cRPG
cRPG => Suggestions Corner => Topic started by: Matey on July 07, 2011, 08:27:57 pm
-
If this has been addressed than please let me know, but every time i have gone to heirloom my light around I was always disappointed to see that i was only worth +1 armour per loom. Seeing as how low the initial value is, spending 120ish hours to triple loom something for +3 armour is a complete waste of time. If the argument for only giving +1 is "but the weight to armour ratio would be just too good otherwise!" then my counter is that you still wont surpass the armour value of any other loomed armour that started with a higher number. even if the weight ratio is better, you are still getting less protection than anyone in equally loomed armour that is heavier, not to mention how very few people would loom such a thing. considering the recent and baffling buff to triple loomed armour that came with the nerf to weapon damage, it doesn't seem to unreasonable to give light armour users a bit of love.
-
you actually get +4 for triple heirlooming low armors, last heirloom gives +2
I think it is fine
-
i think +4 is a waste of time compared to the +7 that every other armour gets.
-
Meh I don't want archers to get all armoured and shit.
That's probably why the devs didn't make them powerful.
-
gothic plate with bevor is funny thing, gets 6 armor on body, leg and head (wtf)
-
i think +4 is a waste of time compared to the +7 that every other armour gets.
I tend to agree with this. Low weight armors are hardly in danger of being too resilient and I don't think adding the lordly armor bonus to light armors would do anything other than to make it a bit more worthwhile.
-
Meh I don't want archers to get all armoured and shit.
That's probably why the devs didn't make them powerful.
The studded leather coat would be the armor most in danger of becoming "all armoured and shit". If given lordly modifier it would have 37 body armor? I fail to see how that would be too powerful, considering such items as the lamellar vests, which archers quite often use, and already have lordly modifiers.
-
The studded leather coat would be the armor most in danger of becoming "all armoured and shit". If given lordly modifier it would have 37 body armor? I fail to see how that would be too powerful, considering such items as the lamellar vests, which archers quite often use, and already have lordly modifiers.
To prevent archers to get a good armour without having to take a wpf reduction.
-
To prevent archers to get a good armour without having to take a wpf reduction.
This.
The difference in weight is prttey important, for not that much armor, from light to medium gear.
Having a +7 lordly would definitely make some armors useless and never used.
Also, it's kind of realistic argument. It's easier going from 50 to 57, than from 10 to 17 on the same armor. It's more... balance.
Don't change it. If you so want heavy armor, why bother in the first place heirlooming a light one ? Good armor goes with big wpf reduction.
-
how many guys do you know with triple loomed light armour? i know exactly ZERO. Marketplace has exactly ZERO triple loomed light armours for sale/trade. Ever wonder why? cause no one is willing to triple loom something for +4 armour.
P.S. I'm a shielder who wears a gambeson. I dont care about wpf penalty, i just go low weight to avoid any run speed penalties, and also it's my style yo. It'd be nice if i didn't get a slap in the face for choosing light armour.
-
3 exceptions:
1 - sarranid padded west
2 - light leather
3 - light strange armor
full +7 bonuses at lordly level
There WAS offers with loomed light armor mate.
-
how many guys do you know with triple loomed light armour? i know exactly ZERO. Marketplace has exactly ZERO triple loomed light armours for sale/trade. Ever wonder why? cause no one is willing to triple loom something for +4 armour.
I know some. But they will never sell or trade it.
If you want to make money on the market, better heirloom medium/heavy armor for infantry. This is the law of the market. A +3 good weapon is more expensive than a +3 practice sword. Some people heirloom their light armor because they USE it. But they'll never heirloom it to sell it, thus no deal on marketplace.
@ Cupid : Damn, didn't know about the light leather getting +7. Is it a bug, or is it intended. :S Wouldn't want to heirloom it to see it getting a +4 newt patch.
-
By the way... this nonsense about "we dont want archers to have armour without losing wpf" is a very very weak argument. archers loom Bow, then arrows... then they might consider armour, but most of the ones who retire that much will be messing around with diff builds and might loom other arrows, other bows, a horse, a melee wep, or heavy armour for a melee build. i really dont see this leading to swarms of hard to kill archers.
-
This.
The difference in weight is prttey important, for not that much armor, from light to medium gear.
