Shields

[TB Cookie [W]]

I agree it isn't being used for it's purpose, hence I've asked for a mage equivalent - otherwise Mages are losing stats against other classes.

With Quivers, at least there is a viable alternative already - Cloaks.

If you're going to go down that route;
Mages shouldn't be wearing metal armour,
Mounted Dexxers shouldn't be using skills designed for Stealthers on foot,
Mages should not be using weapons.
Samurai's should not be using Necromancy.
Dexxers should not be using any Mage skills or armour.

I'd completely agree with you.

 

[Merus]

so you would lost the ability to utilise your shield as a talisman? so what, it's not being used as it's purpose anyways. I also happen to think you should require archery to use the quivers.

Um, that argument could be made for every item post AOS. Suit properties are suit properties. Your arguing to change equipment not based on the equipment requirements, but based on a skill requirement. It would be like saying you have to have a weapon skill to hold (not use) a weapon, or you must have Magery to hold a spellbook. I don't agree with that line of thinking.

 

[Mervyn]

I didn't actually propose that mages should not be able to wear a shield unless they have parrying, i proposed the strength requirement be changed to a higher dex requirement.

In the past, metal armour did indeed take off dexterity.

 

[TB Cookie [W]]

I didn't actually propose that mages should not be able to wear a shield unless they have parrying, i proposed the strength requirement be changed to a higher dex requirement.

In the past, metal armour did indeed take off dexterity.

I know what you proposed, and you're still not taking it in.

You want Shields to have a higher Dex requirement - which by the way, if other things were adjusted, I'd be all for.

What about the 125 Str, 125 Int, 10 Dex Classes of which there are plenty.

They would all lose the ability to use Shields.

And we have discussed what Shields have on them.

You are going round in circles, and not progressing your thinking.

Bit like Pro, and why they always lose.

And while your sat here typing, I've been taking towns nonstop in VvV, while Pro are all probably in Trammel being those guys who rush to the Mage Generals then leave.

 

[Mervyn]

no i do understand, they would indeed lose the ability to use them, so what? how about we think about the new players.

If it's really such a big deal that you absolutly must use your shield as a talisman, how about instead have a cliloc that reads something like
"you must have 80 dex to utulise this fully" when you equip it then?

 

[TB Cookie [W]]

no i do understand, they would indeed lose the ability to use them, so what? how about we think about the new players.

If it's really such a big deal that you absolutly must use your shield as a talisman, how about instead have a cliloc that reads something like
"you must have 80 dex to utulise this fully" when you equip it then?

Nerfing quite a few Casting classes for the sheer hell of it, is quite a big so what.

Regarding the message - sure, that would make it ok.
Or - my suggestion - give me an offhand mage globe.
I don't like the artwork of a shield on a mage anyway.

 

[Mervyn]

oh like a crystal ball?

 

[TB Cookie [W]]

oh like a crystal ball?

Yes.



End of the day, I live on my mage ingame, it's just my 100% favourite character and playstyle.

I am seriously vain, the better I look, the better I PvP, but I also care about PvM on my mage, and the RP aspects of a mage.

 

[Jovi]

Sorry I would vote a big No on this one.

Able to carry it is one thing, able to use it effectively is another thing. It's the same with all weapons.


Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk Pro

 

[Mervyn]

Sorry I would vote a big No on this one.

Haha thanks but i didn't present the issue as a vote, because ofcourse 100% of stratics users are veteran players and already know of the dexterity requirement for parry, and have no interest in assisting new players.

 

[DJAd]

and have no interest in assisting new players.

What new players?

 

[The Craftsman]

... less complexity is what we need, not more.

That ship sailed many years ago.