Best and Worst armor design in RPGs. -- Please use spoiler tags for large images or strings of them

[Norfleet]

I had to double take that ponmel. Almost WTF porn moment. Elves always seem slutty.. this one on guard? Really?

 

[KörangarTheMighty]

The armor value of crowns in Diablo is "jack shit". It's all about them stat bonii, you get shit armor value from them.

They literally have the second best base armor class for a headpiece in the game. In D2 they're number one.

 

[KeighnMcDeath]

I guess my waifu has the right asthetics on her armor.

 

[Norfleet]

They literally have the second best base armor class for a headpiece in the game. In D2 they're number one.

50-60 base defense vs. 111-165? I don't think so. They only compare favorably against low-tier newbie items. Every single version of crown-hat is at the bottom of its class for its character level.

 

[KörangarTheMighty]

They literally have the second best base armor class for a headpiece in the game. In D2 they're number one.

50-60 base defense vs. 111-165? I don't think so. They only compare favorably against low-tier newbie items. Every single version of crown-hat is at the bottom of its class for its character level.

That's a diadem, not a crown.

 

[Norfleet]

If you're arguing about the crowned helmet...

...as opposed to what that guy was talking about, namely, the circlet-type crown, that particular helmet comes with a coif and nasal to go with it, the crown part is just an accent, and is this a fully legitimate armor helmet.

 

[Quillon]

Don't know about the worst(maybe DOS2?) but best armors and weps I've seen in a game was Age of Conan 10+ years ago, still haven't seen any other game top it.

 

[KörangarTheMighty]

If you're arguing about the crowned helmet...

...as opposed to what that guy was talking about, namely, the circlet-type crown, that particular helmet comes with a coif and nasal to go with it, the crown part is just an accent, and is this a fully legitimate armor helmet.

It's just called a crown in game. Whether it's fully armor or not is debatable, the red dome might have steel under it or it might just be fabric. Either way, it would not offer as much protection as a great helm or a full helm, yet it's rated higher.
Anyway, I get your meaning and I agree with the point, but Diablo II is not the best example with such a wonky armor hierarchy.

 

[King Crispy]

Worst armor design in RPGs

Spoiler

 

[Sykar]

A real life example which I find quite interesting:


Wanna see that in a game!

Also:



Debunking the myth that boob armor is neccessarily unrealistic and also if men wore codpieces, also called shlong armor, to show off their dicks what speaks against women showing off their boobs?

 

[Norfleet]

Debunking the myth that boob armor is neccessarily unrealistic and also if men wore codpieces, also called shlong armor, to show off their dicks what speaks against women showing off their boobs?

Nothin', really. It's surely not the greatest design feature, but it wouldn't be cripplingly fatal to the armor, particularly when the person who would be wearing such an armor is probably NOT a front-line slogger, but some kind of commander or officer. This guy agrees with me on these points, but one point he hasn't addressed is that indicating you are in some way important may be rather significant in battle: Distinctive armor allows people to identify who you are. Being identifiable is sufficiently important that samurai would wear these big huge flags on their backs so that people would know which side they were on and who they were. If you're important enough to afford flashy armor, you're probably important enough to fetch a good ransom, which may keep you alive.

 

[ERYFKRAD]

you're probably important enough to fetch a good ransom, which may keep you alive.

Also helps the enemy in prioritizing targets, I guess.

 

[cowking]

Dat hat. That pose. Perfection.

Fuck armor

 

[Norfleet]

Also helps the enemy in prioritizing targets, I guess.

Up until modern warfare, the ability for your own men to tell who is in charge seems to have outweighed the importance of hiding your command structure from the enemy, probably because, until firearms, sniping enemy officers was not a terribly practical thing, as arrows had basically no penetrating power against plate armor. Since officers don't spend most of their time mixed up in the fray of heavy melee, extreme melee combat optimization is not really a requirement.

 

[Cryomancer]

as arrows had basically no penetrating power against plate armor.

