Armor Layering

[Songweaver]

<worn under gambeson> a rough pitted-bog-iron mail hauberk (concealed)
<worn around the chest> a dark-green gambeson of oiled leather

Make it go away, please. It's broken, and imbalanced. No armor layering.

[radioactivejesus]

people back in the middle ages actually did do this. Virtually anyone wearing chainmail would wear a jack of leather or padded cloth underneath to absorb blows.

If doing this somehow combines the AC of both pieces of armour and gives you almost double the AC you normally have, then I'm for getting it removed. But I always assumed that when you get attacked, it only factors in the highest AC among armour you're wearing, so it would use the AC of the oiled gear if you got hit with a mace, and the AC of the chainmail if you got hit with a sword. The tradeoff is that doubling up will do a lot to reduce your movement speed and encumbrance, and also be pricy as hell, because not only do you have to buy 2 expensive pieces of armour, but you also have to maintain both of them now, instead of just the one.

[Songweaver]

It takes the best armor-type for the damage you're receiving, based on the AC chart (basically allowing for you to create a new, super armor-type), and then applies an additional overall AC bonus for layering. We tried it in Atonement ALPHA, and it was broken then. It's broken now, too. Simply put, I didn't design the numbers for armor/weapons to factor in layering, but having been the one who designed the balance for the game, I can effectively say that this isn't it.

ETA: This, and allowing PCs to dual-wield medium-sized weapons, are definitely the two most pressing issues with combat balance in the game right now. Both examples are cases of the balance design not taking into account the staff's application of that design.

[Matt]

Yes, please fix. The d-wielding mediums is super broken.

[Icarus]

Support ticket please.

That said, while I appreciate your demands on staff time and wish for us to fix this immediately, we have limited resources and knowledge of the code in its current form. You are welcome to have Tiamat code a fix on her repository, and send a push to us to do the fix if you are so passionate about it. We will then evaluate it.

I am under the impression that layered armor provides a +1 boost to AC when struck if someone has layered items. That was intended. Does it do something else horribly unbalanced?

[Jarlhen]

To me layered armor makes perfect sense. Most people in chainmail would have had layered armor in the books. Chain without thick padding, a gambeson, underneath loses a great deal of its protection value. Though I am not entirely sure it should pick the strongest against a certain weapon.

The downside of wearing double armor is pretty obvious, it's like 15 extra pounds or whatever.

[Seiryoku]

How about wearing iron hauberks hidden beneath leather gambesons, is that an age-old tradition as well?

[Jarlhen]

How about wearing iron hauberks hidden beneath leather gambesons, is that an age-old tradition as well?

Yes. It dates to Neolithic times.

[Icarus]

Looked into the code on this.

It's a +1 boost to total AC. This is to encourage folks to actually realistically layer armor. Yes, it probably means you won't be able to sneak as well. But we designed the system for this.

Now... medium dual wielding, that I will fix. But it's more of a builder thing.

EDIT:
May have found a few bugs with this while diving deep down. Going to further investigate. Luckily nothing gamebreaking. Just don't wear plate under plate and receive burn damage.

[Songweaver]

The imbalances come from how the system receives a damage-type noun and decides which piece of armor to compare it to on the AC chart. The +1 bonus AC on top of that isn't too awful, by itself, but further compounds the issue.

Additionally, If I wear leather armor with ++ bonuses to skills (like sneak/hide) over top of noisy armor (maille), why should I get the benefits of the leather armor?

In short, the system and the numbers weren't designed for armor layering. You don't need code to fix it -- just build the objects so that they can't be layered. It can be done on the BP.

Sure, layered armor may have historical precedence (more so than, say, dual-wielding medium-sized weapons), but playability (IMO) should trump that.

[Jarlhen]

The imbalances come from how the system receives a damage-type noun and decides which piece of armor to compare it to on the AC chart. The +1 bonus AC on top of that isn't too awful, by itself, but further compounds the issue.

