Light Armour Heirlooms

[Matey]

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.

[Murchad]

you actually get +4 for triple heirlooming low armors, last heirloom gives +2
I think it is fine

[Matey]

i think +4 is a waste of time compared to the +7 that every other armour gets.

[Magikarp]

Meh I don't want archers to get all armoured and shit.

That's probably why the devs didn't make them powerful.

[ThePoopy]

gothic plate with bevor is funny thing, gets 6 armor on body, leg and head (wtf)

[Sammael]

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.

[Sammael]

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.

[Magikarp]

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.

[Bulzur]

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.

[Matey]

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.

[Cup1d]

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.

[Bulzur]

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.

[Matey]

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.

[Sammael]

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

[Sammael]

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