Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Ragnar.4257

Members
  • Posts

    679
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Everything posted by Ragnar.4257

  1. > @"JusticeRetroHunter.7684" said: > no there is no difference at all, that's what you need to understand. both operations are meaningless. 1 operation, 10 operations, 100 operations...they do not amount to any meaning in the balance of the system, because any nerf you do can be done with an equivalent buff somewhere else. It's when they aren't equivalent, when the system becomes imbalanced...and if you make a change that isn't equivalent to something else, then what are you even doing other then purposefully imbalancing the game? Exactly, we're NOT making a change that's equivalent to something else. We're NOT buffing A by 100, and also buffing B by 100. We're ONLY buffing A by 100. So yes there is a difference. Scenario 1: Buff A by 100, Buff B by 100 Scenario 2: Buff A by 100, leave B untouched. You do accept that scenarios 1 and 2 are different, right? They are not equivalent. Scenario 2 does not result in "no meaningful change". If it were accompanied by some other change that offsets it, then sure. But that isn't what is being posited here. Don't respond by modifying my Scenario 2 to something you've imagined, by imagining some previously un-mentioned other changes that offset the 100 buff to A. Address my actual scenario 2 here. The one I've actually posted.
  2. > @"JusticeRetroHunter.7684" said: > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > But you're talking about a universal multiplier applied to everything. > > > > The scenario I posted was ONE change to ONE number. NOT universal. It was therefore NOT relative. NOTHING TO DO WITH ADDING EXTRA 0's ON THE END. > > > > Jesus christ. > > The point is that it doesn't matter if you change one number, 10 numbers 100 numbers...what makes you think the rules change between 1 number and infinity numbers? Surprise, there is no change in the rules. You're not thinking with your logic cap on and your trying to reconcile that the February patch had anything meaningful, other then "upsetting the establishment" or whatever reason someone could explain any meaningful change between then and now. The only thing that "changed" was what builds we used...the number of meta builds didn't increase (it decreased actually) the player population went down, and a whole lot of off meta builds were gutted, and a few off meta builds saw some shine (and sometimes quickly nerfed again) > > Here's another clue. There will always be a meta game in a game like gw2....there will always be some set of traits, abilities or whatever that is the most optimal set of choices, and the only day when there will be no metagame, is when all choices are simply the same choice...and it's because of the effect in trying to bring nerfs and buffs together to make things equal, which is fundamentally impossible to do, especially in a game like gw2. ?????? Of course it makes a difference if you're only changing 1 number vs All numbers. You yourself made that very point earlier in this thread. If you multiply every number by the same amount, then there is no change. But if you only change 1 number while leaving all other numbers the same, then that DOES result in a change. You're actually arguing against your own points, which makes me think you're just a contrarian who wants to disagree with whatever the last person said, not someone with an actual principled opinion. And no, what you listed aren't the only things that changed. The pace and flow of the game changed. Also: "The only thing that "changed" was what builds we used" - you say that like it doesn't constitute a change at all. What? "the number of meta builds didn't increase (it decreased actually)" - wrong, the diversity of builds being played now is much greater than a year ago. And no, the fact that 100% balance is perhaps unachievable, does not mean that it is not worth taking steps in that direction. It only needs to reach a point where it is not super-obvious to everyone that there are 2-3 optimal builds.
