Modding from 90 real skill to 120 in mele/tactics will give you 100% use of 120 in both skills. Once you are over the threshold of 90/70 and add skill it's as if you never changed a thing.
-
Hail Guest! We're looking for Community Content Contribuitors to Stratics. If you would like to write articles, fan fiction, do guild or shard event recaps, it's simple. Find out how in this thread: Community Contributions
-
Greetings Guest, Having Login Issues? Check this thread!
-
Hail Guest!, Please take a moment to read this post reminding you all of the importance of Account Security.
-
Hail Guest! Please read the new announcement concerning the upcoming addition to Stratics. You can find the announcement Here!
lol okay, even at 23 fire damage (when i tested the first time i had 8 sdi and damage is ~30 at 30 sdi) out of 6 seconds still doesn't outweigh the damage done for ai at 80 skill at a one in three chance to hit at max 1.25 seconds or 35 in 3.75 seconds.
And no the math is not 100% of the time, it was 35% chance of hitting at 80 skill and magery not only weighted against damage but casting success. So I don't know where you are getting these things from your argument when the math was layed out in front of you.
Again, sorry for confusing you with facts.
Ok so let's say I have 110 tactics and 100 swords with a capt John hat and talisman. I get the extra damage bonus based in the formula for damage modifiers? Both modified to 120
Does my GM swords count for the 300 skill points for the mana reduction, or does it work off the 120 modified?
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yep, this is fine and accurate but the argument is removing real skill requirement from specials.
Well you still can't use specials at 50 fencing/50 tactics unless you have +skill jewls to get you over 70 or 90..that's what I'm getting from it.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
That's what they are asking for. Currently you cannot use jewelry to perform specials.
Their argument is that it isn't fair for both sets of jewelry not to work. And this is legit, but removing real skill requirement from specials is not. So you still need to have 70 real skill before you can perform a primary skill.
You will get the dmg modifier as if you are real 120 skill. Modded skill counts towards special move bonus
Ok I'm fine with keeping the skill needed to perform the special. But I don't see why it can't be modified or real.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
So why can't you modify skill to use specials..it is a legitimate question at that rate then. They didn't imply that to balance damage so real skill did more. They probably screwed up.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
If you go real 90 mele/tact and put 60 skill on your template to hit 120 mele/tact you will have 100% use of the skill as tho it was real skill. It will also put you at 240 out of 300 skill points for special move lmc bonus
It can, i wasn't arguing that point, i was arguing against specials without the base 70/90 skills.
Not really, or they wouldn't have added tactics as a requirement in publish 46.
What? There isn't a single post in this entire thread that states we want the skill requirement for special moves to be eliminated.
Compare
70 magery + 50 skill increase
with 120 eval
+Scribe
+Pure Mage (30 Sdi)
to 70 weapon skill + 50 skill increase
with 120 tactics.
100 Damage Increase
Swinging At max Speed
No comparison. One is usable and is the exact same as if it had the real skill. The other can only do half its moves and is more or less useless.
Hell toss the skills together and compare
70 Magery + 50 Skill increase
120 Weapon
120 Tactics
100 Scribe
(Capable of using all weapon specials, and casting all spells to max capacity)
120 Magery
70 Weapon Skill + 50 Skill Increase
120 Tactics
100 Scribe
(Can't use secondary abilities)
70 magery + 50 skill increase
with 120 eval
+Scribe
+Pure Mage (30 Sdi)
to 70 weapon skill + 50 skill increase
with 120 tactics.
100 Damage Increase
Swinging At max Speed
No comparison. One is usable and is the exact same as if it had the real skill. The other can only do half its moves and is more or less useless.
Hell toss the skills together and compare
70 Magery + 50 Skill increase
120 Weapon
120 Tactics
100 Scribe
(Capable of using all weapon specials, and casting all spells to max capacity)
120 Magery
70 Weapon Skill + 50 Skill Increase
120 Tactics
100 Scribe
(Can't use secondary abilities)
In the end it all boils down to us rich jerks staring at some AMAZING antique jewelry and going.
