test

4841: Hearth of the North AGAIN !

Reported by ★ Pestilentia at Thu, 27 Sep 2018 20:46:27 UTC
worldbuild bug
invalid

Description

Gnome this is just not True... u only pick a LINK from the 1.64 patch.. but this PATCH say NOTHIGN about this proc Change.. it just tells.. Procs are CHANGED to more favorable ones.

so plz GNOME.. dont tell me this fu DD with 20 dmg is MORE favorable.. this is just ridicolouse..

this pic u got i only pick.. http://i.imgur.com/zb1GJaF.jpg this is NO EVIDENCE !!
There is NO Date no nothing.. this could be ALSO from WAY Later..

And dont forgett.. EVERN is also down.. no DEX QUI Charge AT ALL for Albs.

Your post also tells Latest entry SHOULD.. SHOULD SHOULD SHOULD..

if should sounds got to you.. ist ok.. if it Sound not good to you ist not ok..




Posted by Gnome at Mon, 26 Jun 2017 15:27:32 UTC

The Item was changed from D/Q Charge to a 2,500 Ranged DD Proc following this patch.

Patch 1.64

- The "old" dragon items from Cuuldurach, Golestandt, and Gjalpinuva will now drop made of level 10 materials, instead of the standard classic Camelot level 8 materials. Unfortunately, this does not apply to existing original dragon items...to accomplish this, totally new items had to be made that are copies of the original set of dragon items, because an object's material cannot be changed retroactively. Of these new items, most armor pieces are set to be reactive procs now, and some of the less popular weapon procs are changed to more favorable ones.

Latest entry should reflect this item shown: http://i.imgur.com/zb1GJaF.jpg

Reproduction Steps

1. just read above all is sayd
2. xxvcvxvcbbxnsnsm
3. xndnfbfnsmsjd

Intended Behavior

Just fix it Back to what is should be !! Dex Qui Charge.. OR bring e BETTER Evidence.

Evidence

there is enought Evidence in the other issues.. just make it correct. and

bringt also 100% correct Evidence NO SHOULD crap..

this tine things Destroy alot.. EVERN is also down.. dont forgett..

Status

Issue was invalid:
Item changed in dragon item review.
4 players say this report is valid, 1 disagrees

Comments

Loading Comments...