The Hidden Forest

Any chance the Warrior 3.0 could get a slot 4 in place of one of the 8s it currently has? As it is I had to do some serious augment juggling to make it a better worn item than the 2.0 due to the high AC added from the Feather of Dressolik in the 2.0's type 4 slot.

My understanding is that ac in the secondary slot only ignores diminishing returns if the item is shield type. To that end, if my understanding is correct, then the feather Aug isn't as good as it appears. As always, I could be mistaken.

Lastly, I quite liked that the 3.0s did away with type 4 Aug slots. Maybe the feather could be type 4 and 16?

Secondary? I put it in the back slot. upgraded dsk3 war sword + donor means it has to go elsewhere. I just like ac, diminshing returns or not.

feather being 4/16 would work too.

Wouldn't making it slot 16 just mean the 2.0 could host another high Ac sol ro slot 4 Aug (eg webtools/items.php?id=121727) , further increasing the maximum Ac of a worn 2.0 in relation to the 3.0? This change would be a huge buff to the weapon without exclusively resolving this issue.

The 2.0 can already host the item you linked, and if feather gets slot 16 added it could not go into the 2.0, well at least wont be able to use feather and flame at the same time in the 2.0, or did i miss something? If your talking about the slot16 feather going into 3.0 with the flame slot4 aug, wouldnt make much game breaking difference seeing by the time most are able to get 3.0 done they are t8 flagged and the 10k slot 16s are on par with solro slot4s anyhow, least by AC standards I dont see much harm in making the feather slot16 useable.

myboombox wrote:The 2.0 can already host the item you linked, and if feather gets slot 16 added it could not go into the 2.0, well at least wont be able to use feather and flame at the same time in the 2.0, or did i miss something? If your talking about the slot16 feather going into 3.0 with the flame slot4 aug, wouldnt make much game breaking difference seeing by the time most are able to get 3.0 done they are t8 flagged and the 10k slot 16s are on par with solro slot4s anyhow, least by AC standards I dont see much harm in making the feather slot16 useable.

I know the 2.0 can host it already. The suggestion above is to change the feather to 16 slot, which would absolutely mean it could be slotted with the flame at the same time, as the flame is slot 4. Currently, you can't do this as both augs are slot 4.

I do agree that the 3.0 needs to be a direct upgrade on the 2.0. That said, I'm not entirely sure it needs to be a direct upgrade for a slot other than as a weapon. There might be a way to achieve this, but slot 4 is discarded in general with t7 and up. This is why I don't use t7 weapons on my back slot to replace a 2.0 but I do with my weapons. I've used back specific items that have enough slots to improve on my 2.0 (including needing to ditch the feather on some characters, or move it to the offhand donator)

Adding a slot 4 to the 3.0 would be difficult to maintain balance, at first glance, and allowing the feather to slot 16 doesn't actually provide the fix required above. It'd just make the 2.0 even more desirable as a back item, way ahead of its tier. I don't know of any current slot 16 augs that have 90ac that can be used on te back in conjunction with the feather. Maybe in t8 but not lower.

I don't think the 2.0 has a slot 16, though. So it wouldn't be possible to put both Sol Ro items into it even with the addition of a slot 16 on the feather.

webtools/items.php?id=3232

Nope, no 16.

Aye thats what i was saying lol

Mixed it up with the donator my mistake.

It'd still make the feather a highly desirable weapon slots on tanks, mind. Unless you have the crest of artorius in the slot already. If this change occurred, I'd put the feather into my warrior's mainhand, so I suppose from my point of view it still wouldn't mean my 3.0 is better than the 2.0 for the slot choice (ranged).

I'm not at home so unable to check my loadout quickly. I might be mistaken but the fix doesn't feel right and feels a little dependent on a player's primary choice? Not trying to be obstructive. On paper it seems a quick fix, I'm just considering any knock on effects.