Sobx.1758

> @"Heimskarl Ashfiend.9582" said:

> > @Sobx.1758 said:

> > I'm not "implying it", it's a fact.

>

> Yes well Gazelle Charge was working exactly as the tooltip stated too.

No, it didn't, but if you feel you need to lie to try and "make your point" then it's up to you.

Also you guys keep confusing situations when something isn't specified in the tooltip with situations where something is clearly explained in the tooltip and then sooomehow you're trying to use it as a valid argument in this case. <.<

> @Chaba.5410 said:

> > @Sobx.1758 said:

> > It literally tells you what DJ does and how its dmg scales. That's it. And you're here to claim that it's a bug because... it works like the tooltip says it does.

>

> I never made a claim it's a bug. I said it is an unanswered question whether the bonus damage was meant to be applied to unmarked targets since malice is involved.

Are you high? If something works the way it wasn't intended to, it's literally a definition of a bug. Suddenly "you never said it's a bug", but still claim the tooltip is wrong and the way skill works is unintended. :D

> You keep implying the tooltip text is accurate.

I'm not "implying it", it's a fact.

> @Chaba.5410 said:

> > @Solori.6025 said:

> > Their is no evidence in game that it is working beyond the bounds set by the tooltip.

>

> Again, when you take a tooltip at face value, that is a conclusion that can be drawn, but it relies on the idea that tooltips are infallable. When you account for the fact that tooltips are not always accurate - they're tips, not product certification and calibration, suddenly there is not a measurable boundary. I thought the details given regarding the changes made to Coalescence of Ruin would have made that clear to you. No where does the tooltip say there's a 0.5s icd on the damage it gives to a single player. By your logic that would be a bug or glitch due to being out of the bounds set by the tooltip. We know in hindsight that that is not the case.

You keep talking about "things not included in tooltip", but that's literally not relevant in the case of DJ's tooltip, all you can give are irrelevant ""examples"" that aren't equal to what we're talking about <.<

It literally tells you what DJ does and how its dmg scales. That's it. And you're here to claim that it's a bug because... it works like the tooltip says it does.

> @Shadowcat.2680 said:

> > @Sobx.1758 said:

> > > @Shadowcat.2680 said:

> > > > @Sobx.1758 said:

> > > > > @Shadowcat.2680 said:

> > > > >

> > > > > > @Solori.6025 said:

> > > > > > > @KrHome.1920 said:

> > > > > > > > @Shadowcat.2680 said:

> > > > > > > > the ambients don't need to be on the map

> > > > > > > Yea thanks, as a necro I salute you for that great idea to let me start every fight with 0 Life Force.

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Or in other words: If a skill is broken, fix that skill and not other stuff which causes new problems. Pretty trivial, isn't it?

> > > > > > >

> > > > > > > Besides that: The maps will look and feel weird and empty without ambient creatures.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > So it's ok for everyone else to have a combat advantage from ambient creatures just not a thief?

> > > > > >

> > > > > > Cause if you can build life force why cant someone else build their class resource off an ambient?

> > > > > >

> > > > > > You want to fix ambient creature abuse? Fix it for everyone, don't be a hypocrite about it.

> > > > >

> > > > > At least when a necro uses a white mob ambient for life force, said mob dies. A deadeye marking an ambient for malice stacks doesn't even aggro the mob, much less kill it.

> > > >

> > > > How does it make any difference? If DE aggroed a mob, how would that change literally anything in this situation?

> > > > And how does the fact that "necro kills a mob" makes it in ANY way better? Is killing a single regular mob suddenly hard? Or what's exactly your point here? Because honestly I can't see where you're going with this ""argument"".

> > > >

> > > > Seriously, walk me through your thought process.

> > >

> > > Ability to camp a white ambient for combat advantage.

> >

> > Like you'll run out of mobs as necro, right?

>

> In a given location, yes. And life force has a cap. Malice will build to full stacks and rinse and repeat so long as the deadeye stays within 1500 units of its mark. As a resource, it's endless so long as the deadeye can find any mob nearby to mark. A comparison to a warrior's adrenaline could be made, but it'd be as faulty as the comparison to a necro's life force. Adrenaline does not stay full and has to be built again by finding something new to attack.