Additionally, If I wear leather armor with ++ bonuses to skills (like sneak/hide) over top of noisy armor (maille), why should I get the benefits of the leather armor?

In short, the system and the numbers weren't designed for armor layering. You don't need code to fix it -- just build the objects so that they can't be layered. It can be done on the BP.

Sure, layered armor may have historical precedence (more so than, say, dual-wielding medium-sized weapons), but playability (IMO) should trump that.

Couldn't the part were the armor checks for which AC is strongest be removed? Simply have the armor worn on top always be AC used?

[Icarus]

I've still not been persuaded it's something that needs fixed. We designed our armor with it in mind.

[Songweaver]

But, I designed the armor, and I'm telling you that I didn't design it with armor layering in mind. :p

[Mithrandur]

If we take what Icarus said as fact, that means that if you have a gambeson and hauberk and layer them. If we come up with random numbers (as I have no idea the actual protectiveness of either piece of armor is)

Gambeson

+5 protection against blunt
+3 protection against slashing
+3 protection against pierce
+3 protection vs projectiles

and a Hauberk is

+2 protection against blunt
+5 protection against slashing
+4 protection against pierce
+4 protection against pierce

Added together via layering you'd get

+6 protection against blunt
+6 protection against slashing
+5 protection against pierce
+5 protection against pierce.

And I get it, that seems like an amazingly huge deal and that it's way over powered.. except when you realize for people using maces, the player layering armor is only -slightly- more difficult to kill than someone traditionally wearing a leather gambeson. And for sword/axe/spear users, that person would only -slightly- be harder to kill than someone wearing normal maille.

Given what I've seen of the state of combat, it seems neither side has any problems killing one another as is, Spear-users against maille wearers, or twin-maces vs oiled leather. When a long-time combat veteran can go down in a few heartbeats due to a well-timed/planned ambush, I fail to see how a single point AC will make that much of a difference in the outcome.

[Songweaver]

The unfortunate thing that is common for SOI and other RPIs is wide speculation on how systems actually work. For instance, did you know that ambush doesn't directly increase the amount of damage that you do when you hit? Instead, it greatly increases your likeliness to hit, with a very minor improvement to your likeliness to land a critical hit -- offset by the fact that you can't target a bodypart and ambush at the same time. The advantage of ambush isn't some sort of damage modifier, it's simply in making it easier to hit your opponent for the first 1-3 swings.

Another issue with everything that you stated above, Mith, beyond the fact that weapons and mobs aren't designed to deal enough damage to be balanced against those numbers, is that (with the right crafting) I could create a set of super-armor (more protective than any set of maille by itself) that actually increases my sneak and hide skills.

No, it's simply not balanced. I'm not saying that it makes everyone invincible. I'm saying that it's not balanced, just like the dual-wielding issue.

Maybe that's not as important to everyone else as it is to me, but (IMO) a balanced game is a fair game, is a happy game.

[tehkory]

If we take what Icarus said as fact, that means that if you have a gambeson and hauberk and layer them. If we come up with random numbers (as I have no idea the actual protectiveness of either piece of armor is)

Gambeson

+5 protection against blunt
+3 protection against slashing
+3 protection against pierce
+3 protection vs projectiles

and a Hauberk is

+2 protection against blunt
+5 protection against slashing
+4 protection against pierce
+4 protection against pierce

Added together via layering you'd get

+6 protection against blunt
+6 protection against slashing
+5 protection against pierce
+5 protection against pierce.

And I get it, that seems like an amazingly huge deal and that it's way over powered.. except when you realize for people using maces, the player layering armor is only -slightly- more difficult to kill than someone traditionally wearing a leather gambeson. And for sword/axe/spear users, that person would only -slightly- be harder to kill than someone wearing normal maille.

Given what I've seen of the state of combat, it seems neither side has any problems killing one another as is, Spear-users against maille wearers, or twin-maces vs oiled leather. When a long-time combat veteran can go down in a few heartbeats due to a well-timed/planned ambush, I fail to see how a single point AC will make that much of a difference in the outcome.

