Two Shields?



  • So I read that if you put your shield away it shows up to block your back. Cool, I like that. Can I carry two shields so I always have one on back, or available to replace my main if it breaks?



  • That would be kind of silly.



  • @SlyGoat:

    That would be kind of silly.

    Well i dont think so. It’s realistic, because many people would have a shield to cover their back, and their front.
    Also, a second shield would take another slot, which means a player with 2 shield could only take one weapon.
    It allows for more play style while being realistic and balanced.



  • Don’t think it would be realistic, just imagine the weight and cluttering of it !

    I believe most soldiers with shields on their backs were wielding two-handed weapons, or were archers, and thus didn’t have two shields. Moreover, I believe backshielding was used just to carry a shield when you could need one and used other kind of weaponry before that, not because of the added protection (which would come at a heavy money cost).



  • @Jihell:

    Don’t think it would be realistic, just imagine the weight and cluttering of it !

    I believe most soldiers with shields on their backs were wielding two-handed weapons, or were archers, and thus didn’t have two shields. Moreover, I believe backshielding was used just to carry a shield when you could need one and used other kind of weaponry before that, not because of the added protection (which would come at a heavy money cost).

    A shield isn’t heavier than a two handed sword. Unless it’s a very big shield.



  • @Jihell:

    Don’t think it would be realistic, just imagine the weight and cluttering of it !

    I believe most soldiers with shields on their backs were wielding two-handed weapons, or were archers, and thus didn’t have two shields. Moreover, I believe backshielding was used just to carry a shield when you could need one and used other kind of weaponry before that, not because of the added protection (which would come at a heavy money cost).

    Modern soldiers carry bags 10 times as heavy on their backs, but still, I dont really like the idea of 2 shields in the game. There would be no penalty and everyone, including archers, would carry shields on their back to passively block fire



  • Dedicated turtles carrying two shields? Sounds fine to me. They’d basically be walls with little offensive capability.



  • @Faranox:

    Dedicated turtles carrying two shields? Sounds fine to me. They’d basically be walls with little offensive capability.

    Yeah that’s what I was thinking. To balance things those guys could only carry small weapons because the slot would be used by the two shield.



  • It depends on what you have to trade for it, but either way it’s a bad idea IMO. If you have to give up your primary for a second shield, it’s just a shitty option that nobody will ever go for. If you have to give up a secondary and keep your primary, it’s probably always worth it.



  • @SlyGoat:

    It depends on what you have to trade for it, but either way it’s a bad idea IMO. If you have to give up your primary for a second shield, it’s just a shitty option that nobody will ever go for. If you have to give up a secondary and keep your primary, it’s probably always worth it.

    Probably yeah. Yet a turtle class would be kind of fun to see.



  • @akarnir:

    Probably yeah. Yet a turtle class would be kind of fun to see.

    Like that wasn’t bad enough in previous incarnations of the game.



  • Well do shields break in game? If so I think this is a perfectly valid thing to have. Two shields and a short sword would be a great shield wall guy because even when they break his first shield if there’s a pause he can pull out his back-up.

    Now if there’s NO shield breakage then yeah I agree not really worth it.



  • One shield in each hand + one on the back…that would be something.



  • This just reminds me of Mount and Blade Warband, people carrying around 2 shields so that people can’t shoot arrows into their back lol.



  • i think that would be a good idea using 2 shields it will just add defense



  • This is retarded. Want a shield on your back play an armored class and learn to watch your 6. One of the reasons why I PWN AOC is because I sneak around and get behind people and kill them. Situational awareness is key to any battle and not knowing someone is behind you is your fatal mistake.



  • I don’t think the idea has much merit either Retsnom, but let’s keep it civil.



  • What is not civil? It is a stupid idea, period. Situational awareness has more merit than a shield on your back, not to mention is would look stupid as well. If you don’t like being killed get better, learn new tactics and strategies instead of suggesting something that has no proof of ever existing with in the period, but I digress.



  • @Retsnom:

    What is not civil? It is a stupid idea, period. Situational awareness has more merit than a shield on your back, not to mention is would look stupid as well. If you don’t like being killed get better, learn new tactics and strategies instead of suggesting something that has no proof of ever existing with in the period, but I digress.

    What is not civil?
    is not civil
    not civil

    You sir acted in a manner that was the exact opposite of civil. You insulted and belittled the author and nothing you said was productive. In short nothing you’ve said is civil



  • Waaa, I got my feelings hurt. It is stupid, period. I didn’t call anyone names, Just said the idea was stupid, gave ideas on the need for better skills. No need to sugar coat it for the politically correct. Try that in battle some day. Situational awareness is not productive? Great then keep failing to check your back and I will be there killing you and making you rage quit. But instead request something stupid so that you can live a little longer and be less effective in battle. Yeah, real smart…… :?


Log in to reply