DeletedUser
I'm not getting any of this. What do you mean 3*10K=145? No math can support that. And what do you really want to say with "* would give 160"?
Now previously we thought stamina was only for attacking, and hiding was only for defending... but guess what? We were wrong there too. Stamina is for shooting, and Hiding is for dodging. You also get a base of 25 towards chance to hit (or 20, i just tested it and got 20 not 25) and a base of 10 to chance to dodge.
Therefore, the skills are -
Leadership+Aim+Stamina+25=Chance to Hit
Leadership=Dodge=Hiding+10=Chance to Dodge
The formulas are-
Chance to hit=25+aim^0.4+leadership^0.4+stamina^0.4
Chance to dodge=10+dodging^0.4+leadership^0.4+hiding^0.4
Although the thread-starter used alot of time creating it, and that it can be used as a basis for creating your own build(as long as you take the right formulas into consideration), it doesn't really change the fact that most of the information here is based on the wrong formulas.Now previously we thought stamina was only for attacking, and hiding was only for defending... but guess what? We were wrong there too. Stamina is for shooting, and Hiding is for dodging. You also get a base of 25 towards chance to hit (or 20, i just tested it and got 20 not 25) and a base of 10 to chance to dodge.
Still doesn't change the fact that across my 6 worlds, there is usually 1 post a week, that refers to this thread and claims that the battleskill-formula has been changed.Reading just the first post of any thread is plain amateurish and generally useless.
Unless it's a thread that's closed where the first post was edited after the last post was posted.
Since this thread is still alive and editable, assuming everything you need to know is written in the first post is not a serious attitude.
I guess that's just a question on how you interpret it, just like who is the best dueller etc. Most will probably say that if you have moved all your skills towards the 6 attributes that are used in a fort fight, you are a pure fortfighter. But I reckon to be completly "pure" you would need to stop doing jobs inbetween battles aswell, which is fairly unrealistic on most worlds.Oh and one thing more - there is a certain phrase noone explained to me what does it mean. Oddly, not even this thread. The question is "what is a so called pure fort fighter".
So if one is pure leadership, that makes him pure fortfighter automatically?I guess that's just a question on how you interpret it, just like who is the best dueller etc. Most will probably say that if you have moved all your skills towards the 6 attributes that are used in a fort fight, you are a pure fortfighter. But I reckon to be completly "pure" you would need to stop doing jobs inbetween battles aswell, which is fairly unrealistic on most worlds.
lol, you've been waiting a long time to say that haven't youSo if one is pure leadership, that makes him pure fortfighter automatically?
Awsome.
No, I think that would be categorized as a purely frustrated duellerPure dueler would probably be someone who took the class dueler, right?
It was more of a referral to all those other post where you have mentioned that there is no such thing as a pure fortfighter So I figured you had built yourself a good stack of arguments as to why there is no such thing as a pure fortfighter, and was waiting to use them.And no, I actually didn't think you'll say what you've said so I could pop in with the pure leadership... I honestly thought you'll say pure fort fighter = pure HP. But as with pure leadership, it's again illogical thing to say as a skill or class is not the same thing as your playstyle.
If we're talking about a good fortfighter, it's again something unrelatzed to your build as with any build you can give a good performance by sniping, by sticking to high leadership soldier or by moving behind nonadventurer tanks.