Bossk's contract says to damage the weakest enemy 10 times. It was never implied that it had to be the weakest enemy at the start of the turn, so there was no reason to change it now. I haven't seen anyone complaining about it or pointing it out as a "bug". Please CG! You're doing a great job with most of the new stuff, but this is bad, so please roll back that change if possible, there are more important things that needs to be reworked (like TAC challenge or AI behavior for Starck).
There was a bug that allowed you to complete payout with out ever damaging the weakest enemy or creating a new weakest enemy. Whats your team? At the least you should have boba, greedo or embo all with debuffs to avoid tanks.
The best strategy is use hunting party on the weakest enemy, not create a new weakest using the attack. By no means does this reduce bh gameplay damage out put or viability and definitely not a nerf but a better way to use the attack correctly.
We would never know if it was a nerf or a bug. The one think we know is that it was working as mentioned at the ability description before the hotfix was released. Giving us unwroten terms for abilities and calling it WAI, will always feel like a nerf.
Keep in mind that Bossk was released a while ago. As i know this bug was never posted as a known issue like here: https://forums.galaxy-of-heroes.starwars.ea.com/discussion/185178/known-issues-10-17-2018/p1?new=1
I use Bossk daily I know it was a bug giving payout when the blue marker was on one character while I attacked another with hunting party and the character I was attacking never became the weakest but I mysteriously earned my payout.
You shouldnt be making a new weakest enemy with hunting party and thats what everyone calling this a nerf is doing.
I agree 100% I'm one of the few who run bh in arena and they do quite well for me....this "nerf" doesnt impact his payout activation at all....not even one round and the payout is active....if it's not you need to learn how to use bounty hunters
Yes. With Bossk it is still possible to fulfill his contract. But it is harder. You can circumvent that easily on offense. Agreed.
But Arena in the end is about defense. Every squad is viable on offense. Not every squad is on defense though. Revan got his super overpowered AI for defense.
With the nerf of Bossk BH are less viable in Arena as it will be harder to fulfill the contract (when running Bossk as lead).
Also I do not quite understand at all why Bossk's ability needed a nerf? It worked just like it said in the description: Deal damage to the weakest enemy 10 times. With Bossk's Hunting Party an enemy may become the weakest during an onslaught. And by that time every damage dealt to the then "weakest enemy" should add to the contract. If it does not, I would consider that a bug...so it is bugged now. IMO.
The longer I play this game the less I understand certain decisions CG has made lately and I have a feeling that the game is on a downfall. It all seems like a mess. And the change of how Bossk's Contract works now just adds to the overall impression. But that is actually a different topic.
I got an exterminator badge from the askhq for submitting the GMY yoda TM removal bug in P1 haat but don't see it listed here? ;-; was hoping i'd be able to use him for p1 now, or maybe it is fixed but stealth, will have to test!
That blue mark at the start of the match is just random. If they haven’t been attacked, they all have full health and energy so their all the weakest till you attack. So basically it should always be the 1st enemy you attack in every match
If they were identical enemies, sure, but each enemy has it's own health and "strength" so the speak. The weakest enemy is only chosen at random if there are more than 1 possible "weakest". Like, if you were in a PvE battle against 2 Sith Assassins and a Sith Trooper, it would likely choose randomly between the assassins because both would qualify for "weakest" at the very start of battle.
You shouldnt be making a new weakest enemy with hunting party and thats what everyone calling this a nerf is doing.
So you are saying there should be a damage cap so it is assured that with Hunting Party the enemy does not get the weakest?
Seriously, prior to the "bugfix" the contract marker was jumping to the enemy that was attacked with Hunting Party when it became the weakest. After that every damage dealt was added to the contract. No bugfix. Just a nerf.
Also, it only adds to the contract if you attack the explicit weakness target. If there is a tie, it doesn't register, even if you hit the toon with the blue target. The best way to demonstrate this is the Dathomir event that starts with all duplicate zombies. Only the second and further shots on a zombie counts - the first shot doesn't hit the weakest (only the equal weakest) and thus doesn't seem to count
Seriously, prior to the "bugfix" the contract marker was jumping to the enemy that was attacked with Hunting Party when it became the weakest
I was trying to find evidence of this in Bossk Lead videos on youtube to prove my statement, but could not find one. I may be wrong in that matter and my mind may play tricks on me. But I was convinced that happened all the time.
