Heavy armor should decrease your movement speed.

SFBryan18

TehMagnus wrote: »

Agree with OP, there could also be a possibility to decrease the penality by investing points in CS.

Then again, you're complicating the game too much for some folks if you do this .

Yes, they did have perks like that in past TES games too.

Siluen

Armors do not have their benefits for the sake of "realism" they have it for the sake of making each armor different and beneficial to wear in it's own way.

If you have a look at fantasy realism (this sounds like quite the paradox, I know), light armor is worn by mages not to hinder their casting, leather is worn by rogues and barbarians to allow for supple physical combat and heavy is worn by knights to protect themselves.

Thus giving light spellcasting benefits, medium physical goodies and heavy protection, just makes a lot of sense due to the armor's fantasy archetype.

Taking realism into the equation does not work when looking at a fantasy game. Looking at pure realism, magic does not even exist and even if it did, how would light armor benefit you? It does not hinder you and that's about it. Yet I think all of us are fine with light giving boons to spellcasters in a fantasy setting and think this is a logical way to go. The exact numbers do not have a specific reason based on realism, they have a reason for in-game balance and versatility.

SFBryan18

Siluen wrote: »

Armors do not have their benefits for the sake of "realism" they have it for the sake of making each armor different and beneficial to wear in it's own way.

If you have a look at fantasy realism (this sounds like quite the paradox, I know), light armor is worn by mages not to hinder their casting, leather is worn by rogues and barbarians to allow for supple physical combat and heavy is worn by knights to protect themselves.

Thus giving light spellcasting benefits, medium physical goodies and heavy protection, just makes a lot of sense due to the armor's fantasy archetype.

Taking realism into the equation does not work when looking at a fantasy game. Looking at pure realism, magic does not even exist and even if it did, how would light armor benefit you? It does not hinder you and that's about it. Yet I think all of us are fine with light giving boons to spellcasters in a fantasy setting and think this is a logical way to go. The exact numbers do not have a specific reason based on realism, they have a reason for in-game balance and versatility.

Then why is heavy armor 400% more protective, when is gets pretty much the same passives as the other armors? And by same, I mean equivalent.

rawne1980b16_ESO

Breg_Magol wrote: »

You've been misled .. or the actor's aren't using real armour.
I've worn real chain mail (not plate armour) .. and you do feel encumbered. You certainly don't move or run as fast as if you're wearing street clothes ... and you're correct about the stamina drain.

You also have to remember that people who did fight in chainmail and plate were a hell of a lot stronger than you. Not a put down but they trained for it, unless you have you wouldn't be used to it.

I'm an ex soldier, we used to run with weighted bergen's. If I was to stick one of those on the back of someone who wasn't physically as fit as those of us that are used to it they would probably not be able to move very fast, if at all.

I know it's not the same thing but the point is. Unless you had trained every day for a few years to fight in that armour then you wouldn't be able to move as well as someone who had.

They did indeed get winched onto their horses for jousting though but that's mainly due to not having much bend and give. Kinda hard to fling your leg over with that much metal.

Granted you wouldn't move as well as someone in lighter armour so there should be a trade off.

Then again it is a fantasy world. We need to stop looking at things in a realistic light or the game would be boring as feth if we'd remove everything outside the realm of possibility.

LordTareq

I'm all for super-realistic armour. Heavy armour shouldn't really limit movement much, but should greatly reduce stamina regeneration in combat.
It should also be really expensive to make and repair.

Of course, I'd also expect to see the realistic benefits that plate armour brings in that case.

- Immunity to bladed weapons (sword, dagger etc.) and arrows except critical hits.
- Immunity to critical hits from more unwieldy weapons such as maces that lack the finesse to pierce vizor splits etc.


And of course the realism should not stop there but also project to the other armour classes. I.e. people wearing light armour should be pretty much 1-shotted by any succesful melee attack that hits.

Siluen

SFBryan18 wrote: »

Then why is heavy armor 400% more protective, when is gets pretty much the same passives as the other armors? And by same, I mean equivalent.

Have you taken a look at the heavy armor passives in comparison to the light ones? I used a V14 template for these, picking nothing but their Heavy and Light passives and slapping 7 pieces of either armor on them:

7/7 Light:

• 21% magicka cost reduction of all your skills.
• 28% extra magicka regen.
• Increases spell resist. (2464 on a V14 template)
• Spell crit.
• Spell penetration. (Applies minor breach in 1.6)

7/7 Heavy:

• Increases spell resist and armor. (2459 on a V14 template)
• 28% health regeneration & magicka and stamina return every 4 seconds when taking damage. (336 on a V14 template)
• 7% max health.
• 20% block cost reduction.
• 7% extra healing received.

