What is the point of armor types?

General Discussion
12/24/2016 05:16 AMPosted by Pouncey
12/24/2016 04:44 AMPosted by Gwendi
Because they took our ammo, they took our reagents, they took our training at a class trainer, so by golly, they'll not have the last vestiges of an RPG left in the game!


They're already writing your character's story for you.

This isn't really an RPG anymore.

It's never really been an RPG though. It's always been just an Action/Adventure game.
12/24/2016 05:41 AMPosted by Ilneval
12/24/2016 05:16 AMPosted by Pouncey
...

They're already writing your character's story for you.

This isn't really an RPG anymore.

It's never really been an RPG though. It's always been just an Action/Adventure game.
It was an RPG like an older RPG, y'know, before everything had to have a thousand branching paths. You level, have classes, individual specs, talents, armor types, professions, etc., and you play a single character (at a time), and go through a story you make with them.
12/24/2016 04:44 AMPosted by Gwendi
Because they took our ammo, they took our reagents, they took our training at a class trainer, so by golly, they'll not have the last vestiges of an RPG left in the game!


i think alot of rpg's are taking out alot of those old elements to streamline it a bit more, old roleplaying games used to all make you have to buy your ranged weapon then pick different kinds of ammo, now it seems like you just get your weapon and unlock ammo types and crafting not really want it used to be in alot of older games compared to now.
12/24/2016 06:05 AMPosted by Gwendi
12/24/2016 05:41 AMPosted by Ilneval
...
It's never really been an RPG though. It's always been just an Action/Adventure game.
It was an RPG like an older RPG, y'know, before everything had to have a thousand branching paths. You level, have classes, individual specs, talents, armor types, professions, etc., and you play a single character (at a time), and go through a story you make with them.


All of that is present in Planetside 2.

Battle Ranks are levels. There are many different infantry and vehicle classes. Depending on your loadout you can specialize in different things (covers specs and talents). They have a couple of different types of armor that are better at different things. With the ANT vehicle you can construct your own bases and gather resources (covers professions). You can only play one character at a time, but you have enough character slots to cover all playable factions. And there's nothing stopping you from inventing a story for your character if you want to.
12/24/2016 06:14 AMPosted by Allvoltage
12/24/2016 04:44 AMPosted by Gwendi
Because they took our ammo, they took our reagents, they took our training at a class trainer, so by golly, they'll not have the last vestiges of an RPG left in the game!


i think alot of rpg's are taking out alot of those old elements to streamline it a bit more, old roleplaying games used to all make you have to buy your ranged weapon then pick different kinds of ammo, now it seems like you just get your weapon and unlock ammo types and crafting not really want it used to be in alot of older games compared to now.


Video games are no longer for people that invest a lot of themselves into video games. They must be "streamlined" (read: mechanics and choices must be removed so that there are fewer paths available than 'straight ahead') so that people who do not actually care very much about video games can fully grok them and succeed with minimal investment. Gratification must be immediate and large in order to hold a momentary portion of ever-decreasing attention spans.
SJW's have taken over to try to tell us we are all the same!!!
Personally I like it, it forces them to make variety in armor.

I've seen games without armor types, and it always ends up with just a ton of plate-looking armor and maybe a courtesy robe every once in a while.
ITT : People arguing for the removal of more RPG elements.

Armor is as important now as it was before. The difference is : most of the damage you take as a non-tank ignores armor (it's not physical damage).
Shamans are squishy because Blizzard feels since they get to wear mail and they could heal they auto get a health reduction to make them not OP. It's meant to be balanced but they never really got the balance correct. Mail is fine if you are a ele or resto sham because you (can) get a shield for extra armor. But they have also nurfed the ability of ele and enh to heal but didn't make up for it with health or armor boost. Shammies have been a bit over squishy for a while IMO. At least since cata..... till they get end expansion gear anyway.
You're complaining about mail being too thin? Have you tried wearing plate in pvp?
12/24/2016 06:55 AMPosted by Berith
ITT : People arguing for the removal of more RPG elements.

