PTS Update 29 - Feedback Thread for Armor Bonuses & Penalties

Firstmep · January 2021

BohnT2 wrote: »

The changes to heavy armor are ridiculous compared to light and medium.

The bonus adding 2% damage mitigation while you're CC immune means you'll be running around with 14% damage mitigation all the time in pvp, that's more than major protection.

Neither light or medium armor got any meaningful increase to their damage which will result in everyone playing pvp running 7 pieces of heavy armor.

Those passive simply aren't balanced at all with their downsides:
Light armor gets a little more stam sustain, something highly unnecessary since regen buffs have been increased last patch at the cost of a huge drawback to blocking making light armor even more squishy.

Medium on the other hand has no downside at all but also only relatively mediocre stuff, 14% mitigation for 2 seconds only after a dodge roll, that's just laughably weak compared to 14% mitigation vs everything all the time.

Either medium and light get a huge increase to their damage or the heavy armor mitigation while being CC immune has to be changed to something else.

The current version asks for everyone playing heavy armor in pvp and there's no reason not to

With the crit nerfs again, playing light or medium over heavy mala is even less viable now.
Medium will have some viability still, since they don't get penalties, but it's not looking great.
Light armor? Lol.
Sure glad my bash is going to get cheaper when I get one shot even harder by Stam procs.

Dracane · January 2021

BohnT2 wrote: »

twing1_ wrote: »

BohnT2 wrote: »

The changes to heavy armor are ridiculous compared to light and medium.

The bonus adding 2% damage mitigation while you're CC immune means you'll be running around with 14% damage mitigation all the time in pvp, that's more than major protection.

Neither light or medium armor got any meaningful increase to their damage which will result in everyone playing pvp running 7 pieces of heavy armor.

Those passive simply aren't balanced at all with their downsides:
Light armor gets a little more stam sustain, something highly unnecessary since regen buffs have been increased last patch at the cost of a huge drawback to blocking making light armor even more squishy.

Medium on the other hand has no downside at all but also only relatively mediocre stuff, 14% mitigation for 2 seconds only after a dodge roll, that's just laughably weak compared to 14% mitigation vs everything all the time.

Either medium and light get a huge increase to their damage or the heavy armor mitigation while being CC immune has to be changed to something else.

The current version asks for everyone playing heavy armor in pvp and there's no reason not to

They also made heavy armor considerably harder to sustain in comparison to its light/medium counterparts.

Both light and medium armor have roll dodge reduction, and fat amounts (21% for light, 28% for medium). These defensive maneuvers mitigate all damage.

Heavy, on the other hand, gets a 21% cost INCREASE to this mechanic. Couple that with the removal of roll dodge reduction CP points, and it becomes even more difficult for heavy armor to sustain dodge rolling. This leaves its only defense to be face-tanking damage through mitigation, which I think is a good move.

The heavy armor meta has existed for so long because people could stack its increased resistances with easy access to roll dodging, which becomes super powerful.

I personally welcome these changes because they work to pigeon hole heavy armor users into face tanking a greater number of opponent attacks (because of less dodges), even if that damage is being mitigated more. It makes battling heavy armor users a sort of war of attrition, in which you must deplete their stamina by ccing them until they can't sustain it anymore and are forced to sit there in a cc (without that 14% mitigation, because that only activates whilst cc immune) before you yourself run out of dodges. I like the balance of what they were going for in this regard.

The one thing that I find to be in an odd spot is the block cost reduction on medium armor. This is the one thing I would change, and I would move it to heavy armor passives, as it would further encourage heavy users to sit there and face tank damage by blocking and reducing their speed. Seems counter intuitive to have it on medium armor, where the focus is on mobility and damage avoidance. 21% block cost reduction is huge too, and I could see PvE tanks once again adopting powerful assault for medium armor tanking if it stays with medium armor, especially when all that extra health was given to us at the base level that can be used to offset the loss of resistances.