Malice also has a cap, wtf are you even talking about now?

> @"Doctor Hide.6345" said:

> I don't know if this was mentioned or not, but a gaming mouse helps with kneeling a lot on quickness and reaction time. Today, I set the kneel command as num pad multiply sign which was then set to the number 1 button key on my mouse. The difference is night and day from having to hit 5. So if you have a gaming mouse, try doing what I did.

Suggesting people didn't rebind their 5+ keys before...

> @Crinn.7864 said:

> Reflecting Death's Judgement does not kill the deadeye. Reflected attacks do not benefit from malice damage bonuses, or any of the thief's other bonuses.

Other attacks maybe not, but why wouldn't it work in case of DJ?

> @Shadowcat.2680 said:

> > @Sobx.1758 said:

> > > @Shadowcat.2680 said:

> > >

> > > > @Solori.6025 said:

> > > > > @KrHome.1920 said:

> > > > > > @Shadowcat.2680 said:

> > > > > > the ambients don't need to be on the map

> > > > > Yea thanks, as a necro I salute you for that great idea to let me start every fight with 0 Life Force.

> > > > >

> > > > > Or in other words: If a skill is broken, fix that skill and not other stuff which causes new problems. Pretty trivial, isn't it?

> > > > >

> > > > > Besides that: The maps will look and feel weird and empty without ambient creatures.

> > > >

> > > > So it's ok for everyone else to have a combat advantage from ambient creatures just not a thief?

> > > >

> > > > Cause if you can build life force why cant someone else build their class resource off an ambient?

> > > >

> > > > You want to fix ambient creature abuse? Fix it for everyone, don't be a hypocrite about it.

> > >

> > > At least when a necro uses a white mob ambient for life force, said mob dies. A deadeye marking an ambient for malice stacks doesn't even aggro the mob, much less kill it.

> >

> > How does it make any difference? If DE aggroed a mob, how would that change literally anything in this situation?

> > And how does the fact that "necro kills a mob" makes it in ANY way better? Is killing a single regular mob suddenly hard? Or what's exactly your point here? Because honestly I can't see where you're going with this ""argument"".

> >

> > Seriously, walk me through your thought process.

>

> Ability to camp a white ambient for combat advantage.

Like you'll run out of mobs as necro, right?

> @Solori.6025 said:

> > @Chaba.5410 said:

> > > @Sobx.1758 said:

> > > > @Chaba.5410 said:

> > > >The question as to whether Anet intended DJ to do additional damage with Malice stacks to an unmarked target when Malice is meant to apply bonus damage to marked targets remains unanswered because it isn't Anet answering the question and no amount of your fallacious reasoning using tooltips will change that.

> > >

> > > lmao. Here's your answer:

> > > "**Fire a shot that deals increased damage based on your number of malice stacks. This attack reveals you.**"

> > > And it's astonishing how you can take a fact and dismiss it just because you don't like it. But for now the facts are simple: it is working as intended.

> >

> > Nope, I very clearly countered your argument by challenging your assertion that the tooltips are to be taken at face value; has nothing to do with "I don't like it". Tooltips are not infallable, which is why I would not attempt to base an argument on them over intent. Doing so is like trying to say that when Epidemic's tooltip says it works off a "target foe", it was intended that "foe" includes an oil pot and thus no fix was needed because the tooltip system was revamped. The only fact here is the words of the tooltip, not what the intent is supposed to be in regards to how a skill functions in the environment. The design of the Deadeye isn't to just be a sniper, but also provide for some bonuses when using skills against a marked target as can be seen across multiple skills. What's being questioned here is whether malice stacks were really intended to be used as a damage modifier to unmarked targets. If the answer is yes, and players are able to one-shot others using DJ without having to even mark the person, then that points to an overtuned skill since adding in the additional Malice damage modifier from being marked would be overkill and essentially unnecessary to achieve a one-shot kill. The other issue I've brought up, just like with Epidemic, is using gates to build malice stacks. Certainly "marked target" was not intended to mean gate.

> >

>

> ...

> You...really didn't though..

