SVN Discussion - Page 3

**trevius** · #31 02-22-2009, 04:44 AM

My guess is that rule was added because the old code for it was causing weird avoidance issues and they needed to play around with the formula to find the right one. The old formula before the rule was just a wrong formula because it was divided by 100 instead of 1000. Now, with that correction, things work properly and there is no longer a need for a rule for it.

There are plenty of other places to adjust hit chance and other combat features. Avoidance should be a pretty straight forward formula (as it is now) and can easily be governed by the worn avoidance cap rule and by limiting or adding more avoidance items if you wish.

**KLS** · #32 02-22-2009, 05:04 AM

I'm just amazed we were missing a 0 for a year+ and no one caught it.

ChaosSlayer · #33 02-22-2009, 02:30 PM

well actualy for a year+ LOTS of people were saying that miss ratio was VERY high - you and even con mob could stand against ecah other for 5 min and only ocasinaly landing a hit. That should have been a clue =P

So_1337 · #34 02-23-2009, 11:20 AM

So that's why the evasive discipline was so broken?

EDIT: Just got to reading this thread, I get it now.

Krran · #35 03-08-2009, 02:46 AM

Im having trouble with checkout, Ive tried using several diffrerent paths, but nearly all of them result in...

Error PROPFIND of '/svn/trunk': 200 OK (http://projecteqemu.googlecode.com)
Finished!

The operation failed.

Any help?
If anyone has a setup that works, pasting the info would be awesome
Im on windows xp if it helps any