  3. > @"JusticeRetroHunter.7684" said: > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > I'll say, yet again, that the solution I gave was not to multiply by 10. And neither, as it happens, is the solution you posted here. You did NOT multiply by 10. You added 1000HP to Class B while leaving Class A untouched. That is NOT a universal operation. You're just straight up lying at this point, and very poor lies because it's easily disprovable by reading up a few posts. > > Dude you are MISSING the point here...im saying it doesn't matter what operation you do...it is ALL THE SAME because it's relative, therefor no CHANGE has any fundamental meaning...You could pump an extra 3 0's to the end of every skill and HP, toughness, whatever into the game, and you will still have the same balance. > > Want a real example? Look at WoW gear Treadmill reset after Pandara. Level 100 Gear had stats skyrocketing into the 10's of millions, and it completely invalidated gear that was 10 levels below them, because they were WAY below the barrier for entry. You could take a level 90, and solo ICC 10 man, and invalidate a level 80 40 man raids. this was a clear result of how Powercreep and Powerdip are relative, and it is the reason why they were able to just reset the gear stats on gear so that dungeons could no longer be completely irrelevant 10 level above you. But you're talking about a universal multiplier applied to everything. The scenario I posted was ONE change to ONE number. NOT universal. It was therefore NOT relative. NOTHING TO DO WITH ADDING EXTRA 0's ON THE END. I fully accept that a scenario where you just multiply everything by 10 results in no meaningful change. But. That. Is. Not. What. I'm. Talking. About. Jesus christ. Here it is again: > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > @"JusticeRetroHunter.7684" said: > > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > > Because that is the only scenario in what you're saying makes any sense. If it was perfectly balanced beforehand, then you're right. But, it wasn't, so what are you talking about? > > > > The entire point is to illustrate how in it's fundamentality, changes to a system, whether it's already balanced or not, does not lead to any meaningful changes. I could have given you an unbalanced system (Feel free to go and do that yourself)... there is no operation that makes that system balanced without universally effecting all things in that system. This is a consequence of trying to make things equal. > > Here's an operation for you: > > Prepatch: > > Class A: 100 Dmg / 200 HP > Class B: 50 Dmg / 300 HP > > Class A > Class B, everyone will pick Class A > > Postpatch: > > Class A: 100 Dmg / 200 HP > Class B: 50 Dmg / 400 HP > > Class A = Class B, people will split across Classes A and B depending on their playstyle preference. Balance achieved, greater diversity achieved. > > But I suppose this is all meaningless, and relativity, and systems, and I'm just not smart enough, etc etc The effect of my "patch" here is NOT multiplying by 10. No multipliers of any kind. It is ONLY to add 100 HP to class B. The HP of class A remains static, and all the damage numbers remain static. The balance does NOT remain all the same relatively. Class B has gained strength compared to Class A, NOT retained relative strength.
  4. > @"JusticeRetroHunter.7684" said: > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > Aaaaaaaaaaaand, you're STILL talking about balance. Not about pace/flow. Which is what this is actually about. > > Pace and flow is exactly what changed, Balance is exactly what DIDNT change and that is what i said...you responded to what i said right? you kinda hijacked my point to make your own i suppose. > > Pace and flow is nothing more then the result of Powerdip / Powercreep. You could have a slower pace by just reducing damage...or you can have a faster pace by reducing HP...none of the changes made in February actually mattered in the interest of balance at all...that's my point man. > @"JusticeRetroHunter.7684" said: > Number tweaking in the above manner is pointless because it doesn't change anything about the system in any meaningful sense. My whole point has been that number tweaking can, actually, have a meaningful impact. It does not always result in no change. As is proven by the Feb 2020 patch, which did have an impact on the flow of the game, by reducing damage while leaving HP static.
  5. > @"JusticeRetroHunter.7684" said: > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > And no the solution was not just the same as multiplying each number by 10. What are you talking about? The solution was to add 100 HP to only 1 of the 2 classes, and to leave the damage numbers unchanged. > > Prepatch: > > Class A: 1000 Dmg / 2000 HP > Class B: 500 Dmg / 3000 HP > > Class A > Class B > > Postpatch: > > Class A: 1000 Dmg / 2000 HP > Class B: 500 Dmg / 4000 HP > > Class A = Class B > > ^^^Multply everything by an order of magnitude, and the changes are relatively the same, just with bigger numbers. > > > @"Ragnar.4257" > >>@JusticeRetroHunter.7684 said: > >>I could have given you an unbalanced system (Feel free to go and do that yourself)... there is no operation that makes that system balanced without universally effecting >>all things in that system. > >????????????? > > >I just made it balanced, without universally effecting all things in the system. You said feel free to go and do it myself, and I did. > > It's just a mistype. What i meant to explain, was that there is no operation you can do in the system, that has any meaning* That the system is only balanced, when all things are universally equal. This is why buffs are just as "meaningful" as nerfs. Just like how Class A Class B, you can have any configuration of numbers, so long as they are equal the system is balance EI nerfs and buffs have the same effect, so long as the two sides are equal...anything less then equal is imbalanced. I'll say, yet again, that the solution I gave was not to multiply by 10. And neither, as it happens, is the solution you posted here. You did NOT multiply by 10. You added 1000HP to Class B while leaving Class A untouched. That is NOT a universal operation. You're just straight up lying at this point, and very poor lies because it's easily disprovable by reading up a few posts.
