Why is there no armor?

#1NogahamPosted 11/3/2012 10:50:34 PM
That is totally stupid. You can increase your damage output but not your defenses? Wow, who came up with that dumb idea?
#2legendX66Posted 11/3/2012 10:51:06 PM
he'd still just get shot.
---
legendX66-Ten Tails H4X and Troll H4X Sexy secretary of Haxem Rangers
Thinking is the hardest kind of work, which is probably why so few engage in it.
#3spike17spiegelPosted 11/3/2012 10:53:11 PM
Are you having a hard time fighting or something?
---
"Get your facts first, then you can distort them as you please."
#4Killface99Posted 11/3/2012 10:53:16 PM
It was unnecessary and irrelevant. Why do you want it? They should have taken away the numbers on the weapons too.
---
PSN: optophobe (I ignore blank friend requests)
#5Nogaham(Topic Creator)Posted 11/3/2012 10:53:43 PM
Well if you want to argue like that, then why are there weapons beside guns (and maybe the hidden blade) at all? You could just shoot all your enemies.
#6Another_GamerPosted 11/3/2012 10:54:57 PM
Wouldn't wearing a bunch of armor sort of kill any attempt to blend in and be stealthy? Remember AC1, Altair never got to upgrade his armor. In AC2 Ezio did get to upgrade his, but he lived in a time period when it wasn't out of the ordinary for a man of means to wear some form of armor in his day to day life.

Now, look at AC3. It's set in the 1770s(mostly) and people just didn't wear armor. Wearing armor would make him stick out in the crowd pretty badly. And, why do you need armor anyway? It's not exactly like it's hard to avoid taking health damage during combat...Connor is a bit like a Terminator in his level of fighting skill vs normal people, even the regulars and "heavies".

So, to sum up...armor would make him stand out and make it hard to be a stealthy assassin and he doesn't need it because he's far more badass than everyone else walking the streets.
---
"They that give up essential liberty to obtain temporary safety deserve neither liberty nor safety" - Benjamin Franklin
#7awsomemanspiffPosted 11/3/2012 10:55:41 PM
okay let me just ask you this.

in all of your history classes or history books or pictures from this era or anything have you ever seen someone suited up in armor? and then how would it help against guns?
---
Favorite shows:Arrested development and firefly.
If you're a Christian you're cool. If you're not you're still cool I don't care.
#8Killface99Posted 11/3/2012 10:56:13 PM
Nogaham posted...
Well if you want to argue like that, then why are there weapons beside guns (and maybe the hidden blade) at all? You could just shoot all your enemies.


What does that have to do with anything? The different weapons have different animations and add flavor to the game. The nigh unnoticeable difference in the armor rating and weapon rating doesn't do anything except for tell you "Oh hey you has 1 extra point of defense, bro."
---
PSN: optophobe (I ignore blank friend requests)
#9Uber-WontonPosted 11/3/2012 10:56:59 PM
Armor wasn't commonly used in that era. Guns being used everywhere made armor superfluous, not to mention armor would just make the game even easier.
#10_Dura_Posted 11/3/2012 10:57:05 PM
Your right. Why CAN you buy new weapons? The starting tomahawk never loses it's effectiveness.

Ever.
---
PSN: Duragon_Mikado
kabuki....isnt that were you ...you know...on the girl? - CrusaderZeRo