When there's 3 or more javelins in your shield... you pretty much shouldn't be able to use it.

[Orkmann]

The pilum was actually used to force the enemy to drop their shield. When it hit the shield, it pierced it and stuck in it, making it very unwieldy to carry. One major difference to the game is that the pilum itself was designed to break on impact, making it more difficult to remove from the shield or to throw it back,

 

[metafa]

This! Ever since beta 0.6 or something shields are WAY. WAY. too overpowered. They shouldn't have anywhere NEAR this much HP. When they were weaker it was a lot more fun.

 

[Alenovic]

This! Ever since beta 0.6 or something shields are WAY. WAY. too overpowered. They shouldn't have anywhere NEAR this much HP. When they were weaker it was a lot more fun.

THERE IS AN REASON THAT SHIELDS EXISTED FOR WELL OVER 3000 YEARS UNCHANGED PEOPLE. (in a lot of warrior nations a shield was more important than a good weapon.)

Go get a bow and some arrows.. get a simple wooden slab and make it wet.. You can shoot well over 200 arrows in it, and it still doesnt break.. The same with javelins.. Only pilum works, because is was designed to make the shield unusable (not break it), but this is only on paper because the chance of making a shield unusable is not 100% when it hits an shield.. especially iron shield this chance gets even much lower.

Hacking the shield with sword takes insanely much hits, much more than ingame, you best effort will only see some of the sides of the shield a bit shaved off.. that is assuming the shield doesn't have an iron ring around it.

Hacking a wet wooden shield with an 2 handed axe needs the right circumstances for it to break the shield.. and also quite some hits under the perfect circumstances and position of shield and axe. You need to make the chopping overhead move and the piece of wood needs to be stuck against a hard solid underfloor. (not moving and no soft material behind the woodpiece)

Hacking the shield with a 1 handed axe,, also near impossible.

A well crafted shield is as good as unbreakable, can only be dented

 

[sniparsexe]

They carried *one* (That's all you need)... that was enough to strip the line of most shields. In fact a pilum could go through a shield and pierce the dude holding it in one go.

this shield is a joke, it's so thin and looks like a maximum of 1.5 kg, there are shields that weigh 10 kilograms. Again it depends on the shield and there were 2 types of pilum, heavy and light. Heavy Pilum used to break through shield and kill the enemy while light one used to stuck on the shield and make it useless it is easy to remove, though. not easy in war but easy in normal conditions. Also with a proper kite shield, you can deflect a heavy/light pilum, deflecting a light pilum was harder than deflecting a heavy pilum since it is faster and thinner. Yes, it is a risk. Pilums sometimes bent after hitting a shield but it wasn't a planned design feature. Also, it was hard to make a successful shot with a Pilum while in-game every goddamn troop is a robin hood and can hit a moving target on a horse. Therefore shields are as tough as a castle wall.

 

[metafa]

THERE IS AN REASON THAT SHIELDS EXISTED FOR WELL OVER 3000 YEARS UNCHANGED PEOPLE. (in a lot of warrior nations a shield was more important than a good weapon.)

Go get a bow and some arrows.. get a simple wooden slab and make it wet.. You can shoot well over 200 arrows in it, and it still doesnt break.. The same with javelins.. Only pilum works, because is was designed to make the shield unusable (not break it), but this is only on paper because the chance of making a shield unusable is not 100% when it hits an shield.. especially iron shield this chance gets even much lower.

Hacking the shield with sword takes insanely much hits, much more than ingame, you best effort will only see some of the sides of the shield a bit shaved off.. that is assuming the shield doesn't have an iron ring around it.

Hacking a wet wooden shield with an 2 handed axe needs the right circumstances for it to break the shield.. and also quite some hits under the perfect circumstances and position of shield and axe. You need to make the chopping overhead move and the piece of wood needs to be stuck against a hard solid underfloor. (not moving and no soft material behind the woodpiece)

Hacking the shield with a 1 handed axe,, also near impossible.