>

> What you are arguing is intent and execution,

> If something is not intended or working out of the boundries set in this game( or any game) it is considered a bug, or glitch.

> To state that a skill is not or could not be working as intended would mean their is or needs to be clear evidence of the skill not working within the bounds set.

> In this case you question the intended effect of the bonus damage of Deaths Judgement by stating

>

> "There is also still no clear answer to the question of whether DJ was intended to be affected by the malice stacks against targets that were not marked."

>

> At this point you were presented with the tooltip of the skill

> Not only is this skill working at the tool tip says

> Their is no evidence in game that it is working beyond the bounds set by the tooltip.

> Rather it is working *to effectively

>

> To argue intent of developers ( which if you arent a developer yourself why even assume you know how it works ?) and the fact they change skills, is silly, it doesnt make sense, and has very little relevance to a skill that is in fact working as intended.

> Using that same logic, is every skill working within the parameters of it's tooltip working as intended?

>

> That argument is invalid.

>

> If you want to question if the skill is overtuned, that is a different argument entirely and makes sense, and I would agree with you even, but questioning intent when the skill performs within the parameters set is like asking if auto attacks are intended to be used without a cooldown.

> Then pointing to the changed or nerfed skills and saying " see this wasnt accurate when.."

> Things that are OVERTUNED change

>

> Deaths Judgement tooltip clearly states, "your malice stacks"

> No where in any part of the skill does it say it is reliant on a foe, or even give hint to it needing a target for it's damage bonus.

> It's been that way since beta

>

> Overtuned =/= bugged

>

> Now Malice (or Deadeye mark)

> Is in fact a different skill from Deaths Judgement.

> The bonus for having JUST malice is also on DE utilities as well.

>

> Course you would know that if you read the skills

>

Yh... Thank you, I seriously ran out of patience with that guy. How can he not understand something as simple as that is beyond me.

> @Shadowcat.2680 said:

>

> > @Solori.6025 said:

> > > @KrHome.1920 said:

> > > > @Shadowcat.2680 said:

> > > > the ambients don't need to be on the map

> > > Yea thanks, as a necro I salute you for that great idea to let me start every fight with 0 Life Force.

> > >

> > > Or in other words: If a skill is broken, fix that skill and not other stuff which causes new problems. Pretty trivial, isn't it?

> > >

> > > Besides that: The maps will look and feel weird and empty without ambient creatures.

> >

> > So it's ok for everyone else to have a combat advantage from ambient creatures just not a thief?

> >

> > Cause if you can build life force why cant someone else build their class resource off an ambient?

> >

> > You want to fix ambient creature abuse? Fix it for everyone, don't be a hypocrite about it.

>

> At least when a necro uses a white mob ambient for life force, said mob dies. A deadeye marking an ambient for malice stacks doesn't even aggro the mob, much less kill it.

How does it make any difference? If DE aggroed a mob, how would that change literally anything in this situation?

And how does the fact that "necro kills a mob" makes it in ANY way better? Is killing a single regular mob suddenly hard? Or what's exactly your point here? Because honestly I can't see where you're going with this ""argument"".

Seriously, walk me through your thought process.

Whatever you enjoy.

> @Chaba.5410 said:

There is also still no clear answer to the question of whether DJ was intended to be affected by the malice stacks against targets that were not marked.

It's funny how you're trying to argue about a skill that you didn't even read the description of.

> @Turk.5460 said:

> > @Solori.6025 said:

>

> > It's literally the description of the skill, it clearly, clearly states " based on YOUR number of malice stacks"

> > the bonus damage from the marked target does not apply, only the bonus from having malice to begin with.

> >

> > That's not at all hard to understand.

>

> Being described that way does not infallibly mean that ANET wanted it to perform that way. It could very well be a poorly written tooltip. Which is not uncommon in GW2...

Don't be silly.

> @Bish.8627 said:

> Things like the lazer don't show when you are around a busy fight

It does show and if you can't notice it, it's your problem. It can be said about literally any other skill in the game, so stop trying to use it as an argument about a specific skill, because it's not valid.

> @dawsm.5398 said:

> > @Sobx.1758 said:

>

> > What you said is that creating threads against something is ok, while "defending it" is "amusing". But stay in your own world and pretend that's something normal and that it's not something that contradicts itself.

