Poll: Are shields wielded by hostile NPCs too effective?

Are shields wielded by NPCs too effective?

  • Yes

  • No


Results are only viewable after voting.

Homiccus

Member
Shield users almost always outlast every other npc in Fray. In 8 out of 10 Fray it will be the shield user (Yes I like to spectate fray rounds from some safe corner of the arena). It's not very "realistic" but I don't see any way to fix this apart from nerfing them. So yeah, nerfing is no go. That's one of the in built features of game mechanics.
I like to 'spectate' from the corner too. Sometimes even going as far as pinching another weapon from the dead corpse. Laziness perhaps? Or just simple tactics to preserve my own health?
Would you care to elaborate on what you mean by 'not very realistic'? By my own experience and 'historically' the shield was the first and most important defense of any warrior and only dropped out because of the advances in plate armour technology. It is rather realistic that shield users come on top (especially so if both combatants have similar armour) as they have the ability (or at least possibility) to simultaneously defend and attack.
 

Kaladin

Member
That is true, but this *is* still a game. If shields become so overpowered that it is simply pointless to take anything else, then there is a problem. Having said that, shields aren't that overpowered right now. You can sneak right-swings over the shield at the NPCs heads or under the shield at their legs, lure them in then hit them etc.
 

Snoopbear

Member
Maybe if they added Flails? I mean they had flails in one of the SG video. Well on the ogre. But that means that the physics are possible.
 

CharliePow

Member
Shield do exactly what they're supposed to - protect the user. The effectiveness of shields in the game is realistic, although some shield-vs-shield tactics would be great. In real life a shield user would win over someone without a shield the majority of the time.
 

Midcal9

Member
I like to 'spectate' from the corner too. Sometimes even going as far as pinching another weapon from the dead corpse. Laziness perhaps? Or just simple tactics to preserve my own health?
Would you care to elaborate on what you mean by 'not very realistic'? By my own experience and 'historically' the shield was the first and most important defense of any warrior and only dropped out because of the advances in plate armour technology. It is rather realistic that shield users come on top (especially so if both combatants have similar armour) as they have the ability (or at least possibility) to simultaneously defend and attack.
Venerable Homiccus,

It is not wise to give so much credit to shields in the context of late 14th and early 16th century. The shield might in fact be the best choice for Arena fights up and until Adept level but past that your character can obtain very good plate Armour or at least cover himself in multilayered cloth, mail and leather Armour which might not be very historically correct but it would definitely fulfill its role if made properly.

A large shield user can utilize either a short one handed weapon or a spear (not in exanima) in either case if his opponent's polearm were to connect once with his head, torso, leg, shoulder it would be pretty much the end of him, and don't forget that IRL polearms are FAST and PRECISE. IRL cold steel has no movement limitations like in Exanima either. A shield user would not have any noticeable advantage against a well armored enemy with a two handed weapon, especially not to the point where when two enemies of similar skill clash the shield user would come on top in 8 or even 6 cases out of 10. If that were the case everyone would use shields at least up until the first half of the 17th century. Everyone would consider other weapons or combinations of weapons to be a folly you know. I do know about bucklers being very widely used and then being replaced by left daggers which also played that role.

Because of exanima's limitations on how you can swing the polearm and how precise you can be with it the shield does become far more useful than it really ought to be, your weapon is destined to hit the shield more often then it otherwise would. I also suspect that after blocking an incoming hit from a polearm for the 3rd time I might not be so fresh and fast anymore, nor would I expect my left arm to be in a normal shape.

Sincerely,


Greg

P.S. Scratch that, shield combat mechanics must be integrated into general combat mechanics which means there is no way of nerfing them or adjusting them, doing so will inevitably weaken the geneal responsiveness of the AI overall. And it's not like I want to see any nerfs, it's just when shield users prevail once again in the arena my immersion suffers a little.
 