Having a +7 lordly would definitely make some armors useless and never used.
Also, it's kind of realistic argument. It's easier going from 50 to 57, than from 10 to 17 on the same armor. It's more... balance.
Don't change it. If you so want heavy armor, why bother in the first place heirlooming a light one ? Good armor goes with big wpf reduction.
I'm not sure if you're trying to make a realism or gameplay balance point here. I won't address the realism point because I don't think it adds much to this discussion.
As for the gameplay balance point, it's not about wanting heavy armor, it's about wanting your heirloom choice to actually be worthwhile. No light armor with +7 when masterworked could ever be considered "heavy". Heck, it would only be 1 more armor than the next higher piece unheirloomed, which is usually considered a very light "medium", which reduces your wpf by 4.5, over the next lighter piece.
(Comparing the Lamellar Vest with the Studded Leather Coat)
*edited for clarity
-
By the way... this nonsense about "we dont want archers to have armour without losing wpf" is a very very weak argument. archers loom Bow, then arrows... then they might consider armour, but most of the ones who retire that much will be messing around with diff builds and might loom other arrows, other bows, a horse, a melee wep, or heavy armour for a melee build. i really dont see this leading to swarms of hard to kill archers.
Agreed. If they do manage to get around to heirlooming body armor and gloves then they should be harder to kill
-
I was lobbying for this but I doubt they'll do it.
-
I was lobbying for this but I doubt they'll do it.
dont just lobby, use your equus africanus asinus powers to make it so! tell them tin can devs to show some love to light armour and agility!
-
I agree that the heirloom bonuses should be equal. After all, 2 to all armors is justified since unlike other stats, due to the way armor works every point of armor becomes more significant as the total armor value increases. +2 on a 50 armor is worth much more than +2 on a 20 armor.
The current armor bonus values seem to be measured based on weight of the armor. Here's an example:
Padded Jack (+1 per heirloom)
weight: 3.5
body armor: 25
leg armor: 7
difficulty: 6
Sarranid Padded Vest (+2 per heirloom)
weight: 4
body armor: 23
leg armor: 12
difficulty: 6
And yes, I use triple heirloomed Padded Cloth. Or at least did until a bug caused me to loose it along with once heirloomed Kettle Hat. If someone who can actually do something about it sees this, check here please:
http://forum.c-rpg.net/index.php/topic,9076.0.html
-
Random inequalities like this are so stupid. Make the armor heirlooms all equal...
-
I agree that the heirloom bonuses should be equal. After all, 2 to all armors is justified since unlike other stats, due to the way armor works every point of armor becomes more significant as the total armor value increases. +2 on a 50 armor is worth much more than +2 on a 20 armor.
good point. triple loomed black armour is way more of a problem than +7 armour on a light piece. if they want to argue that realistically it makes more sense to boost heavies... well then just give em +12 for masterwork and make the completely invulnerable instead of just mostly.
-
goretooth has x3 steppe armor
8-) 8-) 8-) 8-) 8-) 8-) 8-) 8-) 8-) 8-)
-
Maybe there is an other way to look at this.
Make the low-tier armor be more efficient. By that I mean keeping the +1 armor but removing -.5 weight, lower the upkeep, lower the ''break rate'', lower the difficulty etc (just some ideas to give those armors some love without giving them +armor).
-
Maybe there is an other way to look at this.
Make the low-tier armor be more efficient. By that I mean keeping the +1 armor but removing -.5 weight, lower the upkeep, lower the ''break rate'', lower the difficulty etc (just some ideas to give those armors some love without giving them +armor).
reduced weight wouldnt mean anything since they already weight little, reduce costs... they cost nothing... lower difficulty, most of em have no difficulty, lower break rate? well they cost like 50 gold to repair.. who cares?
i want my 28 armour gambeson!
-
And i have a 3+ ragged outfit (and some 2+ leather gloves).
-
since armour values are very exponential it should be the opposite way around heavy armour should get less bonus and light armour more bonus.
-
Give them +2, but also make them .5 kg heavier for each loom.
-
Give them +2, but also make them .5 kg heavier for each loom.
OK, but make heavier armour also weight at least .5 more per loom then.
-
i r revive this thread. fix light looms!
