Why should one wear havy armor

[Vkvkvk]

lolno

They're 44 body armor, 10 leg armor, nowhere near heavy.

Sure, if you're so god damned entitled to your own opinions, 44 body armor is pretty much low-heavy tier for armors.

[Bobthehero]

Uh... no?

That's a few (4-5) more armor than most of the mail armor and it doesn't even weight 15 pounds, no, high tier medium at best, not heavy.

[zagibu]

Yeah, people seem to think of different things when talking about heavy armor. Fact is, full plate is only worn by people who like the look. There is NO build that is more effective in full plate armor than in a Kuyak clone set.

And the 5 bec hits story is hilarious. I get two hitted in fully loomed Milanese plate sometimes by bec, and the fourth hit ALWAYS kills me. I don't think it's possible to eat 5 bec hits and still walk.

[Tzar]

Like its been said before only wear plate armor if for looks anything else is just gimping your own performance.

Ever since paul´s soak value changes plate armor have been totally rubbish 

Its a money sink for people who wants too roleplay knights.

EDIT: forgot to say that it does wonders against team hits tho.. its the only area where it shines

[Gurnisson]

If you're bad at the game you can buy a full plate set, a great maul and roll a strength build to improve your performance drastically.

[Malaclypse]

44 body armor is pretty high. Considering that the top tier of body armor (without heirlooms) for a single piece (no gloves) is 56, that's almost at the top. Lower high-tier.

Low  0-20
Medium 20-40
High 40+

The game is way too forgiving in terms of armor and taking hits as it is- you should never get to rely on armor for free hits against you, bottom line. Add on the absurd bonus we can get from strength; not only do you get the ability to use stronger weapons, you get a skill that makes you hit harder with them, as well as the ability to wear heavier armor (and have it effect your movement less and less the more strength you have) and obtain more health. Survivability and lethality should not be so intertwined into one stat, it's borked.

[Bobthehero]

(and have it effect your movement less and less the more strength you have)

Where does that come from?

IS there someone else than heavy armor detractors that can confirm that?


Edit: Also:

you should never get to rely on armor for free hits against you, bottom line.

What's the point of heavy armor then?

[Malaclypse]

Where does that come from?

This came from the tooltip that you got when hovering over the Strength attribute on the character page, as this dude mentions in the Game Mechanic Mega-thread or whatever:

According to the new website strength reduces movement speed penalty associated with item weight. Is that true? Do I run faster in heavy armors when I have more strength?

However... I just checked the website, and the tool-tip no longer shows up, so I'm not sure if that's actually true. We'd need a developer to confirm/deny.

I'd say the point of heavy armor is aesthetics based on the bottom line I put forward. Just like the light armors! Though unlike my Reinforced Ragged Outfit (very lucky to take two hits), I can see a few free hits coming from heavier pieces (three-five melee hits to kill) but anything beyond that with the 6 or 7 PS of a balanced build is bordering on absurdity IMO.

[Lichen]

I'd say the point of heavy armor is aesthetics based on the bottom line I put forward.

Why don't we just give ALL armors the same stats then? I assure you after that what once were heavy armors can then be deleted from the game after becoming totally useless.

[Malaclypse]

Why don't we just give ALL armors the same stats then? I assure you after that what once were heavy armors can then be deleted from the game after becoming totally useless.

If all armors have the same stats, why would heavy armors be any more useless then light armors? It'd be an entirely aesthetic based choice, as the "heavy" armors would no longer actually be heavy in the weight sense or the protection sense.

But anyhow, I think 3-5 hits is plenty of survivability, and a good place for "heavy" armors to be at on average, with medium being 2-4, and light being 1-2 hits on average.

[Lichen]

If all armors have the same stats, why would heavy armors be any more useless then light armors? It'd be an entirely aesthetic based choice, as the "heavy" armors would no longer actually be heavy in the weight sense or the protection sense.

Sure let's give everything the same stats. I suggest 0 weight 7 armor. Would totally not be ridiculous at all.

[Tzar]

unlike my Reinforced Ragged Outfit (very lucky to take two hits), I can see a few free hits coming from heavier pieces (three-five melee hits to kill

Suprised  : you wear a piece of cloth it shouldn't even take more then 1 hit to knock u off.

Anyways the problem we talking about is that wearing anything above loomed kuyak an a set of loomed gloves is pointless since the amount of hits u can take from that point on is roughly the same...

I dunno tbh if we should buff heavy armor but atm its pointless to use it besides looks.

Medium armor have all the def u need plus you are fast and agile

Heavy armor same def as the medium armor but you get slowed down plus you have to pay a silly extra amount of upkeep just for looks since it hardly improves your def.

[Malaclypse]

Sure let's give everything the same stats. I suggest 0 weight 7 armor. Would totally not be ridiculous at all.

To be clear, I'm not seriously entertaining this notion, but if I were, I'd say this is an okay idea, really- as long as damage values are balanced along with it, of course. It wouldn't make sense to have powerstrike, draw, and so on be as high as they are now if such a change to armor were to take place.

I just think armor as it stands offers entirely too much protection, especially with high Strength builds which have both survivability and lethality at the expense of some mobility. The problem of armor offering too much protection is also only exacerbated when you add heirlooms of body and glove armor into the mix. The amount of handicaps we are afforded by armor needs to be toned down; we deserve to pay dearly for our mistakes, but again this is just my opinion on the matter. Why should we wear heavy armor? We shouldn't!

[Lichen]

To be clear, I'm not seriously entertaining this notion, but if I were, I'd say this is an okay idea, really- as long as damage values are balanced along with it, of course. It wouldn't make sense to have powerstrike, draw, and so on be as high as they are now if such a change to armor were to take place.

I just think armor as it stands offers entirely too much protection, especially with high Strength builds which have both survivability and lethality at the expense of some mobility. The problem of armor offering too much protection is also only exacerbated when you add heirlooms of body and glove armor into the mix. The amount of handicaps we are afforded by armor needs to be toned down; we deserve to pay dearly for our mistakes, but again this is just my opinion on the matter. Why should we wear heavy armor? We shouldn't!

All armors should be reduced to 0 armor (just for looks). Then all weaps nerfed after people get tired of dying in 1 hit all the time. Then give all weaps 0 damage (just for looks) then give punches 900 damage. End

[bruce]

Movement of lightly armoured high agi people is beyond silly. They are protected enough as is, even lightly armoured people wearing rags will never be oneshot in normal conditions by an arbalest bolt or longbow archer, or a throwing whatsit unless it's a lance.