Armor is as important now as it was before. The difference is : most of the damage you take as a non-tank ignores armor (it's not physical damage).
No, it is not. It factually is a fraction as effective as it used to be in older expansions when it comes to reducing damage. It's benefit was baked in to the specs relevant so there was no noticeable difference at the user-end but what it has resulted in is a very lopsided feeling with some classes in terms of survivabilty and ability to mitigate hits. Blizzard essentially designs a class's survivavility through their base templates and abilities now, which yes, makes armor class worthless for anything other than differentiating the class fantasies.
Thread is tl:dr, but I will say this. I spend more time and hps healing the shamans in my raid group than the mages.

Then again, our mages are pro.
12/24/2016 03:49 AMPosted by Rickflairwoo
Member when it cost significantly more to repair plate armor than other armors?

i member.


Remember when your stupidity got you put in the hospital for being a dumbass and spouting useless crap all your life?

Just wait a few weeks...
12/24/2016 06:55 AMPosted by Berith
ITT : People arguing for the removal of more RPG elements.

Armor is as important now as it was before. The difference is : most of the damage you take as a non-tank ignores armor (it's not physical damage).


Actually, my interest in advocating the removal of armor types is primarily in opening up more transmog options for myself.

12/24/2016 06:46 AMPosted by Phlynch
Personally I like it, it forces them to make variety in armor.

I've seen games without armor types, and it always ends up with just a ton of plate-looking armor and maybe a courtesy robe every once in a while.


They'd still have to design class sets.
12/24/2016 07:41 AMPosted by Zipzo
12/24/2016 06:55 AMPosted by Berith
ITT : People arguing for the removal of more RPG elements.

Armor is as important now as it was before. The difference is : most of the damage you take as a non-tank ignores armor (it's not physical damage).
No, it is not. It factually is a fraction as effective as it used to be in older expansions when it comes to reducing damage.


Just want to point out that if you take the word "fraction" literally, this does not say anything useful about the difference in effectiveness. Fractions can have any integer as either the numerator or the denominator, so you could be describing literally any change imaginable. And it only has to be imaginable because you would have to believe you know what the difference is, which means it has to be something you can imagine.
12/24/2016 03:49 AMPosted by Rickflairwoo
Member when it cost significantly more to repair plate armor than other armors?

i member.

Had to down vote just because the word member was used .
It's just 2 letters you got to add how hard is it . Member is that thing your dad put into your mom to help create you . Member is some one belonging to an organization . Come on stop being lazy it's causing the troll threads here in GD to suck hard core .
12/24/2016 03:20 AMPosted by Szentai
At first (classic, TBC) armor actually made a pretty significant difference in how much damage it truly mitigated, or didn't mitigate.

I think during the prepatch for wotlk is when armor values began shifting to place more important on defense rating (a stat that at the time was absolutely required for all tanks, to be uncrittable by raid bosses), so becoming uncrittable & then just stacking either stamina or pure avoidance became the trend, even though there were still a few pieces out there with bonus armor on them.

Sometime later, I think at the cata prepatch, defense rating was removed entirely and defensive stats became more ability-based in that they were built into the class & spec. Still a few pieces with armor value on them but most were nowhere near BiS as iirc the meta still favored avoidance/stamina.

Since then armor has become a stat that doesn't matter a whole lot except in very few niche choices (like this trinket over that trinket for BiS, etc), as everything is more spec-centric.

So with that history lesson in mind, the best answer is what pouncey said - it keeps every class from having to compete on every loot drop, and that's about it.


Armor still had a little value in Wrath, though not as significant as Classic/BC, Cata was when it became irrelevant. Otherwise this post accurately sums it up.

Amusingly, some of the most durable classes are cloth ones now. I am not a fan of that tbh, it feels wrong.
All I know is I'd have some dope mogs if I could wear/mog plate
12/24/2016 04:44 AMPosted by Gwendi
Because they took our ammo, they took our reagents, they took our training at a class trainer, so by golly, they'll not have the last vestiges of an RPG left in the game!


They're already writing your character's story for you.

This isn't really an RPG anymore.


But like, Good RPGs already do that? Like, even Table tops, good GM's will put your character in very intentional situations and circumstances. Good story telling usually requires a story teller.
12/24/2016 05:16 AMPosted by Pouncey
This isn't really an RPG anymore.

This made me sad, because it is true.
I felt I was in my toon back then, which is no longer.

I had an urge to downvote you, because it really made me sad, but I had to upvote instead, because I agree with you.

It's sad.

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum