Poll: Better Armor or Better Weapon?

[WolfMage]

If you believe you can kill them before they are a real threat, a new weapon.
If you think you can't kill them fast enough, a new suit of armour.

 

[Tzekelkan]

Better weapons because their effects are more visible and more awesome. Killing is more fun than staying alive!

 

[TheMadTypist]

Armor. Nothing says baddass like plodding ahead of your allies, advancing in a hail of fire, an unstoppable titan who stands above all others, a God among supersoldiers.

Can you tell I like games with power-armor? The bigger and badder, the better.

 

[Gasaraki]

my personal philosophy has always been if you need more armor it's because you're taking too damn long to kill them.

 

[Hybrid Sight]

I always go for Armor first. Unless the weapon looks unbelievably cool, in which case I go for it instead.

 

[Arisato-kun]

I choose weapon. If you can kill something faster than it kills you then armor isn't as necessary.

 

[RanD00M]

Seeing as i almost always play as the long range guy,the damage is my main concern.

 

[fix-the-spade]

Weapon.

Most online shooters if you miss you initial attack or get bounced you're probably going to die. You can either increase the length of time this takes by half a second or so, or you can decrease the time it takes to do to others by a similar amount. Killing your opponent faster is always the best option.

 

[TheSeventhLoneWolf]

More Dakka! More shootey = enemy dead before they shoot me.

Never enuff Dakka.

I'd say weapon, such snipers exist with high power, but little health.

 

[ModsDeleteThisAccountPlease]

Unless I'm already a Sexy, Armored, God-of-War, then I will always take the armor. It hwlps in the long run. Guns run out of ammo, Guns jam, Guns overheat, Guns are noisy, Guns are hard to conceal. A good knife always wins. And if you're wearing kick ass armor, you'll stay alive that much longer, ya Knife Fag.

 

[stonethered]

Obviously I prefer a balance; but a glass cannon is better than a titanium water pistol any day.

Weapon.

 

[Serge A. Storms]

I can't blow someone's head all over a steel corridor with a damn health bar.

 

[Colodomoko]

I say take the pain and hit them back harder with an awesome handcannon.

 

[Xanadu84]

Really depends. If it's survival horror, or there's just a lot of sneaky enemies, Armor. If enemies are pretty weak to begin with, Armor. If enemies have a lot of health, Weapons. If the shooting is a lot more straight up, weapon. I go back and forth, but if I absolutely had to pick...probably weapon. The choices are generally pretty balanced for a single combat, but better armor gives you the chance to pump more bullets into the thing, while better weapons means you waste less bullets.

 

[General Ken8]

I like having good weapons, because generally battles occur much faster when you can own stuff faster with good weapons, and health isn't a big factor when battles are shorter

 

[Kayyyleb]

The best defense is a strong offense.

 

[Flukey]

I go with armor, for peace of mind. I prefer to make every shot count, so I prefer to be able to stand a bit of punishment whilst lining up a perfect headshot (or crotchshot, if I'm in the mood to). It just suits my style of play better. Even if I have an awesome weapon able to obliterate my enemies in one shot, if I have poor armor I tend to panic and miss in a firefight. Obviously this only really applies to fps (I had fallout 3 in mind whilst typing this), but as a general rule I tend to put armor before weaponry, usually ending up with the best armor for whatever particular stage in the game I'm at, and a moderately damaging, simple weapon, which suits me just fine... of course, I wouldn't say no to both