Kite Vs. Tower

[Raahl]

<DIV>In the past there was no difference between a kite and a tower shield.  Some patch in the past they fixed a display error on the blocking stat.  Did this make tower shields better than kite shields?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Is your avoidance better than a kite when using a tower?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Someone was claiming that the shield factor actually now means something?  Is this true?</DIV>

[Ladicav]

<DIV>I think from memory the actual displayed avoidance was incorrect between the 2, but the mechanical operations of the shields in combat actually worked as intended. Only the numbers displayed were out of whack, or something like that, so they just fixed the display.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>It's been a while, I don't remember the exact detailing. Maybe someone else can elaborate.</DIV>

[Wli]

<DIV>I can tell what I see and what I read around(don't ask me where, posts and posts).</DIV> <DIV>The number displayed "Shield Factor" means nothing, one with a higher number will give ya the same as one with lower number.</DIV> <DIV>What a shiled gives: only avoidance(chance to block). AND, kite and tower shileds give the same block chance (15% ?).</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Thats it. Or I am very wrong ? (I think the shiled factor may have a play in the ToS CA, the greater the number, less is the damage taken by the shield on each intercept)</DIV>

[Shizzirri]

<P>That's the only difference, you have to have a tower shield to use tower of stone...</P> <P>But seriously if there the same, why bother having two shield type in the first place, sheesh.</P>

[EvilIguana9]

<span><blockquote><hr>Shizzirri wrote:<p>That's the only difference, you have to have a tower shield to use tower of stone...</p> <p>But seriously if there the same, why bother having two shield type in the first place, sheesh.</p> <div></div><hr></blockquote>If longswords and flamberges are the same, why bother having two weapon types in the first place? Simple: flavor.  Tower shields are large and unwieldy.  They block more attacks in the immediate vicinity of their location on your person, but you are unable to use them with as much maneuverability as a kite shield, which while slightly smaller is designed to be more maneuverable for a more active protective stance.  If you wanted to be historically accurate, kite shields would most likely be better protection than towers.  </span><div></div>

[TunaBoo]

<div></div>Yah as far as I know, shield factor is the only thing that matters on a shield. The only exception for us that I know if, if that kite's wont work for tower of stone, which may matter if you use that skill.<div></div><p>Message Edited by TunaBoo on <span class=date_text>12-13-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:49 AM</span>

[MrDiz]

<blockquote><hr>EvilIguana966 wrote:<span><blockquote><hr>Shizzirri wrote:<p>That's the only difference, you have to have a tower shield to use tower of stone...</p> <p>But seriously if there the same, why bother having two shield type in the first place, sheesh.</p> <div></div><hr></blockquote>If longswords and flamberges are the same, why bother having two weapon types in the first place? Simple: flavor.  Tower shields are large and unwieldy.  They block more attacks in the immediate vicinity of their location on your person, but you are unable to use them with as much maneuverability as a kite shield, which while slightly smaller is designed to be more maneuverable for a more active protective stance.  If you wanted to be historically accurate, kite shields would most likely be better protection than towers.  </span><div></div><hr></blockquote>If its all just flavour why is plate armor more mitigation than chain? If its just flavour why cant paladins use tower shields? And why does a round shield not block as much as a tower shield? or a buckler for that matter? And most importantly: why was tower shield better before the revamp, and why was a warriors ability to use it touted as an advantage?

[EvilIguana9]

<span><blockquote><hr>MrDizzi wrote:<blockquote><hr>EvilIguana966 wrote:<span><blockquote><hr>Shizzirri wrote:<p>That's the only difference, you have to have a tower shield to use tower of stone...</p> <p>But seriously if there the same, why bother having two shield type in the first place, sheesh.</p> <div></div><hr></blockquote>If longswords and flamberges are the same, why bother having two weapon types in the first place? Simple: flavor.  Tower shields are large and unwieldy.  They block more attacks in the immediate vicinity of their location on your person, but you are unable to use them with as much maneuverability as a kite shield, which while slightly smaller is designed to be more maneuverable for a more active protective stance.  If you wanted to be historically accurate, kite shields would most likely be better protection than towers.  </span><div></div><hr></blockquote>If its all just flavour why is plate armor more mitigation than chain? If its just flavour why cant paladins use tower shields? And why does a round shield not block as much as a tower shield? or a buckler for that matter? And most importantly: why was tower shield better before the revamp, and why was a warriors ability to use it touted as an advantage?<hr></blockquote>Because it's not *all* just flavor.  Basically, the biggest advantage of having the tower shield skill is that you have a wider variety of choices, just as is true for having more weapon skills.  That makes it easier to find acceptible gear upgrades.  Logically it makes sense to hgave the shield progression as it is.  A kite shield is the optimal balance of size and maneuverability.  Smaller shields lose significant size for marginal gains in maneuverability, whereas the tower shield makes an equal tradeoff of maneuverability for size.  Basically the main reason is balance, but it can be easily explained in other terms as well.  </span><div></div>

[MrDiz]

It should not be flavour. Tower shield were supposed to offer the most protection. Plate armor give more mitigation than chain. 2h weapons do more damage than 1h weapons. You make these choices, for reasons other than the 'look'. Noone picks a tower shield for its look! You pick it cos its a large bloody wall between you and messy death. Why do you think all guardians are now running round with a kite shield on their back and 3 towershield in their backpacks? Fabled kite shield drop like rain and are better than legendary tower shields ..... thats why. They even look nicer too. Its a total no brainer. If it were not for the Tower of Stone CA most of us wouldnt even carry them.Personally I would like to see more variety in weapons too. eg: damage rating vs different types of armor. A rapier does good damage vs leather but awful vs plat. A stilletto does medium damage vs both. But im not holding my breath the way this game is going.Flavour flavour flavour..... ARGGG! What about substance, content and consequences? You pick a class, you pick an item, you get the benefits, you reap the consequences. Im so sick of this "all toons should be clones" mentality. Im a halfling guardian that has more strength and takes blows as well as an ogre guardian! [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn]!? Oh look, a gnome monk or an ogre berzerker, lets make them identical in every way except model size and skin, oh and lets make horses magically shrink for the gnome. *bangs head on wall*Whats next? Lets make lvl 1 players equal to lvl 60 players because its not fair that they pay the same and arent equal? lets make 'level' just a flavour too?

[Shizzirri]

<P>If you want to preech lore and flavor look at the other side with the ancient roman legions and their use of tower shields in the 10x10 units where they'd use them to protect the whole group.  Or even the Ancient Greek phalanxs.</P> <P>There is no realistic lore in this game, I can carry 4 bank boxes, and still have 50% avoidance in raids, is that realistic?  This game has hardly any realistic aspects to it so why not, tower shields are bigger, when I crafted a kite shield for an alt it used metal components vs leather or other wooden ones, so shouldn't that be considered.</P> <P>Tower shields are bigger, they can block more attacks, guardians and zerkers have high strength so they should be able to handle the "weight" factor you bring up.</P> <P> </P>

[TunaBoo]

"Fabled kite shield drop like rain and are better than legendary tower shields ..... thats why. They even look nicer too."That is rather subjective, I like the look of tower shields much much much much better.... only have kite shields for like my 10th string of gear.<div></div>

[MrDiz]

<blockquote><hr>TunaBoo wrote:"Fabled kite shield drop like rain and are better than legendary tower shields ..... thats why. They even look nicer too."That is rather subjective, I like the look of tower shields much much much much better.... only have kite shields for like my 10th string of gear.<div></div><hr></blockquote>Try being a halfling <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /> I look like a blue turtle.

[Gilson-Bertox]

Sooo, if I'm using a pristine fashioned oak tower shield, all I'm really doing is losing avoidance as opposed to using an oak kite shield?  I always figured higher shield factors were better. <div></div>

[Will.]

<span><blockquote><hr>Raahl wrote:<div>In the past there was no difference between a kite and a tower shield.  Some patch in the past they fixed a display error on the blocking stat.  Did this make tower shields better than kite shields? <font color="#ffff00">Maybe. Type doesn't matter, only shield factor. In most cases kite shields and tower shields have the same shield factor, but when they differ the shield with the higher sheild factor is better.</font> </div> <div> </div> <div>Is your avoidance better than a kite when using a tower? <font color="#ffff00"> Depends on whether that kite shield has a higher shield factor.</font> </div> <div> </div> <div>Someone was claiming that the shield factor actually now means something?  Is this true? <a href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=chars&message.id=40189#M40189" target=_blank>Yes.</a> <font color="#ffff00">All you have to do is buy a couple shields and try it for yourself. Get a kite and tower with different SF and put them on.</font> </div><hr></blockquote>-Will</span><div></div>

[EvilIguana9]

<span><blockquote><hr>Gilson-Bertox wrote:Sooo, if I'm using a pristine fashioned oak tower shield, all I'm really doing is losing avoidance as opposed to using an oak kite shield?  I always figured higher shield factors were better. <div></div><hr></blockquote></span> You're not losing ANYTHING actually, they are entirely equal except that towers are required for the tower of stone art.  <div></div>

[Terron]

From what I know of history: Tower shields where the best when fighting in formation (roman legions and phalanxes - don't need to move shield to stop attacks from many directions as comrades' shields will be there) Kite shields were best for mounted warriors  (medieval knights - small enough to use onn horseback, point protects leg on shield side). <div></div>