Suggestions Regarding Shield Spec Characters:

[Ingleram]

Suggestions Regarding Shield Spec Characters:

I think it is fair to assume that most veteran players of crpg would agree, that within the current game settings, two-handed / polearm using character specs have a clear advantage over shield spec builds.
 
Two-handed / polearm builds, not only enjoy weapons with often vastly greater length and damage but also benefit by having significantly more weapon and skill points to allocate; true they must be proficient at manual blocking, however with the increased wpf and athletics that these builds afford, it is all too easy to simply probe in and out of range avoiding attacks completely and null any advantage that the shield using spec would have defensively.

On the other side, shield using specs who must assign valuable skill points into the shield proficiency, just to be able to use higher tier shields and slightly enhance shield effects, thus limiting the characters overall stats and drastically reducing the builds effectiveness. Thusly dedicating such significant skill points into the shield skill, that the result is a greatly reduced range of potential skills across the build variance and with no real non-defensive advantage for the trade off. Plus as we all know, shields break, giving the oft feeling that the points spent are wasted.

We all know this advantage / disadvantage exists and how it harms the game goes beyond any personal wish of mine to see shield specs get a much needed alteration. For a semblance of balance I suggest the following options: Focused primarily on option A.

A: Points spent in 1-Handed weapon points should add per every 20 points 1 point into the shield skill automatically. Example: 170 1-Handed Weapon = 8 automatic shield points allotted. This allows the shield using player the same freedom to spend skill points, as other builds and remain balanced and competitive within the game. (Any variance of the points could be applied, 20per, 30per etc.. Anything to help offset the overly costly nature of shield points).

B: Removed /agree not needed

C: Removed /agree not needed

Overall, my aim is twofold in these suggestions:

One, to give a needed re-balance to the burdensome nature of shield specs, that allows for a more competitive mixture of builds within the game.

And secondly, most new players often gravitate towards the more defensive nature of the shield spec; if this line of builds is predetermined to underachieve by design, then they will undoubtedly become frustrated by failure and quit playing. Granting a minor enhancement to the shield spec, that in no way takes away from the other builds, gives it more long term playability and a reasonable competitive role within the game. This will insure both a wider range of build diversity on the battlefield and may in time even increase the number of new players that endure the difficult nature of mastering crpg.

Thank you for your consideration.

[Rhekimos]

Shielder is a strong class. The nudges and their defensive capabilities already make them really deadly when they utilize teamwork.

If you think shield is a waste of points, go pure 1h. If you think 1h is weak, pick up a 2h and go duel some good 1h players. You'll see.

Shield "Nudge" and "Bash" ... a low probability stun or knock down, similar to the nature of the "kick" could be implemented to make these defensive attacks more truly useful in combat.

You want a free hit for yourself from a shield nudge?

visitors can't see pics , please register or login


Nope. No way.

When receiving a "kick" if the shield is in the defensive blocking mode, the aggressor would receive a low probability chance for a knock down, to simulate a "slip and fall"

Just... no.

You really need to play the other classes as well. Trust me, it'll be a learning experience when you see a good shielder work around the advantages of your class.

Furthermore both of these suggestions add randomness to the fighting mechanics, which is not at all something we want more of.

[Ingleram]

Ive been a shield spec since almost day one, have played all the spec builds but focused on shield mainly. And I enjoy it, even with its obvious shortcomings.

This is not about my lack of ability, its about the fact that 5-8 points spent in shield is a large investment for very little return. As to the suggestion that I (and other shield specs) simply switch classes, do you see a lack of two-handed or polearm spec players? No, they are by far the most popular spec played and for a reason. They have a significant and imop unfair stat/skill point advantage overall. 

[Rhekimos]

Ive been a shield spec since almost day one, have played all the spec builds but focused on shield mainly. And I enjoy it, even with its obvious shortcomings.

This is not about my lack of ability, its about the fact that 5-8 points spent in shield is a large investment for very little return. As to the suggestion that I (and other shield specs) simply switch classes, do you see a lack of two-handed or polearm spec players? No, they are by far the most popular spec played and for a reason. They have a significant and imop unfair stat/skill point advantage overall.

They are indeed more popular and they have more personal killing potential. Rambo players love the big swords and axes. In the bigger picture though, they will get shot and the team with shielders has more potential for victory.

That bigger picture of all the classes working against each other and in support of each other is also important for game balance.

And if we made a single easy class with no shortcomings, even if it was for the noble purpose of new players, it would just invalidate the concept of a competitive game.