  6. > @"JusticeRetroHunter.7684" said: > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > > > Okay, yes, correct. But this, is scenario is about balancing, not about changing the pace/flow of the game. Which is what the Feb 2020 patch was actually about. > > > > I'm still waiting for you to address the scenario I posted above. You're strangely quiet on that. > > You're writing a bit too fast, and I'm trying to keep up with that here and address all your talking points. > > As for this example here : > >If it was changed that baseline HP was 1,000,000, suddenly the way everyone would play the game would be different, because there'd be no danger of getting 1-shot, and you could maybe accept face-tanking a big burst to achieve some wider strategic goal. People would change their playstyle to min-maxing damage/healing efficiency, because the game would change from being based on twitch reactions, to being about strategically managing resources and maximising efficiency. Your contention that tweaking numbers changes nothing is untrue. > >Likewise, if we consider the inverse, where all damage numbers are multiplied by 1000, and HP remains the same, again people would have to change how they play, because taking even 1 hit would be death. > > The above example is just a varied version of the examples we've been talking about. The numbers themselves are all relative, and thus, any change you make, say to give Class A 1,000,000 HP is going to shift the balance of the game to be bunker meta...because the barrier for entry for doing damage is now much higher. To deal with an enemy of a million health, requires an enemy that does some significant fraction of that health. Likewise the same happens in reverse with damage. You either get Power-Dips or Power-creeps, and we've been down this road in gw2 history. Either attempt to move numbers around just leads to the above scenarios because making things equal is in itself a fundamentally flawed procedure. > > Now i don't talk about this here, but the logic goes further when we talk about the meaninglessness of buffs and nerfs, and how from that, build diversity comes into play. Imagine if in your previous example, you added Class C, D, E...etc. All numbers when comparing them can essentially be different but they all average to the mean number. The mean number at infinity "classes" is going to have both sides equal one another. In other words, having more builds, even with widely varying numbers will equalize. Again this is why @"Arheundel.6451" point about why diversity is so important and comes into play here. Aaaaaaaaaaaand, you're STILL talking about balance. Not about pace/flow. Which is what this is actually about. The 1 million HP scenario is not just a "bunker meta". It would entirely change how you play the game on a fundamental level. A -5% damage modifier would have more impact than dodging even the biggest burst skill in the current game. If a power-rev jumps on you with Shiro, in the current game you have to be IMMEDIATELY popping defensive skills, kiting, etc, whereas in the 1m HP scenario you'd be able to calmly stand still, re-assess, set up some combo fields, wait for certain skills to come off cooldown, and plan out how to win this fight over the next 5 minutes. Likewise, the 1000x damage scenario, wouldn't be "no meaningful change". It would mean that everyone would have to prioritise stealth, invulnerabilities, evades and blocks, and things like healing skills, damage modifiers, regeneration over time, would all become redundant. "No meaningful change" he says. Really? Really? This, in a smaller way, is what the Feb 2020 patch did. It was NOT a balance patch. What it did was increase the time from first-contact to death, which places less emphasis on twitch muscle-memory, and more emphasis on resource management.
  7. > @"JusticeRetroHunter.7684" said: > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > Here's an operation for you: > > > > Prepatch: > > > > Class A: 100 Dmg / 200 HP > > Class B: 50 Dmg / 300 HP > > > > Class A > Class B > > > > Postpatch: > > > > Class A: 100 Dmg / 200 HP > > Class B: 50 Dmg / 400 HP > > > > Class A = Class B > > Which is the same as just making Class A do 75 damage, which is also just the same as multiplying each number in the above example by an order of magnitude (x10). In both cases, the NERFS are just as "meaningful" as the BUFFS you add. Do you not understand this? Wait, hold on, hold on....... You said: > @"JusticeRetroHunter.7684" said: > I could have given you an unbalanced system (Feel free to go and do that yourself)... there is no operation that makes that system balanced without universally effecting all things in that system. ????????????? I just made it balanced, without universally effecting all things in the system. You said feel free to go and do it myself, and I did. And no the solution was not just the same as multiplying each number by 10. What are you talking about? The solution was to add 100 HP to only 1 of the 2 classes, and to leave the damage numbers unchanged. You have to be trolling at this point, because there was nothing in that scenario that in any way was equivalent to multiplying all numbers by 10.
