It's odd how certain numbers and processes in this game are presumed by some to be inviolable and perfected like any consumable crystal contents, champion ability numbers, and champion crystal contents, when all of these have been biffed by Kabam in the past. Without encountering a scenario proving that the numbers are what is listed and without more information, how can you have so much trust in them?
Because if they are different than listed, we should be able to easily prove that by opening a huge sample. People like DNA have tried this with things like arena crystals and the results always mirror the listed drops.
If you think a percentage is different, you should be able to prove it with repeated trials
It's odd how certain numbers and processes in this game are presumed by some to be inviolable and perfected like any consumable crystal contents, champion ability numbers, and champion crystal contents, when all of these have been biffed by Kabam in the past. Without encountering a scenario proving that the numbers are what is listed and without more information, how can you have so much trust in them?
Because if they are different than listed, we should be able to easily prove that by opening a huge sample. People like DNA have tried this with things like arena crystals and the results always mirror the listed drops.
If you think a percentage is different, you should be able to prove it with repeated trials
I didn't say the percentage, I said the contents. The list of contents aren't pulled directly, they're entered manually. The percentages have been accurate based on the large scale pulls that I've seen. Meaning if it says 20%, it would and does approach 20% with enough trials. I'm talking about the contents list saying Punisher or Wolverine or whatever when they're definitely not in that crystal and the contents list needed to be fixed.
How can we tell which other numbers we see are pulled directly and which are entered manually? Rintrah had a host of typos and incorrect data and recently Kingpin's base Regeneration Rate typo was discovered because the number shown in his abilities was different. Was that number 0.4 pulled directly and converted to 40% in the in-game text automagically or was someone typing it in and typed the number that was given to them? How would we have known if the person didn't type what they saw, but typed from memory and entered what it should have been and not what it was? It could have been 50% as far as the text went, but 40% in reality.
Kabam definitely *fixed* AA with their last update. Before, if he dealt two or more bleeds on his heavy, he would refresh all current bleeds on the opponent. This would lead to a fight where your opponent is always bleeding, so you could apply a poison every block, which would lead to higher than normal neurotoxins. Now, he works normally. Still great, but no longer broken. Definitely noticed this during BGs and was hoping they wouldn’t fix it hehe.
It's odd how certain numbers and processes in this game are presumed by some to be inviolable and perfected like any consumable crystal contents, champion ability numbers, and champion crystal contents, when all of these have been biffed by Kabam in the past. Without encountering a scenario proving that the numbers are what is listed and without more information, how can you have so much trust in them?
Because if they are different than listed, we should be able to easily prove that by opening a huge sample. People like DNA have tried this with things like arena crystals and the results always mirror the listed drops.
If you think a percentage is different, you should be able to prove it with repeated trials
I didn't say the percentage, I said the contents. The list of contents aren't pulled directly, they're entered manually. The percentages have been accurate based on the large scale pulls that I've seen. Meaning if it says 20%, it would and does approach 20% with enough trials. I'm talking about the contents list saying Punisher or Wolverine or whatever when they're definitely not in that crystal and the contents list needed to be fixed.
How can we tell which other numbers we see are pulled directly and which are entered manually? Rintrah had a host of typos and incorrect data and recently Kingpin's base Regeneration Rate typo was discovered because the number shown in his abilities was different. Was that number 0.4 pulled directly and converted to 40% in the in-game text automagically or was someone typing it in and typed the number that was given to them? How would we have known if the person didn't type what they saw, but typed from memory and entered what it should have been and not what it was? It could have been 50% as far as the text went, but 40% in reality.
How do we know that Aliens haven't taken over human forms? We know that people look like people, but we haven't seen the inside contents of their bodies.
How can we tell which other numbers we see are pulled directly and which are entered manually?
There have in the past been bugs where both the actual in-game values and the description have been incorrect in exactly the same way, however, there have also been some instances where the in-game values did not match the description. There is therefore always the possibility that the text description of an ability does not match the in-game effects, but this is sufficiently rare that given other typo errors that occur in the game with higher frequency something in either the workflow or the game structure prevents these two from just being randomly set.
I know, for example, there are guardrails in some places to prevent a designer from making things like wild decimal errors, changing 0.01 into 100, say. But this does not prevent all possible errors from occurring.