Datum=/=Data. I mean, I'm not playing. Tonight the wife and I are Don't Starveing together, and I've put all of an hour into SoI in the last few days. I'm bad at this. But data, as in one singular event where one PC died, is not a convincing argument. That's one event

Whereas the whole of Atonement Alpha? That's data. That's plural. I could give a shitty explanation, and I'll try:

Atonement Alpha involved armor stacking. Rather than fix armorstacking(something that was instead saved for beta), the problem was instead fixed with powercreep. More powerful monsters were put out. The level of danger was seemingly one of 'guaranteed death,' and yet rather instead only 'regularly lethal.' This allowed PCs to hit skill-levels that literally have not ever been achieved by anyone since in about 4-5+ years of playing in this codebase. There were multiple PCs with legendary/heroic combat skills, purely due to the way Atonement's alpha worked(almost a dozen of them in over six months, if not more). This was after starting at familiar skill-level or less. In the five years since that hasn't been achieved, even by the exact same players, even with those players gaining +15 boosts to the relevant skills. Matt/Krelm/I probably came closest, on PCs with or without skill/stat boosts.

I don't pretend to understand it, but if Songweaver does, I'd be willing to trust him. He's got the experience in the situation to know when it's bad. Myself, I'll just defer to whatever decisions get made, and continue sortof-playing.

Tonight, though? Tonight's Don't Starve Together. I'mma play a robot.

ETA:
And Atonement Alpha's monsters dealt damage/death through progs and somatics, rather than purely through combat code. I doubt skill-ups take into account somatics/mobs' progs(both of which aren't a focus of this MUD's mogs), meaning that those skill-levels were even more insane than they seem. That's the problem that I -think- Songweaver's trying to put forth, without quite saying it. I'll let him say more.

[radioactivejesus]

It's a +1 boost to total AC. This is to encourage folks to actually realistically layer armor. Yes, it probably means you won't be able to sneak as well. But we designed the system for this.

Now... medium dual wielding, that I will fix. But it's more of a builder thing.

EDIT:
May have found a few bugs with this while diving deep down. Going to further investigate. Luckily nothing gamebreaking. Just don't wear plate under plate and receive burn damage.

well, getting a +1 AC in addition to having it choose your best armour to calculate the damage does seem a bit OP. If it was just using one or the other in calculation and nothing else, then it would be balanced. I'm on Songweavers side on the armour layering thing now. But I think that the biggest issue with combat code that should be looked into is the amount of bleed damage arrows deal, and the fact that shields can't block arrows, which makes them pretty useless.

Medium dual-wielding doesn't even give a real coded advantage. I've stated the reasons before in other threads. But basically dual-wielding longswords gives you the same damage output as dual-wielding shortswords. It also requires you to invest stat points to getting max strength, which makes you lacking in other areas

[tehkory]

It's a +1 boost to total AC. This is to encourage folks to actually realistically layer armor. Yes, it probably means you won't be able to sneak as well. But we designed the system for this.

Now... medium dual wielding, that I will fix. But it's more of a builder thing.

EDIT:
May have found a few bugs with this while diving deep down. Going to further investigate. Luckily nothing gamebreaking. Just don't wear plate under plate and receive burn damage.

well, getting a +1 AC in addition to having it choose your best armour to calculate the damage does seem a bit OP. If it was just using one or the other in calculation and nothing else, then it would be balanced.

Medium dual-wielding doesn't even give a real coded advantage. I've stated the reasons before in other threads. But basically dual-wielding longswords gives you the same damage output as dual-wielding shortswords. It also requires you to invest stat points to getting max strength, which makes you lacking in other areas

People are referring this to how the codebase/game -used- to work, wherein dual-wielding longswords WAS more powerful than shortswords, ontop of requiring peak strength. The fact that shortswords=longswords is just a subset of the problem. That they're one-and-the same means the problem's slightly bigger and less-realistic.

