It's a bit of a misconception that armor type in EQ was the determining factor of your defense.
There were classes with armor considered light, that still had very high defense and very high DPS. One of those classes in EQ is a monk.
Monks wearing leather had comparable mitigation to knights in plate, they actually have higher mitigation than bards wearing plate. This was revealed during TSS beta, when developers told us the AC returns for each class. Each AC you gather in the game, is multiplied by a number specific for each class.
Knights make better tanks than monks of course, they have hate generation skill and have more defensive skills, but the base mitigation between monks and knights is similar.
AC returns are class dependent, not armor dependent. The only thing armor differences in EQ do, is how much total AC you can gather, you can gather more with plate than with chain or leather. However, a monk with leather, has much higher defense than a rogue wearing chain, because of AC returns.
Giving a class both very high defense and very high DPS doesn't have to be an issue. EQ monks are a good example. They have very high base defense, but monks didn't become group tanks because they couldn't generate enough hate and didn't have the needed defensive disciplines. Yet a good geared monk was one of the better solo classes in EQ, especially with their mend skill and with raid gear and AC augs.
The trinity of gear. It used to be that armor was divided into heavy, medium and light. Depending on what type of armor fit you, your dps would be affected. Lightly armored classes had much higher dps potential than heavily armored classes.
But over time, that distinction eroded in many games. Heavily armored classes could do as much dps as a lightly armored one. Which of course raises the issue, why would anyone (who cares about dps) play a lightly armored dps class if they could do as much damage and also enjoy heavy armor?
Devs in various games have come up with all kinds of rationalizations about this, usually claiming that armor type is not that important. But when you respond, "oh then let me have that thing you say isn't important," the answer is always no lol.
I am hoping that Pantheon will be sufficiently old school that the trade-offs between armor type and damage potential will still be there.
I've always gravitated towards heavyily armored dps/hybrids. There's no reason why my sword should hurt any less than yours just because my armor is heavier. Now if you wanted to make lighter armor wearers faster in combat and in movement, then that I agree with, because that makes sense. But trying to convince me that my sword will hurt less because of the type of armor I have on doesn't make any rational sense at all.
The trinity of gear. It used to be that armor was divided into heavy, medium and light. Depending on what type of armor fit you, your dps would be affected. Lightly armored classes had much higher dps potential than heavily armored classes.
But over time, that distinction eroded in many games. Heavily armored classes could do as much dps as a lightly armored one. Which of course raises the issue, why would anyone (who cares about dps) play a lightly armored dps class if they could do as much damage and also enjoy heavy armor?
Devs in various games have come up with all kinds of rationalizations about this, usually claiming that armor type is not that important. But when you respond, "oh then let me have that thing you say isn't important," the answer is always no lol.
I am hoping that Pantheon will be sufficiently old school that the trade-offs between armor type and damage potential will still be there.
I've always gravitated towards heavyily armored dps/hybrids. There's no reason why my sword should hurt any less than yours just because my armor is heavier. Now if you wanted to make lighter armor wearers faster in combat and in movement, then that I agree with, because that makes sense. But trying to convince me that my sword will hurt less because of the type of armor I have on doesn't make any rational sense at all.
It's a gaming convention, not something that is realistic. But if realism is the guide, why can't my character strap on whatever armor he/she likes, same as you?
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
The trinity of gear. It used to be that armor was divided into heavy, medium and light. Depending on what type of armor fit you, your dps would be affected. Lightly armored classes had much higher dps potential than heavily armored classes.
But over time, that distinction eroded in many games. Heavily armored classes could do as much dps as a lightly armored one. Which of course raises the issue, why would anyone (who cares about dps) play a lightly armored dps class if they could do as much damage and also enjoy heavy armor?
Devs in various games have come up with all kinds of rationalizations about this, usually claiming that armor type is not that important. But when you respond, "oh then let me have that thing you say isn't important," the answer is always no lol.
I am hoping that Pantheon will be sufficiently old school that the trade-offs between armor type and damage potential will still be there.
I've always gravitated towards heavyily armored dps/hybrids. There's no reason why my sword should hurt any less than yours just because my armor is heavier. Now if you wanted to make lighter armor wearers faster in combat and in movement, then that I agree with, because that makes sense. But trying to convince me that my sword will hurt less because of the type of armor I have on doesn't make any rational sense at all.
It's a gaming convention, not something that is realistic. But if realism is the guide, why can't my character strap on whatever armor he/she likes, same as you?
