Does silver surfer take Incinerate damage against Torch?

BitterSteel

walkerdog said:

Zan0 said:

BitterSteel said:

walkerdog said:

rockykoston said:

BitterSteel said:

Torch does 140% incinerate damage.

Surfer reduces that by -100%.

Surfer takes 40% incinerate damage.

Each smoulder adds another 10%

Hmm , makes sense in a certain way but still odd.

Surfer reduces damage by 100%, so whatever the incoming Incinerate damage, he should reduce it. It's not like his Ability to reduce damage is affected.

Kabam thinks percentages are units not percentages of a total. Its psychotic but thats what's going on. They don't understand that reducing 100% of anything is all of it, whether its 100%, 2%, or 150%, or they do but they don't care.

It’s absolutely not psychotic. It’s how the game is built and works. Kabam understand this clearly, so I do i. The only example of someone not understanding it, appears to be you I’m afraid.

They do understand that 100% of something is all of it, but they have decided to use the other method as previously explained. You can disagree with that all you want, call it psychotic, complain to your hearts content. It doesn’t change that the logic and the numbers are sound no matter how much you may think it’s not.

What *could* change, is the in game description and clarity. Based on the fact we have these threads every couple of weeks, it could be explained a little more clearly in game to avoid this issue. Although to be fair, I have explained this to you a few times, and you still seem just as angry about it so I’m not sure it would fully solve the problem.

It’s absolutely clear as day what @BitterSteel is saying is correct. Also at this point you can’t change it because it would massively imbalance the game both in our favour and not in our favour

No I agree its how it works, but it is insane to think that reducing something by 100% (as Bitter notes) is not a psychotic description or result when its just subtracting 100 units not actually reducing all of it.

It’s really not insane to think that. You’re just not grasping the point. You know how this conversation should go?

“Why does surfer take incinerate damage”

“Here’s why”

“Oh, ok, that makes sense now it’s been explained”

You’re just taking it far too seriously. @rockykoston demonstrates the perfect way to deal with the situation. He didn’t understand it, he asked, he clarified and once it had been explained, he accepted it. It really should be as simple as that, and it baffles me how it isn’t to you.

You can call what you disagree with insane if you like, but everyone else around here gets it. And when it’s explained to people who don’t, they get it too. Because it makes sense

Think about it however you want, think of it as a base ability, think of it as resistance being a unit. I don’t frankly mind. But please, just accept it’s a fundamental part of the game, and this seriously isn’t something to be up in arms about. It literally benefits you and the entire game.

BitterSteel

walkerdog said:

BitterSteel said:

walkerdog said:

Zan0 said:

BitterSteel said:

walkerdog said:

rockykoston said:

BitterSteel said:

Torch does 140% incinerate damage.

Surfer reduces that by -100%.

Surfer takes 40% incinerate damage.

Each smoulder adds another 10%

Hmm , makes sense in a certain way but still odd.

Surfer reduces damage by 100%, so whatever the incoming Incinerate damage, he should reduce it. It's not like his Ability to reduce damage is affected.

Kabam thinks percentages are units not percentages of a total. Its psychotic but thats what's going on. They don't understand that reducing 100% of anything is all of it, whether its 100%, 2%, or 150%, or they do but they don't care.

It’s absolutely not psychotic. It’s how the game is built and works. Kabam understand this clearly, so I do i. The only example of someone not understanding it, appears to be you I’m afraid.

They do understand that 100% of something is all of it, but they have decided to use the other method as previously explained. You can disagree with that all you want, call it psychotic, complain to your hearts content. It doesn’t change that the logic and the numbers are sound no matter how much you may think it’s not.

What *could* change, is the in game description and clarity. Based on the fact we have these threads every couple of weeks, it could be explained a little more clearly in game to avoid this issue. Although to be fair, I have explained this to you a few times, and you still seem just as angry about it so I’m not sure it would fully solve the problem.

It’s absolutely clear as day what @BitterSteel is saying is correct. Also at this point you can’t change it because it would massively imbalance the game both in our favour and not in our favour

No I agree its how it works, but it is insane to think that reducing something by 100% (as Bitter notes) is not a psychotic description or result when its just subtracting 100 units not actually reducing all of it.

It’s really not insane to think that. You’re just not grasping the point. You know how this conversation should go?

“Why does surfer take incinerate damage”

“Here’s why”

“Oh, ok, that makes sense now it’s been explained”

You’re just taking it far too seriously. @rockykoston demonstrates the perfect way to deal with the situation. He didn’t understand it, he asked, he clarified and once it had been explained, he accepted it. It really should be as simple as that, and it baffles me how it isn’t to you.