In more specific terms, whenever a player reports a "bug" with a random number dependent process in the game, the historical probability that they will be correct is less than 0.1%. Not even one in a thousand such reports turn out to have any validity. So while it is always possible someone is reporting something that's actually there, and it is something I'm always on the lookout for, it is incredibly unlikely.
Furthermore, there's a certain ring of truth to accurate problem reports in my experience. When a player says they used to see seven and now they see two and they are the only one reporting it that is easy to dismiss. Those numbers are too small to be meaningful in the first place, and the ratio of the difference is so high if that was an actual bug everyone would be seeing it. So absent significant confirmation, the player is almost certainly just mistaken.
Kabam definitely *fixed* AA with their last update. Before, if he dealt two or more bleeds on his heavy, he would refresh all current bleeds on the opponent. This would lead to a fight where your opponent is always bleeding, so you could apply a poison every block, which would lead to higher than normal neurotoxins. Now, he works normally. Still great, but no longer broken. Definitely noticed this during BGs and was hoping they wouldn’t fix it hehe.
Do you mean when he was combining the oldest bleeds into neuros instead of the newest?
I think, although it’s never been said(or if it has I missed it) that challenger rating skews the RNG.
Oh, its been said, by players. Also, it is said to mess with well-timed blocks.
Both of these statements are false, by the way, but Challenger Rating has been blamed for everything from breaking Parry to the Kennedy assassination.
Challenger rating is not an "effect" and as such it can't affect anything directly. Challenger rating is just a number that gets plugged into the Diminishing Returns formula. Which means even if the devs introduced a bug somehow, there's no way for that bug to allow CR to affect another ability in that way by accident. That kind of effect has to be constructed deliberately.
You always hear people blaming CR for throwing off something, but you never hear a player claim that their physical resistance rating was affecting their bleed chances or something. But those two are the same kind of bug with the same chance of occurring. CR is just a convenient boogeyman because everyone thinks they understand physical resistance but almost no one understands challenge rating. So CR is ascribed mystical abilities.
I think, although it’s never been said(or if it has I missed it) that challenger rating skews the RNG.
Oh, its been said, by players. Also, it is said to mess with well-timed blocks.
Both of these statements are false, by the way, but Challenger Rating has been blamed for everything from breaking Parry to the Kennedy assassination.
Challenger rating is not an "effect" and as such it can't affect anything directly. Challenger rating is just a number that gets plugged into the Diminishing Returns formula. Which means even if the devs introduced a bug somehow, there's no way for that bug to allow CR to affect another ability in that way by accident. That kind of effect has to be constructed deliberately.
You always hear people blaming CR for throwing off something, but you never hear a player claim that their physical resistance rating was affecting their bleed chances or something. But those two are the same kind of bug with the same chance of occurring. CR is just a convenient boogeyman because everyone thinks they understand physical resistance but almost no one understands challenge rating. So CR is ascribed mystical abilities.
Well. Challenger rating does have an impact on crit rating. And critting less would mean less bleeds. Less bleeds means less neuros. So…. I think it’s not false.
I think, although it’s never been said(or if it has I missed it) that challenger rating skews the RNG.
Oh, its been said, by players. Also, it is said to mess with well-timed blocks.
Both of these statements are false, by the way, but Challenger Rating has been blamed for everything from breaking Parry to the Kennedy assassination.
Challenger rating is not an "effect" and as such it can't affect anything directly. Challenger rating is just a number that gets plugged into the Diminishing Returns formula. Which means even if the devs introduced a bug somehow, there's no way for that bug to allow CR to affect another ability in that way by accident. That kind of effect has to be constructed deliberately.
You always hear people blaming CR for throwing off something, but you never hear a player claim that their physical resistance rating was affecting their bleed chances or something. But those two are the same kind of bug with the same chance of occurring. CR is just a convenient boogeyman because everyone thinks they understand physical resistance but almost no one understands challenge rating. So CR is ascribed mystical abilities.
Well. Challenger rating does have an impact on crit rating. And critting less would mean less bleeds. Less bleeds means less neuros. So…. I think it’s not false.
The statement was that challenger rating skews the RNG. Changing critical rating doesn't skew the RNG. Does anyone ask if there's a synergy that screws with the RNG to get more crits?