I don't think I said realistic. It is a fantasy world after all. But within that fantasy world things should make sense and be believable. Anyone should be able to wear and use anything. That doesn't mean you can master everything, but it does mean you can master some things, be good at other things, and okay at a whole lot of other things. Just like in real life.
For example, inn a game, I would master how to wear and be effective in heavy armor and how to use a sword. I would then become an expert in some offensive lightning spells, a heal spell or life-leech, and maybe a couple offensive and defensive spells to round out my character. That's about as hybrid as one gets. Other people may instead choose to wear lighter armor for more mobility and faster attack speed, and master a few different weapons.
One game that represents a good example of this is SWG. You could master two professions and dabble in another. Or you could become proficient in many, and master none. Or you could dabble in even more for flavor.
One game that represents a good example of this is SWG. You could master two professions and dabble in another. Or you could become proficient in many, and master none. Or you could dabble in even more for flavor.
Yes. I miss that. Good times, those.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
The trinity of gear. It used to be that armor was divided into heavy, medium and light. Depending on what type of armor fit you, your dps would be affected. Lightly armored classes had much higher dps potential than heavily armored classes.
But over time, that distinction eroded in many games. Heavily armored classes could do as much dps as a lightly armored one. Which of course raises the issue, why would anyone (who cares about dps) play a lightly armored dps class if they could do as much damage and also enjoy heavy armor?
Devs in various games have come up with all kinds of rationalizations about this, usually claiming that armor type is not that important. But when you respond, "oh then let me have that thing you say isn't important," the answer is always no lol.
I am hoping that Pantheon will be sufficiently old school that the trade-offs between armor type and damage potential will still be there.
I've always gravitated towards heavyily armored dps/hybrids. There's no reason why my sword should hurt any less than yours just because my armor is heavier. Now if you wanted to make lighter armor wearers faster in combat and in movement, then that I agree with, because that makes sense. But trying to convince me that my sword will hurt less because of the type of armor I have on doesn't make any rational sense at all.
Its not just ground movement speed. Your arm moves slower if your body is encased in plate. Since you move slower each hit will hit for less than maximum effect because the opponent can see it coming and react. The only time it would not be less damage would be if you snuck up on someone.
The trinity of gear. It used to be that armor was divided into heavy, medium and light. Depending on what type of armor fit you, your dps would be affected. Lightly armored classes had much higher dps potential than heavily armored classes.
But over time, that distinction eroded in many games. Heavily armored classes could do as much dps as a lightly armored one. Which of course raises the issue, why would anyone (who cares about dps) play a lightly armored dps class if they could do as much damage and also enjoy heavy armor?
Devs in various games have come up with all kinds of rationalizations about this, usually claiming that armor type is not that important. But when you respond, "oh then let me have that thing you say isn't important," the answer is always no lol.
I am hoping that Pantheon will be sufficiently old school that the trade-offs between armor type and damage potential will still be there.
I've always gravitated towards heavyily armored dps/hybrids. There's no reason why my sword should hurt any less than yours just because my armor is heavier. Now if you wanted to make lighter armor wearers faster in combat and in movement, then that I agree with, because that makes sense. But trying to convince me that my sword will hurt less because of the type of armor I have on doesn't make any rational sense at all.
Its not just ground movement speed. Your arm moves slower if your body is encased in plate. Since you move slower each hit will hit for less than maximum effect.
Hmm, so basically could good attributes lessen the effect somewhat of wearing armor... Sounds logical to me, the armored player would have to put points in it to balance things against the player without any armor or loose speed. That would even work with heavier armors where you could get rid of some of the movement restrictions if you wasted some points on it. That would work since you can balance it, then you could make a slower character who do more damge or a faster that do less. Which is just another way with more options than the classic fixed restrictions, but choices are always good.
And when I think about it: It isn't usually a trinity, most games have 4 armor classes: cloth, leather, chain and plate. Certain games like GW2 do have 3 but I think 4 is more common still. Which is odd since chainmail actually is harder to move in than plate no matter what Hollywood movies think (they confuse plate and tournament armors). Ask anyone who actually have tried a chain and plate armor on. Plate is just an evolution of chain, both are heavy armors. Compare it with a real world tank from WW2 and a modern one.
Some games have a large variety of armors with a range of advantages and disadvantages like Pillars of Eternity. They use recovery speed to mimic being slower in heavier stuff. It becomes a sliding scale at some point and a decision has to made between damage reduction and recovery speed. There isn't any reason why a slightly more in depth system like that couldn't work in an MMORPG.
