Difference between revisions of "Talk:Glorious Conquest"
Jump to navigation
Jump to search
m |
m |
||
| Line 7: | Line 7: | ||
More ath values would be great, hm, but hard to get these. Having Tor and Werredan both at +10% makes this spell actually not that Werredan-centric at all. -- [[User:WinterRose|WinterRose]] 03:36, 7 June 2013 (EDT) | More ath values would be great, hm, but hard to get these. Having Tor and Werredan both at +10% makes this spell actually not that Werredan-centric at all. -- [[User:WinterRose|WinterRose]] 03:36, 7 June 2013 (EDT) | ||
:It's possible that there is an upper limit for this bonus of 20%, if so, Tor could have a stronger bonus... but that's just speculation. --[[User:Shadowtop|Shadowtop]] 09:41, 25 August 2013 (EDT) | :It's possible that there is an upper limit for this bonus of 20%, if so, Tor could have a stronger bonus... but that's just speculation. --[[User:Shadowtop|Shadowtop]] 09:41, 25 August 2013 (EDT) | ||
| + | |||
| + | i'm of the opinion that wer is 14%, tor 10%, kra 8%. | ||
Revision as of 12:04, 20 March 2014
Seem to have enough data to start drawing some conclusions:
dwf (+5%) > cen (+1%) > dgn, drw, elf, gno, liz, spr, trl (+0%)
tor, wer (+10%) > bhy (+6%) > qxl (+5%) > kra (+4%) > ath (+0%) > shz (-2%) > tul (-5%?) Assuming a base of 5%
--Shadowtop 16:32, 6 June 2013 (EDT)
More ath values would be great, hm, but hard to get these. Having Tor and Werredan both at +10% makes this spell actually not that Werredan-centric at all. -- WinterRose 03:36, 7 June 2013 (EDT)
- It's possible that there is an upper limit for this bonus of 20%, if so, Tor could have a stronger bonus... but that's just speculation. --Shadowtop 09:41, 25 August 2013 (EDT)
i'm of the opinion that wer is 14%, tor 10%, kra 8%.
