Nightcrawler evading Ironman IW bug?

Savio444 · July 2019

Evading repulsor attack’s.

Kobster84 · July 2019

Noticed this with domino where nightcrawler evaded when he was unlucky

Unknown · July 2019

This content has been removed.

Savio444 · July 2019

So I guess the bug is with nightcrawler, for me this is the nightcrawler on mysterio quest. It’s the first fight on the quest.

Ultra8529 · July 2019

I suspect that this can be explained as a matter of ability accuracy. When they say that repulsor hits "cannot be evaded", I think that what is actually coded is that "repulsor hits reduce opponent's chance of evading by 100%". If this is true, then the champion description for IMIW is wrong and should be editted.

As for how Nightcrawler could evade, it could be because he is on an enhanced ability node, or best defence node, something that increases ability accuracy of evade. It also explains why Domino can evade IMIW's repulsor hit.

This is the best theory I have, but requires acknowledging that IMIW's current description is misleading and needs to be amended. This is particularly bearing in mind Kabam's recent statement that "cannot" trumps "always" - if IMIW's ability is indeed intended to be "cannot", then it literally can never be beaten (same way nothing circumvents glancing, including ability reduction). It would then be a bug for any champ on any node to evade IMIW's repulsor attacks.

Savio444 · July 2019

Ultra8529 said:
I suspect that this can be explained as a matter of ability accuracy. When they say that repulsor hits "cannot be evaded", I think that what is actually coded is that "repulsor hits reduce opponent's chance of evading by 100%". If this is true, then the champion description for IMIW is wrong and should be editted.

As for how Nightcrawler could evade, it could be because he is on an enhanced ability node, or best defence node, something that increases ability accuracy of evade. It also explains why Domino can evade IMIW's repulsor hit.

This is the best theory I have, but requires acknowledging that IMIW's current description is misleading and needs to be amended. This is particularly bearing in mind Kabam's recent statement that "cannot" trumps "always" - if IMIW's ability is indeed intended to be "cannot", then it literally can never be beaten (same way nothing circumvents glancing, including ability reduction). It would then be a bug for any champ on any node to evade IMIW's repulsor attacks.

I’ve been using Ironman Iw for a long time agains Nightcrawlers and he never ever evaded his repulsor attacks until this update. This is a basic nightcrawler on a quest with no special nodes.

Neotwism · July 2019

I also noticed Sinister blocking IMIW sp1 unblockable blade arm and energy projectiles. This happened 4 times in 1 fight this morning. I dont have a sinister to check his description in case there is a reason for this. I just saw this thread and thought i would mention it.

Ultra8529 · July 2019

Ultra8529 said:
I suspect that this can be explained as a matter of ability accuracy. When they say that repulsor hits "cannot be evaded", I think that what is actually coded is that "repulsor hits reduce opponent's chance of evading by 100%". If this is true, then the champion description for IMIW is wrong and should be editted.

As for how Nightcrawler could evade, it could be because he is on an enhanced ability node, or best defence node, something that increases ability accuracy of evade. It also explains why Domino can evade IMIW's repulsor hit.

This is the best theory I have, but requires acknowledging that IMIW's current description is misleading and needs to be amended. This is particularly bearing in mind Kabam's recent statement that "cannot" trumps "always" - if IMIW's ability is indeed intended to be "cannot", then it literally can never be beaten (same way nothing circumvents glancing, including ability reduction). It would then be a bug for any champ on any node to evade IMIW's repulsor attacks.

Wonder what the two who disagreed think lol. Press disagree but no reasons provided.

SidDDragon · July 2019

I have had domino evade imiw repulsor hits..but I have chalked it to maybe her reducing his ability
But NC should not evade him..plus according to miike never beats always and IMIW's description says that his repulsor hits cannot be evaded which comes under the category of never and even if NC is on an enhanced abilities node..he should not be able to trump over never

Savio444 · July 2019

Neotwism said:
I also noticed Sinister blocking IMIW sp1 unblockable blade arm and energy projectiles. This happened 4 times in 1 fight this morning. I dont have a sinister to check his description in case there is a reason for this. I just saw this thread and thought i would mention it.

Mister Sinister can block unblockable special attacks. I thought the same with Mordo, he can also block unblockable specials.

Ultra8529 · July 2019

So nobody has a plausible explanation for this? It is either a bug or IMIW's description is wrong.

Neotwism · July 2019

I hope this gets some kind of an explanation. It would be nice to know if its a bug or the description is wrong.

MisFit7Gotti · July 2019

I think it only applies to champions without the evade abilities for example Loki s1 is a buff steal but it's only a selective of buffs that he can actually steal

BigPoppaCBONE · July 2019

Nightcrawler has his L1 evade buff active. We're having to make assumptions because Kabam won't tell us or make the definitive order of operations for all champs. If IMIW reduces evade chance by 100% to 0% first and then Nightcrawler's buff increases evade chance to 33%, the scenario OP shows could happen. This same first this, then that plays out in some other interactions throughout the game where logic and ability descriptions say A should happen, but instead you consistently get B.

Unknown · July 2019

This content has been removed.

BigPoppaCBONE · July 2019

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:
Nightcrawler has his L1 evade buff active. We're having to make assumptions because Kabam won't tell us or make the definitive order of operations for all champs. If IMIW reduces evade chance by 100% to 0% first and then Nightcrawler's buff increases evade chance to 33%, the scenario OP shows could happen. This same first this, then that plays out in some other interactions throughout the game where logic and ability descriptions say A should happen, but instead you consistently get B.
He’s repulser blasts say they cannot he evaded. Thus making it into a never vs always argument, this means that there is no % for IMIW repulser hits and evade interactions. Which makes this a bugged interaction

There's a percentage for every ability in the game. They've even put that information in a tip screen. They need to fall back on calculations to determine what happens for every interaction in the game. Always, never, cannot, etc. are converted to percentages and can be adjusted unless otherwise stated. For that reason, certain champs have AA of more than 100% for some of their abilities. So not a bug according to the information we have and observations of what actually happens, just poorly explained or implemented in a fashion contrary to most assumptions.

Unknown · July 2019

This content has been removed.

BigPoppaCBONE · July 2019

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:
Nightcrawler has his L1 evade buff active. We're having to make assumptions because Kabam won't tell us or make the definitive order of operations for all champs. If IMIW reduces evade chance by 100% to 0% first and then Nightcrawler's buff increases evade chance to 33%, the scenario OP shows could happen. This same first this, then that plays out in some other interactions throughout the game where logic and ability descriptions say A should happen, but instead you consistently get B.
He’s repulser blasts say they cannot he evaded. Thus making it into a never vs always argument, this means that there is no % for IMIW repulser hits and evade interactions. Which makes this a bugged interaction
There's a percentage for every ability in the game. They've even put that information in a tip screen. They need to fall back on calculations to determine what happens for every interaction in the game. Always, never, cannot, etc. are converted to percentages and can be adjusted unless otherwise stated. For that reason, certain champs have AA of more than 100% for some of their abilities. So not a bug according to the information we have and observations of what actually happens, just poorly explained or implemented in a fashion contrary to most assumptions.
This is a cannot problem
It seems “cannot” has one of the highest priority in the game. It’s not a % based ability or mechanic even if it were us should have the percentage of the other ability plus one hundred. This means that it will always be active. Example is when she hulk applies a sow debuff on an aspect of war DV. He’s 200% ability Accuracy trumps her 100% , it needs a specific ability to counter it. It infact is a bugged interaction

I thought you were supposed to be disagreeing with me. Every ability in the game has an ability accuracy percentage attached to it.

IMIW throws his attack and drops evade chance from X% to 0% is functionally equivalent to "cannot be evaded".

We'll assume a few things. The attack will come first. Logical or there's nothing to evade. We should assume that IMIW attack doesn't consider what the opponent's current evade chance is, just drops it to 0 at the time of that attack. In most cases, they won't be able to evade. In this case, Nightcrawler's buff increases his evade percentage by 33 points (using points because Kabam uses bad terminology for their percent math). Again, we assume that the attack comes first. Again, logical or there's nothing to evade. The evade ability kicks in when there is an incoming attack and increases his evade percentage by 33 points. Allowing him to evade the attack 33% of the time.

