Pulling Gefjon several times

So correct me if I am wrong… but you should not pull any 5 stars fron Valhalla that has been in use (as it say)?

But now I got Gefjon again… is that a bug? Has it happen to any one ells?

Best regards
MW

You can pull any hero again and again.
You can pull the same hero twice (or more) in a x10 pull also. Luck is random, hence my army of Domitias.
So it’s not a bug!
I’d be happy with a 5* Valhalla dupe tbh.
I hope you’ll get new 5star s3 heroes tho!
:cookie:

3 Likes

So what does the specific text in Valhalla mean then? The one you can click up on legendary hero summoning… (in Swedish it say inte tidigare använd = not earlier used… which I interpret as not pulling heroes you have used?)

its a blessed you got second gefjon than second khagan…

2 Likes

If you dont want any of your multiples Gefjon i would receive one with wide open arms lol

2 Likes

Can you maybe provide us a screenshot so that we could have an idea where to find that phrase?

On German and English I couldn’t find it.

2 Likes

Yes, please, I would very much like to see anything in any summon portal that states anything of the like!

Only situations I am aware of where the term “not earlier used” might come up would be in Alliance Wars, Tavern of Legends, Ninja Tower, etc.

If summon portals only gave me heroes that I’ve never used? I would easily have all the heroes in the game by now. I wish that was the case!

2 Likes

It may be a mistranslation of “Non-Featured” which is what it says in english for the first Legendary odds 1.3%, as opposed to “Featured” for (currently) Lord Loki at 0.3%

Non-Featured in this case would mean previously available.

Featured would then be “not previously available”.

5 Likes

@GipseT you mean this (pink outline):


I’m a bit confused also but then again I just woke up from my siesta!

2 Likes

Non-featured is 1.3% between I think about 15 heroes now, which comes out less than .1% to get another specific season 3 5* hero as a opposed to .3% for the feature one.

1 Like

Yes seams to be this… bad translation. Thank you and every one that has been responding.

1 Like

As a guess it probably should have been “inte tidigare tillgängligt”

1 Like

This topic was automatically closed 30 days after the last reply. New replies are no longer allowed.

Cookie Settings