Make shield skill both strength and agility based

[Riddaren]

Why?

Because it would balance the game.
It also makes much sense that a stronger warrior can carry a heavier shield.

It would be nice to see full strength slow 1H/shield tincans with 10 shield skill.
There are too many high agility shielders out there imo.


Edit: Grammar

[Tears of Destiny]

So I can have a 12PS 11 Shield spammitar/huscarl character? 

[Riddaren]

So I can have a 12PS 11 Shield spammitar/huscarl character? 

Level 30 36/3 12PS 11 SH.
Yeah, why not? 0 athletics will make you quite harmless for anyone with a brain.

Besides, who would be sad about an increase of shielders?
Ranged? Definately. But It's not like there is a lack of ranged players.

[owens]

^what if shields had a strength requirement and a skill requirement.


So I need 5 shield skill for a huscarls but I also need 15-17 strength.
Where as I need 5 shield skill for a Buckler but no strength requirement.


Some shields like the board shields or should mainly have a strength requirement with only say 1 or 2 shield skill. This would be great for 21/15 builds that have those few extra points or strength builds that keep getting shot and are not phased by gear weight.



Note: Restricting the use of shields by athletics biased builds isn't going to help the problems we are facing in the archery area right now. 

[Spa_geh_tea]

Doesn't sound like balance to me.

Currently 21- 18, 24 - 15, and 18 - 21 seem to be the most common builds. Which are fairly balanced between str and agi.

 Is this not the goal?


 I think I'd go 24 - 18 with you proposed change. Seems unfair.

[Kafein]

Shield skill shouldn't be linked to STR.


But being able to do damage at all with 1h weapon should be possible with levels of PS lower or at least equal to those of 2h/pole.

It's kinda ridiculous you can be perfectly fine as a 15/24 2h/pole with any weapon you can use, but you absolutely need the blunt/pierce ones if you go 1h and don't want to hit every single guy 6 times to kill them, not even counting the perfect positioning required not to glance on everything.

[Tydeus]

Interesting idea, actually. I have never thought shield skill as a requirement to use a shield was a mechanic conducive to balance. I don't think I agree with a 36/3 build being able to use huscarl shields and steel shields. Maybe something along the lines of
Shield Requirement = agi & str >= shield skill req*4

So a 21/18 build could use a 4 shield skill shield but a 24/15 build could only use a 3 shield skill shield.

Alternatively, remove requirements altogether but for every shield skill level that you lack for a shield you have equipped, reduce the shield's loom level by 1, to a minimum of -4. So you may be able to equip a huscarl or a plate shield, but without sufficient shield skill, you'd most likely be better off using something else.

[Xol!]

This really isn't a terrible idea, if I'm understanding our Chinese friend here correctly.

If shields were buffed so that a player could equip a shield without shield skill (instead meeting some strength requirement), archers wouldn't be nearly as irritating to melee.  In turn, archers could keep cavalry in check because they wouldn't need to be turned into children firing nerf bows. 

To use a shield a player would either have to meet a strength requirement to use it with no weapon OR meet a shield skill requirement to use it with a weapon.  Perhaps 1h could even get their long awaited, long demanded damage/speed/whatever buff to compensate for poles & 2h getting to carry a shield free of charge. 

My reply from the Chinese topic suggesting something similar.

tl;dr: Player has to meet either a strength or a shield skill (agi based) requirement.  If they meet the strength requirement, they can use the shield with no weapon.  If they meet the shield skill requirement, they can use it with a weapon.

[Pentecost]

My reply from the Chinese topic suggesting something similar.

tl;dr: Player has to meet either a strength or a shield skill (agi based) requirement.  If they meet the strength requirement, they can use the shield with no weapon.  If they meet the shield skill requirement, they can use it with a weapon.

You haven't adequately explained why this change should be implemented in the first place. It would most likely lead to everyone who plays 1h and who can manually block at a decent level respecing into 2h and bringing a round shield or heavy round shield with pretty much no downsides.

[Xol!]

You haven't adequately explained why this change should be implemented in the first place. It would most likely lead to everyone who plays 1h and who can manually block at a decent level respecing into 2h and bringing a round shield or heavy round shield with pretty much no downsides.

If shields were buffed so that a player could equip a shield without shield skill (instead meeting some strength requirement), archers wouldn't be nearly as irritating to melee.  In turn, archers could keep cavalry in check because they wouldn't need to be turned into children firing nerf bows.

To use a shield a player would either have to meet a strength requirement to use it with no weapon OR meet a shield skill requirement to use it with a weapon.  Perhaps 1h could even get their long awaited, long demanded damage/speed/whatever buff to compensate for poles & 2h getting to carry a shield free of charge. 

[Pentecost]

Again, I'm not sure I see what the issue is with the current system. It only takes 3 skill points to use a dependable shield and 4 skill points to use a very good one. Most 2h and pole players have well over 12 agility, so it's not like someone who finds archers "irritating to melee" cannot already achieve the same level of protection you're saying they should have if it's really a problem for them.

[Warcat]

Why?

Because it would balance the game.
It also makes much sense that a stronger warrior can carry a heavier shield.

It would be nice to see full strength slow 1H/shield tincans with 10 shield skill.
There are too many high agility shielders out there imo.


Edit: Grammar

Horrible Idea! KILL! KILL NOW!
No changes to shield skill are needed!

[owens]

 Remember Shield skill is important when actually using a shield and that shields are very heavy.

The problem with shield using at the moment is that the weight of the shield combined with generally lower strength means that shield users are confronted with the full speed penalty due to weight only slightly countered by their short weapons.

Making some of the "clumsier" (use in lack of a better word) shields more accessible is a good idea but, decreasing the force-field generated by a shield when its user is poorly skilled is a necessary precaution.

Some shields like the board shields or fur covered kite shield should have only say 1 or 2 shield skill needed. This would be great for level 29 "finished" builds like 18/18, 21/15, 24/12 ect that have those few extra points or pure strength builds that keep getting shot and are not phased by gear weight.

Remember with low shield skill using a heavy board shield would be very slow and leave the head or feet of the user exposed.

Note: Restricting the use of shields by athletics biased builds isn't going to help the problems we are facing in the archery area right now.

[Shaksie]

I like Owen's idea.

[Lange]

Perfect idea: make shield skill require both strength and agility. No more 13 Shield trolling.