I couldn't find anything on Wayback so I asked on the EQ Tradeskillers forum:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by http://mboards.eqtraders.com/eq/showthread.php?44756-Question-for-the-OLD-(Velious-and-Kunark-era)-Tradeskillers
I was wondering if anyone who played back then remembers:
A) the belief that the two were independent, and/or
B) if the game actually changed to make successes give more skil-ups, or whether this was just a false believe people had (there were many back in the day).
|
And got this response:
Quote:
|
Originally Posted by http://mboards.eqtraders.com/eq/showthread.php?44756-Question-for-the-OLD-(Velious-and-Kunark-era)-Tradeskillers
A) Yes, I clearly remember we all thought they were independent.
B) Sorry, not positive enough on this one to answer.
Happy tradeskilling!
|
Like him I clearly remember this being accepted knowledge on tradeskilling. But since that's all the proof I was able to find (and since I really want tradeskills to work classically here) I want to offer a bounty of 5k (great plat for a lower-level character) for anyone who can provide a (sourced) explanation. Probably either evidence that:
A) people in classic thought skill-ups were independent, but that idea was later proven to be wrong
or:
B) tradeskill skill-ups in classic
were independent of successes, but then that later changed
TLDR: 5k to the first person who posts solid (ie. Nilbog-worthy) evidence which explains why classic EQers were convinced that tradeskill skill-ups were independent of successes .. even though that is no longer the case on live.