Shields need a buff



  • I think it’s about time shields got some love to bring them up to par with 2H setups. There’s a reason you hardly see anyone in scrims with a shield these days. I’m not saying there aren’t any (I’ll be using a shield) but if we’re honest, I think we can all agree that shield users are a minority, and I’m sure several of you would say inferior.

    Shields just break up the combat so much. You’re constantly stopping, starting, stopping, starting… and it’s not just on your end, but on your opponents as well. With 2H weapons, or 1H weapons without shields, you can get that lovely flow with repostes and parrys that just doesn’t happen with shield setups. What I’m getting at is, that playing with a shield feels like your fighting the game as well as your opponent. You feel gimped and restricted, not empowered by a different set of mechanics (like it should be)

    You also lose the stamina game, hard. You have several lockout periods and “pauses” to work around, your shield counts for upper torso damage when struck while not actively held up, you have the only setup susceptible to a daze when you are NOT out of stamina, you lose situational awareness and vision (which should be one of the only drawbacks). 1v2 or 1vX scenarios will butcher you like no other because of the lockout times and no reposte ability. You pretty much have to sit there blocking until you run out of stamina, or lower the shield and attempt a hit trade, of which you’ll more than likely be flinched out of because you need to wait for your shield to lower and for that split second pause that follows it.

    What do you gain? A holdable parry that doesn’t always work and blocks your vision, slightly increased weapon speed and a form of protection against projectiles.

    These positives in no way stack up or mitigate the negatives. I could put half the effort of a shield setup into a 2H setup and get the same, or superior results with ease.

    I especially like how shield raise and shield lower times are susceptible to heavy kick and will daze you. These little pauses and lockout periods are the worst thing about the shields. If you add up shield raise, shield lower and the slight lockout pause that happens after your shield is lowered, I bet you’d get a full second of vulnerability. And since you’re constantly raising and lowering your shield in a fight, it adds up pretty fast. I haven’t done any experimenting or anything, but I’d say the “you’re fucked” time is higher with a shield than a 2H weapon if you added everything up.

    SOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

    Here’s my proposal, of which I think is moderate, because I DON’T want shields getting too powerful. I just want them to be on par with 2H setups so we can start to see some diversity and divergent gameplay.

    -Slighlty decrease the stamina penalty for blocking attacks
    -Remove the shield lower timing and the lockout pause that follows it. We obviously shouldn’t be able to reposte with a shield, but let us at least attack immediately after blocking a blow (which would still come slower than a reposte from a 2H weapon) Shield raise time would still be there and still be punishable, there just wouldn’t be a restriction or penalty for lowering it.

    Thoughts?



  • @H:

    -Slighlty decrease the stamina penalty for blocking attacks
    -Remove the shield lower timing and the lockout pause that follows it. We obviously shouldn’t be able to reposte with a shield, but let us at least attack immediately after blocking a blow (which would still come slower than a reposte from a 2H weapon) Shield raise time would still be there and still be punishable, there just wouldn’t be a restriction or penalty for lowering it.

    Yes to slight stamina decrease.

    Yes to removing shield lowering time.

    Things to think about:

    Fix overhead attack interactions with shields.
    When shield bashing, make shields passively block incoming attacks instead of just being made out of air.



  • I agree that shields are still UP in game. They have a place in TO where a crouching Knight can really protect/complete an objective without too much fear of being shot by an arrow but if you really want to shine you need to ditch the shield and grab a 2 hander.

    They are a hell of a lot better than they were with stamina but a small buff in that area wouldn’t go astray.

    I think the first thing to do is get rid of shield up, shield down and lockout times, or significantly reduce them. If shields can’t riposte then they will never be as fast anyway (and just an aside to reality you can actually block and attack _at the same time _with a shield so they are in fact better than a riposte).

    Secondly fix the two obvious bugs; taking damage from being hit with the shield whilst it’s not up and being able to be kicked whilst still in shield up or down time.

    There are lots of ways to fix shields: one idea is to make them passively protect from melee hits as well as missiles but they have hit points and can be destroyed. You can grab another from a ammo box if you survive. Another idea is to give some sort of riposte ability, for example if there were two blocking styles; a tap that allows ripostes and a block you can hold down. Or even an alt-block that parries with your weapon instead of the shield that allows ripostes.

    The truth is this game is vastly weighted towards two handed weapons and is really nothing like medieval combat. Maybe that’s what the majority of people want- to be a Hollywood style battle with everyone Bravehearting around the place. In real life shields are totally OP which is why everyone used them.

    Making shield bashes more effective is another idea, one that worked well in DW. A comboable shield offensive shield bash goes a long way.

    Why did TB make shields weak in MW and powerful in DW? Because of Hollywood movies. If 300 had never come out people wouldn’t think of Spartans as kick ass and therefore shields would have been weak but because we have this idea in our minds of kick ass warriors with shields all of a sudden shields are good but only when Spartans use them.



