Armor Balancing for PvP: How it should work. (Attn: Developers)

bg22 · January 2017

Albeit in real life heavy armor is superior in every way (unless it's a swimming contest), this shouldn't be the case in ESO. We as gamers love being an "individual" and making our builds our own, and being that this was a huge marketing point for ESO, it's not entirely the case, as we all know.

The current balance of armor is... nonexistent. The primary issue being the gaps, or lack thereof, in stats.

Note that this is a theory for "Cyrodill" or "PvP only". I'll explain below.

While heavy armor offers a substantially higher armor ratings, they lack any sort of negative. This is imperative to balance... surprise surprise?

The armor bonuses are quite easy to fix, and we could find a true balance with simple adjustments.

Before we get into this, let's clarify what "balance" in a MMO is, as there is a overwhelming assumption of this, and it's wrong. Balance does not mean that each armor type should be equally good at everything. Balance means being great at some things, while having equally significant weaknesses.

With that, here's how armor balance should be handled:

Light Armor: (Advantage vs Heavy Armor wearers. Disadvantage vs Medium Armor wearers)
- Superior Spell damage
- Great Spell Resistance
- Good Weapon damage
- Poor Physical resistance

Medium Armor: (Advantage vs Light Armor wearers. Disadvantage vs Heavy Armor wearers)
- Good Spell damage
- Good Spell resistance
- Superior Weapon damage
- Good Physical resistance

Heavy Armor: (Advantage vs Medium Armor wearers. Disadvantage vs Light Armor wearers)
- Good Spell damage
- Poor Spell resistance (only vs other players)
- Great Weapon damage
- Superior Physical resistance

(Duplicated my OP in order to move to General Discussion)

Zanen · January 2017

You can't cut heavy spell resist like that because it's primary purpose is PVE tanks.

I think LA needs a utility buff, combine the regen/cost reductions into one passive and give it something akin to MA speed/stealth buffs.

HA needs a little tuning, probably wrath wasn't the best idea.

Those things said, I don't think we can fix what's wrong with the PVP meta by nerfing HA into the ground, it's a symptom, not the problem. I've said so before in the PTS thread, where proc sets and ults were brought up.

Let me add something else though, you know what the really big difference is between armor balance in PVP and PVE?

Impen.

bg22 · January 2017

Zanen wrote: »

You can't cut heavy spell resist like that because it's primary purpose is PVE tanks.

I think LA needs a utility buff, combine the regen/cost reductions into one passive and give it something akin to MA speed/stealth buffs.

HA needs a little tuning, probably wrath wasn't the best idea.

Those things said, I don't think we can fix what's wrong with the PVP meta by nerfing HA into the ground, it's a symptom, not the problem. I've said so before in the PTS thread, where proc sets and ults were brought up.

Let me add something else though, you know what the really big difference is between armor balance in PVP and PVE?

Impen.

You're correct. Simple solution to this is to treat Spell resistance of HA in Cyrodiil like they treat healing. "While fighting players, Spell resistance reduced by 60%". I'll edit my OP to reflect this.

Zanen · January 2017

No, that's not the simple solution. That's the F'd up Zos-esque bandaid solution to a core mechanical problem.

The simple solution is to remove the intractable balance problem from the equation.

The beginning of addressing the problem is implementing trait crafting as a means of removing impen from the game.

susmitds · January 2017

Your thinking style seems to be influenced by Runescape. :P

bg22 · January 2017

Zanen wrote: »

No, that's not the simple solution. That's the F'd up Zos-esque bandaid solution to a core mechanical problem.

The simple solution is to remove the intractable balance problem from the equation.

The beginning of addressing the problem is implementing trait crafting as a means of removing impen from the game.

How do you figure? I agree with the impen removal, but specifically why would my concept not work? I'm willing to listen, review and edit if legitimate faults are present.

My previous post holds true... you will have to make choices and all of them will have different risk/rewards. You can choose to min/max and be great against certain builds, and bad vs others, or build into a jack of all trades. Either way it would allow for some serious diversity.

Without ACTUAL positives and negatives (and significant ones at that) you will ALWAYS have FotM builds that simply cheeseball ROFLstomp every other build, class, race out there.

Without significant pros/cons to every armor type, you end up with the same armor, just in different colors. It's like asking what weighs more; 10 lbs of feathers or 10 lbs of rocks...

