Azure The Heartless.3261

> @"LucianTheAngelic.7054" said:

> Thief is solid in all areas of the game at the moment. Anyone who tells you otherwise is blatantly lying to you.

Solid, no.

Viable, yes.

Thieves still don't have 1v1 capabilities vs anything non squishy in structured pvp.

> @"OriOri.8724" said:

> Well, yes. How do you think the very first few people got it?

Point taken, but certainly there was some corroboration or scouring done there by the first trailblazers. That's a level of diligence beyond what most people can expend to complete the quest.

> @"Vagrant.7206" said:

> Any curse on this forum gets turned into kitten.

>

> Tank builds are generally supposed to be able to handle 1v2s (if not necessarily win them), but the current design of deadeye P/P thieves allows them to dump all over bunkers if they're not getting focused. There's a lot of interrupt spam that comes out of them on top of the deadeye mark.

I know about the curse filter. I was mocking it.

_1v2s where your add is a deadeye should cause you to lose or vacate the point_ How fast or slowly that turnover happens is incredibly relevant in conquest. Why are we arguing that a thief is overstepping his role when his(or her) +1 damage is too high?

It's still an outnumbered fight.

He already can't 1v1.

That aggressive +1 is what he's supposed to be doing, and if you catch him 1v1 his only options are to flee or fight a losing pokefest against the point because of how squishy thieves are by nature.

> @"Legatus.3608" said:

> Uh, why is a thief doing significant damage too powerful? Is thief supposed to be the no-damage class? We can't bunker, we can't support, we can't contest nodes by ourselves, now we can't do damage either when we +1 by your logic, so we just don't play PVP anymore I guess in your ideal world? We run around avoiding all combat altogether and just camp empty nodes until every node is populated by at least 1 enemy and then we /ragequit?

That post was sarcasm and the above is __exactly the point I'm trying to make.__ I play a D/P Thief. People seem to genuinely think that any build a thief plays is too strong for some reason.

I'm absolutely flabbergasted that people are trying to use "The 1v2 isn't balanced fairly in my favor" as a foundation to have thief nerfed __again.__ Take a step back and realize how silly that sounds objectively.

As Legatus said, the moment you start thinking "boy, this thief sure is good at winning outnumbered fights, we need to nerf him" there's probably something wrong with your concept of balance. Not saying that's a certainty, but evidence strongly lends itself to that assumption.

And don't get me wrong. I absolutely agree that unload is boring and any rework to make the damage output more complex or engaging would be welcomed for discussion. I'm not feeling the "let's kick the thief out of its role altogether" angle though.

> @"Vagrant.7206" said:

> Dueling P/P thieves is easy. I win those handily on my holo. Getting +1'ed by one? Complete kitten.

_Did you just complain about thief being kitten when it +1s a fight with P/P?_

What 1v2 are you supposed to win?

I refer to my previous quote, with some modifiction:

> @"Azure The Heartless.3261" said:

> Any thief that does significant damage is too powerful, and their playstyle is cheesy and annoying regardless of how fragile/easily countered it is.

>

> ~~Because shortbow and stealth. ~~ Because Pistol Pistol.

> @"Opopanax.1803" said:

> Wanted to hear how people manage their inventories.

**[Distant, bitter hysterical crying]**

Lots of bags, A dozen or so shared slots specifically for my Halo, Music Trinkets, a VIP access location ticket of choice, and my perm gathering tool set.

I do all the management manually.

> > @"Samnang.1879" said:

> > I have inventory management disorder; everything must go before I log off the game. I don't like seeing useless items in my inventory or bank. I delete all tonics/potions etc as I never use them.

> >

> > I have 21 characters, 4 of which are mesmers, 1chronotank, 1offchrono, 1 mirage, 1 fractal chrono. and all their inventory more or less look like this; empty and clean.

*Rocking back and forth in disbelief*

> @"OriOri.8724" said:

> This is kind of an absurd argument. Do you honestly expect players to research every part of the game before completing it?

Whenever I am doing a collection achievement, I always research what I will need to get and where I will need to go to get it, just so I can make sure I have the resources to complete it.

This doesnt apply to self-driven content like Living World or World Bosses in most cases, but for collection events like Mawdrey and the Karka Hatchlings in LA, _absolutely._ That's kind of the base requirement for it. You think people would just happen onto all of the griffon eggs by chance?