Last edited:

gugand

Member
I am not 100% sure, but after last patch i hitted head or legs avoiding the shield more often than before. I noticed that animations were a bit different. Maybe the character try to bypass the other's defence adjusting the trajectory during the swing. That is just an impression or a real fact?
 

Midcal9

Member
I am not 100% sure, but after last patch i hitted head or legs avoiding the shield more often than before. I noticed that animations were a bit different. Maybe the character try to bypass the other's defence adjusting the trajectory during the swing. That is just an impression or a real fact?
And when I fight in the arena some NPCs behave like human players, they are faster and more erratic than normal. It would be pretty cool if the devs were actually testing the multiplayer possibilities of exanima by somehow secretly fighting against us. o_O
 

Kaladin

Member
In addition to that, a shield wasn't a forcefield. If your shield was hit by a heavy two-handed axe or a warhammer, you stood a risk of just breaking your hand / splintering the shield / having the shield wrenched away from you, etc. That's why it is said in every combat manual to try to parry a two-handed blow with your own weapon, instead of trying to block it with your shield unless you absolutely have to.

So if we're going for realism, shields do need a bit of a nerf.
 

Midcal9

Member
In addition to that, a shield wasn't a forcefield. If your shield was hit by a heavy two-handed axe or a warhammer, you stood a risk of just breaking your hand / splintering the shield / having the shield wrenched away from you, etc. That's why it is said in every combat manual to try to parry a two-handed blow with your own weapon, instead of trying to block it with your shield unless you absolutely have to.

So if we're going for realism, shields do need a bit of a nerf.
I doubt it, the general combat mechanics and shield mechanics are probably one and the same holistic system. You can't just nerf some aspect of combat without affecting the rest of it.

"Get good scrub!"

Deep thought by Oroboro the ninja.
 

Homiccus

Member
Oh Noble One,
I thoroughly enjoyed reading your elaborate response and I do not disagree with your point of view on shields. However, as I like being obtuse and/or facetious, here are some examples of 15th-century-plus:
A pavise (16th c.): https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a2/Balestriere1.jpg/225px-Balestriere1.jpg
A Scottish targe (18th c.): http://www.thesonsofscotland.co.uk/Photos/Targe Makers/Killicrankie-Targes.jpg
A ballistic shiield (20th c.): http://www.ventureballistics.com/uploads/4/2/3/6/42362847/s769149741884476709_p1_i7_w1248.jpeg

...please, take these as my tongue-in-cheek trolling though. Use of 'knightly' shield by men-at-arms has of course fallen after development of full plate and these examples only confirm this theory. I think the only time a form of shield is used in armoured combat is during 'judicial combat', but this is a highly regulated form of engagement and anyway the 'shield' in question is a buckler, which I think we both agree is not much of a 'proper' shield. :)
 

Midcal9

Member
Oh Noble One,
I thoroughly enjoyed reading your elaborate response and I do not disagree with your point of view on shields. However, as I like being obtuse and/or facetious, here are some examples of 15th-century-plus:
A pavise (16th c.): https://upload.wikimedia.org/wikipedia/commons/thumb/a/a2/Balestriere1.jpg/225px-Balestriere1.jpg
A Scottish targe (18th c.): http://www.thesonsofscotland.co.uk/Photos/Targe Makers/Killicrankie-Targes.jpg
A ballistic shiield (20th c.): http://www.ventureballistics.com/uploads/4/2/3/6/42362847/s769149741884476709_p1_i7_w1248.jpeg

...please, take these as my tongue-in-cheek trolling though. Use of 'knightly' shield by men-at-arms has of course fallen after development of full plate and these examples only confirm this theory. I think the only time a form of shield is used in armoured combat is during 'judicial combat', but this is a highly regulated form of engagement and anyway the 'shield' in question is a buckler, which I think we both agree is not much of a 'proper' shield. :)
I still can't believe they used shields up untill 18th century in Scotland....Savages! Ahaha

Actually you're a bit off I think, some forms of frontline infantry did use large, metal round shields up until 17th century. I believe they were called targeteers or something. The thing is, I wouldn't want to clash against a well organized line of halberdeers and billmen. One would probably pull my shield away and the the other plough me rightly...