  8. > @"JusticeRetroHunter.7684" said: > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > Here's an operation for you: > > > > Prepatch: > > > > Class A: 100 Dmg / 200 HP > > Class B: 50 Dmg / 300 HP > > > > Class A > Class B > > > > Postpatch: > > > > Class A: 100 Dmg / 200 HP > > Class B: 50 Dmg / 400 HP > > > > Class A = Class B > > Which is the same as just making Class A do 75 damage. In both cases, the NERF is just as meaningful as the buff you added. Do you not understand this? Okay, yes, correct. But this scenario is about balancing, not about changing the pace/flow of the game. While the Feb 2020 patch was actually changing pace/flow, not balance.. I'm still waiting for you to address the 1,000,000 HP scenario I posted above. You're strangely quiet on that.
  9. > @"JusticeRetroHunter.7684" said: > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > And I've already demonstrated multiple times in this thread how changing the numbers DOES lead to meaningful changes. > >So, you're wrong. > > Demonstration? Where? Here, I'll quote it, and leave it as the only other quote in this post, so you can't possibly miss it for the 4th time. > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > If it was changed that baseline HP was 1,000,000, suddenly the way everyone would play the game would be different, because there'd be no danger of getting 1-shot, and you could maybe accept face-tanking a big burst to achieve some wider strategic goal. People would change their playstyle to min-maxing damage/healing efficiency, because the game would change from being based on twitch reactions, to being about strategically managing resources and maximising efficiency. Your contention that tweaking numbers changes nothing is untrue. > > Likewise, if we consider the inverse, where all damage numbers are multiplied by 1000, and HP remains the same, again people would have to change how they play, because taking even 1 hit would be death.
  10. > @"JusticeRetroHunter.7684" said: > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > Because that is the only scenario in what you're saying makes any sense. If it was perfectly balanced beforehand, then you're right. But, it wasn't, so what are you talking about? > > The entire point is to illustrate how in it's fundamentality, changes to a system, whether it's already balanced or not, does not lead to any meaningful changes. I could have given you an unbalanced system (Feel free to go and do that yourself)... there is no operation that makes that system balanced without universally effecting all things in that system. This is a consequence of trying to make things equal. Here's an operation for you: Prepatch: Class A: 100 Dmg / 200 HP Class B: 50 Dmg / 300 HP Class A > Class B, everyone will pick Class A Postpatch: Class A: 100 Dmg / 200 HP Class B: 50 Dmg / 400 HP Class A = Class B, people will split across Classes A and B depending on their playstyle preference. Balance achieved, greater diversity achieved. But I suppose this is all meaningless, and relativity, and systems, and I'm just not smart enough, etc etc
  11. > @"JusticeRetroHunter.7684" said: > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > Because that is the only scenario in what you're saying makes any sense. If it was perfectly balanced beforehand, then you're right. But, it wasn't, so what are you talking about? > > The entire point is to illustrate how in it's fundamentality, changes to a system, whether it's already balanced or not, does not lead to any meaningful changes. I could have given you an unbalanced system (Feel free to go and do that yourself)... there is no operation that makes that system balanced without universally effecting all things in that system. This is a consequence of trying to make things equal. And I've already demonstrated multiple times in this thread how changing the numbers DOES lead to meaningful changes. So, you're wrong. And I'll say again: The Feb 2020 patch was not really anything to do with "balance" as such. It was about re-shaping the pace and flow of the game. Balance is not even a relevant topic here. > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > Your second point there is just flat out wrong. If it was changed that baseline HP was 1,000,000, suddenly the way everyone would play the game would be different, because there'd be no danger of getting 1-shot, and you could maybe accept face-tanking a big burst to achieve some wider strategic goal. People would change their playstyle to min-maxing damage/healing efficiency, because the game would change from being based on twitch reactions, to being about strategically managing resources and maximising efficiency. Your contention that tweaking numbers changes nothing is untrue. > > Likewise, if we consider the inverse, where all damage numbers are multiplied by 1000, and HP remains the same, again people would have to change how they play, because taking even 1 hit would be death.