Seriously, prior to the "bugfix" the contract marker was jumping to the enemy that was attacked with Hunting Party when it became the weakest. After that every damage dealt was added to the contract. No bugfix. Just a nerf.[/quote]
If you want to complete the contract quickly you will use hunting party on the weakest enemy. Using it on a stronger enemy is a waste of turns.
And who ever merged this thread nice job of buring this specificdiscussion
Seriously, prior to the "bugfix" the contract marker was jumping to the enemy that was attacked with Hunting Party when it became the weakest
I was trying to find evidence of this in Bossk Lead videos on youtube to prove my statement, but could not find one. I may be wrong in that matter and my mind may play tricks on me. But I was convinced that happened all the time.
This statement shows you’re not using Bossk but you’re screaming “nerf”
Fact is that Bossk's contract worked as stated in the description. It mentioned nothing about "at the start of turn". Now the weakest enemy will get damaged without contribution to the contract.
It makes BH with Bossk lead less flexible. And it makes BH with Bossk lead less viable on defense.
As one who has put resources into BH to make them arena viable this is a bummer. To me at least.
The nerf scream may have been a bit too loud. Admitted.
Now the weakest enemy will get damaged without contribution to the contract.
It makes BH with Bossk lead less flexible. And it makes BH with Bossk lead less viable on defense.
The weakest enemy will always contribute to contract. The change makes it so a new weakest enemy can’t be created mid turn. As far as defense I’m not dropping any more than usual in arena, so there is no proof of defense being an issue.
The contract straight up doesnt work like it did. Yeah on offense, it's still easy to trigger any contract, but the AI has been nerfed significantly. No two ways about it. I say this because a bounty Hunter ally can hit in a group attack, and at that time the enemy health may be depleted to become the weakest, amidst the attacks. Therefore, the potential is now there to successfully attack the weakest enemy and not trigger the contract. Sounds like a bug. Please fix.
I supported BH since Bossk release, indeed his lead ability was deciding factor. I turned a blind eye to mismark of duplicates(if 2 exact health there is no weakest, shouldn't be a mark), because I know fixing visuals isn't cg's forté.
I see some don't understand how this change is unwarranted. The ability worked exactly as stated in its description. Damage weakest = 1/10 contract completion
Real-time calculation of weakest is what is described; start of turn is stated in every(other) ability description that uses start of turn reference point in ability mechanics.
They've inflicted the bug with update, not fixed.
+1 on CG really biting it with the Bossk nerf. And it’s definitely a nerf. Those saying it isn’t are basing it on their opinion of the ability, not the actual wording of the ability...
+1 on CG really biting it with the Bossk nerf. And it’s definitely a nerf. Those saying it isn’t are basing it on their opinion of the ability, not the actual wording of the ability...
The wording being off does not equal nerf. Im basing it off me using Bossk multiple times a day.
+1 on CG really biting it with the Bossk nerf. And it’s definitely a nerf. Those saying it isn’t are basing it on their opinion of the ability, not the actual wording of the ability...
The wording being off does not equal nerf. Im basing it off me using Bossk multiple times a day.
I also use Bossk every day.
If you got contract credit for hitting a unit that wasn’t the weakest when the hit occurred, then yes that’s a bug that should be fixed. But if you’re claiming that the “weakest” indicator shouldn’t move mid-turn, there was nothing prior to this change to indicate it shouldn’t function that way. CG added inferred meaning to the ability to change it to only be the weakest as of the start of the turn. So yes, that’s a nerf.
+1 on CG really biting it with the Bossk nerf. And it’s definitely a nerf. Those saying it isn’t are basing it on their opinion of the ability, not the actual wording of the ability...
The wording being off does not equal nerf. Im basing it off me using Bossk multiple times a day.
I also use Bossk every day.
If you got contract credit for hitting a unit that wasn’t the weakest when the hit occurred, then yes that’s a bug that should be fixed. But if you’re claiming that the “weakest” indicator shouldn’t move mid-turn, there was nothing prior to this change to indicate it shouldn’t function that way. CG added inferred meaning to the ability to change it to only be the weakest as of the start of the turn. So yes, that’s a nerf.
