Buckler realism suggestion



  • A lot of people seem malcontent with the miserable little buckler, which is difficult to block with and obscures one’s view.

    http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=O8RWLxlzTiM

    These guys do historical fencing, unfortunately they have poor taste in music. But as you can see, the buckler is small enough and light enough to ‘parry’ with - the fellow with the rapier can’t turtle behind his shield, he only makes to block when he knows he is going to be hit.

    So I’d suggest the buckler be made even smaller to reduce the block on view and employ a ‘parry’ mechanic similar to weapon block - no attack speed/stam penalty with a slightly longer window at the cost of some vision loss.

    The differences should be subtle in order to not empower men-at-arms, but give flail knights and javelineers a more reliable and traditional parry option.



  • being able to repose with a shield?
    yeah I’d use it



  • The thing is, Chivlary’s “Buckler” isn’t actually a buckler. It’s a small round shield. “Small Shield” nor “Round Shield” aren’t terribly catchy, which is why I presume they call it a Buckler.

    I’d personally love to see them implement an actual buckler (much like what we see in that video), but gameplay wise it’d be too similar to ordinary parrying.

    Giving the Buckler the ability to riposte slightly slower than a parry would be an interesting and unique advantage, but making it smaller would remove the point, as it already has poor (but sometimes adequate) coverage against projectiles.

    So… I don’t really like the idea, shy of just giving the Buckler a counter-attack similar but inferior to the one you get with parries.

    Unless we implement a “Dueling Buckler” or just “Buckler” and rename the current one to “Round Shield.” That’d work.



  • Screenshots below are taken at 16:9 with a FoV of 100.


    Kite shield covers about 26% of the screen, the buckler covers about 41%.
    The buckler also drains much more stamina on a successful block.

    Really needs a tweak to the viewmodel, it shouldn’t be so obstructive.
    One of the reasons people hate the flail is being forced to use this shield because you aren’t allowed to use the flail one-handed alone without it or other shields.



  • @Sir:

    snip

    Yes! This does an excellent job of pointing out just how egregious the Buckler is. It’s ridiculously obstructive, when the opposite should be true. It should be held at an angle, like the Heater shield is. And it should be held out far more.

    Which may seem goofy, but remember that in real life, smaller shields (ones with handles, like our Buckler) are generally used to “punch” at the strike with the boss to deflect it, whereas larger shields are merely held and pivoted to deflect or absorb blows.

    In fact, it would be cool if blocking with the Buckler made you “punch” out with it. If you block an attack during this time (about the same length as a parry, maybe shorter) you get a slightly slower riposte, and less stamina is drained. After the punch, you hold the shield up like you do now.

    It might not even be egregious to give the Buckler the same riposte you get while parrying, since so many people seem to insist it’s worse than lacking a shield at all. I’m not sure this would be prudent until after the change, though.



  • The current buckler seems more like a targe than a proper buckler. Splitting the weapon into two versions, one at the current size with quicker turning and mobility to simulate it’s lighter weight compared to a heater shield, and one at the smaller size (about the size of the current buckler’s boss?) with the riposte/parry ability as a buckler.

    Then let the MAA and javelineers choose whether they want situational awareness, or better (comparitively) coverage against archers. Letting the jav maybe choose the Pavise, as well, if they want?



  • Now that you mention it a targe would be a neat idea to add to the game.
    Put a spike on it and make a do decent damage when you bash with it so it can be an offensive shield.


Log in to reply