Sector 5 inflict death mark isn’t working

Replies

  • TVF wrote: »
    Nick_74 wrote: »
    RS358 wrote: »
    Its due to DR not actually applying the deathmark himself, but rather the enemy applying it to themselves so it doesnt count.

    Only the deathtrooper can do this feat.

    Sure just like JKA doesn’t kill anyone it’s his lightsaber, or Jango never kills anyone it’s his rocket or the blast from his gun.

    Sometimes it’s just better to admit you made a mistake and correct it.

    I'm not defending it but you have to press a button to use JKA's lightsaber, it's not the same thing.

    Does a kill count if it’s caused by a counter attack? I’m not sure anymore.
    I’m not saying you are wrong it’s just quite frustrating to play the game now.
    I love Star Wars and really like this game so I hope CG get their act together and makes the game fun to play again.
  • So since enemies inflict it on themselves, if we face a dr squad and it's inflicted on us does that count as we inflicted it on ourselves? Probably not
  • If a bus hits you and causes pain, that’s not the bus inflicting the pain, it’s your nerves working as intended to respond to pain. It’s basic science.
  • Not getting full credit for using Bad Batch in sector 5. Got 2 for the first battle and only 3 for the 2nd battle. Should I not be getting 5 per?
  • TVF
    36518 posts Member
    Not getting full credit for using Bad Batch in sector 5. Got 2 for the first battle and only 3 for the 2nd battle. Should I not be getting 5 per?

    Not for deathmark
    I need a new message here. https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • Or the expose damage they can cause.
  • Not getting full credit for using Bad Batch in sector 5. Got 2 for the first battle and only 3 for the 2nd battle. Should I not be getting 5 per?

    Like said Expose damage, but it’s also possible that the True Damage from Hunter’s Lead is coded so it doesn’t count as a Bad Batch’s ability. Which is dumb, but so is DR’s Deathmark so there.
  • So much complaining on what is one of the easiest feats. There are so many example methods for this one that people have shared
  • So much complaining on what is one of the easiest feats. There are so many example methods for this one that people have shared

    You’re missing the point completely
  • So.. it isnt working. And they don't care .. and are just excusses to not fix it at this point.
  • I'm just going to put this simply.
    This conquest is a prime example of something that Literally ANY other game would provide compensation for. Even other EA games, which kind of proves it's CG policy, not EA policy, as I've literally been compensated by EA devs in other Multiplayer/Online EA titles for similar issues.

    At a bare minimum, Attempting a battle, having the deathmark not count, and then going to the forum to figure out why, costs each and every player that has done this: 20 conquest energy, potentially credits to remod a team, 1-10 minutes of combat time, ~30 seconds of team selection, 1-5 minutes of finding the forum and finding the thread talking about the "bug".
    Let's look at the top end of the game's playerbase. These people are probably making a minimum of ~$100/hour working. So let's look at the maximum time there.... ~15 minutes... $25.
    That's the simplest and most straightforward way to look at this as an issue.
    And it's why every game ever compensates the playerbase when the devs screw something up.
    At a minimum, the screwup was picking Deathmark as a feat, knowing how the game tracks it's application, and not saying anything about it in-game.

    Because, rule 1 of general game design: You shouldn't have to rely on external resources (external includes official forums) to know how something in-game "works". Whether it's tracking, activation, requirements... We're not talking modifiers here, we're talking the very much user-sided interface stuff. If the feat simply says "inflict deathmark", then any deathmark should realistically work. That's the ONLY way to interpret that. The feat doesn't say "Inflict Deathmark With An Ability", which would make way more sense as to the current functionality. It doesn't say "Inflict deathmark (DR doesn't work)". It doesn't have any problem solving text at all.

    And when you combine that with the EXACT SAME issue also affecting multiple other feats, including both global and sector, including a feat in the same exact sector....
    Like it or not, you simply have to accept the fact that this is going to cost at least some players both resources and rewards.
    Which is something that people should be compensated for. Because in absolutely no way is it the player's fault for the game being coded in a way that prevents things that very obviously should work from working.

