What if Vanguards had shields?



  • It has become obvious that nobody wants to use smoke pots even after the buff. Why not just let vanguards use the smaller shields? This has no doubt been brought up before, but can we consider it again?

    Diversity is nice, but this is a game with just four classes. I think there should not be any counters the magnitude of archer>vanguard. I enjoy playing vanguard, yet I switch at the first sign of trouble because unlike other classes, I am given no tools to compensate for my weaknesses. I usually switch to knight as I can maintain a similiar playstyle with near-immunity to projectiles and a universally useful health boost without openly exploitable drawbacks. Thus, I am not inclined to play vanguard because I can just play the bigger vanguard that doesn’t get completely shut down by archers.

    Although this isn’t about balancing knights, perhaps it ties in with that matter. Giving shields to vanguards won’t change the knight populations on duel servers, but maybe it’ll encourage vanguards who switch to knight out of pure necessity to stick with their class.

    Thoughts?



  • I like the fact that Vanguards feel different. Focused around power and brute force, large ranged sweeping offense. Rather than playing defensively behind a shield. For defence vs melee they have their range as an advantage. They’re also the Archer’s natural target heh.

    I think smoke pots need to last a lot longer, then it should be alright. I remember using them quite tactically in AoC and they worked well. Just they’re not that useful in Chiv so people forget.

    I like as a Vanguard I feel both powerful and vulnerable. Promotes a bit smarter play than just running forward with a shield held up.



  • The vanguard already has a shield. It is called your teammates.



  • The only good weps are 2 hitting knight weps. The other 2h swords are viable with their instant attacks



  • @BobT36:

    I like the fact that Vanguards feel different. Focused around power and brute force, large ranged sweeping offense. Rather than playing defensively behind a shield. For defence vs melee they have their range as an advantage. They’re also the Archer’s natural target heh.

    I think smoke pots need to last a lot longer, then it should be alright. I remember using them quite tactically in AoC and they worked well. Just they’re not that useful in Chiv so people forget.

    I like as a Vanguard I feel both powerful and vulnerable. Promotes a bit smarter play than just running forward with a shield held up.

    I hear you, but I don’t think vanguard would “feel” any different with a shield option. Turtle vanguard would never work, they can’t backpedal away from kicks like MAAs or use greatshields like knights, nor can they onehand their primaries which doesn’t help their already poor weapon selection.
    I can’t imagine using a shield for anything but ranged protection and maybe taking on very dedicated feinters (another thing vanguard is uniquely weak against). I think vanguards would behave much the same most of the time, with the optional shield as a backup strategy replacing the current “run away or die” method when facing archers.
    @BobT36:

    They’re also the Archer’s natural target heh.

    That’s exactly what I don’t like. I’ve played too many games that are heavily balanced around rock-paper-scissor matchups, I wish Chivalry were different.

    @dudeface:

    The vanguard already has a shield. It is called your teammates.

    that’s silly
    why would anyone shoot my teammates when I present such a beautiful large slow target with no protection



  • @BobT36:

    I like the fact that Vanguards feel different. Focused around power and brute force, large ranged sweeping offense. Rather than playing defensively behind a shield. For defence vs melee they have their range as an advantage. They’re also the Archer’s natural target heh.

    Really? Because I always felt that the knight was the power and brute force class considering they have many weapons that can two shot any class and one shot others. I keep telling you guys that range doesn’t count for much unless you are in a team battle and even then it doesn’t matter as much as it should.



  • @Dr.Nick:

    @BobT36:

    I like the fact that Vanguards feel different. Focused around power and brute force, large ranged sweeping offense. Rather than playing defensively behind a shield. For defence vs melee they have their range as an advantage. They’re also the Archer’s natural target heh.

    Really? Because I always felt that the knight was the power and brute force class considering they have many weapons that can twp shot any class and one shot other. I keep telling you guys that range doesn’t count for much unless you are in a team battle and even then it doesn’t matter as much as it should.

    +1



  • @Dr.Nick:

    I always felt that the knight was the power and brute force class considering they have many weapons that can twp shot any class and one shot other.

