Always mean always, not 100%
|
Either change the fucking wording here or change the definition of "Always."
Always mean fucking always. Since, in game, it actually means 100% chance since it can be reduced, it needs to fucking indicate so. If it was actually always, then it couldn't be reduced. It's not fucking rocket science. Last bumped on May 11, 2021, 8:43:04 AM
This thread has been automatically archived. Replies are disabled.
|
|
|
Having no idea what on earth you're on about, doesn't always happen to me, but in this case it is 100% accurate.
Maybe you should try to be a little bit more specific? Carry on my waypoint son, there'll be peace when maps are done. Lay your portal gem to rest, don't you die no more. 'Cause it's a bitter sweet symphony this league. Try to make maps meet, you're a slave to the meta, then you leave. Last edited by Xavathos#5130 on May 5, 2021, 6:17:33 PM
|
|
|
I guess he is talking about "your hits ALWAYS ignite" and then poof - you're ending up on the map with "monsters have a % chance to avoid ele ailments". And where is "always" now?
|
|
|
I agree in theory, but in reality, I'm not sure there is a way to make that more clear without changing the actual map mod itself to be something more like monsters have -200% chance to be ignited and elementalist is something like adds 100% chance to ignite enemies.
|
|
|
Wait, hold on. That's not how it works.
Always means Always, alright. Reaching 100% chance for something to happen means having it "Always" happen. Heck, they could even just put a "Yes" in recap and turn it into a binary value, because that's exactly what happens. It's no more a game of chance - it's a certainty. If you pile up your Chance to Ignite to 100%, you will get "Your Hits always Ignites". I'd like to stress out that, so far, we are talking only about the chance that your hit may proc an ignite. So far, "Always ignite" means exactly that - all of your hits will apply an ignite, if possible. BUT. If the hit target has a chance to avoid ignition (hot word: avoid), then that chance is rolled separately in order to determine if the incoming ignition - be it "assured" or not - will actually land. Which is also why if you enter a map with "all enemy hits ignites" while wearing an Ashrend (cannot be ignited), then you will never get ignited - all enemy hits "Always" ignite but the ignite ultimately fails to land on you because you have "100% chance to avoid ignition". So yeah, having "Always ignite" does not automatically imply you will always ignite your enemy. And you will have a bad time in maps with "chance to avoid ignition". In that case, you may get an easier life with Ignition Proliferation - proliferated ignition do not care about chance to avoid ignition. |
|
|
So it's like "hits can't be evaded" but you can dodge/block because that's another mechanic :)
I represent only myself, my own thought and believes. I am individual, not a representative of the community.
I am not speaking on behalf of someone else and I don't get offended by things that have nothing to do with me. 3.13 was the golden age. |
|
" Yes. As in, "Hits can't be evaded" will make enemy's evasion rating in hit chance calculation null, thus giving you a 100% chance to hit (this is also why there was an update during a major patch so that 100% Chance to Hit against evasive monsters = Hits can't be evaded). There is no "my chance to deal something against your chance to avoid that something" like with Ignite or any ailment in general. Of course, there are still other defence layers like block, dodge and avoidance, which will need their specific roll. For the first two you can try reducing enemy's block/dodge chance via a specific support. The latter can't be countered. |
|
" I see your point and I am assuming you are correct. But I have to say that there is a huge intuitive difference between the contrast of "always ignite x cannot be ignite" and "always ignite x avoid elemental status". I belive that must be better words in english to make more clear this difference instead using "always" and mislead interpretations. But at this point there are so many other misleading interpretations about the content that fixing this one is more like "meh, whatever" Exiles, pffff!
|
|
" "Elemental Ailments" are Ignite, Chill, Freeze, Shock, Scorch, Sap and Brittle. I am pretty sure Advanced Tooltip even states so in any affix that has "Elemental Status" in its text. The fact Advanced Tooltip is not active by default when it should totally be is another thing. I do see the less obvious interpretation of "Hits always ignite VS Avoid elemental ailments" versus "Hits alwyas ignite VS Cannot be ignited", though. I would streamline the choice of words between either "Cannot" or "Avoid", probably the latter since "Avoidance" is another, important hot word used in other context apart the "that status will not apply on me" (namely, Damage avoidance from hits) " GGG tries to choose the right words when possible. One flagrant example I can think about is Touch of Anguish. GGG stated back in one of their posts how they tried to search for the right words for the "Critical Hits do not inherently apply freeze" in a way that it was intuitive enough while conveying the actual meaning of the mod. Considering the alternative was a very misleading "Critical Hits do not always freeze", they choose to create another hot word, "Inherent", which is later used in Painseeker. Last edited by Maxtrux#0762 on May 10, 2021, 4:36:29 AM
|
|
|
That is a good point, but 'reduced chance' and 'chance to avoid' are different.
'reduced chance to ignite' will not affect 'always ignite', but will affect '100% chance to ignite' I believe the existence of 'chance to avoid' is to prevent overstacking '% chance to..' from effectively neutralising a mod. Maybe the wording should be changed to 'chance to be immune to' and this is case of new mechanics clashing with old language use that they haven't got around to fixing yet. |
|
