Found base UC damage (in General)
And I got proof. But I aint sharing yet. So nah nah nah. Lol I will give the proof very soon/ when i get the approval of someone lol. Bye all suffer in agony. Did you know the nah's aren't correct spelling? very annoying they are.
February 12 2006 5:02 PM EST
I have seen the proof, and it will be published coming week :)
February 12 2006 5:07 PM EST
Hurrah! You people are amazing scientific geniuses.
Except you, GodWolf, because I wanna know what it is. >.<
Myself, I think it is around the same as a katana's, from what I've seen, but I'm probably wrong.
February 12 2006 5:20 PM EST
you are probably wrong indeed :p
February 12 2006 5:22 PM EST
Once again, I say that this must have been found a long time ago. However, any data is good data. So tell us now. :P
Why are you witholding this information? If you are unable to post, what is the purpose of this tease?
Unless you are teasing just for the sake of it, for attention?
February 12 2006 8:09 PM EST
"If the spell checker is mistaken, don't panic -- as long as the fraction of mis-spelled words is less than 0.15, you'll be fine. Hints:
Ignoring this advice and simply padding your post with extra words to get above the 0.15 threshold without an exceptionally good reason will result in a fine."
February 13 2006 12:23 AM EST
Well with the build up you're giving it, the proof better be good :)
February 13 2006 12:33 AM EST
Hands/claws up those who have very little interest in this subject. (\/) oo (\/)
February 13 2006 12:42 AM EST
Yes there is a good reason for not directly posting the answer yet, which would be little more data confirmation :)
It had been implied that the base damage for UC was dependent on STR...I see your UC char has a base STR of 20, done any testing to see if adding STR throws your numbers off?
Shade, if that's the case, then why not just post as "I think I've found base UC damage" with everything that been found out so far and get everyone else who's interested to help confirm?
February 13 2006 8:44 AM EST
BAH! If science worked that way, GL, there would never be any stem cell or cold fusion scandals. The research model entails holding press conferences to dole out provocative snippets, then leveraging the interest generated to obtain additional funding for your empire. YES!
Ah... In that case;
I've found out how protection works, but if you wanna know, you gotta pay me 100K CB2 and sign a NDA before I tell you. :) That better?
(Before I get done for scamming, I know nothing more about protection than anyone else and you won't get anything if you send me 100K. Apart from knowing you just made me a little bit richer!)
February 13 2006 10:25 AM EST
Very Very Very bad form to have a post like the one Wolf did.
It serves no real purpose except to troll for responses like he is getting.
And unlike science that was brought up, there is no research money going into this. If Wolf stated that he has an idea and needs people to test his theory out, that would be completely different.
But, IMO of course, his initial post is nothing more than spam.
Bad Wolf, very very bad Wolf.
First of all I padded the post because i had to go and I was not going to spend 10 minutes on something meaningful. Second if it would result in a fine someone like SHADE would tell me and not you sorry. Third I DID indeed do some testing as to whether ST effected the UC and IMO I dont think it does. I will release the information at Shade's approval and not one moment before. So people who CM me or ask me personally please stop.
February 13 2006 10:32 AM EST
So back to the initial question most are asking.
Why did you even post? Read you initial post. It is nothing more than garbage. Basically it is stating you know something we do not and we should all "suffer in agony". If that is not spam, then I give up as to what is.
If you did not want to spend 10 min on something meaningful, then why even post at all?
If it looks like spam, tastes like spam, and smells like spam, then my gosh, it's spam.
February 13 2006 10:36 AM EST
And also, directly from the program:
Ignoring this advice and simply padding your post with extra words to get above the 0.15 threshold without an exceptionally good reason will result in a fine.
Since you just admitted padding your post, Ranger waits for the fine.
February 13 2006 11:03 AM EST
Ranger gets my vote for admin.
February 13 2006 11:22 AM EST
Regarding "padding his post", it looks to me as though he was simply expressing his incredulity that the word "nah" was not in the spellchecker.
Regarding this whole thread... I agree, what is the purpose? I don't even see why it matters what the base UC damage is. It's not as if knowing the damage is going ot change anyone's mind about using it...
No Mael, that'll come after seeing what Johnny and I do with it! ;)
February 13 2006 1:17 PM EST
I hadn't paid attention to it before, but I should be dealing with it indeed.
First of all: he and I had some talks about whether or not make it public already, he wanted to but I thought it would take a bit more research to be truly sure of the final conclusion.
Second: I still don't approve the padding of posts, I have fined somebody for it yesterday or the day before for it also.
Third: Sorry WolfCorpse but I will have to fine you...
February 13 2006 7:19 PM EST
I knew it GW is ebil! Burn the wolf!!!
February 14 2006 3:49 AM EST
so... are you guys done testing yet?
This thread is closed to new posts.
However, you are welcome to reference it
from a new thread; link this with the html
<a href="/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg.tcl?msg_id=001heM">Found base UC damage</a>