I don't recall them announcing the wording on this synergy being changed. That alone is a little weird as they've been known to add even the slightest changes in wording to their change log in the updates. Why this was omitted could just as easily have been an oversight. Was supposed to be said and just got missed. That is a viable possibility. Although an explanation as to why would very much be welcomed. Could still be buggy for some. As I previously stated, it seems work the same as it did before. At least for me it does.
If the synergy works exactly the same as it did before, would they need to tell us the wording changed? Nothing has been confirmed if the synergy is different or not. Just saying if the nothing's changed but the wording, would they really need to tell us?
Just was pointing out that they've been pretty up front about things of this nature in the past. I'm not saying they need to tell us. Just would be nice if they did and brought some clarity to the questions posed. Frankly, I think it's working fine, and can see how the wording hasn't changed anything. Just the same, others see something else. Nothing wrong with a desire for clarity is there?
I dont disagree. Just amazes me sometimes how things like these escalate so quickly over a wording change. Plus it being Sunday, less Mods working and highly doubt any game team person is at the offices with all these people demanding answers.
I don't recall them announcing the wording on this synergy being changed. That alone is a little weird as they've been known to add even the slightest changes in wording to their change log in the updates. Why this was omitted could just as easily have been an oversight. Was supposed to be said and just got missed. That is a viable possibility. Although an explanation as to why would very much be welcomed. Could still be buggy for some. As I previously stated, it seems work the same as it did before. At least for me it does.
If the synergy works exactly the same as it did before, would they need to tell us the wording changed? Nothing has been confirmed if the synergy is different or not. Just saying if the nothing's changed but the wording, would they really need to tell us?
Just was pointing out that they've been pretty up front about things of this nature in the past. I'm not saying they need to tell us. Just would be nice if they did and brought some clarity to the questions posed. Frankly, I think it's working fine, and can see how the wording hasn't changed anything. Just the same, others see something else. Nothing wrong with a desire for clarity is there?
I dont disagree. Just amazes me sometimes how things like these escalate so quickly over a wording change. Plus it being Sunday, less Mods working and highly doubt any game team person is at the offices with all these people demanding answers.
R u just gonna ignore me cuz we had some beef or something How hard is it for the mods to make a thread and include in the threads “We Changed how Angela synergy with hela works” People world be mad that they are needlessly changing **** but at lest they told the community
I don't recall them announcing the wording on this synergy being changed. That alone is a little weird as they've been known to add even the slightest changes in wording to their change log in the updates. Why this was omitted could just as easily have been an oversight. Was supposed to be said and just got missed. That is a viable possibility. Although an explanation as to why would very much be welcomed. Could still be buggy for some. As I previously stated, it seems work the same as it did before. At least for me it does.
If the synergy works exactly the same as it did before, would they need to tell us the wording changed? Nothing has been confirmed if the synergy is different or not. Just saying if the nothing's changed but the wording, would they really need to tell us?
Just was pointing out that they've been pretty up front about things of this nature in the past. I'm not saying they need to tell us. Just would be nice if they did and brought some clarity to the questions posed. Frankly, I think it's working fine, and can see how the wording hasn't changed anything. Just the same, others see something else. Nothing wrong with a desire for clarity is there?
I dont disagree. Just amazes me sometimes how things like these escalate so quickly over a wording change. Plus it being Sunday, less Mods working and highly doubt any game team person is at the offices with all these people demanding answers.
Good point, lol. It is indeed Sunday. Hopefully some clarity will be brought during the week. I do agree that things do occasionally snowball out of control on the forum when people don't get answers right away. Personally, I'm in no rush to know for certain. In the beginning, I just wanted to know if it would work, and 10 out of 10 tries, it did. So I don't think there's anything wrong with it, although apparently there's a few who have experienced issues. We shall see what the official word is soon... hopefully.
While new wording is not very clear about whether your final hero left alive counts as one of the alive teammates (reducing it to 80% theoretically), I would assume that it does not count the hero you are using in the fight.
So hopefully 5-man team, 4 already KO, will still be 100% chance.
BUT, REASON CHANGED is probably for AQ/AW purposes. Before, last champ alive in 3-man team AQ/AW would only have 60% chance. NOW, wording for 3-man team would mean 100% chance with last fighter left alive. Ironically, new wording would also mean you can just bring a 3 or 4 person team in Event Quests, and not have to do extra needless fights just to KO an extra person or 2 before your last hero.
Of course (hoping this is not true) if you technically look at the new wording...
It would have a 100% chance to trigger the “rolling of dice” 20% chance to revive (reduced down to 20% chance to trigger the 20% chance to revive). So even in best conditions, it is a 20% chance, in worst conditions it is only 4% chance (1/5th times 1/5th = 1/25th, or even 0 % depending on the meaning of that “each champ alive”)
This would really be bad, and I’m sure is NOT what is intended (although Technically, this is how it reads), lol.
One of them says in terms of champs alive . I mean, It have 100% chance to trigger, but reduces by 20% for each champ alive.
And the other one says in term of champs dead, it have 20% chance to trigger, but increases by 20% for each champ dead.
In respect to champs alive, base chance to trigger = 100%, but if 4 champs are alive then, 100% - 4 x 20% = 20% (20% chance to trigger if full team is alive.)
In respect to champs dead , base chance to trigger = 20% But if 4 champs are dead then, 20% + 4 x 20% = 100% (100% chance to trigger if 4 champs are dead.)
Whoever changes this synergy wording really needs to take an English classes. The old wording is much clearer than this one. Lesson: Don't skip your English classes
Any clarification by Kabam about how the new Synergy wording should be treated, now that development staff is in the office again.
Guess the primary question is whether if you’re the last Hero still alive, whether you still have 100% chance to Revive/Regen, or is that hero himself treated as a “Chamption still alive on your team”, thus making 80% the highest chance you can ever have now ???
Comments
So hopefully 5-man team, 4 already KO, will still be 100% chance.
BUT, REASON CHANGED is probably for AQ/AW purposes. Before, last champ alive in 3-man team AQ/AW would only have 60% chance. NOW, wording for 3-man team would mean 100% chance with last fighter left alive.
Ironically, new wording would also mean you can just bring a 3 or 4 person team in Event Quests, and not have to do extra needless fights just to KO an extra person or 2 before your last hero.
It would have a 100% chance to trigger the “rolling of dice” 20% chance to revive (reduced down to 20% chance to trigger the 20% chance to revive). So even in best conditions, it is a 20% chance, in worst conditions it is only 4% chance (1/5th times 1/5th = 1/25th, or even 0 % depending on the meaning of that “each champ alive”)
This would really be bad, and I’m sure is NOT what is intended (although Technically, this is how it reads), lol.
And the other one says in term of champs dead, it have 20% chance to trigger, but increases by 20% for each champ dead.
In respect to champs alive,
base chance to trigger = 100%,
but if 4 champs are alive then,
100% - 4 x 20% = 20%
(20% chance to trigger if full team is alive.)
In respect to champs dead ,
base chance to trigger = 20%
But if 4 champs are dead then,
20% + 4 x 20% = 100%
(100% chance to trigger if 4 champs are dead.)
The old wording is much clearer than this one.
Lesson: Don't skip your English classes
Guess the primary question is whether if you’re the last Hero still alive, whether you still have 100% chance to Revive/Regen, or is that hero himself treated as a “Chamption still alive on your team”, thus making 80% the highest chance you can ever have now ???