> @"Trismegistos.3046" said:

> At first i thought 50g was worth it, but 250? No way.

> So i basically lost 50g for nothing. I could have spent that on a nice skin :(

> Thanks for your time.

The griffon is worth more than 250g. It will make your travels in the entire game more efficient, and you will recoup that gold cost in enjoyment very quickly. Not to mention waypoints will take less silver out of your pocket.

Maybe if I liked any of the legendaries enough to go run around and hit every Poi.

Close on my main though. I just refuse to go out of my way for no reason.

> @"starhunter.6015" said:

> I voted yes, but only if the 5 man ques are only paired against other 5 man ques.

>

Thisthisthisthisthisthisthisthis. The option should exist, but only where PuGs cannot be farmed. If it's as wanted as its made out to be, it'll stand on its own.

> @"witcher.3197" said:

> At the very least they should remove the idiotic solo restriction in plat and above. It didn't change anything except driving away more people.

Hmm. A well-synced duo that has made it into plat+ are probably subject to the same "premade" vs "pug" effect that plagued the lower divisions. I'd rather plat not be swayed by a voicecomm pair of sidenoders.

A couple of thoughts on this. Let me just address first:

> @"Ithilwen.1529" said:

> I've been mostly away playing GW1 because it's more fun than GW2 pvp.. it's really as simple as that. **My beloved Mesmer is a constant scapegoat and nerf target.** *The balance swings so wildly that I can't trust the game to be fair.*

Mesmers have _never_ experienced the pain of true nerfing, if I remember balancing so far correctly. Remember the outrage over the scepter torment stack modification?

> @"Grogba.6204" said:

> It's probably one of the most toxic pvp environments I have encountered over tons of games so far. I put up with almost a decade of League of Legends and the "fire and block" amount of insults thrown around combined with the terrible balance and general state of pvp just make the mode unenjoyable in the long run.

I think this is a key factor.

I was one of the individuals that voted for the removal of team queue from ranked, because experiences vs premades happened often, were often blowouts, and left me frustrated in my attempts to give PuGs direction if it seemed like individuals were new. Since then, my experience has been _slightly better_ than before (the cheating notwithstanding), but I've noticed that the issue with the removal of team queue **is valid.**

Kind of. Team queue gives purpose to informal pvp guilds, purpose to informal/freeplay discords, and insulates players against the toxicity often spouted by people who can't understand how to not be a jackkitten. With its removal from ranked, I can see why a ton of people feel like the purpose for their guilds has been gutted.

However.

I don't think I buy into all of that testimony. If guilds simply wanted to pvp with their friends, it's not like they cannot still do that. Automatic Tournaments and Unranked both allow full premades. If the purpose was just to pvp with friends whether for rewards or socializing, that option still exists. Insisting that that allowance be granted to ranked, especially since solo players have a large presence in the pvp scene and would do worse for it, is seeking _something else._

That being said, **I do still think that teammates should have the ability to queue anytime with their friends, if they can coordinate a group.** Perhaps ATs should be more frequent, or a team queue that explicitly places premades vs. premades should be given a trial run. If the teams can muster the population to run it, why not give it to them 24/7? If we've done that before or evidence says that the user pool is too low to afford teamvteam, point me to that please.

Also, balance. This coupled with the player toxicity makes the game unforgiving for new players, and annoying for veterans. PVP guilds might be able to offset this, perhaps?

> > @"Aza.2105" said:

> > A shrinking population just means there aren't any new players being brought in. I have a lot of friends that enjoy pvp in mmos, but will not play gw2. Many have tried it but then decided to play something else. When I ask them why its generally the same response:

> >

> > * Downed in about a second and they have no idea what happened

> >

> > * Toxicity

> >

> > * Tons of visual clutter

> >

> > * Too much pressure in conquest mode

> >

> > I can't say that I blame them. GW2 is not a fair pvp game. If I was a new player and never invested much time into this game, I'd choose to play something else that is more competitive.

> >

>

This.

> > @"Crab Fear.1624" said

> > Edit: How would I address PVP population? (lets just assume any of these are possible):

> >* actively engage the community even more, constantly acknowledging feedback in some way

> >* fix issues with a large consensus of importance

> >* offer more frequent tournaments, or introduce a tournament league with a leader board

> >* as I fix issues, create content to show off the game mode and stream as well

Also this.

