Reduce shield hit points

[Kynes]

please.



I've seen a few posts on durability and weapons breaking/cracking/bending/rusting etc but shields especially need to be weakened. Either that or the bonuses to axes and pilum (do they even have a bonus?) should be increased.

You could lower the damage threshold by about 30-40% easily without unbalancing the game. Seriously, who here has even contemplated adding a point to the 'shields' perk, let alone invested three or four?

 

[Narcissus]

I might be the only one ... but I do.

I enjoy solo-fighting (unmounted) and every extra hp I can get out of my shield is valuable.

I might be the exception to the rule, but I have even began carrying an extra shield with me, so that when my current one breaks ... I can jump on a horse and retrieve it.

I know that few (if any) other people use it as much as I do, though.

Narcissus

 

[Stonewall382]

*raises hand* I do!
I do as Narcissus does, but I do it so that I can take attacks, while my men (and women) kill the attackers.

 

[barbaros]

I definitely agre with Kynes. In fact, exact same thing crossed my mind yesterday. Shields, especially the best ones have so much hit points that they can hold enormous number of hits. So what's the meaning of shield skill?. I didn't give this skill any point for my lvl30 character and my shield (a good one) has never broken yet. Beyond 1 point to this skill is meaningless I think. Shield HP's should be reduced a bit.

 

[Kamamura]

I definitely agree!

 

[Manitas]

I don't think shield's durability is the biggest problem wth them, but the fact that they are the ultimate lifesaver that won't let through any damage coming from the front half-sphere angle.

But if i was to mess around with shield damage, I'd do the following:

- replace shield hit points with resistance to damage. For best shields it would be equal to about the best couched lance damage (or slightly more).
- set a damage threshold beyond which the shields resistance will decrease.
(ex: decrease ammount=60% * ((hit_damage-threshold)/(resistance-threshold)) - just a quick example, not sure if it makes sense)
- if damage > resistance then the shield breaks.

Te above system would accomplish the following:
- Shields could break of just one excellent couched lance hit.
- pecking shields with stones or weak hand weapon hits would do no harm to them

 

[Ilex]

- if damage > resistance then the shield breaks.

Or - if damage > resistance then the shield loses hit points (much less hp than originally).
Otherwise sounds good to me.

 

[Volkier]

Personally I don't use shields too much, and prefer two handers... (personal reason, not like theres anything wrong with shields)
However, may I suggest something to think about?

It is not nesessary to revamp shield HP. But a wider 'spread' in my oppinion, may do somewhat of a trick. IE. there would be a lot more shields which are very low end, likewise for the high end. At the same time maybe shields can be separated into different categories? For example, shield A (insert a fancy name instead of A) would have 50Durability, would break in two hits from any melee attack, but would be virtually indestructible by arrows?
Likewise, shield B, would hold out to slash attacks very effectively, but split in half if a blunt or piercing attack is made? Its relatively realistic as well since we had metal shields, wooden shields, very small and light shields made of bamboo and straw (for archers) etc. all serving different purposes.

Perhaps giving players (and enemies likewise) more options, while bringing more depth to defencive capabilities of combat, would work better than a nerf? Just my oppinion which I seem to share for probably any concept :

 

[Copy_con]

I like it as it is. A shield should endure a lot, but I wonder why it regenerates all the time. Thats just silly!
And about that "all saving shield" Maybe it should be more "narrow" parry area.

 

[fanboy]

shield hitpoints are fine, if you don't let them regen.

 

[Ingolifs]

They only regen between battles, like arrows.

Apparently, if your shield is smashed in battle, it permanently loses a portion of its health.

I'm for giving shields reduced health.

 

[Damien]

I use the Shield skill, like a few others here.


And I wouldn't want to see shields given less durability. It would border on making them useless. I like my sword-and-shield fighter and I -don't- want to have to add "extra shield" onto the already lengthy list of extra crap I have to take with me everywhere.

 

[Jhaerik]

I put a few points in shield if I plan on using one.

Also shields DO NOT need to block every hit, amasing how quick a shield can go to cover someones feet.

 

[Kynes]

I use the Shield skill, like a few others here.


And I wouldn't want to see shields given less durability. It would border on making them useless. I like my sword-and-shield fighter and I -don't- want to have to add "extra shield" onto the already lengthy list of extra crap I have to take with me everywhere.

Colour me surprised.

You shouldn't be able to take that blue shield which is one of cheapest items in the game and take not one but several javelins and a half-dozen solid hits by a well-built guy with an axe. It's just silly.

If you're worried about losing your shield or having to take another one into battle then I'd say you need to work on your tactics. If your shield is going to to be a portable force-field then it might as well have a chance of breaking- seems a shame to waste that fencing AI. I always use that red nordic shield because it looks better than the other ones and I can count on one hand the amount of times I've had it broken in battle.

 

[svart]

Ye shield resistance definetly need to get reworked.
I liked how shields were in the game ruin, different weapons deal different damage to them and you can always pick one from the ground (let's not mention how cool a shield looked on your back).

For now, javelins and axes increase shield damage, but like i say in a lot of other threads, if you want more serious durability you gotta implemented picking weapons/shields from the ground, or balancing things becomes a real headache.

 

[quixotecoyote]

I don't have a problem with shield hitpoints, it's the only way to handle swadian crossbowman or mobs of enemies if you like to play on foot.

 

[Ingolifs]

I was once in a large battle between my men and dark knights. Eventually the only two people left were me and a dark knight with a metal shield. Just for fun, i decided to see if i could break it. I had two quivers of arrows, so my current arrow count at that time would've been about 25.
I shot all 25 arrows at the shield. It didn't break. I then proceded to whack the crap out of it with my irom staff. It took literally ages before the shield actually broke, somewhere in the vicinity of 30-40 hits.

 

[Valec SKylien]

Yet I've had several times where my low end shield breaks. Especialy when I face sea raiders- their missle weapons tears my shields apart. I hate being vulnerable to missle weapons so I use a shield.

As for a possible system for shields:

give them two stats called resistence and hit points. You have to beat the resistence to do any damage to the shield, but the shield would have much less hp then it does now.

Arrows shouldn't be able to break a shield unless it penetrates it and a small one handed club really isn't going to break a shield ever. Also if a missile weapon doesn't beat the shield's resistence then the missile weapon shouldn't stick in the shield.

 

[Narcissus]

I realize that I depend on my shields (two of them ) too much. I dread the thought of having weaker shields as I get a broken shield almost every major battle.

I must say that you all make a pretty convincing argument, though. Valec has a pretty great idea with this suggestion:

give them two stats called resistence and hit points. You have to beat the resistence to do any damage to the shield, but the shield would have much less hp then it does now.

Arrows shouldn't be able to break a shield unless it penetrates it and a small one handed club really isn't going to break a shield ever. Also if a missile weapon doesn't beat the shield's resistence then the missile weapon shouldn't stick in the shield.

I'm not sure how hard it would be to implement, but this has more realism (than the current system) and would balance shields better in the game.

Narcissus

 

[Ingolifs]

If resistance and hit points do pretty much the same thing, then what's the point?

If you have a shield with 100 health and 100 resistance as opposd to 200 health, and the resistance gets worn away just like health does, then what's the point?