Verb:ASSESS/saved posts: Difference between revisions
(ASSESS update (saved post) |
m (ASSESS update (saved post) moved to ASSESS verb update (saved post): Changed to show that it is a verb update) |
(No difference)
| |
Revision as of 17:30, 14 February 2009
Topic: Warrior Ways
Message #: 2427
Author: GS4-WARDEN
Date: 2/13/2009 6:36:58 PM
Subject: Re: Clarification please, on new ASSESS messaging.
I've added a few more thresholds to help you out. Everything from "masterful" down through "light" is unchanged from the convention that has been used for the past several years. Note that incredible has been moved up the list, to be, well, incredible.
In order of descending magnitude:
wondrous
incredible
fantastic <-- standard claidhmores
phenomenal
expert
superb
masterful
exceptional
very heavy
heavy <--- standard katanas
decent
somewhat
light
no padding/weighting <-- This is the baseline
slightly diminished
somewhat diminished
noticeably diminished
substantially diminished
The specific values associated with each threshold are not something we'll be releasing. Player estimates of current value correlations are based on player research.
<<a non-claidhmore weapon(meaning a weapon not NAMED a claidhmore) that has 40 points of weighting, would it read as "claidhmore" weighting, or "fantastic" weighting? >>
A non-claidhmore with critical weighting equivalent to a claidhmore would assess as fantastic.
<<How would armor be worse than average?>>
Any armor with negative padding would be worse than average, and it would actually cause the wearer to take extra damage or more lethal criticals (bummer!). There are some suits of armor in the game with negative damage padding. I'm not aware of any armor with negative critical padding, offhand, but it probably exists.
Warden