Other > General Game Discussion
Sneaking and Perks
touriste:
--- Quote from: Bantz on January 05, 2010, 11:53:00 pm ---How do u want to roll a dice in this case? Sneaking is not a single shot, its a continous action.
--- End quote ---
by rolling the dice each 5s for example =_=. Did you never play a paper rpg?
Elmehdi:
Sneaking was heavily overpowered some time ago and now it's a dead skill. It's like skipping from one extreme to another. Too bad, since well balanced sneak ability would enable many interesting, unique builds like ninja or scout. I do really hope they boost it up substantially.
Bantz:
--- Quote from: touriste on January 06, 2010, 09:48:46 am ---by rolling the dice each 5s for example =_=.
--- End quote ---
So u would be visible every once and then in 5sec cykles? That would limit sneak only for bluesuits pk, there would be no use for it in real PvP.
I see no problem that the formula is luck-independent. That way it credits mainly the experiences of the player and thats the way how it should be.
--- Quote from: Aryan on January 06, 2010, 04:37:15 am --- sneak skill value by reducing it (not substracting)
--- End quote ---
Units of skillpoints are %, so reducing it by 90 could mean either substracting 90 or reducing it to 10% of tis original value. Given the case, it most probably means substracting.
Aryan:
--- Quote from: Bantz on January 06, 2010, 02:06:42 pm ---So u would be visible every once and then in 5sec cykles? That would limit sneak only for bluesuits pk, there would be no use for it in real PvP.
I see no problem that the formula is luck-independent. That way it credits mainly the experiences of the player and thats the way how it should be.
Units of skillpoints are %, so reducing it by 90 could mean either substracting 90 or reducing it to 10% of tis original value. Given the case, it most probably means substracting.
--- End quote ---
unless ofc you read those magical words in the brackets that specifically point out 'NOT SUBTRACTING" then yeah..
Bantz:
My bad, I thought that u added that, I guess I was cofused by the brackets.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version