What's the deal with the Gambit relic?

magnus_xixmagnus_xix Member Posts: 2,019 ★★★★★
Previously, the Gambit relic gave specials that deal physical damage +~2200 crit rating across all rarities and ranks. I can't imagine this was intended but has it now actually been fixed or was it just a visual bug and the crit rating displayed was never accurate?

The crit rating has now changed to various values across the different rarities with the 4* giving +~800 crit rating and the 5* giving +~1600 crit rating. I'm unsure on how much crit rating the 6* gives as I don't own it.

The additional crit rating still doesn't increase as the relic is ranked up however. Is this also intended or not? Will there be anymore changes to it or is this the final version?
«13456

Comments

  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,573 ★★★★★
    xLunatiXx said:

    Wow is that the first (or another) shadow nerf ? I'm losing my words

    There are no shadow nerfs. If anything, it's likely a bug.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,573 ★★★★★

    xLunatiXx said:

    Wow is that the first (or another) shadow nerf ? I'm losing my words

    There are no shadow nerfs. If anything, it's likely a bug.
    Yes because when you are typing 800 you can easily instead type 2100 on accident. It's basically the same number, the characters are right next to each other, and the numbers are the same number of digits. It happens all the time.
    So you think someone went in to change it and mistyped 2100? I've heard some conspiracies but that one is interesting.
  • AverageDesiAverageDesi Member Posts: 5,260 ★★★★★

    xLunatiXx said:

    Wow is that the first (or another) shadow nerf ? I'm losing my words

    There are no shadow nerfs. If anything, it's likely a bug.
    Bishop though
  • AverageDesiAverageDesi Member Posts: 5,260 ★★★★★

    xLunatiXx said:

    Wow is that the first (or another) shadow nerf ? I'm losing my words

    There are no shadow nerfs. If anything, it's likely a bug.
    Yes because when you are typing 800 you can easily instead type 2100 on accident. It's basically the same number, the characters are right next to each other, and the numbers are the same number of digits. It happens all the time.
    It's not that simple
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,573 ★★★★★

    Is likely a shadow nerf, not a bug

    What information do you have to base that on?
  • AverageDesiAverageDesi Member Posts: 5,260 ★★★★★

    Is likely a shadow nerf, not a bug

    What information do you have to base that on?
    God do you ever stop defending Kabam over everything and claiming anything negative people say on these forums are conspiracies? It was 2.1k indeed and now it's 800, that's no bug that is a shadow nerf.



    No what GW is saying is that it's likely that the new values are bugged or the old one was
  • AverageDesiAverageDesi Member Posts: 5,260 ★★★★★

    Is likely a shadow nerf, not a bug

    What information do you have to base that on?
    God do you ever stop defending Kabam over everything and claiming anything negative people say on these forums are conspiracies? It was 2.1k indeed and now it's 800, that's no bug that is a shadow nerf.



    No what GW is saying is that it's likely that the new values are bugged or the old one was
    So you're saying it's far more likely for this whole situation to be a bug than a shadow nerf? Doesn't seem logical to me, sure nobody here has insider information but if you take into account the fact that the values changed on the higher rarities too it's pretty obvious what actually happened here.
    Ps. I really don't think defending GW is a hill you wanna die on mate.
    Is it really that hard to believe this game has bugs?
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,573 ★★★★★
    The point I'm making is NONE of us have enough information to make assertions either way. I suspect it's a bug because history shows they don't just silently nerf things, and they've said so umpteen times.
    The implied point I made, which was overlooked, was it's always best to gather more information and ask then jump to the "nerf" conclusion.
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,573 ★★★★★
    Something is different. = They nerfed him.

    That seem logical?
  • GroundedWisdomGroundedWisdom Member Posts: 36,573 ★★★★★
    xLunatiXx said:

    The point I'm making is NONE of us have enough information to make assertions either way. I suspect it's a bug because history shows they don't just silently nerf things, and they've said so umpteen times.
    The implied point I made, which was overlooked, was it's always best to gather more information and ask then jump to the "nerf" conclusion.

    History does say the opposite tho 💁‍♂️
    Hard disagree. In 8 and a half years, I'd like to know what history of silent nerfs that is.
Sign In or Register to comment.