>

> My amusement doesn't automatically invalidate people defending something, and I never said people should or shouldn't start threads, but you're doing a good job seeing what you want and taking things personally.

Ah yes, the sweet backpedalling... :D

The context of your "amusement expressing post" was quite clear, no need to make up random excuses now, this is not elementary school, buddy.

> > @Sobx.1758 said:

>

> > Uh, oh, you do indeed "delight in this assumption"... except that I've never said YOU don't understand how malice/DJ works, what I wrote was LITERALLY:

> > "if you actually read through the latest threads about it, you'll notice that it's a fact and people don't understand how and why it works the way it does."

>

> And my first post wasn't directed at -you- either, but it didn't stop you from behaving as if it was. In fact, looking back through this thread, you seem to have an issue with several people posting and not just me.

Do you understand how context works? I answered to something you said -it didn't really need to be directed at me. You answered to something I said that was CLEARLY (as I quoted btw) directed at some of the people in other threads and you took it as "me implying something you do", which is -again- CLEARLY wrong. I never said you answering to me is wrong in any way, because that's not how forum works, buddy.

At this point you probably understood your mistake, but who would expect you to admit anything, better tell me "your post wasnt directed at me" lmao.

> > @Sobx.1758 said:

>

> > Do you even understand what you read before you decide to answer to it? Seriously, next time try to focus less on the condecending "delighting" and "amusement" and instead simply understand what you read, buddy. :)

>

> *Laughs* Pot, kettle, and black; as many things as you've basically claimed I said, that I actually didn't, I don't think you should be telling others to work on reading comprehension. You may consider this a response to your last sentence as well, for brevity's sake.

"many things"? What "many things"? It was one thing that you CLEARLY said and now you're just backpedalling and claiming I said multiple false things about you, which is simply a lie. I'd like to say "nice try", but honestly... it was just "a bad attempt" at saving yourself at best.

But again you don't make much sense here.

> > @Sobx.1758 said:

>

> > And I told you why they have the problem with it -it's because they don't understand the mechanic. And, on that point, I'm pretty sure I got it right.

>

> Nope, I'm pretty sure there are people who've tried deadeye that have an issue with how the mechanic works. Heck, I'm one of those people who knows exactly what you can do with it on a power build and considers it wonky. And, no, deadeyes being easy targets, or the attack being easy to dodge, doesn't change the questionable ability to charge up a combat oriented mechanic while not being in combat. But, you' don't seem to have any intention of thinking about this otherwise.

The thing is that attack "being easy to dodge" changes A LOT in a game with such easy access to dodging/blocking/reflecting.

> Now, to really lay it out for you, I'd wager that what you didn't like was my first post basically chiding a certain subset of the "defending" population. That subset being players who treat the Deadeye's Mark / Malice / DJ dynamic as an easy-mode button in regards to building Malice without actually engaging in combat *at* *all*. Naturally, many in that subset want to make as much noise as they can so they don't lose that easy-mode button. People who want to defend the Malice / DJ mechanics as they are, without taking into account that no other profession in the game can so benefit in combat by highlighting a non-combat oriented mob, are just being upset that someone might take their new shiny thing. However, perhaps that shiny new thing needs to be adjusted. But, my amusement at people clamoring over said shiny thing won't make it be adjusted, and the clamoring itself won't keep it from being adjusted; it is ultimately up to Anet.

There's nothing to "wager on", I think my post was quite clear what I liked or rather disliked about your condecending post. And it was exactly that -you came otu as a hypocrite that things that people complaining about 'stuff' are fine and free to continue, meanwhile people on the other side on the argument are "amusing". We all know the reason why you think they're "amusing", no need to keep backpedalling on your own words now to try and wiggle your way out of what you wrote.

> You seem too close to the matter, and too worried about it being changed, to view it objectively. Hence, your every post in this thread basically being to abrasively go at people who question the current design's fairness; even the posters who haven't been as amused as me.

Ah yeah, I'm so "close to the matter" on this one and "too worried about it being changed to view it objectively"! But somehow... you're not? Well, then what exactly makes ME so subjective, but leaves you objective? You understand that I can write exactly same thing about that?