Heavy has -nothing but- passives fitting their archetype, all of them are defensive. The only passive that comes remotely close to helping with resource management and mayhaps some offense is the Constitution passive. But even for this the person needs to be taking damage and it fades into nothingness compared to the regen Light gets on magicka and Medium on stamina. Their passive making them more elusive was moved to Immovable (break free cost reduction), their passive granting extra weapon damage was removed altogether, leaving heavy with just one trick: defense.

Light on the other hand has all but one passive that add to either their offense or their utility (which can be converted into things like healing, shielding, CC etc.).

Sure they have the same amount of passives and their own strength, but equivalent is not the word I would use.

SFBryan18

LordTareq wrote: »

I'm all for super-realistic armour. Heavy armour shouldn't really limit movement much, but should greatly reduce stamina regeneration in combat.
It should also be really expensive to make and repair.

Of course, I'd also expect to see the realistic benefits that plate armour brings in that case.

- Immunity to bladed weapons (sword, dagger etc.) and arrows except critical hits.
- Immunity to critical hits from more unwieldy weapons such as maces that lack the finesse to pierce vizor splits etc.


And of course the realism should not stop there but also project to the other armour classes. I.e. people wearing light armour should be pretty much 1-shotted by any succesful melee attack that hits.

And Lightning would fry anyone wearing metal, right? If you had actually read the thread, you would have seen that my statements were not about realism, they were about balance. Seems all these heavy armor fans keep twisting what I said to serve themselves.

Siluen wrote: »

SFBryan18 wrote: »

Then why is heavy armor 400% more protective, when is gets pretty much the same passives as the other armors? And by same, I mean equivalent.

Have you taken a look at the heavy armor passives in comparison to the light ones? I used a V14 template for these, picking nothing but their Heavy and Light passives and slapping 7 pieces of either armor on them:

7/7 Light:

• 21% magicka cost reduction of all your skills.
• 28% extra magicka regen.
• Increases spell resist. (2464 on a V14 template)
• Spell crit.
• Spell penetration. (Applies minor breach in 1.6)

7/7 Heavy:

• Increases spell resist and armor. (2459 on a V14 template)
• 28% health regeneration & magicka and stamina return every 4 seconds when taking damage. (336 on a V14 template)
• 7% max health.
• 20% block cost reduction.
• 7% extra healing received.

Heavy has -nothing but- passives fitting their archetype, all of them are defensive. The only passive that comes remotely close to helping with resource management and mayhaps some offense is the Constitution passive. But even for this the person needs to be taking damage and it fades into nothingness compared to the regen Light gets on magicka and Medium on stamina. Their passive making them more elusive was moved to Immovable (break free cost reduction), their passive granting extra weapon damage was removed altogether, leaving heavy with just one trick: defense.

Light on the other hand has all but one passive that add to either their offense or their utility (which can be converted into things like healing, shielding, CC etc.).

Sure they have the same amount of passives and their own strength, but equivalent is not the word I would use.

So the passives are not balanced? Interesting.

SFBryan18

Double post.

clocksstoppe

Sure, only if your *** light armor gets permanently destroyed after 5 decent sword cuts. It's only a rag, isn't it?

SFBryan18

clocksstoppe wrote: »

Sure, only if your *** light armor gets permanently destroyed after 5 decent sword cuts. It's only a rag, isn't it?

Another person who missed the point completely.

Orchish

Speaking of Heavy passives, they actually Nerfed heavy resource management by upping the recovery from every 2 seconds you take damage to every 4 seconds. Yet even at 2 seconds recovery was far behind that of medium and light.

Do not get me wrong here,heavy armour users should not be killing, they should be tanking. Except in 1.5 and sadly even more so in 1.6 you can tank equally if not better in light armour simply by stacking shields. Then depending on the situation you can dish out the dps in light and do the killing. The heavy tank cannot he will remain defensive and he will lose the battle of attrition every time against a competent light armour user.

The reason i am so against your suggestion for slow mobility is simply because right now in it's current state heavy is still 3rd best overall and still not even the best for PvP tanking. PvE is a different story.

