The Gold Road Chapter – which includes the Scribing system – and Update 42 is now available to test on the PTS! You can read the latest patch notes here: https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/656454/
Armor penalties have no place in this game?
-
novemberhhh✭✭✭No it doesn't. No armour = 0 Physical Res. Light Armour = More than 0 physical resist. Plus the armour penalty is not an additive, it is a multiplactive.
Light Armor provides exactly -0- resist literally every time Pen > Armor
The fact you then take an additional +x% physical dmg makes it provide less defense than being naked
Changing it to a -y% phys resist would make it provide less defense than other armor weights, but at least you wouldnt ever take more dmg compared to wearing nothing (more pen when already over the targets armor does nothing)4040 -
Scardan✭✭✭✭✭Suna_Ye_Sunnabe wrote: »Araneae6537 wrote: »How does wearing armor make you more vulnerable to an attack???
Light "armour" is simply an enchanted garment, particles of which enter the wound and cause terrible inflammation.
So because of... particles... then light armour should be less defensible than skin.... Hmmm. I should probably reconsider wearing shirt and pants in real life next time I do anything that might scratch me then.
IRL I would prefer to be naked at the moment I get stabbed or shot. Scratching is not an issue, so no need to you to cook naked. Only if it is a satisfaction factor :P.
Also since when is 0 > armour value higher then 0 ? Did I missed mathematical revolution or something?Edited by Scardan on March 7, 2021 9:45AMLet's be extremely precise in our use of terms.0 -
eKsDee✭✭✭✭✭I have no issue with the basic implementation of penalties for armor types (though I agree that maybe they should do them differently). The problem is that that makes no sense when there's already no choice in what armor you wear. Sure, now you can do different combos, but overall its going to stay the same: Mag = Light (often w/ 1 H & 1 M for undaunted passive), Stam = Med, Tank = Heavy (again sometimes with a slight mix). You shouldn't have penalties for wearing armor that you really didn't choose to wear. They need to fix the armor passives to apply for both the Mag and Stam equivalents for their buffs.
Agreed. They're implementing these bonuses and penalties under the pretense of adding more impact to choice. But that choice still remains an illusion.
IMO, they need to hybridize at least the damage providing passives on Light and Medium armor, with a slight alteration regarding crit values.
Light Armor = Hard-Hitting Damage. Each piece (via passives) adds a flat bonus to Spell & Weapon Penetration, and a 2% increase to Spell and Weapon Critical, increasing ability for attacks to hit harder more often.
Medium Armor = Sustained Damage. Each piece (via passives) adds a flat bonus to Spell & Weapon Damage, and a 1% increase to Spell and Weapon Critical, allowing attacks to hit for more damage at a more consistent rate.
That way, when looking from a DD perspective (esp. in PVP), both Mag and Stam would have the option of choosing between different damage types at the caveat of gaining or losing armor rating. If Stam would like more Penetration or Crit, they'll have to give up defense. If mag would like more armor, they'll have to lose out on some Penetration and Crit. And choosing Heavy Armor means losing out on Damage, Penetration, and Crit.
Note: This wouldn't mean implementing Stamina LA sets or Magicka MA sets, as those could still be achieved through the few sets that come in all weights and through crafted sets. This would just be hybridizing the passives.
Then go further and add through either bonuses or passives unique benefits for each type of armor, allowing each to truly have an impact on player choice. For example:
Light Armor = Arcane Aptitude (Mage), where each piece has a bonus to enchantment potency and strength of damage shields.
Medium Armor = Stealthy Aptitude (Thief), where each piece has a bonus to the ability to sneak and move in an agile manner.
Heavy Armor = Martial Aptitude (Warrior), where each piece has a bonus to your steadiness in combat bolstering bash damage and blocking amount.
Note: ___ Aptitude isn't a passive or bonus name, just words I strung together to provide an idea and feel to what I'm trying to suggest.
This still wouldn't be feasible when you consider that not all sets drop in all weights. Under your suggested system, someone playing a stam DPS build might want to go light to maximise burst potential for quicker fights, but they can't because the only good stam DPS sets are medium, the only light ones are decon fodder with completely mismatched bonuses.
If they truly want to hybridise armour weights, they'll need to change all sets to drop in all weights, which would also need to be accompanied with a complete looting overhaul, both to properly support a single weight having multiple sets from a given piece of content when it was previously just 1, and to not make the gear grind worse by further diluting the drop table for gear.1 -
Tommy_The_Gun✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭✭✭✭It may be unpopular opinion but I think they should introduce only armour bonuses (and no penalties), or just do not introduce any new passives at all. It is huge enough change that 5/1/1 will be gone as we will not have 5pcs of armour requirement for the passive to work.1 -
Sahidom✭✭✭✭I was watching some videos about the new cp warfare tree. They have something in there to boost your resistances or penalties to attacks I think. If true won't that just kill the penalties?
The CP 2.0 does have some offered offset some penalties but I believe in a multiplication manner where you don't get a direct negation.
For instance, cost increaes are applied before any flat cost reductions. This is also why the racial %cost reductions are very efficient over flat rate reductions.Edited by Sahidom on March 7, 2021 5:36PM0 -
Suna_Ye_Sunnabe✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Suna_Ye_Sunnabe wrote: »So because of... particles... then light armour should be less defensible than skin.... Hmmm. I should probably reconsider wearing shirt and pants in real life next time I do anything that might scratch me then.
Light armour has an armour value. Skin does not.
My response was clearly sarcasm, but alright lol.Angua Anyammis Ae Sunna0 -
Suna_Ye_Sunnabe✭✭✭✭✭
✭✭Suna_Ye_Sunnabe wrote: »Araneae6537 wrote: »How does wearing armor make you more vulnerable to an attack???
Light "armour" is simply an enchanted garment, particles of which enter the wound and cause terrible inflammation.
So because of... particles... then light armour should be less defensible than skin.... Hmmm. I should probably reconsider wearing shirt and pants in real life next time I do anything that might scratch me then.
IRL I would prefer to be naked at the moment I get stabbed or shot. Scratching is not an issue, so no need to you to cook naked. Only if it is a satisfaction factor :P.
Also since when is 0 > armour value higher then 0 ? Did I missed mathematical revolution or something?
The amount of readers who seem to miss sarcasm is astounding, truly.Angua Anyammis Ae Sunna1