You can call what you disagree with insane if you like, but everyone else around here gets it. And when it’s explained to people who don’t, they get it too. Because it makes sense

Think about it however you want, think of it as a base ability, think of it as resistance being a unit. I don’t frankly mind. But please, just accept it’s a fundamental part of the game, and this seriously isn’t something to be up in arms about. It literally benefits you and the entire game.

No, I accept the function, its fine! But its not what the words mean really. And I'm not saying you're psychotic, I'm saying that when they started using only (afaik) additive treatments of %, they should have either reworded those abilities or just reworked them some (like removing %), and to keep going like it is, as if its clearly worded, is psychotic. Or nuts. Or bad. Hoeever u want to think about it, its poor communication (by them! You are as always very helpful even if I disagree with you).

Sorry to derail it.

See, I’d be fine with you saying you accept the function, but I feel like you’ll pop up in the next thread and say “Kabam don’t understand percentages” and that’ll prove that you’re not fine with it.

If the only point you were making is they could be clearer, yeah, I absolutely agree with you. Chuck the word “flat” in front of these abilities and most of the problems go away. However, that’s not the only point you’re making.

So will you be in the next thread claiming this system is flawed? Or will you only be asking them to be clearer?

DNA3000

walkerdog said:

BitterSteel said:

walkerdog said:

rockykoston said:

BitterSteel said:

Torch does 140% incinerate damage.

Surfer reduces that by -100%.

Surfer takes 40% incinerate damage.

Each smoulder adds another 10%

Hmm , makes sense in a certain way but still odd.

Surfer reduces damage by 100%, so whatever the incoming Incinerate damage, he should reduce it. It's not like his Ability to reduce damage is affected.

Kabam thinks percentages are units not percentages of a total. Its psychotic but thats what's going on. They don't understand that reducing 100% of anything is all of it, whether its 100%, 2%, or 150%, or they do but they don't care.

It’s absolutely not psychotic. It’s how the game is built and works. Kabam understand this clearly, so I do i. The only example of someone not understanding it, appears to be you I’m afraid.

They do understand that 100% of something is all of it, but they have decided to use the other method as previously explained. You can disagree with that all you want, call it psychotic, complain to your hearts content. It doesn’t change that the logic and the numbers are sound no matter how much you may think it’s not.

What *could* change, is the in game description and clarity. Based on the fact we have these threads every couple of weeks, it could be explained a little more clearly in game to avoid this issue. Although to be fair, I have explained this to you a few times, and you still seem just as angry about it so I’m not sure it would fully solve the problem.

I do understand the explanation. I dont understand how their rules team doesn't fix things so that they're consistent with the words in the game despite it being a regular issue (as noted above).

Because when it comes to percentages, the devs are not good at it, and the players are also not good at it, so there's no unambiguous set of words that everyone will understand that will fit in the ability description panels. The literal correct description would be to say that Silver Surfer reduces incineration damage modifiers by one hundred percentage points. That's unambiguous and precise. But how many players would understand that statement? How many players would understand the very common (in game design) but not necessarily intuitive idea of modifier accumulators? How many would know the difference between percentages and percentage points?

BitterSteel

DNA3000 said:

walkerdog said:

BitterSteel said:

walkerdog said:

rockykoston said:

BitterSteel said:

Torch does 140% incinerate damage.

Surfer reduces that by -100%.

Surfer takes 40% incinerate damage.

Each smoulder adds another 10%

Hmm , makes sense in a certain way but still odd.

Surfer reduces damage by 100%, so whatever the incoming Incinerate damage, he should reduce it. It's not like his Ability to reduce damage is affected.

Kabam thinks percentages are units not percentages of a total. Its psychotic but thats what's going on. They don't understand that reducing 100% of anything is all of it, whether its 100%, 2%, or 150%, or they do but they don't care.

It’s absolutely not psychotic. It’s how the game is built and works. Kabam understand this clearly, so I do i. The only example of someone not understanding it, appears to be you I’m afraid.

They do understand that 100% of something is all of it, but they have decided to use the other method as previously explained. You can disagree with that all you want, call it psychotic, complain to your hearts content. It doesn’t change that the logic and the numbers are sound no matter how much you may think it’s not.

What *could* change, is the in game description and clarity. Based on the fact we have these threads every couple of weeks, it could be explained a little more clearly in game to avoid this issue. Although to be fair, I have explained this to you a few times, and you still seem just as angry about it so I’m not sure it would fully solve the problem.

I do understand the explanation. I dont understand how their rules team doesn't fix things so that they're consistent with the words in the game despite it being a regular issue (as noted above).