So, base evade percentage drops to 0 (not bugged), evade percentage increases from whatever it was (0) to 33 points (0 + 33) (not bugged). Result, sometimes his attack gets evaded. In scenarios of the same rough form, my interpretation is what I've actually observed. If he evaded without a buff, in Swashbuckling mode, or without some other function coming into play, I would agree that it's bugged. I could be totally wrong about how it works behind the scenes, but I don't think I'm too far off the mark on the results when the observations fit the model.

Savio444 · July 2019

All i know is that before this update night crawler never EVER, evaded Repulsor attacks. Even with the evade buff on. But now he does sometimes.

Unknown · July 2019

This content has been removed.

Lormif · July 2019

BigPoppaCBONE said:

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:
Nightcrawler has his L1 evade buff active. We're having to make assumptions because Kabam won't tell us or make the definitive order of operations for all champs. If IMIW reduces evade chance by 100% to 0% first and then Nightcrawler's buff increases evade chance to 33%, the scenario OP shows could happen. This same first this, then that plays out in some other interactions throughout the game where logic and ability descriptions say A should happen, but instead you consistently get B.
He’s repulser blasts say they cannot he evaded. Thus making it into a never vs always argument, this means that there is no % for IMIW repulser hits and evade interactions. Which makes this a bugged interaction
There's a percentage for every ability in the game. They've even put that information in a tip screen. They need to fall back on calculations to determine what happens for every interaction in the game. Always, never, cannot, etc. are converted to percentages and can be adjusted unless otherwise stated. For that reason, certain champs have AA of more than 100% for some of their abilities. So not a bug according to the information we have and observations of what actually happens, just poorly explained or implemented in a fashion contrary to most assumptions.
This is a cannot problem
It seems “cannot” has one of the highest priority in the game. It’s not a % based ability or mechanic even if it were us should have the percentage of the other ability plus one hundred. This means that it will always be active. Example is when she hulk applies a sow debuff on an aspect of war DV. He’s 200% ability Accuracy trumps her 100% , it needs a specific ability to counter it. It infact is a bugged interaction
I thought you were supposed to be disagreeing with me. Every ability in the game has an ability accuracy percentage attached to it.

IMIW throws his attack and drops evade chance from X% to 0% is functionally equivalent to "cannot be evaded".

We'll assume a few things. The attack will come first. Logical or there's nothing to evade. We should assume that IMIW attack doesn't consider what the opponent's current evade chance is, just drops it to 0 at the time of that attack. In most cases, they won't be able to evade. In this case, Nightcrawler's buff increases his evade percentage by 33 points (using points because Kabam uses bad terminology for their percent math). Again, we assume that the attack comes first. Again, logical or there's nothing to evade. The evade ability kicks in when there is an incoming attack and increases his evade percentage by 33 points. Allowing him to evade the attack 33% of the time.

So, base evade percentage drops to 0 (not bugged), evade percentage increases from whatever it was (0) to 33 points (0 + 33) (not bugged). Result, sometimes his attack gets evaded. In scenarios of the same rough form, my interpretation is what I've actually observed. If he evaded without a buff, in Swashbuckling mode, or without some other function coming into play, I would agree that it's bugged. I could be totally wrong about how it works behind the scenes, but I don't think I'm too far off the mark on the results when the observations fit the model.

This is not true. CANNOT trumps anything with a percentange. Robots CANNOT be poisoned, this cannot be reduced by AAR..

that being said the question is if this is an actual evade or a bamf. If it happens when he is dodging back then he cannot be hit either, and the defensive abilities trump offensive in a tie. Atleast one seems like a bamf not an evade.

BigPoppaCBONE · July 2019

Lormif said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:
Nightcrawler has his L1 evade buff active. We're having to make assumptions because Kabam won't tell us or make the definitive order of operations for all champs. If IMIW reduces evade chance by 100% to 0% first and then Nightcrawler's buff increases evade chance to 33%, the scenario OP shows could happen. This same first this, then that plays out in some other interactions throughout the game where logic and ability descriptions say A should happen, but instead you consistently get B.
He’s repulser blasts say they cannot he evaded. Thus making it into a never vs always argument, this means that there is no % for IMIW repulser hits and evade interactions. Which makes this a bugged interaction
There's a percentage for every ability in the game. They've even put that information in a tip screen. They need to fall back on calculations to determine what happens for every interaction in the game. Always, never, cannot, etc. are converted to percentages and can be adjusted unless otherwise stated. For that reason, certain champs have AA of more than 100% for some of their abilities. So not a bug according to the information we have and observations of what actually happens, just poorly explained or implemented in a fashion contrary to most assumptions.
This is a cannot problem
It seems “cannot” has one of the highest priority in the game. It’s not a % based ability or mechanic even if it were us should have the percentage of the other ability plus one hundred. This means that it will always be active. Example is when she hulk applies a sow debuff on an aspect of war DV. He’s 200% ability Accuracy trumps her 100% , it needs a specific ability to counter it. It infact is a bugged interaction
I thought you were supposed to be disagreeing with me. Every ability in the game has an ability accuracy percentage attached to it.

IMIW throws his attack and drops evade chance from X% to 0% is functionally equivalent to "cannot be evaded".

We'll assume a few things. The attack will come first. Logical or there's nothing to evade. We should assume that IMIW attack doesn't consider what the opponent's current evade chance is, just drops it to 0 at the time of that attack. In most cases, they won't be able to evade. In this case, Nightcrawler's buff increases his evade percentage by 33 points (using points because Kabam uses bad terminology for their percent math). Again, we assume that the attack comes first. Again, logical or there's nothing to evade. The evade ability kicks in when there is an incoming attack and increases his evade percentage by 33 points. Allowing him to evade the attack 33% of the time.

So, base evade percentage drops to 0 (not bugged), evade percentage increases from whatever it was (0) to 33 points (0 + 33) (not bugged). Result, sometimes his attack gets evaded. In scenarios of the same rough form, my interpretation is what I've actually observed. If he evaded without a buff, in Swashbuckling mode, or without some other function coming into play, I would agree that it's bugged. I could be totally wrong about how it works behind the scenes, but I don't think I'm too far off the mark on the results when the observations fit the model.
This is not true. CANNOT trumps anything with a percentange. Robots CANNOT be poisoned, this cannot be reduced by AAR..

that being said the question is if this is an actual evade or a bamf. If it happens when he is dodging back then he cannot be hit either, and the defensive abilities **** offensive in a tie. Atleast one seems like a bamf not an evade.

Cannot in this instance means "AA reduced to 0 from whatever it was". There is a difference between "robots cannot bleed" meaning they aren't able to have bleed effects placed on them and an attack that "cannot be evaded" except when it can. Base immunities aren't abilities that have an adjustable accuracy component. There are exceptions to Cannot for abilities. Duped Mephisto's AA cannot be modified. Except when it is. Look at it as a failing of English in using the same word with different intents and listing base immunities under the abilities heading.

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:
Nightcrawler has his L1 evade buff active. We're having to make assumptions because Kabam won't tell us or make the definitive order of operations for all champs. If IMIW reduces evade chance by 100% to 0% first and then Nightcrawler's buff increases evade chance to 33%, the scenario OP shows could happen. This same first this, then that plays out in some other interactions throughout the game where logic and ability descriptions say A should happen, but instead you consistently get B.
He’s repulser blasts say they cannot he evaded. Thus making it into a never vs always argument, this means that there is no % for IMIW repulser hits and evade interactions. Which makes this a bugged interaction
There's a percentage for every ability in the game. They've even put that information in a tip screen. They need to fall back on calculations to determine what happens for every interaction in the game. Always, never, cannot, etc. are converted to percentages and can be adjusted unless otherwise stated. For that reason, certain champs have AA of more than 100% for some of their abilities. So not a bug according to the information we have and observations of what actually happens, just poorly explained or implemented in a fashion contrary to most assumptions.
This is a cannot problem
It seems “cannot” has one of the highest priority in the game. It’s not a % based ability or mechanic even if it were us should have the percentage of the other ability plus one hundred. This means that it will always be active. Example is when she hulk applies a sow debuff on an aspect of war DV. He’s 200% ability Accuracy trumps her 100% , it needs a specific ability to counter it. It infact is a bugged interaction
I thought you were supposed to be disagreeing with me. Every ability in the game has an ability accuracy percentage attached to it.

IMIW throws his attack and drops evade chance from X% to 0% is functionally equivalent to "cannot be evaded".