"That means that shield have to be nerfed, like lessen the energy bar of shields"

Shields don't have energy bars, I wish they had banana flavored ones! gosh!
 

Homiccus

Member
I believe they were called targeteers or something.
Aye. Rotella or rodela they were called.
A depiction in 1610 Spanish fencing manual by Ridolfo Capo Ferro. https://3.bp.blogspot.com/-1Jc08zojBCc/VsYuJJ3xrgI/AAAAAAAAHj8/_DTL17TM4xU/s1600/cappo_ferro_rotella.jpg
I seem to recall reading somewhere about the rapier + rodela armed veteran infantry being successfully used in Granada War and by Gonzalo de Córdoba in Italy against Swiss pikemen, but details are a bit vague. Now, I admit that when talking about pretty much anything past 15th century and up until second WW, I am a bit out of my depth. I shall leave the field to more experienced researchers. :)
 

Midcal9

Member
No one at all agreeing with my Flail argument?
Flails have a potential to be a total glitchy, unpredictable mess. Making the flail consistently move in line with your arm when you swing might actually be close to impossible. And even if they could it would probably be the least dependable weapon in game. I want more cool looking weapons and armor, the one handed swords for example tend to look rather shabby. They could add a few Type XVa Castillion swords for a change. The armory needs a bit more spice me thinks.
 

Midcal9

Member
All the more fun!
Ehhh, when you'd swing the flail's ball would probably fly way behind the shaft and it would also either fly way above the shaft's axis point or above it. Now I'm not sure I'm explaining it properly but i hope you get the idea. IE it would be impossible to aim it whatsoever. And would also snag onto other npc's.

Why should the devs spend their time and resources on something like this?
 

Snoopbear

Member
Ehhh, when you'd swing the flail's ball would probably fly way behind the shaft and it would also either fly way above the shaft's axis point or above it. Now I'm not sure I'm explaining it properly but i hope you get the idea. IE it would be impossible to aim it whatsoever. And would also snag onto other npc's.

Why should the devs spend their time and resources on something like this?
Nah But I see your point, Rag-doll physics are unpredictable. I guess it's just wishful thinking.
 

Yngvald

Insider
Sounds like a complicated endeavor to introduce that type of contraption. Only Madoc would truly know, but I suspect you'd need an entirely different approach to the character's weapon handling mechanics as to not hit himself, the multi-layered physics behind the object, and for the character to be be able to keep that thing in motion.
Something later down the line, perhaps, when all the core of the game is in place and SG has already been shipped / went gold.
 

Pc Genie

Member
I personally think this is perfectly fine even though I too have some troubles with shield users. You gain a strong defence in place or a second weapon or two handed item like spears/longswords/etcetera.

I find there are some tricks that work every well against shield users:
- Certain fighters, especially of lower rank, pull their shield back when they swing like movie actors do. A dodge and immediate counter swing is thus extremely effective.
- Several shield designs expose the head (especially the funny square shield) and swings aiming there can split them open, vertical or horizontal.
- I very frequently find that shield bearers are oddly weak against thrusts, definitely including torso thrusts.
- As a specialist swashbuckler myself, I find that general distance keeping with polearms and repeated attacks are very harmful to us.
- Trying what I call a Fiore step (diagonally to stay in range but go around their line of engagement) is very useful if you pull it off correctly.

Having played the arena campaign with set 'characters' in my roster who use specific styles, I could give equal lists of advantages and disadvantages for any style, with the only exception being a single handed weapon without any off-hand item (because they're all idiots and I carve them nicely).

Here's the irony, my recent dedicated large-shield user (as opposed to the swashbuckler, my main character) controlled by myself has been frequently struggling in adept, expert and master levels, much to my annoyance.
 
Top

Home|Games|Media|Store|Account|Forums|Contact




© Copyright 2019 Bare Mettle Entertainment Ltd. All rights reserved.