Guild Wars 2

Hello all. Posted in the Bug forum, but wanted to see if anyone else has experienced this, or can recreate/confirm this.

Thanks!

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/support/bugs/Sigil-of-Fire-not-coming-off-CD/2119331

Hello all.

Seems there’s an issue with Superior Sigil of Fire getting stuck in CD mode.

Here’s the set up

- One dagger with SSoF (main hand)
- One pistol with SSoF (main hand)

With theif-

- Attack with D/D until SSoF procs
- Swap to P/P (or S/P) until SSoF procs

Swap out to S/P if previous using P/P, or P/P if using S/P (keeping the pistol with SSoF, but transferring it to off hand)

Neither SSoF equipped weapon will proc again until log off/log on.

Extensively tested and was able to recreate.

Seems it may be an issue with SSoF as also seen similar in:

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/support/bugs/Sigil-of-Battle-Bug/first#post2082499

I did not encounter the issue until actually swapping out.

Can anyone else duplicate this issue?

Thanks

All on crit sigils share a global CD, hense why you can’t use two fire sigils or a fire and an air for example.

Incurafy.6329:

All on crit sigils share a global CD, hense why you can’t use two fire sigils or a fire and an air for example.

Read the thread before responding. In the circumstance he creates it doesn’t come off cooldown EVER until relogging.

Oops, musn’t have posted the extra sentence… was supposed to say “that would explain the thread about might sigil, but I’m not sure about this one.”

How can you tell that it is stuck on CD and not just having a bad luck proc-ing it again?

Basically, how are you testing this?

Sir Vincent III.1286:

How can you tell that it is stuck on CD and not just having a bad luck proc-ing it again?

Basically, how are you testing this?

I explained the methodolgy above and since there’s no way to actually see if the sigil is on cool down, the only method I have is experimental.

I ran with a 60% crit chance. I used Veteran Oakhearts in queensdale because they allow me to do a number of “spamable” attacks, and allow me to get up Fury up as well taking crit to 80%.

Before swapping out a pistol for a sword, I can consistently get SSoF to proc on a single Oakheart kill, two kills at most.

After performing the swap out, I proceeded to kill numerous vets w/o seeing a proc in the combat log. None at all. Proceed to kill other randoms, no procs. Log out/Log in, SSoF procs as usual.

Really, really bad RNG? Sure absolutely. Possible. But I’m able to reliably repeat this.

I appreciate the scrutiny, but if I couldn’t duplicate the behavior, I wouldn’t have brought it to attention.

Which was the point of this post to see if anyone else could confirm or recreate my findings.

Just as I thought.

If you really want to test the proc-rate, you need to spec for Hidden Killer (30pt CS), this will eliminate the Crit-change randomness.

If you are not proc-ing at a 30% rate, then you did found a bug.

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Just as I thought.

If you really want to test the proc-rate, you need to spec for Hidden Killer (30pt CS), this will eliminate the Crit-change randomness.

If you are not proc-ing at a 30% rate, then you did found a bug.

Sure, I have no problem spec’ing into that and testing with that next time I log in. I agree, for that one attack coming out of stealth, it would give me a pure 30% rate to compare against.

It won’t stop a “really bad RNG” run. But it would elimate a variable factor.

However, I will just re-iterate, I played for a good while each time to verify, and after a reasonable time/kills no procs were fired. If you’re used to playing with this sigil, it’s really become apparent when it does not fire for any extended period of time. I don’t know if you’ve ever played with it, but even if you’re not looking at the combat log, it’s not something you tend to miss.

I know asking players to drop the gold for the sigils just to test is a bit much, so, hoping to hear back from a Dev eventually.

I’m simply helping you solidify your observation using a process of elimination. By having 100% crit, your result zeros-in at the core of the problem.

I do not intend to test this myself since if you can present your observation this way by identifying the source of the problem, you don’t really need anyone else to test it out since you already have a solid case.

But like everything else that is buggy in this game, best of luck having that fixed soon.

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Just as I thought.

If you really want to test the proc-rate, you need to spec for Hidden Killer (30pt CS), this will eliminate the Crit-change randomness.

If you are not proc-ing at a 30% rate, then you did found a bug.

Sir Vincent III.1286:

I’m simply helping you solidify your observation using a process of elimination. By having 100% crit, your result zeros-in at the core of the problem.

I do not intend to test this myself since if you can present your observation this way by identifying the source of the problem, you don’t really need anyone else to test it out since you already have a solid case.

