Warrior upgrade?! no way!

[Tasan]

Was thinking about warriors, and how melee is worthless, and thought of this little gem.

Why not allow warriors to strap on a shield during combat at the expense of 2 melee rounds worth of attacks? I.e. wear shield during combat negates attacking for 2 rnds(maybe more?). Maybe limit it to non-tanking warrior only?

Thoughts?

Twinshadow

[Sarvis]

Can you say: "Already imped"? If a warrior wants to wear a shield he disengages, wears it, then assists or bashes to get back into the fight. All of which takes about 2 rounds.

Unless you mean they could wear shield and bash right away, but they miss 2 rounds of attacks after? That might be cool...

[thanuk]

Why cant you just wear a shield in the middle of a battle again? Why does there need to be lag? I dont see how its any different than wielding a weapon during combat, well i see how its different from a coding aspect, but that is the only reason i can think of that it isn't allowed.

[Daz]

don't you realize how imbalanced it would be if i were allowed to remove my 6 foot long, two handed greatsword and then turn around and strap on a shield and wield a mace or something.

the entire combat system would have to be rebuilt from scratch to accomodate such a drastic change, and just isn't worth implementing.

[thanuk]

why cant they just change shields to the same as a weapon instead of a peice of equipment?

[Sarvis]

don't you realize how imbalanced it would be if i were allowed to remove my 6 foot long, two handed greatsword and then turn around and strap on a shield and wield a mace or something.

the entire combat system would have to be rebuilt from scratch to accomodate such a drastic change, and just isn't worth implementing.

Umm... no. You already can switch weapons in battle, you're just changing the thing you wear from a different sword to a shield. I mean, if I'm wielding my claymore and want to dig my two longswords out of my bp to dual it's no problem. So why not with shields?

I understand it from a realism perspective, since you need to actually strap it to your arm... but it's probably done this way for balance reasons here.

[Zen]

Some shields have buckles sure, but most have simple straps or a grip arrangement. Putthing them on is as simple as sliding your arm through the loops.

And Daz, you constantly talk about warriors being so weak. If that's the case, really, how unbalancing is it if warriors can switch weapons in the middle of combat? Geez. I hope you are being sarcastic, because otherwise that's just being stupid.

Myself, I don't know about the two rounds of not attacking, but maybe either a round of lag after wearing a shield, or a round where you cannot shieldblock after wearing a shield would be appropriate.

-Lorgan

[Pabo]

Honestly, I do find it rather ridiculous if you can change armor during combat. If someone is trying to KILL you, I don't think you have time to dig into your knapsack and look for a shield. If you think realistically about how fast melee combat is, it would make sense. Personally, it doesn't make much sense to change weapons in combat either. If you were standing toe to toe with a foe, I highly doubt you can remove your claymore, put it into your backpack, pull out TWO swords and wield them. In RL sword combat, you'd prolly be dead already if you tried. If you really want to switch out armor/shield during combat, it would have to be done in a way that it makes sense. Some coding would have to be changed. I.E. a slot that is <Strapped to Back> Polished Bone Shield or <Strapped to Waist>, etc. then perhaps in that case, if you were wielding only one weapon, you can reach back to slide the shield onto your arm or reach down to your waist and slide the shield up. If dual wielding, it would take a round to unwield and slide on the shield. Otherwise if it's in a container or some sort, it just wouldn't make much sense. If the shield is on the floor, you should be able to pick it up and strap it on but with a penalty, i.e. easier to hit when you try to reach for the shield. In this case, dual wielding should be allowed because in a reality sense, the second weapon could be dropped in order to pick up the shield. Well, that's just my two cents. Kinda gives the game a more realistic feel even though it's in a fantasy setting.

[Zen]

Honestly, I do find it rather ridiculous if you can change armor during combat. If someone is trying to KILL you, I don't think you have time to dig into your knapsack and look for a shield. If you think realistically about how fast melee combat is, it would make sense. Personally, it doesn't make much sense to change weapons in combat either. If you were standing toe to toe with a foe, I highly doubt you can remove your claymore, put it into your backpack, pull out TWO swords and wield them. In RL sword combat, you'd prolly be dead already if you tried. If you really want to switch out armor/shield during combat, it would have to be done in a way that it makes sense. Some coding would have to be changed. I.E. a slot that is <Strapped to Back> Polished Bone Shield or <Strapped to Waist>, etc. then perhaps in that case, if you were wielding only one weapon, you can reach back to slide the shield onto your arm or reach down to your waist and slide the shield up. If dual wielding, it would take a round to unwield and slide on the shield. Otherwise if it's in a container or some sort, it just wouldn't make much sense. If the shield is on the floor, you should be able to pick it up and strap it on but with a penalty, i.e. easier to hit when you try to reach for the shield. In this case, dual wielding should be allowed because in a reality sense, the second weapon could be dropped in order to pick up the shield. Well, that's just my two cents. Kinda gives the game a more realistic feel even though it's in a fantasy setting.

I find western gunslinger flicks where the hero pulls out two guns at once before the bad guy can blink unrealistic as well. Don't you?

Okay, I'm editing this for unsupported sarcasm, I'll add something as closely resembling a rational response.

