Strikers affected by Accuracy Reductions in the opponent

Comments

• Cjt782 Member Posts: 6 ★

  February 2022

  This is also true for Cav EQ interactions (the attacker can fail to get the beneficial fury buffs because the defender has reduced ability accuracy). I opened a ticket about that, and Kabam said:

  node effects are 'attached' to the Defender, so any Ability Accuracy changes can prevent node effect from applying correctly

  they also told me:

  Since node buffs are attached to the defender and considered their own abilities, this means node buff effects can fail. This is an intended design.

  imho, this equates to a silent nerf of champions who rely on ability accuracy reduction because they are now significantly less useful for content like Cav EQ and anything with Strikers.

  1
• LordSmasher Member Posts: 1,604 ★★★★★

  February 2022

  Cjt782 said:

  This is also true for Cav EQ interactions (the attacker can fail to get the beneficial fury buffs because the defender has reduced ability accuracy). I opened a ticket about that, and Kabam said:
  

  node effects are 'attached' to the Defender, so any Ability Accuracy changes can prevent node effect from applying correctly

  they also told me:

  Since node buffs are attached to the defender and considered their own abilities, this means node buff effects can fail. This is an intended design.

  imho, this equates to a silent nerf of champions who rely on ability accuracy reduction because they are now significantly less useful for content like Cav EQ and anything with Strikers.
  
  Intended design and good design are not the same thing.
  They should just fix it.

  1
• xNig Member Posts: 7,336 ★★★★★

  February 2022 edited February 2022

  I’m pretty sure it was intended. AAR is a double edged sword, downside of which is most pronounced on nodes that rely on actions that benefit you.
  
  It is also very hard to determine what is “beneficial” and what is “not beneficial” to your attacker.
  
  For example, if I bring Warlock with G99 or OGV synergy to fight iAbom, poisons that were going to be inflicted on an attacker is supposed to be “not beneficial”, but in this case, with the synergy, it becomes beneficial.
  
  Given the myriad of champs and interactions in the game, add in the complications of synergies, it becomes almost impossible to produce a general decision to base a code on on whether AAR should or should not affect a certain node. Hence, I think a more standard and logical approach was taken to have AAR affect all interactions.

  0
• Cjt782 Member Posts: 6 ★

  February 2022

  xNig said:

  I’m pretty sure it was intended. AAR is a double edged sword, downside of which is most pronounced on nodes that rely on actions that benefit you.
  
  It is also very hard to determine what is “beneficial” and what is “not beneficial” to your attacker.
  
  For example, if I bring Warlock with G99 or OGV synergy to fight iAbom, poisons that were going to be inflicted on an attacker is supposed to be “not beneficial”, but in this case, with the synergy, it becomes beneficial.
  
  Given the myriad of champs and interactions in the game, add in the complications of synergies, it becomes almost impossible to produce a general decision to base a code on on whether AAR should or should not affect a certain node. Hence, I think a more standard and logical approach was taken to have AAR affect all interactions.

  I agree that it's impossible to determine whether any given interaction is beneficial or not, but these are two examples of recent content where the effect is 100% intended to be a benefit for attackers and where that benefit is completely unrelated to the defender. As such, they could/should be built as "attacker nodes" or "fight attributes" and apply to the attacker/fight instead of the defender.
  
  fwiw, I'm definitely NOT trying to say that Kabam should have to, for example, cause Magneto to get inflicted with bleed when his ability accuracy reduction against a metal champ would otherwise prevent it (since those are basically just a heal for him if you have willpower). You're right that doing stuff like that would be basically impossible.

  0