Azure The Heartless.3261

Maybe they're just not ready? Time till match start is time to: * Look at enemy team * Monitor for enemy team changes * Guess as to what builds you will run into before the match starts and adjust your build appropriately * Gameplan with team * Sort out any point duties/explain that your build isnt facevalue if it is not (I am decapper engie, I can harass far, Thief can stay deadeye/ I am bunker X Dont peel if I'm 2v1ed/Watch beast for Y or some other nonsense) Chill out for a bit. go get a drink, ask how people are doing, hype your team idk

**Distant, bitter laughter**

> @"Fat Disgrace.4275" said: > Good thieves no matter the build could shred people though. Shh. Don't look directly at that statement, you'll go mad if you realize what it implies. You're right though.

> @"Cynz.9437" said: > I thought this is what pvp community wanted. What is the problem? > > With love, > your neighborhood thief <3 *Quietly filing nails* ♬ _They did it to themselvessss_ ♬ Imagine thinking people wouldn't build as immortal as possible if you let them, couldn't be me~

> @"Kuma.1503" said: > > @"Cynz.9437" said: > > > @"Kuma.1503" said: > > > I'm not a fan of the amulet system to begin with. I'd much rather have a pool of stat points that I'm allowed to allocate however I wish > > > > Then we would have condi meta because condis need really only 1 stat to work, rest can be invested into survival. > > One way to help with that. > > Sigil of cleansing cleanses 1 condition >>> reverted to 3 conditions > I think this is just the beginning of a new cycle of "Condi is too effective" / "condi is less effective." It is difficult enough to balance the game as it is because there are hundreds of build combinations with what we have now that allow people to occasionally perform well above what the class should be capable of. allowing people to divide up those builds even further with stat attribution so granular would make it impossible to have any structure. Get the classes ironed out first. Examine how each of their traitlines allow them to perform when they are fully invested in, and make sure the upper limit of these traitlines is tolerable vs the majority of other classes. Then we can look into readding amulets and adding different amulet flavors.

> @"Megametzler.5729" said: > Why do you always compare thief to rev? You really make thief look even more one-dimensional than it already is. He's right though. The comparison is adequate. Rev serves the same purpose as thief except it's a couple armor tiers higher and has other roles it can fill. Thief for the length of this game has been one-dimensional, because people reacted poorly to every venture that allowed thief to perform anything that even slightly deviated from +1, because they could run away. Portraying it as having the potential to be anything other than +1, like it would be accepted in any other role, would be being much too optimistic IMO. He's calling it like it is. It has one role, it will have one role, and other classes do that role better. > Perma evade is unfun. You need openings and counterplay. The same reason significantly increased weaver's evade spam and rightfully so. Agreed. What would be fun for you, coming from a thief? >Give it a new role - like s/d used to have. Keep in mind people hated S/D because good thieves could shred them with it.

> @"Darth Drago.3672" said: > I noticed they added something like that for the Wintersday Tixx's Infinirarium. :eyes: /4charrs

> @"Kaburro.4712" said: > It's all fun and games untill you ahave a deadeye in enemy team. > kitten lose focus, is just impossible to target. Taking into account the fast pace we have every second we lose finding and targeting a deadeye is time lost. > When we find him we are already dead cos his dps is kinda one shot kill. > I am asking you to take a look at that buil, nicely. > It's your game, I have plenty to play and you know this issue is not new, just got worse. I salute that brave deadeye making apparently a guardian mad in 2021. Godspeed brave soldier.

