I NEVER understood the riot shield argument

[sharkbyte1500]

I never got why people were mad about people putting shields on their backs tbh

Like you pissed you can't shoot a dude who had no chance of fighting back????

Not to mention you guys do know their feet is still exposed right?

Also your literally trading a entire secondary in favor of better protection so that's a fair trade off in my opinion

Personally riot shields are only annoying to me when people use them as a primary instead of turtling


Like seriously can someone PLEASE explain to me why people are COMPLETELY fine when people use riot shields in the front which is more annoying and harder to deal with

but loss their ♥♥♥♥ whine and cry like babies when someone equips it on their back

[Crazyhobo100]

When I have a bad day I hop on Call of Duty and main riot shield to hear people yell at me.

[Việt Nam Cộng Hòa]

Originally posted by sharkbyte1500:

I never got why people were mad about people putting shields on their backs tbh

Like you pissed you can't shoot a dude who had no chance of fighting back????

Not to mention you guys do know their feet is still exposed right?

Also your literally trading a entire secondary in favor of better protection so that's a fair trade off in my opinion

Personally riot shields are only annoying to me when people use them as a primary instead of turtling


Like seriously can someone PLEASE explain to me why people are COMPLETELY fine when people use riot shields in the front which is more annoying and harder to deal with

but loss their ♥♥♥♥ whine and cry like babies when someone equips it on their back

only noob use shield on their back

[Cat]

It's the cod community, they all get pissed when you use half of the items/weapons since call of duty 4 modern warfare.

[PuppyFiddler]

"Like you pissed you can't shoot a dude who had no chance of fighting back????"


Flip side to that is - you're pissed you can't shoot someone with your main gun then turn with immunity and run off after missing half your shots. That's not really what the game is about.

Wait, I just remembered I had the black shield in MW. LOL. Get rekt.

[A'den]

What's there not to understand? I can get damaged from behind. You can't. Downsides you get aren't even close to balancing it.

"I have situational awareness of an infant, so I need an advantage to even compete"
just git gud

[⚜Z3⚜ eris in cybersamsara]

Originally posted by Crazyhobo100:

When I have a bad day I hop on Call of Duty and main riot shield to hear people yell at me.

fpbp

[saltan]

its a cruch along with training wheel thermals, only reason players run around with it on there back is because they need a advantage for running around like a plum.

It tickles me when a player complains when they rush a corner, and a camper kills them over and over, and don't once take the shield of there back :D

shield needs a hp bar or ap bullets should frag them up

[sharkbyte1500]

Originally posted by A'den:

What's there not to understand? I can get damaged from behind. You can't. Downsides you get aren't even close to balancing it.

"I have situational awareness of an infant, so I need an advantage to even compete"
just git gud

in a game where you die with 1/12th of a second its useful to have plus you do realize you can shoot their feet right? and they're trading out half their damage sources for it

[(V)(;,,;)(V)]

riot shield and last stand should both be taken out, we have deployable cover to replace the riot shield and stims for last stand that you have to use BEFORE being downed.

if AP rounds when though the shield like they should it would be more balanced but still shouldnt be in the game.

[PuppyFiddler]

How does stationary cover replace a riot shield? The whole point of riot shjelds is for attack.

You want to take a ballistic shield out of a game designed around modern warfare......nah, don't think so. It adds much needed variety.

[Nado]

Originally posted by sharkbyte1500:

your literally trading a entire secondary in favor of better protection so that's a fair trade off in my opinion

There's the flaw in your argument. In some game modes, losing a weapon doesn't cause you any problems, while the shield's passive defense is very useful.

• In multiplayer on Shipment, it is very common to see players using the shield on their backs, because on such a small map, it is common to be attacked from behind.
  
  
• In DMZ on Al Mazrah, it's rare to see the shield being used on the back. The map is large and combat between players can take place both at close range and at long range. On this map it's good to have different weapons for different situations.

[Stimoceiver]

Originally posted by sharkbyte1500:

Originally posted by A'den:

What's there not to understand? I can get damaged from behind. You can't. Downsides you get aren't even close to balancing it.

"I have situational awareness of an infant, so I need an advantage to even compete"
just git gud

in a game where you die with 1/12th of a second its useful to have plus you do realize you can shoot their feet right? and they're trading out half their damage sources for it

please, elaborate on what you mean with "trading out half their damage sources for it"

because, for a fast-paced, short ttk game like this one, that just sounds like mental gymnastics to try and justify horrible and unobservant game direction. shooting the lower extremities is inconsistent due to having a lower damage input (unlike shooting a player in the chest/upperchest,) how the shield moves while the player is moving and how close he is to you (making it worse and harder to shoot at upclose range).

riot shield has no place into the cod gameplay formula, yet every recent cod studio seems to be in unanimity on having this "weapon" added from day one, despite the gameplay twist, setting and weapon selection of whatever cod they've been recently developing

[A'den]

Originally posted by sharkbyte1500:

Originally posted by A'den:

What's there not to understand? I can get damaged from behind. You can't. Downsides you get aren't even close to balancing it.

"I have situational awareness of an infant, so I need an advantage to even compete"
just git gud

in a game where you die with 1/12th of a second its useful to have plus you do realize you can shoot their feet right? and they're trading out half their damage sources for it

"Half their damage sources" - implying secondaries are comparable to primaries in terms of TTK or DPS. I see you not only have situational awareness of an infant, but you also took game sense from that same infant.
"shooting their feet" -oh, sure, that part that has reduced damage. I just throw a knife, works like a charm.

Also, you seem to think I have a problem dealing with that trash. No. I usually die a few seconds after killing them, as I'm found furiously t-bagging turtledorks, but they have to know how little respect they deserve. This is a motivational tool, I want them to strive to improve

[1MantisPhoenix]

Your team mates with riot shields prevent you from passing narrow door frames- or shooting past their strafing..

[imma toxic gamer youtube]

Originally posted by sharkbyte1500:

I never got why people were mad about people putting shields on their backs tbh

Like you pissed you can't shoot a dude who had no chance of fighting back????

Not to mention you guys do know their feet is still exposed right?

Also your literally trading a entire secondary in favor of better protection so that's a fair trade off in my opinion

Personally riot shields are only annoying to me when people use them as a primary instead of turtling


Like seriously can someone PLEASE explain to me why people are COMPLETELY fine when people use riot shields in the front which is more annoying and harder to deal with

but loss their ♥♥♥♥ whine and cry like babies when someone equips it on their back

THIS IS THE ONLY WAY TO SAVE THE COD COMMUNITY WE HAVE TO BRING BACK OG MW2 LOBBIES LIKE THESE WE HAVE TO BRING BACK THE OG MW2 LOBBIES https://youtu.be/FRYCY_u4u0Y