Because when it comes to percentages, the devs are not good at it, and the players are also not good at it, so there's no unambiguous set of words that everyone will understand that will fit in the ability description panels. The literal correct description would be to say that Silver Surfer reduces incineration damage modifiers by one hundred percentage points. That's unambiguous and precise. But how many players would understand that statement? How many players would understand the very common (in game design) but not necessarily intuitive idea of modifier accumulators? How many would know the difference between percentages and percentage points?

That’s why my suggestion would be to use the word flat. A lot of the community know that when the word flat is used it’s an addition or subtraction of the value.

So if Surfer’s abilities were “reduces incinerate damage by a flat -100%”, and enhanced incinerate read “incinerates deal a flat 40% extra damage” or “incinerates deal base 140% damage”, then I believe a lot of players would know that means surfer would take damage.

And for the ones that inevitably won’t understand that (I hope that doesn’t sound patronising, I just mean the outliers), there will be a much clearer explanation rather than “incinerates are 40% more effective” and “surfer takes -100% incinerate damage”. It will be a lot easier to point to the flat description and say, here, this is what flat means.

CoatHang3r

DNA3000 said:

walkerdog said:

BitterSteel said:

walkerdog said:

rockykoston said:

BitterSteel said:

Torch does 140% incinerate damage.

Surfer reduces that by -100%.

Surfer takes 40% incinerate damage.

Each smoulder adds another 10%

Hmm , makes sense in a certain way but still odd.

Surfer reduces damage by 100%, so whatever the incoming Incinerate damage, he should reduce it. It's not like his Ability to reduce damage is affected.

Kabam thinks percentages are units not percentages of a total. Its psychotic but thats what's going on. They don't understand that reducing 100% of anything is all of it, whether its 100%, 2%, or 150%, or they do but they don't care.

It’s absolutely not psychotic. It’s how the game is built and works. Kabam understand this clearly, so I do i. The only example of someone not understanding it, appears to be you I’m afraid.

They do understand that 100% of something is all of it, but they have decided to use the other method as previously explained. You can disagree with that all you want, call it psychotic, complain to your hearts content. It doesn’t change that the logic and the numbers are sound no matter how much you may think it’s not.

What *could* change, is the in game description and clarity. Based on the fact we have these threads every couple of weeks, it could be explained a little more clearly in game to avoid this issue. Although to be fair, I have explained this to you a few times, and you still seem just as angry about it so I’m not sure it would fully solve the problem.

I do understand the explanation. I dont understand how their rules team doesn't fix things so that they're consistent with the words in the game despite it being a regular issue (as noted above).

Because when it comes to percentages, the devs are not good at it, and the players are also not good at it, so there's no unambiguous set of words that everyone will understand that will fit in the ability description panels. The literal correct description would be to say that Silver Surfer reduces incineration damage modifiers by one hundred percentage points. That's unambiguous and precise. But how many players would understand that statement? How many players would understand the very common (in game design) but not necessarily intuitive idea of modifier accumulators? How many would know the difference between percentages and percentage points?

Would they really need a language change since the percentage actually represents a fraction? I would think they could change the numerical values from 100% to 100/100 and things like Torch’s incinerate to +20/100 since that’s what is actually being conveyed, fractions as percentages.

rockykoston

While I agree that kabam doesn't implement the same logic throughout the game, being a QA I can understand how these problems can creep up.

Language, numbers, percentages can certainly be ambiguous given the context.

I've tested Silver Surfer again vs a regular torch and he doesn't work if torch gets a smolder charge aka if you block the last hit in his special.

Smolders increase the chance of Incinerate and once you get an Incinerate, say good bye to surfer because each Incinerate/smolder increases dmg and activation by 12%.

It's quite simple, just remember not to use Silver Surfer against Torch.

BitterSteel

Ignore. Abyss post coming through late

AverageDesi

walkerdog said:

A simple change might be to just say "subtract" instead of reduce. Reduce is less specific imo, and subtraction is whats going on specifically.

it does not say reduce 100%. it says "-100%" " - ' is a symbol used to denote subtraction. just like you wanted. never speak of this again

now, if your issue is that players don't understand what '-' signmeans, that's another issue

FluffyPigMonster

I think Sheldon Cooper can create an equation that accurately reflects what’s happening.

Moral of this thread. Torch incinerates on Surfer is bad for surfer.

Real_Madrid_76_2

Bruh just try that fight and put down a comment on forums regarding your experience or this thread will get closed as it is turning into a fight

FluffyPigMonster

Real_Madrid_76_2 said:

Bruh just try that fight and put down a comment on forums regarding your experience or this thread will get closed as it is turning into a fight

I’ve fought HT many times with Surfer to know it’s not a positive experience. The math is irrelevant to me at this point.

I do wonder where Winter Soldier puts the machine gun after his SP2. That thing heats up after all those rounds are fired.