(Age of Conan actually did this quite well; rogues > casters > tanks > rogues)

bg22 · January 2017

susmitds wrote: »

Your thinking style seems to be influenced by Runescape. :P

Never played it.

But honestly, it's just really the only way to obtain actual balance. And open up many different play styles that are equally viable. Too many ppl believe that balance means that every class, playstyle, and build should have an equal chance against every other class, style, build.

The proposed system even promotes actual teamwork and strategy, rather than the oh-so-lovable mindless zergs.

WhiteMage · January 2017

Rock Paper Scissors makes for the best balance. I like your idea here, OP.

Zanen · January 2017

bg22 wrote: »

Zanen wrote: »

No, that's not the simple solution. That's the F'd up Zos-esque bandaid solution to a core mechanical problem.

The simple solution is to remove the intractable balance problem from the equation.

The beginning of addressing the problem is implementing trait crafting as a means of removing impen from the game.

How do you figure? I agree with the impen removal, but specifically why would my concept not work? I'm willing to listen, review and edit if legitimate faults are present.

My previous post holds true... you will have to make choices and all of them will have different risk/rewards. You can choose to min/max and be great against certain builds, and bad vs others, or build into a jack of all trades. Either way it would allow for some serious diversity.

Without ACTUAL positives and negatives (and significant ones at that) you will ALWAYS have FotM builds that simply cheeseball ROFLstomp every other build, class, race out there.

Without significant pros/cons to every armor type, you end up with the same armor, just in different colors. It's like asking what weighs more; 10 lbs of feathers or 10 lbs of rocks...

(Age of Conan actually did this quite well; rogues > casters > tanks > rogues)

I realize reading it my response was way harsher than I intended, apologies.

I don't like the idea of making core gameplay function differently in different areas of the game, I think that's a big part of the problem already.

I agree with you that all armor types should have strengths and weaknesses, but you can't look at them in a vaccuum either. light armor users use shields, medium does more damage for stam than heavy, and/or should, heavy is tankier. If you make heavy vulnerable to magic you make it useless, it would do less damage and be just as vulnerable.

I don't believe the heavy armor meta we currently have is actually a result of what's actually going on in the armor trees. They probably need a little tuning but I don't think we can even know that until all the bigger issues impacting it are dealt with first.

MalakithAlamahdi · January 2017

I don't think heavy armor is a problem, and a 60% nerf to spell resist will make it completely useless.

That being said, I do think the problem is deeper. For starters it's sets like viper that do massive damage without having to do anything for it. The reason is so strong is because it boosts your defenses while still being able to burst people down using proc sets. A perma blocker doesn't hit much, and can simply be ignored.

More people wear heavy because the damage recieved on light is just awefull while it doesn't give you much benefit. The only classes is still see using light are either sorcs or dk's. The damage and mobility improvement with medium on the other hand is good, so you still see people use that. This might be because stamina hits more already than Magicka to begin with.

Also, light armor needs a buff, it's just worse than the other two. It should also give a bonus to spell shields or something, making it more like medium armor but for magicka would be a good step forward. If I get incaped for 12k I want something in return for it as well.

Knootewoot · January 2017

The heavier the armor, the more protection it should give. The downside should be it would cost more resources to do anything.

So let's keep it simple for PvP only

light armor: protection 30%, resource cost 30%
Medium armor: Protection 60%, resource cost 60%
Heavy armor: Protection 90%, resource cost 90%

You want more protection? Fine, but you can't use many special abilities.

Also heavy attacks should cost resources in PvP only.

Numbers can be tweaked

I already wrote the code for @Zos to implement this, you can thank me and sent flowers later

If armor=light then
begin
resistance=((armor_rating/100)*30;
Stamina=((stamskill_basecost/100*30);
Magicka=((magskill_basecost/100*30);
end
else
If armor=medium then
begin
resistance=((armor_rating/100)*60;
Stamina=((stamskill_basecost/100*60);
Magicka=((magskill_basecost/100*60);
end
else
begin
resistance=((armor_rating/100)*90;
Stamina=((stamskill_basecost/100*90);
Magicka=((magskill_basecost/100*90);
end

Kalante · January 2017

The problem that i see is that you can hit near as hard as medium without proc sets and hit even harder if you wanted to with proc sets in open world pvp. Like wtf man... There is literally no benefits in running medium armor open world over heavy armor. Someone even straight up said to my face "medium armor is used for gangking" i wanted to slap that person right on face because medium armor was not like that and not just relegated solely for a gangking play style. I hate gangnking, i think it's despicable, disgusting, and it doesn't bring me any satisfaction or joy in one shooting people or people one shooting me. You learn nothing from those fights.

sneakymitchell · January 2017

Medium armor is has purpose for only ganking and being on the far side of battle and rush in. They have no survivability in medium armor in both PVP and PvE. Magicka has what harness while wearing light armor.

bg22 · January 2017

MalakithAlamahdi wrote: »

I don't think heavy armor is a problem, and a 60% nerf to spell resist will make it completely useless.

