Armor System

Users who are viewing this thread

Nasrudin

Recruit
Everything but the Armor System in .700 absolutely rocks, as I've seen it so far...BUT...

As is (circa 0.700), the armor level system absolutely sucks. I either have to be rich and high (armor) level or I look like a fricking clown. Not cool. Also, an armor level requirement for helmets seems absolutely rediculous to me unless "armor level" is supposed to reflect the socio-economic status of the wearer. Basically I think the armor system kills/seveeeeeeeerely hurts character customization.
 
Just to add. Horse skill does that too. Why would good horses be harder to ride than the bad ones. I don't get it.

I think you should be able to wear plate mail with armor 0, but you would just suck doing it.
 
I think you should still be able to ride the horse or wear the armor if you don't meet the requirement, but with penalties.
 
Just to add. Horse skill does that too. Why would good horses be harder to ride than the bad ones. I don't get it.

Warhorses IRL were not mellow animals - they were trained, aggresive killing machines in their own right. For those horses (warhorse, charger, and possibly "courser" (no idea what that name means or implies for the horse)) I can understand a requirement/recommended ride level as per Garth's suggestion.

I think you should still be able to ride the horse or wear the armor if you don't meet the requirement, but with penalties.

Looking only at armor, you still hurt character customization with that method.
 
I'm just going to rationalize it as an indication of physical conditioning. Anyone can wear heavy armor with out falling down but to use it in battle you need to be in good shape, so the armor skill is the are you in good enough shape to fight in this armor without collapsing from exhaustion skill. This way it won't bother me as much anyway.
 
Coursers -rouncies- were a cavalryman's horse -a lancer's horse. Understand the distinction? They were fast, heavy horses for troops who charged rapidly, hit hard, and retreated quickly to reform and charge again. In Mount & Blade, the type of horse a courser would be is the Hunter. The M&B "Courser" would actually be more analgous to an Arab, or a good palfrey. It would be good if they'd just switch names on the two types.

Destriers -knight's horses- were less quick, heavier and meaner, for charging, hitting hard, and staying there to hack it out to the finish.
 
Ok I totaly disagree with the idea of an armor skill hurting customization. So let me explain my position.

Like a previous user stated anyone can wear the armor, but not everyone can use it well, as it is ment to be used in battle. There are actually martial art forms revolving around the use of different types of armor. Basically it covers proper possitioning for incomming blows. They teach the optimal locations and angles so that when you do get hit you can use the armors natural curves to better deflect the impact or deflect the blow altogether.

I, however, do agree that there should be penalties to wearing armor in battle or when walking. I don't think you should not b e allowed to wear a peice of armor, no matter what it is, jsut because you lack a skill. In that way I do beleive that it would limit customization and gameplay.

Thanks,
Reavera
 
I totally agree about the post against armor skills, armor skills in games were always ridiculous for me, even if armors need some getting used to, it's just a matter of a weak or so.
The only thing that armors should require imo is strength, which lessens the negative effects of weight (due to equipment)

This seems a bit too silly for me - I've heard of skillful swordsman, trackers, leaders, traders, tacticians but when have you ever heard of something who is "an expert of wearing armor"

Well i doubt they're going to remove it now anyway, so i'll just keep on whining and hopefully more whiners would join :sad:
 
It's not that big a deal. Besides, if they remove it now, you can't use your current characters in the next version.
 
Worbah said:
It's not that big a deal. Besides, if they remove it now, you can't use your current characters in the next version.

It didn't seem like a big deal to me too at first.
But when you think about it, it farthers encourage the player to concetrate on his battle skills and neglect non-combat skills to marnid and borcha.
Take the halving of the intelligence effect on skillpoints, this simply doesn't leave you any choice anymore, i feel like i -have- to recruit both marnid and borcha (i always choose to play only with one hero) if you want to benefit skills like spotting,training,etc *and* have decent combat skills.