We'll assume a few things. The attack will come first. Logical or there's nothing to evade. We should assume that IMIW attack doesn't consider what the opponent's current evade chance is, just drops it to 0 at the time of that attack. In most cases, they won't be able to evade. In this case, Nightcrawler's buff increases his evade percentage by 33 points (using points because Kabam uses bad terminology for their percent math). Again, we assume that the attack comes first. Again, logical or there's nothing to evade. The evade ability kicks in when there is an incoming attack and increases his evade percentage by 33 points. Allowing him to evade the attack 33% of the time.

So, base evade percentage drops to 0 (not bugged), evade percentage increases from whatever it was (0) to 33 points (0 + 33) (not bugged). Result, sometimes his attack gets evaded. In scenarios of the same rough form, my interpretation is what I've actually observed. If he evaded without a buff, in Swashbuckling mode, or without some other function coming into play, I would agree that it's bugged. I could be totally wrong about how it works behind the scenes, but I don't think I'm too far off the mark on the results when the observations fit the model.
By that logic he should also ignore true strike with his buff active

If IMIW had a True Strike buff or effect on the attack, it would be a bug if Nightcrawler was able to evade it. The True Strike fixes evade and Auto-block AA at 0 while active. Nightcrawlers buff still procs, it just can't make the percentage not 0. For him at least. For now. Kabam could always add a synergy that renders True Strike/Accuracy ineffective.

All that being said, Kabam could say it was a bug even though that doesn’t make sense and then reverse themselves with a "working as intended" a week after that, so take everything everywhere with a grain of salt and YMMV.

Lormif · July 2019

BigPoppaCBONE said:

Lormif said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:
Nightcrawler has his L1 evade buff active. We're having to make assumptions because Kabam won't tell us or make the definitive order of operations for all champs. If IMIW reduces evade chance by 100% to 0% first and then Nightcrawler's buff increases evade chance to 33%, the scenario OP shows could happen. This same first this, then that plays out in some other interactions throughout the game where logic and ability descriptions say A should happen, but instead you consistently get B.
He’s repulser blasts say they cannot he evaded. Thus making it into a never vs always argument, this means that there is no % for IMIW repulser hits and evade interactions. Which makes this a bugged interaction
There's a percentage for every ability in the game. They've even put that information in a tip screen. They need to fall back on calculations to determine what happens for every interaction in the game. Always, never, cannot, etc. are converted to percentages and can be adjusted unless otherwise stated. For that reason, certain champs have AA of more than 100% for some of their abilities. So not a bug according to the information we have and observations of what actually happens, just poorly explained or implemented in a fashion contrary to most assumptions.
This is a cannot problem
It seems “cannot” has one of the highest priority in the game. It’s not a % based ability or mechanic even if it were us should have the percentage of the other ability plus one hundred. This means that it will always be active. Example is when she hulk applies a sow debuff on an aspect of war DV. He’s 200% ability Accuracy trumps her 100% , it needs a specific ability to counter it. It infact is a bugged interaction
I thought you were supposed to be disagreeing with me. Every ability in the game has an ability accuracy percentage attached to it.

IMIW throws his attack and drops evade chance from X% to 0% is functionally equivalent to "cannot be evaded".

We'll assume a few things. The attack will come first. Logical or there's nothing to evade. We should assume that IMIW attack doesn't consider what the opponent's current evade chance is, just drops it to 0 at the time of that attack. In most cases, they won't be able to evade. In this case, Nightcrawler's buff increases his evade percentage by 33 points (using points because Kabam uses bad terminology for their percent math). Again, we assume that the attack comes first. Again, logical or there's nothing to evade. The evade ability kicks in when there is an incoming attack and increases his evade percentage by 33 points. Allowing him to evade the attack 33% of the time.

So, base evade percentage drops to 0 (not bugged), evade percentage increases from whatever it was (0) to 33 points (0 + 33) (not bugged). Result, sometimes his attack gets evaded. In scenarios of the same rough form, my interpretation is what I've actually observed. If he evaded without a buff, in Swashbuckling mode, or without some other function coming into play, I would agree that it's bugged. I could be totally wrong about how it works behind the scenes, but I don't think I'm too far off the mark on the results when the observations fit the model.
This is not true. CANNOT trumps anything with a percentange. Robots CANNOT be poisoned, this cannot be reduced by AAR..

that being said the question is if this is an actual evade or a bamf. If it happens when he is dodging back then he cannot be hit either, and the defensive abilities **** offensive in a tie. Atleast one seems like a bamf not an evade.
Cannot in this instance means "AA reduced to 0 from whatever it was". There is a difference between "robots cannot bleed" meaning they aren't able to have bleed effects placed on them and an attack that "cannot be evaded" except when it can. Base immunities aren't abilities that have an adjustable accuracy component. There are exceptions to Cannot for abilities. Duped Mephisto's AA cannot be modified. Except when it is. Look at it as a failing of English in using the same word with different intents and listing base immunities under the abilities heading.

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:
Nightcrawler has his L1 evade buff active. We're having to make assumptions because Kabam won't tell us or make the definitive order of operations for all champs. If IMIW reduces evade chance by 100% to 0% first and then Nightcrawler's buff increases evade chance to 33%, the scenario OP shows could happen. This same first this, then that plays out in some other interactions throughout the game where logic and ability descriptions say A should happen, but instead you consistently get B.
He’s repulser blasts say they cannot he evaded. Thus making it into a never vs always argument, this means that there is no % for IMIW repulser hits and evade interactions. Which makes this a bugged interaction
There's a percentage for every ability in the game. They've even put that information in a tip screen. They need to fall back on calculations to determine what happens for every interaction in the game. Always, never, cannot, etc. are converted to percentages and can be adjusted unless otherwise stated. For that reason, certain champs have AA of more than 100% for some of their abilities. So not a bug according to the information we have and observations of what actually happens, just poorly explained or implemented in a fashion contrary to most assumptions.
This is a cannot problem
It seems “cannot” has one of the highest priority in the game. It’s not a % based ability or mechanic even if it were us should have the percentage of the other ability plus one hundred. This means that it will always be active. Example is when she hulk applies a sow debuff on an aspect of war DV. He’s 200% ability Accuracy trumps her 100% , it needs a specific ability to counter it. It infact is a bugged interaction
I thought you were supposed to be disagreeing with me. Every ability in the game has an ability accuracy percentage attached to it.

IMIW throws his attack and drops evade chance from X% to 0% is functionally equivalent to "cannot be evaded".

We'll assume a few things. The attack will come first. Logical or there's nothing to evade. We should assume that IMIW attack doesn't consider what the opponent's current evade chance is, just drops it to 0 at the time of that attack. In most cases, they won't be able to evade. In this case, Nightcrawler's buff increases his evade percentage by 33 points (using points because Kabam uses bad terminology for their percent math). Again, we assume that the attack comes first. Again, logical or there's nothing to evade. The evade ability kicks in when there is an incoming attack and increases his evade percentage by 33 points. Allowing him to evade the attack 33% of the time.

So, base evade percentage drops to 0 (not bugged), evade percentage increases from whatever it was (0) to 33 points (0 + 33) (not bugged). Result, sometimes his attack gets evaded. In scenarios of the same rough form, my interpretation is what I've actually observed. If he evaded without a buff, in Swashbuckling mode, or without some other function coming into play, I would agree that it's bugged. I could be totally wrong about how it works behind the scenes, but I don't think I'm too far off the mark on the results when the observations fit the model.
By that logic he should also ignore true strike with his buff active
If IMIW had a True Strike buff or effect on the attack, it would be a bug if Nightcrawler was able to evade it. The True Strike fixes evade and Auto-block AA at 0 while active. Nightcrawlers buff still procs, it just can't make the percentage not 0. For him at least. For now. Kabam could always add a synergy that renders True Strike/Accuracy ineffective.

All that being said, Kabam could say it was a bug even though that doesn’t make sense and then reverse themselves with a "working as intended" a week after that, so take everything everywhere with a grain of salt and YMMV.

Can you please show another "cannot" that lists no percentages that AAR can change? And no there is no differnce between "robots cannot bleed" and "imiw's attacks cannot be evaded". They are both used in the same context, and obviously robots in the game can bleed in the case of a bug, as seen in ultron bleeding a few weeks back.

