One thing that always bothered me in TES games is that your character could carry a 18 wheeler on his person if Strength is on 100. My opinion is that Strength should affect only damage done by melee weapons.It would make gameplay more interesting and tactical. I would like to see that changed in Skyrim in a manner that players are able to carry as much as they would in real life (a dagger,few potions,bow,one type of armor,etc.). Your encumbrance would affect your fatigue expenditure and regeneration...but all of this is better suited for another topic.
So yes,quivers and arrows separate items. I'm also glad we won't have such an abundance of arrows that we did earlier.
As a quick aside in regards to this topic, I agree that the general encumbrance mechanics of TES don't function very 'realistically' (not that I'm moping about it, just an observation), but perhaps what you're suggesting (ie, realistic limits on what can be stored in your inventory, how strength contributes to encumbrance limit etc), could be implemented in a hardcoe mode, that will hopefully make an appearance in Skyrim, as has been seen in Fallout NV. Check http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1165099-self-inflicted-hardcoe-mode/ out for a more elaborate explanation of this.
Anyways, glad people like this. So many small http://www.gamesas.com/index.php?/topic/1161326-what-we-want-to-see-in-skyrim-with-rare-screenshots/ to improve TES by so many people...
I voted yes for quivers being individual items that could be equipped to carry arrows of a different make. Personally, I never liked the fact that my stealthily dressed assasin, or my fur and leather clad huntsman would have an ornately designed quiver on his back simply because of the more powerful arrows he was using. So for customization's sake, as well as for a visual consistency in my character's outfit, I am absolutely for quivers that are independantly equipped from the arrows I'm using.
Definately, getting the aesthetics right for an RPG is pretty crucial, plus makes the enjoyment of your charaacter greater.
Your second question is a little harder to answer, but I voted yes to it as well. Ultimately, however, this comes down to balancing the gameplay in a way that isn't too easy for the archer, but also not to hard. It would be dependent on how scarce or expensive they have actually made the arrows in the new game; how effective and much damage the arrows can now do; how quickly arrows degrade through use(how often I can recover my fired arrows from dead targets), and how many arrows the different quivers can possibly carry. If those four factors are properly balanced, without me constantly running out of arrows every couple of battles then I'm all for it. Micromanagement like this is good so long as it doesn't become a constant nuissance and kill the fun factor of being an archer in the game.
Yeah, it'd be important to make sure the balance is right, which is difficult for us to judge with the little info we have. But it makes sense that you can have some arrows stored in your quiver, with some more rolled up in your rucksack/backpack/adventurer's kit/what-have-you. Or, perhaps, taking the idea of quiver properties further, you could assign a set number of
any combination of arrows in your quiver, then hotkey them for use. Ie, 5 poisened, 5 enchanted, 15 normal, and all inside your one quiver. The quality of quiver determines storage space etc.
obviously could lead to absurd looks (a warhammer in a calfslot say) but that would generally be regulated by the sense of the player - tho as its a SP game, if keeping your claymore strapped horizontally across your lower back makes you happy who am I to argue? just make sure you dont try and walk through narrow doors :biggrin:
Agreed man, weapon placing would be awesome, but perhaps the weapon type has realistic limits on placement? Eg, you could not attatch your warhammer to your calf, as this is so unrealistic and cumbersome. It could only be allocated at either hip, or in several positions across the back. Also, perhaps in an inventory screen you had the option of determing (within set parameters) the angle it sat at?