A well crafted shield is as good as unbreakable, can only be dented

Axes, and especially the big ones are made to cut through shields and in BL MP now that's happening way too infrequent.

 

[Pejot]

Axes, and especially the big ones are made to cut through shields and in BL MP now that's happening way too infrequent.

Nope if you read about tactics of fighting shieldwall vs shieldwall than You can find out that they didn't use axes to break shields. They used bearded axes to grab side of the shield than pull it to uncover the bearer and somone with spear stabbed him from axe bearer back.

Well made wooden shields covered with leather were great against most weapons if the bearer knew what he was doing. Shields broke after really long fights and taking many heavy hits.

 

[sniparsexe]

Axes, and especially the big ones are made to cut through shields and in BL MP now that's happening way too infrequent.

not really, they can't get through shields. If someone attacks with full power to a shield it would stick in it and the shield-bearer would kill you It is like trying to cut a tree you can't get through it with just one attack, also the shield-bearer can deflect and parry with his shield so it wouldn't be so smart to attack a shield with an axe

 

[Gremgoblin]

Nope if you read about tactics of fighting shieldwall vs shieldwall than You can find out that they didn't use axes to break shields. They used bearded axes to grab side of the shield than pull it to uncover the bearer and somone with spear stabbed him from axe bearer back.

Well made wooden shields covered with leather were great against most weapons if the bearer knew what he was doing. Shields broke after really long fights and taking many heavy hits.

That's all really great but until we get a mechanism that allows a) the player and AI to pull down shields with axes and b) the AI to know that that means they have to stab the shield user with a spear, the shield breaking is the closest we'll get to what you're describing.

This is a videogame. It's nice that what you described happened in real life, really epic and cool, but if we don't have the game mechanics to back it up, it will remain just that; really epic and cool information that is useless in a game sense because we can't use it.

For that same reason, having shields break after 3 javelins are stuck in it is not feasible in this stage of the game until TW adds some balancing to prevent this from leading to javelin-only armies that can destroy anything and anyone, given how accurate and deadly the javelins are already. And in that regard, getting rid of shield hitpoints and replacing it with dynamic damage to the hield when it's hacked at/has arrows in it would be really neat and could lead to javelins/arrows piercing the shield, but I just don't see that happening. Bannerlord is still a game and there are limits to what we can do.

 

[Alenovic]

That's all really great but until we get a mechanism that allows a) the player and AI to pull down shields with axes and b) the AI to know that that means they have to stab the shield user with a spear, the shield breaking is the closest we'll get to what you're describing.

This is a videogame. It's nice that what you described happened in real life, really epic and cool, but if we don't have the game mechanics to back it up, it will remain just that; really epic and cool information that is useless in a game sense because we can't use it.

For that same reason, having shields break after 3 javelins are stuck in it is not feasible in this stage of the game until TW adds some balancing to prevent this from leading to javelin-only armies that can destroy anything and anyone, given how accurate and deadly the javelins are already. And in that regard, getting rid of shield hitpoints and replacing it with dynamic damage to the hield when it's hacked at/has arrows in it would be really neat and could lead to javelins/arrows piercing the shield, but I just don't see that happening. Bannerlord is still a game and there are limits to what we can do.

There are mechanics already in place, namely hitting the enemy on a body part not covered by shield. Attacking when the dude is open, flanking.

Shields that break after 4-5 hits is soo damn unrealistic, then they should completely undo the workings of shields, and just buff their body, arm and shoulder armor rating for carrying a shield. Which would make the shield just an visual aspect instead of an blocking object.

As I already mentioned there is a reason why almost all nations and cultures in the world used shields unchanged for millenia,, it was cheap and very very very cost effective and most of all insanely practical and quite easy to use.

 

[Pejot]

There are mechanics already in place, namely hitting the enemy on a body part not covered by shield. Attacking when the dude is open, flanking.

Shields that break after 4-5 hits is soo damn unrealistic, then they should completely undo the workings of shields, and just buff their body, arm and shoulder armor rating for carrying a shield. Which would make the shield just an visual aspect instead of an blocking object.