That being said, I do think the problem is deeper. For starters it's sets like viper that do massive damage without having to do anything for it. The reason is so strong is because it boosts your defenses while still being able to burst people down using proc sets. A perma blocker doesn't hit much, and can simply be ignored.

More people wear heavy because the damage recieved on light is just awefull while it doesn't give you much benefit. The only classes is still see using light are either sorcs or dk's. The damage and mobility improvement with medium on the other hand is good, so you still see people use that. This might be because stamina hits more already than Magicka to begin with.

Also, light armor needs a buff, it's just worse than the other two. It should also give a bonus to spell shields or something, making it more like medium armor but for magicka would be a good step forward. If I get incaped for 12k I want something in return for it as well.

My formula does exactly what you're asking for... makes LA viable bc it's great against HA. It also adds high Spell resistance... so it doesn't require bonus shields.

HA in no way becomes useless, just not effective against magic. Theoretically you become a tea kettle. Add fire and you boil... but it would hurt if you punched it.

bg22 · January 2017

Kalante wrote: »

The problem that i see is that you can hit near as hard as medium without proc sets and hit even harder if you wanted to with proc sets in open world pvp. Like wtf man... There is literally no benefits in running medium armor open world over heavy armor. Someone even straight up said to my face "medium armor is used for gangking" i wanted to slap that person right on face because medium armor was not like that and not just relegated solely for a gangking play style. I hate gangnking, i think it's despicable, disgusting, and it doesn't bring me any satisfaction or joy in one shooting people or people one shooting me. You learn nothing from those fights.

Yet it certainly has a function. "Ganking" is disruptive. It's the guerilla warfare part of Cyrodiil in between the massive button mashing contest known as sieges. It gives ppl a reason to sneak, and to not run full sprint through a pinch point.

bg22 · January 2017

Zanen wrote: »

bg22 wrote: »

Zanen wrote: »

No, that's not the simple solution. That's the F'd up Zos-esque bandaid solution to a core mechanical problem.

The simple solution is to remove the intractable balance problem from the equation.

The beginning of addressing the problem is implementing trait crafting as a means of removing impen from the game.

How do you figure? I agree with the impen removal, but specifically why would my concept not work? I'm willing to listen, review and edit if legitimate faults are present.

My previous post holds true... you will have to make choices and all of them will have different risk/rewards. You can choose to min/max and be great against certain builds, and bad vs others, or build into a jack of all trades. Either way it would allow for some serious diversity.

Without ACTUAL positives and negatives (and significant ones at that) you will ALWAYS have FotM builds that simply cheeseball ROFLstomp every other build, class, race out there.

Without significant pros/cons to every armor type, you end up with the same armor, just in different colors. It's like asking what weighs more; 10 lbs of feathers or 10 lbs of rocks...

(Age of Conan actually did this quite well; rogues > casters > tanks > rogues)

I realize reading it my response was way harsher than I intended, apologies.

I don't like the idea of making core gameplay function differently in different areas of the game, I think that's a big part of the problem already.

I agree with you that all armor types should have strengths and weaknesses, but you can't look at them in a vaccuum either. light armor users use shields, medium does more damage for stam than heavy, and/or should, heavy is tankier. If you make heavy vulnerable to magic you make it useless, it would do less damage and be just as vulnerable.

I don't believe the heavy armor meta we currently have is actually a result of what's actually going on in the armor trees. They probably need a little tuning but I don't think we can even know that until all the bigger issues impacting it are dealt with first.

It's all good.

But no, making it susceptible to Spell damage doesn't make it useless, just vulnerable vs casters. It would still reign king vs medium armor or physical damage in general. It then gives ppl a reason to wear LA, a reason to wear MA, and a reason to wear HA.

