View source for Post:Chain Armor testing/templates - 03/25/2014 - 07:27

{{Post
|a=MARTINCOTY77
|t=Re: Chain Armor testing/templates
|d=03/25/2014 07:27 AM CDT
|n=1231
|f=Combat - Weapons and Armor \ Chain Armor
|c=m
|p=''>>How were the different templates in terms of hindrance?''<br>
<br>
{{PRel|Hindrance}} I believe is strictly based on the weight of the item, template and body coverage. (it seems to not care about what the density is before it's created) So they were all Chain type hauberks at 330-331 stones, so basically exactly the same. The 331 stone hauberk would have a very tiny amount more hindrance most likely but completely negligible. Comparing showed no difference as expected.<br>
<br>
Hindrance is interesting as the scale used is completely in the dark, but you can theorize based on armor piece volumes.<br>
<br>
Just looking at ring chain armor here to get an idea:<br>
eyes 3<br>
neck 5<br>
head 8<br>
gloves 6<br>
legs 12<br>
arms 17<br>
abdomen 8<br>
chest & back 18<br>
Total: 77<br>
<br>
You could then imagine that hindrance moves up per stone according to the ratios above. So since a hauberk covers legs, abdomen, chest, back, arms and hands, it would move up 61 points per stone of weight. Seems like a lot but max hindrance could be based on a very large number so 61 really isn't that big.<br>
<br>
This is all theory mind you, there could be gaps where hindrance doesn't move up at all with weight, like a weird rule that it only moves up on even numbers etc. But that's completely beyond what a player would be able to determine unless appraisal gets a major overhaul.<br>
<br>
This also has {{PRel|Experience|experience}} implementations, for example we could apply percentages to each body part.<br>
<br>
eyes 3.89%<br>
neck 6.49%<br>
head 10.39%<br>
gloves 7.79%<br>
legs 15.58%<br>
arms 22.07%<br>
abdomen 10.39%<br>
chest & back 23.37%<br>
Total: 100%
|sub=Combat
}}