As I already mentioned there is a reason why almost all nations and cultures in the world used shields unchanged for millenia,, it was cheap and very very very cost effective and most of all insanely practical and quite easy to use.

Totaly agree. There are already mechanics deciding which body part is hit and hitboxes for body parts so instead of nerfing equipment just update AI behaviour to target uncovered body parts.

 

[Gremgoblin]

There are mechanics already in place, namely hitting the enemy on a body part not covered by shield. Attacking when the dude is open, flanking.

Shields that break after 4-5 hits is soo damn unrealistic, then they should completely undo the workings of shields, and just buff their body, arm and shoulder armor rating for carrying a shield. Which would make the shield just an visual aspect instead of an blocking object.

As I already mentioned there is a reason why almost all nations and cultures in the world used shields unchanged for millenia,, it was cheap and very very very cost effective and most of all insanely practical and quite easy to use.

Sure, but you can't pull down shields with axes and shields cover areas they shouldn't be covering in the game already. They need fixing first before we can even consider adding new features to them. So saying ''just hit em where the shield isn't covering them bro'' seems kinda silly when, in order to do that, you basically need to John Rambo around the shield wall and hit people from the side (a totally valid tactic, but if we're arguing realism, then also a big fat lol). The spears overhead stab also barely works and is a pain to use over top of a man with a shield in the game. It doesn't work as fluently as you're proposing it does, or even remotely close to it.

I believe shields should be a great tool for defending against arrows and should be a tool used for defending against other infantry. That 2h axes do extra damage versus shields is not necessarily realistic but it does balance the game and prevent people from just sword-n-boarding without a counter to it. And most people, myself included, would rather play a balanced game over a realistic game. Or.. perhaps I should say, my enjoyment of the game should not come at the cost of realism just because someone is upset that ''shields were not used this way in real life!''

I definitely agree that shields are as awesome as you're making them out to be but jesus christ dude, it's a game. Games are not 100% about realism, games are about gamey mechanics too, and that includes balancing shields to be broken by axes/missiles sticking into them.

EDIT: of course, if it was made more possible to strike around/over shields, I see no reason why we'd need to nerf them. But if you are 100% sure that it's already easy to do so, just git gud, please upload a video of you doing it, since I think that would be rather valuable information.

 

[Alenovic]

Youtube movie with shield of plywood.. very low quality wood.

Please watch this then you see how a simple shield is insanely sturdy, besides that the chance of a soldier losing its weapon when correctly damaging a shield was MUCH HIGHER than a shield breaking..

If they enabled that mechanic (which is realistic) then shields would be insanely OP...

 

[Alenovic]

Sure, but you can't pull down shields with axes and shields cover areas they shouldn't be covering in the game already. They need fixing first before we can even consider adding new features to them. So saying ''just hit em where the shield isn't covering them bro'' seems kinda silly when, in order to do that, you basically need to John Rambo around the shield wall and hit people from the side (a totally valid tactic, but if we're arguing realism, then also a big fat lol). The spears overhead stab also barely works and is a pain to use over top of a man with a shield in the game. It doesn't work as fluently as you're proposing it does, or even remotely close to it.

I believe shields should be a great tool for defending against arrows and should be a tool used for defending against other infantry. That 2h axes do extra damage versus shields is not necessarily realistic but it does balance the game and prevent people from just sword-n-boarding without a counter to it. And most people, myself included, would rather play a balanced game over a realistic game. Or.. perhaps I should say, my enjoyment of the game should not come at the cost of realism just because someone is upset that ''shields were not used this way in real life!''

I definitely agree that shields are as awesome as you're making them out to be but jesus christ dude, it's a game. Games are not 100% about realism, games are about gamey mechanics too, and that includes balancing shields to be broken by axes/missiles sticking into them.

EDIT: of course, if it was made more possible to strike around/over shields, I see no reason why we'd need to nerf them. But if you are 100% sure that it's already easy to do so, just git gud, please upload a video of you doing it, since I think that would be rather valuable information.

