Ranger Archive
Thread: Do we REALLY want battle armor instead of recon?
Plus, with Carbines IV as a pre-req and Carbineer armor being battle armor as well, I think it was a bit rushed to object that much against recon armor.
Most of you might remember that a lot of Rangers actually wanted recon armor when the CU was in testing.
After the revamp, recon armor would fit the professione even better, now that we're all about stealth and, well, recon
As for the carbineer pre-req. Well there will still be ranger that wand to take a rifleman or pistoleer, even if it waist 14 SP, and giving us recon would force them in to recon armour, or for the ones going BH give them a choice of recon or assault. If ranger gives battle cert, then we have the "all round armour already, and we are not forced to pick our 2nd profession with the armour cert in mind.
I'd rather have battle. Most of the stuff you list as reasoning is still "up in the air". We don't know if they've reconsidered the traps not working on creatures or the carbineer pre-req, both of those things have been addressed as being potentially flexible. Until there is a definitive answer that that is the way things are going to be, I think it's a bit premature to assume anything.
And remember that simply because traps won't work on creatures doesn't mean you'll never battle creatures. And it definately doesn't mean that you'll never get shot at by a kinetic ranged weapon. Capped damage FWG5's in the right hands do a LOT of damage, and I for one wouldn't like to be caught on the other end. A good set of battle armor and a PSG will fare better than all but the best recon armor against energy weapons, and it will fare twice as well against kinetic.
In the end, battle armor is much more flexible in terms of resists and can be made exactly the way you want it. It's the best armor in the game because while it doesn't provide the best against a single damage type, it's able to provide nearly as good protection (using primus layers) against both at the same time. My template has Bounty Hunter in it. But I choose to wear battle armor against creatures (if I wear armor at all) because I know that I might also encounter NPCs while hunting, and inventory space is at a premium.
and what do you say to all the people who want to keep Ranger/Rifles? That they're armor, which they paid for, shouldn't be able to be used by them anymore? That they should have to change THEIR template to carbineer to get the battle cert for the armor they already have? Carbineers are the only ranged profession with battle armor certs, why should they have to be pigeon-holed into carbineer? Wouldn't it be easier for those who wish to have recon armor to simply pick up rifleman or pistoleer? That way those that already spent millions on armor keep their armor, while those that care about the recon cert can freely pick it up if they so desire. Makes much more sense in my opinion.
Battle Armor!!!!!
For one, two ranged professions already cert recon. And most rangers seem to be rifleman (recon) anyways. I would much rather have ranger Keep the all-round good stats of battle armor, than recon wich will get you killed against creatures lol. And, if i can't wear my RIS anymore i'd be slightly peeved. I always considered RIS 'ranger armor' after the CU lol.
I prefer battle armor. I love the maurader armor on my dosh... looks great works great...
But yea recon armor makes more sense. Not cause of the name, but because its geared to be light, flexible and highly resistant to energy attacks. Makes perfect sense to me.
Message Edited by Rolfie on 10-03-2005 07:21 AM
Maxanto wrote:
But yea recon armor makes more sense. Not cause of the name, but because its geared to be light, flexible
I don't want to start another argument here...but what is "light and flexible" about Recon armor? I'm just as fast and flexible in a suit of Composite armor because I have all the armor mitigation. There is no difference between a person in Ubese and a person in Chitin, except for the resists if they both have the mitigation.
So I'm a bit mystified as to what exactly makes recon armor"light and flexible". What in-game difference is there, other than theprotection from certain types of damage? Am I missing something here?
Message Edited by Phenix1050 on 10-03-2005 10:24 AM
Battle is still a good choice, and I am not going to complain about it, but does seem that we are being put into the position that most of the damage we will be taking will be Energy.
(Note, I know that there are kinetic ranged weapons, but almost everyone, including NPCs, seem to carry energy weapons. Therefore, in my little world, Ranged=Energy.)
Then you will get killed in serious PvP. I would love to fight somebody in Recon armor with my capped FWG5. Crit shot I will hit for over 1500 easily before armor, and with Recon you'll only mitigate about 35% of that. 4 or 5 shots and I will beat anybody in Recon Armor.
Calculus_Entropy wrote:
(Note, I know that there are kinetic ranged weapons, but almost everyone, including NPCs, seem to carry energy weapons. Therefore, in my little world, Ranged=Energy.)