PDA

View Full Version : armor for mounts


Corda
11-22-2004, 06:16 AM
<DIV>I think it'd be a pretty cool idea to add armor you could buy for your mount. Head piece, chest, legs, etcs. It would increase your overall AC when riding it and it would just look sweet.</DIV>

Prog
11-22-2004, 01:51 PM
If it was for anything but fluff, armor for mounts increasing your own AC would cause all non-crusaders to scream nerf. Why? Because we get a horse for 7s in a spell, and they have to spend several gold to get a cheap one. Perhaps if the summoned horse was un-armorable it would be alright from the balance perspective. But then, horses in combat would tend to get in the way visually, and there's already enough visual spam in combat IMO. Finally, horse combat has historically been performed in a jesting style. Realistically speaking, trying to slash gnolls with a sword while on a horse is just asking to get your legs hacked off. Heavy horsemen were used in battle, but only to make a quick sweeping pass over the enemy infantry before sending your own infantry in, or to protect your own infantry from the enemy's horsemen. Battles of that scale simply don't exist in EQ2.With that said, I do think an armored horse carrying a vanguard-clad Paladin could look very cool. I'd love to see our summoned horse automatically come with armor, but just as a visual effect. By no means should people be encouraged to fight on horses in these micro-skirmishes where in reality, they would only be a hindrance, and virtually, they just take up more graphical real estate.

Sciy
11-22-2004, 05:01 PM
<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Progor wrote:<BR>If it was for anything but fluff, armor for mounts increasing your own AC would cause all non-crusaders to scream nerf. Why? Because we get a horse for 7s in a spell, and they have to spend several gold to get a cheap one. Perhaps if the summoned horse was un-armorable it would be alright from the balance perspective. But then, horses in combat would tend to get in the way visually, and there's already enough visual spam in combat IMO. Finally, horse combat has historically been performed in a jesting style. Realistically speaking, trying to slash gnolls with a sword while on a horse is just asking to get your legs hacked off. Heavy horsemen were used in battle, but only to make a quick sweeping pass over the enemy infantry before sending your own infantry in, or to protect your own infantry from the enemy's horsemen. Battles of that scale simply don't exist in EQ2.<BR><BR>With that said, I do think an armored horse carrying a vanguard-clad Paladin could look very cool. I'd love to see our summoned horse automatically come with armor, but just as a visual effect. By no means should people be encouraged to fight on horses in these micro-skirmishes where in reality, they would only be a hindrance, and virtually, they just take up more graphical real estate.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>If you want all that 'scale' and detail, go play Total War.</P> <P> <BR></P>

Prog
11-22-2004, 08:14 PM
I don't, I'm just saying that much scale and detail doesn't have it's place in this game. This game is built around tiny battles, while armored horses would fit better in, well, Total Wars <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

jshari
11-25-2004, 07:31 AM
<DIV>I think you sould be able to customize it! that would be sick. like mabee a character select sorta customive where you just choose then accept or mabe buy some cool looking stuff.</DIV>

Rowdi
11-25-2004, 09:53 PM
<DIV>I enjoy the horse for pulling and soloing as it makes for a quick gettaway if things go wrong.</DIV>

Dakbu
11-27-2004, 01:24 PM
<DIV>Even though the Cavalry was typically used for more sweeping type attacks as you mentionioned, there is a HUGE tactical advantage in battle if you are mounted on horseback... getting your legs hacked out from under you is easily remedied.  Most warriors on horseback had good leg armor to prevent this scenario.  It's hard to chop through plate armor.</DIV>

creepazoid4
11-30-2004, 12:55 AM
<DIV>Knights on Horseback were meant for a quick sweep through infantry like the previous poster said,   they were also were used as a scare tactic.  A man on horseback is much more intimidating than a man on foot.  If a knight was ever to prevail in melee battle he would get off his high horse and put his feet back on the ground where it belongs.  Archers on horseback though,  are deadly.</DIV><p>Message Edited by creepazoid420 on <span class=date_text>11-29-2004</span> <span class=time_text>11:56 AM</span>