Can someone tell me whatt he F**K this means:
All limited armors and limited armor platings, old and new, have received a 10000 point increase in durability to give them a competitive edge.

How can they possibly believe that this will give L armor an edge since the PRICE OF THEM IS CONTROLLED BY THE FUCKING MARKET. the effective price of hunting with them will continue to be the same unless the armor sucks so bad it's tt food. It's like MA doesn't know the first thing about econ and continues to make poor descisions due to this. PLEASE MA, take an adult education class on econ!

ffs

I even don't catch what is this whole thing about. They make L more durable (the same TT more dmg absorbed) or increased those 'points' by making TT of L armours bigger. Once again brilliant MA employee published misleading data in changelog. I feel like I'm not surprised... I just got used to it.

ok look at it over time... assume a made-up armor(could be any one of many sets) has a markup of 300% just before 9.1. using that armor results in, lets say 20 pec per hit from a certain mob INCLUDING MARKUP. Ok, version 9.1 comes out and it becomes TWICE as durable, could be something else but for arguments sake it's automatically twice as durable meaning it decays half as much. If the price on that armor remains the same then your decay is half as much as it was, 10 pec per hit. Great! until people realize this and bid the armor up to what it's worth for them WHICH IS 600%. This happens because the market supports the TOTAL DECAY COST of 20 pec per hit and the % on the armor adjusts because of that.

So you had an armor at 300% and get 20 pec per hit decay

and now you have the same armor at 600% and STILL GET 20 pec per hit

I get so pissed off every time they some out with a new VU because it reminds me how little they understand about their own game. Excuse my rantings...

Well, it could be worse. MA could reduce non-L armour durability . And you've forgotten about other market mechanics. If L armour will be looted quite often (big amount on market) it will make prices lower. MA can always change droprate, can't they?

"MA can always change droprate, can't they" Yes, you're right. I was assuming all else reminaing the same but they could indeed do that.

I know that it may sound a bit nave but MA have intrest in popularization of L items. As far as I remember it was discussed in other thread...

I dont get this rant at all. It is a very good thing decay is lowered on (L) armor. Infact, I was surprised it didnt work like that from the beginning. It migh be that decay including markup remains the same, or is even more then UL armor. But markup stays ingame. Meaning either crafters or hunter get that markup, not MA. Besides, low level (L) armor will likely still be cheaper to use including markup then its UL counterparts. Highend (L) armor was never inteded to be cheaper to use then UL armor. If it ever will be, it means that all the UL uber armor becomes next to worthless.

Just compare it to the (L) weapons. Would anyone use those if they were exactly as good as UL ones? Nope, so they had to be made more efficient. Just like what they did when introducing (L) faps, and just like what happned with the armors now. Both faps and (L) weapons are more efficient to use even including markup.

PS, I base this on the assumption that (L) armor indeed decays less now. This needs to be tested first.

@Witte

For crafted armor and indeed from a crafter's standpoint, initially, it would be a great thing as it's a great thing from a hunter's standpoint at the very beginning. However, as people start realizing that the L armors are cheaper AT THAT MARKUP, the markup will rise naturally. Crafters will make more of it and the price of (most likely specialized) ore will rise. Miners benifit from this most I guess...

What I'm saying for this situation is that the market will adjust to this and cause it to not change the overall behavior of hunters to use L armor(what MA wants). There is one obvoius exception... if MA turns up the drop rate so high or makes them so easy to make that they approach tt-value pricing in the market. In this case, it's great for everyone using or producing them. The benifit is shared by everyone and MA gets what they want. However, due to past experience I have doubts on if this will come to pass. MA will restrict drop-rate/crafting in some meaningful and central way and prices will increase far beyond tt value and this entire thing breaks down. People will go back to UL armor again because it's more convenient.

T

Also addressing this point:
"Highend (L) armor was never inteded to be cheaper to use then UL armor."