Only suggestion: move block cost reduction to heavy armor passives and get rid of the bash damage. Damage doesn't belong on heavy armor passives, and bashing isn't for dealing damage.

Have you heard about 7 seconds of cc immunity?

ESO_Nightingale wrote: »

Heavy's cc immunity bonuses are way overstacked. Heavy was already way better than light in pvp but now there's no reason to slot light at all when heavy makes you take less damage against the most common type of damage and makes you even bulkier than before. Heavy should have damage related decreases.

Yea, give us a reason to NOT slot heavy. For heavy and medium, going with 7 is already an option here and there. Albeit it not optimal. But 7 light, I do not see it happening. You lose 4% magicka, which negates the damage gained by LA's penetration and you lose a lot of survivability. Give me an incentive to even go with anything other than 5-1-1.

This is what many people complain about. You make these fancy changes, though it changes nothing at all, because what was BiS before, still is so and outlandish thoughts like 7 light, are still outlandish.

Can't we just change undaunted mettle into a straight 6% ressources rather than depending it on you mixing armor? As long as this passive exists, people will be biased about mixing armor freely based on preference, taste or roleplay. Let's make the decision about mixing armor types more freely and personal than really dictated by this passive.

Brederode · January 2021

Bad changes that make no sense and seem to miss their “intended goal”. You literally acknowledge in the patch notes that these changes are made purely due to PvP, yet it still won’t change much/anything on the PvP part of the game while instead hurting the PvE part of the game, again.

Light armor now increasing movement speed while sneaking per piece when medium has always been considered the “sneaking armor type” (Improved Sneak passive), reducing the cost of bash when light armor users are usually standing at a distance from their targets anyway (staves). The 3% increased block cost per piece also seems way too punishing as a penalty.

Medium armor now reducing the cost of block per piece would have made infinitely more sense on heavy armor instead.

Heavy armor now increasing damage done by bash per piece sounds like something that should be (included in) an One Hand and Shield passive instead. Why would wearing heavy armor increase bash damage? For what purpose? Heavy armor also takes more magical damage per piece even though it’s supposed to offer the best protection out of the three. The reasoning in the patch notes for this is also bad because only PvP situations get mentioned, with light being strong vs heavy and heavy being strong vs medium now, but you forget that this doesn’t apply to PvE were most enemies and bosses in (veteran) dungeons and trials do Magical damage.

This is all mostly coming from a PvE perspective but if I have to shortly sum up my thoughts: some of the bonuses make no sense on the related type of armor, some of the bonuses make barely up for the penalties and I dislike the idea of adding penalties to armor in general, at least in its current way.

RealPhoenix · January 2021

Medium Passive increasing movement speed while CC immune didnt seem to work in one of my tests. Anyone else tested this?

DreadDaedroth · January 2021

If only 2 types of armour gets malus then you should remove them for fairness.
Tanking in PvE will be only harder without any new fun or interesting mechanic just harder boring and dull.

oscarovegren · January 2021

Change magical dmg taken to less dmg done on heavy armor. That would solve issues in both PvE and PvP. Lesser the mitigation when CC immune to 1% for each piece worn

TheImperfect · January 2021

I haven't tried everything yet but in theory I like the changes so far. I do worry a little for my vampire in light armor but time will tell. I guess she will just need to aoe like crazy.

Trinotops · January 2021

I'm not a fan of Armor Types having penalties. It kind of just seems like a strange and pointless attempt to add realism to the game at the expense of limiting a player's freedom to build how they want all while not really doing anything to address balance. Why do Light Armor builds need to take more damage from Martial Attacks and have increased Block Cost when it's already the squishiest armor type? What does it matter if Heavy Armor builds move a bit slower or take a bit more Magical Damage when they will continue to dominate PvP and are likely going to be even stronger than they are now with the damage reduction while CC immune?