My DK is spec'd in both light and heavy, 95% of the time i play in heavy because this is how i intended to play since i very first joined the beta over a year ago. I'm also old fashioned and believe that my Orc tank should be in nothing but heavy. Here is the sad part, when i get repeatedly stomped in heavy, there are times i will throw my warlock set on and not only am i far better in dps(as it should be) but i am a better tank(as it should not be) in PvP thanks to shield stacking and resource management.

So again in no way is heavy overpowered and no heavy users should not suffer a movement penalty. Perhaps if they ever bring heavy armour up to par then we can revisit this subject.

Tarikko

If the OP is using that reasoning, then light armor should not even give 5% the armor that heavy grants... right?

Steel VS Linen: Steel is at least 1000 more sturdy

Valencer

Honestly, SFBryan18, I'm not even sure what you're trying to get at here.

Are you trying to say that heavy armour is too good and should get a movement speed penalty (like some of the singleplayer TES games) to compensate?

I'd disagree that heavy armour is too good. The passives aren't nearly as effective as the ones of light armour. That's okay in 1.6, because heavy armour gets a big innate armour/spell resistance boost.

This game is also not balanced around variable movement speeds. There's gap closers in this game (unlike the singleplayer TES games) that can help mitigate movement speed penalties. I don't think you've really thought about that.

Aneima

Let's just make this game as tedious as possible shall we?

eserras7b16_ESO

TheShadowScout wrote: »

Other things heady armor did in history...
- drag you under the water if you tried to swim (I really, really want to see something like That!)
- make it difficult to stand up when you fell on your back (turtle knights!)
- make jumping almost impossible (duh, try jumping with a sack of bricks weighing you down)
- need help putting it on (Nah, that'd be too much realism)

Amazing suggestions

technohic

This is just light armor not being the be all end all whining disguised as a realism thread. It's not worth arguing about as the OP isn't really interested in hearing good points. He just wants to make his own that light armor is nerfed too much. I might tend to agree with it being only 1/4 of heavy compared to medium being 3/4 of heavy and the consequential complete devastation of the spell resistance; but lets call it like it is.

SFBryan18

technohic wrote: »

This is just light armor not being the be all end all whining disguised as a realism thread. It's not worth arguing about as the OP isn't really interested in hearing good points. He just wants to make his own that light armor is nerfed too much. I might tend to agree with it being only 1/4 of heavy compared to medium being 3/4 of heavy and the consequential complete devastation of the spell resistance; but lets call it like it is.

I never said the word realism. I said balance. Why are you people confusing the two? Heavy armor is expected to have more protection but what is the trade? Do not use light armor passives to justify the heavy armor protection, because heavy armor has its own passives. Or are we to conclude that light armor passive are suppose to be better to justify that it has less protection?

TheShadowScout

The point about "realism" is not that things ought to be all realistic in a game like this, but that IF a drawback were to be added, the realistic ones are the first ones we ought to look at. With some examples.

People keep citing the resource management and the heavy armor lack of regen boost. Well, I found it generally isn't that much of a problem for my plate mailed alts - just means that instead of letting loose a fireworks of skills I have to alternate with more light & heavy attacks...
...and considering the upcoming changes to ultimate generation... that may not be such a drawback in the coming days...

Thus the thought, should wearing heavy metal have some added drawbacks come the 1.6 update? And if so, which ones?
I'm all for sprinting cost, jumping & swimming penalty... it won't affect tanks in combat much (who sprints in combat after all?), it will merely be annoying and tenious out of combat. (which would explain why we see those knights on horseback all the time and not walking while clapping coconut shells... uhm... well... -almost- all the time... )

technohic

SFBryan18 wrote: »

technohic wrote: »

This is just light armor not being the be all end all whining disguised as a realism thread. It's not worth arguing about as the OP isn't really interested in hearing good points. He just wants to make his own that light armor is nerfed too much. I might tend to agree with it being only 1/4 of heavy compared to medium being 3/4 of heavy and the consequential complete devastation of the spell resistance; but lets call it like it is.

I never said the word realism. I said balance. Why are you people confusing the two? Heavy armor is expected to have more protection but what is the trade? Do not use light armor passives to justify the heavy armor protection, because heavy armor has its own passives. Or are we to conclude that light armor passive are suppose to be better to justify that it has less protection?

Thread got locked but go look at the guy with a heavy armor DK trying to face a light armor sorc (who also happened to be an emperor and a lot better of a player). There definitely is some trade off for heavy armor. Lack or resource management and damage boosts hurt. You might be able to make up for one of those with gear but not both.