    His swords are all shorter and weaker than the vanguard equivalents. Knight has a single weapon left with notable HTK. The grand mace and flanged mace have been entirely de-beaked by the MAA blunt armor buff and even the feared maul carries only a fraction of its strength with the loss of overhead to torso and swing to head kills. Anyone wielding the maul now does so only for the romantic power found in not being a SoW knight, there’s nothing else to it that the Bardiche or Zweihander don’t do better.

    Until blunt weapons are restored and the double axe is buffed, I think “power and brute force” must be attributed to vanguard.



  • I a Vanguard recieves a shield, me as a maa player should get a Ninja class with nunchakos and trowings stars.



  • One word: TEMPLAR!

    I mean, wouldn’t hate it if the vanguard have a shield. Since even Archer have a buckle with javelin.



  • @Dr.Nick:

    I keep telling you guys that range doesn’t count for much unless you are in a team battle and even then it doesn’t matter as much as it should.

    ^
    Long ranged weapons are bad in duels and only useful in teamfights if you really know what you’re doing. But (bad) players are already crying a lot about spears and polearms so Tornbanner will probably not buff them…



  • Vanguards don’t need shields, their overwhelming manliness is armour enough.



  • @Torrenz:

    @Dr.Nick:

    I always felt that the knight was the power and brute force class considering they have many weapons that can twp shot any class and one shot other.

    His swords are all shorter and weaker than the vanguard equivalents. Knight has a single weapon left with notable HTK. The grand mace and flanged mace have been entirely de-beaked by the MAA blunt armor buff and even the feared maul carries only a fraction of its strength with the loss of overhead to torso and swing to head kills. Anyone wielding the maul now does so only for the romantic power found in not being a SoW knight, there’s nothing else to it that the Bardiche or Zweihander don’t do better.

    Until blunt weapons are restored and the double axe is buffed, I think “power and brute force” must be attributed to vanguard.

    Har! The longsword and messer do tremendous amounts of damage. Even the SoW is a beast against the weaker classes when you use the stab. They are also much much faster compared to Vanguad weapons. The warhammer, maul, and grand mace all two shot every class and can one shot some. The war axe, pole axe, and bearded axe also all do tremendous amounts of damage with good speed. All the knight weapons kill just as fast as the vanguard’s.



  • I consider it to be more about the playstyle than pure damage.

    With a Vanguard I play full on offense, charging in there to drive my spear through the enemy, pure forward thinking, bulrush mentality. MAA I play sneakier, light footed, ready to dodge and weave around the enemy’s blows to strike. Knight I play offensive, but know that should the enemy attack me, I’ve enough armour, shield, whatever to defend myself, before I dish out my own attacks. With a Vanguard I don’t WANT to take any, I just want to kill them first.

    Giving Vanguard a shield would sorta discourage that balls-out kill them before kill you playstyle. Which I think would be a shame because they’re quite unique in that. Even their defence is based on offense, keeping your enemy at bay with long ranged, powerful attacks.

    I don’t want to feel as if I’m sword’n’boarding It up when playing a Vanguard, or cautiously moving forward towards an archer with a shield up. I want to feel powerful but vulnerable, everything hanging on charging up to and obliterating my enemies.

    If I wanted to play more defensive or feel less vulnerable to ranged attacks, I’d simply play another class…



  • The big thing that separates a good vanguard from a mediocre one is one that uses his smokes well.

    NinjaCub is a prime example of pro smokes.

    This is, of course, in team games. If you want equal footing in duels, use a bardiche; shit is OP.



  • I also think Archers (especially good ones) are far too strong against Vgs.

    No matter how good you are(read: how much better than the archer), you will die against a very good archer.

    Reasons:

    1. The archer can hit/kill you without you being able to do ANYTHING to him (bows being able to 1 shot Vgs is just wrong….so wrong)(I’m not saying that Vgs should get bows just that this is a HUGE advantage for archers)
    2. Smoke pots are not efficient enough. 90% of the time the archer can reposition so he can still shoot you or simply fall back.
    3. The shotgun: a good archer will shoot you until you reach the point where he can only shoot one more arrow. He will hold that arrow until he gets a 99% hit because you are that close. You can’t even rely on spastic movement at this point anymore because at some point you move to move directly at him when you are swinging. That’s where he will hit you and then pull out his secondary which will now 1shot you (if you survived because he either didn’t hit your head or didn’t hit you before) so even though you have reached melee range, you are at no advantage at all.