But like everything else that is buggy in this game, best of luck having that fixed soon.

This concern is idiotic. His original testing methodology generates a much larger useful sample size than your proposed one.

OP’s observation is that Sigil of Fire procc’d 0 times after he swapped weapons. His hypothesis that the Sigil is bugged becomes more likely as he scores more and more crits without procc’ing Sigil of Fire.

Using your method, he’ll get at most 1 crit every 3 seconds (due to the revealed debuff).

Using his method (just autoattacking), with an 80% crit rate he can generate multiple crits in that same 3-second period. Thus, his useful sample size will be much higher over the same time period.

If your concern is just that the OP wasn’t triggering Sigil of Fire because he simply wasn’t scoring any crits (due to extreme back luck), then the better solution would be for the OP to make note of how many crits he scored. Of course, he probably would have noticed if he wasn’t scoring any crits because it is obvious when you’re critting: the damage number shows up differently, the damage amount is higher, and this information is reflected in your combat log.

Asking the OP to redo the test using hidden killer is just asking him to waste his time for poorer results.

ResJudicator.7916:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Just as I thought.

If you really want to test the proc-rate, you need to spec for Hidden Killer (30pt CS), this will eliminate the Crit-change randomness.

If you are not proc-ing at a 30% rate, then you did found a bug.

Sir Vincent III.1286:

I’m simply helping you solidify your observation using a process of elimination. By having 100% crit, your result zeros-in at the core of the problem.

I do not intend to test this myself since if you can present your observation this way by identifying the source of the problem, you don’t really need anyone else to test it out since you already have a solid case.

But like everything else that is buggy in this game, best of luck having that fixed soon.

This concern is idiotic. His original testing methodology generates a much larger useful sample size than your proposed one.

OP’s observation is that Sigil of Fire procc’d 0 times after he swapped weapons. His hypothesis that the Sigil is bugged becomes more likely as he scores more and more crits without procc’ing Sigil of Fire.

Using your method, he’ll get at most 1 crit every 3 seconds (due to the revealed debuff).

Using his method (just autoattacking), with an 80% crit rate he can generate multiple crits in that same 3-second period. Thus, his useful sample size will be much higher over the same time period.

If your concern is just that the OP wasn’t triggering Sigil of Fire because he simply wasn’t scoring any crits (due to extreme back luck), then the better solution would be for the OP to make note of how many crits he scored. Of course, he probably would have noticed if he wasn’t scoring any crits because it is obvious when you’re critting: the damage number shows up differently, the damage amount is higher, and this information is reflected in your combat log.

Asking the OP to redo the test using hidden killer is just asking him to waste his time for poorer results.

Let’s not start with name calling shall we?

If you and the OP thinks that your findings are sufficient enough, then why even ask for others to try it themselves?

Unless of course you have doubts with your current findings and need some verification.

I have offered a method to remove the non-crit damage from the equation, this way you can present your case that every attack used are critical hits. It also eliminates guessing whether the last attack crits or not, or watching the combat log for crit hits.

Your concern about the time spent is moot compare to the quality of case you can present if all your tested attacks are all critical hits.

If you don’t want to use that method, then that’s up to you, but that it is one way to force a sigil to trigger on crit.

I appreciate any advice on how to improve the results and eliminate any number of variables.

The main reason that I ask if others have, or can reproduce my situation is to isolate it to an issue with the siglis and weapon changes. Could it be a combo of my equipment/traits/etc? I dunno. Possibly, but have additional test conditions would help substantiate it.

Just as a note, using the HK would only give me the 1 attack coming out of stealth @ 100%, and then only @ 30% for it to proc. Obviously, I will still be able to notice any crits/procs while waiting to stealth again. So, it would grant me at least one gauranteed critical, not to be discounted. However, given the number of attacks, and crits I’ve experienced thus far, i don’t expect to see much change. Will test soon, and report back.

Ok.. quick update.

Method performed as above, but after weapon changing, I performed over 20 attacks coming out of stealth using HK and no procs occurred. Continued attacking, and stealthing whenever possible continued to yield crits with no procs.

Game update just took place, so, will continue for a bit.

Ok.. something interesting.

It’s may not be just weapon changing. But the method of changing weapons.

Here’s what I had been doing:

- Pistol w/ SSoF in main hand

when I swapped, I dragged pistol main hand, to off hand, and equipped sword.