Moreover, it prevents any one build from reigning supreme. Everyone is wearing HA? Ok, spec into Spell damage, that'll change. Everyone is wearing LA to defeat HA? Sweet, wear MA and split faces. Oh, now they're wearing MA to destroy the casters..? No problem, call in the tanks.

bg22 · January 2017

WhiteMage wrote: »

Rock Paper Scissors makes for the best balance. I like your idea here, OP.

Thank you.

Robbmrp · January 2017

There definitely needs to be something done with armor stats. You shouldn't be able to have the best physical resistance and spell resistance in one armor type. It should be a sacrifice for each area when you equip an armor piece. If you want the best physical resistance, then you go heavy and also have the worst spell resistance. Medium armor should be along those same lines, greater physical with little spell damage.

There are class and armor skills that give you more help with these areas so tanking still won't be a problem.

idk · January 2017

bg22 wrote: »

susmitds wrote: »

Your thinking style seems to be influenced by Runescape. :P

Never played it.

But honestly, it's just really the only way to obtain actual balance. And open up many different play styles that are equally viable. Too many ppl believe that balance means that every class, playstyle, and build should have an equal chance against every other class, style, build.

The proposed system even promotes actual teamwork and strategy, rather than the oh-so-lovable mindless zergs.

Actually not the only way to obtain balance. It completely ignores the bigger issue that someone can gear for survival yet let proc sets do good damage since they do not scale off of our stats.

Balance to armor is mostly irrelevant as long as the above is an issue. Changes on the PTS seem to largely ignore this.

Oh, and the point in the first paragraph that the play as you want isn't really the case is incorrect as well. Play as we want has never intended every way we might want would be very effective.

It should be a choice between survival and damage.

bg22 · January 2017

Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »

bg22 wrote: »

susmitds wrote: »

Your thinking style seems to be influenced by Runescape. :P

Never played it.

But honestly, it's just really the only way to obtain actual balance. And open up many different play styles that are equally viable. Too many ppl believe that balance means that every class, playstyle, and build should have an equal chance against every other class, style, build.

The proposed system even promotes actual teamwork and strategy, rather than the oh-so-lovable mindless zergs.

It should be a choice between survival and damage.

That is not ENTIRELY true... that is 1 form of balance, yes... however it narrows diversity and still points towards FotM builds.

My aforementioned overhaul would provide a relatively "realistic" approach and feel to balance. Knights in shinning armor can still swing a sword pretty damn hard, yet would essentially be a "conductor" when hit with magic.

Metal + electricity = Like holding a rod in a lightning storm

Metal + Fire = agonizing burns (you're a tea kettle)

Metal + cold = frosted gear

An entirely different can of worms I'm about to open, but my overhaul would open an entirely new type of play style; battlemage. Even if carried over to PvE. And now Some dungeons may require you to find a magic tank, rather than a traditional tank. It would also make builds require serious thought; meaning that in order for your tank to run certain PvE dungeons you will require a diverse skill set rather than the FotM tank build.

I'm willing to venture and say that fixing this CORE issue would surprisingly fix a TON of class "issues" and even class balance.

I would give anything to have my theory tested on the PTS at the very least. @ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_JessicaFolsom @ZOS_KaiSchober @ZOS_GaryA @ZOS_TristanK

idk · January 2017

bg22 wrote: »

Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »

bg22 wrote: »

susmitds wrote: »

Your thinking style seems to be influenced by Runescape. :P

Never played it.

But honestly, it's just really the only way to obtain actual balance. And open up many different play styles that are equally viable. Too many ppl believe that balance means that every class, playstyle, and build should have an equal chance against every other class, style, build.

The proposed system even promotes actual teamwork and strategy, rather than the oh-so-lovable mindless zergs.

It should be a choice between survival and damage.

That is not ENTIRELY true... that is 1 form of balance, yes... however it narrows diversity and still points towards FotM builds.

My aforementioned overhaul would provide a relatively "realistic" approach and feel to balance. Knights in shinning armor can still swing a sword pretty damn hard, yet would essentially be a "conductor" when hit with magic.

Metal + electricity = Like holding a rod in a lightning storm

Metal + Fire = agonizing burns (you're a tea kettle)

Metal + cold = frosted gear

An entirely different can of worms I'm about to open, but my overhaul would open an entirely new type of play style; battlemage. Even if carried over to PvE. And now Some dungeons may require you to find a magic tank, rather than a traditional tank. It would also make builds require serious thought; meaning that in order for your tank to run certain PvE dungeons you will require a diverse skill set rather than the FotM tank build.

