Установить Steam
войти
|
язык
简体中文 (упрощенный китайский)
繁體中文 (традиционный китайский)
日本語 (японский)
한국어 (корейский)
ไทย (тайский)
Български (болгарский)
Čeština (чешский)
Dansk (датский)
Deutsch (немецкий)
English (английский)
Español - España (испанский)
Español - Latinoamérica (латиноам. испанский)
Ελληνικά (греческий)
Français (французский)
Italiano (итальянский)
Bahasa Indonesia (индонезийский)
Magyar (венгерский)
Nederlands (нидерландский)
Norsk (норвежский)
Polski (польский)
Português (португальский)
Português-Brasil (бразильский португальский)
Română (румынский)
Suomi (финский)
Svenska (шведский)
Türkçe (турецкий)
Tiếng Việt (вьетнамский)
Українська (украинский)
Сообщить о проблеме с переводом
While it’s true that that a point in a stat you don’t want or need is wasted because it could have been better used in a stat you do want (and every stat point gets more difficult to gain in rune cost), it’s not true that a stat at a random level is “costing you value” or that you “want” a desired stat as low as possible. The stat must be built up regardless and the “value” of the stat is different from the effect of the input point. The ideology has gotten so bad that people can’t even see that something ISNT a ROI scheme.
“ Why should you trust what I say over anyone else? Because I always offer you access to the raw data for you to see for yourself.”
That fact only answers why people should trust your numbers shown. It doesn’t support the idea that people should trust your qualitative claims or advice statements.
"Increased Dexterity scaling when assigning Ashes of War with corresponding weapon Affinities."
21:9