Consuming Fear vs Armor Durability

[poochie2]

Probably a bug, but I am asking for feedback on this:

often an ally has 2 ATK and Consuming Fear attached. When he attacks for 0 damage the opposing hero's armor durability still goes down by a notch.. is this actually wanted?

[Mightyoak713]

I made a post about this once. Got told that's right. I don't think its right. Zero attk should not be able to attack

[Daemon Rayge]

I made a post about this once. Got told that's right. I don't think its right. Zero attk should not be able to attack

The thing is they do not have 0 attack when they declare the attack. It does not drop to 0 until after they attack.

[poochie2]

I get it that it still attacks, but how can 0 atk wear down armor?

[4Ak]

I get it that it still attacks, but how can 0 atk wear down armor?

+1 : wearing down armor with 0atk is ridiculous (...at least)))))

[oijjio]

Contradictory rules lol. If ally has 2hp it dies before swinging. But if it has 2 atk it still swings though technically you can't swing with 0 atk...

[poochie2]

And dmt loses after using its ability :-[ but I guess that was already discussed somewhere.

[oijjio]

I get the logic though. It's because the attack has to be made before CF takes effect, and by that time you can't halt the attack. Guess the system uses attack recieved to calculate durability, not if combat damages received...

[Airact]

Contradictory rules lol. If ally has 2hp it dies before swinging. But if it has 2 atk it still swings though technically you can't swing with 0 atk...

I don't see any contradictions.


Declare attacker -> Attack -> Attacker combat damage -> defender combat damage -> end of combat.

First you say "this guy attacks that guy"
Then the guy attacks (and, in this case, loses two attack and health and if an ally at any point has 0 or less health, it dies).
Then he deals combat damage (if it's not dead) which might be 0 as while you can't attack with a 0 attack guy, an attacking ally that has 0 attack doesn't just stop attacking.

While 0 damage can be considered "no combat damage", which is correct, it also means the attack connected which means the armor wears down.

At least that's how I think it is.

[Mightyoak713]

But if u follow the rule steps doesn't CF reduce atk before its atk is made a connection to the amour?
Cuz isn't it they atk.sub step of effects on his card then your effect then the combat?