Jodynn · January 2021

If you want true build diversity make light armor and medium armor give resource agnostic values of critical, damage, and penetration.

vgabor · January 2021

All this armor changes were made with PvP focus where the rock-paper-scissor approach might make sense, with not giving a single thought how this will affect PvE. Not good ZOS, really not good, you guys should go back to the drawing board and start from scratch with paying attention to both PvP and PvE consequences...

dcmgti · January 2021

Roll dodge increase for heavy is definitely excessive or apply it to Battlespirit. I roll dodge a ton on my pve end game tanks, way more than what you would think a 40k hp, resist cap tank would need to. There is a crazy amount of one shot attacks even for tanks in vet trials and vet DLC dungeons. And if it isn't quite a one shot then its 30k through a s&b block.

Replace the increased magical damage per heavy piece with a reduction in damage done per heavy piece. If people want to tank in pvp then let them tank. Reduce their damage done by a lot in combination with Malacath only affecting class abilities. Malacath users could take an increased crit damage which would help curb heavy armor in pvp also.

If light armor is become even more squishy can we get better damage shields for light? Maybe a slight buff to Harness Magicka or make the duration lasts a longer? Mag sorc will still likely be the only mag class able to wear light armor because of shields and mobility. Light armor magplar, magdk, magden and magcro will be sitting ducks in light armor. At least magblade has some mobility with cloak.

Why is damage from bash even a thing? I'm pretty sure I've never seen anyone bashing except for an interrupt only. 99% of players probably do not care how much damage is done with a bash. So maybe those specifics about bash damage could be replaced with more useful things?

This isn't just a pver's perspective, I play both pve and pvp quite often.

Benoftheflies · January 2021

I like this change and I understand it, but on the flip side, you also don't have a choice 90% of the time. Tank gear is usually heavy and only savvy pve tanks use medium armor.

Even if you say, hey I am a tank with high resists so I can get away with wearing light armor for the defense against magic, there isn't many sets that I can wear that is light armor and relevant.

Is there any intention of allowing us to swap armor weights? like if I want to be a light armor tank for this fight with a lot of magic damage, can I transmute my set of Ebon Yoln to light, and have the dodge roll reduction and magic damage reduction? Like add that functionality to the transmute station

Sandman929 · January 2021

I could understand the armor changes a bit more if the overwhelming majority of sets in the game weren't only available in a single weight. This cripples the options for mixing weights. If we could recreate sets from our sticker book in other weights, then I think the bonus/penalties would result in some choices, right now it's not a choice it's just a penalty for wearing a set that happens to only come in one weight.
I agree with what others have said as well that taking increased damage of any type makes no sense for heavy and really hurts PVE tanking, if anything they should get a damage done penalty and a speed penalty.

GrimTheReaper45 · January 2021

dcmgti wrote: »

Roll dodge increase for heavy is definitely excessive or apply it to Battlespirit. I roll dodge a ton on my pve end game tanks, way more than what you would think a 40k hp, resist cap tank would need to. There is a crazy amount of one shot attacks even for tanks in vet trials and vet DLC dungeons. And if it isn't quite a one shot then its 30k through a s&b block.

Replace the increased magical damage per heavy piece with a reduction in damage done per heavy piece. If people want to tank in pvp then let them tank. Reduce their damage done by a lot in combination with Malacath only affecting class abilities. Malacath users could take an increased crit damage which would help curb heavy armor in pvp also.

If light armor is become even more squishy can we get better damage shields for light? Maybe a slight buff to Harness Magicka or make the duration lasts a longer? Mag sorc will still likely be the only mag class able to wear light armor because of shields and mobility. Light armor magplar, magdk, magden and magcro will be sitting ducks in light armor. At least magblade has some mobility with cloak.

Why is damage from bash even a thing? I'm pretty sure I've never seen anyone bashing except for an interrupt only. 99% of players probably do not care how much damage is done with a bash. So maybe those specifics about bash damage could be replaced with more useful things?