I think it's realistic your heroes carry *a certain* extent of the skills, but not too much, i want them to have their own combat skills too and not be total wimps like they are now.
I'm getting a bit far away from the armor topic here, but i hope you follow what i mean by giving up non-combat skill for an unrealistic skill which seems to just steal more skillpoints from players.

BTW, if they remove it later it will create a lot more problems than removing it now. (remember, this version forced people to restart, so we're talking about fresh characters already)
 
In light of Reavera's post, I guess a penalty system would be better than doing away with it outright, but as it is, it's still terribly limiting.
 
Posted by svart "even if armors need some getting used to, it's just a matter of a weak or so. "

Ok, I have taken 3 years of an art form that blends many styles. This martial art is called Jeet Kun Do. Now, if there is anything I have learned about from the many, many, many different forms that are out there, it is that a week is not good enough.

In favor of your post I will agree, a week is better than nothing. But if you were to study how long it takes a person to make a complex muscle movement into an instinc action you would be amazed, and thats just for ONE movement. I beleive its on the order of mulitples of a thousand.

So I think what is important is how much do you think our characters should be able to learn about armor? I mean if a weeks training is all that is in order, thats fine, we can assume he/she just has a weeks worth of training. But what about after the training? Should the character not be allowed to get better, or are we to assume he is a master of armored defence after a week.

Also I thought I might bring some of the things you would have to practice .

Best angles of defence against, swords, maces, axes, archers, pole arms, charging mount.

Best angles of attack for one handed swords, two handed swords, maces, axes, sword & shield, archery, pole arms.

Repeat all of that above for mounted combat while armored. :shock:

Thanks,
Reavera
 
It adds to the game-play. You have to work harder to get a good character.

In .632 on average after six or seven levels I had the best horse, best quality medium armor and the best quality one handed sword, one of the best missile weapon and one of the best shields.

The game was almost over by then.

These restrictions help spread out the challenges more.
 
Reavera said:
Posted by svart "even if armors need some getting used to, it's just a matter of a weak or so. "

Ok, I have taken 3 years of an art form that blends many styles. This martial art is called Jeet Kun Do. Now, if there is anything I have learned about from the many, many, many different forms that are out there, it is that a week is not good enough.

In favor of your post I will agree, a week is better than nothing. But if you were to study how long it takes a person to make a complex muscle movement into an instinc action you would be amazed, and thats just for ONE movement. I beleive its on the order of mulitples of a thousand.

So I think what is important is how much do you think our characters should be able to learn about armor? I mean if a weeks training is all that is in order, thats fine, we can assume he/she just has a weeks worth of training. But what about after the training? Should the character not be allowed to get better, or are we to assume he is a master of armored defence after a week.

Also I thought I might bring some of the things you would have to practice .

Best angles of defence against, swords, maces, axes, archers, pole arms, charging mount.

Best angles of attack for one handed swords, two handed swords, maces, axes, sword & shield, archery, pole arms.

Repeat all of that above for mounted combat while armored. :shock:

Thanks,
Reavera

Depends what you mean by a master of armored defense, if only a master of armored defense knows how to wear platemail, then yes, after a week you're a master of armored defense.

Putting sarcasm aside, for now armor skill mainly limits what armor you can wear and supposedly (i heard not yet implemented) lowers negative effects of heavier armor. (which means *speed*)

I am confused from your post as most of the things you mentioned would come from weapon expertise rather then armor expertise ? (such as angles of defense against weapons, etc)

Up until 3 months ago I have taken 7 years of taijutsu (formally known as ninjutsu) and kenjutsu (including intensive training with katana, dai-katana, guardless bamboo katana, wakizashi, tanto, shurikens, throwing axes, throwing knives, naginata, bo, hanbo, chain with weights and even a rare hour with an extremly dangerous chain and blade).

