Backpack Ajust

[Absolute]

should. Change the defense bonus of the backpacks, now that I have removed the protection against everything.

I should put either physical resistance or resistance contrary to the element that gives the backpack a boost.

It's illogical to think that full fire damage will go to monsters that hit with fire which are immune to it.

example. Fire defense doesn't work when you're clearly going to hunt monsters that hit with ice and that's why you put up opposite damage..

You should put defense to all elements by 5% or 10% to opposing elements.

[Fridareaper]

I can't say I'm happy about the change for this, but I do understand it. I don't believe that every new bp should have 5% resist all. I think for the players that have purchased these bp with tc with the intention of using them for the 5% resist all should be compensated in some way (at Final Warnings discretion). I also think the bp prices in the shop should be reviewed and lowered to reflect the changes to the bp themselves.

[keebler]

I should put either physical resistance or resistance contrary to the element that gives the backpack a boost.

Physical resistance of BP's doesn't fit well. We have a BP for that.
The resistance contrary to the element is not a bad idea.

It's illogical to think that full fire damage will go to monsters that hit with fire which are immune to it.
example. Fire defense doesn't work when you're clearly going to hunt monsters that hit with ice and that's why you put up opposite damage..

The resistance is not there for hunting mobs, the resistance is there for hunting bosses. There are some bosses that reflect the elemental damage to you. Off the top of my head Megalomania does pure damage reflect. The resistances from the sets are to protect from that, not from hunting random mobs.

Did I like the change to the BP's? No. Do I understand the change? Yes. Should there be something else that should supplement the loss of the defenses? Yes.

[Final Warning]

Backpack bonus logic is simple, you have the boosted element and absorb the same element. Having added it to absorb all the elements was a mistake that has already been fixed.

There is no reason for these items to be weak or strong to elements different from the style of damage boost, this would only make the construction of the set difficult, if there were no damage boosts it would be the same as other items, strong to one element and weak to another, here is one example:

[Canadian]

Backpack bonus logic is simple, you have the boosted element and absorb the same element. Having added it to absorb all the elements was a mistake that has already been fixed.

There is no reason for these items to be weak or strong to elements different from the style of damage boost, this would only make the construction of the set difficult, if there were no damage boosts it would be the same as other items, strong to one element and weak to another, here is one example:

Thing is with Dragon Robe is it's an item that is easily obtainable. Items that have a weakness to another element are usually weaker items.

I agree with Absolute, and since these items are the "supreme" they should have just strengths. WW BP should be Protection fire 5%, boost ice 12%.

[Final Warning]

Backpack bonus logic is simple, you have the boosted element and absorb the same element. Having added it to absorb all the elements was a mistake that has already been fixed.

There is no reason for these items to be weak or strong to elements different from the style of damage boost, this would only make the construction of the set difficult, if there were no damage boosts it would be the same as other items, strong to one element and weak to another, here is one example:

Thing is with Dragon Robe is it's an item that is easily obtainable. Items that have a weakness to another element are usually weaker items.

I agree with Absolute, and since these items are the "supreme" they should have just strengths. WW BP should be Protection fire 5%, boost ice 12%.

bring me a dragon robe and we'll talk.