Hey, you failed to dodge/block/reflect an EASY TO SEE AND REACT TO ability, so you came to cry (or more like "support people that cry") on the boards about the skill. You're too close to the matter and reacted impulsively based on your recent ingame failure and that's why you can't see this case objectively. So... what now? Is anyone here really "objective"? Or only people that share YOUR OPINION can earn this 'title' and right to express what they think?

I think we both know the answer here. ;)

Also I'm not "too close to be objective", because I DID play DE, but as I already wrote on multiple occasions I changed back to DD because:

1) It's more enjoyable for me than DE (even though I really wanted to enjoy the -kind of- rifle hitman playstyle)

2) DD is simply a stronger spec. Relying mostly on one easly dodgable skill for a strong burst dmg is just bad.

And yes, I'd easly pick to face DE than DD. Because DE is easier to kill.

> But, I'm done now, you can respond all you wish without reprisal from me. I've no intention of carrying on with you further, it's just not worth it. ;)

Of course you're done. You have nothing to say other than trying to -hopelessly- twist your own words to get out of what you wrote :)

hf o/

> @"Reaper Alim.4176" said:

> What? Thief got some more skills that one shots people out of the blue in GW2? Meh, just another day in GW2. Nothing to see or hear here, just move along.

>

> That's exactly what ANet wanted for that class. To be able to kill people without offering them the chance to fight back. Come on guys, I thought yall was much smarter than this? Way to let me down again. :trollface:

You literally learn to dodge skills with similar cast time at around level 8. I mean... regular players learn, apparently you don't.

Stick to pve.

> @Caedmon.6798 said:

> > @Sobx.1758 said:

> > > @Caedmon.6798 said:

> > > Yeah 21k is completely legit makes for healthy gameplay.

> > >

> > > I really dont mind deadeye in general but i think no class should be able to pull of this damage with the use of one skill.

> >

> > Then what are you doing here? Why haven't you started an anti-condi dmg crusade yet?

> >

> >

> >

> > > Warris used to be able with killshot where 20 was around max.That got heavily nerfed aswell,and not because were tanky and have acces to invulns and blocks,it just should not be possible for anyone to do this damage with the press of a single skill.

> >

> > Sure, totally not because of that... And you say that based on what? Are you the dev? Did devs share with you some behind-the-scene informations?

> > Or maybe you're another person that prefers to present their opinion/guesses as facts for the sake of making up another ""argument""?

> > Because I think that being a glass cannon with 20k dmg and being a bunker with 20k dmg makes a huge difference.

>

> "What im doing here" Was, giving an opinion.It was certainly not meant to start an argument with some hypocrite who's defending a single skill capable of doing 20 - 31kdmg out of the blue.

"hyporite" at which point exactly?

Also try answering to the whole post instead of picking 3 words and focusing on them like that does the job.

> @Oovie.9206 said:

> > @Sobx.1758 said:

> > aaaand if you have problems dodging something that literally gives you a lazer pointer at your character, then -again- the problem is with you, not with the skill.

> I've read part of the low viewership on Twitch stems from viewers not being able to tell what the flip they're looking at during fights. My eyes would go numb and miss a laser too after this crock:

>

> 

Ah yes, pick a screenshot with a zerg and try to argue that it's hard to see anything. It applies to anything and everything, so it's literally not any argument here (or in fact -probably- not even in any other game where it's possible to 'zerg up' like this).

And nah, that's not the reason lmao.

> @Kallist.5917 said:

> I've been seeing these comments a lot. Deadeye is weak, deadeye isnt mobile enough, deadeye is useless. You cant PVE with a deadeye. And Im here to say your wrong. Try changing your play-style, your goal with the build, before you just decide the spec is bad. I've solo'd through nearly all the dungeons, several factals, solo champs all across the map frequently, and all of it has been with both Condi and DPS deadeyes. Go back, read the skills, read the traits, and figure it out before you demand balance passes. Stuffs been out a month and we already have the meta kiddies are upset they haven't figured it out.

lmao, you realise you jsut said nothing? 4 lanes of nothingness, not bad.