This isn't just a pver's perspective, I play both pve and pvp quite often.

As it stand on live magsorcs dont even want to be wearing light armor, we just have to because heavy doensnt synergize will with us. With just the change to remove the 5pc requirement from light skill line im thinking about switching to around 3-4 heavy on a crafted set. I mean theirs a few like shackle and seducer that work well and not that we can siphon some of the gear awake without completely losing pen and crit. Really heavy is just king in pvp even if you cant utilize it. Light on sorc is just taking a sub par setup because your able to get more out of it than you would the setup that is even better for everyone else.

GreenHere · January 2021

In short, the changes are stupid. I'm not trying to be mean or dismissive, but that's honestly my feedback.

Lot of good reasoning has been offered here and elsewhere on the forums already, but the point that really jumped out at me immediately is:

Why do armor weights even need PENALTIES?!

Not only is it an unwelcome "kick in the groin" type of feeling for using the gear that we want to enjoy for whatever reason (which is often not under our control what weight it is available in), but it's entirely unnecessary... You could achieve the exact same effects numerically by just adjusting the bonuses each armor type gets (or doesn't get), couldn't you? Make whatever the "worst" penalty that you're trying to balance around the baseline, and simply buff the other weights around/above that, you know?

You could achieve the same stats, and make the buffs seem more substantial, all while avoiding the "haha, screw you nerds for wanting to wear [armor type]!" feeling you're inflicting on your players.

And this is all just speaking to the... I don't know, psychological(?) aspect of all this. I'm not technically-minded enough to get into the finer details of why these balance changes are questionable, but even as a casual observer it seems like the numbers you're trying to balance around aren't necessarily going to have the desired "rock, paper, scissors" effect anyway. It all seems convoluted and just poorly thought-out.

There needs to be a simpler implementation to incentivize using a given armor weight over the others. The disincentive should be the opportunity costs you're giving up by not wearing something else -- not trying to avoid getting punished for wearing what otherwise would make sense.

Twohothardware · January 2021

There should be at least a 3% penalty to damage done per piece of heavy armor worn or Malacath needs to be done away with. That’s the only way we can get some kind of balance for the current heavy meta.

There’s just not enough of a damage advantage to be in light or medium in PvP when Malacath is in the game.

FaceDancer · January 2021

I believe that this changes affect a lot the personality of the armour weight, and felt that was primary made thinking on the PvP, then I believe the heavy armour doesn't have sense that the medium armour have a bonus to block and the heavy armour don't, not only because the heavy armour it's the one that it's used for tanking but as well because of a massive and solid materia doesn't need to expend energy to stay stand. And using medium armour need to expend more effort to stand and avoid to be pushed away.
The penalties for the magica look like too much, I believe the best way to get a equilibrium will be in the damage done and more logical, or maybe reduce the speed of atack that will make more sense.
And in this case maybe speed from attacks increased for the medium armour will be great for the personality of the medium armour.

Rungar · January 2021

No issue with the penalties or the principle behind it but you should of kept it simple and reasonable.

light armor penalties to block cost ( 3%) per piece
medium armor penalties to block cost (2%) and sprint cost (1%) per piece
heavy armor penalties to sprint cost (2%) and dodge cost (1 or 2%) per piece

block and dodge are the two most important defensive skills in the game. Seems like something that could of been simple and elegant has been mangled for some unknown reason.

the dmg changes undermine the armor itself and some of the bonuses like the medium blocking bonus make no sense at all.

I do like that the 5 piece requirements were removed.

tomofhyrule · January 2021

I like the idea of armor having penalties, but this current implementation seems like it would cause more problems than it solves. Again, it comes down to the difference in PvP and PvE, since this implementation doesn't really hurt PvP tank builds too much, but almost wrecks PvE tanks. I'll caveat that I don't really PvP so I can only guess there, but my PvE content is solely as a tank.