I think, although it’s never been said(or if it has I missed it) that challenger rating skews the RNG.
Oh, its been said, by players. Also, it is said to mess with well-timed blocks.
Both of these statements are false, by the way, but Challenger Rating has been blamed for everything from breaking Parry to the Kennedy assassination.
Challenger rating is not an "effect" and as such it can't affect anything directly. Challenger rating is just a number that gets plugged into the Diminishing Returns formula. Which means even if the devs introduced a bug somehow, there's no way for that bug to allow CR to affect another ability in that way by accident. That kind of effect has to be constructed deliberately.
You always hear people blaming CR for throwing off something, but you never hear a player claim that their physical resistance rating was affecting their bleed chances or something. But those two are the same kind of bug with the same chance of occurring. CR is just a convenient boogeyman because everyone thinks they understand physical resistance but almost no one understands challenge rating. So CR is ascribed mystical abilities.
Well. Challenger rating does have an impact on crit rating. And critting less would mean less bleeds. Less bleeds means less neuros. So…. I think it’s not false.
The statement was that challenger rating skews the RNG. Changing critical rating doesn't skew the RNG. Does anyone ask if there's a synergy that screws with the RNG to get more crits?
Question. Does challenger rating reduce crits even if critical resistance is not present ?
I think, although it’s never been said(or if it has I missed it) that challenger rating skews the RNG.
Oh, its been said, by players. Also, it is said to mess with well-timed blocks.
Both of these statements are false, by the way, but Challenger Rating has been blamed for everything from breaking Parry to the Kennedy assassination.
Challenger rating is not an "effect" and as such it can't affect anything directly. Challenger rating is just a number that gets plugged into the Diminishing Returns formula. Which means even if the devs introduced a bug somehow, there's no way for that bug to allow CR to affect another ability in that way by accident. That kind of effect has to be constructed deliberately.
You always hear people blaming CR for throwing off something, but you never hear a player claim that their physical resistance rating was affecting their bleed chances or something. But those two are the same kind of bug with the same chance of occurring. CR is just a convenient boogeyman because everyone thinks they understand physical resistance but almost no one understands challenge rating. So CR is ascribed mystical abilities.
Well. Challenger rating does have an impact on crit rating. And critting less would mean less bleeds. Less bleeds means less neuros. So…. I think it’s not false.
The statement was that challenger rating skews the RNG. Changing critical rating doesn't skew the RNG. Does anyone ask if there's a synergy that screws with the RNG to get more crits?
Question. Does challenger rating reduce crits even if critical resistance is not present ?
Challenge Rating isn't an influence itself. It's a number that interacts with other Challenge Ratings. Lower, or higher than. If your question is about negative values, I believe you can have negative values. If memory serves, we went over this in spades in reference to Armor, when discussing Pure Skill. DNA could fill you in better than I could, though.
I also think something is wrong. My AA was giving 5-7 neurotoxin on average per match. Now I'm happy if he gives 1. I had matches with 0 neurotoxin, which was never before. My AA is 6*r4 200 sig.
I think, although it’s never been said(or if it has I missed it) that challenger rating skews the RNG.
Oh, its been said, by players. Also, it is said to mess with well-timed blocks.
Both of these statements are false, by the way, but Challenger Rating has been blamed for everything from breaking Parry to the Kennedy assassination.
Challenger rating is not an "effect" and as such it can't affect anything directly. Challenger rating is just a number that gets plugged into the Diminishing Returns formula. Which means even if the devs introduced a bug somehow, there's no way for that bug to allow CR to affect another ability in that way by accident. That kind of effect has to be constructed deliberately.
You always hear people blaming CR for throwing off something, but you never hear a player claim that their physical resistance rating was affecting their bleed chances or something. But those two are the same kind of bug with the same chance of occurring. CR is just a convenient boogeyman because everyone thinks they understand physical resistance but almost no one understands challenge rating. So CR is ascribed mystical abilities.
Well. Challenger rating does have an impact on crit rating. And critting less would mean less bleeds. Less bleeds means less neuros. So…. I think it’s not false.
The statement was that challenger rating skews the RNG. Changing critical rating doesn't skew the RNG. Does anyone ask if there's a synergy that screws with the RNG to get more crits?
Question. Does challenger rating reduce crits even if critical resistance is not present ?
