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

Nightcrawler evading Ironman IW bug?

2»

Comments

  • LormifLormif Posts: 7,369 ★★★★★
    Ultra8529 said:

    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.

    defensive cannot trump offensive cannot is the stance they took.
  • BigPoppaCBONEBigPoppaCBONE Posts: 2,277 ★★★★★
    Lormif 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.
    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"
    You were stating that cannot is ironclad and unchangeable in the game and I was saying that it can be changed. Kabam has left out information and altered other interactions before. It wouldn't have surprised me at all either way if it turned out that was an intended one-off or something they jacked up.

    I figured the cannot be struck for Nightcrawler was included for people without dexterity where you also cannot be hit when dodging.

    More testing against Nightcrawler with Ghost and after a zillion of her crits that also "cannot be evaded" he never evaded them with or without the buff where he would infrequently evade IMIW with the buff.

    Testing with IMIW against Miles Morales and he never evaded any repulsor attacks. Ghost vs MM and he never evaded her crits and I did enough attacks with both that it's highly unlikely that it was RNG busting me over the course of multiple fights across multiple champs. Possible, but I doubt it.

    After trying the cannot vs evade a zillion different times, Nightcrawler vs IMIW is bugged with the buff assuming all the other cannot be evaded vs evade buff/passive interactions I was able to find and test are what Kabam was going for. I wasn't able to get him to evade without it. In the past, I naively assumed it was just bad RNG that kept him from evading other attacks.

    I'm going to be so annoyed if Kabam Miike pops in and says that he is supposed to still evade unevadeable attacks sometimes and all those cannot evade champs are bugged except for IMIW.
  • KeepinItRealKeepinItReal Posts: 229 ★
    Mods it's also happening to IWIM vs Stealth Spidey in Uncollected,..this a Bug or mis-reading some "working as intended" buff node/champ combos???
  • Kabam ZibiitKabam Zibiit Posts: 7,033
    We passed this along to the rest of the team. For anyone that didn't mention it already, can you specify which quest and difficulty you saw this in and what nodes were active for that fight?
  • Ultra8529Ultra8529 Posts: 526 ★★★
    edited July 2019
    Kabam Zibiit said:

    We passed this along to the rest of the team. For anyone that didn't mention it already, can you specify which quest and difficulty you saw this in and what nodes were active for that fight?

    IMIW vs Domino in Arena
  • Ultra8529Ultra8529 Posts: 526 ★★★
    Ultra8529 said:

    Kabam Zibiit said:

    We passed this along to the rest of the team. For anyone that didn't mention it already, can you specify which quest and difficulty you saw this in and what nodes were active for that fight?

    IMIW vs Domino in Arena
    @Kabam Zibiit did you get that?

    In arena so no nodes were operating. In other words, this is not node specific. Shouldn't be too hard to isolate the issue.
  • Ultra8529Ultra8529 Posts: 526 ★★★
    Just experienced this in Epic mode for Class Trips - 2nd quest i think, vs NC. Multiple times I dashed in with IMIW and NC evaded - he had his evade buff which comes up after using his first special.

    Leads me to think this is a case where the evade buff is increasing ability accuracy for evade. But that is still a bug because IMIW's repulsor beam "cannot" be evaded, which trumps all ability modification.
Sign In or Register to comment.