This causes the no proc.

If you unequip Pistol, sending it inventory, no issues. And re-equip to offhand all good.

Odd….

Sir Vincent III.1286:

ResJudicator.7916:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Just as I thought.

If you really want to test the proc-rate, you need to spec for Hidden Killer (30pt CS), this will eliminate the Crit-change randomness.

If you are not proc-ing at a 30% rate, then you did found a bug.

Sir Vincent III.1286:

I’m simply helping you solidify your observation using a process of elimination. By having 100% crit, your result zeros-in at the core of the problem.

I do not intend to test this myself since if you can present your observation this way by identifying the source of the problem, you don’t really need anyone else to test it out since you already have a solid case.

But like everything else that is buggy in this game, best of luck having that fixed soon.

This concern is idiotic. His original testing methodology generates a much larger useful sample size than your proposed one.

OP’s observation is that Sigil of Fire procc’d 0 times after he swapped weapons. His hypothesis that the Sigil is bugged becomes more likely as he scores more and more crits without procc’ing Sigil of Fire.

Using your method, he’ll get at most 1 crit every 3 seconds (due to the revealed debuff).

Using his method (just autoattacking), with an 80% crit rate he can generate multiple crits in that same 3-second period. Thus, his useful sample size will be much higher over the same time period.

If your concern is just that the OP wasn’t triggering Sigil of Fire because he simply wasn’t scoring any crits (due to extreme back luck), then the better solution would be for the OP to make note of how many crits he scored. Of course, he probably would have noticed if he wasn’t scoring any crits because it is obvious when you’re critting: the damage number shows up differently, the damage amount is higher, and this information is reflected in your combat log.

Asking the OP to redo the test using hidden killer is just asking him to waste his time for poorer results.

Let’s not start with name calling shall we?

If you and the OP thinks that your findings are sufficient enough, then why even ask for others to try it themselves?

Unless of course you have doubts with your current findings and need some verification.

I have offered a method to remove the non-crit damage from the equation, this way you can present your case that every attack used are critical hits. It also eliminates guessing whether the last attack crits or not, or watching the combat log for crit hits.

Your concern about the time spent is moot compare to the quality of case you can present if all your tested attacks are all critical hits.

If you don’t want to use that method, then that’s up to you, but that it is one way to force a sigil to trigger on crit.

I’d like to first start off with an apology. I came off way too aggressively and I know you were just trying to offer some constructive (albeit wrong) criticism. That said, I submit that you’re still missing the point.

Which of these results do you think would be more compelling: 0 procs out of 50 crits, or 0 procs out of 20 crits? Obviously, 0 procs out of 50 crits presents a stronger case of the sigil being bugged. In the time it takes to get 20 crits w/ HK (your method), you can get ~50 crits just autoattacking with an 80% crit rate (OP’s method). Whether he gets exactly 50 crits, or instead gets 30 crits or 70 crits doesn’t really matter because hypothesis requires a 0% proc rate. All that matters is that he generate as many crits as possible to validate that the 0% proc rate is not the result of bad luck.

The OP did not claim that his methodology is perfect, and I don’t claim that either. But just because he asked for suggestions doesn’t mean that your suggestion is automatically correct.

As to the OP, I’m curious if you’ve noticed the same problem with other sigils? Do you think it’s a bug that’s specific to the Sigil of Fire? You might have discovered a bug that’s common to all on-crit sigils.

the probabilty of getting even just 0 out of 20 is .70 to the 20th power. :P yessum thats 0.000797 or 8/1000th’s of 1% chance at happening. but larger sample size from a larger sample population is always preferred

Hi.. ok.. no solution, but simple work around seems to be to keep the SSoF weapon(s) in the same hand, don’t move it to the other hand when changing weapons. Either leave it, or unequip and requip to the other hand.

To make things easy, I put another SSoF on the sword. So, when swapping between S/P and P/P the SSoF equipped weapon will always be in main hand. D/D was also MH, so, swapping to S/D or P/D(if you really want to) is an option.

Ran tonight’s session like this, swapping and changing weapons often. Never encountered a “dry spell” of procs.

For what it’s worth off-hand either had a stacking sigil (bloodlust) or static sigil (force).

As to the OP, I’m curious if you’ve noticed the same problem with other sigils? Do you think it’s a bug that’s specific to the Sigil of Fire? You might have discovered a bug that’s common to all on-crit sigils.