BigPoppaCBONE · July 2019

Lormif said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

Lormif said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:
Nightcrawler has his L1 evade buff active. We're having to make assumptions because Kabam won't tell us or make the definitive order of operations for all champs. If IMIW reduces evade chance by 100% to 0% first and then Nightcrawler's buff increases evade chance to 33%, the scenario OP shows could happen. This same first this, then that plays out in some other interactions throughout the game where logic and ability descriptions say A should happen, but instead you consistently get B.
He’s repulser blasts say they cannot he evaded. Thus making it into a never vs always argument, this means that there is no % for IMIW repulser hits and evade interactions. Which makes this a bugged interaction
There's a percentage for every ability in the game. They've even put that information in a tip screen. They need to fall back on calculations to determine what happens for every interaction in the game. Always, never, cannot, etc. are converted to percentages and can be adjusted unless otherwise stated. For that reason, certain champs have AA of more than 100% for some of their abilities. So not a bug according to the information we have and observations of what actually happens, just poorly explained or implemented in a fashion contrary to most assumptions.
This is a cannot problem
It seems “cannot” has one of the highest priority in the game. It’s not a % based ability or mechanic even if it were us should have the percentage of the other ability plus one hundred. This means that it will always be active. Example is when she hulk applies a sow debuff on an aspect of war DV. He’s 200% ability Accuracy trumps her 100% , it needs a specific ability to counter it. It infact is a bugged interaction
I thought you were supposed to be disagreeing with me. Every ability in the game has an ability accuracy percentage attached to it.

IMIW throws his attack and drops evade chance from X% to 0% is functionally equivalent to "cannot be evaded".

We'll assume a few things. The attack will come first. Logical or there's nothing to evade. We should assume that IMIW attack doesn't consider what the opponent's current evade chance is, just drops it to 0 at the time of that attack. In most cases, they won't be able to evade. In this case, Nightcrawler's buff increases his evade percentage by 33 points (using points because Kabam uses bad terminology for their percent math). Again, we assume that the attack comes first. Again, logical or there's nothing to evade. The evade ability kicks in when there is an incoming attack and increases his evade percentage by 33 points. Allowing him to evade the attack 33% of the time.

So, base evade percentage drops to 0 (not bugged), evade percentage increases from whatever it was (0) to 33 points (0 + 33) (not bugged). Result, sometimes his attack gets evaded. In scenarios of the same rough form, my interpretation is what I've actually observed. If he evaded without a buff, in Swashbuckling mode, or without some other function coming into play, I would agree that it's bugged. I could be totally wrong about how it works behind the scenes, but I don't think I'm too far off the mark on the results when the observations fit the model.
This is not true. CANNOT trumps anything with a percentange. Robots CANNOT be poisoned, this cannot be reduced by AAR..

that being said the question is if this is an actual evade or a bamf. If it happens when he is dodging back then he cannot be hit either, and the defensive abilities **** offensive in a tie. Atleast one seems like a bamf not an evade.
Cannot in this instance means "AA reduced to 0 from whatever it was". There is a difference between "robots cannot bleed" meaning they aren't able to have bleed effects placed on them and an attack that "cannot be evaded" except when it can. Base immunities aren't abilities that have an adjustable accuracy component. There are exceptions to Cannot for abilities. Duped Mephisto's AA cannot be modified. Except when it is. Look at it as a failing of English in using the same word with different intents and listing base immunities under the abilities heading.

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:
Nightcrawler has his L1 evade buff active. We're having to make assumptions because Kabam won't tell us or make the definitive order of operations for all champs. If IMIW reduces evade chance by 100% to 0% first and then Nightcrawler's buff increases evade chance to 33%, the scenario OP shows could happen. This same first this, then that plays out in some other interactions throughout the game where logic and ability descriptions say A should happen, but instead you consistently get B.
He’s repulser blasts say they cannot he evaded. Thus making it into a never vs always argument, this means that there is no % for IMIW repulser hits and evade interactions. Which makes this a bugged interaction
There's a percentage for every ability in the game. They've even put that information in a tip screen. They need to fall back on calculations to determine what happens for every interaction in the game. Always, never, cannot, etc. are converted to percentages and can be adjusted unless otherwise stated. For that reason, certain champs have AA of more than 100% for some of their abilities. So not a bug according to the information we have and observations of what actually happens, just poorly explained or implemented in a fashion contrary to most assumptions.
This is a cannot problem
It seems “cannot” has one of the highest priority in the game. It’s not a % based ability or mechanic even if it were us should have the percentage of the other ability plus one hundred. This means that it will always be active. Example is when she hulk applies a sow debuff on an aspect of war DV. He’s 200% ability Accuracy trumps her 100% , it needs a specific ability to counter it. It infact is a bugged interaction
I thought you were supposed to be disagreeing with me. Every ability in the game has an ability accuracy percentage attached to it.

IMIW throws his attack and drops evade chance from X% to 0% is functionally equivalent to "cannot be evaded".

We'll assume a few things. The attack will come first. Logical or there's nothing to evade. We should assume that IMIW attack doesn't consider what the opponent's current evade chance is, just drops it to 0 at the time of that attack. In most cases, they won't be able to evade. In this case, Nightcrawler's buff increases his evade percentage by 33 points (using points because Kabam uses bad terminology for their percent math). Again, we assume that the attack comes first. Again, logical or there's nothing to evade. The evade ability kicks in when there is an incoming attack and increases his evade percentage by 33 points. Allowing him to evade the attack 33% of the time.

So, base evade percentage drops to 0 (not bugged), evade percentage increases from whatever it was (0) to 33 points (0 + 33) (not bugged). Result, sometimes his attack gets evaded. In scenarios of the same rough form, my interpretation is what I've actually observed. If he evaded without a buff, in Swashbuckling mode, or without some other function coming into play, I would agree that it's bugged. I could be totally wrong about how it works behind the scenes, but I don't think I'm too far off the mark on the results when the observations fit the model.
By that logic he should also ignore true strike with his buff active
If IMIW had a True Strike buff or effect on the attack, it would be a bug if Nightcrawler was able to evade it. The True Strike fixes evade and Auto-block AA at 0 while active. Nightcrawlers buff still procs, it just can't make the percentage not 0. For him at least. For now. Kabam could always add a synergy that renders True Strike/Accuracy ineffective.

All that being said, Kabam could say it was a bug even though that doesn’t make sense and then reverse themselves with a "working as intended" a week after that, so take everything everywhere with a grain of salt and YMMV.
Can you please show another "cannot" that lists no percentages that AAR can change? And no there is no differnce between "robots cannot bleed" and "imiw's attacks cannot be evaded". They are both used in the same context, and obviously robots in the game can bleed in the case of a bug, as seen in ultron bleeding a few weeks back.

SMH. I already showed you that a "cannot" ability can be changed one way or another and now you need another example. Why? One proves the case.

How about "water cannot rust", "robots cannot bleed", and "imiw's [repulsor] attacks cannot be evaded"? Do they have the same meaningfulness and intent, regardless of context just because they all use the word cannot?

Obviously nearly anything can happen in the context of a bug, so that doesn't mean anything.

Anyway, if someone official ever pops in here, I fully expect this to get taken to the team AKA filed in the bin and our opinions won't matter either way, although an offical explanation about these interactions would be welcome.

I just dueled an IMIW with Nightcrawler and I was able to dex his repulsor attacks. I dueled a Nightcrawler with IMIW (only using repulsor attacks) and he was able to evade but only with the buff. With the buff, he was able to evade a few times but not frequently. I don't think it's a bug (I do think it's counterintuitive and interactions are needlessly obscured), but that might not be the way they intended it to work, although it wouldn't surprise me if it was since he's the evade guy.

Unknown · July 2019

This content has been removed.

