3 New Notifications

New Badge Earned
Get 1K upvotes on your post
Life choices of my cat
Earned 210

Drag Images here or Browse from your computer.

Trending Posts
Sorted by Newest First
O
Olezha Buhalo 22.07.20 03:04 am

gumble (Diablo 2)

86 LVL
194 amulet
only 1st and 2nd skill
what is the formula for the probability 2скилового amulet?
play on the classics
29 Comments
Sort by:
B
Baaaalshoy Andrey 22.07.20

Dude, you just have to fuck the formula. Just. Take 95 LVL and gamblers. Infa 100.

O
Olezha Buhalo 22.07.20

Baaaalshoy Andrew
the KL JI I :D

O
Obsessed 22.07.20

Oleg Bukhalo, take 95 to KL, you weakling! E
and Cho didn't you tell me, Shaw KL? :-) there are only LVL boor it is necessary to take (normal people :D), infa 100.

G
Gav 22.07.20

strange how you're the one caught, there need to LVL 92 in principle, they could shamblers.

B
Baaaalshoy Andrey 22.07.20

Oleg Bukhalo
In solidarity with New only a wuss takes 95 to KL:) And in the case, silent. In KL only soar. They say 95% safer:)

s
sxDiablo2 22.07.20

For the appearance of an affix +2 skills amulets need affix_level>=90. For affix_level charms=ilvl. When you get gamble items with ilvl from clvl-5 to clvl+4. Thus, the minimum clvl where can shamblers +2 skills amulets - 86 (where did the number 92 I don't understand). Only when you gambling at clvl=86 amulets ilvl=90 (that is, those which have a chance to get either +2 skills) will appear only in 10% of cases. This veratnet will increase by 10% with each level reaching 100% at clvl=95. By the way, rark gamble when you are issued only in 10% of cases (regardless of level).
As to what is the probability of the particle loss of +2 skills on the amulet with ilvl>=90, then it is more difficult to calculate. Saw on a German forum the affix calculator which allows to calculate the probability of different combinations of affixes, but it kind of broke. Specifically, for magic amulets, I have seemed to work the probability for a specific class 1:130. The idea is that to be more rare, because there the prefix can generates up to 3 times (I don't know how to count, everything is more dull).
In General, 1 of 194 on clvl=86, I think it's normal number, somewhere it will. I still recommend bulk up to 88-89, it's not that hard, but gold will be spent much more efficiently (if they live in desperate need of +2 amulets).

T
Top_Gun 22.07.20

sxDiablo2>Dobermn

R
Rivnyanyn 22.07.20

Download Oleg 95, do IT!!!

a
annortheone 22.07.20

Top_Gun
It is so obvious, even writing about it is not worth it.

O
Olezha Buhalo 22.07.20

sxDiablo2
thank you)

m
minovalo 22.07.20

If we live desperately needs +2 amulets, it is questmap diablotones.

R
Resu 22.07.20

LVL 86, only 10% shambling amulets will be 90+ LVL, ie, only ~19 amulets could be 2ск on 95ур all amulets will be 90+ LVL, LVL 92 need for crafting

O
Obsessed 22.07.20

passed, ...and sways to 92, Dronov a few dumb Amul 2 sk ;D

m
minovalo 22.07.20

Obsessed
Yeah, it's a cunning plan. ;)

m
minovalo 22.07.20

For crafting 93+. But this is not about CL.

G
Gav 22.07.20

passed
well, questrom right in six hundred trillion times increases the likelihood of dropping out of +2 Amul, the that of Diablo will not fall off the bottles and scrolls.

O
Obsessed 22.07.20

Dobermn, I fell on LVL 86 was ngambil AMOLED 2 sor 60 hp 1 str ~18 fres. but me it is my lucky day once. more players - more chances that someone namutili more Amul (stuffed ham KL 92, ofc) and will sell them. where are lucky with Di or gamble - XS, of course. but if the TC players were more - there would have been certainly more fun. you there say.. but Oh, well. ;D

P
Progon_mulov. 22.07.20

sxDiablo2
vot tot kalk. link pomenyalsa
ezhttp://diablo3.ingame.de/diablodb/affix_chances_rare.php?type=amul&lang=en&version=lod&patch=111&item=Amulet&ilvl=99&qlvl=1&mlvl=0

G
Gav 22.07.20

Obsessed wrote:
I fell on LVL 86 was ngambil AMOLED 2 sor 60 hp 1 str ~18 fres
specks, no FKR ;D

O
Obsessed 22.07.20

Dobermn, no specks will be when to start gambling 15 people (at least).
[edit] by the way, for me, fcr 2 sor KL eMule not needed. :-)