I haven’t tested this, but will look into it. And report back when I’ve had a chance to test.

Thanks for reading & GL

ResJudicator.7916:

I’d like to first start off with an apology. I came off way too aggressively and I know you were just trying to offer some constructive (albeit wrong) criticism. That said, I submit that you’re still missing the point.

I believe that you are the one missing the point here.

Which of these results do you think would be more compelling: 0 procs out of 50 crits, or 0 procs out of 20 crits? Obviously, 0 procs out of 50 crits presents a stronger case of the sigil being bugged. In the time it takes to get 20 crits w/ HK (your method), you can get ~50 crits just autoattacking with an 80% crit rate (OP’s method). Whether he gets exactly 50 crits, or instead gets 30 crits or 70 crits doesn’t really matter because hypothesis requires a 0% proc rate. All that matters is that he generate as many crits as possible to validate that the 0% proc rate is not the result of bad luck.

If you want more crit sample, why stop at 20? I don’t see why you’re so worked up about this one.

If you rely on the 80% crit, to trigger a 30% proc, that’s like rolling 2D10 dice whenever you attack. If you can cut that by rolling just 1D10 die because all your attacks are 100% crit, then your evidence is more solid because auto-attack damage (white damage) is a valid reasonable doubt that may be tainting your result. Since we cannot know this for sure, it is safer to remove white damage from the equation.

The OP did not claim that his methodology is perfect, and I don’t claim that either. But just because he asked for suggestions doesn’t mean that your suggestion is automatically correct.

Nor did I ever made such claim either.

Please review my replies and point me to where I said that my “suggestion is automatically correct.”

@OP

Here’s a note from wiki:

“Cooldown Sigils will enter cooldown even if they have no actual effect.”

This may very well happen that the sigil triggers without any effect and can be percieved to be in a constant cooldown.

“All things equal, the mainhand cooldown sigil will trigger before the offhand cooldown sigil.”

Another possibility that while your sigil in main hand was in CD, then you placed it in your off-hand, that the sigil is now waiting for itself to get off CD from the main hand and wait forever.

Sir Vincent III.1286:

@OP

Here’s a note from wiki:

“Cooldown Sigils will enter cooldown even if they have no actual effect.”

This may very well happen that the sigil triggers without any effect and can be percieved to be in a constant cooldown.

“All things equal, the mainhand cooldown sigil will trigger before the offhand cooldown sigil.”

Another possibility that while your sigil in main hand was in CD, then you placed it in your off-hand, that the sigil is now waiting for itself to get off CD from the main hand and wait forever.

Thanks.

Regarding the affect, as I mentioned before, the affect of the SSoF is really hard to miss. It’s not like the affect of SSoPurity (as referenced in the wiki) where the proc would occur, but would have no effect.

And yes, it has happened with the SSoF, specifically, when the target is killed by the crit, the sigil still procs, the graphic fires, but no damage is reported in the log.

To the second point, this was a consideration, but ample time had passed for the Sigil to come off cooldown before the hand change (it’s only 5 seconds).

Thanks for testing OP. It’s people like you, who are willing to put in the hard work to find and confirm these bugs, that make this game shine.

Sir Vincent III.1286:

If you want more crit sample, why stop at 20? I don’t see why you’re so worked up about this one.

If you rely on the 80% crit, to trigger a 30% proc, that’s like rolling 2D10 dice whenever you attack. If you can cut that by rolling just 1D10 die because all your attacks are 100% crit, then your evidence is more solid because auto-attack damage (white damage) is a valid reasonable doubt that may be tainting your result. Since we cannot know this for sure, it is safer to remove white damage from the equation.

Again, you get fewer crits per minute using your method than using the OP’s method. The issue isn’t “why stop at 20?” It’s that, in the time it takes you to get 20 crits, the OP could have gotten 50. The OP is spending his own, personal time doing this testing for us. My problem with your suggestion was that you were essentially asking the OP to waste even more of his time without getting any benefit in the form of better results.

And your “reasonable doubt” argument is completely meritless. We “can know for sure” how many crits vs non crits were scored because, as I stated earlier, crits show up differently both on-screen and in the combat log. You don’t need to use Hidden Killer to know when you’ve scored a crit.

ResJudicator.7916:

Thanks for testing OP. It’s people like you, who are willing to put in the hard work to find and confirm these bugs, that make this game shine.

No prob.

