How does Armor works? Are there different types of damage depending the weapon? And does Armor has defense types?

[Hans 77]

Indeed, since the closed MP beta i've seen people complaining that armor does nothing and on EA release one of the first mods that were made was "armor does something", there is also Realistic Battles mod now that's one of the most popular on nexus and it completely overhauls the armor formulas to be much more realistic (reminds me of how armor worked in 1257ad for warband)

Warband armor formula was awesome, a good balance between realism and gameplay, don't know why they tried to reinvent the wheel here.

+1

This cannot be overstated. The armor issue is a problem and needs to be addressed -more urgently than any immersion or cosmetic improvements because armor formulas directly affect gameplay.

 

[Terco_Viejo]

It is not a typical ax and the conditions are weird too. what's the point to chop over hard flat plain surface with strait (at the moment of hit) blade? Typical war ax was designed to hit with its toe, this is why the toe of an ax's bit mostly was extended. It was designed this way to help to bio-mechanics of human body, which does this naturally. So ax in terminal phase looks like >| or >/ maybe, where "pipe" and "slash" represent a hit surface. More like spear point of strange shape. Comparing to the sword, ax's center of mass is almost in the end, so most of kinetic energy is applied.

Enjoy


---
I'm fine with certain fast paced combat-style game modes being linked to easy difficulty experiences for new players.

That said, there are players (myself included) who need a realistic formulation; why do you think battles last less than 2 minutes? Armour in general needs a buff of protection, taking into account the type of material, as you rightly say the damage rates should also be reviewed taking into account on which material that value is applied and finally there are weapons that are either disproportionately op or don't perform as they should.

The feedback is there all over the forum.

---
Edit: After a long time of searching, I have found it. Have a look at this thread (Armour. Why it doesn't work and how to make it work)

 

[Akka]

yeah, it really should be reworked, right now armor is too weak and there is no reason to use anything other than blunt aswell, it's as if armor was painted on the body or something lol

maybe adding more values to armor to create a paper/scissor/rock system? just like damage is divided they could separate armor rating into things like deflection, absorption and hardness (just examples from the top of my mind) and add them accordingly to each armor based on their tier and visual representation.

a Gambeson would have bad deflection, good absorption and medium hardness for example making it weak against cut, good against blunt and medium against pierce.

The idea of each armor piece having a different resistance to each type of damage is not new, but I really like the names you found to describe them. Pretty simple and descriptive.

 

[ratschbumm]

Enjoy

I see here exactly what I said above (and many times before). Mail is destructed in the point of hit, so delivered damage significantly greater (even if we will talk about backface signature trauma only) then caused by the sword with the same move pattern. I'm not sure if typical sword with center of mass in the back third of length will leave even simple bruise here. But in the game they are equal.

 

[geala]

Not true for glaives however cause they had kind of special hardening (allegedly dark magic was involved), you could cut even hardened steel armor with it, easy-peasy. The tech was unfortunately lost when the inventor fell from a horse and died while demonstrating his latest models in 1092.

Earnestly, the problem of armor in games is that there are usually no gaps included (only Kenshi I know as an exception). We know of the many cases in which well armored people were killed through these gaps. In addition usually some drawbacks of armor, mainly heat exhaustion, are not simulated.

So armor cannot be made as strong as in a test against a weapon. It's difficult to balance. I'm playing with Realistic Battle Mod, and I like it more than vanilla, but it's still debatable.

 

[Zarthas]

do you think that ax cannot penetrate mail? Ax is cutting in the game.

Oh no, of course it does, that's not what I'm saying. I thought that was one of the reasons axes were largely preferred on the battlefield to swords when chain armors were most common.

I'm saying that we have a mathematical abstraction here were 25% is the lowest penetration value possible, making it effectively the 0% of the system, and it seems a little arbitrary to have no damage type against which armor is 100% effective, thus making the given armor value somewhat deceiving.

To be honest, I've always found the "3 damage types" system lacking in actually simulating the effect of various kinds and weights of weapons against armors. I would've been very interested in seeing a "rigid" vs "flexible" armor system in Bannerlord, or some other slightly deeper simulation.

Don't know if you guys played Rune:Viking Warlord back in the day, but that was actually one of my favorite armor systems. Swords had lowest penetration, then axes, then maces. I think armors went something like Soft(Cloth/Leather), Flexible(Chain), and Rigid(Plate), with the three classes of weapons pitched against them.

 

[ratschbumm]

To be honest, I've always found the "3 damage types" system lacking in actually simulating the effect of various kinds and weights of weapons against armors. I would've been very interested in seeing a "rigid" vs "flexible" armor system in Bannerlord, or some other slightly deeper simulation.

same here. now I am trying to add forth type if you are interesting: https://forums.taleworlds.com/index...mage-in-general-and-axes-specifically.389046/

another approach I proposed is to apply two damage types but mix them accordingly to armor characteristics.

 

[vonbalt]

Oh no, of course it does, that's not what I'm saying. I thought that was one of the reasons axes were largely preferred on the battlefield to swords when chain armors were most common.

I'm saying that we have a mathematical abstraction here were 25% is the lowest penetration value possible, making it effectively the 0% of the system, and it seems a little arbitrary to have no damage type against which armor is 100% effective, thus making the given armor value somewhat deceiving.

To be honest, I've always found the "3 damage types" system lacking in actually simulating the effect of various kinds and weights of weapons against armors. I would've been very interested in seeing a "rigid" vs "flexible" armor system in Bannerlord, or some other slightly deeper simulation.

Don't know if you guys played Rune:Viking Warlord back in the day, but that was actually one of my favorite armor systems. Swords had lowest penetration, then axes, then maces. I think armors went something like Soft(Cloth/Leather), Flexible(Chain), and Rigid(Plate), with the three classes of weapons pitched against them.

Oh that's very similar to the suggestion i gave before in this thread, the 3 damage types are cool but not developed to their fullest potential if they don't have 3 armor types to be put against.

only them vs a generic armor rating doesn't do it justice, the system should be improved to make a "rock, paper, scissors" kind of system, it would be fun, more realistic and greatly improve gameplay (and balance)

say if i wanted more protection against sword-wielding enemies i would prefer armors that had a high protection against cut attacks, if my biggest treats were enemy arrows i would prefer amor with highest protection against piercing and so on.

Maille would provide superb protection against cut, medium against pierce and low against blunt for example, the possibilities are endless in a system like this!

This way it wouldn't just be a more armor rating = always better with no downsides, it would create a much more interesting system.