My point is that, as level 50 warrior, I am not you run of the mill foot soldier. I am a warrior at the pinacle of his abilities, not some geak out of boot camp, nor some average joe soldier. This applies to any class at level 50 as well, the things that a level 50 player can do are exceptional. It is the highest mortaly attainable level. So in my mind at least, and that being where I spend most of my time, I am the gunslinger who has the fastest draw. Most men couldn't do what I can, and that's why most stop at L35 if you get my drift.

You can only take realism so far on a game like this, at level 50 I would argue that any class is _supposed_ to be a little unrealistic. Currently, warriors aren't. That will change tho, and maybe being able to slip your arm through the straps of your shield while warding off attacks with your sword in one hand is a small step towards that.

-Lorgan

[Gavry]

I still can't quite understand all these threads about upgrading warriors damage, and making them hit more etc. I wish you fellow morts would just concentrate on the real issue facing tanks right now, the fact that we just plain suck at tanking. Take stone/scale, blur, displace and vit away and we go down faster than a 2c hooker.

As a Paladin I'd happily sacrafice ALL my +hit and +dam items for +HPs and -Saves. Once we can actually tank a little better then start worrying about doing some damage.

Old Bastard

PS: Upgrade paladin weapons

Avenger: 1d1 +0 +0 +65 HPS

[Malacar]

Part of the problem is mobs have advanced far beyond their old capacity and capabilities.

Another part of the problem is the melee code in general. It's on a newer system that can be tweaked, but it's showing its age. With the rash of new mages and spellcasters in general, the melee code needs modifications. Both from PC and mob sides.

I'm hoping the eq equalization will help with that, and mobs will get a bit of a downgrade in the process. As it is, things are a little out of control right now.

[Daz]

[hahahaha]

hahahahahaha
i got flamed
hahahahahaha
i was beign sarcastic and you wasted emotion getting pissy on it

[/hahahaha]

[Xisiqomelir]

[hahahaha]

hahahahahaha
i got flamed
hahahahahaha
i was beign sarcastic and you wasted emotion getting pissy on it

[/hahahaha]

LMAO! Good job, soldier! Have a cookie for your efforts

[Shevarash]

Why not allow warriors to strap on a shield during combat at the expense of 2 melee rounds worth of attacks? I.e. wear shield during combat negates attacking for 2 rnds(maybe more?). Maybe limit it to non-tanking warrior only?

Not a bad idea, though I'd have to give the exact penalty for strapping a shield on some more thought. And yes, there WOULD have to be a penalty, otherwise we'd end up with triggers to swap shields in whenever it's time for a bash and vice-versa...which would just be silly. :)

[Daz]

woo! shev realizes our ultimate goal is to twink every bit of the code we can!

who told on us?

[Deltin]

why cant they just change shields to the same as a weapon instead of a peice of equipment?

Probably because then people would be wearing/wielding 2 shields hehehe, why can't you use 2 shields anyway?

[thanuk]

why cant they just change shields to the same as a weapon instead of a peice of equipment?

Probably because then people would be wearing/wielding 2 shields hehehe, why can't you use 2 shields anyway?

I dunno, but nobody would. If you used 2 shields you couldnt parry.


Hey shev, how about we lose movement points for changing to shield in battle, like with disarm? So you can do it once or twice but if you try to spam it all the time you will run out of moves and be screwed mightily!

Honestly the only reason i want this is so i can walk around grids wielding a 2hand weapon and then change in the middle of battle if too many mobs enter and i need to shieldblock. Switching on and off every time i bash just isn't worth the effort considering how trivial warrior damage really is during a fight.

[Pabo]

My point is that, as level 50 warrior, I am not you run of the mill foot soldier. I am a warrior at the pinacle of his abilities, not some geak out of boot camp, nor some average joe soldier. This applies to any class at level 50 as well, the things that a level 50 player can do are exceptional. It is the highest mortaly attainable level. So in my mind at least, and that being where I spend most of my time, I am the gunslinger who has the fastest draw. Most men couldn't do what I can, and that's why most stop at L35 if you get my drift

Perhaps make this shield switching situation a skill for warriors. You would have to notch it and improve upon it like every other skill. It would make it so that a level 1 warrior couldn't switch out a shield like a level 50 warrior could. This would be a melee skill, and would of course increase with experience. While a level 1 would be a rookie and level 50 is considered a 'master', it would be quite unbalanced if a level 1 could do exactly the same thing as a level 50 warrior could. As for the skill, perhaps if it is a total failure, you fumble your weapon and the shield isn't strapped on, and if it is successful, there are no penalties or a slight penalty of somesort. I'm not big on the lag deal, I know warrior skills already create enough lag as it is. This would be a skill availible to the warrior only, wouldn't make sense for mage or cleric to strap on a shield in the middle of combat.

[Sarvis]

Actually a mage should be able to get naked and do a little dance if they wanted, since spells should be cast from a good 20 yards away. ;)

[Snurgt]

Actually a mage should be able to get naked and do a little dance if they wanted

I agree with this 100%.

I also think naked gnomes should cause area blindness.

[Treladian]

"I also think naked gnomes should cause area blindness."

Why? What's there to see? I think innate camoflauge or invis is more inline for naked gnomes.