UNOwen.7132

> @"Moradorin.6217" said: > > @"UNOwen.7132" said: > > > @"Moradorin.6217" said: > > > > @"UNOwen.7132" said: > > > > > @"Moradorin.6217" said: > > > > > > @"lightstalker.1498" said: > > > > > > I would like to see YOU, the one complaining about thief, show casing how thief is OP, and can we see last 10 games played on thief screenshot with at or above 50% win rate? It is a sad state of affairs when devs balance the game around streamers. Some really do nothing else, and I would hope that means they are good at the game, if you get my drift. > > > > > > > > > > Sure here is a video I made recently. exactly 10 minutes into the video I ambushed by an high rank d/p thief. Although I did defeat the thief in both fights, I think its pretty clear that the thief lost almost by choice. What I mean is, the thief is able to reset over and over trying to get a burst. At the same time, on Mirage my clones run around and almost never actually make contact. The actual kill on the thief is very short using confusion, which is NOT easy. Most of the time these fights go to the thief. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Exactly 10 minutes into the video my fight with a d/p DD starts. The clip right after is the DDs 2nd attempt which also fails. > > > > > > > > Are you sure this is the video you wanted to show? It seems to me like it shows that even against Thieves best matchup by a wide margin, condi mesmer (Plasma is OP), the thief had absolutely no hope of ever killing you. The best he could do is run away and survive, and if he stayed to fight, he would always have died, as he did in the end. And thats even against a player *clicking* their skills, which is highly inefficient to the point of giving the thief a massive advantage he usually wont have in a fight. Now of course, this is in WvW, not sPvP, so thieves advantage of being the fastest decapper and +1er is non-existent, and yeah, thief isnt any good in WvW, hence why despite the inherent popularity of rogue classes, nowadays you dont see a lot of thieves in WvW. > > > > > > Actually, it proves the thief should NEVER die to a mirage. It shows how hard it is to make contact with the DD due to crazy high mobility and infinite reset thanks to its access to stealth combined with slow kitten clones. > > > > > > > I mean, if the thief runs away? Sure. But thats what I said. At best the thief just runs away and doesnt get a kill. At worst he dies before he can do so. Thats not a winning proposition. > > > > > For example: If the DD chose to leave the Mirage (me) wouldn't have enough mobility to catch it, nor would the Mirage be able to run away once the fight has started. I have two options, fight the DD or run to the camp and hope the NPCs took care of it for me. > > > > > > > Slightly incorrect. You have 2 options. Indeed. They are "the thief stays and you kill him", and "the thief runs away and no one dies". There is no option in which you die. > > > > > With blink's 35 second cool-down and the fact that its also one of two stun-breaks being used its not like the Mirage can actually close on the DD unless the DD keeps coming back to try and kill the Mirage. Meanwhile, the DD has MORE than enough damage available to kill a Mirage many times over. Additionally, if the Mirage attempts to chase and close on the DD the Mirage its forced to use Blink (1 of 2 stun-breaks) and jaunt (loss of burst damage and clone generation), which then leaves the Mirage basically without jack kitten to use if the DD decides to turn and kill the mirage after a short run. Likewise, if the Mirage tries to run it is forced to use Blink and also its other stun-break if it wants stealth and again **IF the DD Chooses** it can easily chase down the Mirage and kill once those are used up with little to no risk. Again, DD ALWAYS has the advantage and should NEVER lose this match-up PERIOD! > > > > > > > Yeah we saw that DD having more than enough damage available to kill you. Or rather what we saw was them barely scratching you and certainly not being to kill you once, let alone "many times over". What we saw is that if the thief wanted to do enough damage to at least put a dent in you, they die. If they run away before dying then you didnt take nearly enough damage to even be threatened. This is a matchup that Mirage cannot lose. He usually wont win either unless the thief wants to stick around and fight, but lose he will not. > > > > > The only reason they didn't kill me is they got sloppy, both times. I would guess the reason the DD got sloppy/kept attacking without