Immovable - Why in the name of all that's holy?

Spangla

Why in the name of all that's holy would you allow a full light amour wearer to have access to this skill. Sorry to have a moan but its the worst bit of skill/game design I think I've ever seen.

MorHawk

You're not on your own. the idea to restrict armor skills to only people with a given number of relevant armor pieces equipped (5 seems to be the most popular demarcation) is so obvious it's painful. But hey, fixes are coming. Soon™.

Gorthax

they wont ever fix this. It is the most *** thing ever. Simple fix to do too. I am claiming update 24 will address this issue

jrgray93

I used to think all of the block abusers / FotM builds were rolling with this because I could never stun them, but that was before I figured out how CC lockouts worked. There's still plenty of cloth users using Immovable, but I've come to terms with it. I still wouldn't mind it being restricted to wearers of certain armor types. Hell, I encourage that change.

Pseudonym

It does seem counter intuitive. I feel as though armour skills should only be available to people wearing 5 or more parts of said set.

Aeratus

It's because when you've learned immovable, you've done so after gaining a deep understanding of heavy armor.

However, combat techniques for one type of armor is not necessarily limited to that armor type. You can use immovable because you can apply your understanding of heavy armor to light armor.

There, simple logical explanation!

eliisra

I think it's more of a panic solution to messy CC-mechanics.

The CC-immunity isn't working the way it should. The CC lockout timer is more of a fairytale than an actual game mechanic.Than there's the CC-break, it's been bugged since say one. Many CC combinations are impossible to break out of.

This combined with CC-skills having no cool-down and very high players burst. You're basically permaknocked down and killed in seconds, when CC counters stops working (again...)

I actually tried to remove Immovable and use the Arena Set instead. With the reduction from the 5 set bonus, break free was cheaper than casting Immovable (and I got a free skill slot). After an hour or so I went back to my original build. Having a 40% cost reduction on a broken ability, turned out to be a total waste of time.

But yeah, probably easier to let everyone use armour skills, than fixing all the problems surrounding CC. But I actually do think armour skills should require you to wear the actual armour.

Spangla

Aeratus wrote: »

It's because when you've learned immovable, you've done so after gaining a deep understanding of heavy armor.

However, combat techniques for one type of armor is not necessarily limited to that armor type. You can use immovable because you can apply your understanding of heavy armor to light armor.

There, simple logical explanation!

No - Should be something that can happen as a consequence of wearing it.

Pseudonym

Aeratus wrote: »

It's because when you've learned immovable, you've done so after gaining a deep understanding of heavy armor.

However, combat techniques for one type of armor is not necessarily limited to that armor type. You can use immovable because you can apply your understanding of heavy armor to light armor.

There, simple logical explanation!

I understand this explanation, and it works quite well, if not for the fact that these are two entirely different things. If I were to say my skills in Tennis come from years of playing Squash, that might be somewhat valid, but heavy armour and light armour have no physical correlation.

That metaphor might not do it, so I'll try another approach. Take the Evasion skill from medium armour; moving around and dodging attacks might be easy where you're wearing tight leather armour, but I doubt you'd be able to evade like that wearing full plate mail or a dress.

On another related note, if say you're right in suggesting that these skills were used elsewhere, but are still applicable to another armour type, how is it that buffs like Rally from two-handed weapons, can't be used while a two-handed weapon isn't equipped? It's not a physical attack you do with the weapon, it's a buff you learned while training with two-handed weapons.

Right or wrong, they need to be consistent.

MorHawk

Aeratus wrote: »

It's because when you've learned immovable, you've done so after gaining a deep understanding of heavy armor.

However, combat techniques for one type of armor is not necessarily limited to that armor type. You can use immovable because you can apply your understanding of heavy armor to light armor.

There, simple logical explanation!

Not particularly fussed if the current situation can be rationalised. I want this change because it will make your armor choice more meaningful.

Chrlynsch

Best thing to do is to make base stats of the skill scale with the number of armor prices you have on. Example: 2 sec of immovable with each heavy you have equipped for a max time of 14 sec (duration morph).

Rune_Relic

+1 These skills are learned through the use of an item to be applied to that item.
Otherwise there should be a general armour tree that applies to every armour or a general weapon tree that applies to every weapon

Spangla

Aeratus wrote: »

It's because when you've learned immovable, you've done so after gaining a deep understanding of heavy armor.

However, combat techniques for one type of armor is not necessarily limited to that armor type. You can use immovable because you can apply your understanding of heavy armor to light armor.

There, simple logical explanation!

Carrying on with the tennis example mentioned. This analogy is ridiulous if you think about it like this.

I played tennis for years and am really good at it because I learnt it. However if im not using my dam racket I cant play tennis!

If i'm not wearing my heavy armour I AM NOT IMMOVABLE DAMMIT!

Seriously this cannot be left this way, it is frankly, ridiculous.

Vizier

@OP You are right to wonder as you do. The ability should be restricted. Personally I think you should have to be wearing full heavy armor 7 pieces.

Aeratus

Pseudonym wrote: »

Aeratus wrote: »

It's because when you've learned immovable, you've done so after gaining a deep understanding of heavy armor.

