Posted by JoeBob on August 14, 1999 at 00:58:25:
Now don't get me wrong, standard for applicants are one thing, but some of the things expected of battle applicants seem a bit daft to me. For instance, why would a warrior who has dedicated his life to say staff/spear or polearm use shield block? He cannot use a shield with his weapon so why? Just so he can see that spiffy 100%? And requiring assassins to learn their kicks, now most of the higher kicks are rather nice, but really i would think mastering throw and trip a bit more important than getting scissor kick, but that is just me. And from past experience with higher level thiefs, I would think mastery of maces a bit more important than swords, though dagger goes without saying. And I would think battle would want a thief to have more than passing knowledge to backstab/knife/circle stab but these were strangely left out of the note. As I have not played the other classes that are acceptable to battle I cannot really say much about the requirements for them. The new policies do seem to be pushing applicants to be more self reliant, as skill mastery usually seems to mean not grouping for the most part at lower levels, and self reliance is not a bad thing and it will be funny seeing all the giants trying to master dodge. And I did find it a bit strange that there was no mention of killing mages before being accepted. PS: personally as a warrior I would rather master one weapon and have a high degree of knowledge with all others than master 2 weapons. PPS: I am not angry with battle's new policy just mad that cf seems to be unreachable.