when did they changed this?
its long-as helllllll
Changed Dmg(while enchanted) text?
Indian
when did they changed this?
its long-as helllllll
Savio
http://www.guildwarsguru.com/forum/s...0048336&page=3
They did it on shields too... I dread to look at my monk's equipment.
They did it on shields too... I dread to look at my monk's equipment.
Ulivious The Reaper
yeh they made my fellblade really ugly 
Zinger314
I have news from an insider source! The 4th expansion will be called Guild Wars: Idiotproof!
HawkofStorms
It happened in todays update.
I agree, it does seem a little TOO long winded. They are doing it to "noob proof" the game. I'm all for a.net changing the wording around of stuff to make it clearer to understand (ie, clearly stating how much damage superior absorption absorbed compared to minor runes), but really, come on.
MORE words does not make something easier to understand!
What's next? "Requires 9 Hammer Master to do the 19-35 damage but does not require it for equiping the weapon or having any of the other mods" on every weapon.
Also, while on the subject of unnecessary word changes to item descriptions, why in the world must weapon mods say "attachs to axe/sword/etc." Can somebody who buys a weapon mod not figure out that a bow string attaches to a bow or a sword hilt attaches to a sword without that sentence in there?
I agree, it does seem a little TOO long winded. They are doing it to "noob proof" the game. I'm all for a.net changing the wording around of stuff to make it clearer to understand (ie, clearly stating how much damage superior absorption absorbed compared to minor runes), but really, come on.
MORE words does not make something easier to understand!
What's next? "Requires 9 Hammer Master to do the 19-35 damage but does not require it for equiping the weapon or having any of the other mods" on every weapon.
Also, while on the subject of unnecessary word changes to item descriptions, why in the world must weapon mods say "attachs to axe/sword/etc." Can somebody who buys a weapon mod not figure out that a bow string attaches to a bow or a sword hilt attaches to a sword without that sentence in there?
TheMadKingGeorge
Oh 1 Thing... Does Elemental Tempest Armor +10 Armor Enchanted Mean + 10 Armor On Any Enchantment Or +10 Armor On Maintaining Enchants
Tookis Elite
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by TheMadKingGeorge
Oh 1 Thing... Does Elemental Tempest Armor +10 Armor Enchanted Mean + 10 Armor On Any Enchantment Or +10 Armor On Maintaining Enchants
|
srry to use ya as a subject bud
but this is why they changed that. maybe a few people were confused as to which enchants affected the "damage mod" and whatnot.
-it works on any enchants to answer your question
Truong
I agree, it is too long. ;l
Nivryx
noticed it too, makes my perfect mursaat hornbow look butt ugly, takes two lines - wtheck? i think 'while enchanted' was perfectly idiot proof, change it back =/
bam23
"Under Enchantment" sounds good enough.
That's overdoing it IMO.
That's overdoing it IMO.
Mercury Angel
The weird thing is, they left 'while Hexed' alone, which is just as 'incorrect' as that. (which is to say, it was fine.)
BoredJoe
Unless A.Net introduce a hex that negates the effect of any enchantment on a character. So the character will be enchanted but not under the effect of any enchantment. o.O
fenix
Obviously Anet think the population of Guild Wars players are stupid. You would have to be stupid if you didn't understand "while enchanted", but I suppose it's just them making it easier for kids to play the game...
ubermancer
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by BoredJoe
Unless A.Net introduce a hex that negates the effect of any enchantment on a character. So the character will be enchanted but not under the effect of any enchantment. o.O
|
fatmouse
If I were to guess I would say the dervish enchantments that 'do nothing for x seconds' will no longer count towards the enchanted modifier.
Nathan the Skank
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by talon
Obviously Anet think the population of Guild Wars players are stupid. You would have to be stupid if you didn't understand "while enchanted", but I suppose it's just them making it easier for kids to play the game...
|
/endsarcasm
gene terrodon
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by fatmouse
If I were to guess I would say the dervish enchantments that 'do nothing for x seconds' will no longer count towards the enchanted modifier.
|
It's obviously because of a change to how some enchantments work.
To have an enchantment on you is different than being under the effects of an enchantment.
Think...then post.
Edit: Hawk, this is a prime example
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Guildwiki
Aura of Thorns - Enchantment Spell. All nearby foes are crippled for 4...9 seconds. For 30 seconds, this Enchantment does nothing. When this Enchantment ends, all nearby foes begin Bleeding for 5...13 seconds.
|
As you can see, enchanted but not under the effects of an enchantment.
There is a difference.
Not only does this enchantment do nothing for 30 seconds, when it does do something, it doesn't affect the enchanted person, but the enchanted person’s foes. At no point is the caster under the effects of this enchantment, hence the change in the wording for the enchanted mod.
For enchantments that have an effect on your character, there would be no change.
HawkofStorms
Umm... no it isn't.
Not all dervish enchantments are like that (god forms for instance diffenantly have an affect). Dervish enchantments can be shattered etc. They are enchantments. If they wanted to introduce a new type of skill called "derish enchantments" that dont' effect the "while enchanted" weapons, they would have just called the derivish enchantments something else (like weapon spells are currently).
Not all dervish enchantments are like that (god forms for instance diffenantly have an affect). Dervish enchantments can be shattered etc. They are enchantments. If they wanted to introduce a new type of skill called "derish enchantments" that dont' effect the "while enchanted" weapons, they would have just called the derivish enchantments something else (like weapon spells are currently).
frojack
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by HawkofStorms
Umm... no it isn't.
Not all dervish enchantments are like that (god forms for instance diffenantly have an affect). Dervish enchantments can be shattered etc. They are enchantments. If they wanted to introduce a new type of skill called "derish enchantments" that dont' effect the "while enchanted" weapons, they would have just called the derivish enchantments something else (like weapon spells are currently). |
Also, using terms that question other peoples intelligence is generally a bad idea when all you have to work with is theory. Unless of course arrogance became cool overnight.
Savio
Quote:
|
As you can see, enchanted but not under the effects of an enchantment. There is a difference. |
HawkofStorms
Thanks for that edit Gene and the note dirrected at me. I had no idea since I had been playing a Dervish for 7 hours so far in the preview event... /end sarcasm
Please test theories before posting them.
Please test theories before posting them.
Aera Lure
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Zinger314
I have news from an insider source! The 4th expansion will be called Guild Wars: Idiotproof!
|
gene terrodon
Educate me then, using Aura of Thorns as an example.
It does nothing for 30 seconds and makes your foe bleed....what is the effect it has on YOU?
I can't see any...but since playing for 7 hours makes you an expert...please share that expertise.
It does nothing for 30 seconds and makes your foe bleed....what is the effect it has on YOU?
I can't see any...but since playing for 7 hours makes you an expert...please share that expertise.
LuckyGiant
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Aera Lure
And the funny thing is the original "while enchanted" was more clear than this new and rather silly "clarification." :\
|
Zonzai
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by talon
Obviously Anet think the population of Guild Wars players are stupid.
|
Arena.Net changed it because they have been.
