A thief that traits/gears for pure defense will have higher armor than a warrior that traits/gears for pure offense.
A thief that traits/gears for pure offense will have lower armor than a warrior that traits/gears for pure offense.
Meanwhile, a warrior that traits/gears for pure defense will have higher armor than a thief that traits/gears for pure defense, due to the innate bonus from heavy armor.
It’s not a difficult concept to grasp. You’re attempting to apply RP/classic trinity rules to a system that prioritizes player choice over predetermined class roles, or at least tries to. A player that chooses to gear themselves defensively should have higher defensive stats than a player that chooses to gear offensively, regardless of armor class.
wich in turn makes armor classes useless to have overall.
just give us all.. “armor”.
They hate trinity.. dps – healing – tank speciality.
And yet they have classes to fullfill those criterias…And since they dont want trinity, but still balance for it…
The game gets imbalanced. (pretty logical).And the result is people gets kitten ed of.
A-net should realy make up their mind.
Heavy armor vs light armor or even medium.
heavy armor should always win in naturaly higher defense..
no matter how you gear the other two.
This is pure logic… trinity or not.
That is pure logic but you are ignoring very important things specific to the real world as well as this setting.
1) Heavy armor protects more than medium armor. This is true. But heavy armor was not always desirable in warfare. Heavy armor is heavy, and without cavalry, it would wear out armies and force them to march slower. Medium armor allowed for much more mobility, and didn’t fatigue the wearer as much. Neither of these are really modeled in the game, so making drastic differences between the two in terms of protection don’t matter as much.
2) This game assumes that magic is real. This really matters, because weapons and armors are imbued with magical inscriptions and runes and sigils that either add to the weapon’s ability to pierce armor, or armor’s ability to absorb damage as well as other things. Because of this, it is possible to imbue cloth armor with powerful magic that makes it more protective than steel. Yet steel being sturdier, can still be imbued with similar magic, and wind up more protective still.
It is pure logic…this game is set in a magical world, therefore magic rules apply, and armor/weapon material is not the sum total of the damage that a single warrior can absorb or receive.
Also, in the real physical world, in a fight with a heavily armored knight, a knife could one hit kill the knight, especially if that knight was not paying attention. There are many important and vulnerable parts of the body that only really need one good cut to completely kill a person. If someone armed with a stilleto managed to sneak up on a knight in armor, they could probably easily get through one of the many weak points in the armor and kill the knight in one hit. Armor helped prevent that in the chaos of battle, but in real battle, a hit either kills you, or wounds you, or it doesn’t. It doesn’t “do damage” and let you keep fighting as if nothing has happened until you take enough damage to die. That’s video game logic…so please stop trying to apply flawed and inaccurate logic based in the real world to a video game set in a magical world.
