I’d love to see a change that helps address a few issues currently facing the game. At the moment, there are discussions to review survivability of light armor users and the viability of heavy armor users in PvE and PvP scenarios.
Equip loads are optimized towards to top-end of weight distribution per tier. I instead think their should be a more dynamic, sliding scale of benefits within the threshold for equip loads. At the moment, heavy users have incentive to use all heavy armor, as this offers the most protection and still gives them the benefits within the equip load tier. There is no incentive to run anything but all heavy. Light users also focus on builds with the most optimized weight, with absolutely no reason to run all light armor pieces in this equip load.
Light armor (no shield) currently has 4 builds that achieve the highest armor (shown as: head / chest / hands / legs / feet = weight + armor rating)
- light / medium / light / light / light = 12.7 + 611
- light / light / medium / medium / light = 12.6 + 611
- light / light / light / medium / medium = 12.6 + 611
- medium / light / light / medium / light = 12.6 + 611
These are the most optimal for light armor users since they provide the most protection while still offering the 20% damage increase. No light user should want to use a suboptimal weight distribution given the lack of armor rating, unless there was some sort of trade off.
Instead of looking at perk adjustments by weight, why are we not looking at total weight as a source of damage/survivability?
If for example, we offer light users that run light armor across all of their slots a damage increase of 22.5 - 25%, with a trade off of an armor rating of 480.6, we’d encourage a more dynamic cost/benefit analysis of higher damage output for minimal to no protection. This gives players agency on builds, output and defense without putting so much emphasis on an already difficult gearing system.
For heavy users, using full heavy would give max damage reduction and 22.5 - 25% stun, root, slow reduction, but have the least amount of damage, while the lower end could have a 15% - 17% stun, root, slow reduction but with a 5% damage buff.
It also increases the viability of less used armor weights, evening out some of the trade value of certain pieces. The best example is medium legs, which are not considered optimal in no shield medium builds.
- The top 3 combinations offer 1108.09 armor rating (light leg builds)
- The next 3 offer 1104.07 armor rating (heavy leg builds)
- Medium legs aren’t considered optimal until the 3rd tier with an armor rating of 1084.4
The biggest draw back is the sheer number of total weight combinations which makes things a bit more complicated. A separate, but relevant thread, could be created to suggest a more streamlined approach to armoring rating where armor pieces are standardized by weight ie. all light armor pieces have the some calculated weight. This reduces some realism of the game, but greatly simplifies a fairly complex and needlessly convoluted armor weight system.
The streamlined approach could yield new 3 tier equip load within light, medium and heavy, like:
Light
- Low armor - highest damage, lowest protection (full light gear)
- Balanced set - medium damage, medium protection (1 piece of medium, 4 light)
- Armored - lowest damage, highest protection (2 pieces of medium, 3 light or 1 piece of heavy and 4 light)
Medium
- Low armor - highest damage, lowest protection (3-4 pieces of medium, 1-2 light)
- Balanced set - medium damage, medium protection (all medium, or 3 medium, 1 light and 1 heavy)
- Armored - lowest damage, highest protection (3-4 pieces of medium, 1-2 heavy)
Heavy
- Low armor - highest damage, lowest protection (2 pieces medium, 3 heavy or 1 piece of light, 4 heavy)
- Balanced set - medium damage, medium protection (1 piece of medium, 4 heavy)
- Armored - lowest damage, highest protection (Fully heavy)
While the math may not fully accurate or balanced, I hope the ideas are portrayed in a way that makes sense.