Its way easier to complete the contract by attacking the weakest rather than wearing down another enemy until they become the weakest. Yes they should update the text but how often is CG descriptions inaccurate? If not fallen any more than normal in arena and can still earn the payout on offense with ease. So if it continued to move the marker mid turn you have reduced your chance to maximize a fast payout. The best strategy has and always will be to attack the weakest no matter what the text says.
The weakest enemy will always contribute to contract. The change makes it so a new weakest enemy can’t be created mid turn. As far as defense I’m not dropping any more than usual in arena, so there is no proof of defense being an issue.
Can you define "weakest enemy"?
I would say it is the enemy with the lowest combined health + protection.
The contract says: Deal damage to the weakest enemy 10 times.
So Hunting Party goes off. Damage is dealt and at one point the attacked enemy's combined health + protection becomes the lowest of all other enemies.
Now should any further damage to that very enemy add to the contract or not?
And if not, why not?
Why would the party not benefit of having the option to do an onslaught and get some contribution to the contract? Your argument of saving the Hunting Party for the weakest enemy does not hold. It is very situational. And the nerf takes away one option.
I am a bit confused that you, as a Bossk user, prefers the nerf over how it was before.
The weakest enemy will always contribute to contract. The change makes it so a new weakest enemy can’t be created mid turn. As far as defense I’m not dropping any more than usual in arena, so there is no proof of defense being an issue.
Can you define "weakest enemy"?
I would say it is the enemy with the lowest combined health + protection.
The contract says: Deal damage to the weakest enemy 10 times.
So Hunting Party goes off. Damage is dealt and at one point the attacked enemy's combined health + protection becomes the lowest of all other enemies.
Now should any further damage to that very enemy add to the contract or not?
And if not, why not?
Why would the party not benefit of having the option to do an onslaught and get some contribution to the contract? Your argument of saving the Hunting Party for the weakest enemy does not hold. It is very situational. And the nerf takes away one option.
I am a bit confused that you, as a Bossk user, prefers the nerf over how it was before.
Im not sure you really know what you’re saying,no offense. The weakest enemy,the one with the blue marker, it’s pretty clear. If your bounty hunters are strong and your strategy is wise I cannot understand why you feel the need to make your own weakest enemy to gain payout. You’re delaying payout by doing so. Can you explain to me the advantage of spending time weaking a second character? To me the faster I get that payout the faster I can work on the next character.
+1 on CG really biting it with the Bossk nerf. And it’s definitely a nerf. Those saying it isn’t are basing it on their opinion of the ability, not the actual wording of the ability...
The wording being off does not equal nerf. Im basing it off me using Bossk multiple times a day.
I also use Bossk every day.
If you got contract credit for hitting a unit that wasn’t the weakest when the hit occurred, then yes that’s a bug that should be fixed. But if you’re claiming that the “weakest” indicator shouldn’t move mid-turn, there was nothing prior to this change to indicate it shouldn’t function that way. CG added inferred meaning to the ability to change it to only be the weakest as of the start of the turn. So yes, that’s a nerf.
Its way easier to complete the contract by attacking the weakest rather than wearing down another enemy until they become the weakest. Yes they should update the text but how often is CG descriptions inaccurate? If not fallen any more than normal in arena and can still earn the payout on offense with ease. So if it continued to move the marker mid turn you have reduced your chance to maximize a fast payout. The best strategy has and always will be to attack the weakest no matter what the text says.
So again, you’re basing this off of your opinion of what one “should” do. What if you can’t get to the weakest due to taunt or stealth? Sometimes you have to make one. Moving the marker mid-round would not reduce your chance to maximize a fast payout because once it moved to the weakest odds are that char will continue to be the weakest.
So, is IG-88s contract bugged? Crit hits on a debuffed enemy. Boba applies dot on first hit, crits on second hit, it counts. Or a more applicable example, Bossk Hunting Party on a non-debuffed enemy, every crit after Bossk applies stun counts. Works the same with Jango...
So either there’s a bunch bugged or Bossk wasn’t...
Im not sure you really know what you’re saying,no offense. The weakest enemy,the one with the blue marker, it’s pretty clear. If your bounty hunters are strong and your strategy is wise I cannot understand why you feel the need to make your own weakest enemy to gain payout. You’re delaying payout by doing so. Can you explain to me the advantage of spending time weaking a second character? To me the faster I get that payout the faster I can work on the next character.
So, your definition of the weakest enemy is "the one with the blue marker". Noted.
It is all about options. The nerf takes one away.