Shortswords should do less damage, in exchange for being off-hand, and you should require peak str to dual-wield longswords. That's what is trying to be said.

[Mithrandur]

The unfortunate thing that is common for SOI and other RPIs is wide speculation on how systems actually work. For instance, did you know that ambush doesn't directly increase the amount of damage that you do when you hit? Instead, it greatly increases your likeliness to hit, with a very minor improvement to your likeliness to land a critical hit -- offset by the fact that you can't target a bodypart and ambush at the same time. The advantage of ambush isn't some sort of damage modifier, it's simply in making it easier to hit your opponent for the first 1-3 swings.

Another issue with everything that you stated above, Mith, beyond the fact that weapons and mobs aren't designed to deal enough damage to be balanced against those numbers, is that (with the right crafting) I could create a set of super-armor (more protective than any set of maille by itself) that actually increases my sneak and hide skills.

No, it's simply not balanced. I'm not saying that it makes everyone invincible. I'm saying that it's not balanced, just like the dual-wielding issue.

Maybe that's not as important to everyone else as it is to me, but (IMO) a balanced game is a fair game, is a happy game.

I never said sneak attacks did more damage, I just said that with a well-planned ambush, combat vets are still taken down with little effort. Which just goes to show that current weapons vs armor are already incredibly effective.

Sure, they might be imbalanced in pve. Except I cannot recall any time in the last rl month that I've heard of players being pressed hard by anything short of a group of trolls. Wargs, boars, and everything in between are a joke to any group of 4 or more skilled fighters as is. As it is, i've seen a patrol go out, take on easily 12 or so wargs/wolves during a single patrol, and half a dozen boars, and the only injury was one person was bitten -once- in the entire event. And even then, it was only a small.

The same thing happened in PRPI even without armor layering. Once a core group of players got even remotely decent combat skills and armor, wildlife became entirely trivial, and the issue more became "How are we going to carry all of these Lagatos back home?" instead of "Be careful, we might run into dangerous wildlife."

I mean really, we can try and point fingers at armor and say it was to blame, but it's been the same whether we've had armor layering or not.

[tehkory]

I mean really, we can try and point fingers at armor and say it was to blame, but it's been the same whether we've had armor layering or not.

But it's not been, because armor-layering was unique to Atonement's Alpha, which had unique problems you aren't addressing. Also:

Code: Select all

compare hatc axe
Compared to a sturdy, long-hafted axe, a short, sturdy, off-white
hatchet:
   + weighs less
   + would on average cause less damage
   + strikes at about the same speed
   + cause less damage against padded armours
   + cause less damage against hardened armours
   + cause less damage against mesh armours
   + cause less damage against composite armours
wield hatch
OK.
You wield a short, sturdy, off-white hatchet.
grip
The grip command cannot be used with this weapon type.
put hatch pack
You put a short, sturdy, off-white hatchet into a large, tartan, grey pack.
OK.
You wield a sturdy, long-hafted axe.
grip
You shift to a two-handed grip on a sturdy, long-hafted axe.
inv
<wielded in both hands>  a sturdy, long-hafted axe
grip
You shift to a single-handed grip on a sturdy, long-hafted axe.
get hatch pack
You get a short, sturdy, off-white hatchet from a large, tartan, grey
pack.
wield hatch
OK.
You wield a short, sturdy, off-white hatchet.
<wielded in right hand>  a sturdy, long-hafted axe
<wielded in left hand>   a short, sturdy, off-white hatchet


Stolen from Parallel briefly, this is how off-handed weapons used to work.

[Mithrandur]

I mean really, we can try and point fingers at armor and say it was to blame, but it's been the same whether we've had armor layering or not.