  12. > @"JusticeRetroHunter.7684" said: > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > What relevance does this have to anything that is being discussed? > > Like i said, any change that doesn't universally effect the entire system in an attempt to make it equal, imbalances the system. what the hell do you think happened February Patch? and what do you think happened as a consequence of the patch? > Are you suggesting that gw2 pre-patch was perfectly balanced? (Or, at least, better balanced than it is currently?) Because that is the only scenario in what you're saying makes any sense. If it was perfectly balanced beforehand, then you're right. But, it wasn't, so what are you talking about? The Feb 2020 patch was not really anything to do with "balance" as such. It was about re-shaping the pace and flow of the game. Balance is not even a relevant topic here.
  13. > @"JusticeRetroHunter.7684" said: > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > Think of it like this then... > > You have Player A, That does 1000 damage, and has 10 HP. You have another player that does 10 damage, and 1000 HP. How would you go about balancing this system? > > There is essentially no operation you can do to balance the system above. In fact, the above is as equivalent to both players having 505 damage, and 505 HP. In all sense of the word, no matter what you do in this system, the above can not be changed to anything that is meaningfully balanced then what it already is. making either of them less or more makes the system by definition IMBALANCED. What relevance does this have to anything that is being discussed? That in no way describes the situation gw2 was/is in pre/post patch, or any of the balance changes being faced. This scenario of 1000/10 vs 10/1000 is, technically, balanced. Why would I need to go about balancing it? Or are you suggesting that GW2 pre-patch was perfectly balanced?
  14. > @"JusticeRetroHunter.7684" said: > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > The Feb 2020 patch didn't reduce damage and health by the same proportion. Why do you keep making this point? > > uhh...exactly. Only some of the things changed, it's all pointless number pushing. Nothing is actually accomplished. What goal is there if the entire meaning of balance is to make things equal (Is that not what "balance" means), when you are purposefully making some things stronger or weaker then other things. In either case, nothing is actually accomplishing the goal of "balance." This argument is just incoherent. First you say that changing all numbers by the same co-efficient results in everything staying the same, relatively. Which is correct. And now you're saying that balance can only be achieved by keeping all numbers the same relatively, and that doing otherwise results in imbalance. Your second point there is just flat out wrong. If it was changed that baseline HP was 1,000,000, suddenly the way everyone would play the game would be different, because there'd be no danger of getting 1-shot, and you could maybe accept face-tanking a big burst to achieve some wider strategic goal. People would change their playstyle to min-maxing damage/healing efficiency, because the game would change from being based on twitch reactions, to being about strategically managing resources and maximising efficiency. Your contention that tweaking numbers changes nothing is untrue. Likewise, if we consider the inverse, where all damage numbers are multiplied by 1000, and HP remains the same, again people would have to change how they play, because taking even 1 hit would be death.
  15. > @"JusticeRetroHunter.7684" said: > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > I think its you who don't understand what it is you actually wrote. > > Please explain how i don't understand what i wrote, it's quiet clear. lowering all numbers in a system that was previously 1000 damage for every 10,000 health, is the same as a system with 1 damage for every 10 health. In this scenario, the barrier for entry doesn't change. But that isn't what happened! The Feb 2020 patch didn't reduce damage and health by the same proportion. Why do you keep making this point?
  16. > @"JusticeRetroHunter.7684" said: > Something that does 1000 damage against an opponent that has 10000 health, is the same barrier for entry for something that does 1 damage against an opponent with 10 health. > @"JusticeRetroHunter.7684" said: > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > Except, that isn't what happened is it? @"JusticeRetroHunter.7684" > > I think you misunderstand. No matter what one could do to change the system with number changes, the system doesn't change in any meaningful sense. Creating a new power-level does nothing because it's all relative. In the same token, changing some but not all things, means you aren't actually balancing anything, just moving numbers in the system around. I think its you who don't understand what it is you actually wrote. Your suggestion was that all numbers had had the same co-efficient applied. This is demonstrably not true. Reducing damage while keeping HP the same is not just "all relative". It completely changes the flow and pace of the game.
