WTF? shield?



  • Why can I get backstabbed even though I have my shield on my back? hope that is being fixed…



  • Shields don’t block melee attacks when they’re on your back – they only block arrows.



  • Why is that so? It doesn’t make sense. In fact, it would be a great feature for the knight class.



  • Tower shield on your back and blocking incoming attacks with a weapon would make you nearly invulnerable to melee. In real life shields broke all the time and blocking with a weapon was very hard, so introducing conditional realism to a system built on non-realism would actually result in less realism, or something like that.



  • You can still hit a blocking player. Also, it’s not about realism but what makes sense. New players are confused when they see that big shield on enemies’ backs. A game should communicate with it’s players clearly with it’s visuals.

    So a correct way of doing this should be to either take out shields from knight when they select two handed sword, or make the shield on back block attacks for at least 2-3 times.



  • Because what this game needs is to make greatsword spamming even more powerful.



  • @Rak:

    what makes sense

    Makes sense according to what? Your sense of realism?



  • Like Knight and Vanguard (can’t use shields, I know) aren’t easy enough to use already… If you’re going to allow a shield to block attacks from the back, then they should also make shields breakable, which makes them completely useless.



  • If you’re going to make shields work on your back, may as well have swords bounce off armor, because you know, that’s realistic, since armor actually did deflect most attacks, making knights even more powerful!



  • @GeneralMonkey:

    If you’re going to make shields work on your back, may as well have swords bounce off armor, because you know, that’s realistic, since armor actually did deflect most attacks, making knights even more powerful!

    to be fair they also killed most of their users with heat stroke.



  • From another thread in this section:

    g9xlaISxn6Y

    viewtopic.php?f=5&t=4238



  • Lololol, I love that. The hitting people behind you while looking up with the maul never gets old.

    But yeah, shields should never passively block melee attacks. I don’t even like the passive block on ranged attacks. It may not be realistic, but there was no passive block at all in AoC and nobody complained.



  • Hi! my first post on this forum.
    Im going to give my opinion. I think shields should block wherever they are, in your hand or in your back, but they should have a durability meter, and according what weapon hits it, it should break sooner or later, and I think that way shields wouldn’t be too much powerful, but too weak neither.



  • @Preputencio:

    Hi! my first post on this forum.
    Im going to give my opinion. I think shields should block wherever they are, in your hand or in your back, but they should have a durability meter, and according what weapon hits it, it should break sooner or later, and I think that way shields wouldn’t be too much powerful, but too weak neither.

    I agree!…