I agree with you that there are skills of fighting while wearing armor, a lot of katas and techniques are actually based on wearing heavy samurai armor (for example Tai-Sabaki which is like moving and strafing by keeping your balance while wearing heavy weight).
However (!) they will not cause you to :
1. Be able to wear armor you couldn't before knowing it.
2. Be faster in any way.
The only thing that will make you to move faster with armor is being stronger. (something that supposed to happen in higher levels anyway, no need for a new skill)
Since nearly everyone wants to wear heavy armor sooner or later we're talking about a few points *everyone* have to spend in this meaningless skill.

I have heard only little about Jeet Kune Do, do the armor skill you learned originate from ancient schools you can reference (or better yet link) here ?

Cheers
 
What I do not understand is: they halved the number of skill points you gain through intelligence (and everybody knows how much important skill points are), but they added this new skill. So now a char becames competitive at much higher levels, as he requires at least 1/3 more levels to obtain the same amount of skills, and still has a new skill wich is absolutely fundamental to develop.

But? But they increased the xp required to level up quite a lot. What's the fuss? I can't understand this choice fully. What's the point with that? Make the game more difficult? I think it only forces a player to fight much more battles to became half decent, and forces even more all kind of chars to became fighters as quest xp is too little now to just keep doing non-combat missions.
 
I appologize if my post was confusing, svart, I had just woken up and wasn't overly concerned with explaining myself in detail.

Moving on, you stated that "most of the things you mentioned would come from weapon expertise rather then armor expertise ? (such as angles of defense against weapons, etc)".

Yes a certain amount of training/understanding of the weapons I made mention of would be required, however the type of martial training I was speaking of is focused on armored combat ( particularly plated combat ).
In this type of martial art it is imparitive that you know your opponents, namely the weapons that will be wielded against you in the field.

I agree outside of practice in armor your speed would not increase, and this can come from experience in the field or rigerous training, either way a armor skill would cover this. The type of skill set implemented in this game is not a learned skill set, but rather a chosen skill set. You the player choose how you have spent your time in the field and in training, it is not tracked ( such as in morrowind) by the game. Furthermore, though a speed increase would only be expected through an increase of strength
a knowledge of foot placement, and proper body posture can be learned and I beleive this to be very important when you are talking about heavy armor defence.

This armored skill (as far as I understood it) applies to more than just plated armor. So we must then assume that it is not a strength based "skill", and that it is about the use of the armor rather than the ability to simply put it on or wear it. Also training would also teach the wearer ways in wich he could hold himself so as not to be overtly fatigued.

You asked "I have heard only little about Jeet Kune Do, do the armor skill you learned originate from ancient schools you can reference (or better yet link) here ?".

I have not learned this skil but have talked in length with an individual who teaches a school out of the UK. As far as references go, I am sure you can find the related info ( google for example) with a little diligence.

Thanks,
Reavera
 
Daimyo, like the name btw. I am obviously new so I am not up to date on all of the goings on in this forum or about the game. If I were to wager a guess i would assume that it has something to do with the empending story line. The game is ever closing in on its 1.0 release and I am sure that a story is not far
off.

I know from trying to program my own rpgs that it can be difficult to maintain a good rate of growth for the character when you have an advancing plot or story.

Thanks,
Reavera
 
If the game needs to be adapted to err on the side of 'realism' -- then at the most I'd suggest lowering the need to have the armour skill.

For example, heavy armour like a plate harness (there is no such thing as 'platemail,' people) or a coat-of-plates might require an armour skill of 2 or 3, at most. Most everything else that could really even qualify as armour (so things like padded cloth and leather don't count) would require an armour skill of 1.

This would represent that you -do- need to train to be able to wear any armour effectively.. but that it really doesn't take long to learn, and once you've got it down.. you can wear almost anything.

I do think the game makes it seem like armour is a lot harder to wear than it really is.

But in my opinion.. armour slows you down -way- too much. A decade being involved with historical re-enactment and research, and being involved specifically with ARMA (formerly HACA) and the SCA and I have YET to see anyone significantly slowed down by a plate harness.


But when it comes down to it.. it really doesn't bother me. Probably because I never put my characters in plate.. I don't like the way it looks... never have.
 
Back
Top Bottom