Base AF buff on Necro Pet INCREASES damage

[Sair]

I did a bunch of testing with necro pets today using a scout because there was 0 variance with 50 bow.

If you put a base AF buff on the necro pet, it INCREASES the damage dealt with both quick shot and point blank shot. This is the inverse of what is expected. This increase was minimal but present. 1 damage on the quick shot and 4 damage on the point blank.

Notably, Spec AF has no effect whatsoever.

[Karen]

Please read viewtopic.php?t=55

[Sair]

Really? And a warning? Don't worry, this is the last bug I report. For the record, I read the post you linked.

Steps to reproduce.

1. Play a necro.
2. Have a buddy play a scout. 50 bow.
3. Have a buddy play a cleric. Any spec.
4. Summon any necro pet.
5. Shoot necro pet with Rapid Fire 8.
6. Note the damage.
7. Have cleric base AF buff the necro pet. (level 42. Aura of Deflection)
8. Shoot the necro with Rapid Fire 8.
9. Note the damage.
10. Compare damage with and without base AF buff.
11. Do math.
12. Realize that casting base AF buff causes necro pet to take more damage.
13. Repeat test with Point Blank Shot 8.
14. Post your results to the forum because it is obviously a bug.
15. Get a warning on said forum for actually trying to help.

[Karen]

Please understand viewtopic.php?t=55

[succi]

I did a bunch of testing

You need to post the combat log / methodology of that testing then state how it should work (ideally citing live/patch notes)

[Sair]

I did a bunch of testing

You need to post the combat log / methodology of that testing then state how it should work (ideally citing live/patch notes)

"please provide as much information as possible on the issue, like :"

on the list:

"- Anything else that might be helpful"

I provided as much information as possible at the time. It doesn't say that I MUST provide that information. It simply lists some things that are helpful to provide. When I posted the OP, it was several hours later, after RVR. I had talked to some people about it and decided to make a bug ticket. I no longer had the combat logs. My 2nd post, while admittedly snarky because I was miffed about the warning, is accurate steps to reproduce the issue. I'm confident that my OP had enough info that someone could also reproduce the issue.

I simply tried to help by posting a bug. I probably could have included more info, but what I provided was the best I had at the time. That OP did not deserve a forum warning. It's not a big deal though. This is my last forum post. I have learned my lesson and will not try to be genuinely helpful in the future.

[Epicburn]

Or just have a more complete post next time.

You received a warning bc you basically made a claim with no information or proof backing it so the person who deals with these things all day every day told you to give a more detailed explanation with proof showing how it should work or how it's happening so its not anecdotal.

Karen is fielding bug reports all day that on average arent actual bugs.. and if they are.. they need proof.

Imagine if they tried to chase down every single "Bug report" with no information provided to be able to easily identify what is a actual claim with proof or hypothetical bugs.

If I had 10 Bug reports on the table.. and 4 of them have screenshots and proof.. and 6 of them are hypothetical bugs.. what one do you think ill go after or what one would you ask for more information on?

[Karen]

Closing due to inactivity.