  • @DokB:

    Things to think about:

    When shield bashing, make shields passively block incoming attacks instead of just being made out of air.

    That’s another good idea too, might get people to use the shield bash a bit more. But we don’t wan’t to overdue it either, because even with small changes, it’s possible that shields can become too strong.

    I think one or two small changes is all they really need, but we should probably come to a consensus on what the best changes actually are and which would be the best for combat, even when playing against. I don’t want them buffed in a way that makes them overly obnoxious to fight. I just want them on equal ground.



  • Why not get rid of shield up time? That is real pain in the arse for riposte OV lookdowns, if you have even a moderate amount of lag you can’t really raise that shield up in time.



  • Shields shouldn’t be buffed before the attack speed with them is nerfed, it’s bonkers. Norse+shield can more or less interrupt broadsword which is crazy.
    Other than that I see the shield as a support setup, which it’s really good for, one of my pals usually pick the shield as his secondary and we use it to get closer to teh enemy archers, lets say if I play vanguard or MAA I can just run behind him so I won’t get shot and any obstacles aka melee opponents gets taken down quite fast as we surrond them and attack simultaniously from one direction each. When he’s either alone or he doesn’t need the shield he uses his primary. So shield is more or less like a support setup like the other misc choices.



  • @H:

    -Slighlty decrease the stamina penalty for blocking attacks
    -Remove the shield lower timing and the lockout pause that follows it. We obviously shouldn’t be able to reposte with a shield, but let us at least attack immediately after blocking a blow (which would still come slower than a reposte from a 2H weapon) Shield raise time would still be there and still be punishable, there just wouldn’t be a restriction or penalty for lowering it.

    And how are the smaller shields supposed to compete with the shield down time gone? I think it should stay. But combining those it could be possble to do the following:

    • decrease the stamina penalty for blocking for bigger shields
    • decrease the down time for smaller shields

    Other ideas:

    • decrease the time of kick daze (make daze break when damaged or depend on the shield you use)
    • shield bash passively blocks incoming attacks (defense hitbox active during shield bash)
    • animation rework to stop attacks with shields from connecting faster
    • make shields deflect attacks sooner or kick dazing a shield user later
    • make the first 0.3s of a block work like a parry:
      *smaller stamina cost compared to blocking while holding the shield up
      *smaller shields have a higher negation here
    • remove the Archer limit on the official servers (more reason to pick a shield)
    • nerf Archers, especially snipers (less reason to counter-pick an Archer)

    The idea behind this is to make the Towershield a “turtling” choice meant to be used alongside teammates with the best projectile protection and the Buckler a “melee” choice that offers less protection but also less of the common downsides of using a shield. Heater and Kite rest in between.



  • @Evil:

    …snip, snap mcgee…

    Smaller shields would still benefit from this change. Smaller shields still have the lower and pause timings like the Kite and Tower. They would also benefit from the decreased stamina penalty as well.

    The only true benefit that should come from picking a smaller shield is more vision, which can be HUGE in terms of gameplay, reading animations and enemy actions. I also think that holding a smaller shield up shouldn’t restrict as much movement as with one of the larger ones. I think some degree of lethargy would make the decision between a larger and smaller shield a bit more difficult.

    But shield on shield balance can come later. Right now, they’re all in the hole insofar as effectiveness and viability. None of them stack up well against a skilled player with a 2H weapon.



  • Definitely like the idea of shield bashes blocking hits. It makes sense.



  • @H:

    The only true benefit that should come from picking a smaller shield is more vision

    Vision is not a balance element in Chivalry as you can see by the presence of a third person view. So more vision isn’t huge at all and they should have other advantages as well.



  • Shield knights are pretty useful in TO scrims. Just being able to distract 2 comp players for an extended period of time is extremely helpful for your team.

    That being said, the shield should definitely should not extend your own hitbox, which I’ve heard it does. All in all, shields are in a decent place, but very small buffs might bring them on par with 2h.

    Also, I think kickstun should only stun knights who are kicked with a shield raised, if they have less than a certain amount of stamina. I’m not going to lie, I don’t get kick stunned that often (or basically ever) when dueling, it is really difficult to land one. However, in team matches, it is super irritating to have to make a decision that requires you to either a). Take 2-3 hits and not get kick stunned, or b). Block 2-3 hits, but then get kick stunned for however long it is (it seems like ages).



  • Shield knights are pretty useful in TO scrims. Just being able to distract 2 comp players for an extended period of time is extremely helpful for your team.

    Thing is that comp people would just ignore the shield user and wax the rest of the team, then focus and bring down the tank.



  • @Kim:

    Thing is that comp people would just ignore the shield user and wax the rest of the team, then focus and bring down the tank.

    That could be combated with better positioning.

