Riot Shields/Ballistic Shields. Yay or Nay?

[XanderShadow]

It's something that I've seen pop up around the net in airsoft videos and the like. Shields and their use in airsoft.

I was curious what your thoughts were on the subject?

I've been pondering picking up a shield or making one for some time. I'm a disabled player, so I often can't move around as quickly or jump about like others can do. Getting to cover or dashing between them without significant pain or issues most days. So figured stuff like sniping, support gunning and breach defense might be more suited. So moving in through things with a shield for mobile cover and a sidearm seemed a good fit for more CQB/Building based play.

Now I know one of the main gripes with shields is that, if played right or not countered properly.. the players all but immortal. And it's honestly one I agree with fully. Shields CAN be broken as all hell.
That's why if/when I do get this shield running, I plan to make/modify it so it is "Resistant", not Proof to hits. Likely by cutting out segments of the shield itself and filling them with layered cardboard or similar. That way it can be shot at and stop rounds; but it'll wear out in places and start letting shots through if you just try camping behind it or they focus on a spot to burrow through.

That way; you have your ballistic shield stopping rounds, but you know you can't keep just tanking hits, you have to still move, use the world around you.

 

[Skara]

I plan to make/modify it so it is "Resistant", not Proof to hits. Likely by cutting out segments of the shield itself and filling them with layered cardboard or similar. That way it can be shot at and stop rounds; but it'll wear out in places and start letting shots through if you just try camping behind it or they focus on a spot to burrow through.

That, my friend, is a great idea

 

[hitmanNo2]

With the appropriate shield, i.e. weighted to a RS spec with limited viewing window and specific, crystal clear rules for the shield - only sidearm allowed when carrying for instance, they should be OK.  That said, I've never come across one in game but I gather Vant shields are quite popular in Europe and and most people don't seem to have issues with them.

 

[Jimbodini42]

Hi

In my experience it totally spoils the games and most of the people using them don’t take hits on exposed areas (feet etc) this could be genuine accidents with loads bbs flying around or through an air of being a tool. My experience is that most people who use shields are abit strange... 
 

What you have suggested sounds like a good idea and I totally get the reasoning behind your thinking considering your health condition.  

Personally think anyone using a shield cannot use a weapon, even a side arm. Seriously pisses me off getting shot at by someone with a shield and think goes against the spirit of the game. 
Don’t mind it’s use when it’s maybe where the attack without a shield is impossible / other team has a massive advantage anyway. 
 

Not sure how the cardboard idea would work, can foresee a situation where it’s pierced and you might not feel it when it comes through with less velocity? Could also cause even more arguments than there already are regarding shields. 
 

Not trying to shoot your idea down because totally emphasise with why you are thinking about it as an idea but worth having more aspects to consider to get it right. 

 

[Adolf Hamster]

i think the thing that most folk get annoyed at with shield users is the ones who seem to think that getting shot in the shins/arms/sides/back/top of the helmet doesn't count because they have their sheild up.

however, that's divorced from the actual use of shields. which if wielded by someone who's playing the game properly are fine imo. at least in the outdoor settings i've dealt with them at it's pretty easy to get a flanking action to take them out, or as mentioned a sufficiently accurate gun to put a round into one of the areas inevitably exposed.

your idea of a "resistant" shield is a pretty cool one, and i'm sure if it works it'll alleviate some of the more staunch opponents of shield usage.

 

[Steveocee]

Bloody nightmare.

Only to echo the above, the 2 times I've played against shield users they've been hit multiple times and ignored them because "shield" like it's bloody god mode or something.

If implemented properly and honestly then theres a place otherwise, just another opportunity to be manipulated.

 

[Tommikka]

My first thoughts on the title this morning would have pointed towards shields only really being viable in a suitable location / game theme etc and needs to be done in conjunction with site owners/game organisers, and they can often cause issues similar to those already brought up by others 

Often ideas are brought up with the players point of view on one side, but they need to be considered from both sides-

eg a fort on site often has big wide open doors at the front and back, and towers may not have back walls - bad defence, but that’s to balance defendabilty and attackability.

The same goes with shields - and you’ve shown good thinking with the cardboard ‘degradability’

This is a very interesting idea - keep us posted

For your situation on disability - you’ve covered your reasoning, so just speak to the site or sites you intend to use and I’d expect a positive response
 

The main key will be the understanding of all participants for the rules on its use, so should be covered by staff among the game rules in the morning.  Sometimes the ‘common’ rules or ‘local’ rules don’t get detailed which can cause problems when different players think that different interpretations of rules that are active 

 

[Ropeyshep]

I was going to echo the thoughts on shields being acceptable if the real world limitations are incorporated, weight should be high enough to make it an awkward thing to carry and to manoeuvre quickly, visibility should be limited, pistols only, blind fire rules fully complied with etc... I really like your idea of degradability with card sections or perhaps an audible hit area (flat steel bell plate?).

