armor values inncorect?

For ideas on how to make Second Age a better shard. Can it get any better? Maybe.
Forum rules
Posts in this forum are expected to be constructive, realistic and civil. Inflamatory or off topic posts will be removed.
Eulogy
Posts: 481
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2009 1:28 am

Re: armor values inncorect?

Post by Eulogy »

If you are using normal armor regarding the chain chest, the arms will give more armor.
If you are using GM armor, the arms take away armor.
Image

Kraarug
UOSA Donor!!
UOSA Donor!!
Posts: 1448
Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2008 2:46 pm

Re: armor values inncorect?

Post by Kraarug »

Eulogy wrote:If you are using normal armor regarding the chain chest, the arms will give more armor.
If you are using GM armor, the arms take away armor.
That's not how it worked on OSI. I had a gm smith and lt archers, gm made, always had sleeves and they always added to the armor.

That's the only reason why we ran around with that mix-match set up.
Image

Eulogy
Posts: 481
Joined: Thu Apr 16, 2009 1:28 am

Re: armor values inncorect?

Post by Eulogy »

I agree. If it behaved on OSI like it currently does here, no one would have worn the ringmail arms.
Image

caveman
Posts: 175
Joined: Thu Sep 25, 2008 2:01 am

Re: armor values inncorect?

Post by caveman »

The one thing that I am absolutely sure is wrong is the female armor not covering arms. My main in t2a was a female and i never had to wear arms if wearing a female chest piece. Adding plate arms to female plate did absolutely nothing.

Kraarug
UOSA Donor!!
UOSA Donor!!
Posts: 1448
Joined: Tue Dec 16, 2008 2:46 pm

Re: armor values inncorect?

Post by Kraarug »

Eulogy wrote:I agree. If it behaved on OSI like it currently does here, no one would have worn the ringmail arms.
Also please keep in mind that we not only had Light Archer but we had Heavy Archer suits too... And the difference was only between Ring Arms (-1) and the Plate Arms (-3??).

There was a reason for this and it was for the higher AR count.

If tunics covered arms or somehow excluded the AR benefits from ring or plate arms

a) no one would have done it
b) no one would have given up the dex
c) there wouldn't have been lt or hvy archers because there woudlnt' have been any benefit.

As I primarily play an orc, this fix is little to no benefit to me. I'd just like to see it fixed for accuracy.
Image

malice-tg
UOSA Donor!!
UOSA Donor!!
Posts: 309
Joined: Sat May 31, 2008 12:11 pm

Re: armor values inncorect?

Post by malice-tg »

tekai wrote:Derrik I was a blacksmith for a very long time. Through all of T2A and atleast as far into UOR that i played the standard suit of armor was the "archer suit"

That was chain shirt, ring shoulders, plate gorget, chain pants, whatever hat.

If you put a chain shirt on and a ring shoulders you lose armor.. thats not possibly correct or that would not have been the suit of armor everyone was wearing forever.

Chain Shirts covered chest only!
on catskills the most common was;

helmet/ plate arms / plate gorget/ chain chest/ chain legs/ringgloves

this would be 30 armor -3dex suit

Post Reply