No, it was annoying, and smithing is OP it doesn't need to be more useful.

It wouldn't make Smithing more useful. It would make Smithing a requirement, basically.

I miss the disintegrate spells, which is obviously tied to weapon and armor degradation.

Pretty much.

No.

THIS!!

I for one applauded the fact that I no longer have to lug around repair hammers and fix my weapons/armor every few swings

Short answer? Absolutely not.

From a realistic standpoint, you would be extreamly lucky to get in a parry-battle with someone and come out with a usable blade. Claymores aren't meant to be sharp, and could be used much more than a short sword, but on that same note you cannot sword fight with a Claymore in reality.. as they are much too heavy. In a game like this having my weapons degrade is cool at first, and becomes tedious very fast.

As for making a BROKEN sword battle ready again? In short, it would not happen.

Gorsh no!

I hated weap degradation more than a smelly salamander!

NO, never liked having to repair my gear.

Yup, clicking on a hammer icon over and over again adds a lot of enjoyment to the game...

yes I miss it like a tumor

Smithing allows you to improve weapons and armor, giving you a positive incentive to be attentive to your gear. Degradation was a negative consequence of ignoring it. They serve the same purpose, smithing is just more enjoyable and has more depth. Therefore, no.

I think it added realistic needs to the game. After all, weapons do dull up and guns do have to be cleaned and oiled after battle.

This, and think about it logically. Should a master, hand-crafted sword, supposedly the best in all the land, break after a dungeon's worth of guys in little more than pieces of leather?

Nope it's a pure pain in the behind

I don't like weapon degradation.

nope, not at all