Crit chance is one of the stats affected by diminishing returns. All stats affected by diminishing returns are by definition affected by the challenge rating of the opponent. In other words, the challenge rating of your target affects your critical chance, and your challenge rating affects the critical chance of your target.
So yes, CR reduces crits even if there is no crit resistance present. But to be very clear, if you're using AA against a target and you want to know how often you will crit, it is the target's CR that matters, not yours. Whether your own CR is zero or fifty billion will have no effect on your chance to crit. But the higher your target's CR, the lower your crit chance will get.
For completeness sake: all stats affected by diminishing returns are actually plain number "ratings" that get converted to the actual functioning value via the Diminishing Returns formula: Value = Rating / (Rating + 1500 + CR * 5). That CR in the formula is opponent CR, not your own. The higher it gets, the bigger the denominator gets, the smaller your overall value gets. In theory an opponent with fifty billion CR would reduce all your DR related stats basically to zero, even if your own CR is fifty trillion. Having higher CR does not help you counteract someone else's high CR.
Comments
If you think a percentage is different, you should be able to prove it with repeated trials
How can we tell which other numbers we see are pulled directly and which are entered manually? Rintrah had a host of typos and incorrect data and recently Kingpin's base Regeneration Rate typo was discovered because the number shown in his abilities was different. Was that number 0.4 pulled directly and converted to 40% in the in-game text automagically or was someone typing it in and typed the number that was given to them? How would we have known if the person didn't type what they saw, but typed from memory and entered what it should have been and not what it was? It could have been 50% as far as the text went, but 40% in reality.
Now, he works normally. Still great, but no longer broken.
Definitely noticed this during BGs and was hoping they wouldn’t fix it hehe.
I know, for example, there are guardrails in some places to prevent a designer from making things like wild decimal errors, changing 0.01 into 100, say. But this does not prevent all possible errors from occurring.
In more specific terms, whenever a player reports a "bug" with a random number dependent process in the game, the historical probability that they will be correct is less than 0.1%. Not even one in a thousand such reports turn out to have any validity. So while it is always possible someone is reporting something that's actually there, and it is something I'm always on the lookout for, it is incredibly unlikely.
Furthermore, there's a certain ring of truth to accurate problem reports in my experience. When a player says they used to see seven and now they see two and they are the only one reporting it that is easy to dismiss. Those numbers are too small to be meaningful in the first place, and the ratio of the difference is so high if that was an actual bug everyone would be seeing it. So absent significant confirmation, the player is almost certainly just mistaken.
I think, although it’s never been said(or if it has I missed it) that challenger rating skews the RNG.
Both of these statements are false, by the way, but Challenger Rating has been blamed for everything from breaking Parry to the Kennedy assassination.
Challenger rating is not an "effect" and as such it can't affect anything directly. Challenger rating is just a number that gets plugged into the Diminishing Returns formula. Which means even if the devs introduced a bug somehow, there's no way for that bug to allow CR to affect another ability in that way by accident. That kind of effect has to be constructed deliberately.
You always hear people blaming CR for throwing off something, but you never hear a player claim that their physical resistance rating was affecting their bleed chances or something. But those two are the same kind of bug with the same chance of occurring. CR is just a convenient boogeyman because everyone thinks they understand physical resistance but almost no one understands challenge rating. So CR is ascribed mystical abilities.
If your question is about negative values, I believe you can have negative values. If memory serves, we went over this in spades in reference to Armor, when discussing Pure Skill.
DNA could fill you in better than I could, though.
So yes, CR reduces crits even if there is no crit resistance present. But to be very clear, if you're using AA against a target and you want to know how often you will crit, it is the target's CR that matters, not yours. Whether your own CR is zero or fifty billion will have no effect on your chance to crit. But the higher your target's CR, the lower your crit chance will get.
For completeness sake: all stats affected by diminishing returns are actually plain number "ratings" that get converted to the actual functioning value via the Diminishing Returns formula: Value = Rating / (Rating + 1500 + CR * 5). That CR in the formula is opponent CR, not your own. The higher it gets, the bigger the denominator gets, the smaller your overall value gets. In theory an opponent with fifty billion CR would reduce all your DR related stats basically to zero, even if your own CR is fifty trillion. Having higher CR does not help you counteract someone else's high CR.