Armor vs Shields

[Elysium]

Hey,

Been playing for a few hours now, and I noticed a lot of the templar armor come in 2 varieties, armor + shield and just pure armor alone. I'm playing a Blademaster, currently lvl 11, so I was wondering which one I should be aiming for ?

Been reading a few threads that said shields go down way too fast, and its probably better to invest in armor, but unfortunately, all the BM armor is in the variety of armor + shield. So should i forgo the melee bonus % on the items and just go for armor all the way ? or a balance is the way to go ?


TIA

[Molehs_Mum]

Armor # / 2 = % of damage negated past shields

So if you have 100 armor you negate 50% of damage to self.

But shields recharge and fend off damadge aswell, so personally, knowing nothing about the templar classes would think that a blance of both shields and armor would be best...

[zyloch]

imo armor > shield, shield is too easy to take a beating. this is from a pvp point of view of course. Besides shield penetration in pvp is such a @#$@#. Shield is only useful if you have a overshield (purple) or like 1000pts.

[MrSparkles]

+armor all the way IMHO. Can easily add another 10% to your total damage reduction, ie from 60% to 70%, or 70% to 80%. Which is effecting a 25-30% total cut in the amount of damage you take.

[buman]

In the case of the guardian you can use shield of faith to fill your shields and you keep anything that isn't over your max shield amount. In the case of the blade master that have limited healing and shield regen so going for max numbers like %hp instead might be more usefull.

[Slade]

Armor # / 2 = % of damage negated past shields

So if you have 100 armor you negate 50% of damage to self.

/facepalm

People like you need to be stopped from posting. Did you think for even a moment before you posted that nonsense?

You can get 100 armor by level FIVE. Do you really think it works like this?

[Xdeathfire]

Go for armor.

Shield could theoretically be better if you can keep it up, buts thats basically impossible in intense fights so armor is the way to go

[Credge]

You'll find yourself sorely missing shields if you go pure armor. Also, if you're a guardian, AoD is simply amazing coupled with shields. Even one point into it can net you more than going for pure armor, not to mention the possibility of added shields.

To make this clearer, going for pure armor is not as beneficial as going for shields+armor and AoD. In fact, coupled with spiritual strength and AoD, you can get 99% absorb (whether this does anything is debatable), loads of health, and lots of shields to boot.

[islander1]

Armor # / 2 = % of damage negated past shields

So if you have 100 armor you negate 50% of damage to self.
.


This is NOT true.

Armor mitigation/damage absorption is on a bit of a weighted curve. I've got 270 ac right now at level 13, and no, my mitigation isn't 100%. it's 78%.

Armor mitigation is based on your AC relative to your level, and also the higher you get armor wise the harder it is to improve.

for example, with my defensive aura with maximum current benefit I can get my ac rating (temporarily) up to almost 500. That still ranks me below the maximum of 95% mitigation. MY ac % maxes out at 92%.

[islander1]

Go for armor.

Shield could theoretically be better if you can keep it up, buts thats basically impossible in intense fights so armor is the way to go

Shields are good for short conflicts. i.e. minon fighting.

Armor is best for serious battles, because once your sheilds are down, they are useless for the rest of the battle.

I personally run with gear that gives me 12 shield points at present, I dont make it a priority and it hasn't been an issue yet. I'd improve it only if it was a side affect of new gear that met my needs for an upgrade.

Keep in mind also, if you have nova armor then you actually won't mind getting hit some. Especially if you are heavy on defense or regeneration. Granted, I'm still a lowbie, taking my time, in act II, but since starting defense aura at level 10 I've never come close to dying (yet).

[Tel]

knowing nothing about the templar classes

You dont say...

[Nomnomnom]

At level 22 on my BM, i had ~120 shields, which were destroyed in 2-3 hits by most mobs. I gave up on shields and went for more armor, since I'm always the one tanking the heavy hits (always partied when I play). It's helped far more than those shields ever did, since you're never in danger of dying during the short fights where the shields actually do anything anyway. In the longer fights, you just need more armor.

[gpfsmurf]

I haven't played Templar yet but one thing I've noticed is while the Health potion is just a big regen boost, the Shield 'potion' is instantaneous.