I agree here and the above arguement breaks down in this case because decay is secondary to the player in this situation. However, I don't think that's what MA is after in this update. They want to see widespread (everyday) HUNTING behavioral changes and that is indeed decay-driven. I'm talking about above applies to the 90% of total armor decay that is produced by players hunting mobs that are at their hunting level. ie mid level players hunting midlevel mobs.

Quote:MA will restrict drop-rate/crafting in some meaningful and central way and prices will increase far beyond tt value and this entire thing breaks down. People will go back to UL armor again because it's more convenient.

When you can get a (L) jaguar with overall decay which is 30% higher, but you dont need to invest a single dollar, I think it will be a very popular armor. Besides that, imagine looting a 100 PED (L) jaguar part you can sell for 150%. Thats 50 PED in the pocket, money that else would have gone to MA mostly.

I agree that diehard hunters will likely take the UL armors, but for people that dont hunt that often, the whole (L) series is an exelent solution. There have been many people complaining that you cannot play this game without thousands of dollars investment. (L) armor is part of the solution to this problem. Making them decay less then UL, also makes the armors interesting to the eco type hunters.

I see totally no negative side to this change. Maybe it will not be groundshaking, but it wont harm anyone, and it didnt cost any development time (just some balancing), so I dont understand why you reply so angry to it .


I still have to see that it is actually true, that these armors decay less now. AFAIK durability didnt have any meaning in the past.

I suppose you're right. It's all meaningless really when you think about it. I personally believe the "personal loot pool" idea where your ammo and decay(with markup) go in and your loot comes out(with markup) minus a fee for MA to develop new features like L armor and pet taming and the new graphics updates that forced people in my soc to quit and meaningless foot-armor...

I've become a tad bitter with MA of late and I'm sorry to take it out on you guys.

---

I sat back in my chair just now for a full 5 min and thought why I was ranting and so angry with my initial post. I think I'm so angry because I have to find feet for all my existing armor and another armor change flipped a switch in my head. I'm looking at about 600USD for this and I ask WHY. What value am I getting for that 600 bucks that MA is almost forcing us to spend?

Sorry Witte, but THANK YOU for sticking to your guns on this. I'll be taking a long hard look at if I will ever buy angel feet for myself.

T

I did something dumb and sold my ghost feet. Then two days later the freakin VU happened and now I need them back.

Travis Apple Wrote:I suppose you're right. It's all meaningless really when you think about it. I personally believe the "personal loot pool" idea where your ammo and decay(with markup) go in and your loot comes out(with markup) minus a fee for MA to develop new features like L armor and pet taming and the new graphics updates that forced people in my soc to quit and meaningless foot-armor...

I've become a tad bitter with MA of late and I'm sorry to take it out on you guys.

---

I sat back in my chair just now for a full 5 min and thought why I was ranting and so angry with my initial post. I think I'm so angry because I have to find feet for all my existing armor and another armor change flipped a switch in my head. I'm looking at about 600USD for this and I ask WHY. What value am I getting for that 600 bucks that MA is almost forcing us to spend?

Sorry Witte, but THANK YOU for sticking to your guns on this. I'll be taking a long hard look at if I will ever buy angel feet for myself.

T

I understand your bitterness, Im not too happy with some changes either. But I always treat EU as a game so it dont get too upset about it . To cheer you up: Angel armor is found to decay more then 50% LESS then in the previous VU at a 90HP hit. Previous VU it was ~26PEC and now it is ~12PEC. It is also confirmed that (L) armor decay about 15% less then UL armor (at 15 HP), and the difference seems to get bigger at higher damage.

Overall, armor decay seems to be reduced quite significantly. Under 14 HP it is slightly more then it used to be, but above 14 the difference gets big fast.

A picture i posted on EF:

Yeah, I was out hunting osseo(with polaris feet) and came back with 25 ped less armor decay than I used to. Now that is a huge bright silver lining is there ever was one.

I always thought that people discovered that the durability had nothing to do with the decay anymore and its the total protection what count for the decay. So with this statement from MA that durability does affect decay, all that is just made up.

And then nemesis is better in decay than ghost (not only due to total protection but also due to durability)