Commando Archive
Thread: TKA 'armor' superior to all else?
So all their uber armour crafting resources that had great SR/OQ, but bad UT has now become worthless...
Anyways getting back on topic. Having innate armour will be nice with TKA, but remember the costs for ranged:
And if you were solely melee:
Basically, the defense bonus is high...but so are the costs in your choices...
StarNick wrote:
MAS' have more too worry about than armour sales, Shock Resistance is being taken out (currently) as one of their experimentation stats, and being replaced with (I believe) UT.
So all their uber armour crafting resources that had great SR/OQ, but bad UT has now become worthless...
Anyways getting back on topic. Having innate armour will be nice with TKA, but remember the costs for ranged:Less skillpoints to spend on ranged skills No specials that would work with their ranged weapons
And if you were solely melee:Combined with swordsman, this could be very potent...but remember - ranged combat will have strong emphasis in the CU, so you'll be at a disadvantage in PvP
Basically, the defense bonus is high...but so are the costs in your choices...
Also, it reamins to be seen whether an unarmored Master Commando/TKM holding a flamethrower will get the benefit of the innate armor. It might work that way, it might not.
And as for armour breaking...no idea, would be something interesting to test
Iron-Monkey wrote:
AfeeElandra wrote:
But looks aside - a TKM gets to keep 300k a suit of armour and potentially has 60% protection to all damage types as opposed to a 50% protection from assault armour.
If a commando wants to spend his sp's on TKM instead of say Pistol...its a good trade off IMO.
That is going to be the whole point of the CU, making the appropriate trade-offto fityour play style.
Lots of guns = less defense + need to wear bulky armor.
Though I can see the Commando / TK combo being more popular than ever. Imagine being able to wield all your glourious new weapons and not need the bulky armor due to your innate TK armor. oooooooooh, fun times.
Will you be a commando using only a knukler? Couse the innate TK armor only works when unarmed and it's totally negated when wielding another weapon.
garvin wrote:
RSBarak wrote:
I have not managed to get onto TC to play the CU as yet, but I have been doing alot of reading and template building and I am finding it hard to see the advantage of actual armor, such as the assult armor, over the TKM TIA (I blieve this is what the TKA cor is calling it). Anyway, it seems to me that armor,(in our case)the assult armor will always havea penalty to speed if you cannot stack the armor mitigations beyond that in master commando. As a result, why not simply pick up TKA for a reported 60% protection with no encumberance and not bother to pay for or wear amor? I have seen some other posts stating that we (commandos) can wear the assult armor without penalty...so i guess my firstquestion is: - can commandos wear this armor (assult armor)without any penalty to speed or other stats? Second: - What is the benefit of Armor over the defence that a TKA recieves?
1) There will always be penalties for wearing armor...it's just the higher you go in a combat profession, the more you can mitigate some of those penalties based on armor type...
2) Let me tell you what Blixtev told me once when I asked the same question...The difference between wearing armor and having TK's Avoidance, is that, when facing a TK who isn't wearing armor, they will be pretty hard to hit, but when they do get hit, they get hit HARD...So basically, a person who faces a TK will want (1) ranged abilities to try and keep them out of range & (2) As much accuracy (both general and specific) as they can get so they can "hit them hard"...
There is a price to wearing armor...but there is also a price to NOT wearing armor...Wearing it gives you movement and speed penalties...Not wearing armor lifts those penalties, but makes you much more vunerable to damage (no damage mitigation). So the question is, which hurts less?
Atanmir wrote:
Iron-Monkey wrote:
AfeeElandra wrote:
But looks aside - a TKM gets to keep 300k a suit of armour and potentially has 60% protection to all damage types as opposed to a 50% protection from assault armour.
If a commando wants to spend his sp's on TKM instead of say Pistol...its a good trade off IMO.
That is going to be the whole point of the CU, making the appropriate trade-offto fityour play style.
Lots of guns = less defense + need to wear bulky armor.
Though I can see the Commando / TK combo being more popular than ever. Imagine being able to wield all your glourious new weapons and not need the bulky armor due to your innate TK armor. oooooooooh, fun times.
Will you be a commando using only a knukler? Couse the innate TK armor only works when unarmed and it's totally negated when wielding another weapon.
xPREDATORx wrote:i know u gona say bullet proof vests but even in todays army troops dont get body armour... CRAZY?
I don't know about wherever you're from, but in my country they do.
xPREDATORx wrote:
i know u gona say bullet proof vests but even in todays army troops dont get body armour... CRAZY?
I don't know about wherever you're from, but in my country they do.
im from england and regular infantry do not get body armour. hell even if u went to world war 1,2, vietnam falklands even in iraq none of the soldier would have bullet proof armour
maybe some sepecial forces troops mite get issiued some sort of protective padded body armour but nuthing intended for bullets. inthe u.s.a maybe.
xPREDATORx wrote:
xPREDATORx wrote:
i know u gona say bullet proof vests but even in todays army troops dont get body armour... CRAZY?
I don't know about wherever you're from, but in my country they do.
im from england and regular infantry do not get body armour. hell even if u went to world war 1,2, vietnam falklands even in iraq none of the soldier would have bullet proof armour
maybe some sepecial forces troops mite get issiued some sort of protective padded body armour but nuthing intended for bullets. inthe u.s.a maybe.
xPREDATORx wrote:
xPREDATORx wrote:
i know u gona say bullet proof vests but even in todays army troops dont get body armour... CRAZY?
I don't know about wherever you're from, but in my country they do.
im from england and regular infantry do not get body armour. hell even if u went to world war 1,2, vietnam falklands even in iraq none of the soldier would have bullet proof armour
maybe some sepecial forces troops mite get issiued some sort of protective padded body armour but nuthing intended for bullets. inthe u.s.a maybe.
first of all i never mentioned the cops even our armed response units have body armour but not our army and the helmit u talk about the british army helmits can stop bullets from a certain amount of distance ( and nodont go on about point blank lets not get stupid)but its still not classed as bullet proof its mainly designed for protection of the head from falling objects.... and thats 1 peice of protection for the whole body.... and number 3 ive already stated im from england not the usa!