What if my Bh are not strong? My strategy is not wise?
Can you explain to me the advantage of spending time working around a tank/stealth to get to the weakest enemy? Sorry for answering a question with a question...
The weakest enemy will always contribute to contract. The change makes it so a new weakest enemy can’t be created mid turn. As far as defense I’m not dropping any more than usual in arena, so there is no proof of defense being an issue.
Can you define "weakest enemy"?
I would say it is the enemy with the lowest combined health + protection.
The contract says: Deal damage to the weakest enemy 10 times.
So Hunting Party goes off. Damage is dealt and at one point the attacked enemy's combined health + protection becomes the lowest of all other enemies.
Now should any further damage to that very enemy add to the contract or not?
And if not, why not?
Why would the party not benefit of having the option to do an onslaught and get some contribution to the contract? Your argument of saving the Hunting Party for the weakest enemy does not hold. It is very situational. And the nerf takes away one option.
I am a bit confused that you, as a Bossk user, prefers the nerf over how it was before.
Im not sure you really know what you’re saying,no offense. The weakest enemy,the one with the blue marker, it’s pretty clear. If your bounty hunters are strong and your strategy is wise I cannot understand why you feel the need to make your own weakest enemy to gain payout. You’re delaying payout by doing so. Can you explain to me the advantage of spending time weaking a second character? To me the faster I get that payout the faster I can work on the next character.
What he said is 100% accurate, so I have the feeling you’re the one that doesn’t know what you’re talking about... As I said in my other post, there are scenarios where you can’t always get to the weakest character. TBs are a great example, with the amount of taunts and stealth that get thrown around you can’t always get to the weakest. So in that case it’s benefical to make a char you *can* get to the weakest.
Replies
The best strategy is use hunting party on the weakest enemy, not create a new weakest using the attack. By no means does this reduce bh gameplay damage out put or viability and definitely not a nerf but a better way to use the attack correctly.
Keep in mind that Bossk was released a while ago. As i know this bug was never posted as a known issue like here: https://forums.galaxy-of-heroes.starwars.ea.com/discussion/185178/known-issues-10-17-2018/p1?new=1
You shouldnt be making a new weakest enemy with hunting party and thats what everyone calling this a nerf is doing.
Yes. With Bossk it is still possible to fulfill his contract. But it is harder. You can circumvent that easily on offense. Agreed.
But Arena in the end is about defense. Every squad is viable on offense. Not every squad is on defense though. Revan got his super overpowered AI for defense.
With the nerf of Bossk BH are less viable in Arena as it will be harder to fulfill the contract (when running Bossk as lead).
Also I do not quite understand at all why Bossk's ability needed a nerf? It worked just like it said in the description: Deal damage to the weakest enemy 10 times. With Bossk's Hunting Party an enemy may become the weakest during an onslaught. And by that time every damage dealt to the then "weakest enemy" should add to the contract. If it does not, I would consider that a bug...so it is bugged now. IMO.
The longer I play this game the less I understand certain decisions CG has made lately and I have a feeling that the game is on a downfall. It all seems like a mess. And the change of how Bossk's Contract works now just adds to the overall impression. But that is actually a different topic.
And lol at the Bossk nerf
If they were identical enemies, sure, but each enemy has it's own health and "strength" so the speak. The weakest enemy is only chosen at random if there are more than 1 possible "weakest". Like, if you were in a PvE battle against 2 Sith Assassins and a Sith Trooper, it would likely choose randomly between the assassins because both would qualify for "weakest" at the very start of battle.
~Morningfrost
If that happened, yes that is a bug. But that is not what got addressed in the update.
So you are saying there should be a damage cap so it is assured that with Hunting Party the enemy does not get the weakest?
Seriously, prior to the "bugfix" the contract marker was jumping to the enemy that was attacked with Hunting Party when it became the weakest. After that every damage dealt was added to the contract. No bugfix. Just a nerf.
I was trying to find evidence of this in Bossk Lead videos on youtube to prove my statement, but could not find one. I may be wrong in that matter and my mind may play tricks on me. But I was convinced that happened all the time.
Seriously, prior to the "bugfix" the contract marker was jumping to the enemy that was attacked with Hunting Party when it became the weakest. After that every damage dealt was added to the contract. No bugfix. Just a nerf.[/quote]
If you want to complete the contract quickly you will use hunting party on the weakest enemy. Using it on a stronger enemy is a waste of turns.
