Menu
What's New
By:
Filters

FYI: Testing Armor Decay version 2.0000

mace9 said:
Well if this about plates is true I would say new meta = big armor with no plates?
Yes, Dura might not be that big difference but if you have the choice between small armor and plates or big armor without for same protection....

At least for people with "normal" plates like 5b
Click to expand...

Sure, but there is nothing "new meta" about this. That approach would have worked under the old system.
Durability isn't that huge of a deal when comparing things less than 5k. In the new system (L) is a viable alternative at the right price.
 
mace9 said:
Well if this about plates is true I would say new meta = big armor with no plates?
Yes, Dura might not be that big difference but if you have the choice between small armor and plates or big armor without for same protection....

At least for people with "normal" plates like 5b
Click to expand...

Immortal said:
Sure, but there is nothing "new meta" about this. That approach would have worked under the old system.
Durability isn't that huge of a deal when comparing things less than 5k. In the new system (L) is a viable alternative at the right price.
Click to expand...

Actually, the new meta is absorbing damage on the highest durability gear you have wether that is a combo of armor and plate or just armor.

In the old system, the major savings on "meta" setups came from splitting the damage between plates and armor as evenly as possible. The big savings came from avoiding the non-linear decay model on any one piece. It was always much cheaper to absorb 10 damage through something like warrior + 2a then using shogun. This is no longer the case.

Immortal is right in that differences in durability don't actually add up to that much savings (at least on UL). Taking even 1 or 2 less damage will Trump any dura rating every time.

But this is new Immortal, wearing just big armor in lieu of smaller armor + plates would not have been a good move in the old system. Now, as long as the armor has the higher durability than other options or combos it is a valid setup.
 
And it is not only that armor usually has higher Dura than those Plates, but also comparing a medium armor + plates with high armor, the stronger armor has better dura as well usually.
 
Stefan 008 Bond said:
Actually, the new meta is absorbing damage on the highest durability gear you have wether that is a combo of armor and plate or just armor.

In the old system, the major savings on "meta" setups came from splitting the damage between plates and armor as evenly as possible. The big savings came from avoiding the non-linear decay model on any one piece. It was always much cheaper to absorb 10 damage through something like warrior + 2a then using shogun. This is no longer the case.

Immortal is right in that differences in durability don't actually add up to that much savings (at least on UL). Taking even 1 or 2 less damage will Trump any dura rating every time.

But this is new Immortal, wearing just big armor in lieu of smaller armor + plates would not have been a good move in the old system. Now, as long as the armor has the higher durability than other options or combos it is a valid setup.
Click to expand...

mace9 said:
And it is not only that armor usually has higher Dura than those Plates, but also comparing a medium armor + plates with high armor, the stronger armor has better dura as well usually.
Click to expand...

The old system used to damage your plates AND your armor, so there was always n extra cost to having plates. I think you are right that the benefit now is more pronounced since we're now looking at 5B plates and balking at their durability
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top