> @"Reaper Alim.4176" said:

> > @ArmageddonAsh.6430 said:

> > The problem is NOTHING will ever be done about it. Look at the times where players have shown proof of people hacking and cheating and its the person that SHOWS it that gets into trouble...

>

> Speaking from personal experiences. This guy is completely correct. You get punished, while the cheater laughs and continues to cheat. It's awesome how that works right?

What did you report and how did you get punished?

I like how you conveniently avoided my post after you've tried to say warriors have no way to avoid DJ damage, lmao.

Instead you keep focusing on the raw number ignoring everything else, good one.

> > @Sobx.1758 said:

> > > @dawsm.5398 said:

> > > Amusing how many folks come out to defend the Malice mechanics and claim people don't understand how it works, when anyone with a minimum of common sense should understand why many have a problem with how it currently stands.

> >

> > It's amusing that people who most probably never touched the spec are free to spread their "one and only valid opinion on the matter" and decide what should or shouldn't be nerfed, but somehow "defending" it is... "amusing" for you?

> > Don't be a hypocrite.

> >

> > There are easy ways to counter this skill, which already was explained on multiple occasions, but the only answers to that so far is anything along the lines of "WELL I THINK NOT" or "BUT I DON'T WANT TO FOCUS ON PVP IN WvW". Maybe you should find this little fact "amusing" and focus on calling out those people?

> > No? Well, so I guess someone else will, even if you won't like it. (or like it to the point of being "amusing", whatever suits you)

> >

> >

> >

> > E: ah and btw, it's not "claiming people don't understand how it works" -if you actually read through the latest threads about it, you'll notice that it's a fact and people don't understand how and why it works the way it does. And then they come on the boards and claim "it's bugged". Ahh... isn't THIS amusing? :D

>

> Gee, someone is a little touchy on this subject. Someone also needs to look up hypocrite, as I've yet to contradict myself.

What you said is that creating threads against something is ok, while "defending it" is "amusing". But stay in your own world and pretend that's something normal and that it's not something that contradicts itself.

>But, I do delight in the assumption that I have zero knowledge at all of the Malice / DJ mechanics; your knowing what I know, and what builds I've tried out is an awesome ability! I also never personally called the mechanic a bug, but oh well.

Uh, oh, you do indeed "delight in this assumption"... except that I've never said YOU don't understand how malice/DJ works, what I wrote was LITERALLY:

"if you actually read through the latest threads about it, you'll notice that it's a fact and people don't understand how and why it works the way it does."

Do you even understand what you read before you decide to answer to it? Seriously, next time try to focus less on the condecending "delighting" and "amusement" and instead simply understand what you read, buddy. :)

> What I did do, however, was point out why many people have a problem with the mechanic as it stands. And, on that point, I'm pretty sure I got it right.

And I told you why they have the problem with it -it's because they don't understand the mechanic. And, on that point, I'm pretty sure I got it right.

> No worries, still amused at how up in arms some people are over this. ;)

I, for one, am amused over how you fail to understand what you read and then claim I wrote something I didn't ;)

> @Caedmon.6798 said:

> Yeah 21k is completely legit makes for healthy gameplay.

>

> I really dont mind deadeye in general but i think no class should be able to pull of this damage with the use of one skill.

Then what are you doing here? Why haven't you started an anti-condi dmg crusade yet?

> Warris used to be able with killshot where 20 was around max.That got heavily nerfed aswell,and not because were tanky and have acces to invulns and blocks,it just should not be possible for anyone to do this damage with the press of a single skill.

Sure, totally not because of that... And you say that based on what? Are you the dev? Did devs share with you some behind-the-scene informations?

Or maybe you're another person that prefers to present their opinion/guesses as facts for the sake of making up another ""argument""?

Because I think that being a glass cannon with 20k dmg and being a bunker with 20k dmg makes a huge difference.

> @dawsm.5398 said:

> Amusing how many folks come out to defend the Malice mechanics and claim people don't understand how it works, when anyone with a minimum of common sense should understand why many have a problem with how it currently stands.

It's amusing that people who most probably never touched the spec are free to spread their "one and only valid opinion on the matter" and decide what should or shouldn't be nerfed, but somehow "defending" it is... "amusing" for you?

