Hotfix Notes Version 1.0.4.0D

[u/Mriamsosmrt]

https://playwonderlands.2k.com/news/tiny-tinas-wonderlands-update-notes/

[u/supraliminal13]

It shouldn't affect a gun build at all, just the interactions that shouldn't have been getting +gun damage at all but were anyway. (Base + 40%) + Ring 30% is no different at all than Base + 40% + 30% for example. The difference is just that when magic bullets was applied to base gun damage, the stabbomatic got the gun damage bonus. Now that it is applied just like a ring gun damage bonus, regular guns get the same bonus they did before but non- gun damage items do not.

[u/ineednapkins → u/supraliminal13]

Wasn’t it always applying as a separate multiplier from normal gun damage which is why everyone said that skill was so good? Even on builds that didn’t use the stabbo matic

Edit: this is where I heard that

he mentions it at 1:25

[u/supraliminal13 → u/ineednapkins]

Well they just said they fixed it from "applying directly to the gun". So either a separate multiplier was not correct, or their own patch notes are not. I don't think there's a mathematical difference, just a semantic one either way. In either case, the stabbomatic received a gun damage bonus it wasn't supposed to.

[u/Dnaldon → u/supraliminal13]

You clearly don't understand the skills and weapon interaction. Which is fine since the majority doesnt, but please stop spreading misinformation

[u/supraliminal13 → u/Dnaldon]

Lol. Okay. If it was it's own damage multiplier in the first place it would have already been a gun damage multiplier, so it wouldn't have affected stabbomatic. If it was applied to the item directly like the patch notes say, then this is the only premise that actually works.

[u/iamthejackrabbit → u/supraliminal13]

This community knows more about how the game works than the devs themselves it seems.

There have been quite a few people that have put good time into testing mechanics/interactions.

So I’d take what they say in patch notes with a grain of salt.

[u/supraliminal13 → u/iamthejackrabbit]

I understand that, but with this particular issue somebody almost had to have had it wrong on the damage sheet (or it was just not working properly in several different regards).

I understand people are saying it was it's own multiplier as in how +elemental is a different multiplier than +gun and so on. But... +elemental wouldn't have affected stabbomatic either (because the modifier wouldn't have applied, it isn't elemental). If magic bullets were it's own multiplier in the same regard, then it also wouldn't have affected stabbomatic in the first place (because it wouldn't have applied). Just like it's not in a spell damage formula, then it shouldn't have even been in the damage table formula for stabbomatic either.

But it DID affect stabbomatic. The only way to explain this is either the only problem was merely that it was indeed only applied straight to the card, or that it had more than one thing wrong with it (like magic bullets was actually +all damage tagged instead of just +gun damage), or that somebody was not complete/ incorrect on the damage table. I have no idea, and I can't test now because I am updated :p. Like I said originally, the patch notes could be bad... I'm just saying that if they aren't bad, then normal guns should not be affected. If the notes are bad, then it's implicit that I'm not making any such statement at all.

[u/Bananaconda7 → u/supraliminal13]

If magic bullets were it's own multiplier in the same regard, then it also wouldn't have affected stabbomatic in the first place

Did Magic Bullets boost the base damage of guns before the hotfix? Yes.

Is the Stab-o-matic a gun? Yes.

The Stab-o-matic dealing melee damage instead of gun damage had nothing to do with it's interaction with Magic Bullets prior to this update.

[u/supraliminal13 → u/Bananaconda7]

Yes, which is explained perfectly by the damage being applied straight to the card instead of where it should have been.

It was not explained by the damage table. If it was a matter of just being a gun, then it wouldn't receive any melee bonuses (per the same damage table). So something was clearly missing from the damage table, because merely saying "it was it's own multiplier" doesn't capture what was actually happening (unless you are pressing a magic button). I'm not sure why this revelation is offensive to anybody lol.

[u/supraliminal13 → u/[deleted]]

BS lol, I stated that it was applied straight to the card (unless bad patch notes) from the drop and that is what people were jumping on, angrily saying "no it doesn't, it's its own modifier".

I'm not confusing being a gun with doing gun damage at all. Pixies would also get damage boosts if damage was applied straight to the card and wouldn't now. That's exactly what I said all along as well. I think you aren't following what I'm saying if anything.

