Air of Disenchantment
Elite Hex Spell. Remove one enchantment from target foe and all nearby foes. For 5...17...20 seconds, enchantments expire 150...270...300% faster on those foes.
I just wondering say you cast an Aegis which lasts 10sec then someone Casts AoD whIT 16 Illusion Magic / 300% Faster Expire - How long will Aegis then be upp? Also bit wondering on the math formula your gonna use :P - Im so lazy i dont understand it :P
Take 150% faster of 10sec is / 100% = 10, then its 50% which means in expires 5sec before its even casted oO?
Edit: Or is it 10:3 = 3,3333? Which is the 300% faster expire?
300% Exipre
Massive Impulsa
R A N D O M
yea i don't get that either, i mean wouldnt expireing 100% fast mean it ends as soon as it casts, man im all confused now..
eagleblade
yeah i'd have to agree its pretty messed up
talk about a major blunder
talk about a major blunder
Pleikki
lol like for example Aegis lasts 10secs = 100%
300% = 10 / 3 = 3.3sec i guess?
300% = 10 / 3 = 3.3sec i guess?
Marty Silverblade
Here's how I read it: Aegis (for example) expires normally in 10 seconds. Air of Disenchantment increses this rate of expiry by 300%, or 3 times as quickly. Normally it's 1 second of enchantment duration per RL second, with AoD it's 3 seconds of enchantment duration per RL second. Therefore, you're using up the enchantment duration more quickly but not gaining any benefits.
That's how I see it anyway, don't know if it'd work any other way.
That's how I see it anyway, don't know if it'd work any other way.
Massive Impulsa
Ye that its the seconds which is lengthended, i suppose that right as i said the first time.. If i have 300% of 1 = 3sec.. Which is 3x time quicker / 300% faster.... 
ok i think thats right ;D
ok i think thats right ;D
R A N D O M
that makes it easier to understand thanks
thanks
Shiro Katagari
Don't forget, 300% faster isn't just a third of the duration - it's actually a quarter.
100% faster = half the time
200% faster = 1/3 the time
300% faster = 1/4 the time
400% faster = 1/5 the time
etc...
100% faster = half the time
200% faster = 1/3 the time
300% faster = 1/4 the time
400% faster = 1/5 the time
etc...
Sjeng
it's still not very logical to say something expires 300% faster...
Because then you would assume that if something expires at the normal rate, it would expire after the "normal" 100% duration time.
They should have written: enchantments will only LAST 75%...33% of normal duration time. (I didn't calculate it here, this is just an example). That would have been MUCH more clear.
exactly, that's what I thought. normal = 10s, 100% faster = 5s, 200% faster = 3,33s, 300% faster = 2,5s. Strange calculus imo.
Because then you would assume that if something expires at the normal rate, it would expire after the "normal" 100% duration time.
They should have written: enchantments will only LAST 75%...33% of normal duration time. (I didn't calculate it here, this is just an example). That would have been MUCH more clear.
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by Shiro Katagari
Don't forget, 300% faster isn't just a third of the duration - it's actually a quarter.
100% faster = half the time 200% faster = 1/3 the time 300% faster = 1/4 the time 400% faster = 1/5 the time etc... |
exactly, that's what I thought. normal = 10s, 100% faster = 5s, 200% faster = 3,33s, 300% faster = 2,5s. Strange calculus imo.
TheodenKing
Their logic is flawed in the skill description. It will get corrected in a future update once someone who took statistics or quantitative decision theory in college explains it to them.
For now, just know that it makes the enchants expire faster.. and the faster the better, right?
For now, just know that it makes the enchants expire faster.. and the faster the better, right?
Shiro Katagari
I agree it's not a 'clear' way of explaining the faster expiry. It would probably have been easier to say "For 5...20 seconds, Enchantments only have 75....25% of their normal duration", or something like that.
Actually, when you start using variable percentages, there's always going to be an issue with clarity
Actually, when you start using variable percentages, there's always going to be an issue with clarity