Siren Radiation anointment bugged?

Borderlands 3 Amara the Siren
#1

20200723_161107
20200723_1611072016×1512 1.88 MB

Wasn’t it over 100% before today’s update? I’m going to say this was a unintended as it’s not listed anywhere as being adjusted.

Edit: upon closer testing after going back to Sanctuary it seems to be doing around 110% of the gun cards damage so working as intended just a text error.

#2

So before it was bugged and did 40% while the card said 130%. Now you’re saying that it’s dealing 130% but the card says 40%?

If so, then GG GB :rofl:. Definitely double check just in case.

2 Likes
#3

It still deals only 40%, as it has done since release. The only thing that’s “fixed” is the text. They did mention it in the notes, but the wording sounded to me like they’d fix the damage dealt, not the text: “Addressed a bug that was causing the Siren’s radiation elemental Anointment to do less than indicated in the description”.

If they’re going to keep this value, this anointment is absolutely pointless and should be removed from the game.

2 Likes
#4

The text was “On Action Skill End, deal 130% bonus radiation damage for a short time.”

It’s pointless with the existence of the “On Action Skill End, the next 2 magazines deal 100% bonus radiation damage.” At best, it’s niche for weapons for small magazines and fast reload speeds.

#5

Patch notes very clearly imply that effect has been buffed to match description just like people have been asking for 7+ months.

“fixed” it in the opposite direction instead thus leaving it as the same garbage it already was. Which they toooooootally couldn’t have done any of the multiple other times that the text was changed instead of getting are hopes up.

Essentially Gearbox chose to officially approve the problem and call it a fix.

Combined with the elimination of extra projectiles caused by bonus elements; we have yet more examples of patch-notes being terribly written.

#6

@Axel_V Well, you can’t criticize GBX on both sides of the issue. I would prefer the card state the actual anointment’s effect than to state a value of 130% and only actually be 40%.

I get where you’re coming from - ideally, it both works as described AND is useful. But if it is not useful, at least the anointment functions “as described on the card.” Very few things in this franchise function “as described on the card.”

But I do agree this anointment is not only redundant but also kind of useless at the value it has been set.

#7

What’s the problem with criticizing “on both sides” when “both sides” have been failed. The item card fix is too little too late when it has already been changed multiple times.

#8

Well at least there’s no more confusion for people unaware of this issue, and no one will be tricked anymore into using this anointment.

1 Like
#9

@DocStrangelove That’s kind of where I was coming from. If it’s a “we can’t fix it” issue, then at least make the card read correctly. @Axel_V Again, I’d rather have it function as stated AND be useful, but if it can’t be useful, at least it is clear that it is useless and not confusing to players.

#10

Well, with this fix I feel they should add it to the list of anointments to remove. Now it is just diluting the anointment pool LoL

1 Like
#11

I think this one anoint is just the main example of how bad code base management and communications are between teams in this studio.