Does the armor protect the shields? i.e. if your armor absorbs 50% damage, does it work when you still have shields or do they take full damage?

[zyloch]

shields take full damage :\

[Superb]

There is plenty of BM armor with armor bonus only. As a BM you will always be getting hit (Guardians even more so), so it will be rare to have your shield full. You can kite mobs and bosses around to regen, but i don't think it is a good idea to go for a full shields set. If anyone has tried that, i'd like to hear how it works in practice.

[lachescandinavu]

the problem is templar armor is a bit to weak in shields,but even if it wasn't you'd still be loosing them very fast

for example,on my guardian i can use the 2 shield skills to get about 5000-6000shields and against a lvl ~30mob they don't last more than 10-13 seconds at most

bad ideea to rely on them imo

[nosfe]

Shields are good for classes that don't see front line action much because it protects them from status effects(especially useful for evokers as a defense against the lightnings special) and also they recharge very fast

[Superb]

10 seconds is more than enough for a BM to destroy any mob and smoke a cigar with an attitude, but we can't get shields that high.

[Tsuyu]

As stated, the main problem with Shields is that they have absolutely none damage reduction - they always take 100% damage. And that means even if you manage to get a decent ammount of Shield it will be gone in a flash.

Sure it might help you live a second longer, but more Armour helps in the long run and Health is just way more managable than Shield because it can be healed by various means. So more Armour protecting your Health is the way, rather than having Shields taking a couple of hits then having them ravage through your Health.

But as a Blademaster I'd pick the "Blademaster armour" still because it gives that meele bonus doo-hickey. And it is not like the Marksman armour which have only Shield and none Armour, it still has quite solid Armour base value.

[nosfe]

true, shields are no replacement for armor but for ranged characters it helps a lot to have lots of shields. dunno bout marksman but with the evoker i'm getting all the armor i need from venom armor

[Tsuyu]

true, shields are no replacement for armor but for ranged characters it helps a lot to have lots of shields. dunno bout marksman but with the evoker i'm getting all the armor i need from venom armor

As a Marksman Shield would make sense - if Overshield did what it was supposed to. That would make the Marksman really have a large enough Shield-pool to take the hits before the enemy is down.

But now I'd rather have a solid Armour value instead.

[Kahuna]

I still can't say I like shields too much. The reason for this is that, playing an evoker on elite, My shields tend to take a ridiculous amount of damage from just one hit from most things, sort of in the region of 150-200 per hit, which is an insane amount. I mean, I have 300 shields and 160 armor at this point, but my shields die in seconds when I start fighting, whereas armor will last through the entire fight, and if you are playing group play at all, then the fights tend to last quite long with less stopping periods than you might have solo. Even then, when you are killing stuff in solo you have to kite things, and shields get worn down in a few shots and don't regen for the rest of the fight, which I find makes armor better for me.
Maybe its just my play style, I don't know, but I still think maintaining about 50% damage mitigation is more useful than having an extra 150 shields which go down in one hit, and thereafter you get raped by any mob that touches you.

[Tsuyu]

Yup, that's what I think as well. Shield is gimped

[Shayera]

true, shields are no replacement for armor but for ranged characters it helps a lot to have lots of shields. dunno bout marksman ...

My MM is sniping mostly, but still you can get rushed in confined areas. So far i try to get as much armor as possible without having to rely on the stuff for engineers (which has good armor but needs strengh to wear it).

The simple fact is that shields are nice, but armor is much better!

[gangreen]

For templars(melee combat) armor > shields
If u have 1000 hp and 90%dmg reduction they have to throw 10 000 dmg at you in order to kill you.

For ranged i prefer shields since they regen pretty fast and i stay out of melee range always. Shields are only decent to absorb ranged damage.


But hey i could always be wrong :mrgreen:

[Hannibal]

If you play a melee character, you plan to get it. If you get hit, armor helps reduce damage in the long run and armor is what you want. If you play a range character, and if your play style is kill them before they kill you, then shield is best. Most of the time you won't get hit. This allows shield to regen. And if you do, your shield pool should allow you to take the first salvo, which should be enough to either escape or kill the mobs. This means that the first salvo damage is absorbed by shield and you will be ready (shield regenerated) for your next engagement.