There's a huge need for developers to appear as if they have interest in this game mode, and not just look as if they are plugging holes in a leaky dam to stop it from immediately collapsing, as well. I understand manpower may be strained and that back and forths with the community are hard to get done, but there needs to be at least an outreach. Relative silence coupled with balancing patches that make strong specs stronger and weak specs weaker are corrosive to the playerbase. I will add, though, that the scale back of passives for most classes was a good direction for Anet to take. If that pattern continues, balance might improve.

Nice suggestion. Thresholds to mitigate ranking loss sound wonderful.

If this gets implemented though, it needs to keep the threshold at 400 specifically and not below. We don't want to place it below that, where the game could still flip, and have people stop trying once they hit that threshold.

Agreed though. When you have two points and its a close game, having your squishy die off point is the worst feeling in the world.

It's both.

It can be a good foundation for starting builds but your personal preferences, playstyle and the like should take precedence, because people -do- use that site to mess with the meta and influence the opinions of others who don't want to do the legwork for their own builds.

I'd enjoy seeing some Tengu running around. As long as the lore gets tweaked to explain it.

> @"Vicariuz.1605" said:

> > @"BMW.2951" said:

> > Sadly ANET does not have control of the population man.

>

> This is one of the most ignorant posts of this forum. That's impressive.

>

> The DEVELOPERS of the game don't have control over their content? wowee. No wonder this game mode is in the state that it is.

?

Players aren't content.

I'm all for giving you longer queue times though.

Throughout the years, I have seen this back and forth evolve from "Zerk gear ONLY" to "Ping gear or KICK" to "NO NECROS" to "DPS over threshold or KICK" and the people railing against those ideas, but all in all the way for dealing with it hasn't changed.

Some people are **elitist.** Mechanics cant change that. Mechanics cant make people be less elitist. They will find something to divide people based on some arbitrary stat.

some people are **speedrunners.** Mechanics wont change that. They will always optimize their gear and acquire people who do so to clear things as efficiently as possible.

Some people are **relaxed.** Mechanics won't change that. They dont care what you run as long as you are not a burden.

Some people are **new.** Mechanics won't change that. They will either go with a cookie cutter build or carve out their own and fall into one of the aforementioned groups over time.

Just avoid playing with those that rub you the wrong way, instead of wasting time trying to find a way to manipulate mechanics and information to get people to tolerate you if they refuse to. As was said before, chill groups exist. The people that won't tolerate you based on DPS meters will not suddenly do so if the DPS meters are removed. They will simply go back to "Ping gear or KICK" and then we will be fighting trying to make zerker punish players for running it, like we did last year/the year before.

The DPS meter is **helping**. It's allowing people to see hard numbers instead of making approximations based on what gear you're running. Those numbers are a culmination of execution and build, instead of just one or the other. Toxic people be toxic. its not the DPS meter's fault.

....

I want this.

It would be a 50/50 split on thief and mesmer, but mesmer is broken right now so I expect their numbers are inflated.

Thief is supposed to be the most annoying thing in the world. Given that it can lend a large hand to wining or losing games when played particularly well or particularly poorly. I'd hazard that a lot of people foam at the mouth from the mere sight of one.

Mesmer is also supposed to be the most annoying thing in the world + butterflies, but Arenanet apparently forgot that you kill balance if you make an annoying class a hard-to-kill heavy hitter as well.

> @"KLTX.2603" said:

> nerf the ranger, necro, guardian, mesmer (with copies), engineer.

> buff the thief and warrior.

Be specific.

> @"Ashen.2907" said:

> > @"Arathor.5819" said:

> > > @"Oldirtbeard.9834" said:

> > > > @"Arathor.5819" said:

> > > > > @"Laila Lightness.8742" said:

> > > > > > @"Oldirtbeard.9834" said:

> > > > > > My account is safe, not banned. I'm more concerned with the privacy violation. I think this should have been better put together like Blizzards Warden in a way where it prohibits people from logging in or staying logged in if said programs are active, permanent again like Warden, and finally they should have had the decency to tell us what was happening so that we don't have all of these conspiracy theories going around. Personally I haven't logged in beyond making sure I wasn't swept up with the 1500. The lack of transparency has really killed my interest in playing or spending money until we get a statement regarding this program and what data was collected, how it was encrypted (if it was even), and what data they kept. I also think ANet should release a statement to major blogs such as Massively OP because out side of GW2s player base ANet has egg on it's face.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > I want to avoid any sparring so if I see anything I feel might get my blood boiling it's probably smart of me to not engage.