Oh, it has bushido on it, can't use that on a Nerve striker because it lowers the damage.
Oh, I have 35 Archery with this loadout. Guess I can only use 30 of it.
Oh, I have +15 Tactics. Guess I'm using 105 Tactics Instead of actually being able to increase a skill that I needed More of.
Meanwhile the jewel with +20 Magery, +20 Meditation, +20 Eval. The player is saying, OH Goody, I get to add 60 points to something else with this.
Makes 0 Sense.
Oh, it has bushido on it, can't use that on a Nerve striker because it lowers the damage.
Oh, I have 35 Archery with this loadout. Guess I can only use 30 of it.
Oh, I have +15 Tactics. Guess I'm using 105 Tactics Instead of actually being able to increase a skill that I needed More of.
Meanwhile the jewel with +20 Magery, +20 Meditation, +20 Eval. The player is saying, OH Goody, I get to add 60 points to something else with this.
Makes 0 Sense.
Did you read the thread?
It's literally #4 on the initial post, which refers to it as a bug. (It's not)
Chad was directly in favor of removing real skill and others removing tactics requirement. Posts 13, 31, 43, 46, 69 to name a few
Not only that but a good deal of my posts refer to this argument but people such as yourself even kept giving refutals.
How did you miss that exactly?
How are you figuring that 360 magery skill on the initial post is a justification for the 240 skills to have a lower special requirement?
Second argument is moot since it's the same template.
This part should be fixed, just leave real skill special requirements in place.
This should be a Rule, if you quote/reply to someone with a disagreement explain why you do not agree, if you don't everyone assumes you don't know why you disagree thus you are just trolling w/e.
I agree, however, there's no reason you should be able to make two identical templates, using different skill bonus jewels to finish it up, except one is more effective than the other.
I'd still rather see tactics be removed as a requirement, but either way, increasing tactics and/or weapon skills with jewelry to meet/exceed the skill required to perform primary and secondary specials (70/90 respectively) should also take into account modified skill.
PS: Remove Poison Immunity & Casting Focus already...
Wtf? lol...Did YOU read the thread?
I never asked for the tactics requirement to be removed. I asked for special moves to be available as long as you hit the threshold of 70/90, whether that be with jewelry or real skill. Which, there is not a single actual valid argument against it.
That's the Thing, its not the same template because one of them can perform secondary specials and the other one cannot. That's the point.....
Its pretty simple, One template loses nothing for the skill increase, whereas the other one loses half its capabilities. I swore I outlined that when i posted the template that used the combined skills...
Uh did you?
This has been my point the entire time. Aside from the 840 skill cap post.
I'm fairly certain I referenced this several times.
Where did you think I was getting the 60 skill from?
I agree with balancing jewelry as
Long as specials require real skill.
If we were arguing two separate points, I do not know where the disconnect was.
end game template is the same, you want a swords Mage template or a Mage swords template. Seems like a weak argument.
As far as 360 vs 240, where are you making this connection of being unfair if mages are picking up a 100 points in scribe?
Margery, eval, scribe vs weapon skill and tactics.
The point being scribe has nothing to do with the comparison.
Jewelry should factor in every skills functions except removal of real skill specials.
I Actually PVP
Adventurer
How is it a weak argument? The current system is clearly nonsensical! Why is it ok to make my Mage/Swords temp by having +50 in Magery through jewlery but making the template with +50 in tactics/swords would make it a broken temp?
Neither Chad nor myself (or I think anyone on here) has said to get rid of the skill requirements for specials; we're just saying that jewelry should allow you to use specials (since they currently allow you to use most every other skill to their max potential).
You keep saying this but you haven't provided a reason as to why it should be this way. Back to my first argument in this post, why is it ok for non-real Magery to have all the benefits of real Magery skill but non-real tactics/wep skills shouldn't? In this era where you can't hold specials while casting, I see high level spells and specials as pretty equal.
1. They stated this as a bug which is number 4 in the first post. Refuting posts against removing real skill from specials only further backs this.