    I really like the alt-block idea, basically parrying with your weapon instead of blocking with your shield, allowing for a riposte. The parry window could be shorter than on a 2H setup to not make shield better altogether, and there would be no PiP, only PiB :P

    I’d like to see shield blocking hits when bashing too.



  • Shields have absolutely no crowd control in their current state, plain and simple. Shield lockout needs to go so we’re not forced to trade hits if we’re using a bastard, as does kickstun in shield drop. Allowing the shield to block in the second half of the raise sequence would also solve a few issues with fast ripostes/latency.

    A buff to 1H bastard damage would be nice, and maybe give the heavy shield bash with kite and tower a small area of effect (for defensive cc) along with the passive block.
    I’m all for fixing the speed of the weapons too, so long as 1H knight primaries get recompense of some kind.

    And please don’t drop the “shields are fine because ky wild” argument.



  • @Kim:

    Thing is that comp people would just ignore the shield user and wax the rest of the team, then focus and bring down the tank.

    Well you are kinda doing it wrong if you let them ignore you, if someone ignores you you should just attack them until they give you their attention.

    I think shields are fine now. I don’t want them to go back to being as incredibly op as they were before. They let you soak up alot of damage in team fights and they are almost feint and drag proof. That’s enough



  • A few things I’d say would make me more tempted to pick a shield back up:

    Increase overall animation speed for raise/drop across the board

    Decrease shield lock by at least half

    Allow immediate attacks from behind the shield (if you’re holding it up, pressing LMB/scroll wheel immediately drops your guard and starts windup)

    Right now, apart from missile protection, the only real benefit shields offer is a bit of defense against feinting. PiP is, from what I’ve found, actually MORE reliable against multiple enemies. Shields also drive your countering ability into the ground, block vision, increase your hitbox when passive (that REALLY needs to be fixed), remove ripostes, and can be kicked. Outside of specialized scenarios, there is absolutely no benefit to taking one. Sure, they have a place if you’re trying not to get shot off of an objective, or occasionally against really feint happy archers/MaA, but in general, they’re pretty meh right now.



  • @Jonasi:

    Well you are kinda doing it wrong if you let them ignore you, if someone ignores you you should just attack them until they give you their attention.

    I think shields are fine now. I don’t want them to go back to being as incredibly op as they were before. They let you soak up alot of damage in team fights and they are almost feint and drag proof. That’s enough

    If you’re gonna be attacking, you’d probably be better off not using a shield. I didn’t mean ignore in the sense that you forget about them entirely, but if their shield’s up just attack somebody else. Basically using a shield makes you a lower priority target since your damage output potential (and along with that, target switch potential) is significantly reduced with the lack of ripostes. Not saying they’re useless by any stretch, but they just aren’t that great against players who know how to properly team fight and shut down their targets.

    Never once have I been in a scrim where a shield knight has been more of a threat than a non-shield knight.



  • I think the game should certainly cater for shields. A shield should give a tank like feeling to a knight, allowing him to fight multiple opponents. But with parry into parry and such a vicious penalty for carrying a shield it is certainly off.

    Boosting the defense capability of the game will make for a more interesting game, and appeal to noob players who can at least hold off high level opponents until the cavalry arrives.

    I don’t like the shield raising times though I suppose it is fair. A vanguard can easily beat a shield user to 0 stamina quickly so definitely lower that. Buckler still needs some love to obscure the vision less. Heater shield needs to be worthy of using.



  • @Kim:

    If you’re gonna be attacking, you’d probably be better off not using a shield. I didn’t mean ignore in the sense that you forget about them entirely, but if their shield’s up just attack somebody else. Basically using a shield makes you a lower priority target since your damage output potential (and along with that, target switch potential) is significantly reduced with the lack of ripostes. Not saying they’re useless by any stretch, but they just aren’t that great against players who know how to properly team fight and shut down their targets.

    Never once have I been in a scrim where a shield knight has been more of a threat than a non-shield knight.

    You shouldn’t stand around holding your shield up all the time is what im saying, you need to be a threat to really mess up your opponents target switching and the like otherwise they can ignore you. Shield should only be up when needed ie when blocking an attack. You have to play differently than you would if you don’t have a shield, less target switching and such.

    A shield is a defensive item you can choose to use, imo choosing it should increase defensive capabilities while reducing your offense slightly, if shield users can be as effective threats then why would you not use a shield?



  • I wouldn’t buff shields unless you remove them from MaA. It already gives them the upsides without the downsides it has with other classes. Just like how panic parry was meant to help all the classes fight MaA, it ended up making MaA stronger.

    Also, I would like to note that when you are carrying a shield, you don’t always have to use it. It is there for fights where it is going to be helpful, and you can put it away for fights when it might cause you trouble. Think of it as a replacement to throwing axes, as that is what it is. If shield needs a buff, then you should be able to block and melee with throwing axes.


Log in to reply