BigPoppaCBONE · July 2019

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

Lormif said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

Lormif said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:
Nightcrawler has his L1 evade buff active. We're having to make assumptions because Kabam won't tell us or make the definitive order of operations for all champs. If IMIW reduces evade chance by 100% to 0% first and then Nightcrawler's buff increases evade chance to 33%, the scenario OP shows could happen. This same first this, then that plays out in some other interactions throughout the game where logic and ability descriptions say A should happen, but instead you consistently get B.
He’s repulser blasts say they cannot he evaded. Thus making it into a never vs always argument, this means that there is no % for IMIW repulser hits and evade interactions. Which makes this a bugged interaction
There's a percentage for every ability in the game. They've even put that information in a tip screen. They need to fall back on calculations to determine what happens for every interaction in the game. Always, never, cannot, etc. are converted to percentages and can be adjusted unless otherwise stated. For that reason, certain champs have AA of more than 100% for some of their abilities. So not a bug according to the information we have and observations of what actually happens, just poorly explained or implemented in a fashion contrary to most assumptions.
This is a cannot problem
It seems “cannot” has one of the highest priority in the game. It’s not a % based ability or mechanic even if it were us should have the percentage of the other ability plus one hundred. This means that it will always be active. Example is when she hulk applies a sow debuff on an aspect of war DV. He’s 200% ability Accuracy trumps her 100% , it needs a specific ability to counter it. It infact is a bugged interaction
I thought you were supposed to be disagreeing with me. Every ability in the game has an ability accuracy percentage attached to it.

IMIW throws his attack and drops evade chance from X% to 0% is functionally equivalent to "cannot be evaded".

We'll assume a few things. The attack will come first. Logical or there's nothing to evade. We should assume that IMIW attack doesn't consider what the opponent's current evade chance is, just drops it to 0 at the time of that attack. In most cases, they won't be able to evade. In this case, Nightcrawler's buff increases his evade percentage by 33 points (using points because Kabam uses bad terminology for their percent math). Again, we assume that the attack comes first. Again, logical or there's nothing to evade. The evade ability kicks in when there is an incoming attack and increases his evade percentage by 33 points. Allowing him to evade the attack 33% of the time.

So, base evade percentage drops to 0 (not bugged), evade percentage increases from whatever it was (0) to 33 points (0 + 33) (not bugged). Result, sometimes his attack gets evaded. In scenarios of the same rough form, my interpretation is what I've actually observed. If he evaded without a buff, in Swashbuckling mode, or without some other function coming into play, I would agree that it's bugged. I could be totally wrong about how it works behind the scenes, but I don't think I'm too far off the mark on the results when the observations fit the model.
This is not true. CANNOT trumps anything with a percentange. Robots CANNOT be poisoned, this cannot be reduced by AAR..

that being said the question is if this is an actual evade or a bamf. If it happens when he is dodging back then he cannot be hit either, and the defensive abilities **** offensive in a tie. Atleast one seems like a bamf not an evade.
Cannot in this instance means "AA reduced to 0 from whatever it was". There is a difference between "robots cannot bleed" meaning they aren't able to have bleed effects placed on them and an attack that "cannot be evaded" except when it can. Base immunities aren't abilities that have an adjustable accuracy component. There are exceptions to Cannot for abilities. Duped Mephisto's AA cannot be modified. Except when it is. Look at it as a failing of English in using the same word with different intents and listing base immunities under the abilities heading.

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:
Nightcrawler has his L1 evade buff active. We're having to make assumptions because Kabam won't tell us or make the definitive order of operations for all champs. If IMIW reduces evade chance by 100% to 0% first and then Nightcrawler's buff increases evade chance to 33%, the scenario OP shows could happen. This same first this, then that plays out in some other interactions throughout the game where logic and ability descriptions say A should happen, but instead you consistently get B.
He’s repulser blasts say they cannot he evaded. Thus making it into a never vs always argument, this means that there is no % for IMIW repulser hits and evade interactions. Which makes this a bugged interaction
There's a percentage for every ability in the game. They've even put that information in a tip screen. They need to fall back on calculations to determine what happens for every interaction in the game. Always, never, cannot, etc. are converted to percentages and can be adjusted unless otherwise stated. For that reason, certain champs have AA of more than 100% for some of their abilities. So not a bug according to the information we have and observations of what actually happens, just poorly explained or implemented in a fashion contrary to most assumptions.
This is a cannot problem
It seems “cannot” has one of the highest priority in the game. It’s not a % based ability or mechanic even if it were us should have the percentage of the other ability plus one hundred. This means that it will always be active. Example is when she hulk applies a sow debuff on an aspect of war DV. He’s 200% ability Accuracy trumps her 100% , it needs a specific ability to counter it. It infact is a bugged interaction
I thought you were supposed to be disagreeing with me. Every ability in the game has an ability accuracy percentage attached to it.

IMIW throws his attack and drops evade chance from X% to 0% is functionally equivalent to "cannot be evaded".

We'll assume a few things. The attack will come first. Logical or there's nothing to evade. We should assume that IMIW attack doesn't consider what the opponent's current evade chance is, just drops it to 0 at the time of that attack. In most cases, they won't be able to evade. In this case, Nightcrawler's buff increases his evade percentage by 33 points (using points because Kabam uses bad terminology for their percent math). Again, we assume that the attack comes first. Again, logical or there's nothing to evade. The evade ability kicks in when there is an incoming attack and increases his evade percentage by 33 points. Allowing him to evade the attack 33% of the time.

So, base evade percentage drops to 0 (not bugged), evade percentage increases from whatever it was (0) to 33 points (0 + 33) (not bugged). Result, sometimes his attack gets evaded. In scenarios of the same rough form, my interpretation is what I've actually observed. If he evaded without a buff, in Swashbuckling mode, or without some other function coming into play, I would agree that it's bugged. I could be totally wrong about how it works behind the scenes, but I don't think I'm too far off the mark on the results when the observations fit the model.
By that logic he should also ignore true strike with his buff active
If IMIW had a True Strike buff or effect on the attack, it would be a bug if Nightcrawler was able to evade it. The True Strike fixes evade and Auto-block AA at 0 while active. Nightcrawlers buff still procs, it just can't make the percentage not 0. For him at least. For now. Kabam could always add a synergy that renders True Strike/Accuracy ineffective.

All that being said, Kabam could say it was a bug even though that doesn’t make sense and then reverse themselves with a "working as intended" a week after that, so take everything everywhere with a grain of salt and YMMV.
Can you please show another "cannot" that lists no percentages that AAR can change? And no there is no differnce between "robots cannot bleed" and "imiw's attacks cannot be evaded". They are both used in the same context, and obviously robots in the game can bleed in the case of a bug, as seen in ultron bleeding a few weeks back.
SMH. I already showed you that a "cannot" ability can be changed one way or another and now you need another example. Why? One proves the case.

How about "water cannot rust", "robots cannot bleed", and "imiw's [repulsor] attacks cannot be evaded"? Do they have the same meaningfulness and intent, regardless of context just because they all use the word cannot?

Obviously nearly anything can happen in the context of a bug, so that doesn't mean anything.

Anyway, if someone official ever pops in here, I fully expect this to get taken to the team AKA filed in the bin and our opinions won't matter either way, although an offical explanation about these interactions would be welcome.

I just dueled an IMIW with Nightcrawler and I was able to dex his repulsor attacks. I dueled a Nightcrawler with IMIW (only using repulsor attacks) and he was able to evade but only with the buff. With the buff, he was able to evade a few times but not frequently. I don't think it's a bug (I do think it's counterintuitive and interactions are needlessly obscured), but that might not be the way they intended it to work, although it wouldn't surprise me if it was since he's the evade guy.
Do me a favor and try to use Corvus against a glancing opponent. Thank you
Btw dext is not the same as evade

What does Corvus have to do with anything? He doesn’t have cannot be glanced as an ability.

BTW, I didn't say they were the same, but they are both evades. Thank you. Also BTW, Kabam calls them dexterity evades and the dex mastery itself said evade before the edit with the MD change. Thank you. If there was a True Strike-like effect, you wouldn't be able to dex away from them and it didn't differentiate between passive evades and manual evades in the abilities and I wanted to be sure. BTW, thank you.