  17. Except, that isn't what happened is it? @"JusticeRetroHunter.7684" HP and Damage didn't get reduced by equal proportion, HP has stayed in exactly the same place. We aren't in a bunker meta. People will still get deleted in the blink of an eye if they're not paying attention. This whole thing you're arguing about is entirely in your imagination. Incase you didn't notice, it wasn't just damage which got nerfed, sustain did too in the form of healing-values, stunbreak CDs, block/evade CDs, boon durations, cleanses etc. The concept of the Feb 2020 patch was a good one. The only problem was a failure to quickly follow up on some of the outliers which got missed. And honestly, they're slowly getting there. The state of the game right now is the most diverse it's been for years.
  18. Would it actually be better to watch a recording, by yourself, several hours/days after the event? There's alot to be said for the hype and communal feel of watching a match with a large group of other people 'live', with commentary, banter etc. Pretty much every sport is best watched live. As long as there are streamers actually streaming, this setup is fine.
  19. > @"WillPaharu.4837" said: > > @"Tharan.9085" said: > > > @"WillPaharu.4837" said: > > > Why would you nerf a build that is only ranked "good" (decap druid)? please refer to metabattle.com before nerfing anything. The only classes and builds that should be nerfed are the ones ranked "Meta". Meta means over powered. "Good" means it's not very effective unless played very well. Please undo the nerfs on Decap druid. It is the only druid build and one of the few ranger builds viable in conquest. > > > > > > Were people actually complaining about decap druid or something??? If so that is hilarious, feel free to ignore them. Play decap druid yourself and see how not overpowered it is. > > > > > > Again, please undo these nerfs to decap druid. Nerf Dragon hunters instead. > > > > > > Ideally there would be no meta builds. Just all good and great, so that it comes down to skill and knowing your class and role. When there are meta builds, people flock to them because they are easier to win with. Which is cheap. I digress, as there will always be meta builds I reckon. But pls leave the "good" builds alone. They aren't the imbalance. > > > > imagine thinking metabattle is a good source for anything > > yah lets just pretend they don't have all the current meta builds. okay. > > At the time you made this thread, and before the last patch, fireweaver and core-support-guard were not listed as meta, despite being very much meta. So, no, metabattle does not always have all the meta builds.
  20. > @"WillPaharu.4837" said: > > @"Leonidrex.5649" said: > > most rangers will agree that kitten decap druid. > > They should probably nerf ancient seed too because kitten that trait, then they can go ahead and nerf it again and again and THAN they can think about making druid a proper support instead of this pile of smelly cheese. > > > > P.S > > reducing gs KB to 100 might be a buff, but in my personal opinon it just looks super silly, make it 150 or 200 please. > > > > PSS > > srsl kitten decap druid with a stick. Sideways. > > Unfounded bias right here. Why there got to be so many haters for none competitive build/class. leave my druids alone! we are few!
  21. > @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > > > > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > > > > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > > > > > > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > > > > > > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > > > > > > > > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > > > > > > > > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > > > > > > > > > Against power guardian: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shadowshot -> unblockable 3k damage -> dash out of range of counter-pressure > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Repeat until you win, don't even need other weapon skills. Bonus points for using the stolen 3s daze. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lmao just that easy eh, given guards a known hard counter to thieves and known to be in favor of guard when players are close to equal skill im surprised everyone has missed this easy tactic all these yrs, who woulda thought it was so easy lol. > > > > > > > > > Man these forums are sad these days. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Doesn't stop it being true. And whether or not the matchup is in favour of the thief or the guard, doesn't change the fact that this is the best strategy for the thief to emply. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thieves lose to guards when they try to stay in melee and go toe-to-toe. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Thieves can beat power guards when they spike-and-kite, and prioritise their unblockable stuff. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Talking about a dps power guard, not a burn-bunker. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > u saying it doesnt make it true :) all ur statements says is u sit there and eat repeated shodow shots till ur dead lol what are u doing in between afking, Then complain how easy a target u are? > > > > > > > > > > > > What could it do? > > > > > > > > > > > > It can't catch the thief? > > > > > > > > > > > > The way a guardian beats a thief is by standing on point and waiting for the thief to come close and make the mistake of fighting toe-to-toe. > > > > > > > > > > > > The way a thief beats guardian is to refuse to play that game. > > > > > > > > > > u must be be doing something wrong given guard is thiefs hard counter and is usually a favored match up for the guard. Most guards I face even with a shadow shot successful usually immediately return the favor with higj damage burn stacks, usually if ur even close enough to touch a guard with melee ur eating burn etc that delete a teefs hp quick. Thief can clear em sure but is eating more stacks when trying to engage again. They kite u use ur scepter and Jesus beam lol or spirit weapon for high burn stacks. Guards have options vs thief and is actually a favorable fight for the guard, maybe u should practice more. > > > > > > > > You've missed the part where I said I was talking about power-guardian. It really helps to read all of the words. > > > > > > > > Burn-DH is an entirely different situation. > > > > > > > > You're also STILL ignoring that this isn't about which class is favoured in the matchup. This is about which strategy has the best chance of winning for the thief. > > > > > > > > Nobody ever said that thief was favoured in this matchup, so why do you keep arguing that point? > > > > > > > > I'll say it again, very very slowly. This thread, is not about which matchups does thief win. Not about that. Not. About. That. It is about which strategy gives the thief the highest chance of winning, even if that chance is slim. > > > > > > Regardless whether ur playing power guard or not i doubt its as easy as shadow shot and repeat. U are right I missed the power guard part, props are due to u then good sir for not jumping on the fotm burn guard. To that I say carry on. > > > > It really is that simple. > > > > Guardian defense is based around blocks. > > > > You have an unblockable skill. > > > > Why would you waste initiative on anything else? > > Only the blinding projectile is unblockable, not the damaging hit. > > Not arguing with your point though. It clears the aegis and gives space for a few 111s for free before ducking back out. Guard out-damages thief in the long term, but thief can do more in the first 1s of an engage.
  22. > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > > > > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > > > > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > > > > > > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > > > > > > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > > > > > > > Against power guardian: > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Shadowshot -> unblockable 3k damage -> dash out of range of counter-pressure > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Repeat until you win, don't even need other weapon skills. Bonus points for using the stolen 3s daze. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lmao just that easy eh, given guards a known hard counter to thieves and known to be in favor of guard when players are close to equal skill im surprised everyone has missed this easy tactic all these yrs, who woulda thought it was so easy lol. > > > > > > > Man these forums are sad these days. > > > > > > > > > > > > Doesn't stop it being true. And whether or not the matchup is in favour of the thief or the guard, doesn't change the fact that this is the best strategy for the thief to emply. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thieves lose to guards when they try to stay in melee and go toe-to-toe. > > > > > > > > > > > > Thieves can beat power guards when they spike-and-kite, and prioritise their unblockable stuff. > > > > > > > > > > > > Talking about a dps power guard, not a burn-bunker. > > > > > > > > > > u saying it doesnt make it true :) all ur statements says is u sit there and eat repeated shodow shots till ur dead lol what are u doing in between afking, Then complain how easy a target u are? > > > > > > > > What could it do? > > > > > > > > It can't catch the thief? > > > > > > > > The way a guardian beats a thief is by standing on point and waiting for the thief to come close and make the mistake of fighting toe-to-toe. > > > > > > > > The way a thief beats guardian is to refuse to play that game. > > > > > > u must be be doing something wrong given guard is thiefs hard counter and is usually a favored match up for the guard. Most guards I face even with a shadow shot successful usually immediately return the favor with higj damage burn stacks, usually if ur even close enough to touch a guard with melee ur eating burn etc that delete a teefs hp quick. Thief can clear em sure but is eating more stacks when trying to engage again. They kite u use ur scepter and Jesus beam lol or spirit weapon for high burn stacks. Guards have options vs thief and is actually a favorable fight for the guard, maybe u should practice more. > > > > You've missed the part where I said I was talking about power-guardian. It really helps to read all of the words. > > > > Burn-DH is an entirely different situation. > > > > You're also STILL ignoring that this isn't about which class is favoured in the matchup. This is about which strategy has the best chance of winning for the thief. > > > > Nobody ever said that thief was favoured in this matchup, so why do you keep arguing that point? > > > > I'll say it again, very very slowly. This thread, is not about which matchups does thief win. Not about that. Not. About. That. It is about which strategy gives the thief the highest chance of winning, even if that chance is slim. > > Regardless whether ur playing power guard or not i doubt its as easy as shadow shot and repeat. U are right I missed the power guard part, props are due to u then good sir for not jumping on the fotm burn guard. To that I say carry on. It really is that simple. Guardian defense is based around blocks. You have an unblockable skill. Why would you waste initiative on anything else?
