Talk:Calculated Risk

Decent skill
I'd rather take a couple extra damage than let a warrior/sin complete an attack chain. --Roland of Gilead (talk) 19:38, 30 July 2007 (CDT)


 * Just throw on prot spirit with it and their advantage pretty much disappears anyway :P --Gimmethegepgun 19:43, 30 July 2007 (CDT)


 * Rofl, Spirit Bond + this at 0 illusion anybody? Armor of the Sun 16:59, 4 August 2007 (CDT)
 * It wouldn't do any good because the hex will last only 4 seconds. CabooseOwnsYou 20:50, 5 August 2007 (CDT)

Very nice. Now Mesmers have a skill of their own to combine Spirit of Failure with. With a chance to fail of roughly 2/3 some extra points of damage wont matter A.Saturnus 12:03, 7 August 2007 (CDT)

Yeah, this is some useful skill.PvEreanor 10:09, 8 August 2007 (CDT)

you guys think this might replace reckless haste? J1j2j3 23:51, 12 August 2007 (CDT)


 * If ANet keeps nerfing it, then maybe... [[Image:Entropy Sig.jpg]] (T/C) 23:53,     12 August 2007 (CDT)

Why couldn't you use both and make it so they miss 100% of the time, am I missing a common rule, is this a noob question? Himoto 11:49, 12 Augest 2007
 * It stacks multiplicatively (I don't know what it means, but thats what it does) I just saw some person using that term.  But, no you don't get 100% block.--Gigathrash 23:59, 12 August 2007 (CDT)

50% and 50% does not equal 100%. It is multiplicative, not additive. You'd end up with an overall 75% chance I think...That is why Aegis + Guardian does not give 100% Block. (T/C) 00:00, 13 August 2007 (CDT)

Ah, thank you. Next question... could you put together the 75% with aegis and guardian, making a almost untouchable by normal attacks character? like 90%? Himoto 12:00, 12 Augest 2007

The more Block skills you combine, the closer you will get to 100% Block. Whirling Defense + Guardian + Aegis + Shield of Deflection + Pensive Guardian + Defensive Anthem...However, at least in mathematical theory, it is impossible to ever reach 100% with a multiplicative bonus such as how Blocking stacks. You can get to 99.9999% or whatever but never truly 100%. That would only happen for an additive bonus, such as stacking Shielding Hands on Armor of Sanctity. And in any case a 100% Block tank is not feasible for PvP or PvE...except maybe DoA but you always use Obsidian Flesh there. (T/C) 00:10, 13 August 2007 (CDT)
 * You only need 75%. That's as good as 100% anyway, since unless all your attacks get through (and with that much block, that's not going to happen), they'll survive your spike and you just wasted time. --Kale Ironfist 00:15, 13 August 2007 (CDT)
 * In addition to that, the problem with focusing so heavily on Block is that ANY skill like Guided Weapon or Expose Defenses makes your entire team worthless. Block is good but mixing in "active Prot" like Protective Spirit is the only smart way to go about things. [[Image:Entropy Sig.jpg]] (T/C) 00:18, 13 August 2007 (CDT)
 * I'm pretty sure Guild Wars rounds the numbers, so if you had 99.999% block rate it would be 100%. Zulu Inuoe 08:39, 13 August 2007 (CDT)
 * Most of stacks have their limit, I don't think you can get a 100% block rate. But such a limit is hard to see for something like block attacks. Alea 18:13, 15 August 2007 (CDT)
 * Nothing gives less than 100% block and more than 99%, so you can't say it will round, since it has to resolve each block chance separately. --Kale Ironfist 18:16, 15 August 2007 (CDT)


 * O_o Kale, you DO know that you said everything blocks more than every attack? :D EDIT: waiiit... I get it, meh, i'm getting tired I suppose... *ZzZ* 84.24.206.123 18:18, 15 August 2007 (CDT)
 * Damn, I had a great response to that, but you ended up making it a wasted effort! Ah well. --Kale Ironfist 18:26, 15 August 2007 (CDT)
 * Oh, I thought that since they changed the system (No more Dodge) that they just added up all the block rates, didn't know they still used separates.. Zulu Inuoe 18:35, 19 August 2007 (CDT)

Lamest skill name ever
it might have taken three seconds to make that up M s4 21:51, 25 August 2007 (CDT)

I reckon it's a pretty good name. 220.101.136.175 09:36, 28 August 2007 (CDT)