However, combat techniques for one type of armor is not necessarily limited to that armor type. You can use immovable because you can apply your understanding of heavy armor to light armor.

There, simple logical explanation!

I understand this explanation, and it works quite well, if not for the fact that these are two entirely different things. If I were to say my skills in Tennis come from years of playing Squash, that might be somewhat valid, but heavy armour and light armour have no physical correlation.

On the other hand, the game permits 2h sword and 2h mace to share the same skillset, even though these two types of weapons should realistically require vastly different techniques and fighting styles.

Not particularly fussed if the current situation can be rationalised. I want this change because it will make your armor choice more meaningful.

Lol yeah I agree that immovable should require heavy armor to use, regardless of the rationalization.

Tigeracer

@Prothwata‌
Maybe I've misunderstood your post, but it seems to me that you don't know the immovable morphs. One of them gives you exactly what you said, longer duration for more heavy armour pieces worn.
I wear 7/7 heavy, so my immovable actually lasts 10 seconds rather than 8

Chrlynsch

Tigeracer wrote: »

@Prothwata‌
Maybe I've misunderstood your post, but it seems to me that you don't know the immovable morphs. One of them gives you exactly what you said, longer duration for more heavy armour pieces worn.
I wear 7/7 heavy, so my immovable actually lasts 10 seconds rather than 8

You do misunderstand the heart of the change. It's correct that you a full plate wearer would still be able to run this skill without change... but a full cloth wearing caster would not be able to run immovable (2secx0heavy=0sec)

Spangla

Are we all pretty much in agreement? I don't think going all the way to 7 pieces is necessary i think the 5 piece rule that is kind of in place already, that allows you to gain the best passive from the armour set is enough.

Please look at this zenimax - its pretty poor combat skill design as it is. A super high damage mage should not be as immovable as a fully armour sword and shield tank. I think anyone with a brain can see that?

Magdalina

I agree it's kind of...weird, to say at least. I've recently picked up heavy armor for fun and giggles, unlocked Immovable...and found out I don't need to wear ONE piece of heavy to use it. Nor do I actually need to wear ONE piece of armor to use Annulment, apparently. Well, in that case, I want weapon abilities available no matter what weapon I have equipped, too. Why can't I shoot fireballs(*cough*Crushing Shock/Impulse*cough*) with sword&board if I can use Immovable in a bathrobe? That just isn't fair:P

In my eyes it'd make sense if it was restricted to 5 piece armor of corresponding type - for all three armor abilities, Immovable, Annulment and whatever the third one is called.

Merlin13KAGL

Spangla wrote: »

Are we all pretty much in agreement? I don't think going all the way to 7 pieces is necessary i think the 5 piece rule that is kind of in place already, that allows you to gain the best passive from the armour set is enough.

Please look at this zenimax - its pretty poor combat skill design as it is. A super high damage mage should not be as immovable as a fully armour sword and shield tank. I think anyone with a brain can see that?

To be fair, enchantability of a Mage's light set would be greater than that of a non-mage, at least allowing increase in armor class vs what it currently affords.

Something between. No one should be completely immune to CC/knockback. Should be percentages rolled against your gear.

I realize you can add armor enchants to jewelry, but there is other drawback to wearing light. The AC is less and the survivability is generally less. Couple that with fewer points in health and stamina, in most cases, and there you have it.

I would be okay with a time per piece worn or general armor skills that would apply to all types of armor. There should be a medium between complete immunity and no immunity.

To reference the tennis example, you can't tell me if I switch to racketball that none of my tennis experience would carry over because my racket is no longer the same?

Spangla

Yes I can:) - Would be more like a switch to ping pong

Francescolg

1. Immovable does not help vs. all forms of CC
2. If you are smart (I know some do) find out what forms of CC are not countered by immovable
3. 3. Use that forms of CC
4. You know that-beside immovable use-people keep spamming "purge/efficient purge" due to too much CC in the game? I'm sure you know, if you're smart.
5. And again: find out what forms of CC are not countered by purge + immovable
6. 6. Use this forms of CC if you absolutely need CC
7. Go on like that...

People using shield do not enough or just a little bit damage. There has to (!) be a counter to CC-abuse in this game. Otherwise it will be a simple shooter, who shoots first - wins. And it's already "there", having the Stealth-restealth-multi crit gankers. So wtf do we need to remove immovable if the game is already offering enough "weird strategies" to kill opponents without any chance of them to "break free" or "try to survive a 3-4.000 stealth attack.

Actually Immovable requires you to use skill, not just CC, that means the right skills / block / etc. instead of just "fire and forget". And, as mentioned before, "fire and forget" is already in the game, just play an NB and use the right skills, go - regenerate ultimate - come back and kill.

Spangla

This thread is not about the ways to deal with Immovable - Which by the way is not as simple as "play a nb use the right skills regen ultimate and come back" this genuinely made me lol.

This thread is about combat design - personally I feel, as do many others that an Armour skill with such intrinsically linked connotations such as this skill has, should be unique and only accessible when using the Armour it derives from. Simple.

For me, and many others you can only be immovable, almost by definition if you are heavily armored.

I personally also feel it would add a far more professional and diverse dynamic to the game in general - especially in pvp

Any chance of some thoughts on this topic ZENIMAX?