I agree with you there. Armor really should be about more than a damage reduction value and a simple buff.
Another thing action MMOs like Tera could do would be to have hit locations and allowing anyone with the rights speccs to equip different types of armors on different locations. For an instance are the most commonly hit location in a real swordfight firstly arms and secondly the stomach. Legs are not that often hit unless you ride and since they restrict your movement most people like landsknechts tended to have light armor on the legs while heavy on the rest of the body.... it would open up for a new combat system where you would aim for the achiles heel of the opposing player or boss. With regular tab targetting systems this would be slightly less fun but you could have most attacks hitting random places with a few special ones (like headshots) targetting fixed locations.
Add a debuff for being wounded in a specific part (if you loose more than 20% of your HP in a part it affects you and if you lose half you get a crit that would be nasty).
Just a thought but it would add a new dimension to combat which is something particularly action MMOs really need.
Just to add to this that I think heavy armor is general done correct by reducing melee dmg, but I wish that light would give movement bonuses and casting benefits.
Just to add to this that I think heavy armor is general done correct by reducing melee dmg, but I wish that light would give movement bonuses and casting benefits.
Why would they give bonuses?
Lets say a person in no armor (just basic clothing) is at 0. When you add armor, you are gaining protection, but it may have limitations in its mobility and movement. The more you add, the heavier it is, the more protection, but then so is there more restrictions.
There is no logic in it "adding" movement/flexibility bonuses (unless it is magical and of such a specific bonus), only adding penalties to its use as I explained. So, you wearing cloth should reasonably have no restrictions, but if you put on leather (have you ever tried on leather armor? It isn't flexible at all), there should be penalties, just less than wearing chain, and less than wearing plate as each armor presents new problems with mobility and flexibility.
What I would like to see though is special pros/cons to certain armor. Leather is great against slashing damage, terrible against blunt. There many pros/cons of armor and it would be nice to see such added to the game content where one class may not be as ideal for a given situation just because he is wearing a massive pile of plate armor.
Just to add to this that I think heavy armor is general done correct by reducing melee dmg, but I wish that light would give movement bonuses and casting benefits.
Why would they give bonuses?
Lets say a person in no armor (just basic clothing) is at 0. When you add armor, you are gaining protection, but it may have limitations in its mobility and movement. The more you add, the heavier it is, the more protection, but then so is there more restrictions.
There is no logic in it "adding" movement/flexibility bonuses (unless it is magical and of such a specific bonus), only adding penalties to its use as I explained. So, you wearing cloth should reasonably have no restrictions, but if you put on leather (have you ever tried on leather armor? It isn't flexible at all), there should be penalties, just less than wearing chain, and less than wearing plate as each armor presents new problems with mobility and flexibility.
What I would like to see though is special pros/cons to certain armor. Leather is great against slashing damage, terrible against blunt. There many pros/cons of armor and it would be nice to see such added to the game content where one class may not be as ideal for a given situation just because he is wearing a massive pile of plate armor.
Why bonuses? I think armor and weapons are more than just defense, especially physical.
We are playing fantasy game. That means magic. There is no reason why some armies wouldn't have magical resistances or bonuses imbubed into them.
And I would add, procs from armor and weapons are what add fantasy flavor to things. Was so bummed when Wow dropped almost all of them.
Just to add to this that I think heavy armor is general done correct by reducing melee dmg, but I wish that light would give movement bonuses and casting benefits.
Why would they give bonuses?
Lets say a person in no armor (just basic clothing) is at 0. When you add armor, you are gaining protection, but it may have limitations in its mobility and movement. The more you add, the heavier it is, the more protection, but then so is there more restrictions.
There is no logic in it "adding" movement/flexibility bonuses (unless it is magical and of such a specific bonus), only adding penalties to its use as I explained. So, you wearing cloth should reasonably have no restrictions, but if you put on leather (have you ever tried on leather armor? It isn't flexible at all), there should be penalties, just less than wearing chain, and less than wearing plate as each armor presents new problems with mobility and flexibility.
What I would like to see though is special pros/cons to certain armor. Leather is great against slashing damage, terrible against blunt. There many pros/cons of armor and it would be nice to see such added to the game content where one class may not be as ideal for a given situation just because he is wearing a massive pile of plate armor.
Why bonuses? I think armor and weapons are more than just defense, especially physical.
