But is a 6-foot two-handed sword really that different than a 6-foot two-handed axe? I mean, you can't stab with either; they're both to be swung in an arc, probably horizontally but maybe overhand. Granted that you could do more advanced tricks with the battleaxe, like hooking it on an opponent's shield and pulling, that wouldn't be possible with a large sword, but that's sort of outside the scope of the game. In the context of TES, it seems like certainly all two-handed weapons could easily be lumped together.

I could more see your point if there were actual fighting moves you could perform based on the different one-handed weapons you could use: hooking a shield with a war axe, stabbing with a longsword, and so forth, but in the context of Skyrim being an RPG and not a 3-d, first-person fighting game like Mortal Kombat or a platformer like Arkham City, I can't see that there's enough in the game to justify having such a wide variety of weapons skills.

As a matter of fact, yes. I've seen expert swords men stumble like children when trying to use an axe for the simpliest parry. And i'm nothing of an expert, so if i can see the obvious problems they have, i'm sure said experts are far more aware of it than i am. The weight, ballance and even the basic movements between Axes, Swords and Maces are radically different. Axes and Maces are, indeed, much more similar, but even then an Axe has a considerably different attack dynamic, being still a bladed weapon, whereas a Mace is little more than a blunt instrument for causing crushing wounds.

Which, of course, brings in another topic of contention... What ever happened to attack modes? Everything is just swing away these days. You know how useless as Rapier is in a slashing motion?

you're close, and as far as skyrim is concerned you may be right. i like to roleplay, so i like the idea of keeping them seperate. but here's the thing about great swords vs. say a dane axe. yes you can't stab with either, however the horizontal and vertical cuts work with a great sword. because there's an edge on both sides, you have a chance of reversals and or corrections. a dane axe there is no reverse stroke with the blade, so any sort of correction brings it into the "staff/quarter staff" schools.

You want meaningful choices for an addition of an armor class? It would require an overhaul of the entire gear system in Skyrim.

First of all, items would have to have an enchantment ability tied to it. Dead squirrels tied together (hide armor) wouldn't be able to hold as high a quality enchantment as say high quality piece of rare metal forged by an artisan.

Secondly, certain actions would be hindered, or flat out impossible in a certain armor types. Someone in light armor should not expect to chuckle off the swing of a battleaxe by an enraged Orc. Neither should someone outfitted like a walking fortress expect to be able to disappear in broad daylight simply because they crouched. (that makes about as much sense as a toddler believing they turned invisible because they covered their own eyes and can't see anything)

Different armor types should have different perks as well. Heavy armor, just for instance, allow someone to swing a heavy two handed weapon faster than someone in light. Meanwhile, someone in light would be much more agile as they aren't trying to overcome the momentum of something weighing 3 times more than they do. Casting should be something done in plain clothes, or light armor. I'm not saying that donning that daedric suit means you suddenly lose the abilty throw lightening like a proper emperor of an evil empire, but anything that isn't instant, should take a touch longer to do. Sprinting in heavy though should be right out. I'm more inclined to saying the stopping part is the issue with heavy armor. Light armor (or forgoing ammor altogether and going with robes) should allow for more efficient use of magicka to the point it wouldn't need the reduced magicka cost enchants on them.

Once you get the benefits and hindrances done right to really make light armor and heavy armor very different from one another, as they should be, you can then create the medium armor. In medium armor, you are far less squishy than light, but can't swing a monster of a 2 hander as gracefully, or shrug off power attacks behind your shield, you'll still stagger a bit. Medium armor would still be middle ground, but that middle ground would actually be in the middle. As it is right now, once you are high level and have the perks, there is ZERO difference between the 2 classes now. For mediums 'perk' over the other 2, it can hold better enchantments over the other two, but not enough to make it the prefered choice over light. I don't know, it should have a sneak/magicka negative that can't be completely overcome with enchantments to make it a better choice for someone who is a pure mage or a pure thief/assassin.

And to reiterate, physical damage mitigation cap should only be attainable by wearing a complete suit of whatever is the highest tier heavy armor while holding a shield, AND having the relevant perks filled completely.

Medium armor is pointless in a game like TES where you don't have attribute requirements to equip armor. I like it the way it is, personally. If I want medium armor, I just mix sets. Our beloved Iconic Dovakiin does so.

No, it would just blend both positives and negatives into a new armor group it would not overhaul anything. It would just add a new perk tree.

A fantasy game like Skyrim skews things in a big way. In TES plate is relatively poor armor and chain is "medium".

In reality, European plate was the finest hand to hand armor ever made. European plate armor did not come into being until very late in the medieval period - late 13th/early 14th century. Only the wealthiest could afford such a suit of armor.

Mail defined heavy armor for nearly 1400 years. Mail was the classic heavy armor at the height ot the medieval period. Mail was the armor of the crusades. It was very expensive (although not nearly as much as plate) and was generally not affordable by all. it was definitely NOT medium armor.

Light and heavy are IMHO decent distinctions. In reality you were wearing plate, mail, scale, or segmented or you were wearing leather, padded, or nothing at all. Heavy and light were true distinctions. I don't think that "medium" ever existed.