-
how many guys do you know with triple loomed light armour? i know exactly ZERO
I have a +3 Ragged Outfit. Represent. The armor value of the Reinforced tag over Lordly is really depressing from a stats viewpoint. An idea I had was a passive bonus outside of armor value. Say you loom Rich Outfit 3 times, you'd gain more gold on your base tick while wearing it... or something along those lines for the lighter armors.
-
What about changing some mid tier armour like tunic over mail to have a drop in wieght? Make the +3 a lose of 2.5
-
dont cry, if you love an armor you loom it, no matter it only brings +4 armor.
ps: my hardened blue hose is awesome.
-
also think that this 3 armor dont give to agi/ranged charcters really much, all what we need is 40 armor +-5 from armor and gloves to survive arbalest shoot from distance.
-
ive yet to see a good argument against giving light armour the same loom benefit as every other armour... the best light armour will still give less body armour than the worst medium armour even if you get +7 to the light from looming. so stop this needless hate against light armours... give a tiny bit more incentive not to run around in a tin can suit.
-
ive yet to see a good argument against giving light armour the same loom benefit as every other armour... the best light armour will still give less body armour than the worst medium armour even if you get +7 to the light from looming. so stop this needless hate against light armours... give a tiny bit more incentive not to run around in a tin can suit.
Light armor already is a better choice than medium/heavy armor for overall convenience. It doesn't need that.
-
Light armor already is a better choice than medium/heavy armor for overall convenience. It doesn't need that.
wat
-
yeah cause you know, 99% of level 25+ chars dont roll around in tunic over mail or better... obviously light armour is amazing and thats why its so popular that 1% of higher level chars use it. maybe less than 1% if you dont include joke builds and STFs who spent all their 10k on a wep... oh and take archers out of considering and you are left with even less...
-
btw i also dont loom my body armor(padded armor) because dont want to spend 3 gen for this, i will just go lvl 31+ earn some gold and maybe buy it later or loom points.
-
I also know some guys with 3x loomed light armour.
Don't know if it's worth it, they say yes, I don't agree. I think it doesn't make much difference as an archer whether you have 25 or 28 body armour, you are still 1-2 hit kill^^
But light armours shouldn't get +7 with 3rd loom. That's why they are light ;)
-
Khergit Lamellar Vest, weighing 4.5 pounds more than Studded Leather Coat (heaviest armor to get Reinforced), gets the Lordly bonus. Meanwhile, Peasant Dress, weighing 4.5 pounds less than Studded Leather Coat gets exactly the same bonus as it. Seems off to me somehow. Same weight difference between Studded Leather Coat/Peasant Dress and Studded Leather Coat/Khergit Lamellar Vest, yet the Dress gets exactly the same armor bonus as the Leather. This also goes upwards, with the 20 LB armors getting the same bonus as a Khergit Lamellar Vest instead of a yet greater one based on weight.
-
obviously whoever is responsible for fucking over light armour is racist and hates people who have the balls not to prance around in metal armour.
i petition we change the name of the heirloom stages for light armour...
examples...
Hardened vomit stained Blue Gambeson: 22armour
Padded toilet paper Blue Gambeson: 23 armour
Piece of Cloth wrapped around Blue Gambeson: 25armour
-
Honestly, rather than more armor I'd like to see light armor get lighter with loom points. Heavy armor is about brute protection, light armor is about keeping speed so what if each loom point dropped weight?
I'm thinking .25, .25 .5 for a total of 1 pound dropped off most light armors.
To beat people to the punch, yes 1 pound of weight is significant to the point of being noticeable (at least in terms of running).
-
ive yet to see a good argument against giving light armour the same loom benefit as every other armour... the best light armour will still give less body armour than the worst medium armour even if you get +7 to the light from looming. so stop this needless hate against light armours... give a tiny bit more incentive not to run around in a tin can suit.
Totally agree. Currently it doesn't make much sense.
-
i agree as well
i understand why certain weapon have stat differences in their looms, some require weight to be effective or speed best off their natural purpose (like blunt and axe require more weight while a sword requires more speed for example)
but armor is all the same they have one purpose....to protect you
there IS a sacrifice for protection vs speed but looms should be the same for armor seeing how ALL armor has the same purpose just some reflect speed while others reflect sheer protection therefore the wearer looses speed