What you were expecting to happen, and what actually happened?
I killed a stunned Infernal King, His trait, Immortal triggered and he was resurrected after dying. Stun should have disabled Immortal.
What are the steps to make it happen again?
I had Emperor Khorvash on my team. I was facing the Infernal King, who had the stun clearly showing on the display. I activated EK’s ability, which killed the Infernal King. He was resurrected after death.
Do you have any screenshots or video you want to share with us so we can see the problem? Attach them to your post!
All traits happening on death actually happen after the death of the unit. Since dead units are no longer affected by any status effect, it’s “normal” that the skill can still trigger.
I’m not sure wether this was first intended or not. Neither do I know if devs have any intention to change that or not.
I had this happen to me the other day, too but never got around to reporting it so thanks for doing that. I’m glad to see, per @Zelarith that this is a know issue.
As long as this is unintended, it qualifies as a bug, otherwise, every bug fix would be a balance adjustement since every single aspect of a game is based on its code.
And @Lyya made it perfectly clear that this wasn’t intended, and is yet to be solved.
Yes, they are. Believe me, if I make mistakes or overlook some details, my clients are very unhappy and won’t ask some “balance adjustements” from me (well, maybe that’s because I’m not in the game industry)
The code always does exactly what it has been programmed to do (barring stray photons or hardware failure). In other words, all bugs are human-caused. If the end result is unintended, it’s a “bug.” Combinations of intended effects that produce an unintended result are still bugs.
From my point of view, it is not. Generating an error means that the code was designed properly enough to be able to notice something unexpected happened.
The code is always “working” exactly how it has been programmed. If the end result is unintended, or has unintended side effects, that’s what we in the industry term “bugs.” The term is subjective, since what is unintended (and detrimental) to one person may be beneficial to another, but this case in particular is fairly clearly and unambiguously incorrect, and therefore a “bug.” Both the developers and their clients have indicated this to be an issue.
There’s no error. Stunned IK dies, status effect ends, IK revives. Exactly how the code was written.
The Devs messed up, BACKPEDELED and tried to deflect blame. No big deal, but let’s stop pretending they don’t rarely consider older Troops when they make new Troops and game mechanics
When “how it is written” differs from “how it was intended,” that’s a bug. I’m not sure how else to phrase it.
The devs indicated the intent by saying “No, no intended.” Now, you can choose to believe they are lying about their intent, but then you might as well have started your argument that way instead of debating semantics.
