Difference between revisions of "Talk:Defense"
From SpiralKnights
(Armor defense section appears to contradict Knight defense section) |
Mr sausage (Talk | contribs) m (→Armor defense section appears to contradict Knight defense section) |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
==Armor defense section appears to contradict Knight defense section== | ==Armor defense section appears to contradict Knight defense section== | ||
The new section on "armor defense" appears to directly contradict the preceding section on "knight defense", which was extremely carefully researched. Explain? [[User:Jdavis|Jdavis]] ([[User talk:Jdavis|talk]]) 01:16, 1 November 2019 (UTC) | The new section on "armor defense" appears to directly contradict the preceding section on "knight defense", which was extremely carefully researched. Explain? [[User:Jdavis|Jdavis]] ([[User talk:Jdavis|talk]]) 01:16, 1 November 2019 (UTC) | ||
| + | The new section correctly contradicts it on some parts, because damage for small sources tested in the private training hall are definitely based on % reduction and is non-linear as tested in the Training hall by a friend who made that edit. I contacted him regarding the rest of the issues (ie, it being a new section when it shouldn't, and the small error in it) and asked him to test this for large amounts of damage as well, since I think he's not the kind of person to visit the discussion pages here. --[[User:Mr sausage|Mr sausage]] ([[User talk:Mr sausage|talk]]) 21:48, 1 November 2019 (UTC) | ||
Latest revision as of 21:48, 1 November 2019
Armor defense section appears to contradict Knight defense section
The new section on "armor defense" appears to directly contradict the preceding section on "knight defense", which was extremely carefully researched. Explain? Jdavis (talk) 01:16, 1 November 2019 (UTC) The new section correctly contradicts it on some parts, because damage for small sources tested in the private training hall are definitely based on % reduction and is non-linear as tested in the Training hall by a friend who made that edit. I contacted him regarding the rest of the issues (ie, it being a new section when it shouldn't, and the small error in it) and asked him to test this for large amounts of damage as well, since I think he's not the kind of person to visit the discussion pages here. --Mr sausage (talk) 21:48, 1 November 2019 (UTC)