However, I think your use case makes a very good point about levelling the playing field and letting you take more part in games, we are all there to have fun, after all.

I'll be keen to see what you come up with.

 

[CrackCommandoUnit1972]

Shield use would be fine with me as long as they were a realistic shape and weight. Running up and down stairs all day would get pretty tiring lugging a 10kg attached to your arm.

 

[EvilMonkee]

No, just no. Just creates friction

Shields are meant to be mostly for pistol calibres, they probably wont stop a rifle round.  Most players use rifle calibre weapons, so the realistic weight argument etc goes out the window.  You cant apply two set of rules

 

[GeorgePlaysAirsoft]

No, just no. Just creates friction

Shields are meant to be mostly for pistol calibres, they probably wont stop a rifle round.  Most players use rifle calibre weapons, so the realistic weight argument etc goes out the window.  You cant apply two set of rules

I disagree, we absolutely can - make the most of what works, cut what doesn't. Shields are cool and fit far more naturally within the parameters of airsoft then say, a sniper rifle or machine gun imo. But careful consideration is required - and a bit of creativity too.

I think the MSW rules offer some inspiration: https://static1.squarespace.com/static/50e53176e4b0837383d71516/t/58f3efba3a0411c68a377f87/1492381645094/MSW_TACSOP_v.3.3.pdf (page 36)

 

[hitmanNo2]

Shields are meant to be mostly for pistol calibres, they probably wont stop a rifle round.  Most players use rifle calibre weapons, so the realistic weight argument etc goes out the window.  You cant apply two set of rules

Nah.  Modern stuff is fairly heavy duty.  The one used when the Bataclan theatre was stormed took a beating from AKs and did it's job, although it wasn't quote as maneuverable as a typical ballistic shield as it was on wheels.

 

[Tackle]

The shield argument is an old one, & rightly so, as like in many aspects of Airsoft, there's been a lot of "bullet proof piss takers".

BUT

The idea of a shield that degrades fairly quickly, & used in the right environment, LOVE IT ?, already got me thinking of a design, a framework that can have suitable cardboard slipped in to between games would be an excellent prop for seige type scenarios.

I'd go as far to say obviously only the assaulters could use them in much the same as law enforcement, shield carrier has a pistol only, shield size no more than 3ft tall & 2ft wide, & all assaulters only able to use single shot, while the defenders are allowed full auto to combat/degrade the shields.

I'm against their general use, but scenario driven degradable props, bring it on ?

 

[DrAlexanderTobacco]

Nah.  Modern stuff is fairly heavy duty.  The one used when the Bataclan theatre was stormed took a beating from AKs and did it's job, although it wasn't quote as maneuverable as a typical ballistic shield as it was on wheels.

Used historically too

View attachment 57016

 

[BigStew]

We have used shields as a game mechanic. The person carrying the shield can't fire but can cover other players who can shoot. what generally happens is the combatant players get picked off while the shield holder takes as much cover as they can and waits for back up to respawn or get out flanked. makes for an interesting game. team that has access to the shield must have a limited playing area while holding the shield and must have a set location as the objective. however i think it's a bad idea for individual players to have their own shields they can fire behind it's an unfair advantage and will lead to over kill and people getting absolutely lit up.  

 

[Adolf Hamster]

The main key will be the understanding of all participants for the rules on its use, so should be covered by staff among the game rules in the morning.  Sometimes the ‘common’ rules or ‘local’ rules don’t get detailed which can cause problems when different players think that different interpretations of rules that are active 

If i had a penny for every time i heard a complaint from someone who thought the rules from their home site applied to the one they were currently playing on.

 

[Tackle]

If i had a penny for every time i heard a complaint from someone who thought the rules from their home site applied to the one they were currently playing on.

Lol, me too, my usual response is "well f#ck off back there then"

 

[Cromulon1994]

I'd speak to your site about it.

I wouldn't see a problem, if its 

1. Actually heavy

2. Degradeable

3. Only 1 or 2 were in use.

Ie. A steel frame and a couple of layers of cardboard as the skin.

Moscarts should be a kill if they hit the shield, grenades should be a kill if you're in the blast radius no matter the direction. 

 

[Adolf Hamster]

Lol, me too, my usual response is "well f#ck off back there then"

Favourite one was "headshots dont count" in response to a single pistol round that bounced off a branch and hit higher than intended.

I dont know what site he goes to but ive not met one that has that rule, headshots discouraged as a matter of ettiquette maybe but not actually banned.

 

[CrackCommandoUnit1972]

3 hours ago, hitmanNo2 said:

Nah.  Modern stuff is fairly heavy duty.  The one used when the Bataclan theatre was stormed took a beating from AKs and did it's job, although it wasn't quote as maneuverable as a typical ballistic shield as it was on wheels.

Eddie looks like a very intense individual.