Glorious Alpha Two Testers!
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Phase I of Alpha Two testing will occur on weekends. Each weekend is scheduled to start on Fridays at 10 AM PT and end on Sundays at 10 PM PT. Find out more here.
Check out Alpha Two Announcements here to see the latest Alpha Two news and update notes.
Our quickest Alpha Two updates are in Discord. Testers with Alpha Two access can chat in Alpha Two channels by connecting your Discord and Intrepid accounts here.
Shieldspear
Ace1234
Member
Ive been reading different threats regarding shields. It seems that one group of people want duel shields/two handed shields, but another group of people think its dumb because why wouldn't you want at least one normal weapon in one of your hands.
I have my opinion on this- but besides that- I think you could satisfy both parties by having a shield that has a weapon sticking out of it, such as a spear in the center and/or jagged sword like edges around the shield. This could allow those who want that added defense of double shields (compared to only one shield and a weapon)- while still having something that can function as an offensive tool to satisfy those that think double shields are silly with no practical use. This could either be two small shields or a two handed shield with a spear or something attached.
Though from another perspective, a shield in-and-of itself can have offensive potential as-is. Blunt force is a type of offense, and a shield is definitely capable of delivering significant blunt force. So I can't really say I get the hate or arguments against the shields because the points being made against them don't really make any actual sense to me. If its about immersion, then if something can be argued to be completely practical, then there is no issue of immersion at that point because it has real reasons for being used.
I have my opinion on this- but besides that- I think you could satisfy both parties by having a shield that has a weapon sticking out of it, such as a spear in the center and/or jagged sword like edges around the shield. This could allow those who want that added defense of double shields (compared to only one shield and a weapon)- while still having something that can function as an offensive tool to satisfy those that think double shields are silly with no practical use. This could either be two small shields or a two handed shield with a spear or something attached.
Though from another perspective, a shield in-and-of itself can have offensive potential as-is. Blunt force is a type of offense, and a shield is definitely capable of delivering significant blunt force. So I can't really say I get the hate or arguments against the shields because the points being made against them don't really make any actual sense to me. If its about immersion, then if something can be argued to be completely practical, then there is no issue of immersion at that point because it has real reasons for being used.
0
Comments
There are no reasons to use double shields. Using a shield relies on getting enough weight behind the shield to take the hit coming at you. Even for a deflection, you need to have enough behind it to not just lose the shield from your grip. You're never going to be able to put your weight behind both shields at once. The second is totally redundant, and could have been a weapon to use for a counterattack. Shields are heavy. They have to be to give them the strength to withstand an incoming hit. The added weight from the second shield hinders your manoeuvrability, making you even more ineffective on the battlefield. Additionally, shields don't have much of an offensive edge to them. You can't stab, chop, slash, etc with them. It's really, really hard to kill an enemy if you're only using a shield. Bear in mind that they've been sensible and not gimped themselves, and have have brought an actual weapon to the fight.
Single Shield = Yes, very practical.
Dual Shields = Utterly moronic.
No more, please.
Who says both shields would have to hit at one time? Duel weapons are usually animated to have one arm at a time being used for an attack. That would be completely practical and reasonable to have one arm at a time swinging a shield in an offensive manner. The benefit is that for defensive options you have the extra protection. It seems like you have aleady made your mind up without really fully thinking through the other perspective.
I've been the one-handed&shield against a dual-shield, and they didn't even get a look in. When the shields were big enough for full protection, they couldn't see anything and could barely move, and when the shields were small enough for them to move and see, they weren't big enough for proper protection. It was ridiculous.
And yes, they even tried with a sword sticking out the front in between the two huge shields. And it did absolutely nothing. There was no power or control behind it, and didn't hit me even once.
Have one be more defensive than the other.
It would be like a Block in one hand, a Parry in the other.
Increase arm strength to Brutal.
Player agency ftw.