Kobster84 · July 2019

BigPoppaCBONE said:

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

Lormif said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

Lormif said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:
Nightcrawler has his L1 evade buff active. We're having to make assumptions because Kabam won't tell us or make the definitive order of operations for all champs. If IMIW reduces evade chance by 100% to 0% first and then Nightcrawler's buff increases evade chance to 33%, the scenario OP shows could happen. This same first this, then that plays out in some other interactions throughout the game where logic and ability descriptions say A should happen, but instead you consistently get B.
He’s repulser blasts say they cannot he evaded. Thus making it into a never vs always argument, this means that there is no % for IMIW repulser hits and evade interactions. Which makes this a bugged interaction
There's a percentage for every ability in the game. They've even put that information in a tip screen. They need to fall back on calculations to determine what happens for every interaction in the game. Always, never, cannot, etc. are converted to percentages and can be adjusted unless otherwise stated. For that reason, certain champs have AA of more than 100% for some of their abilities. So not a bug according to the information we have and observations of what actually happens, just poorly explained or implemented in a fashion contrary to most assumptions.
This is a cannot problem
It seems “cannot” has one of the highest priority in the game. It’s not a % based ability or mechanic even if it were us should have the percentage of the other ability plus one hundred. This means that it will always be active. Example is when she hulk applies a sow debuff on an aspect of war DV. He’s 200% ability Accuracy trumps her 100% , it needs a specific ability to counter it. It infact is a bugged interaction
I thought you were supposed to be disagreeing with me. Every ability in the game has an ability accuracy percentage attached to it.

IMIW throws his attack and drops evade chance from X% to 0% is functionally equivalent to "cannot be evaded".

We'll assume a few things. The attack will come first. Logical or there's nothing to evade. We should assume that IMIW attack doesn't consider what the opponent's current evade chance is, just drops it to 0 at the time of that attack. In most cases, they won't be able to evade. In this case, Nightcrawler's buff increases his evade percentage by 33 points (using points because Kabam uses bad terminology for their percent math). Again, we assume that the attack comes first. Again, logical or there's nothing to evade. The evade ability kicks in when there is an incoming attack and increases his evade percentage by 33 points. Allowing him to evade the attack 33% of the time.

So, base evade percentage drops to 0 (not bugged), evade percentage increases from whatever it was (0) to 33 points (0 + 33) (not bugged). Result, sometimes his attack gets evaded. In scenarios of the same rough form, my interpretation is what I've actually observed. If he evaded without a buff, in Swashbuckling mode, or without some other function coming into play, I would agree that it's bugged. I could be totally wrong about how it works behind the scenes, but I don't think I'm too far off the mark on the results when the observations fit the model.
This is not true. CANNOT trumps anything with a percentange. Robots CANNOT be poisoned, this cannot be reduced by AAR..

that being said the question is if this is an actual evade or a bamf. If it happens when he is dodging back then he cannot be hit either, and the defensive abilities **** offensive in a tie. Atleast one seems like a bamf not an evade.
Cannot in this instance means "AA reduced to 0 from whatever it was". There is a difference between "robots cannot bleed" meaning they aren't able to have bleed effects placed on them and an attack that "cannot be evaded" except when it can. Base immunities aren't abilities that have an adjustable accuracy component. There are exceptions to Cannot for abilities. Duped Mephisto's AA cannot be modified. Except when it is. Look at it as a failing of English in using the same word with different intents and listing base immunities under the abilities heading.

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:
Nightcrawler has his L1 evade buff active. We're having to make assumptions because Kabam won't tell us or make the definitive order of operations for all champs. If IMIW reduces evade chance by 100% to 0% first and then Nightcrawler's buff increases evade chance to 33%, the scenario OP shows could happen. This same first this, then that plays out in some other interactions throughout the game where logic and ability descriptions say A should happen, but instead you consistently get B.
He’s repulser blasts say they cannot he evaded. Thus making it into a never vs always argument, this means that there is no % for IMIW repulser hits and evade interactions. Which makes this a bugged interaction
There's a percentage for every ability in the game. They've even put that information in a tip screen. They need to fall back on calculations to determine what happens for every interaction in the game. Always, never, cannot, etc. are converted to percentages and can be adjusted unless otherwise stated. For that reason, certain champs have AA of more than 100% for some of their abilities. So not a bug according to the information we have and observations of what actually happens, just poorly explained or implemented in a fashion contrary to most assumptions.
This is a cannot problem
It seems “cannot” has one of the highest priority in the game. It’s not a % based ability or mechanic even if it were us should have the percentage of the other ability plus one hundred. This means that it will always be active. Example is when she hulk applies a sow debuff on an aspect of war DV. He’s 200% ability Accuracy trumps her 100% , it needs a specific ability to counter it. It infact is a bugged interaction
I thought you were supposed to be disagreeing with me. Every ability in the game has an ability accuracy percentage attached to it.

IMIW throws his attack and drops evade chance from X% to 0% is functionally equivalent to "cannot be evaded".

We'll assume a few things. The attack will come first. Logical or there's nothing to evade. We should assume that IMIW attack doesn't consider what the opponent's current evade chance is, just drops it to 0 at the time of that attack. In most cases, they won't be able to evade. In this case, Nightcrawler's buff increases his evade percentage by 33 points (using points because Kabam uses bad terminology for their percent math). Again, we assume that the attack comes first. Again, logical or there's nothing to evade. The evade ability kicks in when there is an incoming attack and increases his evade percentage by 33 points. Allowing him to evade the attack 33% of the time.

So, base evade percentage drops to 0 (not bugged), evade percentage increases from whatever it was (0) to 33 points (0 + 33) (not bugged). Result, sometimes his attack gets evaded. In scenarios of the same rough form, my interpretation is what I've actually observed. If he evaded without a buff, in Swashbuckling mode, or without some other function coming into play, I would agree that it's bugged. I could be totally wrong about how it works behind the scenes, but I don't think I'm too far off the mark on the results when the observations fit the model.
By that logic he should also ignore true strike with his buff active
If IMIW had a True Strike buff or effect on the attack, it would be a bug if Nightcrawler was able to evade it. The True Strike fixes evade and Auto-block AA at 0 while active. Nightcrawlers buff still procs, it just can't make the percentage not 0. For him at least. For now. Kabam could always add a synergy that renders True Strike/Accuracy ineffective.

All that being said, Kabam could say it was a bug even though that doesn’t make sense and then reverse themselves with a "working as intended" a week after that, so take everything everywhere with a grain of salt and YMMV.
Can you please show another "cannot" that lists no percentages that AAR can change? And no there is no differnce between "robots cannot bleed" and "imiw's attacks cannot be evaded". They are both used in the same context, and obviously robots in the game can bleed in the case of a bug, as seen in ultron bleeding a few weeks back.
SMH. I already showed you that a "cannot" ability can be changed one way or another and now you need another example. Why? One proves the case.

How about "water cannot rust", "robots cannot bleed", and "imiw's [repulsor] attacks cannot be evaded"? Do they have the same meaningfulness and intent, regardless of context just because they all use the word cannot?

Obviously nearly anything can happen in the context of a bug, so that doesn't mean anything.

Anyway, if someone official ever pops in here, I fully expect this to get taken to the team AKA filed in the bin and our opinions won't matter either way, although an offical explanation about these interactions would be welcome.

I just dueled an IMIW with Nightcrawler and I was able to dex his repulsor attacks. I dueled a Nightcrawler with IMIW (only using repulsor attacks) and he was able to evade but only with the buff. With the buff, he was able to evade a few times but not frequently. I don't think it's a bug (I do think it's counterintuitive and interactions are needlessly obscured), but that might not be the way they intended it to work, although it wouldn't surprise me if it was since he's the evade guy.
Do me a favor and try to use Corvus against a glancing opponent. Thank you
Btw dext is not the same as evade
What does Corvus have to do with anything? He doesn’t have cannot be glanced as an ability.

BTW, I didn't say they were the same, but they are both evades. Thank you. Also BTW, Kabam calls them dexterity evades and the dex mastery itself said evade before the edit with the MD change. Thank you. If there was a True Strike-like effect, you wouldn't be able to dex away from them and it didn't differentiate between passive evades and manual evades in the abilities and I wanted to be sure. BTW, thank you.