ResJudicator.7916:

Again, you get fewer crits per minute using your method than using the OP’s method. The issue isn’t “why stop at 20?” It’s that, in the time it takes you to get 20 crits, the OP could have gotten 50. The OP is spending his own, personal time doing this testing for us. My problem with your suggestion was that you were essentially asking the OP to waste even more of his time without getting any benefit in the form of better results.

And your “reasonable doubt” argument is completely meritless. We “can know for sure” how many crits vs non crits were scored because, as I stated earlier, crits show up differently both on-screen and in the combat log. You don’t need to use Hidden Killer to know when you’ve scored a crit.

Wish there was a way to get a dump of the combat log, because you’re absolutely right. When running food, and attacking from behind/side (almost always against slow, easy to read oakhearts, which is why I chose them), crit chance is actually upwards of 95%. It’s actually the non-crits that stand out at that point.

Being able to land crits really wasn’t a concern

For what it’s worth, I used HK as an opener, with Cloak & Dagger and Hide in Shadows during combat as often as “revealed” allowed. I prob could have added Shadow Refuge, but didn’t think about it at the time. So, it didn’t really slow me down, it did however result in me having to wait for respawns, or having to find new test subjects at a faster rate

ResJudicator.7916:

Thanks for testing OP. It’s people like you, who are willing to put in the hard work to find and confirm these bugs, that make this game shine.

Sir Vincent III.1286:

If you want more crit sample, why stop at 20? I don’t see why you’re so worked up about this one.

If you rely on the 80% crit, to trigger a 30% proc, that’s like rolling 2D10 dice whenever you attack. If you can cut that by rolling just 1D10 die because all your attacks are 100% crit, then your evidence is more solid because auto-attack damage (white damage) is a valid reasonable doubt that may be tainting your result. Since we cannot know this for sure, it is safer to remove white damage from the equation.

Again, you get fewer crits per minute using your method than using the OP’s method. The issue isn’t “why stop at 20?” It’s that, in the time it takes you to get 20 crits, the OP could have gotten 50. The OP is spending his own, personal time doing this testing for us. My problem with your suggestion was that you were essentially asking the OP to waste even more of his time without getting any benefit in the form of better results.

The OP did not ask what is the most efficient way to get more crits, so time is not an issue. The OP is already wasting time trying to test a sigil that should have worked properly in the first place. I am actually suggesting that since the OP chose to waste time in testing, I offered a method that can make the quality of the result better.

And your “reasonable doubt” argument is completely meritless. We “can know for sure” how many crits vs non crits were scored because, as I stated earlier, crits show up differently both on-screen and in the combat log. You don’t need to use Hidden Killer to know when you’ve scored a crit.

Hidden Killer is just a method to insure a 100% crit and unless the combat log specifies that you managed a critical hit, you cannot know for sure and you’re simply guessing. On-screen combat text can be missed if multiple crits happen consecutively.

But whatever, take it or leave it.

Sir Vincent III.1286:

The OP did not ask what is the most efficient way to get more crits, so time is not an issue. The OP is already wasting time trying to test a sigil that should have worked properly in the first place. I am actually suggesting that since the OP chose to waste time in testing, I offered a method that can make the quality of the result better.

Whoa… now you’re just trolling. Everything in the game “should work properly in the first place”? Of course it should, but unfortunately we all don’t have the perfect version of the game that you obviously do. Maybe it’s not just me

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/support/bugs

And I have no regrets having “wasted” my time, as it lead to a viable workaround.

And the practical difference between 100% and 95%+ crit chance really isn’t interesting given the nature of the test. As I said, when SSoF stops proc’ing over any period of time, it’s noticiable from even casual observation (how I first noticed). Once it stops, it stops. It’s not a matter of frequency at that point.

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Hidden Killer is just a method to insure a 100% crit and unless the combat log specifies that you managed a critical hit, you cannot know for sure and you’re simply guessing. On-screen combat text can be missed if multiple crits happen consecutively.

But whatever, take it or leave it.

Seriously? You posted elsewhere prefer you Valk/Knights gear, so, perhaps you don’t have much experience running a high crit/dmg zerker build. Crits aren’t the exception, they’re the norm. To provide some perspective, when you’re in zerker gear and running over ~100% crit damage (~2.5x dmg of a normal hit), it doesn’t take much to spot a non-crit in the combat log . There is no guessing, it sticks out.

