|
|
Questions to the Community Guides and how-to play threads posted by other users |
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
02-19-2012, 08:41 AM | #1 |
Banned
Join Date: Dec 2007
Location: Poland
Posts: 489
|
Distracting shot.
What are your experience with that spell now? I have 90% failure rate. Does anyone else experiencing that? It is not matter of enemy buffs, im talking now only about those DS's I'm sure were casted on unbuffed enemies. Did I miss momething in changelog? Please help.
|
02-19-2012, 09:10 AM | #2 |
Baron
Join Date: Nov 2011
Location: Feeding@ Farmal :P
Posts: 714
|
Ehm, if you are serious u should do something with your luckiness.
__________________
I heard draconic gem makes people stupid. Now i see it is exactly so. lol fail \ iFail \ I Am Multirealmer Good bye RO, the poor players.... have fun |
02-19-2012, 01:43 PM | #3 |
Banned
Join Date: Mar 2011
Location: Morocco
Posts: 286
|
Well I know from about 1 month ago when I played my hunter, 6to7 out of every 10 distracting shot got resisted. The resist rate on this spell has to be way higher than on spells like ambush. If not, there's something seriously wrong with this spell.
|
02-19-2012, 07:51 PM | #4 |
Initiate
Join Date: Mar 2008
Posts: 195
|
I bet it's a conspiracy :o
__________________
|
02-19-2012, 09:15 PM | #5 |
Baron
Join Date: May 2008
Location: Portugal
Posts: 940
|
Certain spells get more resisted than others, that is true. Try casting Will domain as a level 15 warlock on level 35 snakes, then test with any kind of DoT spells. I guarantee you that Will domain will always be resisted, while - if lucky - every DoT spell will succeed. Could also have to do that Constitution provides extra resistance to Knock down and Stun.
__________________
Daar |
02-19-2012, 11:47 PM | #6 | |
Baron
Join Date: May 2010
Location: South Africa
Posts: 906
|
Quote:
|
|
02-20-2012, 12:32 AM | #7 |
Baron
Join Date: Aug 2009
Location: /dev/null
Posts: 766
|
Somehow it seems non-damaging CCs have a much higher failure rate than damaging ones or DoTs (from my personal experience).
__________________
|
02-20-2012, 02:06 AM | #8 | |
Pledge
Join Date: Jul 2010
Location: Hellas
Posts: 29
|
Quote:
I tested that on amun with some friends a while ago and spell success was guaranteed everytime (I might be wrong though).Idk if NGD stated smt about it in the past but thats my experience so far. Regards.
__________________
Jesus-[Antartes] Syrtis/HAVEN!!! Πας μη Έλλην Βάρβαρος
|
|
02-20-2012, 05:22 AM | #9 |
Banned
Join Date: Jan 2011
Posts: 280
|
Nope this is not a rule as you say. I've seen a lot fails with casting Ambush on a distracted player. The chance can be higher than usually casted Ambush, but it's not 100% for sure.
|
02-20-2012, 02:11 PM | #10 | |
Initiate
Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: Retired
Posts: 203
|
Quote:
I noticed this : ambush lvl 5 = 80% fail ,Distract lvl 5 =80% fail. I dunno what level you use this skills,but i prefer use them on lvl 4 max,the succesful chance seems be major than a lvl 5 skill.....it is my experience,but i may be wrong,try to test it guys. The random number generator of regnum,is a total fail.Too many resist etc. I think it is made to balance a lvl 60(with 20 more power point) on a lvl 50,or generally to balance an highter lvl powers vs a low level one. It sucks too,as in other MMo,they can simply give low levels a sort of immunity or a passive at dmg resitence (ex: a lvl 60 hit on a lvl 45 will do only 60% of his total dmg,so the lvl 45 have some chance to escape,or combat his enemy),or do some zones accessible only for certain lvls to pvp/grind etc. Consider also that some class,have too many CCs to use in pvp(without consider the WM shitty powers in RvR that allow to play god-mode and resist everything). If they continue ignore the problem on the gameplay point of view,you must continue play with that pain my friend:your ability on use skills don't give you any kind of advantage,luck is your best friend in this game at moment. Play regnum with CCs,is like play at slot machines actually,this is not your problem only,all the players suffer this. |
|
|
|