I think shields currently offer goid protection vs missilee BUT are overcosted and too situational. My suggestion is aimed at making them more useful against wider range of armies while still remaining the best pick vs heavy missile armies.
Suggestion: reduce MD provides by shields, reduce cost of taking shields, add armour for taking a shields.
Shields cost 50 to equip for infantry 75 for cav
Bronze = +3MD inf/+2MD cav, 35% missile block from front, +5 armour
Silver = +3MD inf/+2MD cav, 55% missile block from front, +10 armour
This way shields would provide little extra protection vs ranged fire due to armour from all sides while still having an impact if the opponent did not bring missiles.
Units that have shields as defoult might deserve -25g cost down but this should be on case by case basis.
0 ·
Comments
- Spam
- Abuse
- Report
6 · 6LikeOn the other hand shields are very situational at best, would be good to make shields less situational and still usefull when the opponent is not targeting them with his shooting.
- Spam
- Abuse
- Report
0 · LikeGet on, Kroq-Gar, we're going shopping
- Spam
- Abuse
- Report
1 · 1Like- Spam
- Abuse
- Report
0 · Like- Spam
- Abuse
- Report
2 · 2Like- Spam
- Abuse
- Report
0 · LikeGet on, Kroq-Gar, we're going shopping
- Spam
- Abuse
- Report
0 · Like- Spam
- Abuse
- Report
0 · LikeNo dice.
Shieldless versions should get a buff instead to actually make it a choice. Right now people already tend to preferably take the shielded versions, your changes would make that an even easier choice.
- Spam
- Abuse
- Report
0 · Like- Spam
- Abuse
- Report
0 · Like- Spam
- Abuse
- Report
0 · Like- Spam
- Abuse
- Report
0 · Like- Spam
- Abuse
- Report
0 · Like- Spam
- Abuse
- Report
0 · Like- Spam
- Abuse
- Report
0 · LikeMy suggestion is that unshielded variants get a buff to MA and WS since holding a spear with two hands actually makes it easier to aim accurately and thrust with it. The prices of the variants should then be homogenized so that the choice is then between survivability and killiness.
- Spam
- Abuse
- Report
0 · LikeFirst of all i find shield and non-shield versions kinda wrong. What it should have been imho is armoured and non-armoured versions. Like the HE archers. Because thats the big thing that would distinguish better and worse geared troops. Shields and weapons were much easier to come by.
Whether shield or armor, both should increase melee defence compared to an unshielded or an unarmoured person. Shields already do that. But armour not always. It righfully happens with HE archers but not chaos trolls for example. Which is weird imho. Someone wearing armour is making the life of the attacker much more difficult, ap weapon or not. Because he still has to make effort to go for less protected parts and also ''connect'' his hits or they could glance off, even if the armour couldnt normally withstand a ''connected'' hit in a particular instant. There is a reason why helmets where shaped as they were for the most part.
Anyway thats what id do, worse and better armoured variants instead of shielded and unshielded. Everyone and their mothers had some form of shields back in the day i think. Armour in this game is trivialised enough, at least smthing like this could happen.
Which reminds me how ap works in this game, which i dont like. Historically ap weapons were weapons who actually allowed for much more forcefull impact, not some magical armour bypassing. Great weapons ingame should ve been like saurus warriors dmg, not blunt (and lower form a single hand weapon!) ap. To balance that all armour values could decrease of course. One of the things TT got right imho.
Anyway thats my 2 cents, not that i m expecting smthing to change since that would need complete rework but its nice to dream.
- Spam
- Abuse
- Report
1 · 1LikeAt some point i also wanted to rework shield block chances and make tower shields get 70% block chance (gold shields), but that would make the cheap dark elf frontline way too effetive against skirmish ( both dreadspears and bleakswords have tower shields ).
One more thing, shields addind armor doesn't make much sense to me, shields help against missiles and block hits in melee, but once you take hit, your body armor takes it, shield shouldn't affect the amount of armor you have.
- Spam
- Abuse
- Report
1 · 1LikeIn regards to reasoning behind why shields should not give armour i do disagree, what you say is actually correct however what is true also is if you have full body armour and no helmet (many chaos troops) and get hit in the head with the sword if we're being realistic it should count as you having 0 armour no? The reason i suggested shields to give armour is because overall they do protect you from dmg so they should either provide block chance in melee or armour and in TT having a shield meant better armour save. If however the MD they give is enough than fair enough, but if thats the case and its represented by MD i do think different level shields should give different MD bonus.
- Spam
- Abuse
- Report
0 · Like- Spam
- Abuse
- Report
0 · LikeThe solution lays not in shields or armour though. Its plain and simple: armies that have good ranged, shouldnt atleast have great cav at the same time, or atleast their cav should cost sagnificantly more then aquivalents from other factions. Currently, especialy elf factions, spread out their ranged forces across the map supporting it with highly effective and fast cav and a flying lord to be able to prevent picking up separated units of their army. This doesnt seem to be fair, considering those factions can also field pretty effective melee builds.
Shields are fine: no changes needed at all.
- Spam
- Abuse
- Report
0 · LikeSSSSSSSSIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIINNNNNNNNNNNNNNNDDDDDDDDDDDDDDRRRRRRRRRRRRRIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIIII
- Spam
- Abuse
- Report
0 · LikeIf it was up to me I'd consolidate all Weapon Damage into one stat, set weapons tagged 'AP' to ignore 50% of armor, and lower armor values by 20 or 30% across the board.
- Spam
- Abuse
- Report
1 · 1LikeIf it was like this, people would pick according to a strategy they d develop in their mind (e.g. great weapons for rush, shields for staying power) and not according to pick and pray.
- Spam
- Abuse
- Report
0 · Like- Spam
- Abuse
- Report
0 · Like- Spam
- Abuse
- Report
1 · 1LikeLook i dont wanna be that guy but a certain degree of realism whould greatly appreciated. Let me put it this way someone with a great weapon does almost the same dmg against a peasant and a steam tank. Thats magic except it shouldnt, even in the warhammer universe, for GW to go through armour just because. Historically speaking having armour was always always always better than not having under any circumstance until at least the advent of blackpowder weapons. And of course depending on the role, peltasts would be better off without armour i suppose.
edit: or what the above poster said, lol didnt notice
- Spam
- Abuse
- Report
0 · LikeP. S. Being ap doesn't mean a weapon is large and 2handed, it is crafted to be ap, could be a small blade etc.
- Spam
- Abuse
- Report
0 · Like- Spam
- Abuse
- Report
0 · Like