So I've always been a big fan of armor mode, but I feel that 35% really doesnt cut it for having an armor module. It really boils down to the level 3 ability of the module, which is immunity to nanodisruptor. I've felt that this defeats the entire point of having something made for disabling suits being negated by a suit function that really doesn't have much of a place.

Since killstreaks are map based (Very cool idea crytek) the 5-4-streak disruptor hardly seems useful since it's only worth using on Crashsite and only on the maps that allow it. I'd suggest adding a 5-10% armor buff at it's max level just to set it apart and make you really feel more like a tank then just another guy slowed a little less by armor.

Please give me some input cry-tom I'd love to know what you think

I suggested this elsewhere before. Armor Enhance just has a poor concept.

Reduced Drain <- Armor mode is already the least demanding for energy and people only activate it when its needed.
Reduced speed penalty <- Again people only activated it when its needed
Protection from Nano Distruption <- Great.. protection from the worst and most useless killstreak on the game. Dont waste your time posting "WELL ITS GOOD IN CRASH SITE BLABLA".. its not. Anyone with half a brain destroys it 5 seconds after it drops for a free 200EXP.

Armor Enhance just doesnt fit into the way Armor is used. Nobody keeps Armor on for extended periods of time because it makes you an extremely easy spot. This module is just plain bad.

Base health is 120.
35% reduction gives 180 EHP. (this is the amount of damage you have to cause to kill someone in Armor from full health)
40% reduction gives 200 EHP.
45% reduction gives 220 EHP.
50% reduction gives 240 EHP.

Ive rounded the figures slightly. A 5 or even 10% extra mitigation would make the module more worthwhile but I wouldnt suggest going any higher than 10% in my opinion.

Nice... Hedgehog8 You have some great attitude on it HA HA HA

Increasing the damage mitigation effectively gives more health (obviously), which is always a balancing no-no in games.

I suggested this elsewhere before. Armor Enhance just has a poor concept.

Reduced Drain <- Armor mode is already the least demanding for energy and people only activate it when its needed.


the reduced drain works also for the energy that drains when you get shot, so you have "more" armor

35% of 120 is 42. I was thinking that you get a top a instant buff of 42 hp when you turn on full armor mode (100% charge). How did you get 180?

With 5-10% you can take like 1 or 2 extra bullets. Hardly a big deal, and damage mitigation is not a bad thing, all the faster games of the past had armor buff (grab body armor here!)

Reduced drain doesn't give you MORE armor it lets you have it on longer and lets the max amount of boost it give you drop slower.

Increasing the damage mitigation effectively gives more health (obviously), which is always a balancing no-no in games.

That is a pretty bad generalization in my opinion. Someone in Armor mode with Armor Enhance will die just as fast as someone in Armor mode without it so why even bother taking a module that gives poor bonuses to a mode that you are in the least?

Armor Enhances bonuses are based around prolonged usage but thats simply not how Maximum Armor is used.

35% of 120 is 42. I was thinking that you get a top a instant buff of 42 hp when you turn on full armor mode (100% charge). How did you get 180?

With 5-10% you can take like 1 or 2 extra bullets. Hardly a big deal, and damage mitigation is not a bad thing, all the faster games of the past had armor buff (grab body armor here!)

Reduced drain doesn't give you MORE armor it lets you have it on longer and lets the max amount of boost it give you drop slower.

It doesnt give you 35% health. It reduces incoming damage by 35%, its not the same thing. To deal 120 damage with 35% mitigation you would need to deal near 185 damage.

For example 50% mitigation does not give you 50% more health, it gives you 100% more health.

Increasing the damage mitigation effectively gives more health (obviously), which is always a balancing no-no in games.

That is a pretty bad generalization in my opinion. Someone in Armor mode with Armor Enhance will die just as fast as someone in Armor mode without it so why even bother taking a module that gives poor bonuses to a mode that you are in the least?

That's not the point though is it.

I'm saying the buff you proposed would be a balancing faux pas. I don't disagree that something could be done to improve it, but giving people essentially more health is always a rocky path to go down.


Armor Enhances bonuses are based around prolonged usage but thats simply not how Maximum Armor is used.
I totally agree.

Personally, I think a decent change would be to make AE III reduce the glow effect of someone in armour mode. This would make staying in armour mode (with the previously unlocked increased menouverability) a viable option without lighting up like a Christmas tree, and without impacting on your movement too negatively. Thus making the prolonged use bonuses more 'useful' to cerrtain playstyles. Especially to those whom don't spend 90% of their time in stealth mode.

