Give infantry classes higher shield skill

[(TWD)Tom]

You left out the Glaive, because archers can use that aswell and you can use the glaive very effectivly in the open if you have skill or not seeing as it has good damage, good speed, and a long range, making it easy for people who have no idea how to block to just spam/pepper their enemies.

 

[Illusive Man]

Shield skill needs to be increased, you can use any shield, but there is little chance not to get shoot by an experienced archer in the head or legs by a war bow or by a siege crossbow through your shield.

 

[yedrellow]

You left out the Glaive, because archers can use that aswell and you can use the glaive very effectivly in the open if you have skill or not seeing as it has good damage, good speed, and a long range, making it easy for people who have no idea how to block to just spam/pepper their enemies.

I left out glaive deliberately, it is a decent weapon against slow armoured opponents with high base damage, range, and stunning potential. It is weaker against less armoured opponents because its speed is only 90, which means that a decent fighter can move in range and outspeed any of your attacks. This lower speed also limits its group fighting potential.

It is good for quickly dispatching warhorses, platemailed opponents and outnumbered opponents very quickly though.

 

[Bauglir]

Agree with Illusive. Even with heavy board shield skilled archer can shoot you to legs, and if you try to cover your legs he shoots you to head.

 

[Peton]

Agree with Illusive. Even with heavy board shield skilled archer can shoot you to legs, and if you try to cover your legs he shoots you to head.

Smart archer.

Foolish shield bearer.

 

[Vornne]

After many hundreds of arrows fired at bots setup for testing, I have come to the conclusion that 3 shield skill is a bit too much: the footman should have 1, sergeant and lord 2, and everyone else 0. Against an enemy facing with the shield held up: skill 0 basically means that you can shoot anywhere outside the visible shield always getting a hit (sometimes appearing to shoot through the edge of the shield), as if they were totally untrained in holding it; skill 1 means that head shots are more difficult, needing precise aim, though foot shots are still quite easy; skill 2 means that head shots are very rare, but foot shots are still possible; skill 3 means head shots never happen and foot shots are rare; skill 5 (native Swadian crossbowman and Rhodok sergeant) is basically a magic forcefield. Of course, the descriptive results need to be adjusted for the type of shield - horseman shields are easier to shoot past, board shields harder - and that it is still possible to hit from the back or side in any case.

Sergeants will have their crossbow skill dropped from 50 to 35 since the shield skill serves as a more appropriate upgrade from the footmen - unless another plan to limit crossbows gets implemented before next release.

 

[Aldric]

Just a question Vornne, what shield did  you used during the test ?
I'm not quite agree with the lastest change ( from 3-2 to 2-1 ) but i also do remember that the health system change is also very important to reduce the effectiveness of archers.

 

[Vornne]

Just a question Vornne, what shield did  you used during the test ?

A range of all the main types for each test troop, randomly picked by the spawning code.

 

[Aldric]

Remember that valid tactics for archers shouldn't be to shoot straight on on the head or in the foot and that relativly few players take lord ( one per team ) and sergeants  ( in favor of MAA better for horse back )
so being good with shield should be garanted for them.
Therefore i would be in favour of going ahead with the 2-3 plan and see how it's run. while remembering that the "shield" protect only one side at time and that a cross fire is very easy to do in PW game.
I would also agree on the nerf on Crossbow WPF for sergeant.

 

[Serann]

Late answer to splint: Yes, I am aware that backpaddling isn't moving forward, that is why I said that you need to STICK to
the enemy because YOU are faster moving FORWARD than the ENEMY moving BACK.

Anyway, yes you can dodge attacks, but if you have good footwork, you can also stick to your enemy, and he will be pretty
screwed against a winged mace spinning through the air like helicopter blades.

Either way: I am still in support of adding shield skill.

 

[Feretal]

Just going to add a little bit here, being shot in the foot in mount and blade appears to be just as damaging as being shot in the chest. 

 

[eth1234567890]

Just going to add a little bit here, being shot in the foot in mount and blade appears to be just as damaging as being shot in the chest.

that cuz in real life you get shot in the foot you can not walk.

 

[Vornne]

Therefore i would be in favour of going ahead with the 2-3 plan and see how it's run.

I think 3 seems to go a bit beyond skilled shield handling into magic force field territory; later, after you have had some time to see how it works in practice, you could suggest further skill increases in the appropriate thread if you think necessary.

 

[(TWD)Tom]

Just going to add a little bit here, being shot in the foot in mount and blade appears to be just as damaging as being shot in the chest.

that cuz in real life you get shot in the foot you can not walk.

not always true

 

[Feretal]

Just going to add a little bit here, being shot in the foot in mount and blade appears to be just as damaging as being shot in the chest.

that cuz in real life you get shot in the foot you can not walk.

not always true

Yes, you might be unable to walk, but you wouldn't have taken as much damage as being shot in the chest where a ton of important organs are.

 

[eth1234567890]

Just going to add a little bit here, being shot in the foot in mount and blade appears to be just as damaging as being shot in the chest.

that cuz in real life you get shot in the foot you can not walk.

not always true

Yes, you might be unable to walk, but you wouldn't have taken as much damage as being shot in the chest where a ton of important organs are.

if you get shot in the foot it will shatter you bones and that not fun. i think you can not change that.

 

[Feretal]

Just going to add a little bit here, being shot in the foot in mount and blade appears to be just as damaging as being shot in the chest.

that cuz in real life you get shot in the foot you can not walk.

not always true

Yes, you might be unable to walk, but you wouldn't have taken as much damage as being shot in the chest where a ton of important organs are.

if you get shot in the foot it will shatter you bones and that not fun. i think you can not change that.

My point is that you have a much better chance of dying from being shot in the chest, being shot in the foot may make you unable to walk but you won't die.  Maybe I'm just thinking too realistically about this whole thing.

 

[eth1234567890]

Just going to add a little bit here, being shot in the foot in mount and blade appears to be just as damaging as being shot in the chest.

that cuz in real life you get shot in the foot you can not walk.

not always true

Yes, you might be unable to walk, but you wouldn't have taken as much damage as being shot in the chest where a ton of important organs are.

if you get shot in the foot it will shatter you bones and that not fun. i think you can not change that.

My point is that you have a much better chance of dying from being shot in the chest, being shot in the foot may make you unable to walk but you won't die.  Maybe I'm just thinking too realistically about this whole thing.

but if you can not walk you are as good as dead. so you die and have to sit on the dirt for 10mins as you die.

 

[Feretal]

but if you can not walk you are as good as dead. so you die and have to sit on the dirt for 10mins as you die.

I'm just trying to say that being shot in the foot isn't as damaging as being shot in the chest, but in mount and blade it is just as damaging.

 

[Splintert]

Only because being shot in the leg is equally as lethal (or soldier career-ending) as being shot in the face in medieval warfare. They didn't really have medicine, you know.