True strike doesn’t stop dexterity the lack of knowledge wow
Only one that does is heimdall because it’s true sight and states in the ability it stops dexterity

BigPoppaCBONE · July 2019

Kobster84 said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

Lormif said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

Lormif said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:
Nightcrawler has his L1 evade buff active. We're having to make assumptions because Kabam won't tell us or make the definitive order of operations for all champs. If IMIW reduces evade chance by 100% to 0% first and then Nightcrawler's buff increases evade chance to 33%, the scenario OP shows could happen. This same first this, then that plays out in some other interactions throughout the game where logic and ability descriptions say A should happen, but instead you consistently get B.
He’s repulser blasts say they cannot he evaded. Thus making it into a never vs always argument, this means that there is no % for IMIW repulser hits and evade interactions. Which makes this a bugged interaction
There's a percentage for every ability in the game. They've even put that information in a tip screen. They need to fall back on calculations to determine what happens for every interaction in the game. Always, never, cannot, etc. are converted to percentages and can be adjusted unless otherwise stated. For that reason, certain champs have AA of more than 100% for some of their abilities. So not a bug according to the information we have and observations of what actually happens, just poorly explained or implemented in a fashion contrary to most assumptions.
This is a cannot problem
It seems “cannot” has one of the highest priority in the game. It’s not a % based ability or mechanic even if it were us should have the percentage of the other ability plus one hundred. This means that it will always be active. Example is when she hulk applies a sow debuff on an aspect of war DV. He’s 200% ability Accuracy trumps her 100% , it needs a specific ability to counter it. It infact is a bugged interaction
I thought you were supposed to be disagreeing with me. Every ability in the game has an ability accuracy percentage attached to it.

IMIW throws his attack and drops evade chance from X% to 0% is functionally equivalent to "cannot be evaded".

We'll assume a few things. The attack will come first. Logical or there's nothing to evade. We should assume that IMIW attack doesn't consider what the opponent's current evade chance is, just drops it to 0 at the time of that attack. In most cases, they won't be able to evade. In this case, Nightcrawler's buff increases his evade percentage by 33 points (using points because Kabam uses bad terminology for their percent math). Again, we assume that the attack comes first. Again, logical or there's nothing to evade. The evade ability kicks in when there is an incoming attack and increases his evade percentage by 33 points. Allowing him to evade the attack 33% of the time.

So, base evade percentage drops to 0 (not bugged), evade percentage increases from whatever it was (0) to 33 points (0 + 33) (not bugged). Result, sometimes his attack gets evaded. In scenarios of the same rough form, my interpretation is what I've actually observed. If he evaded without a buff, in Swashbuckling mode, or without some other function coming into play, I would agree that it's bugged. I could be totally wrong about how it works behind the scenes, but I don't think I'm too far off the mark on the results when the observations fit the model.
This is not true. CANNOT trumps anything with a percentange. Robots CANNOT be poisoned, this cannot be reduced by AAR..

that being said the question is if this is an actual evade or a bamf. If it happens when he is dodging back then he cannot be hit either, and the defensive abilities **** offensive in a tie. Atleast one seems like a bamf not an evade.
Cannot in this instance means "AA reduced to 0 from whatever it was". There is a difference between "robots cannot bleed" meaning they aren't able to have bleed effects placed on them and an attack that "cannot be evaded" except when it can. Base immunities aren't abilities that have an adjustable accuracy component. There are exceptions to Cannot for abilities. Duped Mephisto's AA cannot be modified. Except when it is. Look at it as a failing of English in using the same word with different intents and listing base immunities under the abilities heading.

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:
Nightcrawler has his L1 evade buff active. We're having to make assumptions because Kabam won't tell us or make the definitive order of operations for all champs. If IMIW reduces evade chance by 100% to 0% first and then Nightcrawler's buff increases evade chance to 33%, the scenario OP shows could happen. This same first this, then that plays out in some other interactions throughout the game where logic and ability descriptions say A should happen, but instead you consistently get B.
He’s repulser blasts say they cannot he evaded. Thus making it into a never vs always argument, this means that there is no % for IMIW repulser hits and evade interactions. Which makes this a bugged interaction
There's a percentage for every ability in the game. They've even put that information in a tip screen. They need to fall back on calculations to determine what happens for every interaction in the game. Always, never, cannot, etc. are converted to percentages and can be adjusted unless otherwise stated. For that reason, certain champs have AA of more than 100% for some of their abilities. So not a bug according to the information we have and observations of what actually happens, just poorly explained or implemented in a fashion contrary to most assumptions.
This is a cannot problem
It seems “cannot” has one of the highest priority in the game. It’s not a % based ability or mechanic even if it were us should have the percentage of the other ability plus one hundred. This means that it will always be active. Example is when she hulk applies a sow debuff on an aspect of war DV. He’s 200% ability Accuracy trumps her 100% , it needs a specific ability to counter it. It infact is a bugged interaction
I thought you were supposed to be disagreeing with me. Every ability in the game has an ability accuracy percentage attached to it.

IMIW throws his attack and drops evade chance from X% to 0% is functionally equivalent to "cannot be evaded".

We'll assume a few things. The attack will come first. Logical or there's nothing to evade. We should assume that IMIW attack doesn't consider what the opponent's current evade chance is, just drops it to 0 at the time of that attack. In most cases, they won't be able to evade. In this case, Nightcrawler's buff increases his evade percentage by 33 points (using points because Kabam uses bad terminology for their percent math). Again, we assume that the attack comes first. Again, logical or there's nothing to evade. The evade ability kicks in when there is an incoming attack and increases his evade percentage by 33 points. Allowing him to evade the attack 33% of the time.

So, base evade percentage drops to 0 (not bugged), evade percentage increases from whatever it was (0) to 33 points (0 + 33) (not bugged). Result, sometimes his attack gets evaded. In scenarios of the same rough form, my interpretation is what I've actually observed. If he evaded without a buff, in Swashbuckling mode, or without some other function coming into play, I would agree that it's bugged. I could be totally wrong about how it works behind the scenes, but I don't think I'm too far off the mark on the results when the observations fit the model.
By that logic he should also ignore true strike with his buff active
If IMIW had a True Strike buff or effect on the attack, it would be a bug if Nightcrawler was able to evade it. The True Strike fixes evade and Auto-block AA at 0 while active. Nightcrawlers buff still procs, it just can't make the percentage not 0. For him at least. For now. Kabam could always add a synergy that renders True Strike/Accuracy ineffective.

All that being said, Kabam could say it was a bug even though that doesn’t make sense and then reverse themselves with a "working as intended" a week after that, so take everything everywhere with a grain of salt and YMMV.
Can you please show another "cannot" that lists no percentages that AAR can change? And no there is no differnce between "robots cannot bleed" and "imiw's attacks cannot be evaded". They are both used in the same context, and obviously robots in the game can bleed in the case of a bug, as seen in ultron bleeding a few weeks back.
SMH. I already showed you that a "cannot" ability can be changed one way or another and now you need another example. Why? One proves the case.

How about "water cannot rust", "robots cannot bleed", and "imiw's [repulsor] attacks cannot be evaded"? Do they have the same meaningfulness and intent, regardless of context just because they all use the word cannot?

Obviously nearly anything can happen in the context of a bug, so that doesn't mean anything.

Anyway, if someone official ever pops in here, I fully expect this to get taken to the team AKA filed in the bin and our opinions won't matter either way, although an offical explanation about these interactions would be welcome.

I just dueled an IMIW with Nightcrawler and I was able to dex his repulsor attacks. I dueled a Nightcrawler with IMIW (only using repulsor attacks) and he was able to evade but only with the buff. With the buff, he was able to evade a few times but not frequently. I don't think it's a bug (I do think it's counterintuitive and interactions are needlessly obscured), but that might not be the way they intended it to work, although it wouldn't surprise me if it was since he's the evade guy.
Do me a favor and try to use Corvus against a glancing opponent. Thank you
Btw dext is not the same as evade
What does Corvus have to do with anything? He doesn’t have cannot be glanced as an ability.

BTW, I didn't say they were the same, but they are both evades. Thank you. Also BTW, Kabam calls them dexterity evades and the dex mastery itself said evade before the edit with the MD change. Thank you. If there was a True Strike-like effect, you wouldn't be able to dex away from them and it didn't differentiate between passive evades and manual evades in the abilities and I wanted to be sure. BTW, thank you.
True strike doesn’t stop dexterity the lack of knowledge wow
Only one that does is heimdall because it’s true sight and states in the ability it stops dexterity

The type of person that says things like "the lack of knowledge wow". Do you also roll your eyes all the time, speak in sarcasm, and wonder why people don't like you? Anyway, I was in TrueStrike = no dex mode from testing and dueling Heimdalls. I freely admit to a mistep. Can't all be as perfect as you, but we mere mortals still try.

Unknown · July 2019

This content has been removed.

Ultra8529 · July 2019

IMIW getting evaded is a bug. Would be good to get some acknowledgement of this issue.