Still though, if you think the shield investment has little return, why do you make it? Just playing one handed with no shield is a perfectly valid class, even if slightly trickier than 2h, pole or shielder. Many people consider it enjoyable also.

Edit: Gave you a +1 because you dropped B. and C.

[Ingleram]

No change will occur, if it did I would be totally surprised. What I am pointing out is obvious and it is reflected in the dominate spec selection within the game. There is a clear advantage that is unbalanced and favors specific specs. If we all want more diversity, it will be demanded but since the majority is within the current popular view point, no alteration will occur. As such, the favoritism will prevail.

Playing a shield spec, is my choice, I am fair at it and will continue, regardless. It would be just more evenly balanced if instead of having to put points in for blocking I could use them for a few more minor enhancements to my spec.     

I will not respond to any further posts, even making this post was likely just a waste of time.

[Rhekimos]

Discussion is welcome. But seriously, 1h has some not immediately obvious game mechanical advantages. They benefit from a faster attack turning speed and movement speed when compared to 2h and pole classes, to name what I can remember off the top of my head.

Your main idea isn't unworkable, but it might find more success at a more conservative level. For example, 120 wpf in 1h gives you +2 to shield and 160 wpf +3. I personally still don't think it would be a necessary boon to shielders. And that is as someone who was already planning to go shielder next, once I get my weekly free respec again.


In any case, enjoy playing.

[Jona]

Shielders are definitely the weakest 1v1 melee class in the game, you don't exactly see too many people bring shields to duel tourneys. That said, there is a reason I sacrifice ironflesh in favor of shield skill. It is because more often than not it adds more survivability-per-skillpoint than speccing ironflesh does. If you've got some points in ironflesh and find yourself blackbarred after a fight, congrats, your ironflesh actually did something. If you've got 6 arrows in your shield, then your shield skill probably saved your life twice over, while also potentially helping nearby allies. I've only got 4 shield skill though, since I don't find the 5 requirement shields to be worth the further investment, nor do I see how spending more than 5 points in shield adds much noticeable benefit... if anything, I agree that heavy investment in shield skill should be rewarded since it is currently pointless to spend many more points than the requirement for your shield of choice.

[owens]

Not a bad idea. Shield classes should be rewarded for hybridisation not by having outright more or as much wpf as dedicated 1v1 melee players.

What is shield increased your ability to spec in multiple melee weapon classes. Would put few more spears on the battle field and increase the utility of 1H/2H hybrid weapons.

[Dionysus]

I think the bigger issue is that with these high-level builds, two-handers and polearms can use the length of their weapons and their agility to safely escape most one-hand shielders' swings. If we're going to keep playing with this level 35 nonsense, then the difficulties on long weapons need to be upped in proportion to the new level 35 builds so that points that would otherwise be put in creating a spamming character are reallocated to strength to be able to use those weapons.

I also think that shielders are like pikes/long spears and ranged in that they are a team-oriented support class. Leave the high KDs to the vulturing two-handers and polespammers. Without good shielders, a team has significantly more troubles dealing with ranged and overall staying in the fight.

[Ingleram]

Last post: The advantage in favor of the two-handed / polearm specs has ruined the game for me. If there is a change to how the game views stats and spec, which is more balanced I would gladly return.

Ya know, screw it: the game is fun for me, I am just going to switch to joust-lancey cav and HA... screw it... lol. 

[Tristan_of_Erzoth]

I've done some 20 odd gens as a 1h/shielder/xbow and I gotta say, shield isn't weak at all. With my fuck off tiny buckler I can 1v5 people and through the power of spin to win get hits in and last an annoying amount of time. Getting out reached/spammed was never a big problem for me because I would keep the pressure on the opponent, and if i was getting spammed or out reached I'd just put the shield away and fight without it(since just plain 1h is better 1v1 than shield IMO). Shield isn't a 1v1 tool its a team fight or useful if you're facing more than one person.

[Ingleram]

....and if i was getting spammed or out reached I'd just put the shield away and fight without it(since just plain 1h is better 1v1 than shield IMO). Shield isn't a 1v1 tool its a team fight or useful if you're facing more than one person.

Yet again, my point is made by this type of argument... time after time, in-game I see shields being dropped or put on the players back when they get into combat as such, often even when facing multiple foes... which makes my point completely. Shields are now only basically used for defending against arrows / throwing projectiles. And yes, I agree that 1handed fighting is a solid spec, but that is not what I am talking about. The 1handed spec, is just that, players who use the increased speed of such weapons and excel at manual blocking... the true shield spec is under-powered. Of course you see people carrying shields, even two-handers / polearm specs, but not for melee for basic ranged protection.... these player are not shield specs.