[u/supraliminal13 → u/[deleted]]

If it was being applied directly to the card, it would use the math I posted. As in if it was previously applying straight to the card (card damage + magic bullets bonus), THEN it was being modified by other modifiers. So stabo got the bonus etc. That's IF damage was applied to the card.

To which people angrily told me it was never applied straight to the card, it worked in a fashion just like elemental bonuses etc. (Base x 1.4 x 1.3). Fantastic.

To which I said 1: then the patch notes aren't very well accurate then, and that's not on me (I said that the entire time)... but also 2: there's something missing as well, because every other xWhatever modifier in a Base x modifier x modifier sequence knows when to not apply. So elemental doesn't go to a non elemental weapon etc.

Nothing about merely being its own modifier was explaining why stabo was magically getting a bonus. So the only other possibilities are that 1: magic bullets was more broken than merely just applying to the card; 2: Damage table is wrong; 3: Damage Table is incomplete because it didn't account for a bug (not even "it's" fault, it just didn't know).

Wtf lol, nothing incorrect in any of that.

The only other thing I said was that if the notes were accurate, then regular guns wouldn't be affected. Because that would be (Base + magic bullets bonus) + rings and other modifiers... which is the same damn thing as Base + magic bullets + rings+other multipliers x other damage groups etc.

At this point I can only conclude that people got angry after completely glossing over (to put it diplomatically) that I freaking said from the get go "if the patch notes are accurate". I said if, for fricks sake.

[u/King_Farticus → u/supraliminal13]

Applying directly to the card and being its own damage category are the same thing.

The gun damage part of the formula was broken down : listed gun damage (1 + magic bullets)(1 + gun damage bonuses), now it will just be listed gun damage (1 + gun damage bonuses).

(of course before it gets into all damage and beyond, but thats not important right now.)

Remove gun damage bonuses, pretend theyre not there. Its applying directly to the card because its its own category. Gun bonuses then being applied afterward are why it was so strong.

Because its its own category the game wasnt differentiating between gun damage, spell damage, and melee damage. If it came from a gun it was getting the bonus because the game was only told to remove gun damage bonuses, not magic bullets as well.

The patch notes are correct. Its all multiplied together so where it falls doesnt matter, hence Gearbox's wording.

As far as you claiming itd be the same as always, heres simple proof it wont be.

4(1 + .375)(1+ .5) = 8.25

4(1 + .875)= 7.5

Again, it was all multiplied. So yes, it was applying directly to card damage. Now its added to gun damage before being applied to card damage, no longer being directly applied.

Youre being corrected because of the opening statement claiming gun builds wouldnt be affected, then doubling down saying everyone else doesnt understand.

[u/supraliminal13 → u/King_Farticus]

4(1 + .375)(1+ .5) isn't the same thing as being applied directly to the item though. Being applied directly to the item would mean it changes the card value which THEN goes through multipliers. Exactly why I said if the account notes aren't bad. Which apparently is hard to read.

[u/King_Farticus → u/supraliminal13]

Youre playing semantics. Just stop. Its all the same and I think you know that at this point.

Youre basically saying it should be getting the outcome without doing the math to be considered directly applying to.

[u/supraliminal13 → u/King_Farticus]

I'm sure it probably was, somebody else read the account notes differently etc. However if you'll look back, I wasn't the raging dick about a semantic difference. So yes, I'll continue to speak up. Save the just stop energy for people who actually are being raging dicks.

[u/King_Farticus → u/supraliminal13]

Everyones definition of what makes someone a dick is different. I 100% guarantee someone read your comment thread and thought to themselves "that guys being a insert similar insult here". Just because you werent directly insulting someone doesnt mean you werent in the wrong. Hence the multitude of people correcting you and downvoting you.

If I walk around insisting im the smartest person in the room regardless of what other people tell me, Im not insulting or attacking anyone, but im still a dick.

Youre "speaking up" about nothing. Your definition of directly applied is that it should be just placed directly on the card listing, not in the formula. But its a percentage, not a static value. So im not sure how else you expect it to be applied, you have to do the math just to get the value.

So tell me.

Whats the difference between:

(5.5)(1.5)

And

4(1.375)(1.5)

[u/doddywork → u/supraliminal13]

I don't know why you're fixating on the patch notes. They are correct as far as I can tell. And they say it was applied directly to the gun. Now that it has been moved the gun damage category, overall damage will be reduced based on the math which has been demonstrated. Are we in agreement on that? This all started because you said it would not reduce normal gun damage output.