BTW i was sarcastic with my comment.. because fighting against an shielded warrior IS INSANELY difficult, trying the cut his legs,, will result in you losing your head.. Trying to attack the shield will result in you losing your sword or creating holes in you own defence. trying to hit him with a spear over his head will make you lose your kidney by the counter attack, Remember that a shield is also a weapon, it doesn't necesarry attack, but it keeps you alive and creates openings for you to use

pulling a shield down is just unrealistic, maybe in shield wall pushes but in real combat you will need 2-3 soldiers just to engage 1 shielder.

Shield are just awesome... let them be like that, because shield ARE AWESOME and have always been like that.

 

[Pejot]

Sure, but you can't pull down shields with axes and shields cover areas they shouldn't be covering in the game already. They need fixing first before we can even consider adding new features to them. So saying ''just hit em where the shield isn't covering them bro'' seems kinda silly when, in order to do that, you basically need to John Rambo around the shield wall and hit people from the side (a totally valid tactic, but if we're arguing realism, then also a big fat lol). The spears overhead stab also barely works and is a pain to use over top of a man with a shield in the game. It doesn't work as fluently as you're proposing it does, or even remotely close to it.

I believe shields should be a great tool for defending against arrows and should be a tool used for defending against other infantry. That 2h axes do extra damage versus shields is not necessarily realistic but it does balance the game and prevent people from just sword-n-boarding without a counter to it. And most people, myself included, would rather play a balanced game over a realistic game. Or.. perhaps I should say, my enjoyment of the game should not come at the cost of realism just because someone is upset that ''shields were not used this way in real life!''

I definitely agree that shields are as awesome as you're making them out to be but jesus christ dude, it's a game. Games are not 100% about realism, games are about gamey mechanics too, and that includes balancing shields to be broken by axes/missiles sticking into them.

EDIT: of course, if it was made more possible to strike around/over shields, I see no reason why we'd need to nerf them. But if you are 100% sure that it's already easy to do so, just git gud, please upload a video of you doing it, since I think that would be rather valuable information.

The problem is with melee aiming rather the OP equipment. Cause you can use upper stab but it still hits wherever you point your mouse instead of hitting above.

 

[Dearmad]

this shield is a joke, it's so thin and looks like a maximum of 1.5 kg, there are shields that weigh 10 kilograms. Again it depends on the shield and there were 2 types of pilum, heavy and light. Heavy Pilum used to break through shield and kill the enemy while light one used to stuck on the shield and make it useless it is easy to remove, though. not easy in war but easy in normal conditions. Also with a proper kite shield, you can deflect a heavy/light pilum, deflecting a light pilum was harder than deflecting a heavy pilum since it is faster and thinner. Yes, it is a risk. Pilums sometimes bent after hitting a shield but it wasn't a planned design feature. Also, it was hard to make a successful shot with a Pilum while in-game every goddamn troop is a robin hood and can hit a moving target on a horse. Therefore shields are as tough as a castle wall.

you're right. Hundreds of years of Roman history, successful battles, empire building, and actual warfare are wrong.

The pilum was a joke and never worked to strip shields. In fact it was all forced on the soldiers due to iron union rules of supply. It was cintractual. Something to do with a garum sauce sponsorship

 

[Ichon]

How about offering 2 types of shields? A wood/hide based shield (like the ones ingame atm) that are lighter and break quickly, and steel-plated shields that take much more of a beating.

As it stands, I don't think making all shields easy to rip apart is a good idea. Lighter shields, yes, but the option for tougher shields (at the cost of slower movement) should also be available.

+1 The difference between large shields and smaller/lighter shields needs to be shown. A great big strong shield offers a huge amount of protection... but limits mobility.

Especially if the heavier armours also affected mobility a bit (less than a great big shield but added together it should be noticeable). By mobility I mean both run speed AND more importantly weapon attack/swing speed. -25 attack speed for a large shield offset by 5% per 100 skill so a 200 weapon skill soldier would only get -15% attack speed and if they also had 200 athletics they would only have -5% slower attack speed.