The roll dodge cost increase for heavy makes sense from a practical standpoint. As a tank player I don't like it, but I completely understand that it would be hard to tumble out of the way in full plate. The problem is that some PvE dungeon/trial monsters require the tank to roll dodge out of them because of the mechanics of the fight - think about enraged Kjarg in Icereach, who will OHKO through block, or the gryphons in Cloudrest who apply heavy bleeds unless you dodge roll the attacks. If PvE tanks are expected to avoid dodgerolling, some of these dungeon/trial mechanics may need to be revisited slightly.

The big thing is the mag damage penalty in heavy. I completely disagree with this, as PvE incoming damage can be physical or mag. I'll take Icereach as an example again - the final boss is entirely mechanics and heavy attacks with staves, unless you're doing the HM where you get a handful of incoming physical as well. That means a tank for nonHM Icereach would be best served in light armor...sort of... but then they'd still need the Heavy passives...? But heavy is bad against mag enemies...?

I realize the point is to balance PvP as well, which has had a major stam weapon/heavy armor meta. That means that there isn't much incoming mag damage in PvP as there is stam, so the heavy armor meta will still not be broken. In essence, this change is wrecking PvE tanks and reinforcing PvP tanks.

If I were in charge, I'd have made it so so heavy armor is opposed to light/med on the movement, but I'd make light and medium oppose on resistances while heavy got a different penalty, most likely with damage done. PvE tank builds are pretty slow to go through overland since they usually have sub 10k DPS, so just enforcing that building for resistance will not build for DPS will help the tankiness problem in PvP without affecting PvE that much. I like the damage/attributes being tied to armor, and doing it by piece as opposed to "5 pieces or not" is a much better choice. Still, I don't think that getting rid of the connection of light/med/heavy to mag/stam/tank is a good way to go.
Granted just a thought, but here's where I'd start:

Light: + Magicka/recovery/damage, - dodge/sprint cost, + dmg on block, + mag resist, - phys resist
Medium: + Stamina/recovery/damage, -dodge/sprint cost, - sneak cost, - detection radius, - mag resist, + phys resist
Heavy: + Health/recovery, + dodge/sprint/sneak cost, + detection radius, - dmg on block, ++ mag/phys resist, -- mag/phys damage

And then in addition, I'd make sure that this gave PvE tanks reasonable enough resistances for some of the PvE content or adding slight nerfs so that some things which are designed to go through block are reduced.

EDIT: Another thing to play with that would support PvP vs PvE would be crit resistances. If heavy was weak to crits and light/med has some crit resist, that could also help shift the meta of PvP only. Incoming crit damage is only seen in PvP - light and med both have + crit bonuses, so heavy armor users don't have many bonuses in crit to start with. As such, Malacath's "no crits" isn't a penalty when you have a low crit chance anyway.

Nerhesi · January 2021

Heavy armor is too stacked.

You need really highlight the differences in the armor type by directly tying in bonuses and negatives to each armor piece that do matter.

You want heavy armor to be more defensive? You have to significantly penalize damage and sustain it. Or perhaps, if you want the thematic approach that heavy armor can still hit hard, you have to absolutely cripple it's sustain. As in -10% per piece.

The heavy armor monster can be that toon that will hit you hard, and take less damage - but is nearly guaranteed to die after 30 seconds. It can't be these minor non-impactful negatives (pvp).

ExistingRug61 · January 2021

twing1_ wrote: »

Drazhar14 wrote: »

I don't understand the + and - % damages for light and heavy armor. The defense you get from each is based on the armor value. Heavy armor has a higher defense value than light already. Light will take more physical damage because its armor value is lower than heavy. The new extra stats are irrelevant.

Just giving light armor extra magic resistance and penetration will accomplish your same intention. Having negative stats should not exist. You're pretty much saying when you're naked you take normal damage, but if you put on a robe you suddenly take extra physical damage. Makes no sense and hurts the immersion you're trying to create by adding these new armor passives. Stick to positive modifiers. The downside should be you're losing out on the positive modifiers of other armor weights and not actual negative stats.

