<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.
Moderator: Elder Staff
<worn under gambeson> a rough pitted-bog-iron mail hauberk (concealed)
<worn around the chest> a dark-green gambeson of oiled leather
[From Shammat] The Dark Lord demands more mashed potatoes.
Yes. It dates to Neolithic times.Seiryoku wrote:How about wearing iron hauberks hidden beneath leather gambesons, is that an age-old tradition as well?
[From Shammat] The Dark Lord demands more mashed potatoes.
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?Songweaver wrote: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.
[From Shammat] The Dark Lord demands more mashed potatoes.
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 eventMithrandur wrote: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.
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.Icarus wrote: 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.
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.radioactivejesus wrote: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.Icarus wrote: 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.
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
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.Songweaver wrote: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.
But it's not been, because armor-layering was unique to Atonement's Alpha, which had unique problems you aren't addressing. Also:Mithrandur wrote: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.
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
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.tehkory wrote:But it's not been, because armor-layering was unique to Atonement's Alpha, which had unique problems you aren't addressing. Also:Mithrandur wrote: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.
Stolen from Parallel briefly, this is how off-handed weapons used to work.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
Like I said; nobody achieved that in ~4 years since Atonement's Alpha ended, even with 140+ days and years to do it.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.
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 combatantsMithrandur wrote: 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
my bad.Icarus wrote:Wrong topic radioactive, but yes appears someone mucked them.