Originally posted by WiSeIVIaN
Not that I should be considered a source, but I know for a fact bort gas said in the past it boosts your str portion while not decreasing the weight of anything else. I have no link of course. #bortspeak
Originally posted by DiMo28
This is what I remember as well.
Unless Bort was lying or incompetent to the point that he doesn't know what his code does, this quote proves that it does in fact lower the importance of non-strength attributes in the break block roll.
Originally posted by Bort
Equation to break a block is altered. Strength's importance becomes higher.
It is not possible to alter the percentage weight of one term in an equation while maintaining the percentage weight of the other terms. You can't have 130%, everything will just be rescaled to 100%, or rather to 1. The only way that it could work otherwise would be if it gave a % bonus to strength, but he specifically avoided that option in the question and said it worked the other way.
If someone could find a contrary statement from Bort I would like to see it, it wouldn't be the first time he contradicted himself.
Not that I should be considered a source, but I know for a fact bort gas said in the past it boosts your str portion while not decreasing the weight of anything else. I have no link of course. #bortspeak
Originally posted by DiMo28
This is what I remember as well.
Unless Bort was lying or incompetent to the point that he doesn't know what his code does, this quote proves that it does in fact lower the importance of non-strength attributes in the break block roll.
Originally posted by Bort
Equation to break a block is altered. Strength's importance becomes higher.
It is not possible to alter the percentage weight of one term in an equation while maintaining the percentage weight of the other terms. You can't have 130%, everything will just be rescaled to 100%, or rather to 1. The only way that it could work otherwise would be if it gave a % bonus to strength, but he specifically avoided that option in the question and said it worked the other way.
If someone could find a contrary statement from Bort I would like to see it, it wouldn't be the first time he contradicted himself.