The problem I have had with armor upgrade was that at first I was under the assumption that it would do as the term implied at some point (Kept hope till level 3.) Instead of being an armor upgrade it was instead made more armor effectiveness boost. The increased speed is nice so is the first perk of reduced drain, but with those two things it really isn't upgrading armor in my sense just making it more effective. Armor is for defense and upgrade means to buff so at level three I finally expected something to improve the armor defense but was let down :<

To reply about making armor less visible while it would be nifty, it's hardly something I'd care for on it. I'd suggest if my idea were to be tested would to rearrange the order of the upgrades.

Upgrade path:
Tier 1: Armor performance boosted 5-15% (Whatever works )
Tier 2: Speed reduction lowered
Tier 3: Armor drain lowered

While tier 2 and 3 could be swapped in whatever order I still find that being immune to nano disruptor is useless and logically shouldn't happen anyway. A device that disrupts nanosuits being stopped by the suit is alittle bit goofy.

The problem I have had with armor upgrade was that at first I was under the assumption that it would do as the term implied at some point (Kept hope till level 3.) Instead of being an armor upgrade it was instead made more armor effectiveness boost. The increased speed is nice so is the first perk of reduced drain, but with those two things it really isn't upgrading armor in my sense just making it more effective. Armor is for defense and upgrade means to buff so at level three I finally expected something to improve the armor defense but was let down :<
You know the term 'upgrade' just means an improvement right? Increasing mobility, slowing suit drain and giving resistance to jammers all count as improvements over the basic armour mode.

Upgrade path:
Tier 1: Armor performance boosted 5-15% (Whatever works )
Tier 2: Speed reduction lowered
Tier 3: Armor drain lowered
Do you not see how this would be completely imbalanced in relation to other suit modules? Boosting the effectiveness of armour mode is just ridiculous, considering it is already a VERY effective tool when used in conjunction with stealth mode. Coming out of stealth and being able to fight with armour which is 115% effective would be ludicrous.

This is why I suggested lowering the visbility of armour mode. This doesn't overpower the armour, while giving an incentive to use the mode for prolonged periods of time (which is the whole point of armour enhance).

While tier 2 and 3 could be swapped in whatever order I still find that being immune to nano disruptor is useless and logically shouldn't happen anyway. A device that disrupts nanosuits being stopped by the suit is alittle bit goofy.

Don't do that. It is completely plausible for a fictional defence to be created against a fictional pulse/signal disruptor weapon. In the book the N2 has EMP protection. Your 'logic' will get you nowhere in fiction.

I don't really know what book your talking about, during Crysis 2 gameplay Hargreeve has you sabotage an emp device if you remember setup by that cell commander. I would say that proves that the suit is not immune to EMP.

I suppose stealth completely slipped my mind since I almost never use it. However that said it doesn't really see how it wouldn't be unlike using the other combinations of powers. My idea was that typical stealth players will use things to benefit their stealthness or take one of the armor perks that actually help snag energy back or charge quicker. With a boost of 5-10% you're only dealing with 20-40 extra hp hardly something two or three more bullets wont chew through.

Another suggestion would be something tangibly beneficial and more useful then blocking the nanojammer would be negating the effects of weapons that give you a bonus against armor. Sniper rifles ignore armor, grendel gets +15% damage typically along with some of the other pistols while an enemy is in armor. The whole issue with the nanojammer is that being immune to it not only logically doesn't make sense it also is typically a useless killstreak to be immune to.

While there probally could be some issues with stealth or possible balance issues, somewhere a change is needed for the module. Being less 'flashy' in armor mode is something I wouldn't care for, and the point is made why would you want to leave armor mode on?

I don't really know what book your talking about, during Crysis 2 gameplay Hargreeve has you sabotage an emp device if you remember setup by that cell commander. I would say that proves that the suit is not immune to EMP.
Yes, but the accompanying book says the N2 has some Faraday mesh or something for EMP protection. Whether the N2 is immune to EMP or not is largely irrelevant (I know it's not in Campaign) as the nanosuit jammer is not clarified as EMP, and the suit used in MP is not the same as SP anyway; neither are the upgraded modules.

The point is that it is entirely plausible that something could be developed to counter any measure used on the nanosuit.