Lynx7386

No armor type in the game comes with an inherent penalty, just different bonuses.

For example, you get a boatload of magicka regeneration, spell penetration, reduced spell cost, and spell critical with light armor. Heavy gets none of that, but instead has enhanced defense.

It's called options. If you want survivability, wear heavy, but dont expect your resource pools to last very long.

frosth.darkomenb16_ESO

TheShadowScout wrote: »

Actually if you talk with people who wear medieval armor for reenactment events, they will tell you you can move just about as fast in well made heavy armor then in normal clothes.

You just can't do it as long... because heavy armor is -heavy-. Just like carrying a backpack with 80 to 120 pounds will exhaust you a LOT quicker when running, running in heavy armor is exhausting, but not really much slower (less maneuvrable, possibly... bit harder to change direction quickly when your inertia had all that weight added, but...).
So, if they add that realism, which I would fervently support, then heavy armor ought to give a hefty penalty to stamina cost for sprinting, not reduce speed.

Other things heady armor did in history...
- drag you under the water if you tried to swim (I really, really want to see something like That!)
- make it difficult to stand up when you fell on your back (turtle knights!)
- make jumping almost impossible (duh, try jumping with a sack of bricks weighing you down)
- dull your senses - those big enclosed helmets reduced your field of view and dampened your hearing (Stealth detection debuff, dependent on head slot only?)
- need help putting it on (Nah, that'd be too much realism)

This got loled for no reasons. He's correct.
And the game already shows similar concepts with medium armor increasing stamina regeneration and such. Speed doesn't need to be impacted.

LordTareq

SFBryan18 wrote: »

LordTareq wrote: »

I'm all for super-realistic armour. Heavy armour shouldn't really limit movement much, but should greatly reduce stamina regeneration in combat.
It should also be really expensive to make and repair.

Of course, I'd also expect to see the realistic benefits that plate armour brings in that case.

- Immunity to bladed weapons (sword, dagger etc.) and arrows except critical hits.
- Immunity to critical hits from more unwieldy weapons such as maces that lack the finesse to pierce vizor splits etc.


And of course the realism should not stop there but also project to the other armour classes. I.e. people wearing light armour should be pretty much 1-shotted by any succesful melee attack that hits.

And Lightning would fry anyone wearing metal, right? If you had actually read the thread, you would have seen that my statements were not about realism, they were about balance. Seems all these heavy armor fans keep twisting what I said to serve themselves.

Actually, since electricity takes the path of the least resistance, and the metal from the armour conducts electricity better than your body (not to mention there is cloth between the metal of the armour and your skin) the metal armour would act like a Faraday cage making you at best immune to any electrical based attacks and at worst less affected by it. Mostly the heat generated by the electrical currents would be an issue.

Gidorick

I am all for this. I have also suggested we be allowed to over-stuff our inventory and become encumbered.

http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/discussion/140990/the-option-to-be-over-encumbered

Merlin13KAGL

LA should have least protection against physical/melee (which it does).
HA should have least protection against magic/elemental (which it presently does not - see 1:1 Spell Resist:Armor Class without any passives.
MA should be somewhere in between.

LA generally implies natural enchant for magic resistance. HA for physical resistance.

LA should attack faster, HA (and weapons) should hit harder.
MA somewhere in between.

Each armor type should have its benefit and its drawback. Otherwise, one of more types cease to have purpose.

Their should not be a one-size-fits-all, whether the complaints now of unkillable ubertanks (due to massive health/armor) or the "Stick and Dress" complaints.

If I'm in a robe, I expect to get knocked on my *** when hit with a two handed warhammer.

If I'm in full plate, I expect to get roasted when someone launches a lightning bolt my way.

It doesn't have to be one exclusive or the other.

And why they didn't break it up as 1/3 AC, 2/3 AC, full AC between LA, MA, HA, eludes me.

Celless

I think heavy armor should not get any additional penalties / negative adjustments to it. Heavy armor provides the most passive protection and CC resist/breaking cost management, but once damage shields are factored in, medium armor and light armor maintain their offensive and resource management properties while heavy armor's protection benefit is on hold.

And light armor has its spell damage shield, while not passive spell resist, makes its active mitigation against spells impressive.

