HAS LIGHT ARMOR BEEN NERFED TOO HARD?

rileynotzb14_ESO

We all know that light armor was too good for a long time. It was used for damage, tanking and everything in between. But now with heavy and medium armor getting better and better, light armor getting worse and stamina (physical) builds becoming amazingly good, I have to ask...has ZOS taken it too far?

deleted221205-002626

No, light armor is on par with heavy and medium.

Depends on what aspect of the light armor yur talking about.. The armor/resists? theyre about where they should be realistically imo

rileynotzb14_ESO

Yes, light armor is now too weak in comparison to heavy and medium.

Im talking about them as a whole. So you think that heavy armor should have 4x the resistances? If so, shouldn't light armor have 4x the damage?

Panda244

Yes, light armor is now too weak in comparison to heavy and medium.

rileynotzb14_ESO wrote: »

Im talking about them as a whole. So you think that heavy armor should have 4x the resistances? If so, shouldn't light armor have 4x the damage?

This.

Light armor needs to have the highest spell resistance and the lowest armor, as well as the highest spell damage.

Medium armor needs to have a mixture of both good and medium armor/spell resistance, and the highest physical damage.

Heavy needs to have the highest armor resistance and good spell resistance, and *** for damage.


Or they need to make LA viable again, way to squishy atm.

posthumecaver

If LA was OP before 1.6 it was OP, I don't have a problem with that.

My problem is the buff like Major Resolve and it is % based. If LA would be 1/4 of HA then this buffs should be flat Armor buffs. Now you are once penalised while you are using LA and 2nd time while the buffs you are using are scaled from LAas % absed.

derpsticks

No, light armor is on par with heavy and medium.

If you look at the trends that ZOS follows with regards to abilities and gear you'll see that they are simply trying to mitigate the all or nothing style that seems to plague many mmos.

For instance, undaunted passives are almost a direct counter to using 7/7 of one type of armor. Using at least a 5/2 setup is arguably better in more cases than it was previously.

Looking at skills, the introduction of uniform non-stacking buffs was an attempt to normalize many skills to create more diversity in builds.

While the new system has mostly retired many hybrid builds, I suspect that ZOS will normalize this concept as well when they do a complete gear overhaul. 1.6 should have included many more changes to gear than it did. I expect to see many more sets that have balance between health, stam, and magicka bonuses in the future. I also expect that they will reduce the number of common 2 piece set bonuses in the future to mitigate the builds that use specific 2 or 3 piece set bonuses to stack one thing.

Furthermore, with regards to light armor specifically, it is simply a tradeoff and that is exactly how it should be.

Artemiisia

No, light armor is on par with heavy and medium.

just wear 1 of each type and 5 piece light and you will be fine with undaunted passives

if you wanna be a 7/7 light armored glass canon for more dps thats the game in the game, having to sacrifice something to gain something else, in this case lose survivability for more dps, and if you do this dont blame healers for dying

Ryuho

michaelpatterson wrote: »

Depends on what aspect of the light armor yur talking about.. The armor/resists? theyre about where they should be realistically imo

Nope, there is 0 realism.. It supposed to look like:
-> Heavy armor - highest spell resist and armor rate
-> Medium armor - high armor rate and low spell resist
-> Light armor - high spell resist and low armor rate

But in current system, medium armor provides higher spell resist than light armor, which imo is rly stupid. In evry mmo or single player rpg it looks like i wrote above.. so where we have realism here..

Anvos

No, light armor is on par with heavy and medium.

Actually I say it makes more sense that more substantial armors are also better at mitigating spells.

Lets do a thought experiment

I throw a fireball at a sheet of cloth, a sheet of leather, and a plate of metal which ones will be least damaged by the fire?

(using fire since lightning can't really be applied without knowing conductivity of fantasy metals and differences in crafting)

Atirez

Anvos wrote: »

Actually I say it makes more sense that more substantial armors are also better at mitigating spells.

Lets do a thought experiment

I throw a fireball at a sheet of cloth, a sheet of leather, and a plate of metal which ones will be least damaged by the fire?

(using fire since lightning can't really be applied without knowing conductivity of fantasy metals and differences in crafting)

In a world where I can create fire with my hands and throw it at people, would I not stop to consider for a moment that perhaps I need to do something to my clothing to make sure I do not burn myself alive? In a guild full of mages, throwing magic at each other, does it not seem sensible - as with all warfare - that while increasing damage done, research is also given to defending against it.

daemonios

Yes, light armor is now too weak in comparison to heavy and medium.

I have to say I don't understand why LA got the worst physical defense AND the worst magical defense. If we're going by logic, then a magical cloth robe should do more against magica than a sheet of metal, right? And if we're going by game balance, then giving HA users 4x the resists of LA users seems like overkill.

That said, as a Sorc I've found I can still pretty much keep myself alive by using ward. I don't know how other classes are doing with LA and just hope the PvP whiners won't get ZOS to nerf ward into the ground.