They are trying to make a rock paper scissors dynamic between light armor, medium armor, and heavy armor in which light beats heavy, heavy beats medium, and medium beats light.

Simply adding spell penetration to light armor wouldn't be the same thing, because it would affect medium armor just the same as it would affect heavy armor.

I could agree that light armor's vulnerability to physical damage is already reflected in its pitiful amount of physical resistance, however.

Or they could, you know, lower the base spell resistance on heavy armour pieces and the heavy armour passive (like you already identified occurs with light and its low physical resistance). Then only heavy is affected.

Basically the effects of the modifiers could be achieved by modifying the resistance values, on the pieces themselves and the already existing passives, without the need for the percentage modifiers.

There are some other complications to this idea though, due to individual pieces giving different resistance amounts (ie: you would likely get balanced phys and spell res from heavy chest + legs + 5 pieces light instead of having to have an equal number of pieces to get balance with the +/- % modifiers) and also resistance having a varying effect depending on much other resistance you have. But still, simply using resistance values does seem a bit "cleaner" or more elegant than just chucking some +/- % modifiers in there as another calculation.

That said, the +/- % modifiers do potentially mean the weaknesses and strengths are more pronounced than could be achieved by just changing resistance values, which may be what they are going for.

Hmmm, tbh I've sort of convinced myself both ways on this so I'm on the fence. Plus we probably won't actually know the true effect of these changes until they go live into the full PvP population.

ExistingRug61 · January 2021

tomofhyrule wrote: »

EDIT: Another thing to play with that would support PvP vs PvE would be crit resistances. If heavy was weak to crits and light/med has some crit resist, that could also help shift the meta of PvP only. Incoming crit damage is only seen in PvP - light and med both have + crit bonuses, so heavy armor users don't have many bonuses in crit to start with. As such, Malacath's "no crits" isn't a penalty when you have a low crit chance anyway.

Agreed, crit resistance would be a stat to look at as a way of changing the balance in PvP without affecting PvE.

Thematically it would make sense if crits against heavy armour were allowed to somehow bypass the resistance you get from the armour, ie: a crit could be viewed as an attack that has found a gap in the armour and so shouldn't really be reduced by the armour. Such a mechanic would possibly be a bit hard to implement, but could the same effect could be achieved by making heavy reduce base crit resist (or remove base crit resist and then give +crit resist passives to light and medium). This could potentially then change the dynamic of the value of crits vs malacath as well.

That said I am not in a position to comment on the current balance between the passives at the moment as I can't test, but I think this (modified base crit resist) would be an interesting area to explore if it becomes apparent that there is imbalance between the new armour passives.

ealdwin · January 2021

Here's my two-cents.

The idea behind adding some passive attributes to each armor type based on what benefits/penalties that armor type should have in combat is not an inherently bad idea, and actually a fairly common one in the single player Elder Scrolls titles.

The problem, is that the implementation of such has too many un-needed benefits/penalties, such that it makes certain armor types undesirable in specific content. The goal should be affording players choice based on what benefits they want, not punishing them for seeking what is best for their character. Ie. Mag specs should be encouraged to run Light Armor, unless the player specifically wants the benefits of Medium or Heavy and doesn't care too much for the benefits of Light.

There are, roughly, four aspects to what armor currently provides via passives or the Armor value on the tooltip Defense, Mobility/Movement, Damage, Sustain.

Sustain is already achieved through the passives, reflecting improved resource management for those experienced using the armor type. No need to address it through benefits/penalties.

Damage is again, achieved through passives. Heavy Armor should have no benefits or passives increasing damage (and it has none), and Medium and Light have passives that reflect increased efficacy in combat or casting spells through experienced use of the armor type. No need to address it through benefits/penalties. If anything, the passives for Medium and Light need to provide more damage, further increasing the divide between them and Heavy. (Malacath's Band is a separate issue that needs addressed as well).

