Cài đặt Steam
Đăng nhập
|
Ngôn ngữ
简体中文 (Hán giản thể)
繁體中文 (Hán phồn thể)
日本語 (Nhật)
한국어 (Hàn Quốc)
ไทย (Thái)
Български (Bungari)
Čeština (CH Séc)
Dansk (Đan Mạch)
Deutsch (Đức)
English (Anh)
Español - España (Tây Ban Nha - TBN)
Español - Latinoamérica (Tây Ban Nha cho Mỹ Latin)
Ελληνικά (Hy Lạp)
Français (Pháp)
Italiano (Ý)
Bahasa Indonesia (tiếng Indonesia)
Magyar (Hungary)
Nederlands (Hà Lan)
Norsk (Na Uy)
Polski (Ba Lan)
Português (Tiếng Bồ Đào Nha - BĐN)
Português - Brasil (Bồ Đào Nha - Brazil)
Română (Rumani)
Русский (Nga)
Suomi (Phần Lan)
Svenska (Thụy Điển)
Türkçe (Thổ Nhĩ Kỳ)
Українська (Ukraine)
Báo cáo lỗi dịch thuật
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