Heavier armour should also slow weapon speed but by a lesser amount (since the armour is distributed over the whole body a person only has to counteract the amount of armour on their weapon hand and offsetting leg). Probably only a -10% affect for the heaviest armours so a large shield + heaviest armour would offer huge protection but greatly reduce damage output unless highly proficient in weapon skill and athletics.

A smaller light shield would have lower block area making predicting where an attack is coming from more important but at the same time not reduce attack speed but generally also be more fragile. Small metal bucklers could be tough(high HP) but nearly useless blocking against arrows/bolts, a buckler can block javelins and hand weapons if moved into the right spot to block making it a high skill cap shield and also have virtually no utility against arrow/bolts.

This would also allow recruit and lower tier infantry to attack fairly well in formation when they have great big shields all together but without the armour and 100+ proficiency of higher tier units still at a disadvantage as soon as the formation is broken/shields dropped.

 

[Mppqlmd]

I wouldn't say your shield should break from javelins or arrows, but it should get heavier.

The roman pilum was actually designed to bend and encumber the shields they were planted in, to render them more cumbersome and useless. So i guess you could raise the weight of a shield for every arrow in it, and give you the option to abandon it.

 

[Ichon]

THERE IS AN REASON THAT SHIELDS EXISTED FOR WELL OVER 3000 YEARS UNCHANGED PEOPLE. (in a lot of warrior nations a shield was more important than a good weapon.)

Go get a bow and some arrows.. get a simple wooden slab and make it wet.. You can shoot well over 200 arrows in it, and it still doesnt break.. The same with javelins.. Only pilum works, because is was designed to make the shield unusable (not break it), but this is only on paper because the chance of making a shield unusable is not 100% when it hits an shield.. especially iron shield this chance gets even much lower.

Hacking the shield with sword takes insanely much hits, much more than ingame, you best effort will only see some of the sides of the shield a bit shaved off.. that is assuming the shield doesn't have an iron ring around it.

Hacking a wet wooden shield with an 2 handed axe needs the right circumstances for it to break the shield.. and also quite some hits under the perfect circumstances and position of shield and axe. You need to make the chopping overhead move and the piece of wood needs to be stuck against a hard solid underfloor. (not moving and no soft material behind the woodpiece)

Hacking the shield with a 1 handed axe,, also near impossible.

A well crafted shield is as good as unbreakable, can only be dented

+1 There are sometimes prices of the equipment in historical records and usually armour was the most expensive, a horse next, but a good strong shield was almost as expensive as a horse in most cultures while basic functional weapons tended to be the cheapest. Better forging (broken weapons not just broken shields were a real thing) did cost more as did fancy inlays/engraving.

Of course, people could get by with a cheaply made hide shield but... it wouldn't last more than a single fight and often not even that long but if it served to shield against arrows until the fight closed into melee it still did a hell of a job making the fight more even for the side with the cheap equipment but possibly much higher numbers.

 

[BlackRainZ]

I feel like there are way too many people in this thread that chop wood lol

 

[Gremgoblin]

BTW i was sarcastic with my comment.. because fighting against an shielded warrior IS INSANELY difficult, trying the cut his legs,, will result in you losing your head.. Trying to attack the shield will result in you losing your sword or creating holes in you own defence. trying to hit him with a spear over his head will make you lose your kidney by the counter attack, Remember that a shield is also a weapon, it doesn't necesarry attack, but it keeps you alive and creates openings for you to use

pulling a shield down is just unrealistic, maybe in shield wall pushes but in real combat you will need 2-3 soldiers just to engage 1 shielder.

Shield are just awesome... let them be like that, because shield ARE AWESOME and have always been like that.

OK, that's a nice argument but it is useless because you're arguing that shields are awesome in real life. Yes they are, everyone agrees with you, shields rock.

You're playing a videogame though and videogames need balance to make it fun. Nothing is "fun" about being forced to use a shield because as you put it, there is no counter to a shield apparently.