much care was they are used to face-rolling over the average CMirage (how ever skills are activated), for example, moving away enough to make my clones melt, then coming back each time (they let me maintain my clones, which is rare/sloppy) > > > > > > > Uh, no. Even with you playing inefficiently, the reason they didn't kill you is because they couldn't. You could see that their damage was just more than insufficient. The reason they died despite you playing super inefficient is because they got sloppy, but the only other outcome is that they ran away and you lived for free. Them killing you would never happen. > > > > > Also as to using mouse to skill click, yes I do esp on Mirage you have to use mouse for jaunt and blink constantly. Additionally, unlike Thief I have to actually face my target for most of my attacks to work (ambush wont work for instance) so I don't see much point in doing it any other way. I have always played vanilla and I never claim to be a _super pro gamer bro_ type of player so what ever dude. > > > > No you dont? Its super inefficient compared to just using regular inputs. And you think Thief doesnt have to constantly keep its camera in mind, despite having you know, *backstab*, as well as the whole usage of Heartseeker in black powder? Like kitten, I knew you didnt know thief but still. > > Also to be clear. When I posted that I wasn't actually trying to say thief is OP in pvp specifically or that it has no counter or anything, infinite reset is much more useful in wvw and they have access to a wider range of stats that help them get kills very effectively when roaming, with little risk thanks to the ability to reset continually on a number of builds not just DD d/p. > Actually their mobility is a lot more useful in PvP. In WvW all it does is mean that you dont die. You dont kill either though. Youre just useless. Thats why you dont see a lot of thieves roaming noawadys. > I was more posting this after reading: > > @"Yasai.3549" said: > > Isn't Thief like, doodoo tier now in PvP? > > Now if we are talking about WvW, Thief is undeniably strong due to the reset potential, partly because WvW allows Thieves to reset as many times as they like by going OOC. > > > > PvP? No such thing. > > If Thief can't pull off their burst on yu, they have to run away and at that point they lost due to losing point control. > > ...and was attempting to agree that in WvW thief is very strong thanks to things like reset potential. I wasn't actually trying to say Thief is crazy OP. I think one dodge is rather under powered and the fact that I think DD d/p thief should be able to own cmirage typically doesn't imply that thief is OP. > Its not though, thats precisely the issue. WvW thief is *weak*. It can survive, but it cant accomplish anything. Its a mosquito. As I said, thats why despite being a rogue, you dont see many of them anymore nowadays. Its all Holos and Soulbeasts and Reapers and DHs and Revenants. > I am trying to agree that they have crazy amounts of stealth and mobility that gives them often infinite reset potential. I would say DE is arguably better at the stealth, burst, reset, repeat thing in more safety in wvw. Thief is hella common around in wvw still more so than Mirage for sure. > Moreso than mirage? Sure. Mirage isnt very good. "Hella common" however? *Nope*. Of the classes I see while roaming, its bottom 4 at best, and Im pretty sure its bottom 3. > "*backstab*, as well as the whole usage of Heartseeker in black powder?" yep why do you think I kept trying to move my back around and throw up refelctions + cripple for. > Missing the point here. > Lets face it I'm just talking about the OPs thread and you are just attempting to make personal attacks to make your outrage clear now that thief is LESS OP than it was before. Just like I'm bitter that Mirage has one kitten dodge while DD has 3. Yet at the same time I'm not trying to call for nerfs to thief am I? Im not trying to insult or belittle anyone, am I? I just made a reasonable response to this post (although I did forget to quote Yasai). You seem very defensive about thief as a whole. I can relate to feeling passionate about a class. Try to understand I'm not trying to attack your favorite class per say. I was trying to agree that in wvw thiefs reset ability can, at least seem, infinite. > Oh please. OPs thread was arguing that thief isnt OP. It never was, it just was mandatory as a decap and +1 bot. You then tried to pivot it to WvW, where thief not only wasnt "OP" in a very long time, but is actively *bad* right now.