We are playing fantasy game. That means magic. There is no reason why some armies wouldn't have magical resistances or bonuses imbubed into them.
And I would add, procs from armor and weapons are what add fantasy flavor to things. Was so bummed when Wow dropped almost all of them.
I am not arguing the fact that there may be magical bonuses to armor, rather it was the logic of saying that lighter armors should give a bonus to movement and casting because they are lighter armors.
Why bonuses? I think armor and weapons are more than just defense, especially physical.
We are playing fantasy game. That means magic. There is no reason why some armies wouldn't have magical resistances or bonuses imbubed into them.
And I would add, procs from armor and weapons are what add fantasy flavor to things. Was so bummed when Wow dropped almost all of them.
I am not arguing the fact that there may be magical bonuses to armor, rather it was the logic of saying that lighter armors should give a bonus to movement and casting because they are lighter armors.
You mean less penalties then heavier armors, right. Having someone in none magical leather moving faster then someone in regular clothes make no sense.
The Holy Trinity was originally based on Tank, Healer, CC and then over the years it blurred into Tank, Healer, Dps but what we are doing is taking it back to it's roots and also incorporating the Dps in with Tank, Healer, CC and creating what we call, the "Quaternity" system as described in our FAQ.
I like that they are going with this as the system. It works great.
As far as the armor levels equating to damage levels.... maybe class examples best explain my opinion here.
rogue = silent stealthy or speed and dodge until they are behind you stab stab dead. Can't do that in anything heavier than leather/cloth
ranger = mix of bow and arrow and swordplay. Can wear chain or leather.
cleric = defensive casters with some melee skills. Can wear chain with some plate like helm.
Warrior = flexible battle hardened weapon and shield specialist. Can wear heavy plate and shield but will be slower. Can use heavy two hander for more dps and less armor.
Wizard = all channeling, casting, fireball to the face. Cloth only since anything more would mess up the casting process.
Now dps associated with each class is tricky. A Warrior might be able to do tremendous damage with a two handed axe to a single target. The same warrior could to less damage to a large number of enemies at once by swiping a fire sword across in a big arch. But a warrior wouldn't ever be good at chasing down quick enemies since they are weighted down by heavier gear. The trade off is they will always be a bit more protected.
A rogue is more about damage and avoiding damage. So if they are not good at avoiding damage while dealing a bunch...they will get hurt fast. Trade off here is a bit more crit damage and movement but less armor.
Caster classes will vary in roll as well and armor specifications should be based on that roll with a little flexibility.
LOL... combat robe... you do realize you're just wearing a bathrobe with the word combat attached to it? In reality any weapon should strike you down in an instant. You are, in fact naked, compared to wearing plate.
But before anyone gets all wrapped up in armors... lest we forget, no one wields a sword twice their body height, let alone swings it. An archer can pierce plate from over 300 yards. Magicians should be able to make you disappear from the game or turn you into a rabbit.
Pretty sure if you were teleported back into Medieval times as they were, you'd long to be teleported back to the here and now toot sweet. You can't aim for realism and then alter it for ones own comfort... you end up with Xena the Warrior Princess.
If I ever make the mistake of trying to enliven a discussion thread title again, you each have my permission to punch me in the junk. This was never about tank/healer/dps. It was about gear attributes.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
Comments
There were classes with armor considered light, that still had very high defense and very high DPS. One of those classes in EQ is a monk.
Monks wearing leather had comparable mitigation to knights in plate, they actually have higher mitigation than bards wearing plate. This was revealed during TSS beta, when developers told us the AC returns for each class. Each AC you gather in the game, is multiplied by a number specific for each class.
Knights make better tanks than monks of course, they have hate generation skill and have more defensive skills, but the base mitigation between monks and knights is similar.
AC returns are class dependent, not armor dependent. The only thing armor differences in EQ do, is how much total AC you can gather, you can gather more with plate than with chain or leather. However, a monk with leather, has much higher defense than a rogue wearing chain, because of AC returns.
Giving a class both very high defense and very high DPS doesn't have to be an issue. EQ monks are a good example. They have very high base defense, but monks didn't become group tanks because they couldn't generate enough hate and didn't have the needed defensive disciplines. Yet a good geared monk was one of the better solo classes in EQ, especially with their mend skill and with raid gear and AC augs.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
For example, inn a game, I would master how to wear and be effective in heavy armor and how to use a sword. I would then become an expert in some offensive lightning spells, a heal spell or life-leech, and maybe a couple offensive and defensive spells to round out my character. That's about as hybrid as one gets. Other people may instead choose to wear lighter armor for more mobility and faster attack speed, and master a few different weapons.