2. I've stated a good deal of times they should fix jewelry without removing real skill specials. If you disagree then you are refuting keeping real skill as a requirement.
(I shouldn't have to explain your argument to you.)
3. Read your second paragraph and tell me how that doesn't contradict itself. I've been saying REAL skill requirements.
Yes, we are all saying get rid of REAL skill for specials, but keep the 90 Total Requirement. If you have 50 Real Weapon Skill and add +40 on your suit, you should be able to do all of your specials.
Do I need to just make it a full template for you? I added Scribe + Pure mage to help you envision the end damage capable by the template. The point, is still that +50 Magery is Viable and +50 Weapon is not. The only thing that this does is make some Antique jewels Cost Billions, and others that have similar mods cost millions.
Players are already running hybrid templates with +60 Skill increase. This would just make it so more players had the option to do it without investing billions.
Do I need to just make it a full template for you? I added Scribe + Pure mage to help you envision the end damage capable by the template. The point, is still that +50 Magery is Viable and +50 Weapon is not. The only thing that this does is make some Antique jewels Cost Billions, and others that have similar mods cost millions.
Players are already running hybrid templates with +60 Skill increase. This would just make it so more players had the option to do it without investing billions.
So, for clarification, are you FOR or AGAINST someone toggling secondary special moves if they have 120 swords and 75 tactics with one piece of jewelry on that has +15 tactics for a total of 120 swords and 90 tactics.
I Actually PVP
Adventurer
Because we're saying to keep the 70/90 skill requirements for specials but allow skill bonuses from jewelry to be factored into the equation.
We all know that you've stated this, we've all read it a bunch of times. You just haven't said why real skill should be required ONLY for specials... As I and others have said an equal number of times, skill bonuses in Magery let you cast more spells, skill bonuses in Eval give you higher damage, skill bonuses in animal taming let you control and tame better pets.
The point being: in most every other skill, bonuses through jewelry allow you to use that skill to the fullest. WHY are weapon/tactics bonuses the only ones that don't contribute anything to a template? Why shouldn't they be changed to function the way every other skill group functions?
I Actually PVP
Adventurer
Ha, never thought of actually asking the question directly. Kudos for logic!
If someone had 120 real skill and 75 tactics I would be for allowing 15 skill to toggle the secondary.
What I am against is removing the requirement for real skill for weapons to use specials only having
minimum skill (I.e. 40 real fencing and 40real tactics with 60 points in jewelry to perform an armor ignore with a kryss)
You are arguing you are not saying to remove the real skill requirement because you're saying you want the skill requirement in place.
Then you are asking me why you shouldn't allow specials to be used with jewelry.
Do you see how this is walking the thread in circles?
See my previous posts about damage balance.
So, what is the Justifiable Cutoff point to be able to perform BOTH primary and secondary abilities for you.
Those two statements contradict one another. You are FOR using a small amount of skill increase to reach the 90 tactics threshold, but are AGAINST using a large amount of skill increase to reach the 70 threshold. So again, I am confused on what your actual standpoint is.
I don't see what would be wrong with someone being 40 (+30) / 40 (+30). At a total of 70 fencing, they lose out on a massive amount of HCI when swinging against someone with 120 weapon skill. Will you explain to me why you feel this would be unbalanced?
I Actually PVP
Adventurer
I don't think someone with 70 fencing & tactics (whether real or fake skill) is going to be doing 35 damage AI's (I haven't tested it, but no one would ever run a temp with 70 wep skill). Even if they are, they're not going to be hitting anyone so I don't see why this scenario is a concern.
Either way, and again, your argument seems to be centered around your own non-sensical fencing/mage template that you've tailored for whatever solo pvp you partake in, I'm glad that we're in agreement and are getting a definitive answer, but your stance seems overly tailored to your own style of gameplay.
If you're for the first scenario, you should logically be for the second one. The same principles and game mechanics are at play and neither one seems to be overpowered/game breaking.
This isn't contradicting anything. Currently to perform a single armor ignore with a kryss is 140 points. 70/70.