Lithium Flower

Well, you have enchanting options available to buff your resistances and armour values. There isn't really a reason to assume that clothing made by a tailor will have inbuilt spell resistances. A tailor is not an echanter. Light armour is significantly squishier but it's working as intended.

However: I do agree however that light armour should have an innate bonus to spell damage. Currently as it stands, they are the squishiest and also do less average damage than stamina builds and that's not right.

Morvul

personally, I am perfectly fine with light armor offering basically no protection.
in my opinion though, light armor users should get slightly more offensive power as a trade-off.

The way it's currently set up, medium offers more protection AND more offensive power from it's passives

LtCrunch

Yes, light armor is now too weak in comparison to heavy and medium.

Light armor needs to embody the glass cannon more. Big damage potential at the cost of low resistance. Right now it's pretty heavily outclassed by medium in both resistance and damage potential. It needs some tweaking.

ElliottXO

They should start with a 1/3 for LA, 2/3 for MA and 3/3 for HA distribution and then fine tune the passive. Seems to make more sense.

vichoi

Anvos wrote: »

Actually I say it makes more sense that more substantial armors are also better at mitigating spells.

Lets do a thought experiment

I throw a fireball at a sheet of cloth, a sheet of leather, and a plate of metal which ones will be least damaged by the fire?

(using fire since lightning can't really be applied without knowing conductivity of fantasy metals and differences in crafting)

True, so one wearing cloth and the other wearing heavy armor, who can run faster, are you happy to have 20% decrease on movement speed for using heavy armor?

Now heavy armor gave up damage to gain survibility, light armor give up survibility for dps, however, medium armor getting both dps and survibility.

What the Dev group want at the moment is to balance magicka and stamina user. there're too many magicka user before, so they have to make medium armor better than light so player will start using stamina build, once the number of sta and magicka user balanced, they'll nerf medium or buff light armor to balance the game.

Orchish

No, light armor is on par with heavy and medium.

rileynotzb14_ESO wrote: »

Im talking about them as a whole. So you think that heavy armor should have 4x the resistances? If so, shouldn't light armor have 4x the damage?

It's not just about resistance though is it? it's also about recovery and resource management. Heavy will leave you high and dry so fast you'll wonder what hit you when facing competent PvP players.

You'll lose the war of attrition every time. LA users just stack shields to take care of their problem, heavy users pop a potion once low and then die.

htoncic

Yes, light armor is now too weak in comparison to heavy and medium.

Anvos wrote: »

Actually I say it makes more sense that more substantial armors are also better at mitigating spells.

Lets do a thought experiment

I throw a fireball at a sheet of cloth, a sheet of leather, and a plate of metal which ones will be least damaged by the fire?

(using fire since lightning can't really be applied without knowing conductivity of fantasy metals and differences in crafting)

But you do know the flammability of fantasy cloth, then? Do share.

Guppet

No, light armor is on par with heavy and medium.

Why do people keep comparing the armour? The different types are for different things. Heavy is best for survival.
Medium is best for stamina users
Light is best for magic users
If you try to use any armour for any other category other than the above, you are seriously weakened.

If you use heavy, you attacks cost a fortune, you have no sustain and your damage is much lower.

You can't use medium or light in place of each other, that just does not work.

Your only actual options are to use the most effective armour (for your chosen resource) or use heavy at the cost listed above.

There is no longer one armour to rule them all, there is armour appropriate to your chosen resource or survivability. To me that works great.

Septimus_Magna

Yes, light armor is now too weak in comparison to heavy and medium.

Physical resistance of light armor is fine but the spell resist is too low imo. Its very strange that medium armor offers more spell resistance than light armor. I think light armor should get the spell resist of medium armor and vice versa.

Praxxos

No, light armor is on par with heavy and medium.

Ryuho wrote: »

michaelpatterson wrote: »

Depends on what aspect of the light armor yur talking about.. The armor/resists? theyre about where they should be realistically imo

Nope, there is 0 realism.. It supposed to look like:
-> Heavy armor - highest spell resist and armor rate
-> Medium armor - high armor rate and low spell resist
-> Light armor - high spell resist and low armor rate

But in current system, medium armor provides higher spell resist than light armor, which imo is rly stupid. In evry mmo or single player rpg it looks like i wrote above.. so where we have realism here..

Actually it should be:

-> Heavy armor - lowest spell resist and highest armor rate
-> Medium armor - medium armor rate and medium spell resist
-> Light armor - highest spell resist and lowest armor rate

Elara_Northwind

No, light armor is on par with heavy and medium.

My two main characters still wear full light armour and I don't see it as too much of an issue. That said, I do now carry 2 pieces of heavy with me which I feel obliged to change into from time to time

Guppet

No, light armor is on par with heavy and medium.

Seems to me the only actual argument here, is should light have better spell resist than medium?

Here's another question to go with that.

What skills that aid survivability (damage shield, heals, etc), scale better as a magic user as opposed to a stamina user?

