Armorsmith Archive
Thread: Why wear a full suit of armor?
Page 1 of 1
Bloodgloom
Wed May 12, 2004 6:50 pm
#1
Ok, so after some searching here, the answer to this question still evades me, others have asked it and similar questions to it but I have yet to find a response.
It seems to me that while damage is targeted, it is grouped only into head, torso, legs, and arms.
What doesn't seem to make sense is that if boots are missing, the damage always seems to go to the leg armor, or if arms and bracers are missing the damage seems to go to the gloves. I tried to test this for a while on my own, and it seems to be true, but im wondering if its ever been tested more completely like for instance against different kinds of specials ect.
So the real question is, is there any drawback to wearing only legs OR boots instead of legs AND boots, or only wearing gloves as opposed to gloves AND bracers AND arms?
Alot of HAM costs for special moves can be avoided if this is so.
Wearing partial armor in the legs and arms seems to cause armor to degrade faster (because it takes more damage instead of it being spread out) but are there other drawbacks at all?
Thank you, any feedback would be appriciated.
It seems to me that while damage is targeted, it is grouped only into head, torso, legs, and arms.
What doesn't seem to make sense is that if boots are missing, the damage always seems to go to the leg armor, or if arms and bracers are missing the damage seems to go to the gloves. I tried to test this for a while on my own, and it seems to be true, but im wondering if its ever been tested more completely like for instance against different kinds of specials ect.
So the real question is, is there any drawback to wearing only legs OR boots instead of legs AND boots, or only wearing gloves as opposed to gloves AND bracers AND arms?
Alot of HAM costs for special moves can be avoided if this is so.
Wearing partial armor in the legs and arms seems to cause armor to degrade faster (because it takes more damage instead of it being spread out) but are there other drawbacks at all?
Thank you, any feedback would be appriciated.
Metroid
Wed May 12, 2004 6:52 pm
#2
I think you just have odd luck, anytime Im missing one piece of armor, I ALWAYS get hit there. Like, the other night my gloves hit 0, and immediately 5 quenkers nailed me full damage, and I seriously doubt all 5 got through an armorhole.
Srednii
Wed May 12, 2004 8:10 pm
#3
During a course of any tought fight you'll get hit in every armor spot. So say you're killing rancor's, and you don't have gloves on. Eventually they'll hit you in the hands and you'll get damage like...
50
50
50
50
500
50
50
500
50
50
ect
Okram2k
Thu May 13, 2004 2:24 am
#4
are your boots always at perfect condinition? 'Cause if it's lost conditions, it's taken damage and given protection.
Bloodgloom
Thu May 13, 2004 4:23 am
#5
I did some light testing last night, ran around engaging different types of Yavin4 creatures from Black Sun to Anglers and faction soldiers in various combination of partial leg/arm armor. I also did some testing against a couple players spamming various specials as well as using normal fire mode.
The damage to the targeted area almost always seems to go to the armor part of the arms or legs/feet that you are wearing. The exception to this was when hit with a DoT type attack (poison, healthshot actionshot), which still did reduced damage although it didnt report the area of armor hit. I wasnt serious about the testings, hoping that someone here would have conducted these experiments before, so I feel the need to do more research to provide more conclusive evidence but I invite anyone curious to join me.
Metroid said:
"I think you just have odd luck, anytime Im missing one piece of armor, I ALWAYS get hit there. Like, the other night my gloves hit 0, and immediately 5 quenkers nailed me full damage, and I seriously doubt all 5 got through an armorhole."
This information is irrelevant to what im asking unless you actually remove the gloves after they degenerate. If you are wearing a piece of armor, damage will get applied there regardless of who protective (or in this case unprotective) it is. It is my theory that if you are not wearing complete legs or arms that the damage almost always, if not always, gets applied to the other portion or armor that you do have. Hopefully before this test is done, if no-one has done this before (and I'm surprised if they havn't) we can come up with some generally accurate statistics as to how often, if ever, a shot gets through partial arm/leg armor. As it stands now, the rate seems exceedingly low.
The damage to the targeted area almost always seems to go to the armor part of the arms or legs/feet that you are wearing. The exception to this was when hit with a DoT type attack (poison, healthshot actionshot), which still did reduced damage although it didnt report the area of armor hit. I wasnt serious about the testings, hoping that someone here would have conducted these experiments before, so I feel the need to do more research to provide more conclusive evidence but I invite anyone curious to join me.
Metroid said:
"I think you just have odd luck, anytime Im missing one piece of armor, I ALWAYS get hit there. Like, the other night my gloves hit 0, and immediately 5 quenkers nailed me full damage, and I seriously doubt all 5 got through an armorhole."
This information is irrelevant to what im asking unless you actually remove the gloves after they degenerate. If you are wearing a piece of armor, damage will get applied there regardless of who protective (or in this case unprotective) it is. It is my theory that if you are not wearing complete legs or arms that the damage almost always, if not always, gets applied to the other portion or armor that you do have. Hopefully before this test is done, if no-one has done this before (and I'm surprised if they havn't) we can come up with some generally accurate statistics as to how often, if ever, a shot gets through partial arm/leg armor. As it stands now, the rate seems exceedingly low.
Ackan111
Thu May 13, 2004 4:37 am
#6
Well, heres one thing you might think about.. with a brand new full set of armor you will often find that the chest piece and leg piece decay the fastest, so its safe to assume that they are getting hit the most, you can often repair and replace the chest and legs several times over and still most the other pieces of comp will still be above 30k condition. Arms, feet, hands and even head do not get hit anywhere near as often (ok head does if pvp, but talking about pve here). I think it just may be your not seeing the occasional random hit to your unprotected areas... (Heck ive been wearing the same set of composite gloves for 2.5 months on my Jedi and they just fell below 30k tonight)
Page 1 of 1