I just read an opinion in a battlefield thread that fourth attack is a waste. Is that simply due to the low chance? How low is it? It seems strange that fourth attack wouldn't be worth a single practice.

Without looking back I *think the comment was that it wasn't worth prac = 75%. Wasted practice, those skills tend to go up fairly quickly.

I may be wrong.

They're talking about whether it is worth it to put 1 practice versus 2 practices into it with 23 int. I think 1 practice leaves you at 71/69, somewhere around there. The second practice, of course, would take you up to 75.

I would only use one practice if it were me.

Yeah, that was the debate.

My thought was that 4th attack, while it does go up, is going to take a good while before it's perfected. That means by starting at 75% instead of 71% you enjoy a 4% "advantage" for the period of time between when you first practice the skill and when it's perfected. If that's going to be 100 hours, then imho it's worth it.

I also put two practices into two-handed weapons, since I wasn't going to specialize in any of them. The extra 4% might mean one less hour per weapon that I'd need to spend practicing.

It's only one practice and in most cases you won't have anything to do with it, so this is obviously a tiny issue.

However, I wouldn't consider it a 4% advantage, because you will go from 71-80% much more quickly than you will from 96-100%

Still, I usually don't have much problem perfecting it quickly with high-int characters. YMMV.

nt

There are a few good cases for using two; assassinate for example. I'd probably put two in evade as well based on my experiences with its speed of improvement.

It would be simpler if, instead of having practice work with actual percentages, there were just "blocks".

23+ INT = 75% in 1 prac. Tweak down subsequent improvement rate for 23-INT characters ever so slightly to keep them balanced.

16-22 INT = 75% in 2 pracs. Tweak down subsequent improvement rate for 16-INT characters ever so slightly to keep them balanced.

15 or below = 75% in 3 pracs.

How is this different from what currently exists? Other than you bumped 23 into the 75% in one prac range instead of the 75% in two prac range, and 16 into the 2 instead of 3?

Characters with 16 or 23 INT face a dilemma where they have to choose whether to spend 2 vs. 3 or 1 vs. 2 practices. Daevryn and Linolaques have suggested that it's almost always preferable to spend the lower number and just accept the additional delay on perfecting the skill.

So take away the dilemma. It's the same argument for why drow thieves and assassins should get sneak at 100%: so they don't waste practices on it by mistake or out of ignorance.

Make playing an arial or human/halfhuman with int as primary stat just as advantageous as a dark-elf or elf when it comes to skill% gained for one prac?

Nah.

Or cloud giant just as good as storm giant with respect to that?

Nah.


I think things balance pretty nicely right now.

Characters with higher INT would still have a higher rate of skill improvement, and will still be better at anything that benefits from INT. These are far more potent advantages than percent practiced; I don't think it would hurt anything if they lost that small perk.

Splntrd

In fact, the suggestion was to tweak tha rates to compensate. So the 23 int race would still, reach 100% in the same time as before, they would just be starting from 75 instead of 71. I think this would be a slightly positive thing, but really the difference is probably too marginal to be worth bothering with.

in which case what would be the point other than to give 23 int races the ability to save more practices? How does this change make a positive impact on the game save your arial lovers now get extra trains at hero?

-I'd rather be the sheath to a sword than the bullets to a gun-

>Make playing an arial or human/halfhuman with int as primary
>stat just as advantageous as a dark-elf or elf when it comes
>to skill% gained for one prac?

Yes, but with the caveat that an arial/human/halfhuman would have their improvement rate diminished slightly vs. the current rate, in order to account for the extra 4% they'd be picking up during the initial practice session.

I think both types of character would be in roughly the same boat as they are now, except 16 and 23 INT characters wouldn't have to choose how many practices to use on a per-skill basis.

intelligence is still the only deciding factor when it comes to practice % and making anything short of 24 int getting the full 75% would kind of defeat the purpose. I just don't see what the benefit of this would be.

-I'd rather be the sheath to a sword than the bullets to a gun-

in my mind 71% artery (for example) is not that same as 75% artery. So if I'm an arial, and I just learned artery - I might think twice about using it in a PK at 71%, whereas if it's at 75% I might go for it.

I mean, maybe that's just me... but I think having your skill at 71% for a while is part of the pitfalls of the one prac system.

Last time I checked half-humans with int as their primary max at 24 so they are already on par with dark-elves and elves in this regards.

It would also be simpler if you didn't have to practice skills and you'd just get them. That doesn't necessarily make it a good option.

>There are a few good cases for using two; assassinate for
>example. I'd probably put two in evade as well based on my
>experiences with its speed of improvement.

I would probably reconsider evade learning rate based on my experiences

Yeah okay I'm dumb that's what I get for not playing for too long.