Rune shop page showing incorrect information: scaling mana glyph

Jiggurat·12/11/2014, 12:09:56 AM·2 votes·1,180 views

So I spent IP on Greater Glyph of Scaling Mana regen runes but it is giving incorrect information on the shop and rune pages, it states "+0.06 mana regen / 5 sec per level (+1.2 at champ level 18)" while the Seal states 1.17 at 18.

1.17 = 0.065 x 18, as the seal correctly states in store and rune page 1.2 = 0.06 x 18, nope, it states 1.2 in store and rune page but the math brings it only to 1.08.

So clearly I bought the higher (which always means it is Primary rune) meanwhile in the rune page it says secondary. Well low and behold In the rune page it is counting it as 1.2, so having all 9 says 11 mana / 5 per level. Though I cannot confirm if it is giving the incorrect 1.2 mana amount or the mathematically correct 1.08 in game, it doesn't show less than whole numbers for the stat. If it is in fact a Secondary Rune and not giving as much mana regen as it states in shop I would rather just have my IP back.

Also, played for almost 6 years now and they still haven't added the Primary/Secondary distinction for runes in shop, why would this obvious feature still not be added?

6 Comments

Penta Ki11er12/23/2014, 11:21:08 PM3 votes

ROFL ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ Do your math riot!

booboomssh12/11/2014, 12:45:14 AM2 votes

You might want to add a picture to make it a bit more clear.

PC: PrintScreen (Nothing should happen), then open paint, and press control-v

Mac: Command-Shift-3

Jiggurat12/14/2014, 1:27:04 AM2 votes

I thought my math was quite explanatory. You can see for yourself in client, but here are screen shots added to the OP, only added to OP because file uploader doesn't work right for multiple files and only editing OP allows multiple usages of file uploader.

Jiggurat12/20/2014, 6:22:37 AM1 votes

Anyone?

Dzj Ules1/5/2016, 3:11:40 PM1 votes

So fixing a text probably isn't too hard. But in over a year the bug is still there... Actually it's not even a bug it's a typo. fixit!

Jiggurat1/13/2015, 2:29:45 AM

Nope, error still there.