Pmarsico9

They are pushing tanking towards being as stamina based as possible. Meaning that they are attempting to lessen the punitive elements of Heavy's resource issues. Light and Medium both offer ability cost reduction and increased regeneration for Magicka (light) and Stamina (medium.)

Heavy offers no increased regeneration, but at least now you can use it with a single stat stacked for tanking (in most cases it will be stamina due to near incessant blocking when you tank.)

It's still going to be stupid to wear mostly heavy to DPS in. So zerking Nord Two handed warriors are still going to be up a creek and glued to medium.

I will say this: Tanking should require heavy. Maybe allow for 1 medium and 1 light, but mostly heavy at a minimum. Heavy needs a purpose aside from PVP gear.

The easiest means to making heavy armor viable for DPS is to offer a crafted set that overcomes heavy's resource issues but has no impenetrable on it (for PVP balance) and perhaps has a 5 piece bonus for straight resource refunds.

Juggernaut will need buffed for its weapon damage if they are going to try to do this.

hrothbern

Agree?

Heavy armor should have movement decrease
Blocking has already movement decrease
and
damage shields, 'the way to go!?" in 1.6 should ALSO get movement decrease

or?

Samadhi

TheShadowScout wrote: »

I have worn chain mail too, once. And talked with people who wear plate for medieval events.
The chain alone I found pretty heavy, true, though I espect someone who trains for it... maybe ask some soldiers if they can run with their backbags and other assorted gear, all together probably weights as much as a set of medieval chainmail; I expect they can, and unfit, nerdy me couldn't, much.
...

Previous Elder Scrolls games had movement penalty for armour weight, then passive bonuses that reduced or eliminated that penalty, in order to represent being skilled/properly trained at moving in armour.

Orchish wrote: »

SFBryan18 wrote: »

With the upcoming changes to make heavy armor better, I'm really surprised that armor does not have weight. If someone is wearing armor that gives them more protection, they should not be able to move and run as fast as someone in lighter gear. This was suppose to be the trade in TES, sacrificing protection for mobility.

I take it you haven't actually played in heavy in 1.6. Better? ha, yes maybe in pure numbers but resource management is so bad that you cannot outlast a sorc in light armour who can shield stack to be equally protected whilst still being able to dish out the dps. No, heavy armour is already pathetic enough it doesn't need anymore negatives.

Wait, so Sorcerers can manage their resources to use shield stacking in order to be equally protected compared to Heavy Armour wearers?
That does not make a lot of sense. There should be a tradeoff between protection and mobility in the Elder Scrolls series; perhaps shields should not be stackable, or Sorcerers should be unable to slot shields if they have Bolt Escape slotted on either bar.

LordSkyKnight

http://youtu.be/NqC_squo6X4

Please stop making assumptions about plate armour based on limited knowledge you may have received from movies.

and

Stop saying chainmail. Ugh.... It's maille armour.

Dagoth_Rac

Pmarsico9 wrote: »

I will say this: Tanking should require heavy. Maybe allow for 1 medium and 1 light, but mostly heavy at a minimum. Heavy needs a purpose aside from PVP gear.

I think the problem with Heavy and tanking is that tanking in this game is not about just standing there and getting beat on. There is no aggro, so you need to taunt and taunt had a huge cost increase in 1.6. You also need to buff yourself and debuff enemies and dodge roll out of the red and block power attacks and break CC and kite and put up damage shields and so on. All require resources.

And resource management of heavy armor in Update 6 got cut in half! 336 magicka/stamina every 4 seconds for a VR14 on PTS? That is equivalent of 33.6 on live. 33.6 / 4 = 8.4 magicka/stamina every second. With the immense cost of skills while wearing heavy armor, 8.4 return every second just comes nowhere near cutting it.

I did not see the resource usage of tanking decreasing all that much on PTS. You can mitigate more damage now that the softcaps are gone, but still not enough to overcome the limited resource management.

And the fact that the Templar healer needs to have pinpoint aim to get that Luminous Shard to land right on top of tank if tank wants to activate its stamina/magicka synergy? That sure does not help. The radius where tank can activate that synergy is now tiny.

Either make tanking less reliant on skills/abilities/resources and more reliant on just having a boatload of health and armor/resist, or give heavy armor better resource management. Light Armor's magicka management remains great for stacking shields and Medium Armor's stamina management remains great for blocking, dodging, spamming 1H+S skills, and kiting.

You just lose out on too many helpful abilities when wearing Heavy Armor. Tanking is actually harder in Heavy, which makes no sense!