Curse

Alone) · Sep 27, 2005, 06:12 AM // 06:12

I've noticed that so many people argue on wether absorption is locational or universal. People are sayiing that they run tests, that everyone knows, that people say this and that. Please stop. The only way one would know about what each armor does is the people who work at ANet themselves. Arguing on this, I feel gets no one anywhere.

Locational or not, it's all based on preference.

Savio · Sep 27, 2005, 06:35 AM // 06:35

If you want to wear Knight's armor for looks, then be my guest. It is your preference after all. But for Warriors, mainly PvPers, looking for the most effective armor, they turn to either Platemail or Gladiator. Glad wins out because of its +energy. The fact is that the way armor absorption works and Knight's normal armor rating, it just plain sucks.

BTW, players can figure things out without Anet telling us. It is testable; the ways that Tyria function is not just mere "magic". It has always been proven to be universal, when an actual testing method is used. Until Anet decides to change it, few Warriors looking for good armor will go to Knight's or dragon. That's just how it is. If you want to make improvements, sound off on LifeInfusion's thread in the Sanitarium: http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/s...704#post525704
I'd honestly like to see Knight's armor made feasible, but until then I'll stick with my Glad.

Alone) · Sep 27, 2005, 06:39 AM // 06:39

I refuse to argue, because I've done testing myself.

Savio · Sep 27, 2005, 06:43 AM // 06:43

Testing? What was your method? What was the range for damage? Most people who say it's locational decide to test against something random, like Aatxe or something in which the damage isn't controlled. Be more specific. In most cases the damage reduction benefits aren't obvious, as few people keep track of every single hit they take.

As for myself, I tested it quite easily against the lvl 8 Charr in Old Ascalon and came to the conclusion that it was global, barring a freak occurance that the Charr liked to smash my toes. If I wanted to I could drag 7 others into International Team Arenas and do this, but I think plenty of other people have done enough testing.

Manderlock · Sep 27, 2005, 07:16 AM // 07:16

Its been tested by the great number cruncher himself Ensign. Its global

If you want to see the test and results use the search feature, Im much to lazy for that

Shinsei · Sep 27, 2005, 07:53 AM // 07:53

There's no reason to carry more than 1 piece of Knight's armor, period. Nice job on this useless thread, troll.

Ollj · Sep 27, 2005, 07:56 AM // 07:56

no matter if its based on testing or belief, whats the percentage or people that think one piece absorbs for all?

myword · Sep 27, 2005, 08:22 AM // 08:22

silly post indeed. like someone said, refer to Ensign's post.

FrogDevourer · Sep 27, 2005, 08:45 AM // 08:45

It has been tested by multiple people. It is universal. In terms of protection, one piece of armor is enough. You have the right to disagree, but unless you provide a relevant proof, be ready to be met with flames.

You can wear a Knight Armor to look cool if you want, but don't spread ignorant statements. Thanks.