2v2 followed very closely by 5v5. It's easier to balance for large group interactions when you can monitor them small scale more easily. If a class is good at support but bad at being focused, or if a class is good at brief interactions but bad at sustained ones in general, that data should theoretically be highly visible when you compare what people play frequently in 2v2 vs what they play in 5v5. You also create more opportunities to find people you would be willing to Duo queue with by seeing how they perform in a spotlight. 3v3 is basically 5v5. A cohesive, cherry picked 3 man team can pull the effort of a 5 man pug so use this sparingly. It is easier to get upsets in 2v2 vs premades than it is in 3v3. > @"Firebeard.1746" said: > I think we should get 3v3 versions of conquest and/or stronghold. I'd also be willing to give the former the shot, but not the latter. Stronghold is a bit large for 3 players. Conquest is the perfect size for this. > @"Multicolorhipster.9751" said: > [Murderball](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Murderball), Never do murderball unless it is for some special event that gives progress for even participating. It exacerbates the issues in conquest and in class balance and offers no remedy to cover them with smart play.

> @"Filip.7463" said: > I dont play thief, i just more liked thief meta than rev. And i think im not the only one who wants traditional thief back... Pretty sure you're alone on this front. People like classes they can see, and rev has no stealth, so-

> @"atrimentalis.5302" said: > I couldn't agree more, and I don't understand why so many old time players are keeping their heads in the sand about this issue, defending the game and blaming the noob for not spending half a decade studying mobs (seriously, it's ridiculous). Anet is killing the game and making it really really difficult for new players to get hooked. I think they know this, since the "free version" of the game is so beautiful, and then you pay the money and meet this incredible grind-fest and insanely absurd difficulties that I believe only an age-long player with an extremely meticulously curated bunch of characters would enjoy (maybe Anet is not interested in new players?). This is the reason I'm not buying whatever upcoming kitten they come up with. It'll just be a cool story (that I can watch on youtube instead of spending dozens of hours trying to get from point A to point B in a map or story) with an insane amount of gimmicks. It's not friendly for a casual player, like, at all, and that is not going to improve, ever, from what I can see. Are you talking about PVE or PVP? In PVE Anet has been streamlining and making content more forgiving for new players and small groups pretty aggressively. In PVP that's to be expected. You should have a solid grasp of your character's movement and skillset before expecting anything to go your way in pvp. >meet this incredible grind-fest and insanely absurd difficulties that I believe only an age-long player with an extremely meticulously curated bunch of characters would enjoy Definitely can see this happening though if you're talking about pve. Usually having a leveling/party buddy fixes that. If you decide to stick around, send me a mail in game and I can drop in to lend you a hand here and there.

*Quietly filing nails* Just let Revenant handle the role now.

> @"ollbirtan.2915" said: > Firstly, FB has never been a bunker. ? This wasn't even a year ago. https://metabattle.com/wiki/Build:Firebrand_-_Mantra_Bunker > And secondly, it was pretty much deleted from sPvP thanks to random nerfs. Not random, but yes. > Your example is not doing any good to whatever argument you are trying to prove. My argument is "If amulets are causing builds that are geared to support of other players to be themselves unkillable. remove the amulets that enable those builds to be unkillable while you sort out what you want from your support spec. Also, there is a difference between support and bunker."

> @"Smoosh.2718" said: > Sadly the rise in cheaters isnt exclusive to just Gw2. Realworld punishments should be put into the terms and conditions for the act of cheating tbh. This and only this will stop people from cheating. Make it financial. Get caught, get fined. > > All game companies go under the basis that you get caught, you get banned. The banned user creates a new account and cheats again. Nothing stops the cheater with this method. Should just gate pvp unless you've bought the game. Its no fine, but having to pay 30 bucks and hope you dont get instasmacked for ban evasion is a good start at least.

> @"FrownyClown.8402" said: > They got rid of almost every amulet with toughness because support healing was too effective. The game would still work fine if **support builds were heavily nerfed to uselessness** This, partially. Note the bold. "Support" in this game is often used as an interchange for "unkillable" rather than "This class/spec is only useful paired with a damage partner to keep it alive." If a firebrand made, say, a warrior hard to kill and made both agents in that unit faster as long as they were close together, that would be much more fun to attempt to deal with than a firebrand setting up shop on a point and not downing unless three people are beating him up. The support needs to be either squishy, slow, or weak on its own with its survivability largely in the hands of the skill of the buffed player(s) for that dynamic to work properly though. We approached that dynamic with some of the amulet removals and recent balancing, but it's still not there. Not to mention even if it was there I don't think that dynamic would be respected or understood. People usually just 1/2v1 a bunker on a point they control all day, then wonder why they lost the match. Supports as defined above would probably be treated similarly. Nerfing bunkers through certain amulet removals was a good call, but there's still work to be done there.

