**Mastery Loadouts**
Due to issues related to the release of Mastery Loadouts, the "free swap" period will be extended.
The new end date will be May 1st.

Silver Surfer suffering dmg from Human Torch

JefechutaJefechuta Posts: 1,204 ★★★★
in Bugs and Known Issues
This happened many times but I thought that it would be solved but maybe nobody noticed it, but Silver Surfer sometimes gets dmg from High Voltage or Incineration debuffs when its meant to not receive dmg.

This time I recorded a fight where it happens:



As u can see, i get dmg when I shouldnt, pls, fix this, this has been happening for 2 years now.

Comments

  • MaratoxMaratox Posts: 1,495 ★★★★★
    It’s not a bug. Torch increases his incinerate damage for every smoulder or incinerate on either champ
  • JefechutaJefechuta Posts: 1,204 ★★★★
    It doesnt matter, if u receive a 100% less of the dmg you should receive it means you receive none of that damage, it works like X+ x% - 100% when it should be (X+x%) - 100%, its just an error in the calculation of the dmg
  • H3t3rH3t3r Posts: 2,879 Guardian
    Not a bug. Move on. It's the same with red hulk against mephistos who have increased incinerate damage.
  • JefechutaJefechuta Posts: 1,204 ★★★★
    Still incorrectly formulated, its just an error as I said with the calculation of the dmg, the fact that Silver Surfer isnt immune is that he gets an advantage as the debuffs count as buffs instead for the rest of his abillities, its not meant to get dmg anyway when he gets -100% less dmg. Its senseless and Kabam knows it, they may fix it or let it be but its still senseless
  • MagrailothosMagrailothos Posts: 5,348 ★★★★★
    As Maratox stated - Torch can boost his Incinerate damage.
    Elsa Bloodstone can do the same thing, because her Busted debuffs increase the potency of her Incinerates:

  • JefechutaJefechuta Posts: 1,204 ★★★★
    Maratox said:

    Jefechuta said:

    Still incorrectly formulated, its just an error as I said with the calculation of the dmg, the fact that Silver Surfer isnt immune is that he gets an advantage as the debuffs count as buffs instead for the rest of his abillities, its not meant to get dmg anyway when he gets -100% less dmg. Its senseless and Kabam knows it, they may fix it or let it be but its still senseless

    -100% damage and “takes no damage” mean different things. Torch increases his incinerate damage by like 12% per incinerate or smoulder. That means you take 112% damage. Surfer only negates 100% of that. It’s additive. Not a bug. Not poorly worded. Not incorrectly calculated.
    As I already explained, there are 2 ways to calculate this stuff, ((12%* X)* incinerate dmg) -100%, this formula equals 0, and its formula that makes more sense since theres no details on both characters abilities about the way you suffer the damage more than that.

    And even if you get a boost in the damage, that boost is still between the parenthesis, so Silver Surfer should still suffer no dmg, because doesnt matter if the you get 150% of the incinerate dmg or 1500%, that dmg still equals an X, and doesnt matter the amount of that X because -100% it will always equal 0, as I say, Kabam should either give more details, or fix this mistake, but probably they will pretend that they always intended this effect
  • AverageDesiAverageDesi Posts: 5,260 ★★★★★
    Jefechuta said:

    Maratox said:

    Jefechuta said:

    Still incorrectly formulated, its just an error as I said with the calculation of the dmg, the fact that Silver Surfer isnt immune is that he gets an advantage as the debuffs count as buffs instead for the rest of his abillities, its not meant to get dmg anyway when he gets -100% less dmg. Its senseless and Kabam knows it, they may fix it or let it be but its still senseless

    -100% damage and “takes no damage” mean different things. Torch increases his incinerate damage by like 12% per incinerate or smoulder. That means you take 112% damage. Surfer only negates 100% of that. It’s additive. Not a bug. Not poorly worded. Not incorrectly calculated.
    As I already explained, there are 2 ways to calculate this stuff, ((12%* X)* incinerate dmg) -100%, this formula equals 0, and its formula that makes more sense since theres no details on both characters abilities about the way you suffer the damage more than that.

    And even if you get a boost in the damage, that boost is still between the parenthesis, so Silver Surfer should still suffer no dmg, because doesnt matter if the you get 150% of the incinerate dmg or 1500%, that dmg still equals an X, and doesnt matter the amount of that X because -100% it will always equal 0, as I say, Kabam should either give more details, or fix this mistake, but probably they will pretend that they always intended this effect
    "Boost is still in paranthesis " says who?
  • MaratoxMaratox Posts: 1,495 ★★★★★
    Jefechuta said:

    Maratox said:

    Jefechuta said:

    Still incorrectly formulated, its just an error as I said with the calculation of the dmg, the fact that Silver Surfer isnt immune is that he gets an advantage as the debuffs count as buffs instead for the rest of his abillities, its not meant to get dmg anyway when he gets -100% less dmg. Its senseless and Kabam knows it, they may fix it or let it be but its still senseless

    -100% damage and “takes no damage” mean different things. Torch increases his incinerate damage by like 12% per incinerate or smoulder. That means you take 112% damage. Surfer only negates 100% of that. It’s additive. Not a bug. Not poorly worded. Not incorrectly calculated.
    As I already explained, there are 2 ways to calculate this stuff, ((12%* X)* incinerate dmg) -100%, this formula equals 0, and its formula that makes more sense since theres no details on both characters abilities about the way you suffer the damage more than that.

    And even if you get a boost in the damage, that boost is still between the parenthesis, so Silver Surfer should still suffer no dmg, because doesnt matter if the you get 150% of the incinerate dmg or 1500%, that dmg still equals an X, and doesnt matter the amount of that X because -100% it will always equal 0, as I say, Kabam should either give more details, or fix this mistake, but probably they will pretend that they always intended this effect
    Unless you work for Kabam and make these kinds of decisions you have no way to say that they’re wrong. Kabam has already confirmed the math behind this long ago and just because you don’t like it doesn’t mean it’s wrong or needs to be changed
  • mattyben27mattyben27 Posts: 55 ★
    I was confused with a similar situation from ibom. I took poison damage from Diablo and kabam explained that their 100% definition does not mean "all", just means the normal amount of damage. I do find it odd wording because I think most people read 100% as "all" as that is normal usage in everyday language
  • JefechutaJefechuta Posts: 1,204 ★★★★
    This kind of stuff should be explained in game, not in forums, if theres no parenthesis then they should explain it aswell in the details of each ability, because if its not detailed it would mean that u receive no dmg, as u say, then its not a bug but a mistake from Kabam, because they lack details in the math behind all this stuff
Sign In or Register to comment.