Bungie Universe
This topic has moved here: Subject: To shield or not to shield, that is the question.
  • Subject: To shield or not to shield, that is the question.
Subject: To shield or not to shield, that is the question.
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Just interested to see why people prefer/dislike playing with shields.

  • 04.29.2004 11:13 AM PDT
  •  | 
  • Exalted Legendary Member

no

  • 04.29.2004 11:15 AM PDT

bah

I prefer shields. They reward strategy more yet at the same time rewards skill. You can't just go all out and weaken someone with shields, you have to plan your attack, yet at the same time the player who can kill the other guy quicker gets rewarded with having that big chunk of shield back. Also, no shields encourages too mush pistol use. If shields are off, you won't see me with any guns other than the pistol and the sniper.

  • 04.29.2004 11:16 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

got to agree with The Rip Saw. covenant weapons would be all but obsolete. besides, having to cope with shields is half the strategy of the game.

  • 04.29.2004 11:30 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Honestly, shields don't matter to me, just as long as i can run them over in a tank

  • 04.29.2004 11:43 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

No shields with rockets playing oddball is always fun...

but yeh...on normal i take shields

  • 04.29.2004 11:49 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Just wondering as i have one group of freinds that use shields and another that doesnt which means that i constantly have to vary my tactics slightly.

  • 04.29.2004 11:50 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

In big 8-16 player games no shields, makes you work in a team more, in anything under its fun to play with or without.

  • 04.29.2004 11:51 AM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

I dont think useing sheilds proves anything. I dont mind either cos the game is equally good but sheilds just make it harder to kill people. You could spend all this time bringing someones sheild down and then they wimp out and run away to let their sheild recharge and that doesnt show any skill wotsoever nor tactics. Real stratagy comes from no sheilds because u have to be careful with the life you have and if you get hit it shows and u cant run away so it takes more thought and stratagy to stay alive and you also need to think quickly so if you ask me sheilds are for wimps but i really will play either way its just as fun...

  • 04.29.2004 12:19 PM PDT

bah

It also rewards camping a whole lot more. just sitting in the shadows with a pistol waiting for that one shot. I like shields because it allows you to take bigger risks. You can boldly walk aound a corner without worrying about someone one-shot killing you.

  • 04.29.2004 12:22 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT


It also rewards camping a whole lot more. just sitting in the shadows with a pistol waiting for that one shot. I like shields because it allows you to take bigger risks. You can boldly walk aound a corner without worrying about someone one-shot killing you.


you can camp without sheilds and you just contridicted yourself you said it took more skill and stratagy earlier and now your sayin you can walk around boldy around corners! What the hell is that?! that isnt stratagy thats carelessness and stupid who does that with sheilds?! anyway if as you said with sheilds you can walk around corners and get shot then it doenst show skill or stratagy just bad playing style.

  • 04.29.2004 12:28 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Mouseman, you think using shields renders a game tacticless. Isnt running away and hiding a tactic, and a good one at that as it keeps you alive, which im sure you would choose over death. And dont say its cowardly, remember its just a game, cowardice,bravery and honour dont come into it, all that counts is you and your team stay alive and the other team dies, and everyone enjoys the game.
But then again, if you enjoy the game without shields then go for it, im just arguing, that it isnt cowardly to run away when you know your loosing.

  • 04.29.2004 12:31 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

personally i think that using shields is not fun. Whats fun is getting head shots with one bullet. Whats fun is hearing your opponent in the other room yell and scream about how he shot you. Whats fun is throwing grenades to someone elses demise. I dont prefer shields, because with out them, you become better. you have to become better. your aim gets better because you want a headshot, and you become more tacticle because your life is in danger. If we all had shields we could stand in the middle of hang em high and not get anywhere.

  • 04.29.2004 12:37 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

i see ur point but i still have to stick by my earlier comment. It may just be a game but there still is cowerdice in games as well. In real life you cant run away and let your sheild recharge you either fight or u die trying you cant run and let your health regain, it cant be done. Eventually all the team have to die you might as well die with pride rather than crouching behind a rock waiting for your health to regain, that is not a tactic. Besides i dont play with sheilds people just asked my opinion im just trying to find the flaws in wot their saying and pointing it out to them.

  • 04.29.2004 12:38 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

personally i think that using shields is not fun. Whats fun is getting head shots with one bullet. Whats fun is hearing your opponent in the other room yell and scream about how he shot you. Whats fun is throwing grenades to someone elses demise. I dont prefer shields, because with out them, you become better. you have to become better. your aim gets better because you want a headshot, and you become more tacticle because your life is in danger. If we all had shields we could stand in the middle of hang em high and not get anywhere.

exactly what i beleive. Sheilds prove nothing about how good u are and they definantly dont help you get better.

[Edited on 4/29/2004 12:42:57 PM]

  • 04.29.2004 12:41 PM PDT

bah

Posted by: MouseMan

It also rewards camping a whole lot more. just sitting in the shadows with a pistol waiting for that one shot. I like shields because it allows you to take bigger risks. You can boldly walk aound a corner without worrying about someone one-shot killing you.


you can camp without sheilds.
Read your post, then mine. i was staing that camping is easier without shields.

As for me "contradicting" myself, you misread my post. Even with shield, just wlking around like a fool will get you killed. Without shields, however, even those who are cautious can get nailed in one shot by a camper. With sheilds, you get a chance to live, but only if you were being smart enough to watch the shadows.

  • 04.29.2004 12:42 PM PDT

bah

Posted by: SpartanMC04
Whats fun is getting head shots with one bullet.
I absolutely agree, but I prefer it with the S2AM and shields. The problem with no shields is kind of contradictory. it rewards pure skill of aiming over tactics. If you stick me in a no shields match, 400% health on Hang 'em, I'll love every second of it because you have so much health you can afford a few shots unless your attacker is a good shot. But with less health, like 100%, all they need to do is hit you twice anywhere, in the foot, and you're gone. I like it both ways, but for CTF and large maps, shields is the way to go. This is merely my opinion. I don't think your opninion is wrong, I just think you're resoning behind it is. You prefer quick deaths that require skill, I prefer well thought out plans of attack, where getting the jump on your enemy doesn't guarantee sucses.

  • 04.29.2004 12:47 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

Read your post, then mine. i was staing that camping is easier without shields.

As for me "contradicting" myself, you misread my post. Even with shield, just wlking around like a fool will get you killed. Without shields, however, even those who are cautious can get nailed in one shot by a camper. With sheilds, you get a chance to live, but only if you were being smart enough to watch the shadows.


Im sorry for misreading your earlier post and yeah ok you are right about good camping WITHOUT sheilds but getting shot by a camper without sheilds helps you get better and makes the game harder and means you have to risk your life trying to find where they are. its a lot harder and a lot more fun. Besides if you dont get killed in the first shot by a camper then theres really no point in camping at all. So with sheilds u may be able to live a bit longer but it doesnt show any skill in it. At least without sheilds you have to work to find the sniper and struggle.

  • 04.29.2004 12:48 PM PDT
  • gamertag:
  • user homepage:
  • last post: 01.01.0001 12:00 AM PDT

TH- the obvious answer to this conundrum is that you play with US more often. were the more handsome of your two friend-sets anyhow.

for the record, i support the lack of shields for the reason that it negates one-shot sniping kills.

  • 04.29.2004 1:39 PM PDT