cRPG
cRPG => Suggestions Corner => Topic started by: owens on March 26, 2012, 02:50:56 am
-
Armour balance.
I am not happy with the way heavy armours work. I would like to propose that they work a little like shields in that they have both armour and health.
That is right i am proposing that some armours not only top tier armours incorporate an element of health that is they absorb some damage as well as supplying armour this soak would have a limit and be largely ignored by pierce (daggers do not damage armour just the guy in it it).
This would allow for another element of game balance as some armours could have less armour values then there counterparts but more soak. Armour values would have to be tweaked (a general drop in armour). I imagine that some armours deflect and others cushion like the current shields we are using this could be reflected. This is realism and is easily balanced.
yes or no
-
interesting idea. The term you are looking for ablative btw
would armors need to show dmg or make some sort of alternative sound if they are losing affectiveness?
-
I imagine that you healthbar would have a green or blue section representing your armour.
-
I think it's cool that you used checkboxes, so I can neutralize my own vote.
Also, I think your idea merits further investigation at least. I'm so sick of getting pummeled to death by cheap hackblades like a katana. I want my deflections back.
-
Bump.
I had a thought about this suggestion and i reasoned that blunt weapons should wreck certain armours plate would take damage while protecting its wearer where as soft shell armours such as mail and padded armours should only soften the blow (work like out current armours) without taking damage. Mail should take damage from arming swords(often serrated to tear mail) and pierce weapons. Plate should be very resistant to sword blows but weak against high weight and certain pierce weapons(daggers, x-bow, morning-stars and swords in polearm mode).
This way RPing as a heavy knight will be badass again. And the weapon teirs will mean less with some cheap plate armours (fat plate, black plate) filtering down due to high weight and very low resistance to blunt.
I don't know if this is possible with the game engine but it would be great if armour was a tactical decision as well as a personal preference. Imagine a team of plate wearers getting smashed by a team carrying maces as well as swords. Some players may choose to carry a sword,axe, mace and pick to deal with most melee fighters.
The best will still win but team work will become more important with certain classes getting a statistical buff but being far more easily countered. eg killing iron man with a small sword will once again be difficult but killing one with a morningstar or maul still easy
-
Very interesting idea.
I'm not a plate user, but I always found it strange I could kill a noob in plate by hitting him with a tiny sword.
This would actually force me to carry a blunt weapon with me. It could also make the secondary mode on a number of weapons actually usefull (changing damage type from cut to pierce/blunt).
-
Interesting idea. Would take some balance testing. It seems that depending on the numbers involved, in some situations, it might be better to take a medium armor. Not certain and haven't done the math. Nice thought process nonetheless.
-
I like this idea.
-
Also like this idea...interesting no one has posted negatively to this yet...was almost certain someone would oppose this vehemently
-
I think I'm on it. However it'd require some good balancing... and there is a problem that everyone would carry some pierce or blunt weapon to have any chance with tincans. Maybe arms, legs and head would be still more or less vulnerable to cut dmg?
-
The fact is that weight, slots and cost will prevent people carrying many different weapons and if they do they still have to be better players. Thick mail and padded armours would be effected differently by blunt, soaking and injuring the wearer but not heavily damaging the wearer. Plate would protect the wearer but take damage more quickly and would be rendered ineffective in fewer blunt damage swings.
-
Its a cool idea. Certainly would be better than the current thud fest.
Black +3 with mail gauntlests gives me a hell of a lot of staying power against pretty much most things if I face hug, no need to block at all just face hug and run against the shots while prodding away with a dagger.
How would it effect glancing? As your armor craps out you take more shots??? would be interesting to see.
-
Why dont you play in AUS anymore isn't it a enraging playing with 250 ping.
Lol probably easier than playing against Me I guess.
Every time I Play in America I get a positive kd which is stupid considering i can only go one for one or worse against sudo, caeser and kadeth.
Thanks for the promotion and imput.
The purpose is to give plate some of its old value back. Wearing plate should make you tough but it should also have a downside(not in my opinion) my suggestion is that it is easily countered on another level other than movement speed.
-
Dark age of Camelot had a similar armor system to the one you are describing. For instance, plate was weak to crush (blunt) strong to cut, and neutral to pierce, Chain was strong to cut, neutral to blunt, weak to pierce, and leather was strong to blunt, weak to cut, and neutral to thrust. And it was nice to make weapon decisions based on what you were likely to face.
Something like that would be fun and refreshing. Probably a bitch to code though.
-
The purpose is to give plate some of its old value back. Wearing plate should make you tough but it should also have a downside(not in my opinion) my suggestion is that it is easily countered on another level other than movement speed.
More weight and movement speed because of wearing late-medieval plate armour is unrealistic, because generally these armours were well fitted and movement was even easier than in heavy mail that whole weight was on wearer's shoulders. Unfortunately making plate armours very heavy is the only way to balance it, because making it super expensive would be like erasing it from the game, noone would use them
necron <- wow, comparison to DAoC is a great recommendation for this idea, imho.
-
My additions..
I don't know if having the armor absorb all the damage is a good idea... Rather, it should work something like this.
You start out and have armor X which has,
Armor value: Works like current armor, a base amount of reduction capacity.
Weight: Same as current
Hit points: Amount of damage armor can absorb before becoming "minimally effective"
Now, the way that damage reduction will be handled is where the big difference is.
Rather then have the hit points absorb all damage outright it will rather be in place so that you absorb more damage based on how much HP the armor has. So if i have 100% hp armor the armor might absorb 75% of the damage (or something) and then go down to 50% hp... and if i get hit with my armor at 50% let say it only absorbs 25% of the damage. The amount of 'hp lost" could also be effected by the type of damage and weight of weapon.. so if someone hits me with a short sword while im in full plate it may only take away 5% of the armor hp and do to my body only a few damage. With that said, i think the idea that the armor absorbs all of the damage is dumb, because even if you have full plate and i swing a sharp light sword at you as hard as i can it's not going to simply glance off every time so that you feel nothing. Also, the idea the the armor eventually "breaks" and effectively leaves you naked is really dumb, rather this is a way to simulate the armor becoming "damaged"...
But.. these increases in damage reduction are added onto the base armor value... so it effectively keeps armor the way it is now while also adding a small boost for the first few hits..
so the general equation is something along the lines
damage done = (standard crp damage calculation with armor value included) * percent_absorbed, where percent absorbed ranges between .01 and 1 and which has it's value based on the amount of HP in the armor.
The thing to remember here is that what we are basically doing is altering the core mechanics in a significant way by changing the standard number of hits it takes to kill someone. Currently for most of the population it takes 3-4 hits to kill.. The question you want to ask your self is how many more hits do you want it to take to kill someone in armor? I think that the amount of HP and the resistances of the armor should not grow linearly with armor cost... Plate armor should have more HP and more restiances, where as leather armor should have very little hp and weak resistances.
or we could just increase the number of glancing blows on plate?
-
Yeah I was thinking it would basically work like that.
As the armors health is lowered the armor rating drops. So if you have 60 as a rating at 50% healt your rating is down to say 45.
There is however a problem, hand armor... Would it be a separate rating or would you just combine all of the stuff together to give a total HP reserve?
-
Hand armour is not relevant it even when fully loomed contributes little.
Even if it was being worn with very light armour the armours abilty to soak should be many times larger no gloves should just give a straight armour value.
Come on frank add me on the old steam im itching for a fight. Pk_Owens