Was being rather patient and accomodating with your suggestions, but your earlier quotes from the wiki were already suspect and showed either a lack of understanding, or disregard for the difference between Sigils. But these kind of statements go beyond skeptiscism, and into pettiness.

Mourningcry.9428:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

The OP did not ask what is the most efficient way to get more crits, so time is not an issue. The OP is already wasting time trying to test a sigil that should have worked properly in the first place. I am actually suggesting that since the OP chose to waste time in testing, I offered a method that can make the quality of the result better.

Whoa… now you’re just trolling. Everything in the game “should work properly in the first place”? Of course it should, but unfortunately we all don’t have the perfect version of the game that you obviously do. Maybe it’s not just me

https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/support/bugs

And I have no regrets having “wasted” my time, as it lead to a viable workaround.

Wasn’t that your expectation that’s why you are running this test? You expected that the sigil should work properly. If you don’t expect things to run properly, then you should accept it as it is and not even waste your time in testing it.

So you either have the same expectation or you don’t.

And the practical difference between 100% and 95%+ crit chance really isn’t interesting given the nature of the test. As I said, when SSoF stops proc’ing over any period of time, it’s noticiable from even casual observation (how I first noticed). Once it stops, it stops. It’s not a matter of frequency at that point.

So tell me why doctors and nurses perform procedures that it is practically not going to help a dead patient?

It’s so that they can tell the family that they did EVERYTHING they can, even the impractical ones.

Isn’t that more convincing and acceptable?

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Hidden Killer is just a method to insure a 100% crit and unless the combat log specifies that you managed a critical hit, you cannot know for sure and you’re simply guessing. On-screen combat text can be missed if multiple crits happen consecutively.

But whatever, take it or leave it.

Seriously? You posted elsewhere prefer you Valk/Knights gear, so, perhaps you don’t have much experience running a high crit/dmg zerker build. Crits aren’t the exception, they’re the norm. To provide some perspective, when you’re in zerker gear and running over ~100% crit damage (~2.5x dmg of a normal hit), it doesn’t take much to spot a non-crit in the combat log . There is no guessing, it sticks out.

Obviously you’re not here long enough that you are judging me based on my recent posts. All I can tell you is, you’re assumption about me is wrong.

Was being rather patient and accomodating with your suggestions, but your earlier quotes from the wiki were already suspect and showed either a lack of understanding, or disregard for the difference between Sigils.

Are you then saying that we should update the Wiki and change this statement?

“All sigils that have a cooldown share the same cooldown timer; while the timer is active, no other sigil with a cooldown can trigger.”

What difference between sigils are you talking about?

But these kind of statements go beyond skeptiscism, and into pettiness.

Look, nobody is forcing your hand here. Do what you think is best. It was a simple suggestion about another method to force a crit.

This whole thing started out because someone wants to save you from wasting your time.

And I myself already wasted enough time here. Good luck with your findings.

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Look, nobody is forcing your hand here. Do what you think is best. It was a simple suggestion about another method to force a crit.

This whole thing started out because someone wants to save you from wasting your time.

And I myself already wasted enough time here. Good luck with your findings.

I’ll respond to the rest of the post, later if you’d like.

But this is the key part. I don’t know why you’re so obsessed with having to force a crit. Which as explained above, takes more time, not less. Scoring a crit is not the issue. More then enough crits are occurring without having to force one. A crit is a crit, regardless if it came from 100% or 95% or 60%. The issue is that on crit, the sigils don’t proc.

As an example please see the below the screen shots. The first shows Unload triggering the proc twice. It’s obvious that a crit on unload is in the 80+ range, a normal hit is in the 50s. You can see that in 1st volley after the 1st flame blast. Except for 1 more normal hit, all other attacks are crits.

Now, the rest of the images show what happens after changing weapons. I went to a rare pistol, as I didn’t have another exotic berserk pistol, so, the damage is less. But it’s still apparent – early on crits are in the 50s, normal hits are in the 30s. Two more screen shots of crits. Not one single proc.

I hope this helps explain how the issue isn’t identifying a crit, or scoring a crit. There are more then enough. Now this is just two kills. I can assure you I performed more then one. And further, the ease to which I can reproduce this should indicate that things are not “working as expected”.

The issue is the proc. Not the crit, which you keep insisting needs to be forced. Which brings me back to the point that if you really did play a high crit build, and you ever paid attention to the combat feed, having to force a crit to be sure it’s a crit is just silly. Sorry, but there’s no other way to put it.