VERY IMPORTANT: Item Bug Report

[Rando]

It has come to my attention that the Heraldic Transitonal Armor +3 has been at a +4 armor bonus value rather than +5 for a very long time.
As all other versions of Heraldic Transitional Armor at +3 give a +5 armor bonus (literally all of them), I see no reason for the Heraldic Transitional Armor to be any different.
I've made this report numerous times over my year back to cRPG, all of which have gone largely ignored. Even so, new items (of poor quality and balancing) continue to be added, as a sort of "feel-good" "band-aid" approach to appeasing the community.

My suggestion: Stop adding more low-quality, poorly thought-out armors to clutter up the shop while there are still any items bugged from what their true stats should be. Fix what we have before adding anything more, basically.

If you're willing to put in the effort to add brand new items, why aren't you willing to fix the ones that always existed? Personally, I would've preferred to see items that already existed fixed. Ritterbruder Armor is another great example of an armor that is a literal downgrade from other armors in its weight class, which I have also reported before.
I decided to make the font size large and colorful so it would be IMPOSSIBLE for ANYONE (yes, anyone, even you. you know who you fucking are, reading this shit, lazy fucker.) to miss it.

Thx and God bless.

[Rico]

It's not a bug but an intended feature of previous balancers.

gotta roleplay that bling

Exquisite materials such as gold decoration or colorful banners have been addressed with increased upkeep or inferior stats compared to the non-shiny items. For example, compare Rus Scale Armor and Gilded Rus Scale Armor. The Barded Warhorse and the Heraldic Barded Warhorse used to have identical stats too, with the exception of higher upkeep for the latter. Looks like someone has changed that a while ago. This shiny/non-shiny reasoning hasn't always been applied very consistently, though.

Increased upkeep may be justifiable, inferior stats are a bit over the top. Will look into it, potentially even before Dec2010.

[Tristan_of_Erzoth]

It's not a bug but an intended feature of previous balancers.

Exquisite materials such as gold decoration or colorful banners have been addressed with increased upkeep or inferior stats compared to the non-shiny items. For example, compare Rus Scale Armor and Gilded Rus Scale Armor. The Barded Warhorse and the Heraldic Barded Warhorse used to have identical stats too, with the exception of higher upkeep for the latter. Looks like someone has changed that a while ago. This shiny/non-shiny reasoning hasn't always been applied very consistently, though.

Increased upkeep may be justifiable, inferior stats are a bit over the top. Will look into it, potentially even before Dec2010.

The armor Rando is talking about isnt a "shiny" armor. Its literally just the heavy heraldic armor.

[Bobthehero]

Gotta pay for that heraldy, m8

[Rico]

The armor Rando is talking about isnt a "shiny" armor. Its literally just the heavy heraldic armor.

Yeah, do I look like a guy who agrees with what previous balancers did?

Edit: Disclaimer - Some of the stuff makes sense, Heraldic Transitional heirloom bonus is one of the things which doesn't

[Heibai]

Since it's all about ingame balance, higher upkeep is always the better method than inferior stats.

Edit: I looked through some other items and found this. Mongolian Guard Boots and Iron Greaves, exactly the same stats and price, but Iron Greaves gives +5 at rank 3 and the Mongolian Guard Boots only +4 and that's racist.

[Rando]

hey

[Sparvico]

ho

[Zeus_]

lets go

[the real god emperor]

Also plz fix Swedish sword, it is 7 length shorter than Lombardic but every other stat is the same (also weights 0.1 more)

2h warhammer is 3.8kg with 35 blunt meanwhile 1h barmace is 4.1 kg with 35 blunt, I think 2h warhammer either has to lose the unbalanced perk or get more weight, around 4.5-5 imo.