  23. > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > > > > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > > > > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > > > > > Against power guardian: > > > > > > > > > > > > Shadowshot -> unblockable 3k damage -> dash out of range of counter-pressure > > > > > > > > > > > > Repeat until you win, don't even need other weapon skills. Bonus points for using the stolen 3s daze. > > > > > > > > > > Lmao just that easy eh, given guards a known hard counter to thieves and known to be in favor of guard when players are close to equal skill im surprised everyone has missed this easy tactic all these yrs, who woulda thought it was so easy lol. > > > > > Man these forums are sad these days. > > > > > > > > Doesn't stop it being true. And whether or not the matchup is in favour of the thief or the guard, doesn't change the fact that this is the best strategy for the thief to emply. > > > > > > > > Thieves lose to guards when they try to stay in melee and go toe-to-toe. > > > > > > > > Thieves can beat power guards when they spike-and-kite, and prioritise their unblockable stuff. > > > > > > > > Talking about a dps power guard, not a burn-bunker. > > > > > > u saying it doesnt make it true :) all ur statements says is u sit there and eat repeated shodow shots till ur dead lol what are u doing in between afking, Then complain how easy a target u are? > > > > What could it do? > > > > It can't catch the thief? > > > > The way a guardian beats a thief is by standing on point and waiting for the thief to come close and make the mistake of fighting toe-to-toe. > > > > The way a thief beats guardian is to refuse to play that game. > > u must be be doing something wrong given guard is thiefs hard counter and is usually a favored match up for the guard. Most guards I face even with a shadow shot successful usually immediately return the favor with higj damage burn stacks, usually if ur even close enough to touch a guard with melee ur eating burn etc that delete a teefs hp quick. Thief can clear em sure but is eating more stacks when trying to engage again. They kite u use ur scepter and Jesus beam lol or spirit weapon for high burn stacks. Guards have options vs thief and is actually a favorable fight for the guard, maybe u should practice more. You've missed the part where I said I was talking about power-guardian. It really helps to read all of the words. Burn-DH is an entirely different situation. You're also STILL ignoring that this isn't about which class is favoured in the matchup. This is about which strategy has the best chance of winning for the thief. Nobody ever said that thief was favoured in this matchup, so why do you keep arguing that point? I'll say it again, very very slowly. This thread, is not about which matchups does thief win. Not about that. Not. About. That. Because the answer to that question is "none of them". What it is about is which strategy gives the thief the highest chance of winning, even if that chance is slim.
  24. > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > > > Against power guardian: > > > > > > > > Shadowshot -> unblockable 3k damage -> dash out of range of counter-pressure > > > > > > > > Repeat until you win, don't even need other weapon skills. Bonus points for using the stolen 3s daze. > > > > > > Lmao just that easy eh, given guards a known hard counter to thieves and known to be in favor of guard when players are close to equal skill im surprised everyone has missed this easy tactic all these yrs, who woulda thought it was so easy lol. > > > Man these forums are sad these days. > > > > Doesn't stop it being true. And whether or not the matchup is in favour of the thief or the guard, doesn't change the fact that this is the best strategy for the thief to emply. > > > > Thieves lose to guards when they try to stay in melee and go toe-to-toe. > > > > Thieves can beat power guards when they spike-and-kite, and prioritise their unblockable stuff. > > > > Talking about a dps power guard, not a burn-bunker. > > u saying it doesnt make it true :) all ur statements says is u sit there and eat repeated shodow shots till ur dead lol what are u doing in between afking, Then complain how easy a target u are? You are free to ignore this advice and keep being a victim. OP asked "how do I beat you". I told him how. As someone who has many hours playing power-guardian in P2/P3, yes I do usually beat thieves 1v1, but I do occasionally lose, and when I do lose this is how those thieves have played the matchup.
  25. > @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > (...) > > Talking about a dps power guard, not a burn-bunker. > > Isn't it even more difficult as burn guard? Because they have almost zero cover condis and thief cleanses single stack with evading? It depends on the build and how much sustain it has built in, not the damage-type. A symbol build with honor+valor will never die to a thief, but a more damage-oriented build can absolutely be killed.
×
×
  • Create New...