Rune of the Second Wind broken

Printable View

10th May 2016, 15:40
Xnes

Rune of the Second Wind broken

I posted this in TL servers allready but i don't know if its read there so i post it here again. Now that arena is out quite a while i hope some more people got this rune and noticed that it does not work as intended.

PvE Epic Runeston "Rune of the Second Wind" does not work as intended... On my HoX i have 2988(41,5%) Protection with the Buff (+5% Armor, +5% Protection) which proccs with Stamina and Mana pots i get 3004(41,7%) protections. That means i get a total of +16 protection where i should get around 150 prot. The armor buff does not work either.
14th May 2016, 05:40
Evito

It does work, but in a way that makes it only useful on tanks. The 5% increase only counts your gear, and only counts the base armor/protection stats on the gear (so it doesn't multiply the armor you get from strength etc).
14th May 2016, 06:09
Kurt2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by Evito

It does work, but in a way that makes it only useful on tanks. The 5% increase only counts your gear, and only counts the base armor/protection stats on the gear (so it doesn't multiply the armor you get from strength etc).

A similar handling can be found by newer revamped abilities that "should" give a percentual increase (like the guardians or conqs protection increase). They all seem to completely ignore normally feated (general tree) and natural (attributes) based increase.
14th May 2016, 09:50
EmSi86

also i believe the pve runes counts only towars regular protection so pvp prot is excluded, if you would want buff this one go for pvp one (rune)
14th May 2016, 14:04
Cappa

Quote:

Originally Posted by Kurt2013

A similar handling can be found by newer revamped abilities that "should" give a percentual increase (like the guardians or conqs protection increase). They all seem to completely ignore normally feated (general tree) and natural (attributes) based increase.

this is wrong as far as i remember. will check again
14th May 2016, 17:24
Kurt2013

Quote:

Originally Posted by Cappa

this is wrong as far as i remember. will check again

I will check again as well. It was a few months ago and i reported it as well...so maybe it changed.