Options

No fury buff for 6* in act 7.1?

Woody_federWoody_feder Member Posts: 584 ★★
in General Discussion
I noticed that six star champs no longer have a fury buff in act 7.1... is the is a bug? I’m playing act 7.1.6 the footloose path. Anyone else see this?


«1

Comments

  • Six_strings6Six_strings6 Member Posts: 223 ★★
    Just theorising here but have you tested to see if the attack bonus is still there. My guess would be they still give you the +700 attack but removed to fury effect specifically so fury doesn’t get the infinite duration tactical charges in his first phase.
  • Woody_federWoody_feder Member Posts: 584 ★★
    I first noticed it on sabertooth, then I tried thing to make sure I wasn’t crazy, and then also gambit did not get a fury effect... not really sure what your talking about when you say first phase
  • Six_strings6Six_strings6 Member Posts: 223 ★★
    Woody_feder said:

    I first noticed it on sabertooth, then I tried thing to make sure I wasn’t crazy, and then also gambit did not get a fury effect... not really sure what your talking about when you say first phase

    By fury I meant nick fury. The passive fury from the act 7 global prevents his tactical charges from expiring. Therefore he can go fully unblockable in his first phase. What I was also suggesting was if you go into another piece of content with the same team is there a noticeable attack difference. Implying the fury is still there but not showing up due to the nick fury interaction I just mentioned
  • Woody_federWoody_feder Member Posts: 584 ★★
    Nick fury is not on my team, and the screen shot shows thing vs nebula... But I think I understand what you’re saying. You think kabam took the passive fury away because of an effect on Nick fury?
  • Woody_federWoody_feder Member Posts: 584 ★★
    Lol I just said that... was this announced and I just missed it?
  • Woody_federWoody_feder Member Posts: 584 ★★
    Ok so I did another path with thing, I did not notice a difference in his attack. My guess is that it is bugged...
  • BabyMiikeBabyMiike Member Posts: 1,184 ★★★★
    Lmao said:

    Jaded said:

    Haha that’s a dirty play by kabam lmao

    Sneaky buggers

    Stop blaming everything on kabam and thinking that it was done on purpose. It’s probably just a mistake
    Yes exactly we don't give them enough credit and we bash them for everything
  • Woody_federWoody_feder Member Posts: 584 ★★
    Oh no not wanting to bash Kabam, but I do want it looked into! I am one chapter away from my exploration run. I just want the benefit of bringing my 6*s
  • JadedJaded Member Posts: 5,477 ★★★★★
    Lmao said:

    Jaded said:

    Haha that’s a dirty play by kabam lmao

    Sneaky buggers

    Stop blaming everything on kabam and thinking that it was done on purpose. It’s probably just a mistake
    I was being sarcastic 🤷‍♂️, it’s not there but yes probably just a mistake. Sorry, I didn’t mean to come across against kabam.
  • WorknprogressWorknprogress Member Posts: 7,233 ★★★★★
    edited February 2021
    Just as an FYI, 6* Nick is not getting the fury passive or maintaining tac charges in LMD currently. Just tested it out
  • WorknprogressWorknprogress Member Posts: 7,233 ★★★★★

  • Woody_federWoody_feder Member Posts: 584 ★★
    @Kabam Miike any ideas on this topic?
  • UnknownUnknown
    This content has been removed.
  • Mobile_P0tat0Mobile_P0tat0 Member Posts: 966 ★★★★
    Worknprogress said:

    Hopefully it's not an intentional change and just a bug though. Wouldn't be a great look to change stuff like that on the slick and conveniently not have it in the change log.

    I have a feeling that was a contributing factor for this change
  • GamerGamer Member Posts: 12,033 ★★★★★
    Kabam Boo said:

    Some of you have got it! So, the Fury icon has been removed, that is correct! But, you are definitely receiving a boost. Please let us know if you are still noticing any discrepancies or have any further questions! :)

    I’m find it oddly bad to changes it because one didt said it the patch nod what so ever. Change it back or at lest said it no bug people use it for like nick Fury fx with was nice but now you saying it was a bug and the pasive fury wasn’t meant to be there
  • JadedJaded Member Posts: 5,477 ★★★★★
    Worknprogress said:

    HI_guys said:

    Worknprogress said:

    Hopefully it's not an intentional change and just a bug though. Wouldn't be a great look to change stuff like that on the slick and conveniently not have it in the change log.

    Apparently it is. Getting too comfortable making changes without notifying
    That's quite unfortunate. It's one thing to make changes bc of an unintended interaction, it's a whole other one to do it and just hope no one notices and not say anything.

    Also, I find it odd that it was changed now as it worked exactly as it did on release in the beta and I'm pretty sure that interaction was not only used in the beta (that I'm sure of bc I did it) but also discussed in the beta forum as well
    Full heartedly agree!!
  • UnknownUnknown
    This content has been removed.
  • WorknprogressWorknprogress Member Posts: 7,233 ★★★★★
    HI_guys said:

    Lmao said:

    Jaded said:

    Haha that’s a dirty play by kabam lmao

    Sneaky buggers

    Stop blaming everything on kabam and thinking that it was done on purpose. It’s probably just a mistake
    Lol
    Yes, but I feel the same way personally. I'd rather get confirmation on things before overreacting to everything and assuming something was done as opposed to broken.

    This is still somewhat disappointing but overall not massive. Just makes it a bit harder to defend stuff
  • Realm_Of_RahRealm_Of_Rah Member Posts: 430 ★★★
    Can't they just put another icon in its place similar to Cyclop's 200% attack boost in AQ?
  • LmaoLmao Member Posts: 900 ★★★
    Worknprogress said:

    HI_guys said:

    Lmao said:

    Jaded said:

    Haha that’s a dirty play by kabam lmao

    Sneaky buggers

    Stop blaming everything on kabam and thinking that it was done on purpose. It’s probably just a mistake
    Lol
    Yes, but I feel the same way personally. I'd rather get confirmation on things before overreacting to everything and assuming something was done as opposed to broken.

    This is still somewhat disappointing but overall not massive. Just makes it a bit harder to defend stuff
    Exactly, besides this isn’t that big of a change either. The only champion affected was NF and it wasn’t even suppose to affect him. This is like the Morningstar interaction and people calling it a “nerf” all over again
  • WorknprogressWorknprogress Member Posts: 7,233 ★★★★★
    Lmao said:

    Worknprogress said:

    HI_guys said:

    Lmao said:

    Jaded said:

    Haha that’s a dirty play by kabam lmao

    Sneaky buggers

    Stop blaming everything on kabam and thinking that it was done on purpose. It’s probably just a mistake
    Lol
    Yes, but I feel the same way personally. I'd rather get confirmation on things before overreacting to everything and assuming something was done as opposed to broken.

    This is still somewhat disappointing but overall not massive. Just makes it a bit harder to defend stuff
    Exactly, besides this isn’t that big of a change either. The only champion affected was NF and it wasn’t even suppose to affect him. This is like the Morningstar interaction and people calling it a “nerf” all over again
    Well any fury affects him regardless of it being passive or active so if there was a fury it was supposed to affect him. The dev team just didn't think of it and apparently didn't pay attention to beta testing videos or forum posts.
Sign In or Register to comment.