    Honestly? We should've had these feats pulled with the other ones that weren't working at all.
    Which really does mean it was intentional, TWICE, for a feat to be added that doesn't work as expected by the user. ...with absolutely no in-game communication at all whatsoever that it knowingly doesn't work as a player would expect.

    Stuff like this is honestly just... inexcusable. There's no reason this ever should've been an issue - "Inflict Deathmark With An Ability" should've been the description of the feat, plain and simple.
  • I am apologise as perhaps I wasn’t clear enough. It is working and anyone who disagrees is just whinging.

    The death mark for DT is an active thing. The character acts to place death mark and triggers the counter for the feat. DR death mark is passive. DR does not have to take any action to trigger the death mark and it does not count.

    It took all of 2 turns for me to realize it. Came here to let people know and others had beaten me to it.

    Conquest is clearly meant to be hard. R8 material is as being gain too quickly at too low a level and clearly they are slowing it down. Either that or they need to intro R9 sooner and all the same people will complain.

    Clearly there is no problem, clearly there will be no fix and no compensation otherwise it would have been noted days ago.

    Find a different dead horse to beat.

    This conquest in total cost me an extra 400 crystals and perhaps an extra half day. It’s a problem solving task and half the problems have been solved for people on here. I am sure the majority of those complaining are running a rerunning battles for feat when a little planning means you can get it done in far fewer runs.

    It’s a game. It’s finally challenging (and arguably balanced better than for a longtime). Play it, don’t play it, but don’t keep telling everyone about how your going to stop playing it because ‘it’s not fair’
  • The problem here is Ambiguity. The wording simply is “Inflict Deathmark 5 times”, which implies that however this is done it should count.

    DR’s leadership ability states “If an enemy falls below 50% health during that turn, Inflict Deathmark on the enemy leader for 1 turn”. This is not a passive thing at all, the conditions are met when this happens. It should therefore count.
  • th3evo
    358 posts Member
    edited September 2021
    The death mark for DT is an active thing. The character acts to place death mark and triggers the counter for the feat. DR death mark is passive. DR does not have to take any action to trigger the death mark and it does not count.
    Thermal Detonators from Jawas are a passive thing and yet they counted towards the feats in previous Conquests.
    Marked from General Grievous is a passive thing and yet it counted towards the feat in previous Conquests.

    Your class in mental gymnastics is starting soon! I hope you enjoy it.
  • I am apologise as perhaps I wasn’t clear enough. It is working and anyone who disagrees is just whinging.

    The death mark for DT is an active thing. The character acts to place death mark and triggers the counter for the feat. DR death mark is passive. DR does not have to take any action to trigger the death mark and it does not count.

    It took all of 2 turns for me to realize it. Came here to let people know and others had beaten me to it.

    Conquest is clearly meant to be hard. R8 material is as being gain too quickly at too low a level and clearly they are slowing it down. Either that or they need to intro R9 sooner and all the same people will complain.

    Clearly there is no problem, clearly there will be no fix and no compensation otherwise it would have been noted days ago.

    Find a different dead horse to beat.

    This conquest in total cost me an extra 400 crystals and perhaps an extra half day. It’s a problem solving task and half the problems have been solved for people on here. I am sure the majority of those complaining are running a rerunning battles for feat when a little planning means you can get it done in far fewer runs.

    It’s a game. It’s finally challenging (and arguably balanced better than for a longtime). Play it, don’t play it, but don’t keep telling everyone about how your going to stop playing it because ‘it’s not fair’

    By all means plz explain how I can win 14 battles with BH & NS & Geos with fewer runs.
  • th3evo wrote: »
    The death mark for DT is an active thing. The character acts to place death mark and triggers the counter for the feat. DR death mark is passive. DR does not have to take any action to trigger the death mark and it does not count.
    Thermal Detonators from Jawas are a passive thing and yet they counted towards the feats in previous Conquests.
    Marked from General Grievous is a passive thing and yet it counted towards the feat in previous Conquests.

