Resists

[Slave]

Resists are still VERY MUCH abnormally high. It's been a real damn drag. This coupled with the new mysterious 28-damage cap from 10-20 makes leveling anything from 1-20 really freaking difficult at the moment. Which is the biggest shame, because people who are even EXPECTING a rough classic experience will come here and find it WAY TOO HARD, then go play something else.

[Stormhowl]

Originally Posted by Slave [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Resists are still VERY MUCH abnormally high. It's been a real damn drag. This coupled with the new mysterious 28-damage cap from 10-20 makes leveling anything from 1-20 really freaking difficult at the moment. Which is the biggest shame, because people who are even EXPECTING a rough classic experience will come here and find it WAY TOO HARD, then go play something else.

The 28 damage cap for 10-20 is classic from what I remember, and that was back in the day with an Axe of the Iron Back on a Warrior, during the Kunark era.

Only links I can find to support it are from 2003 and 2004, though, which I suspect will just get me flamed for sharing. >.>
http://www.monkly-business.net/forum...hp/t-4580.html
http://forums.station.sony.com/eq/po...topic_id=28142

[Slave]

Originally Posted by Stormhowl [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

The 28 damage cap for 10-20 is classic from what I remember, and that was back in the day with an Axe of the Iron Back on a Warrior, during the Kunark era.

Only links I can find to support it are from 2003 and 2004, though, which I suspect will just get me flamed for sharing. >.>
http://www.monkly-business.net/forum...hp/t-4580.html
http://forums.station.sony.com/eq/po...topic_id=28142

You're wrong, it was 31.

[Stormhowl]

Originally Posted by Slave [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You're wrong, it was 31.

I don't feel the need to be argumentative about a mere *THREE* damage, and since you don't feel like substantiating your point with any proof what-so-ever from any source, I'm just going to leave it at this then.

[Slave]

Originally Posted by Stormhowl [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I don't feel the need to be argumentative about a mere *THREE* damage, and since you don't feel like substantiating your point with any proof what-so-ever from any source, I'm just going to leave it at this then.

I'm not arguing with you, I'm correcting you... with the exact number of damage that you could hit for between 10 and 20 in live Everquest. I thought you would be happy! Enjoy.

[Stormhowl]

Originally Posted by Slave [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I'm not arguing with you, I'm correcting you... with the exact number of damage that you could hit for between 10 and 20 in live Everquest. I thought you would be happy! Enjoy.

Except you failed to substantiate your point with any evidence what so ever. Are you somehow suggesting that Sony in all their wisdom, nerfed the damage cap from 31 to 29 sometime between Classic and 2003 (the date of the Monkly Business post I gave that says the 10-20 cap was 29 damage)?

Substantiate or concede.