I'm willing to venture and say that fixing this CORE issue would surprisingly fix a TON of class "issues" and even class balance.

I would give anything to have my theory tested on the PTS at the very least. @ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_JessicaFolsom @ZOS_KaiSchober @ZOS_GaryA @ZOS_TristanK

Narrows diversity but having the armor uniquely different? If they are more similar then the diversity is not there.

My comment, which you mostly edited out, is correct. It also increases the diversity available.

bg22 · January 2017

Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »

bg22 wrote: »

Giles.floydub17_ESO wrote: »

bg22 wrote: »

susmitds wrote: »

Your thinking style seems to be influenced by Runescape. :P

Never played it.

But honestly, it's just really the only way to obtain actual balance. And open up many different play styles that are equally viable. Too many ppl believe that balance means that every class, playstyle, and build should have an equal chance against every other class, style, build.

The proposed system even promotes actual teamwork and strategy, rather than the oh-so-lovable mindless zergs.

It should be a choice between survival and damage.

That is not ENTIRELY true... that is 1 form of balance, yes... however it narrows diversity and still points towards FotM builds.

My aforementioned overhaul would provide a relatively "realistic" approach and feel to balance. Knights in shinning armor can still swing a sword pretty damn hard, yet would essentially be a "conductor" when hit with magic.

Metal + electricity = Like holding a rod in a lightning storm

Metal + Fire = agonizing burns (you're a tea kettle)

Metal + cold = frosted gear

An entirely different can of worms I'm about to open, but my overhaul would open an entirely new type of play style; battlemage. Even if carried over to PvE. And now Some dungeons may require you to find a magic tank, rather than a traditional tank. It would also make builds require serious thought; meaning that in order for your tank to run certain PvE dungeons you will require a diverse skill set rather than the FotM tank build.

I'm willing to venture and say that fixing this CORE issue would surprisingly fix a TON of class "issues" and even class balance.

I would give anything to have my theory tested on the PTS at the very least. @ZOS_GinaBruno @ZOS_JessicaFolsom @ZOS_KaiSchober @ZOS_GaryA @ZOS_TristanK

Narrows diversity but having the armor uniquely different? If they are more similar then the diversity is not there.

My comment, which you mostly edited out, is correct. It also increases the diversity available.

The base stats of armor type has nothing to do with changing the diversity of armor sets. Idk why you even mentioned it to be honest. That's an entirely different topic in a sense. Sure, proc sets need revisited... but firstly, armor needs balanced.

TequilaFire · January 2017

I will say it again, there was a time when we begged for heavy armor improvement because it was bad and the devs listened.
Heavy>Medium>Light is how it should be.
If you want the benefits of heavy armor then wear heavy armor.
My magic paladin/templar does not want to wear a dress!

That being said no armor should do damage, armor should buff stats and mitigate damage.
Weapons should do damage and devs need to create some weapons with better traits/procs.

bg22 · January 2017

TequilaFire wrote: »

I will say it again, there was a time when we begged for heavy armor improvement because it was bad and the devs listened.
Heavy>Medium>Light is how it should be.
If you want the benefits of heavy armor then wear heavy armor.
My magic paladin/templar does not want to wear a dress!

That being said no armor should do damage, armor should buff stats and mitigate damage.
Weapons should do damage and devs need to create some weapons with better traits/procs.

Your theory should pertain to physical damage mitigation only. Heavy should not be greater against magic damage.

AGAIN, that provides no balance. Nor would that even be the case in real life, let alone a video game.

It's even testable, you could put on a iron mitten, then stick a fork in an outlet and see how well the mitten protects you.

Nickernator · January 2017

I think it's pretty balanced already:

Light armor for magicka
Medium for Stamina
Heavy for health

bg22 · January 2017

Nickernator wrote: »

I think it's pretty balanced already:

Light armor for magicka
Medium for Stamina
Heavy for health

Thanks for the clarification. Based on what you said, everything is perfectly balanced.

...

...

bantad87 · January 2017

Rock, paper, scissors balancing is boring. The Elder Scrolls universe has already established what each armor type is for and its uses.

Robes (aka light) are worn almost exclusively by mages because they're easy to enchant with powerful effects to enhance a users magicka abilities. Yes, I'm aware you can also enchant armor to do the same things, but for the sake of game balancing - it would be easiest if light armor only buffed magical damage stats.