One game that represents a good example of this is SWG. You could master two professions and dabble in another. Or you could become proficient in many, and master none. Or you could dabble in even more for flavor.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests
Another thing action MMOs like Tera could do would be to have hit locations and allowing anyone with the rights speccs to equip different types of armors on different locations. For an instance are the most commonly hit location in a real swordfight firstly arms and secondly the stomach. Legs are not that often hit unless you ride and since they restrict your movement most people like landsknechts tended to have light armor on the legs while heavy on the rest of the body.... it would open up for a new combat system where you would aim for the achiles heel of the opposing player or boss. With regular tab targetting systems this would be slightly less fun but you could have most attacks hitting random places with a few special ones (like headshots) targetting fixed locations.
Add a debuff for being wounded in a specific part (if you loose more than 20% of your HP in a part it affects you and if you lose half you get a crit that would be nasty).
Just a thought but it would add a new dimension to combat which is something particularly action MMOs really need.
Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.
Lets say a person in no armor (just basic clothing) is at 0. When you add armor, you are gaining protection, but it may have limitations in its mobility and movement. The more you add, the heavier it is, the more protection, but then so is there more restrictions.
There is no logic in it "adding" movement/flexibility bonuses (unless it is magical and of such a specific bonus), only adding penalties to its use as I explained. So, you wearing cloth should reasonably have no restrictions, but if you put on leather (have you ever tried on leather armor? It isn't flexible at all), there should be penalties, just less than wearing chain, and less than wearing plate as each armor presents new problems with mobility and flexibility.
What I would like to see though is special pros/cons to certain armor. Leather is great against slashing damage, terrible against blunt. There many pros/cons of armor and it would be nice to see such added to the game content where one class may not be as ideal for a given situation just because he is wearing a massive pile of plate armor.
An EQ rogue class power would be distributed like this:
A shadowknight like this:
A bard like this:
Why bonuses? I think armor and weapons are more than just defense, especially physical.
We are playing fantasy game. That means magic. There is no reason why some armies wouldn't have magical resistances or bonuses imbubed into them.
And I would add, procs from armor and weapons are what add fantasy flavor to things. Was so bummed when Wow dropped almost all of them.
Take the Magic: The Gathering 'What Color Are You?' Quiz.
I am not arguing the fact that there may be magical bonuses to armor, rather it was the logic of saying that lighter armors should give a bonus to movement and casting because they are lighter armors.
As far as the armor levels equating to damage levels.... maybe class examples best explain my opinion here.
rogue = silent stealthy or speed and dodge until they are behind you stab stab dead. Can't do that in anything heavier than leather/cloth
ranger = mix of bow and arrow and swordplay. Can wear chain or leather.
cleric = defensive casters with some melee skills. Can wear chain with some plate like helm.
Warrior = flexible battle hardened weapon and shield specialist. Can wear heavy plate and shield but will be slower. Can use heavy two hander for more dps and less armor.
Wizard = all channeling, casting, fireball to the face. Cloth only since anything more would mess up the casting process.
Now dps associated with each class is tricky. A Warrior might be able to do tremendous damage with a two handed axe to a single target. The same warrior could to less damage to a large number of enemies at once by swiping a fire sword across in a big arch. But a warrior wouldn't ever be good at chasing down quick enemies since they are weighted down by heavier gear. The trade off is they will always be a bit more protected.
A rogue is more about damage and avoiding damage. So if they are not good at avoiding damage while dealing a bunch...they will get hurt fast. Trade off here is a bit more crit damage and movement but less armor.
Caster classes will vary in roll as well and armor specifications should be based on that roll with a little flexibility.
But before anyone gets all wrapped up in armors... lest we forget, no one wields a sword twice their body height, let alone swings it. An archer can pierce plate from over 300 yards. Magicians should be able to make you disappear from the game or turn you into a rabbit.
Pretty sure if you were teleported back into Medieval times as they were, you'd long to be teleported back to the here and now toot sweet. You can't aim for realism and then alter it for ones own comfort... you end up with Xena the Warrior Princess.
EQ1, EQ2, SWG, SWTOR, GW, GW2 CoH, CoV, FFXI, WoW, CO, War,TSW and a slew of free trials and beta tests