My new MPB (in General)


AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 25 2006 11:35 AM EDT

Just for comparison folks.

With a tiny amount of Str (around 40K), a x114 BoNE and a non maxed BL, I'm now hitting for more damage per blow, than my old UC character did (that had about a x75 weapon and a lot more Str...).

The point I want to make with this, is if using a physical weapon, it's now very viable to put more xp into other areas (say for example a massive AMF or EC) than it used to be.

As you can now do significant damage without having to spend a significant amount of XP.

ScY July 25 2006 6:01 PM EDT

a BoNE has a higher base damage than UC (approx. 75ish)
and on the exp thing, if you were to put more exp into AMF say, your damage would be less than what it COULD be if you put that exp into st

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 25 2006 6:07 PM EDT

Scy, of course if you trained everything into damage dealing stats, you'ld do more damage than if you didn't. I was trying to say that now I do way more damage in a non damage optimised set up, than I did before the change in a purely damage focuses one. So you can still do well and focus in something other than damage.

I think the base for UC is about 74, the size of a katana? So that shouldn't make too much difference.

Godpanda July 25 2006 7:01 PM EDT

Or you could look at it the very opposite GL. That now is more important then ever to gets lots of strength, to take advantage of the super weapons all tanks now have at their disposal. .... just saying

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 25 2006 7:06 PM EDT

:) I think my point was that you could make a tank team with a 3.5 Mil AMF and still be viable, as with a good enough weapon, you would still be able to put out a lot of damage.

So if people are complaining their AMF doesn't stop DD, maybe they should train it more?

There's now a choice to do so.

Godpanda July 25 2006 7:12 PM EDT

Or.. you would just make a two minion ET. E= AMF. T= ToA


no DD =D

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 25 2006 7:15 PM EDT

;) Minion number doesn't matter. It could be TEEE for all that it matters. :)

Godpanda July 25 2006 7:17 PM EDT

NOT true. AMF has an effect thats affected by how strong their DD is. So, I THINK, that means that 3 AMF's with same xp in them all combined as one with the same, would be less effective, The advantage of course would be that it would take extra rounds to get through them.

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 25 2006 7:30 PM EDT

Actually, due to the increasing costs, it would be slightly (although minutly) better. :)

AMF, like the other enchantments, stacks by levels, it then works out an effect from that total.

2 * 100K AMF = 1 * 200K :)

ScY July 25 2006 9:31 PM EDT

so you have a nice big AMF, and you say, oh, look, my AMF is soo powerful

while those "uber" and "overpowered" mages can just get killed in one round of melee with a large weapon, or in however many rounds of ranged, ala seeker arrows
(proven: nymandus vs. ranger)
(proven: mikel vs. tuffbunny)

AdminQBGentlemanLoser [{END}] July 26 2006 4:34 AM EDT

Eh?

Godpanda July 26 2006 12:04 PM EDT

ditto to the "eh?"

QBRanger July 26 2006 12:11 PM EDT

What he is saying is that who really needs a large AMF when equipping a large elb with seekers does the job much better. Spend all those xp you would put into AMF into another enchantment to boost your tanks abilities. For instance GS to boost its strength.

IE: Nymandus vs Ranger

Godpanda July 26 2006 12:13 PM EDT

Okay, thanks for making it human. Personally, I do not see ANY reason for a tank to train AMF when the very irksome DM is sitting right there. Seeker the mage, DM the enchantments, Elven gear the tanks. You win =D
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=001rbw">My new MPB</a>