Level 46 Anchor Adept1I is a downgrade to Level 32 Entrench Master1?!?

[Stosh68]

<div></div>This just doesn't seem correct, shouldn't a Level 42 Adept1 be an upgrade to a Level 32 Master1? <img src="http://www.freeimagehosting.net/uploads/c12b31d887.jpg"><p>Message Edited by Stosh68 on <span class=date_text>11-18-2005</span> <span class=time_text>11:13 PM</span>

[Sasaki Koji]

<P>yep... even adept III anchor is worse heh</P> <P> </P>

[Sasaki Koji]

<P>doh, double post +( Forum error lied to me.</P> <P> </P> <p>Message Edited by Sasaki Kojiro on <span class=date_text>11-19-2005</span> <span class=time_text>06:29 AM</span>

[EvilIguana9]

Higher quality tiers of spells, adept III, Master I and II, sort of break from the usual progression.  Like legendary and fabled gear, they may well be more useful than common items from a higher tier.  <div></div>

[Wli]

Actually, they said this would not be the case anymore. A CA on the next tier needs to be better than anything on the previous tier, no ?

[EvilIguana9]

I believe the case they wanted to remove was a spell or skill of a higher level and the same quality tier being worse than the other for several levels.  That extremely high quality spells are more powerful than low quality spells of a higher level makes perfect sense, and was inevitable if there was going to be a noticable difference between the levels of quality.  The same is true of armor.  A fabled piece from tier X will be better than a handcrafted piece from tier X+1.  <div></div>