Medium armor is more of a scout or skirmishers armor - intended to be used by assassins and scouts to sneak around and ambush people. Medium armor should be balanced for that role exclusively. It should provide stealth options and burst buffs. So, stealth, crit, armor penetration, critical damage. The stats that help you gank quickly and get out.

Heavy armor in ES lore is specifically intended for front-line soldiers. It should buff your survivability and sustainability. It doesn't need a damage buff, it needs the ability to buff stamina/magicka recovery, increase defensive stats, increase health, and decrease spell/stamina ability cost.

Heavy armor is for people who want to engage in direct combat. Medium armor is for skirmishers. Light armor is for mages. They each have distinctive battlefield roles - and with the exception of light armor, shouldn't really have anything to do with enhancing overall dps.

TequilaFire · January 2017

bantad87 wrote: »

Rock, paper, scissors balancing is boring. The Elder Scrolls universe has already established what each armor type is for and its uses.

Robes (aka light) are worn almost exclusively by mages because they're easy to enchant with powerful effects to enhance a users magicka abilities. Yes, I'm aware you can also enchant armor to do the same things, but for the sake of game balancing - it would be easiest if light armor only buffed magical damage stats.

Medium armor is more of a scout or skirmishers armor - intended to be used by assassins and scouts to sneak around and ambush people. Medium armor should be balanced for that role exclusively. It should provide stealth options and burst buffs. So, stealth, crit, armor penetration, critical damage. The stats that help you gank quickly and get out.

Heavy armor in ES lore is specifically intended for front-line soldiers. It should buff your survivability and sustainability. It doesn't need a damage buff, it needs the ability to buff stamina/magicka recovery, increase defensive stats, increase health, and decrease spell/stamina ability cost.

Heavy armor is for people who want to engage in direct combat. Medium armor is for skirmishers. Light armor is for mages. They each have distinctive battlefield roles - and with the exception of light armor, shouldn't really have anything to do with enhancing overall dps.

And why should light armor be the exception?
Your staff and skills should enhance your DPS not your clothes/armor.
There is also lore for heavy armor wearing battle mages.
The real problem is any weight OP proc damage type armor sets.
Other than blazing shield templar heavy builds there was very little outcry against HA before the new OP sets.

Danksta · January 2017

Nickernator wrote: »

I think it's pretty balanced already:

Light armor for magicka
Medium for Stamina
Heavy for health everything

Fixed it.

bg22 · January 2017

Danksta wrote: »

Nickernator wrote: »

I think it's pretty balanced already:

Light armor for magicka
Medium for Stamina
Heavy for health everything

Fixed it.

Ah... I knew something was off. Couldn't put my finger on it.

bg22 · January 2017

TequilaFire wrote: »

bantad87 wrote: »

Rock, paper, scissors balancing is boring. The Elder Scrolls universe has already established what each armor type is for and its uses.

Robes (aka light) are worn almost exclusively by mages because they're easy to enchant with powerful effects to enhance a users magicka abilities. Yes, I'm aware you can also enchant armor to do the same things, but for the sake of game balancing - it would be easiest if light armor only buffed magical damage stats.

Medium armor is more of a scout or skirmishers armor - intended to be used by assassins and scouts to sneak around and ambush people. Medium armor should be balanced for that role exclusively. It should provide stealth options and burst buffs. So, stealth, crit, armor penetration, critical damage. The stats that help you gank quickly and get out.

Heavy armor in ES lore is specifically intended for front-line soldiers. It should buff your survivability and sustainability. It doesn't need a damage buff, it needs the ability to buff stamina/magicka recovery, increase defensive stats, increase health, and decrease spell/stamina ability cost.

Heavy armor is for people who want to engage in direct combat. Medium armor is for skirmishers. Light armor is for mages. They each have distinctive battlefield roles - and with the exception of light armor, shouldn't really have anything to do with enhancing overall dps.

And why should light armor be the exception?
Your staff and skills should enhance your DPS not your clothes/armor.
There is also lore for heavy armor wearing battle mages.
The real problem is any weight OP proc damage type armor sets.
Other than blazing shield templar heavy builds there was very little outcry against HA before the new OP sets.

Battlemages don't wear heavy armor. They're frontline fighters who specialize in pure offense. They're the epitome of a glass canon.

But I do agree with you, no armor should directly effect weapon or Spell damage. Now, that can be effected via Stamina or Magicka boosts, but not the armor itself.