> > > > > >

> > > > > > We all have great love for this franchise and I respect your viewpoints so let's keep our discourse civil over this hot button situation.

> > > > >

> > > > > One reason the warden stuff wouldnt work is its to well known wich hasnt prevented never hacks and can be bypassed what anet did was a way a person couldnt hide unless you play on linux ore mac since anet used windows api

> > > >

> > > > The grammar here makes this really hard to understand.

> > >

> > > My post or his, I understood it but I can see if perhaps English might not be a native language you may have trouble?

> >

> > Please, just learn what constitutes a sentence. I'm not saying you need to be perfectly punctual, but if you manage to have 5+ mistakes in one sentence like your post does don't confuse incompetence of legibility with the incompetence of comprehension.

>

> The irony here is hilarious.

I love this.

> @"shadowpass.4236" said:

> > @"Azure The Heartless.3261" said:

> > If you took the evade out, nobody would play the build, because what thief wants to be stuck in a melee range animation where they can easily be stunned, interrupted, bursted or the like just to apply condis?

>

> That's the point.

>

> Sure, you can time an interrupt at the end of the evade frame, but the amount of effort that goes in on both players' parts is disproportional. The person spamming 3 and dodge has an extremely easy and skill-less playstyle. Meanwhile, the person on the receiving end has to evade the thief's evades as they are slowly getting burned down by permanent poison, unblockable bleeds/cripple, and torment. It's not healthy for the gamemode.

>

> >

> > The evade is the lynchpin holding that build together. Just move out of the way. D/D thieves run out of init quickly.

>

> There's also Lotus Training, which has a range of 300. In other words, roughly the radius of most capture points (with the exception of middle at Foefire). The only way to completely avoid their attacks is to give up the node. Otherwise, you have to dodge the enemy's dodges and have really good timing to hit the thief spamming evasion skills that also do damage.

>

> And, for the record, people like to assume that **I** am having difficulties fighting against these types of builds. I don't. I just find it annoying how builds can get away and have moderate success with spamming 1 or 2 buttons over and over again. If every single build in the game was like this, it would be a snoozefest.

Agreed that it's incredibly annoying, but I don't think removing the evade is the solution to that particular problem.

Since we cannot have skills mechanically split between pve and pvp, we should probably be looking at the reward it gives for being able to contest the node while evading on the pvp side without upsetting the pve builds.

That being said, I don't know what particularly you can shave down that particular build to make it -less- effective for its ease without cutting into the foundation for other condition builds. Maybe the aftercast on death blossom? Make it cost one more init? It already costs four.

I think the window to shut them down -after- the evade frame is reasonable enough. Most thieves will buckle under being stunned after an evade. There's going to be cheesy playstyles, but it's not strong enough to consider removing the evade. Keep in mind that this build and P/P are the only ways thieves can contest nodes versus bunkers/scourges 1v1. Crippling it would push them further into +1 roles.

If you took the evade out, nobody would play the build, because what thief wants to be stuck in a melee range animation where they can easily be stunned, interrupted, bursted or the like just to apply condis?

The evade is the lynchpin holding that build together. Just move out of the way. D/D thieves run out of init quickly.

> @"luke.5082" said:

> The funny thing about AFK is it can be detected. ANET could keep track of activity from a player and have some concept of players not playing. At a base level some of the AFKing is simply someone who never leaves the spawn point all game.

This. There have been some successful implementations of algorithms in game that determine the behaviors of people considered to be idling. It already has a partial implementation in gw2, since running against a wall still gets you idled out.

Eventually they may have to take more aggressive approaches, like detecting whether or not the player has touched any of their skills other than a specific one (like autoattack), whether or not theyve been out of combat for a substantial amount of time, and whether they put up a fight for a significant percentage of the combat situations they got into.

I dont know how far to push this mediation though. The more you define what -active play- is, the more creative people will become in trying to circumvent it while still tanking the team.

> @"Legatus.3608" said:

> Lol wut people voting thief

>

> I never would have guessed, that's interesting

People in general like thief as long as the dagger/barrel isn't pointed at them/ is used effectively against their enemies.