Once you have your perks, their aren't any positive or negatives about the 2 classes of armor we have now. They are identical in everything but name after you are leveled and have your perks. You can dress yourself like a Daedric prince and turn basically invisible in broad daylight because you crouched, or hit the physical damage mitigation cap while wearing the lowest tier light armor. Repeat, you can make yourself the most heavily armored person possible because you are wearing what used to be bunnies.

look at the crusades, archers wore leather "jerkins"(boiled leather)=light, men at arms wore leather "jacks"(leather with scales or rivets, maybe some mail skirts or head pieces)=medium, and the knights a wore full mail, with a surcoat. (plate pauldrons, and possibly greaves.)=heavy

Again its just an added option. I am not into maxing everything out, I am interested in choices.

and there's the crux of the whole argument, some want more choices. some want their hands held because they can't help min/maxing

Yes I know it, I just have got to voice my opinion in case Bethesda hears it, that would be a fantastic day when Bethesda brings our choices back.

agreed, though then what would we come on the forum to debate? LOL

Then we could talk about speculation on The Elder Scrolls VI and then we could talk about how wonderful this game is finally.

When you compare Plate to Chain (And i'm not talking full head-to-toe Prythian chain, that crap was like walking around with 300lbs of iron on your head) plate offered much more in the way of protection, and was, pound for pound, heavier. That said, because of the fact that is was largely self-supporting, it gave more freedom of movement than chain. In terms of literal weight, then, i do agree with you.

However, in terms to relative protection, there is a definate middle ground.

Leather, padded, studded and light-weight-material armours (IE Glass) are light and offer little in the way of protection. They are more for the purpose of redirecting glancing blows than stopping a blow cold.

Chain, reinfroced Leather, and to a lesser extent some banded armours can range, weight wise, from being brutally heavy (Theres a reason Knights were mounted) to relatively light, and offer sufficient protection to turn an average blow of their own accord.

Heavy armours, including most Banded metal and Plate armours were, pound for pound, the heaviest, but actually offered on average more mobility than medium armours. They were also expencive as sin. The Banded iron used by the Roman legions was, on average, worth a small village. There was a particular psycological effect of seeing 20,000 troops all wearing better gear than your king could afford...

On this scale, the actual Light-Medium-Heavy grade is more about protection than weight.


Particularly when you look at the fantasy setting of TES, the middle ground becomes even more pronounced than it would be historically. Where does Bonemould fit? Its not that heavy, but offers sound protection. And Orcish, again a lightweight and comparitivly protective form of armour. Or Troll-bone? Heavy as hell, but not particularly protective at all.

The problem, of course, is that at 100 skill, theres (to my knowlege) no differance between the AC of equal grade Light or Heavy armour. Light Armour SHOULD offer considerably less protection, in return for greater mobility and decreased stamina loss.

The streamlining and lack of impact between Armour choice is, IMO, what dooms the posibility of medium armour, something which should by all rights exist in a fantasy game full of strange materials. Even worse, they go and put in a Perk and a Standing Stone which completely removes any differance between them (The decreased mobility) and renders it as a purely asthetic choice.

I don't think there should be, you have to decide. Light armour is only good for stealth, heavy is good for protection.

No, as I said before, they'd be combined into a mediocre set of armor that really has no point. You want stealth or fast movement, light would still be your best choice. You want to take a hit, you go with heavy. Medium in such a system would be good at neither and offer no benefits of it's own, rendering it rather pointless. For it to have any actual benefits or real use, the gear system would need an overhaul. Which I also said earlier.

Considering the gear system is its self flawed to begin with, this doesn't strike me as a problem...

They need to make light and heavy armor more different and diverse before they do anything like adding a new class of armor. A little more stamina regen at the cost of armor isn't that much. Most of my characters don't even spec into armor and just wear what I feel like. My magic users have magic shields, my stealth characters don't get hit, and my warriors have shields to take a huge amount of damage for them.

I would love to see an overhaul of the system. Particularly one that completely removes the light/medium/heavy classifications and the linear progression from weakest to strongest/heaviest.

I don't know if you've ever worn armour, but there is a major differance in them. If you know how to wear chainmail, for instance, your going to be tripping over your own feet in Plate. There is no linear progression through armour types, and even a Heavy-Medium-Light system is simplified, as each individual type of armour tends to be radically different in terms of mobility and the training involved.

• Cloth
  
• Light
  
• Medium
  
• Heavy
  
• Bulked

I think they should be the armour classes, with only one skill for them: Armoured.
Within that tree, you have trees of perks which could be beneficial to one or many of the different armour classes.
Like a sprinting tree or a muffle tree, maybe a better armour condition tree etc. you know, the usual stuff.

But yes, I would have liked more armour types so that I wouldn't be mooched into a specific choice of playstyles.

This is more of how i feel. As it stands, the only determining factor between Light and Heavy is sneaky-vs-loud. Those qualifiers have nothing to do with armour. Armour is about provection-vs-mobility. I've seen some people moving quite stealthily in full plate, and some who are several factores louder in geans and sneakers.

I'm actually gonna have to agree with you.

Light armor doesn't really protect much, and heavy armor is too slow.

The reason why I was in favor of removing medium armor in oblivion was that there were too many skills governing it. You had light armor, medium armor, and heavy armor. It felt redundant.

But I know of a compromise. Just as how they merged sword, axe and mace into one-handed skill, merge all light, medium and heavy armor into one skill called armor. Then create perk paths that lets you specialize in light, medium or heavy armor.

This way you can even mix and match light, medium and heavy armor parts, and not be gimped because they are all governed by the same armor skill.

You can always mix and match heavy and light and get decent mobility and decent protection. The only problem would be you don't get the maching set perk, nor the armor class perk.

Or you can use the enchanting and Smithing spams and be a god and it wouldnt matter..