I started the tests without defensing up, so I finished them that way.

If possible, I'd like to see a test with the max strength you can get (minus fortuna, fete, favours, etc)... you know, flex, lichdom at night, etc.

My stats at the time:
Strength : 20 Dexterity : 12 Constitution : 17
Intelligence : 11 Size : 15 Charisma : 11

Greatrobe stats:
57 Cutting 32 Blunt

Weapon stats:
59 Damage 225 Precision 234 Speed

Focusing on her right leg, you strike at Eruttu with a baleful rapier of darkened steel. You strike her right leg, striking a major artery which splurts blood in all directions.

Targetted Strike
Wound damage: 16
Affliction: LegArtery
Wound state needed for affliction: Negligible

With a powerful lunge, you strike at Eruttu's left leg with a baleful rapier of darkened steel. You strike powerfully into her left leg, and blood fountains out in a thick spray.

Lunge
Wound damage: 26
Affliction: PierceLeg
Wound state needed for affliction: Medium

My Assessment:
Well, five points of strength made very little difference in wounding, thus proving that once speed warriors get runes, damage warriors will be obsolete.

26 wounding in one lunge?

Roark is really the expert here and is keeping track of the issue, but I thought I'd just throw out a random idea. It seems logical to me that knight armor would deflect/absorb more damage (though isn't it true that the armor gets damaged and becomes less effective as the battle goes on?). But if the concern is what the wound state is, maybe simply redefining the wound state makes more sense. For instance, if a wound state of 30 is a typical 'round' or two of combat, maybe negligible should be in the 20-50 range. Or am I missing the point?

A concern is that, even with negligible wound status being lowered, as long as someone is taking more wound damage, that's more time they have to spend healing the wounds as opposed to healing their health. It isn't as large a concern as the fact that one to two combos is enough for pinleg or similarly debilitating wounds to go through, but it's still an issue that needs to be addressed. It's pretty much the same situation as if a Guardian with the capacity to absolve was doing significant damage to both health and mana reserves; one can only choose one of the two to heal consistently, and eventually even with the best healing you're going to be overtaken, and its generally sooner rather than later.

That would be nice if knights weren't doing 52 wounding per combo on top of 600 damage.

Except there is no strategy to it. There have been VERY few times that I could afford to cure wounds, because I'm usually taking so much damage that if I miss one round of sipping, I'll die the next.

That aspect of combat is mostly lost on anyone without massive armor and health.

No, it's not true. It should be!

Yes, you are

You should really stop with the logical leaps of faith. I did 26 wounds per lunge(2 power) against 57 cutting protection with a 225 precision rapier. That is not something that can be maintained nor done most of the time. It was also at night.

Well, let's be very generous then and say you were only doing 20 wounds per lunge.

There is also 600 damage.

4000 health, 100 wounds
Combo
3400 health, 60 wounds
Apply
3400 health, 85 wounds
Combo
2800 health, 45 wounds
Sip
3600 health, 45 wounds
Combo
3000 health, 10 wounds

It's simply not feasible to heal that volume of both wounding and damage.

Oh, of course, forgive me for not taking the Lusternia website as the end-all be-all of strategic combat guidelines.

In all seriousness, the fact that it says that only leads me to believe that they are fully aware of the concept I was espousing, but fail to recognize the difficulties inherent in actually carrying through with the healing process.

Ceres, how much power does it take to lunge?
How many ways are there to stop a warrior from attacking completely?
How many counters exist against normal attacks?
How much wound damage do normal attacks deal out?

Daevos, how long ago did I ask you to spar?
How long ago did you not?
How much would an actual log help the discussion?

Told you, I am busy. Now answer my questions.

Well, that's a bug then. We'll look into it. The design of armor is that the more damaged it is, then the less effective it is. Thus a helm at 90% would only be 90% effective, chain at 50% would be only 50% effective, etc.

Means that after two battles your armour is down to 50% or so and you can either have an only 50% effective armour or have it reforged? (And since you need decent stats that could take a few tries..)

Smiths can repair.

Yah... I BUGged that about 15 bloody times. I had people do just about every physical attack existent to me, and the armour status never decreased a single point. After about 3 RL months, I just kinda figured the stat was there for show.
Oops.