As Kabam took the position that "cannot" trumps everything else in this game (see debate regarding glancing means opponent cannot crit vs guaranteed crits), this should similarly be applied to IMIW's repulsor beams which "cannot" be evaded.

Lormif · July 2019

BigPoppaCBONE said:

Lormif said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

Lormif said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:
Nightcrawler has his L1 evade buff active. We're having to make assumptions because Kabam won't tell us or make the definitive order of operations for all champs. If IMIW reduces evade chance by 100% to 0% first and then Nightcrawler's buff increases evade chance to 33%, the scenario OP shows could happen. This same first this, then that plays out in some other interactions throughout the game where logic and ability descriptions say A should happen, but instead you consistently get B.
He’s repulser blasts say they cannot he evaded. Thus making it into a never vs always argument, this means that there is no % for IMIW repulser hits and evade interactions. Which makes this a bugged interaction
There's a percentage for every ability in the game. They've even put that information in a tip screen. They need to fall back on calculations to determine what happens for every interaction in the game. Always, never, cannot, etc. are converted to percentages and can be adjusted unless otherwise stated. For that reason, certain champs have AA of more than 100% for some of their abilities. So not a bug according to the information we have and observations of what actually happens, just poorly explained or implemented in a fashion contrary to most assumptions.
This is a cannot problem
It seems “cannot” has one of the highest priority in the game. It’s not a % based ability or mechanic even if it were us should have the percentage of the other ability plus one hundred. This means that it will always be active. Example is when she hulk applies a sow debuff on an aspect of war DV. He’s 200% ability Accuracy trumps her 100% , it needs a specific ability to counter it. It infact is a bugged interaction
I thought you were supposed to be disagreeing with me. Every ability in the game has an ability accuracy percentage attached to it.

IMIW throws his attack and drops evade chance from X% to 0% is functionally equivalent to "cannot be evaded".

We'll assume a few things. The attack will come first. Logical or there's nothing to evade. We should assume that IMIW attack doesn't consider what the opponent's current evade chance is, just drops it to 0 at the time of that attack. In most cases, they won't be able to evade. In this case, Nightcrawler's buff increases his evade percentage by 33 points (using points because Kabam uses bad terminology for their percent math). Again, we assume that the attack comes first. Again, logical or there's nothing to evade. The evade ability kicks in when there is an incoming attack and increases his evade percentage by 33 points. Allowing him to evade the attack 33% of the time.

So, base evade percentage drops to 0 (not bugged), evade percentage increases from whatever it was (0) to 33 points (0 + 33) (not bugged). Result, sometimes his attack gets evaded. In scenarios of the same rough form, my interpretation is what I've actually observed. If he evaded without a buff, in Swashbuckling mode, or without some other function coming into play, I would agree that it's bugged. I could be totally wrong about how it works behind the scenes, but I don't think I'm too far off the mark on the results when the observations fit the model.
This is not true. CANNOT trumps anything with a percentange. Robots CANNOT be poisoned, this cannot be reduced by AAR..

that being said the question is if this is an actual evade or a bamf. If it happens when he is dodging back then he cannot be hit either, and the defensive abilities **** offensive in a tie. Atleast one seems like a bamf not an evade.
Cannot in this instance means "AA reduced to 0 from whatever it was". There is a difference between "robots cannot bleed" meaning they aren't able to have bleed effects placed on them and an attack that "cannot be evaded" except when it can. Base immunities aren't abilities that have an adjustable accuracy component. There are exceptions to Cannot for abilities. Duped Mephisto's AA cannot be modified. Except when it is. Look at it as a failing of English in using the same word with different intents and listing base immunities under the abilities heading.

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:

SquishyjrThe_4TH said:

BigPoppaCBONE said:
Nightcrawler has his L1 evade buff active. We're having to make assumptions because Kabam won't tell us or make the definitive order of operations for all champs. If IMIW reduces evade chance by 100% to 0% first and then Nightcrawler's buff increases evade chance to 33%, the scenario OP shows could happen. This same first this, then that plays out in some other interactions throughout the game where logic and ability descriptions say A should happen, but instead you consistently get B.
He’s repulser blasts say they cannot he evaded. Thus making it into a never vs always argument, this means that there is no % for IMIW repulser hits and evade interactions. Which makes this a bugged interaction
There's a percentage for every ability in the game. They've even put that information in a tip screen. They need to fall back on calculations to determine what happens for every interaction in the game. Always, never, cannot, etc. are converted to percentages and can be adjusted unless otherwise stated. For that reason, certain champs have AA of more than 100% for some of their abilities. So not a bug according to the information we have and observations of what actually happens, just poorly explained or implemented in a fashion contrary to most assumptions.
This is a cannot problem
It seems “cannot” has one of the highest priority in the game. It’s not a % based ability or mechanic even if it were us should have the percentage of the other ability plus one hundred. This means that it will always be active. Example is when she hulk applies a sow debuff on an aspect of war DV. He’s 200% ability Accuracy trumps her 100% , it needs a specific ability to counter it. It infact is a bugged interaction
I thought you were supposed to be disagreeing with me. Every ability in the game has an ability accuracy percentage attached to it.

IMIW throws his attack and drops evade chance from X% to 0% is functionally equivalent to "cannot be evaded".

We'll assume a few things. The attack will come first. Logical or there's nothing to evade. We should assume that IMIW attack doesn't consider what the opponent's current evade chance is, just drops it to 0 at the time of that attack. In most cases, they won't be able to evade. In this case, Nightcrawler's buff increases his evade percentage by 33 points (using points because Kabam uses bad terminology for their percent math). Again, we assume that the attack comes first. Again, logical or there's nothing to evade. The evade ability kicks in when there is an incoming attack and increases his evade percentage by 33 points. Allowing him to evade the attack 33% of the time.

So, base evade percentage drops to 0 (not bugged), evade percentage increases from whatever it was (0) to 33 points (0 + 33) (not bugged). Result, sometimes his attack gets evaded. In scenarios of the same rough form, my interpretation is what I've actually observed. If he evaded without a buff, in Swashbuckling mode, or without some other function coming into play, I would agree that it's bugged. I could be totally wrong about how it works behind the scenes, but I don't think I'm too far off the mark on the results when the observations fit the model.
By that logic he should also ignore true strike with his buff active
If IMIW had a True Strike buff or effect on the attack, it would be a bug if Nightcrawler was able to evade it. The True Strike fixes evade and Auto-block AA at 0 while active. Nightcrawlers buff still procs, it just can't make the percentage not 0. For him at least. For now. Kabam could always add a synergy that renders True Strike/Accuracy ineffective.

All that being said, Kabam could say it was a bug even though that doesn’t make sense and then reverse themselves with a "working as intended" a week after that, so take everything everywhere with a grain of salt and YMMV.
Can you please show another "cannot" that lists no percentages that AAR can change? And no there is no differnce between "robots cannot bleed" and "imiw's attacks cannot be evaded". They are both used in the same context, and obviously robots in the game can bleed in the case of a bug, as seen in ultron bleeding a few weeks back.
SMH. I already showed you that a "cannot" ability can be changed one way or another and now you need another example. Why? One proves the case.

How about "water cannot rust", "robots cannot bleed", and "imiw's [repulsor] attacks cannot be evaded"? Do they have the same meaningfulness and intent, regardless of context just because they all use the word cannot?

Obviously nearly anything can happen in the context of a bug, so that doesn't mean anything.

Anyway, if someone official ever pops in here, I fully expect this to get taken to the team AKA filed in the bin and our opinions won't matter either way, although an offical explanation about these interactions would be welcome.

I just dueled an IMIW with Nightcrawler and I was able to dex his repulsor attacks. I dueled a Nightcrawler with IMIW (only using repulsor attacks) and he was able to evade but only with the buff. With the buff, he was able to evade a few times but not frequently. I don't think it's a bug (I do think it's counterintuitive and interactions are needlessly obscured), but that might not be the way they intended it to work, although it wouldn't surprise me if it was since he's the evade guy.

Except you did not. You took something, the AAR of a champion that says cannot be reduced and countered it with something that says specifically states it can. AAR is a percentage, and I said give me something that is not a percentage. You gave me something that did not fall into that category. Shoot we dont know if this is even an evade, or a bamf, which is not an evade but a "cannot be hit"

Nightcrawler evading Ironman IW bug?

Comments