![]() |
|
|||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
| PvP Discussion PvP, looting, thugging and thieving discussions go here. |
|
|
Thread Tools |
|
|
#1 |
|
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 23
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
![]() |
120 tactics vs 115 tactics
I'm looking for something that will tell me the damage difference between these two, but every search I've done comes up dry.
Help? |
|
|
|
|
|
#2 |
|
Ronin
Join Date: Jan 2006
Shard: Black Water Raiders, Azeroth
Posts: 8,903
Thanks: 88
Thanked 54 Times in 45 Posts
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Re: 120 tactics vs 115 tactics
__________________
![]() Thanks again Maddux! Adri: women don't discuss men while in the bathroom, we sacrifice small animals and smoke tampons *rolls eyes* |
|
|
|
|
|
#3 |
|
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 23
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
![]() |
Re: 120 tactics vs 115 tactics
Yeah I found that, but i got strange results...
120 tactics - 27-32 damage 115 tactics - 26-32 damage 100 tactics - 25-31 damage I figured it was old, or is this right? |
|
|
|
|
|
#4 |
|
Ronin
Join Date: Jan 2006
Shard: Black Water Raiders, Azeroth
Posts: 8,903
Thanks: 88
Thanked 54 Times in 45 Posts
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Re: 120 tactics vs 115 tactics
It could very well be correct.
Looking at this table (created by Bendavho) it shows only a 3.125% increase from 115 Tactics to 120 Tactics. This is the very reason why I normally only suggest GM Tactics in any template.
__________________
![]() Thanks again Maddux! Adri: women don't discuss men while in the bathroom, we sacrifice small animals and smoke tampons *rolls eyes* |
|
|
|
|
|
#5 |
|
Join Date: Apr 2006
Posts: 23
Thanks: 0
Thanked 0 Times in 0 Posts
![]() |
Re: 120 tactics vs 115 tactics
Damn. Thank you!
|
|
|
|
|
|
#6 |
|
Ronin
Join Date: Jan 2006
Shard: Black Water Raiders, Azeroth
Posts: 8,903
Thanks: 88
Thanked 54 Times in 45 Posts
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Re: 120 tactics vs 115 tactics
Welcome.
__________________
![]() Thanks again Maddux! Adri: women don't discuss men while in the bathroom, we sacrifice small animals and smoke tampons *rolls eyes* |
|
|
|
|
|
#7 |
|
Trustworthy
Join Date: Jul 2006
Shard: Many 6 or so
Posts: 413
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
![]() ![]() |
Re: 120 tactics vs 115 tactics
Thing is just goto test center put weopon on your had and then say set tactics 1200 your 120 see # then say set 1150 then you 115 then you see # that easy way to find all #
|
|
|
|
|
|
#8 |
|
How do you tell when you run out of invisible ink?
Join Date: Jan 2007
Shard: alantic
Posts: 2,663
Thanks: 0
Thanked 1 Time in 1 Post
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Re: 120 tactics vs 115 tactics
i still like the 120 tatics for squeezing the most out of my weapon
__________________
For to win one hundred victories in one hundred battles is not the acme of skill. To subdue the enemy without fighting is the acme of skill. |
|
|
|
|
|
#9 |
|
Ronin
Join Date: Jan 2006
Shard: Black Water Raiders, Azeroth
Posts: 8,903
Thanks: 88
Thanked 54 Times in 45 Posts
![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() ![]() |
Re: 120 tactics vs 115 tactics
True, and if you don't need the 5 skill points for something else I say go for it! But I normally only reach for a 120 in the skills where there is a big difference (Weaponskill, Magery, Spellweaving).
__________________
![]() Thanks again Maddux! Adri: women don't discuss men while in the bathroom, we sacrifice small animals and smoke tampons *rolls eyes* |
|
|
|
![]() |
| Thread Tools | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Thread Starter | Forum | Replies | Last Post |
| Tactics... | Macdaddy | Ultima Online General Discussion | 6 | 22nd October 2007 05:23 PM |
| Tactics q? | Baldguy | Warrior Forum | 11 | 17th July 2007 09:05 PM |
| Tactics | Moony | PvP Discussion | 9 | 6th July 2007 03:56 AM |
| Anatomy or Tactics | Fireangel | PvP Discussion | 17 | 27th January 2006 01:32 PM |