That depends a lot on the thickness of the armor, the arrow weight, arrowhead(bodkin, broadhead, etc), bow draw height, distance, "impact angle" and other factors. Only because a armor stopped a arrow, doesn't mean that it can stop every arrow. Just like in modern times, only because your body armor protected you from a 9mm shot, doesn't mean that it can protect you from a 14.5x114mm anti tank rifle round. The plate armor thickness is not the same in the entire body, if a arrow failed in penetrating the chest, doesn't mean that it can't pierce on "neck". I am pretty sure that even in plate armor, receive hail of shots from the heaviest longbow with poisoned steel bodkin arrows can be quite deadly.

Don't get me wrong, plate armor offers a HUGE protection. But is not a magic field which can block anything. Just like a AR500 body armor IRL can offer a huge protection. But doesn't make you immune to anything.

That said, IMO a game which depicts armor X arrow well IMO is Mount & Blade. Sadly you can't chose arrowheads but you can with the best armor in the game soak MOST bow shots in the chest. In areas where the armor is less thick, good lucky dealing with Rhodok Sharpshooter which is BTW my favorite unity in the game

 

[oscar]

Archers didn't let fly at individual enemy soldiers they bombarded a general area.

 

[KeighnMcDeath]

Well.....

 

[KörangarTheMighty]

Archers didn't let fly at individual enemy soldiers they bombarded a general area.

If that were the case (It's not.), there would be little need for butts in so many English towns. Moreover that would be horrendously wasteful of state resources.

If you have a skill you're going to make use of it.

 

[oscar]

At immediate range maybe sure. How does that work for archer formations more then two men deep?

 

[ERYFKRAD]

there would be little need for butts in so many English towns

 

[KörangarTheMighty]

Archers didn't let fly at individual enemy soldiers they bombarded a general area.

I didn't say they didn't ever volley, I said it's a horrendous waste of ammunition and to qualify it further I'll add especially when dealing with heavily infantry. Cycling ranks would be the answer you're looking for. One rank tires or exhausts its allotment, the next moves forward to take its place. Just because you can shoot randomly into the air doesn't mean you should but there are times where it is useful to do so. Against undeployed cavalry for instance.

 

[Poseidon00]

Neverwinter Nights has the best armor design. Every piece is customizable. Logic goes out the window. Go shirtless while having Full Plate equipped.

Neverwinter Nights 2 has the worst. Everything is ugly. Most enchanted versions are just recolors of the vanilla style. No customization whatsoever. Robes in particular are awful.

 

[Darth Roxor]

niggas not even mentioning rage of mages, smh

rage of mages is THE paperdolling experience

 

[oscar]

Archers didn't let fly at individual enemy soldiers they bombarded a general area.

I didn't say they didn't ever volley, I said it's a horrendous waste of ammunition and to qualify it further I'll add especially when dealing with heavily infantry. Cycling ranks would be the answer you're looking for. One rank tires or exhausts its allotment, the next moves forward to take its place. Just because you can shoot randomly into the air doesn't mean you should but there are times where it is useful to do so. Against undeployed cavalry for instance.

If an archery formation ever got close enough to their foes that they were shooting individually they were probably in trouble (and about to get smashed). Agincourt and Crécy were exceptions to the era and the English longbowmen were something special and unique.

 

[KörangarTheMighty]

If an archery formation ever got close enough to their foes that they were shooting individually they were probably in trouble (and about to get smashed). Agincourt and Crécy were exceptions to the era and the English longbowmen were something special and unique.

Longbow units were not unique to England, the Burgundians made use of them as well. You're free to look at Henry V's formations at Agincourt and you will see the archers were placed deliberately on the flanks of each heavy infantry block. I see no reason to array them there rather than in the direct rear, unless they were wanting to shoot essentially point blank into the less-armored sides of the French infantry blocks upon engaging the English. Sighting the target would give them the best chance to actually pierce the armor and less energy would be wasted on flight.

I think that the blind volley as most people imagine it is a meme manufactured by Hollywood. Blowing much of your ammo in the first engagement, perhaps killing a few dozen advancing light infantry while potentially having to fight the rest of the day is big-dumb. Situationally, for harassment it becomes more useful. I think this because I've looked at a lot of manuscript art over the years and even outside of the hundred years war, there are a lot of depictions of straight shooting. I'd hazard to say more often than not, excepting siege depictions for obvious reasons. I trust that even when medieval artists take liberties with perspective and scale, certain trends in the art can still be relied upon when they show up in so many sources from varying periods.