|
Shields Replacing Armor - Good or Bad Change?
|
|
Greetings fellow vets and hopeful recruits-
Lately, I have been wondering how many people know, or care, of a certain issue that scares me with the change. According to the thread on game features:
• Shields replace armor, shields regen if you don’t take damage, health takes full damage, no BLOODY SCREEN health heal, different types of shields (regen slower, higher max, faster regen timer)
Now, I know a of people play and enjoy games like Halo, CoD, ect, that employs a shield, or shield style health system, but I know others also enjoy games with a more permanent health that does not regenerate without assistance. Health will be separate from shields in PS2, obviously, but is giving everyone shields over armor a good idea?
The Bad:
In PS1, we had armor and you'd have to go to an equipment terminal or find an engineer to get repairs. This gave engineers are more close quarters and infantry styled job. Instead of being just mine layers and vehicle crews, they'd jump off into the base and storm along side you, killing and repairing as they went, keeping the push going.
Having armor over shields also means that if you wing someone and chase them down, they will still be hurt. With shields they can hide and regenerate their shields and face you at full again, despite having been hit earlier.
The Good:
It can speed up gameplay. No longer do you need to worry about facing an enemy weakened or hunt down an engineer. You can just wait a minute, recharge and jump into the fray again.
If you get injured in the middle of no where, you can recover without trekking back to the nearest base or engineer.
You won't have to worry about minor hits that aren't worth seeking help over. As the shields regenerate, you will always start a fight at full.
The Either:
As seen in the recent gameplay video. When hit, the player flashes since his shields are taking damage. On one side, it helps you hit a target, if they glow for a second, you know where they are and that you hit them. On another side, it takes out a bit of realism and difficulty, and makes you light up if you happen to be hit by a stray bullet in the middle of a battle while taking a tactical position or flanking.
Also, shields are most likely intended to keep the battle heavier and more brutal. If you regenerate shields, you don't need an engineer and to seek repair. On the other hand, if you get hit, you may be more inclined to hide every time to regenerate, instead of with armor where you can't so you would charge in an all or nothing attack since it was your only chance sometimes. Would shields speed up combat, or make us seek shelter every time we take dmg, the same way many instinctively reload after every shot.
My personal take:
While I understand what they are after, I myself, do not like the idea of going to shields. It takes out a LOT of tactical elements and they are making the game a bit too fast paced as is. Armor gave you a greater sense of vulnerability, made you think on your next move after every conflict cause it kept you alive. Shields just keep going and going. I makes combat too different, and that's not just nostalgia speaking. Personally, I think shields can work as an armor class of their own, but we need armor. Shields should be on top of a light amount of armor and primarily used in Vanu infantry and armor, it makes more sense for Vanu to have it. I'm pure NC, and I don't like Vanu, but as far PS goes, Vanu need stuff like this while the rest use harsher armor system. It makes it more themed and feel right.
So what does everyone else think of this replacement of armor with shields? Does it make sense? Is it good for PS theme? Is it a good gameplay choice? Should it belong to all 3 factions or just Vanu?
Last edited by Zekeen; 2012-03-16 at 05:40 PM.
|
Linear Mode