Again, this is about the viability of having to put points into shield just to be able to block, how many players have you killed by "blocking" with your shield.... Yes you can play the role of a defensive player, but that is by playing off the aggression of another team mate... so eventually if you are faced with a one v one situation... I guess your point is, "oh put the shield away and fight as a one hander"... lol.

Your all right, I just suck. 
 

[Grumbs]

I'd support a hp/armour buff on shields but I don't think they really need much more than that (and even then its not essential). If you give free points in shields that will just make xbowers even more powerful than they already are, and there are intrinsic benefits in skilling into shields that probably don't need mentioning (blocking multiple directions at once, being able to get into flanking positions easier, drawing aggro for your team etc).

I do think most of the issues with the game come down to too high levels. Everyone has too much agi/wpf for the game to handle

[Ingleram]

I'd support a hp/armour buff on shields but I don't think they really need much more than that (and even then its not essential). If you give free points in shields that will just make xbowers even more powerful than they already are, and there are intrinsic benefits in skilling into shields that probably don't need mentioning (blocking multiple directions at once, being able to get into flanking positions easier, drawing aggro for your team etc).

I do think most of the issues with the game come down to too high levels. Everyone has too much agi/wpf for the game to handle

Oh stop it... lol I just can not resist. Yet it is also frustrating, as you either do not play the classes you are referencing or just are not aware of the overall trends in the game...

Ok, so the "If you give free points in shields that will just make xbowers even more powerful than they already are..."

The vast majiority of X-bowers do NOT use shields: they use the extra slot for more bolts and often take to flight when approached, thus the extra weight of a shield defeats their (annoying) tactics: They are also by in large, two-hand / one-hand / some even polearm specs: Again, I see it all the time, the x-bower is shooting, gets approached initially may run OR drop his x-bow and engage in melee combat, without the use of a shield....

And your point #2: " and there are intrinsic benefits in skilling into shields that probably don't need mentioning (blocking multiple directions at once, being able to get into flanking positions easier, drawing aggro for your team etc)."

This is really a poor point indeed: First off it points out the blatantly obvious and also the obvious drawbacks, yet again making my points for me....

Firstly, "drawing aggro".. ok yeah for DTV lol (sighs) : otherwise you might argue "Tankyness" right.... but wait: Non-shield specs get... higher overall stats, skills ect... that can be put into avoidance granting foot speed, Iron Flesh, weapon speed... ect : You'll be slower, less beefy and have less damage output with Shield spec: so NO.

Ok so Blocking in Multiple directions and Flanking:

Flanking... two-handers / polearms are the kings of flanking, they can even, yes believe it or not... out flank shields with their (yes you guessed it) higher agi, athletics and longer ranged weapons: which once in position can even reach around ( the nerfed shield coverage range that you used to get with increased shield spec but NOOO) the shield edge to cut your arse off.... With their increased foot speed and typically long weapon reach, they have a massive advantage over shielders. So wrong and NO.

And Blocking in Multiple directions:

True, shields do in fact block in multiple directions: however only for so long remember Shields will break and reaming in a fully defensive role only works for so long and will easily be spotted by seasoned players: Plus have you ever been "kicked", oh yeah, even with your shield up you get a nice stun (that no shield attack grants) that often leads to you being cut in half, so go ahead vs. skilled two-handed / polearm players... you gonna die boy. Now having worked in a shield wall formation myself, I know all too well how this tactic can and did work: however you must have several (4 or more) players dedicated to the wall formation and they must all work as a team (a combination of shielder, hoplite, / pike and two-handed works best): and this was in the old days: we no longer employ the shield wall formation because: it does not work with the high agi / athletic builds that are present now, they are too fast-a-foot and will easily out flank you and cause the breakup of the formation: And again Blocking in multiple directions  does not cover the stat / skill loss from the investment form the points required, after all no other spec must put points into "blocking" just to be able to block and weapons have NO durability factor and do not break. So I give you a "yes obvious" and again my point is made that defense is no argument for the nerffing of a spec in favor of another spec: NO

However I will say this: add point skill requirements for manual blocking speed "more points the faster your blocking reaction becomes" and let's see the tears... OR durability for weapons; the heaver the weapon and its quality the more durability and you lose durability for blocking, attacking (yes even hitting on shields) and double for parrying with weapons. Ohhh lol...

Arrrggghh...

[MURDERTRON]

What if we made it so you could hang glide with your shield, instead of your awful suggestions?  Would that be acceptable?

visitors can't see pics , please register or login