Defense is already touched on, both through passives where Heavy Armor benefits most, and where Light Armor gains some protection against spells. But also through the nature of Armor. If I recall the numbers correctly (correct me if I'm wrong), using Heavy Armor pieces as a base, providing 100% Armor_Value, Medium Armor pieces then provide somewhere between 75% and 66% the Armor_Value of Heavy Armor pieces, and Light Armor pieces provide somewhere between 25% and 20% the Armor_Value of Heavy Armor pieces. There's no reason to build further onto the defense provided by each armor type through benefits/penalties, because the benefits and penalties already exist, baked into the nature of each armor. Going further only serves to make Light Armor even more undesirable.

Mobility/Movement. I like the idea of the benefits/penalties touching on this aspect. In previous Elder Scrolls titles, the nature of your worn armor type affected defense oppositely from mobility. Armors with more defense hindered movement speed, as it should be. If you seek defense through withstanding damage, go Heavy. If you seek defense through evading it, go Medium or Light. Baking these values into the nature of armor via benefits/penalties makes sense as well as doing so in reverse strength of Defense.

One further point, before my proposal, to be fair to Heavy Armor, and not deprive them of any benefits or leave them with only penalties, I'll go back to touch on Defense. I mentioned the idea previously of withstanding/evading damage. For that purpose, Heavy Armor should benefit from the ability to block more damage than the other armor types.

Here are my suggested changes:
The bonus are calculated along a 100%/75%/25% calculation. Rather than using 4%/3%/1%, the numbers are decreased by -2 to put the midpoint at 0 rather than 2, resulting in 2%/1%/-1% equating 100%/75%/25%. The targets of the benefits are also uniform, so that they are more comparable to one another. There are 2 aspects of mobility and 1 aspect of damage, because the primary aspect of damage (Armor Value) is addressed by the nature of each piece of Armor.
Light Armor Benefits/Penalties:

Reduce cost of Sprint by 2% per piece. (+2% reduction = 100% mobility bonus)
Reduce cost of Roll Dodge by 2% per piece (+2% reduction = 100% mobility bonus)
Reduce the amount of damage blocked by 1% per piece (-1% increase = ~25% defensive bonus)

Medium Armor Benefits/Penalties:

Reduce cost of Sprint by 1% per piece (-1% reduction = ~75% mobility bonus)
Reduce cost of Roll Dodge by 1% per piece (-1% reduction = ~75% mobility bonus)
Increase the amount of damage blocked by 1% per piece (+1% increase = ~75% defensive bonus)

Heavy Armor Benefits/Penalties:

Increase cost of Sprint by 1% per piece (-1% reduction = ~25% mobility bonus)
Increase cost of Roll Dodge by 1% per piece (-1% reduction = ~25% mobility bonus)
Increase the amount of damage blocked by 2% per piece (+2% increase = 100% defensive bonus)

Note, any redundancy in armor benefits and passives is fine, as it represents further mastery of that armor type. (Potential conflicts: Grace - cost of sprint (LA), Athletics - cost of roll dodge (MA).

Sahidom · January 2021

These heavy armor changes would turn Ironblood armor set into an amazing source of layered damage mitigation. Why? The movement reduction is considered a CC effect that triggers, for example, Hist Sap healing plus 30% unique damage reduction, plus 14% mitigation while CC (New changes), plus minor protection (Temproal Guard), and 3% Potentates... Gap closure or Rapids, Swift traits etc. would help soft mitigate movement reductions... You thought blood spawn helm set activated like crazy in PVP, this 5pc set bonus would be always up in a AoE, proc set environment.

DreadDaedroth · January 2021

Malus on armour types are a bad idea.
Overall when only two of three types are affected by it.
Fair is foul and foul is fair.

Xebov · January 2021

ealdwin wrote: »

[...]
Here are my suggested changes:
[...]

