn't try to fight me in a melee with a bow
I wasn't saying that an archer wouldn't pull a melee weapon if you managed to get close enough and that you'd then put away the shield. I was questioning why the bloody hell you'd continue to use a longsword as a 1h weapon (and how that would be even remotely effective). Hell, even if the archer does (for some reason; perhaps they've had a stroke mid-game) keep their bow out in melee, you can safely switch to 2H anyway and destroy them.
Again, this is all assuming you can get close enough. My comment was regarding the absurdity of using the longsword as a 1h, especially with no 1h WPF. This disclaimer is provided in the hopes that you won't try to employ some logical fallacy (like claiming that I'm now saying a 2H can easily beat an archer).
Usually none. I accept that 2hers are supposed to be weak vs ranged spam, however I do have a rank 0 shield for advancing when I'm too lazy to use cover or juke at all (which isn't often). It gets me from point A to B just fine, B being in melee range of the ranged guy I want to kill. You don't just walk in a straight line with the shield raised the whole time you're advancing just because you have a shield on do you? I hope not.
Yep, I put on a shield, realise that my feet are getting shot and my shield is rapidly deteriorating and decide it best to walk in a straight line [note again: this is also sarcasm].
A decent archer can easily shoot your feet through a board shield while you slowly dodge across the field. Even if they can't, for some reason, they can sure as hell destroy your shield before you get to them.
So again is it buff shielders, or nerf throwing/ranged?
Again, it is neither. I was not discussing a nerf, I was pointing out the ridiculousness of your statements. If you really want to know what I think should happen; throwing should be nerfed. My thrower has only one weakness; other throwers. Of course, a sneaky ninja can get a quick hit or two on me, but a sneaky anything could do that as well.
So you made a concious decision to give up protection vs ranged. Good for you. I do the same as well most of the time on my 2hers and polearm toons. However just because you choose not to use it, doesn't mean the capability doesn't exist. Big difference.
Yes, forgive me for making that assumption. I mean, I've obviously missed the point in my post and completely neglected that a 2H can use a shield [note again: this is sarcasm]. I think it's quite bloody obvious that I'm saying that a shield is so damned useless that it's easier to just dodge projectiles than weigh yourself down with a shield.
Hopefully my use of the sarcasm notes and my increase in detail with explanations will reduce the number of straw man arguments used in your post. I'm doubtful though. (Also of note, I wouldn't be talking to you like this if you'd stop behaving like a smug douche).
Reply to other posts while typing:
They'll stop an arrow or two, for no skill investment. Otherwise put 1 point into shield skill and carry:
Nordic Shield
1064
weight 3.5
requirement 1
hit points 240
body armor 5
spd rtng 100
shield width 34
Or
Old Board Shield
600
weight 4.5
requirement 1
hit points 200
body armor 1
spd rtng 89
shield width 26
shield height 60
Can't use on horseback
That's at least 200 hp worth of protection for 1 point invested.
That's at least 200 hp worth of protection if you're trying to block the arrows of an absolutely terrible (in skill, please don't twist this to assume I'm commenting on an archer's moral or other fortitude) archer. As I've said; any decent archer (even my level 20 archer) can shoot through a board shield to hit people's feet.