And who ever merged this thread nice job of buring this specificdiscussion
This statement shows you’re not using Bossk but you’re screaming “nerf”
Fact is that Bossk's contract worked as stated in the description. It mentioned nothing about "at the start of turn". Now the weakest enemy will get damaged without contribution to the contract.
It makes BH with Bossk lead less flexible. And it makes BH with Bossk lead less viable on defense.
As one who has put resources into BH to make them arena viable this is a bummer. To me at least.
The nerf scream may have been a bit too loud. Admitted.
I am however not at all happy with that change.
The weakest enemy will always contribute to contract. The change makes it so a new weakest enemy can’t be created mid turn. As far as defense I’m not dropping any more than usual in arena, so there is no proof of defense being an issue.
I see some don't understand how this change is unwarranted. The ability worked exactly as stated in its description. Damage weakest = 1/10 contract completion
Real-time calculation of weakest is what is described; start of turn is stated in every(other) ability description that uses start of turn reference point in ability mechanics.
They've inflicted the bug with update, not fixed.
Ha! Good times, I knew a guy at 3drealms, we moderated a commercial software forum together. Ok, where's my BFG?
The wording being off does not equal nerf. Im basing it off me using Bossk multiple times a day.
I also use Bossk every day.
If you got contract credit for hitting a unit that wasn’t the weakest when the hit occurred, then yes that’s a bug that should be fixed. But if you’re claiming that the “weakest” indicator shouldn’t move mid-turn, there was nothing prior to this change to indicate it shouldn’t function that way. CG added inferred meaning to the ability to change it to only be the weakest as of the start of the turn. So yes, that’s a nerf.
Its way easier to complete the contract by attacking the weakest rather than wearing down another enemy until they become the weakest. Yes they should update the text but how often is CG descriptions inaccurate? If not fallen any more than normal in arena and can still earn the payout on offense with ease. So if it continued to move the marker mid turn you have reduced your chance to maximize a fast payout. The best strategy has and always will be to attack the weakest no matter what the text says.
Can you define "weakest enemy"?
I would say it is the enemy with the lowest combined health + protection.
The contract says: Deal damage to the weakest enemy 10 times.
So Hunting Party goes off. Damage is dealt and at one point the attacked enemy's combined health + protection becomes the lowest of all other enemies.
Now should any further damage to that very enemy add to the contract or not?
And if not, why not?
Why would the party not benefit of having the option to do an onslaught and get some contribution to the contract? Your argument of saving the Hunting Party for the weakest enemy does not hold. It is very situational. And the nerf takes away one option.
I am a bit confused that you, as a Bossk user, prefers the nerf over how it was before.
Im not sure you really know what you’re saying,no offense. The weakest enemy,the one with the blue marker, it’s pretty clear. If your bounty hunters are strong and your strategy is wise I cannot understand why you feel the need to make your own weakest enemy to gain payout. You’re delaying payout by doing so. Can you explain to me the advantage of spending time weaking a second character? To me the faster I get that payout the faster I can work on the next character.
So again, you’re basing this off of your opinion of what one “should” do. What if you can’t get to the weakest due to taunt or stealth? Sometimes you have to make one. Moving the marker mid-round would not reduce your chance to maximize a fast payout because once it moved to the weakest odds are that char will continue to be the weakest.
So, is IG-88s contract bugged? Crit hits on a debuffed enemy. Boba applies dot on first hit, crits on second hit, it counts. Or a more applicable example, Bossk Hunting Party on a non-debuffed enemy, every crit after Bossk applies stun counts. Works the same with Jango...
So either there’s a bunch bugged or Bossk wasn’t...
So, your definition of the weakest enemy is "the one with the blue marker". Noted.
It is all about options. The nerf takes one away.
What if my Bh are not strong? My strategy is not wise?
Can you explain to me the advantage of spending time working around a tank/stealth to get to the weakest enemy? Sorry for answering a question with a question...
What he said is 100% accurate, so I have the feeling you’re the one that doesn’t know what you’re talking about... As I said in my other post, there are scenarios where you can’t always get to the weakest character. TBs are a great example, with the amount of taunts and stealth that get thrown around you can’t always get to the weakest. So in that case it’s benefical to make a char you *can* get to the weakest.