Your suggestion would not lead to a good solution for PvE. What you keep out of focus is that we are forced into specific armor types for our roles per design.

Sprinting is needed to traverse content and in some cases during fights as well. Having a cost increase for it would put more preasure on Tanks sustain.

Blocking and Dodging are freqently needed during fights and there are mechanics that require a block while others require a dodge. Again you would put one sided preasure onto tanks here.

Besides that the bonus for damage blocked is useless. All bonuses are multiplicative. For example i have max armor as a tank i only take 50% damage. Block shoves off 50% which means i only get 25% damage. Now with SB or Frost staff i get 20% more damage blocked which means im now taking 20% damage. The 20% more damage blocked end up as 5%. Even if i leave all other mitigating factors our your 2% per piece would translate to 0,4% less damage taken per piece. Thats next to nothing and would not warrant the increased cost for dodging and sprinting.

Thraben · January 2021

I think these armor changes are reasonable.

Since they seem to be directed at changing the general PvP to trend towards more tanky players (as PvE guys have always used the armor according to their role), I would actually make the penalties more severe. 10% is not enough to dissuade players from using Heavy Armor.

GreenHere · January 2021

Thraben wrote: »

I think these armor changes are reasonable.

Since they seem to be directed at changing the general PvP to trend towards more tanky players (as PvE guys have always used the armor according to their role), I would actually make the penalties more severe. 10% is not enough to dissuade players from using Heavy Armor.

That's the exact problem a lot of us have with the changes, though!

The penalties are punishing enough to suck for PvE purposes, but not enough to really knock PvPers that utilize heavy off their stride. So it would seem like it's not a good course of action in the first place, right? Your solution seems like it would only increase the severity of the discrepancy many are worried about!

Firstmep · January 2021

So here i come with my overall thoughts:

1. When i first saw they introduce the new bonuses/penalties, i thought: Why? Why do we need more stats?

Armor weights already have thematic passives, if you are mage, light armor makes you a better mage.

This bonus/penalty system is going to come back biting them in the future if they want to change anything balance related.

This just feels like unnecessary stat bloat for no reason( kinda like many of the new cp stars(oh we 6 trillions stars to "choose" from!)yeah right..)

2. It looks very clear that they didnt think about the overall balance of the game, when coming up with these bonuses.

Heavy armor already dominated the pvp meta, and now you are making it even stronger for no apparent reason, while with the same stroke putting extra pressure on pve tanks?

3. They couldve just as easily baked these into new purchasable passives.

For example, rather than just taking more physical damage for wearing light armor, we could have a passive that increases our damage with magicka based attacks, but we also take more damage from martial attacks.

We can then CHOOSE if we want to take this passive that provides us with more damage, that comes with a downside or not.

In the current system if i want to play a magicka dd in pve i still have to use mostly light armor to maximize dmg and efficiency, so these new passives arent really a choice.

4. I feel like ZOS forgot that most sets in this game have 5pc bonuses and they also only drop in 1 armor weight XD.

The "Dream" of running 4/3 or 4/2/1 etc is a pipe dream, if you want to run a set thats light armor, you will still run that set in light armor and be forced into running light armor and deal with its downsides.

Not much of a choice really.

Dracane · January 2021

Firstmep wrote: »

The "Dream" of running 4/3 or 4/2/1 etc is a pipe dream, if you want to run a set thats light armor, you will still run that set in light armor and be forced into running light armor and deal with its downsides.

Not much of a choice really.

That's why sets also exist for jewelry and weapons.
I agree though, probably nothing will change.

I still like the armor changes, they just need some reconsideration. I doubt ZoS will change their mind and remove it all together. So what we can and should do, is give feedback on how to properly balance penalties and benefits instead of complaining how much we want them gone.

I fear that when all we do is to voice how much we want it all reverted instead of giving advise, this might just go live as it is. Time is always short here.