> @"Moradorin.6217" said: > > @"UNOwen.7132" said: > > > @"Moradorin.6217" said: > > > > @"lightstalker.1498" said: > > > > I would like to see YOU, the one complaining about thief, show casing how thief is OP, and can we see last 10 games played on thief screenshot with at or above 50% win rate? It is a sad state of affairs when devs balance the game around streamers. Some really do nothing else, and I would hope that means they are good at the game, if you get my drift. > > > > > > Sure here is a video I made recently. exactly 10 minutes into the video I ambushed by an high rank d/p thief. Although I did defeat the thief in both fights, I think its pretty clear that the thief lost almost by choice. What I mean is, the thief is able to reset over and over trying to get a burst. At the same time, on Mirage my clones run around and almost never actually make contact. The actual kill on the thief is very short using confusion, which is NOT easy. Most of the time these fights go to the thief. > > > > > > > > > > > > Exactly 10 minutes into the video my fight with a d/p DD starts. The clip right after is the DDs 2nd attempt which also fails. > > > > Are you sure this is the video you wanted to show? It seems to me like it shows that even against Thieves best matchup by a wide margin, condi mesmer (Plasma is OP), the thief had absolutely no hope of ever killing you. The best he could do is run away and survive, and if he stayed to fight, he would always have died, as he did in the end. And thats even against a player *clicking* their skills, which is highly inefficient to the point of giving the thief a massive advantage he usually wont have in a fight. Now of course, this is in WvW, not sPvP, so thieves advantage of being the fastest decapper and +1er is non-existent, and yeah, thief isnt any good in WvW, hence why despite the inherent popularity of rogue classes, nowadays you dont see a lot of thieves in WvW. > > Actually, it proves the thief should NEVER die to a mirage. It shows how hard it is to make contact with the DD due to crazy high mobility and infinite reset thanks to its access to stealth combined with slow kitten clones. > I mean, if the thief runs away? Sure. But thats what I said. At best the thief just runs away and doesnt get a kill. At worst he dies before he can do so. Thats not a winning proposition. > For example: If the DD chose to leave the Mirage (me) wouldn't have enough mobility to catch it, nor would the Mirage be able to run away once the fight has started. I have two options, fight the DD or run to the camp and hope the NPCs took care of it for me. > Slightly incorrect. You have 2 options. Indeed. They are "the thief stays and you kill him", and "the thief runs away and no one dies". There is no option in which you die. > With blink's 35 second cool-down and the fact that its also one of two stun-breaks being used its not like the Mirage can actually close on the DD unless the DD keeps coming back to try and kill the Mirage. Meanwhile, the DD has MORE than enough damage available to kill a Mirage many times over. Additionally, if the Mirage attempts to chase and close on the DD the Mirage its forced to use Blink (1 of 2 stun-breaks) and jaunt (loss of burst damage and clone generation), which then leaves the Mirage basically without jack kitten to use if the DD decides to turn and kill the mirage after a short run. Likewise, if the Mirage tries to run it is forced to use Blink and also its other stun-break if it wants stealth and again **IF the DD Chooses** it can easily chase down the Mirage and kill once those are used up with little to no risk. Again, DD ALWAYS has the advantage and should NEVER lose this match-up PERIOD! > Yeah we saw that DD having more than enough damage available to kill you. Or rather what we saw was them barely scratching you and certainly not being to kill you once, let alone "many times over". What we saw is that if the thief wanted to do enough damage to at least put a dent in you, they die. If they run away before dying then you didnt take nearly enough damage to even be threatened. This is a matchup that Mirage cannot lose. He usually wont win either unless the thief wants to stick around and fight, but lose he will not. > The only reason they didn't kill me is they got sloppy, both times. I would guess the reason the DD got sloppy/kept attacking without much care was they are used to face-rolling over the average CMirage (how ever skills are activated), for example, moving away enough to make my clones melt, then coming back each time (they let me maintain my clones, which is rare/sloppy) > Uh, no. Even with you playing inefficiently, the reason they didn't kill you is because they couldn't. You could see that their damage was just more than insufficient. The reason they died despite you playing super inefficient is because they got sloppy, but the only other outcome is that they ran away and you lived for free. Them killing you would never happen. > Also as to using mouse to skill click, yes I do esp on Mirage you have to use mouse for jaunt and blink constantly. Additionally, unlike Thief I have to actually face my target for most of my attacks to work (ambush wont work for instance) so I don't see much point in doing it any other way. I have always played vanilla and I never claim to be a _super pro gamer bro_ type of player so what ever dude. No you dont? Its super inefficient compared to just using regular inputs. And you think Thief doesnt have to constantly keep its camera in mind, despite having you know, *backstab*, as well as the whole usage of Heartseeker in black powder? Like damn, I knew you didnt know thief but still.