Magic users have much better access to skills that aid survivability than stamina users, not to mention they get an entire resource they can use just for blocking.

idk

No, light armor is on par with heavy and medium.

Light armor is cloth. I think the armor value is on par for a piece of cloth. Since 1.6 I have been in Vet DSA a few times healing in light armor and I hold up just fine. Of course in AvA I choose to wear a couple heavy pieces and again, seems to work just fine and as expected.
I would say light armor was to OP before 1.6. That may be why a few people object to the recent change.

Merlin13KAGL

Yes, light armor is now too weak in comparison to heavy and medium.

Yes, AC should be 1/3 , 2/3, 3/3.

Spell Resist should be 3+/3, 2+/3, 1+/3

Opt for Heavy, you get physical resist. Opt for Light you get magic resist.

Right now, shy of some regen bonuses, there is little reason not to go MA or HA for many builds.

WraithAzraiel

No, light armor is on par with heavy and medium.

rileynotzb14_ESO wrote: »

Im talking about them as a whole. So you think that heavy armor should have 4x the resistances? If so, shouldn't light armor have 4x the damage?

Alright check this out.

PURELY HYPOTHETICAL!!!!!!

Say you did this.

Go outside, wearing a hoodie and let one of your friends huck a rock at your chest as hard as they can.


Tomorrow, go outside again and this time, hold a frying pan over your chest, let the same friend huck the same rock at your chest as hard as they can.

The next day, find an old leather jacket, put it on - go outside and have the same friend yet again huck the same rock at your chest as hard as they can.


Come back to the forums and report your findings of Light, Heavy and Medium armor, what would they be?

technohic

Yes, light armor is now too weak in comparison to heavy and medium.

I think they could have just done Heavy armor, then medium armor at 3/4ths like it is now, then light as 2/4th in stead of the 1/4th it is. then it would have been fine.

daemonios

Yes, light armor is now too weak in comparison to heavy and medium.

WraithAzraiel wrote: »

rileynotzb14_ESO wrote: »

Im talking about them as a whole. So you think that heavy armor should have 4x the resistances? If so, shouldn't light armor have 4x the damage?

Alright check this out.

PURELY HYPOTHETICAL!!!!!!

Say you did this.

Go outside, wearing a hoodie and let one of your friends huck a rock at your chest as hard as they can.


Tomorrow, go outside again and this time, hold a frying pan over your chest, let the same friend huck the same rock at your chest as hard as they can.

The next day, find an old leather jacket, put it on - go outside and have the same friend yet again huck the same rock at your chest as hard as they can.


Come back to the forums and report your findings of Light, Heavy and Medium armor, what would they be?

No, the real test would be: go outside wearing a hoodie and try to face a daedric boss... oh, wait...

A game is not real life, nor does it have to be 100% realistic. If we're going for realistic, then drop magic damage and magic resistances.

Cuyler

Yes, light armor is now too weak in comparison to heavy and medium.

LA should be 1/2 that of HA, not 1/4.

Jules

Yes, light armor is now too weak in comparison to heavy and medium.

Looking at these armor types as a vertical hierarchy has us thinking, ok, they should scale up. Only problem is they scaled up survivability just fine but failed to scale in the opposite direction to give LA best damage stats. There has to be SOME positives to LA to make the trade off for lack of survivability actually worthwhile.

As LA & MA are BOTH meant as DPS armor styles, they should be brought more back in line with one another. Everyone treats them as if it's a hierarchy. This would be fine if we wore armor based solely on survivability and not damage output and resource regeneration. It's not as if as a caster dk I can just "choose" to wear medium armor cause it gives me higher spell and physical resist. That would completely contradict my magicka build. In reality, post 1.6 both stam & magicka builds are viable in a way they weren't before. LA & MA are both meant to optimize DPS but with separate resource pools. We should treat them as such.

LA should have more spell damage and resistance, less armor and physical resist. MA should have more physical damage and resistance, less spell damage and resist. Heavy armor least spell/weapon damage and most spell/physical resist. Voila.

Robbmrp

Yes, light armor is now too weak in comparison to heavy and medium.

Panda244 wrote: »

rileynotzb14_ESO wrote: »

Im talking about them as a whole. So you think that heavy armor should have 4x the resistances? If so, shouldn't light armor have 4x the damage?

This.

Light armor needs to have the highest spell resistance and the lowest armor, as well as the highest spell damage.

Medium armor needs to have a mixture of both good and medium armor/spell resistance, and the highest physical damage.

Heavy needs to have the highest armor resistance and good spell resistance, and *** for damage.


Or they need to make LA viable again, way to squishy atm.

This completely. Light armor should have the least amount of physical damage protection but should provide the highest amount of spell resistance and spell damage as it's magicka based. Medium armor should be a balance of both light and heavy with better spell resistance than heavy and better physical protection than light. Heavy should have the most physical damage protection of all armors and the least amount of spell resistance. Heavy armor should never be about spell or physical damage as it's only worn for the defense of physical damage.