> @"Griever.8150" said:

> > @"Yannir.4132" said:

> > What ever happened to "projectile hate" in this game?

>

> There's plenty of projectile hate still. People just don't run that utility in their build anymore because most if not all projectile-based builds are out of the meta. Why run utility to counter something you're unlikely to see.

I'd like to mention that a healthy meta functions in specifically this way.

People play certain builds, in playing those builds someone finds a counterbuild that shuts those builds down, everyone plays that counterbuild, then someone finds a counter to that counter and the cycle goes on.

If the weapon set is strong against you because you didn't take an option to completely counter it, the meta is working properly. You can either take the option to completely counter it, or dont and accept that you will be weak against that particular build.

There's a difference between hard counter and overpowered. If you have the tools to counter or mitigate a playstyle and you choose not to use them, that loss is on you. it's poor form to come complaining about things you cannot beat with your present build, but -can- beat if you picked up a different utility skill or weapon. Reserve the complaints for things so over the top that they can outperform most builds, or so underwhelming that they cannot counterplay against a significant portion of builds.

> @"Chaith.8256" said:

> > @"witcher.3197" said:

> > > @"JayAction.9056" said:

> > > > @"Azure The Heartless.3261" said:

> > > > I think it's something like:

> > > >

> > > >

> > > > S Tier:

> > > > * Mesmer (Chronomancer, Mirage)

> > > >

> > > > A Tier

> > > > * Necro (Scourge)

> > > >

> > > > B Tier

> > > > * Warrior (SpellBreaker)

> > > > * Warrior (Core)

> > > > * Engineer (HoloSmith)

> > > > * Guardian (DragonHunter)

> > > > * Guardian (FireBrand)

> > > > * Thief (Deadeye)

> > > > * Ranger(Druid)

> > > > * Ranger(SoulBeast)

> > > >

> > > > C Tier

> > > > * Thief(Daredevil)

> > > > * Necro (Reaper)

> > > > * Mesmer (Core)

> > > > * Warrior (Berserker)

> > > > * Revenant (Power Herald ONLY)

> > > > * Elementalist (Tempest)

> > > > * Thief (Core)

> > > > * Guardian (Core)

> > > >

> > > > D Tier

> > > > * Elementalist (Weaver)

> > > > * Elementalist (Core)

> > > > * Ranger(Core)

> > > > * Engineer(Core)

> > > > * Engineer(Scrapper)

> > > >

> > > > F Tier

> > > > * Necro (Core)

> > > > * Revenant (Non-power Herald Builds)

> > > > * Revenant (Renegade)

> > > > * Revenant (Core)

> > >

> > > **Extremely** accurate

> > >

> > > I would rate core thief, scrapper, and weaver a tier higher.

> > >

> > > Renegade In its own tier below F.

> >

> > Extremely accurate? lmao. Putting soulbeast and deadeye into the same tier as spellbreaker, holo, and druid?! Deadeye aboe daredevil? Core guard below DH?

> >

> > Core thief in C tier instead of A?

> >

> > Looks like silver 1 is leaking.

>

> I noticed all of those things as well. Also Scrapper is too low. Core Mesmer too high, is in no way on the same level as acro-SD core thief, should go to F tier- only Mesmer Elite specs are currently 400% better than their base profession.

>

> Below average accuracy tier list :anguished:

/shrug

I don't play every build for every spec, and I sure don't play them all at a high level. I took a crack at rating based largely on my interactions with those classes and what I've spectated, so there's bound to be inaccuracies.

I'm not putting core mesmer in F tier just because its elite specs are miles better in relation to any other core-elite class pairing though, lmao. It works vs several builds still, so I left it in C.

I stand by my ranking for Deadeye, Core Guard, and Soulbeast, though. There are variants of these classes that resemble their cores but are slightly better when you substitute elite traitlines/mechanics. I agree with weaver being higher, and perhaps core thief, but not scrapper, not until I confirm they're less glitchy.

Not all Deadeyes carry rifles, not all Soulbeasts carry dagger, and not all Dragonhunters carry longbow. I attempted to account for situations where elite spec traitlines applied to what would otherwise be a core build made the classes perform better on average. :3

It's obviously going to be overwhelmingly Mesmer, so ignoring the elephant in the room to talk about something less obnoxious...

Engie. Your double mini elixirs - to - stealth - to - turret - to - reset fight.

Stop it.

_Stop._