    Your class in mental gymnastics is starting soon! I hope you enjoy it.

    Clearly states that Jawa scavenger has 80% to inflict. Unlike with DR when it just says inflict as part of leadership modifiers. Jaws bombs not passive - I’m would have been a great point if you had bothered to read the descriptions first - oops
  • th3evo wrote: »
    The death mark for DT is an active thing. The character acts to place death mark and triggers the counter for the feat. DR death mark is passive. DR does not have to take any action to trigger the death mark and it does not count.
    Thermal Detonators from Jawas are a passive thing and yet they counted towards the feats in previous Conquests.
    Marked from General Grievous is a passive thing and yet it counted towards the feat in previous Conquests.

    Your class in mental gymnastics is starting soon! I hope you enjoy it.

    Clearly states that Jawa scavenger has 80% to inflict. Unlike with DR when it just says inflict as part of leadership modifiers. Jaws bombs not passive - I’m would have been a great point if you had bothered to read the descriptions first - oops
  • th3evo wrote: »
    The death mark for DT is an active thing. The character acts to place death mark and triggers the counter for the feat. DR death mark is passive. DR does not have to take any action to trigger the death mark and it does not count.
    Thermal Detonators from Jawas are a passive thing and yet they counted towards the feats in previous Conquests.
    Marked from General Grievous is a passive thing and yet it counted towards the feat in previous Conquests.

    Your class in mental gymnastics is starting soon! I hope you enjoy it.

    Clearly states that Jawa scavenger has 80% to inflict. Unlike with DR when it just says inflict as part of leadership modifiers. Jaws bombs not passive - I’m would have been a great point if you had bothered to read the descriptions first - oops

    Oops, I guess you didn't even read Death Trooper's Terminate because by your "logic" not even his attack should count.
    Deal Physical damage to target enemy. If the target is suffering any debuffs, this attack is a guaranteed Critical Hit. If there are any defeated enemies, also inflict Deathmark for 2 turns, which can't be Resisted. Targets defeated by Terminate can't be revived.

    It doesn't it say that it's Death Trooper or the attack that inflicts the Deathmark - it only says inflict Deathmark under certain circumstance. What else says inflict Deathmark under certain circumstance? Oh, that's right - Darth Revan's leader ability.
  • I am apologise as perhaps I wasn’t clear enough. It is working and anyone who disagrees is just whinging.

    The death mark for DT is an active thing. The character acts to place death mark and triggers the counter for the feat. DR death mark is passive. DR does not have to take any action to trigger the death mark and it does not count.

    It took all of 2 turns for me to realize it. Came here to let people know and others had beaten me to it.

    Conquest is clearly meant to be hard. R8 material is as being gain too quickly at too low a level and clearly they are slowing it down. Either that or they need to intro R9 sooner and all the same people will complain.

    Clearly there is no problem, clearly there will be no fix and no compensation otherwise it would have been noted days ago.

    Find a different dead horse to beat.

    This conquest in total cost me an extra 400 crystals and perhaps an extra half day. It’s a problem solving task and half the problems have been solved for people on here. I am sure the majority of those complaining are running a rerunning battles for feat when a little planning means you can get it done in far fewer runs.

    It’s a game. It’s finally challenging (and arguably balanced better than for a longtime). Play it, don’t play it, but don’t keep telling everyone about how your going to stop playing it because ‘it’s not fair’

    First of all, DR’s leader ability does not say anywhere that it’s not done by DR himself. It’s text reads that DR inflicts it on the enemy leader. Not that the enemy does it to itself. So your argument is moot.