> @"CutesySylveon.8290" said: > > @"Cynz.9437" said: > > > @"Shao.7236" said: > > > > @"Cynz.9437" said: > > > > > @"Kuma.1503" said: > > > > > Thief skill breaks > > > > > > > > > > Anet: Dw fam I gotchu > > > > > > > > > > Kalla Elite doesn't have fire field for months > > > > > > > > > > Anet: I'm just gonna ignore that. > > > > > > > > There are a lot of thief skills that are not working, some since launch. Don't worry, thieves are in same boat and often die due to those bugs (actually have to build and play around those bugs since they affect most builds). The reason why bound was fixed is most likely due to pve (raids say hello). Also, hammer is inconsistent while bounding dodger effect was simply removed - the last is probably easier to fix than wonky mechanics. > > > > > > They broke the skill consistency since the added uniformity in the damage and it's only gotten worst with the targeting added with the dislocated hitbox in front of the player, so really It's not hard to fix, they're just not doing it. Shouldn't have had to fix what wasn't broke, or broke what was working fine beforehand. > > > > > > The skill is really popular in WvW too so there's no reason to neglect it so badly. > > > > Did you really just assume that they care about class balance in wvw lol? > > Well, that is quite literally the only reason it was ever changed. Hammer is used absolutely nowhere but WvW as ranged burst damage. The damage nerfs, damage equalizing, and the CD nerfs were all 100% done in attempt to balance around WvW. So...yes, they do. Certainly not often, but it's the case here. Absolutely true. The only reason the damage got normalized is because people were upset (apparently) at getting nuked in wvw by backline hammer revs. The response was to make the skill objectively worse, and useless if you attempt to hit anything directly in front of you or on a modest incline. Before this at least it had meme potential in Spvp. Now it just doesn't function acceptably as a weapon.

Scrapper not dying is kind of its whole thing, isn't it? > @"ollbirtan.2915" said: > While you are on it, please NERF THEEEF. Thanks. Ye

> @"NorthernRedStar.3054" said: > This would work wonders for both PvP and WvW. Yes. > Obviously you will compensate by reverting some of the past nerfs while at it. Nah, I think they're fine. There's nothing you can revert that won't be re-nerfed the moment any thief gets it.

> @"Trevor Boyer.6524" said: > 3. **Dragonhunters should not be able to gank, rotate, and disengage like a Thief. End of story.** *Better than Fixed [/bitter]

> @"gmmg.9210" said: > The downtime between blind is maddeningly small, and the burn dps is too strong. Sincerely a warrior. You're right. It's just also funny. > @"Shrapnel.7249" said: > On what? There’s no context here. Mesmer? Thief? Guard? Ranger? Engi? Warrior?! Warrior is most likely since those other classes have multi hits that they can afford to miss a couple of. You blind a warrior and it ruins his whole week. > @"Axl.8924" said: > The floodgates have open ANET its your fault for listening to all the wrong people now folks are demanding nerf to blind which is a huge mistake. We wouldn't be here if warriors did damage reliably enough to not be shut down by blind being applied every couple of seconds. Their only viable build is a damage sponge. They have the tools to remove the blind, but any damage delivered for doing that correctly just reminds the opponent to be slightly more aware of how they chain blind for the rest of the fight. Also weakness.