In your example of a person has 195 real skill 120/75 then 15 skill in jewelry is really a wash right?
This is entirely different from allowing 80 skill 40/40 to perform a special with a cap of 35.
If you took 40/40 Margery and evAl or lore and taming this contributes nothing in the same 60 points.
The only thing then would be RNG affecting damage which was around like 30-35% chance to hit.
How is it balanced if a Mage not
Only will fizzle on a flamestrike but that also only does 23 base damage at 70 skill once in three or four casts?
This doesn't include disruption from hits and mana consumption. I tested it on test center and I was lucky to even cast one in four times.
I didn't look at taming and lore but what can they control that is equivalent to that damage output at 70 lore and 70 taming?
Aside from this, they added the tactics requirement to balance it out a long time ago to begin with
Last edited:
They do with 100 di, that is why I have it on my tactics Mage. But the di is a little shy so it generally hits at 32 points and then the hitspell
and this is only one template.
The parry tactics Mage had been around for years.
It is the suit that ins set for stats.
Your entire argument seems to be based around ignoring my refutals and going back to asking me why. And if that doesn't work you try to discredit a template that had been around for years.
Why not try going in depth why we should allow it other than the they have it so why not us?
Last edited:
So, you're saying that they get a lot of upside and very little downside by going 70/70? I would have to heartily disagree.
A player with 120 skill and 45 HCI swinging at a character with 70 skill and 45 DCI will hit 77% of the time. Conversely, a player with 70 skill and 45 HCI swinging at a character with 120 skill and 45 DCI will only hit 32% of the time. Furthermore, your idea of using a kryss to armor ignore with 70 tactics is silly and inefficient. Not only will you never hit cap AI, but you will hover between 25-31 damage max, even with 100 damage increase. I believe this is fairly comparable to your example of 70 mage/eval.
Last edited:
I'm somewhat confused by your argument then, if you're saying they're not going to be doing this, then why would we bother removing the real skill requirement for specials?
Let's be clear the armor ignore for a kryss is only one example, now apply the same argument to dismount etc.
But I'd ask you to test the difference if the two, like i did, and then come tell me they are comparable.
For example, many suits/templates involve items like captain johns hat(+20 swords). Let's say you have a ring/bracelet combo with +30 swords on it, that melds perfectly with your template/suit. In the current system, 20/50 skill points on your suit are unusable. Maybe you have a template that doesn't scale well with damage increase or tactics(most melee templates fall into this category -- nervestrikers, deathstrikers, etc.) but you have an amazing piece of jewelry with +15 tactics. You can't use this piece of jewelry currently because you have NO reason to exceed 90 tactics.
As for testing, I can post proof of everything I've said. It's competely comparable. Do you think hitting 32% of the time is a good ratio? Or worse, BEING HIT 77% of the time? If you ran into any average archer on the field when you have 70 fencing, he is going to decimate you.
I Actually PVP
Adventurer
Dismount? What are you pvping with, a club, a pitchfork, a sc, balanced heavy x-bow that you're swinging once every 5 seconds?? You're bringing up the most obscure, non-sensical scenarios that no one plays in.
I'm pretty sure Chad, myself and others are interested in playing 120 wep skill, 90 tactics hybrid temps and we'd like the option to be using jewels with +Wep Skill & +Tactics in order to make these temps and suits more conceivable and widely available.
That's it.
You can continue playing whatever 70/70 temp you want, it's not OP in the slightest (in fact, it's a huge disadvantage).
Off topic, I'm now just really curious, what is your temp and could you post a pic of your 100 di mage/fencing/kryss-based suit? PM me or post it here, I'm now really just genuinely curious.