Don't be a hypocrite.

There are easy ways to counter this skill, which already was explained on multiple occasions, but the only answers to that so far is anything along the lines of "WELL I THINK NOT" or "BUT I DON'T WANT TO FOCUS ON PVP IN WvW". Maybe you should find this little fact "amusing" and focus on calling out those people?

No? Well, so I guess someone else will, even if you won't like it. (or like it to the point of being "amusing", whatever suits you)

E: ah and btw, it's not "claiming people don't understand how it works" -if you actually read through the latest threads about it, you'll notice that it's a fact and people don't understand how and why it works the way it does. And then they come on the boards and claim "it's bugged". Ahh... isn't THIS amusing? :D

> @Adamarc.7463 said:

> > @Solori.6025 said:

> > > @Shadowcat.2680 said:

> > > Title says it pretty succinctly. The mechanic of Death's Judgment, the skill not caring which target (player, NPC, or ambient mob) the Deadeye has marked does not work for WvW. Death's Judgment is a one-shot skill requiring no setup in WvW as it exists now. Dodging the tell is problematic in anything beyond a 1 v 1 as the Deadeye doesn't have to make its presence known (again, it doesn't have to mark any enemy if it's marked something else) until it fires off Death's Judgment for numbers high enough to wipe out a toon's entire health pool.

> >

> > Skills that can also one shot you or do a ton of damage which is almost unavoidable or with little to no tell.

> > Backstab

> > Gunflame

> > Shatters

> > CoR

> > Worldy Impact

> >

> > Yes DE is annoying, but simply moving up uneven terrain is enough to counter the weapon as a whole.

>

> Some of the most complained about skills in WvW during the past five years:

> Backstab

> Gunflame

> CoR

> True Shot

> Epidemic

> Death's Judgment

Hey, can you show me the exact source of this... well, statistic? Or did you just decide to present your subjective opinion/feeling on the matter as a fact?

*> @gmmg.9210 said:

> > @Sobx.1758 said:

> > > @gmmg.9210 said:

> > > It's kitten. Anet entered dangerous territory with this. Giving a one hit anything without a **very** significant telegraph is just bad for the game. And the WvW setting just makes matters worse. It needs a change.

> >

> > Except it has a **VERY** significant telegraph, if you keep missing it somehow, you might want to see a doctor. For real.

>

> This is one of the problems with introducing one-hit kill mechanics. It leads people to say things like "well if you can't do a simple dodge then git gud".

>

> Look, some people just want to sit back and roam or play without having to be paranoid every 30 seconds about some random sniper one shotting them out of nowhere and without a marker. If Anet simply fixes this whole Deadeye leaching off targets in WvW problem, everyone will benefit.

So what you're saying here is that you want to roam and gank people.... but you don't want to be ganked? This is not how this works.

And it's not "git gut", that's just a fact. If something has a counterplay, but you refuse/fail to do it, it's not a faulty mechanic, it's you being, well, bad probably. And you writing "hurr durr people just write git gut" won't change that fact. If you don't want to "be paranoid" then:

a) don't be paranoid and deal with a fact that when you get jumped while not being ready, you'll most probably die. Well, kitten happens.

b) don't play a mode that's in a big part based on roaming and jumping people. Go play pve instead to "sit back and be safe".

But hey, I don't like blobs rolling over the smaller groups or single players, should anet start thinking about changing whole WvW, beacuse I don't like something that's undeniably a part of that gamemode?

As I said (probably in another thread?), WvW is the closest GW2 has to open world pvp. Deal with all of the requirements/consequences or leave and do something you like.

> @Felipe.1807 said:

>but i guess in this game most players are to lazy or just bad to actually learn how to play, so they need this kind of skilless combat desings in order to be competitive...

Oh look, another SB ;D

>but it is funny sometimes when playing Firebrand and end up crossing the path of those deadeyes groups, I just drop to reflect from F3 and watch they kill thenselfs, they are so bad that they dont even know why they are dying...

Guys, I can easly and effortlessly counter groups of DE, but I'll come here and complain that DE is OP.

#logic

>but it does suck when you face someone who actually knows what he is doing

Oh jesus, the irony....