> @"Kuma.1503" said: > Accidental double post, but I suppose I'll use this opportunity to post the build I use > > http://gw2skills.net/editor/?PawAgqRlNwuYbsMGJW2WnvOA-zZIPkMlC9rAKZEYrB > > It's balls to the wall, but a ton of fun. I'm glad you're having fun with it, but this looks like itll lose to anyone that can close a 1200 range gap once. Not critique or anything, just... jaded

> @"Hannelore.8153" said: > Some classes literally have the same health as Thief, though? > In case of Ele you even have less armor, yet are fully visible all the time, and without all the access to teleports and such since both Guard and Ele only have one utility port, and MAYBE one on weapon, depending on what's equipped. So to say you're super squishy and always playing on the edge when you can just disappear, even porting 5k range, is just silly. Even though this was addressed I'd like to quote it again and remind people with this thought process that context matters. Yes, Ele has less armor. Yes, Ele has less ports. They also have significant access to protection, evades, outright invulns, blocks and significant incoming healing to cover these weaknesses in various ways. Thief has various lengths of stealth to attempt to achieve this same level of weakness covering, yes, but to take it you have to give up point contesting, reduce your damage to 0, and hope that something doesn't reveal you and strip your sustain mechanic before you get value out of it. Health values at the end of the day don't matter all that much. what matters is how many avenues you have to keep yourself alive, and Thief always manages to get their builds shoved into the most -disliked- one.

> @"Terrorhuz.4695" said: > ** EXAMPLES OF SKILLS THAT ARE ALMOST GOOD > - [Vault](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Vault) has a very clear animation, _but_ the animation itself is very similar to that of [bounding Dodger](https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Bounding_Dodger)... but the first deals 5k damage and can be interrupted, the latter deals 1k and can't be interrupted! They look too similar for skills with such a different impact. For example adding some dust when the thief jumps for the vault can help differentiate between the two attacks. Vault blue, bound is not. Also Vault reaches the apex of the jump faster than bound. also Gale, Fire Signet, and Hunter's call could use a more significant telegraph.

> @"Axl.8924" said: > Well guess i'm alone on thinking that 150s is absurd if they gut the damage. Maybe if its reduced in CD. You're not. I suggested spreading the damage out over the skills and then cutting the elite cd heavily since it's like the only useful elite they have for single/small target damage.

> @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said: > > @"Azure The Heartless.3261" said: > > People not understanding skill ceiling doesn't stop them from arguing that nerfing what they personally find annoying is top-level balancing. > > > You've confused two things. Arguing for a top-level balancing philosophy is different from believing that a player is at the top level. Their arguments for their annoyances can have merit, too. Looks like you've decided to just declare people hypocrites without actually checking first. You're right, but this doesn't stop people from conflating those two, making an argument based on an assumption generated by this conflation, then being surprised when it doesn't work in their favor, and those people are **definitely** hypocrites. I'm not talking about people with objectively reasonable opinions backed by concise proof, or even those people's attempts at balancing in a way that takes into account how different skill levels approach and experience the same mechanics. > @"Blood Red Arachnid.2493" said: > > @"Azure The Heartless.3261" said: > > So either quit, or it's balanced. It still works at top level, so practice. People will scream about "balance should be determined by how class functions at top level" but get upset when it actually happens. > No they don't. **To argue for top-level balancing they have to understand skill ceiling.** Those are the people telling everyone else to "git gud" when something gets nerfed. There's someone in this thread doing this right now. I don't know what you mean by "No they don't." This is a hallmark of the forums that transcends class bias. These people aren't rare. Also, I feel like these are important: > @"Sobx.1758" said: > "I can consistently win against thieves if they decide to fight me, but if they decide to fight me then it's automatically losing *by choice*. Class broken because it can run away". > > Isn't this what you've just said? > @"Sobx.1758" said: > As you said, I pointed out and then *you confirmed again*: the thief *"lost by choice"*, because he *chose* to participate in a fight while in wvw instead of running away and pveing camps I guess. All I wanna know is are thief decap bots or not. If they are, say so, slap "support" label on them and quit whining when they stealth away. If they aren't it should be easy to prove they have they staying power to contest/win matchups with just their raw damage.