I've tested it and run 70 fence/tact 120 Mage wep so I could use DP..which obviously is no longer need but I digress. Actually as a matter of fact I don't even recalling having tacts with that template but who knows. My mind can be a fuzzy place sometimes.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
It's really not a disadvantage. You can get some pretty nice damage in there. Especially with the new masteries. But that's not even an issue I don't think considering the templates are easily made now. Except instead of using a +20 Tact +20 Swords ring and starting at 70/70 or even 50/50 for certain weapons with a -Mage wep you have to be 100/100 and sacrifice 60 skill points. Which is where I think he's seeing the imbalance. After a lot of though it doesn't seem right that a +20 Mage +20 resist 1/3 25ep 15/15 hci/dci compared to those skills being swords and tact has a market and the other has a very very small niche market. Who most likely would ignore part of the skills.
Sent from my iPhone using Tapatalk
Yes in reality people are pvping with a five second weapon only with no ssi.
Go ahead and base your argument on that.
Again I agree that tactics should weight damage etc just not weapon specials I'm real skill. We all know people aren't pvping by relying on regular hits. They're mashing weapon specials.
You're also bouncing back and forth between blocking and weapon specials.For example, many suits/templates involve items like captain johns hat(+20 swords). Let's say you have a ring/bracelet combo with +30 swords on it, that melds perfectly with your template/suit. In the current system, 20/50 skill points on your suit are unusable. Maybe you have a template that doesn't scale well with damage increase or tactics(most melee templates fall into this category -- nervestrikers, deathstrikers, etc.) but you have an amazing piece of jewelry with +15 tactics. You can't use this piece of jewelry currently because you have NO reason to exceed 90 tactics.
As for testing, I can post proof of everything I've said. It's competely comparable. Do you think hitting 32% of the time is a good ratio? Or worse, BEING HIT 77% of the time? If you ran into any average archer on the field when you have 70 fencing, he is going to decimate you.
help me out here, I'm trying to see this from your point of view.
I get the 50 points if skills for blocking, though templates with the minimum skill are going to include either parry or bushido etc.
So at 70 skill you are only worried about not using secondaries?
And if 30 skill of tactics is worthless wouldn't they want to weight this up and not decrease the skill requirement which they added to help balance templates?
Bottom line is, there should be clear, easy to find, written information on the uo.com website. The lack of information on game mechanics is mind-boggling.
Players should not have to dig into unofficial websites or forums to find information, only to find that the information they found was given second-hand and could incorrect.
These things should not be secrets. Game mechanics should be clear. Players should be allowed to know these mechanics so that they can choose themselves if they want to put +skill on their gear, which +skill would be best to put on gear, or if it would be best for their template not to have +skill at all.
This goes for everything in the game.
Players should not have to dig into unofficial websites or forums to find information, only to find that the information they found was given second-hand and could incorrect.
These things should not be secrets. Game mechanics should be clear. Players should be allowed to know these mechanics so that they can choose themselves if they want to put +skill on their gear, which +skill would be best to put on gear, or if it would be best for their template not to have +skill at all.
This goes for everything in the game.
I'm talking about blocking because you asked for valid reasoning why someone wouldn't go 70 fencing. I'm telling you why -- because it is awful. It gives low hit chance, low defense chance, and low damage. Sounds like it scales similarly to mage/eval, which was your point of argument. I want to respect your opinion, but it is has no basis in reality.
So, someone picks up parry and blocks 35% of the 77% successful shots on them? Okay, so what? That person would also be forfeiting the ability to drink potions since they're using kryss and shield.
Yeah, so one of the points I was trying to make is if the minimum weapon skill they are going to roll around with is 70. This allows you to use primary specials. So no reason to get rid of the real skill requirement there. Gotcha.
So in the case of 20 points of skill, as pointed out to me, you would just switch skills that work i.e. eval for tactic or whatever. So no reason to remove real skill for specials here. Gotcha.
You said there's no reason to go over 90 tactics. Yep, this is correct, so why would we get rid of the real skill requirement to lower this?
I completely AGREE that jewelry should be weight for damage and blocking. But there's not been any reason justifying the removal of the real skill requirement from specials. Other than "well it works for other skills".
Hopefully if a dev reads this (unlikely) he/she has the discerning mind to recognize your utter lack of game knowledge.
I love running templates designed to play in stat because that holds more weight than a fully functioning char.