But it's not been, because armor-layering was unique to Atonement's Alpha, which had unique problems you aren't addressing. Also:

Code: Select all

compare hatc axe
Compared to a sturdy, long-hafted axe, a short, sturdy, off-white
hatchet:
   + weighs less
   + would on average cause less damage
   + strikes at about the same speed
   + cause less damage against padded armours
   + cause less damage against hardened armours
   + cause less damage against mesh armours
   + cause less damage against composite armours
wield hatch
OK.
You wield a short, sturdy, off-white hatchet.
grip
The grip command cannot be used with this weapon type.
put hatch pack
You put a short, sturdy, off-white hatchet into a large, tartan, grey pack.
OK.
You wield a sturdy, long-hafted axe.
grip
You shift to a two-handed grip on a sturdy, long-hafted axe.
inv
<wielded in both hands>  a sturdy, long-hafted axe
grip
You shift to a single-handed grip on a sturdy, long-hafted axe.
get hatch pack
You get a short, sturdy, off-white hatchet from a large, tartan, grey
pack.
wield hatch
OK.
You wield a short, sturdy, off-white hatchet.
<wielded in right hand>  a sturdy, long-hafted axe
<wielded in left hand>   a short, sturdy, off-white hatchet


Stolen from Parallel briefly, this is how off-handed weapons used to work.

Now, I can't really say I played much Atonement myself, given i wasn't a huge fan of the whole space zombie bug idea behind it, but in the end, wildlife being trivialized by players was -not- unique to Atonement.

Yes, armor layering was unique to Atonement alpha. But the problem of players trivializing wildlife/npc dangers has been present in literally every form of the game on this code base that I've seen.

Scav trips in PRPI (which used the same code base) Where there'd be no fewer than 10 lagatos killed on the plains and practically nobody in the party was injured.

The sewer event where there were literally around 20-30 crocodiles killed when they tried to escape the metro. Including one monstrously sized one. All done by maybe half that many players. Maybe not even that many.

And in current SoI, entire warg packs (4+ wargs) taken down in roughly 20-30 seconds. Or trolls that get taken down in 3 rounds of combat.

And as is, I'm pretty sure the only reason players haven't managed to get heroic/legendary skills is primarily due to being killed off in PVP, because i'm pretty sure even in most of the major pve rpts, there has been a distinct lack of player deaths that I've noticed. At least human side, I can't say much for orcs. I do know though that the rate players chew through wargs and wolves and other nasties that apart from the occasional noob hunter, wildlife isn't culling the herd any either.

And unless AC does something wildly different than I'm expecting, 1 AC difference is literally the difference between a honed and unhoned weapon of the same type. And unless you're dualwielding a bladed weapon and a bludgeon weapon, I have my doubts you'd notice that much of a difference at all. I could be wrong though since I don't have access to the code to actually look at it, and we're really just sort of having to take either Icarus, or Songweaver's word for it.

[radioactivejesus]

it seems like all the shortswords in the game just got their variables scrambled. Some turning into pitted-bog-iron shortswords, some turning into pitted-bog-iron longswords. They're also all either unwieldable, or used as lights.

[Icarus]

Wrong topic radioactive, but yes appears someone mucked them.

[tehkory]

And as is, I'm pretty sure the only reason players haven't managed to get heroic/legendary skills is primarily due to being killed off in PVP, because i'm pretty sure even in most of the major pve rpts, there has been a distinct lack of player deaths that I've noticed. At least human side, I can't say much for orcs. I do know though that the rate players chew through wargs and wolves and other nasties that apart from the occasional noob hunter, wildlife isn't culling the herd any either.

Like I said; nobody achieved that in ~4 years since Atonement's Alpha ended, even with 140+ days and years to do it.

[radioactivejesus]

And as is, I'm pretty sure the only reason players haven't managed to get heroic/legendary skills is primarily due to being killed off in PVP

Staff changed the way skill caps work for SOI. Most people are simply incapable of ever hitting heroic unless they minmax their stats to the point of being noticably weak in other areas. There are no more atonement alpha superheroes, talented/low-adroit skills are the new industry standard for powerful combatants

Wrong topic radioactive, but yes appears someone mucked them.

my bad.