Sure, its more realistic for armor to degrade with use, but I'm personally glad its gone. I've never played a game where item degradation was anything more than a time wasting hassle. Item degradation has never made a game harder because I'd always program myself to go repair my stuff at every opportunity before anything ever breaks, and it ends up just being a repetitive time sink that I don't really feel is necessary.

Because that's what the previous games had.

lol oh how silly of me.

Hello REL_Dovahkin. Glad you dropped by.

You're describing two separate issues. I agree with you on that legendary weapons shouldn't really degrade, as their undegradability would be one of their special attributes. On the contrary, regular weapons should degrade, especially when there's a smithing skill around to account for it. Point in case, Tood Howards's rationale behind the decision was that in Oblivion you had to smith so not to have your weapons damage decrease over time, whereas in SKyrim you can actually increase it via the same smithing skill. Suipposedly, It is more fun and rewarding this way. I say why not have both? Let different materials degrade at different rates. Todd's rationale here seems to be the twtin brother of his stated reason why horses didn't get an inventory.

i find it bewildering that so many of you would rather see something completely eliminated, rather than, improved, advanced and given some creativity.

I could get behind something like that, but the material alone isn't what makes a weapon or piece of armor strong/durable, but also the design of it. A Blade Sword wouldn't necessarily degrade at the same rate as a Steel Sword, which definitely shouldn't degrade at the same rate as a Skyforge Steel Sword. I'd rather not see it implemented at all than to see it implemented as a straight down the board "You have 100 strikes before it breaks" kind of system.

I havent played previous TES games but I have from time to time while playing Skyrim thought shouldn't the edge on this blade dull and nic. I then thought maybe it should and we could carry a sharpening stone as any warrior would. However although it could add to the role play it seems that it could also be incredibly tedious.

Why in the name of sanity would it break just because you havent sharpened it ?. Go dull and lose some damage points yes but I cant see why it would break.

I haven't played the older TES games long enough to dictate whether or not Weapon Durability is something I would like/dislike.

But since Magical Weapons degrade and lose charge, I think normal weapons should degrade as well.

But the more I think about it, the more it seems like it would be an annoyance rather than a welcomed addition to Skyrim.

It's common parlance to say 'break' in Oblivion when your sword reaches 0 health. It's not actually broken permanently, it can be repaired, but it is unequipped and useless until you repair it.

The game series I've played that consistently implemented weapon degradation is Fire Emblem, and that's the system they used. "X amount of swings and after that it's gone for good." Frustrates me to no end.

Fully agreed. I'd like to see some kind of field work for simple things (for all crafting), but also include some kind of corrosion which would take some time and effort or money to get fixed at smiths. Like, slowly degrading the equipment (based on environment? I bet swimming in ocean wouldn't be my first choice if wanting to preserve my steel), depending on material (more expensive might not automatically mean more withstanding, like leather might be better than steel in this regard).

Then they'd have to deal with the hundreds of posts crying about how everyone is constantly having to repair their equipment, yet it never counts towards their Armorer Skill... as I said in my earlier post.

it could still contribute towards skill points.

hoblak- even 2worlds had swimming penalties with armor and should, obviously, have been a gameplay mechanic in skyrim.

I do want it back, however, it should be much slower and the damage of a weapon should only suffer if the durability reached 33%. In addition, an in-depth system where a daedric sword hitting an iron shield would make the iron shield suffer much more than if the iron shield was hit by a steel or elven weapon. Same goes other way around; if an iron sword hits a daedric shield, it wouldn't be damage almost at all.

durability should be brought back, i could definitely go for that, gives me a reason for carrying around this ebony sword...

they removed the pointless hammer spamming, durability was a pointless thing

Any
Ok, any ideas on how to fix them?

It was never broke per say, but so dull that it was useless was more how I thought about it. However, armor was something that I considered to be broken when it was at 0%.


Maybe not corrosion. However, let's look at sharpening. Swords, or any blade, is heat treated in the area that is sharpened, but not on other parts of the blade. This leaves the blade flexible or rather, not brittle, but the area that is sharp can hold an edge. Once you sharped the blade enough, the metal that is heat treated is worn away. It needs to be heat treated again on the edge to be able to hold a sharp edge.

Absolutely.

My idea of reasonable armor and weapon degradation would be weapons have a chance of being damaged if you block with them or if you attack an enemy's shield or weapon when they are blocking.

As for armor degradation, damage should only occur to armor when you would take an amount of damage from a single physical attack equal to 150% the armor's armor rating if you were wearing no armor at all. Something to that effect.

As for how damage should be measured, I would think a quality system would suffice as opposed to a numeric system, ie. Normal, Worn, Damaged, Severly Damaged, repairing could simply be reversed as though you were "improving" an item. Each improvement raises the quality level towards normal if it is damaged, and if it is normal, it would be raised to an improved quality. Improved items could then be worn down to less improved.

I don't miss it. In my opinion, weapon and armor degredation were best in a game like System Shock 2, where the atmosphere suits it more than a fantasy adventure does. If you have to introduce it, make it so that average wear and tear occurs slowly. Add some sort of armor threshold system where say, edged weapons would do better against leather (and do more armor damage), but aren't as effective against plate.

I never liked it, it was annoying. Skyrim is just fine without it.

Adding durabilty to weapons could have made unique weapons & daedric artifacts feel more unique, cause they would have obviously lasted longer than crafted and enchanted weapon.

I really don't want to see Degradation as it was in Morrowind/Oblivion return, that's for sure.

But weapons and armor not wearing out at all just doesn't feel right... Given how incredibly overpowered weapons can get (Even on master, without exploits) and how useless gold is (Lack of a currency destroyer balance, which repairing fulfilled in previous games, particularly the new Fallout games) it just doesn't seem right to not have some form of item wear.