Heavy armor should deflect arrows

should heavy armor deflect arrows?


  • Total voters
    62

Currently viewing this thread:

D0c1

Knight at Arms
lamellar straps get broken with arrows and scale gets pierced in between the scales.

i think that bows needs to get nerfed but deflection is too much for gameplay and historical perspectives


8:40 for lamellar
 
Unfortunately your request is not acceptable for the following reason:
the number of hurtboxes of the character are few and they are all covered by a piece of armor.
If that part of the armor was in plate or heavy as you write, then the character would be 100% protected by arrows and would become invulnerable to them, leading to a disproportionate imbalance in many cases.
To introduce the mechanics you require, you need to make some adjustments to the armor system and the hurtboxes of the models.
These tweaks, the introduction of the mechanics you requested without an imbalance and without the invulnerability of those wearing heavy armor, with the addition of greater depth of the combat system both melee vs melee and distance vs melee, are written in the thread that I insert here:

JOINT HURTBOXES and ARMOR HURTBOXES: an armor system that provide a way to balance factions warfare and make more deep the combat system(suggestions)
thats a great idea, hope it gets implemented,
heavy armor should deflect arrows, but it needs to have weak points where the armor isnt there like armpits/etc
 
lamellar straps get broken with arrows and scale gets pierced in between the scales.

i think that bows needs to get nerfed but deflection is too much for gameplay and historical perspectives


8:40 for lamellar
i only want historical accuracy,
i think more arrows should deflect,
lets at least look at the statistics of this,
i think right now arrows penetrating everything is silly
lets change it to a more historically accurate percentage of penetration
 

D0c1

Knight at Arms
i only want historical accuracy,
i think more arrows should deflect,
lets at least look at the statistics of this,
i think right now arrows penetrating everything is silly
lets change it to a more historically accurate percentage of penetration
how would historical accuracy improve gameplay?
i think they should just make best bows need ~10 shots to down best armored units.
the absolute worst bows can be made to need ~70-100 shots. the rest can fall in between.

i think people will start complaining if pierce was made an rng chance.
i would complain too.
 

Mushbeast

Knight
Your suggestions will make the game less fun for at least %90 of the community.
To be honest I think it'd be the other way around. Majority of people despise archers and they really mess with the flow of the game.

Saying that, I don't think that armor should necessarily deflect every arrow, though it should be a lot more resistant to it or there should be a greater variety in arrow/bow strengths in comparison to different sets of armor.

Ideally there could be a penetration system based on armor quality, angle and distance but I think that's a bit out of the scope. Most people could settle for large damage reductions and this would actually give heavy infantry a role on the battlefield if they can with-stand archer fire. They shouldn't be invincible to it but they certainly need to survive more than they do now.

By the way, 90% of the community is like forty people at this point. If archers and cavalry weren't so cancerous this number would be much greater.
 
To be honest I think it'd be the other way around. Majority of people despise archers and they really mess with the flow of the game.

Saying that, I don't think that armor should necessarily deflect every arrow, though it should be a lot more resistant to it or there should be a greater variety in arrow/bow strengths in comparison to different sets of armor.

Ideally there could be a penetration system based on armor quality, angle and distance but I think that's a bit out of the scope. Most people could settle for large damage reductions and this would actually give heavy infantry a role on the battlefield if they can with-stand archer fire. They shouldn't be invincible to it but they certainly need to survive more than they do now.

By the way, 90% of the community is like forty people at this point. If archers and cavalry weren't so cancerous this number would be much greater.
i just want arrows to realistically deflect arrows,

even if they are deflected, not 100% some penetrate gaps in armor, there is still blunt damage that is very little
 
i just want arrows to realistically deflect arrows,

even if they are deflected, not 100% some penetrate gaps in armor, there is still blunt damage that is very little
If you left the damage as it is and added a deflect chance based on the armor that could be good. On a deflect the damage is ignored. So if you are wearing cataphract armor you have 50 / 50 chance of ignoring the damage to chest (I think its ac 50?)
 

hoonii

Squire
To be honest I think it'd be the other way around. Majority of people despise archers and they really mess with the flow of the game.

Saying that, I don't think that armor should necessarily deflect every arrow, though it should be a lot more resistant to it or there should be a greater variety in arrow/bow strengths in comparison to different sets of armor.

Ideally there could be a penetration system based on armor quality, angle and distance but I think that's a bit out of the scope. Most people could settle for large damage reductions and this would actually give heavy infantry a role on the battlefield if they can with-stand archer fire. They shouldn't be invincible to it but they certainly need to survive more than they do now.

By the way, 90% of the community is like forty people at this point. If archers and cavalry weren't so cancerous this number would be much greater.
Yeah I agree pierce damage should do a bit less damage to armor that would help both cav and archers being strong but primary reason archers are super annoying is their accuracy, especially the xbows.
 

Grank

Sergeant Knight
WBNWVC
Yeah I agree pierce damage should do a bit less damage to armor that would help both cav and archers being strong but primary reason archers are super annoying is their accuracy, especially the xbows.
I'm not sure about that. I think the accuracy is fine. Lowering it will make horse archery neigh-unplayable.

I share the sentiment that arrows hurt an awful lot, but I still think it's fair because it needs some skill to land a hit. Making heavy armor deflect arrows will make it unfair to archers. People can already use a shield for negate their attacks. Someone wearing an arrow-deflecting heavy armor and a shield will make any archer shoot himself in the mouth.
 

OurGloriousLeader

Grandmaster Knight
Infantry already have a way to completely negate arrows, it's called shields. If the shield coverage is poor (it is), then we should address that.
 

Einarcf

Master Knight
M&BWBWF&SNWVC
Remember that crush through was not random, but it still felt random. Adding such mechanics might bring back a similar feeling.
 
Top Bottom