    Because of 3 it is simply suicide to attack an archer with any class if you don’t have a shield and can’t take one hit.

    One example for 3: Not long ago I played archer with a haevy crossbow a clan internal 3v3(just for fun). I made their MaA ragequit because he didn’t have a shield and I killed him 4 times in a row (one time long range, 3 times shotgun). Said MaA is very good and it is unlikely I would beat him with my main class 4 times in a row, however I could beat him easily as archer (and I’m a bad archer). Sounds balanced? I don’t think so.

    And everyone knows the rage moment when you get killed by a rank 6 archer by an arrow knowing you could have killed him with your bare fists easily…it is simply not fair. If I am THAT much better, why can he beat me? He couldn’t with any other class…

    The essence of the problem is the shotgun. With projectiles being as lethal as they are the nearly guranteed hit at close range is simply op. Ranged weapons are already very powerful at range(and that is fine imho) but they get too powerful on close range. You can dodge arrows at a certain range of just about any archer if you know how to move. You can’t once you get into shotgun range.
    Another reason why the shotgun is so powerful is because if the archer hits(and a good one will), then he can pull out his weapon before he gets hit.

    So what does the shotgun do actually? It turns the archer’s weapon in a 1shot (2shot for knights) weapon and keeps the archer safe from opponents how cannot take at least one hit. So good archers dominate at range and still have equal chances in melee.



  • @Dr.Nick:

    Har! The longsword and messer do tremendous amounts of damage. Even the SoW is a beast against the weaker classes when you use the stab. They are also much much faster compared to Vanguad weapons. The warhammer, maul, and grand mace all two shot every class and can one shot some. The war axe, pole axe, and bearded axe also all do tremendous amounts of damage with good speed. All the knight weapons kill just as fast as the vanguard’s.

    I maintain that Knight swords are less damaging (if slightly faster) than Vanguard swords, with the zwei being the most powerful, killing MAAs on head, archers on torso and even slightly exceeding the slash/blunt damage of the Messer against fellow Knights. As for axes, the poleaxe could certainly be considered a beefier halberd, but in the end none of its versatile damagetypes provide the power needed to oneshot archers and MAAs like the bardiche does.

    I concede that the maul holds the overall highest damage value, so even if 90 of 100 knights use comparatively weak swords and one is holding a maul, he’s technically the hardest-hitting class in the game. Practically however, I would insist that the wildly popular bardiche and zweihander define vanguard as the powerhouse damage dealer.



  • @Falc:

    I also think Archers (especially good ones) are far too strong against Vgs…

    Great points, which is probably why clans take 2 knights not 2 vanguards in competitions.

    I think the vanguard should get 2 short spears to take care of those pesky archers. But yeah that would be overpowered and make the other options worthless.

    Instead of a shield and replacing charge I think vanguard should get a special move which is a 360 degree swing of their weapon with a 15 second cooldown.

    Now that would be cool.



  • @Falc:

    -snip-

    You explain a great deal of my grievances. I didn’t want to overload the first post with textwall and complaining, but I meant to write something along those lines.
    I met a heavy crossbow archer that immediately made me rage-switch to knight, and when I did safely close the distance and windup my sword he put a bolt right in my face. At least in that case there was some severe risk involved for him, if he’d botched that shot he would’ve been dead. Against vanguards it is pretty hard to miss at point blank.

    I don’t mean to discredit good archers, I just think they’re far more effective against vanguards in particular than they should be. A vanguard with a shield would still be more vulnerable than a MAA or knight due to inferior coverage and speed, so they’d still be the “natural target”, just in a less extreme way.

    @gregcau:

    Instead of a shield and replacing charge I think vanguard should get a special move which is a 360 degree swing of their weapon with a 15 second cooldown.

    Now that would be cool.

    That would be pretty cool, but what for? Is it going to deflect projectiles?



  • @gregcau:

    Instead of a shield and replacing charge I think vanguard should get a special move which is a 360 degree swing of their weapon with a 15 second cooldown.

    Now that would be cool.

    Too much PVKII for ya :P


Log in to reply
 

Looks like your connection to Torn Banner Forums was lost, please wait while we try to reconnect.