    As for the other changes being good….Then you are the micro minority that are pleased with these changes. Nobody is complaining or whining about the changes being hard. The issue is with how after 6 conquests of feedback nothing changes, but in fact got worse with the feats being too grindy and repetitive, no feat counters, little diversity in enemies, extreme randomness of data disks as well as the same data disks in 2 or all of a data disk cache, poor quality and quantity rewards, etc. Not to mention the complete money grab of a move to increase the energy cost per battle by 50%. How was it a blatant money grab? Allow me to explain…

    You refresh 1 energy per 12 minutes. 5 energy per hour. That’s 120 energy per day. Over 14 days you’ve got 1680 energy. At 20 energy per battle, That’s good enough for 84 battles with no crystal refreshes. Well, you’ve gotta beat 14 nodes per sector, 5 sectors total. 70 battles that you just need to beat. Then add in several feats that requires anywhere from 8-14 extra battles a piece. Of course there’s the mini boss nodes that need 3 hits a piece for those feats….and you see how this adds up immensely requiring you to spend extra crystals on consumables and energy refreshes.

    No, people are not whining. They have every right to be upset with these changes that made conquest even more of a chore, repetitive and grind. They also have every right to call out CG about DR’s deathmark application as well.
  • th3evo wrote: »
    The death mark for DT is an active thing. The character acts to place death mark and triggers the counter for the feat. DR death mark is passive. DR does not have to take any action to trigger the death mark and it does not count.
    Thermal Detonators from Jawas are a passive thing and yet they counted towards the feats in previous Conquests.
    Marked from General Grievous is a passive thing and yet it counted towards the feat in previous Conquests.

    Your class in mental gymnastics is starting soon! I hope you enjoy it.

    Clearly states that Jawa scavenger has 80% to inflict. Unlike with DR when it just says inflict as part of leadership modifiers. Jaws bombs not passive - I’m would have been a great point if you had bothered to read the descriptions first - oops
    Anyone arguing that the situation with DR’s deathmark is “clear” from the kit description is trolling, plain and simple.

    The typos / errors in your closing sentence are an added bonus.
  • It could also be as simple as it's not counting the locked version of Deathmark, in the same way that the locked Stuns don't count for the stun feat.
  • TVF
    36518 posts Member
    It could also be as simple as it's not counting the locked version of Deathmark, in the same way that the locked Stuns don't count for the stun feat.

    Is it locked though?
    I need a new message here. https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • TVF wrote: »
    It could also be as simple as it's not counting the locked version of Deathmark, in the same way that the locked Stuns don't count for the stun feat.

    Is it locked though?
    It can’t be dispelled, but Death Trooper’s can.
  • TVF
    36518 posts Member
    TVF wrote: »
    It could also be as simple as it's not counting the locked version of Deathmark, in the same way that the locked Stuns don't count for the stun feat.

    Is it locked though?
    It can’t be dispelled, but Death Trooper’s can.

    Maybe that's the actual answer then, since SLKR and Padme stuns don't count for that feat either.
    I need a new message here. https://discord.gg/AmStGTH
  • TVF wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    It could also be as simple as it's not counting the locked version of Deathmark, in the same way that the locked Stuns don't count for the stun feat.

    Is it locked though?
    It can’t be dispelled, but Death Trooper’s can.

    Maybe that's the actual answer then, since SLKR and Padme stuns don't count for that feat either.

    it's not the answer we've been presented with though.
  • th3evo
    358 posts Member
    edited September 2021
    TVF wrote: »
    TVF wrote: »
    It could also be as simple as it's not counting the locked version of Deathmark, in the same way that the locked Stuns don't count for the stun feat.

    Is it locked though?
    It can’t be dispelled, but Death Trooper’s can.

    Maybe that's the actual answer then, since SLKR and Padme stuns don't count for that feat either.

    Marked from Piett's Imperial Ambition is also a locked debuff and yet it was counted towards the Marked feat in previous Conquests.
    Same goes for Thermal Detonators.
  • All of this is just a consequence of the rush to deliver conquest 7. They fixed the most experience breaking bugs and re-launched it. These mechanics are working as implemented, probably not as intended.

    Considering they needed at least 2 months to deliver this very low quality version of conquest 7, what are they going to do with conquest 10? It should start in 2 months from now! Will they try to fix the current bugs for conquest 8 and 9 or will they just focus on delivering the new bugs for conquest 10 in time?
Sign In or Register to comment.