> @"Moradorin.6217" said: > > @"lightstalker.1498" said: > > I would like to see YOU, the one complaining about thief, show casing how thief is OP, and can we see last 10 games played on thief screenshot with at or above 50% win rate? It is a sad state of affairs when devs balance the game around streamers. Some really do nothing else, and I would hope that means they are good at the game, if you get my drift. > > Sure here is a video I made recently. exactly 10 minutes into the video I ambushed by an high rank d/p thief. Although I did defeat the thief in both fights, I think its pretty clear that the thief lost almost by choice. What I mean is, the thief is able to reset over and over trying to get a burst. At the same time, on Mirage my clones run around and almost never actually make contact. The actual kill on the thief is very short using confusion, which is NOT easy. Most of the time these fights go to the thief. > > > > Exactly 10 minutes into the video my fight with a d/p DD starts. The clip right after is the DDs 2nd attempt which also fails. Are you sure this is the video you wanted to show? It seems to me like it shows that even against Thieves best matchup by a wide margin, condi mesmer (Plasma is OP), the thief had absolutely no hope of ever killing you. The best he could do is run away and survive, and if he stayed to fight, he would always have died, as he did in the end. And thats even against a player *clicking* their skills, which is highly inefficient to the point of giving the thief a massive advantage he usually wont have in a fight. Now of course, this is in WvW, not sPvP, so thieves advantage of being the fastest decapper and +1er is non-existent, and yeah, thief isnt any good in WvW, hence why despite the inherent popularity of rogue classes, nowadays you dont see a lot of thieves in WvW.

> @"Bazsi.2734" said: > > @"UNOwen.7132" said: > > > @"Bazsi.2734" said: > > > > @"UNOwen.7132" said: > > > > > @"Bazsi.2734" said: > > > > > > @"Kuma.1503" said: > > > > > > > @"Bazsi.2734" said: > > > > > > > > @"Kuma.1503" said: > > > > > > > > Instead of nerfing sustain again, we need to bring damage back up a tad and reduce the cooldown of #2 skills. Both of these changes were done to slow down the game, make choices more deliberate, but they went too far in their intended goal. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Lower weapon cooldowns, raise damage across the board. Bring damage back to heavily telegraphed CC skills like Executioner's slap, Prime light poke, drop the squeaker, big ol' fart, and backscratcher. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Each of these tweaks should have followed the feb patch. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > > We've need to stop trying to solve issues by nerfing what's directly in front of our face and instead ask how it got there in the first place. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > Both damage and sustain were so high that attrition style gameplay did not exist. You stacked vitality/thoughness (or both) to survive oneshots, not to deal with pressure. > > > > > > > Damage was drasticly lowered in february, and then some. Oneshots are gone from competetive PvP, they are banished to unranked meme build status. > > > > > > > Which was the purpose of the patch, good on A-net. However sustain bunkers are a thing now. You sit on the node(often with 1 another bunker buddy of yours), and you rotate through your defenses. It almost doesn't matter whats trying to attack you. As long as you move out of the most concentrated AoE-s and avoid getting 5v2-d, you can easily draw any fight out to eternity. > > > > > > > Sustain is too high, period. The gamemode is about holding/contesting nodes, if any build can just sit on it, it's bad for the game. There should be an intricate dance of jumping on/off the capture point to hold, avoiding pressure, faking out bursts, coordinating spikes... not this braindead "lets just tank everything while we spam defensive rotation and heals" that most of my matches with plat 2+ players devolve into. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > I'd propose to shift supports from raw healing towards damage mitigation. Of course every support could still heal some, but guardians could excel at spamming protection/aegis, necromancers could be the king of condition transfers, druids could mix healing with outgoing buffs/mightstacks etc. > > > > > > > > > > > > > > The point would be that once you land damage, it matters. Currently the initial midfight 4v4 can go on for minutes. People dipping below 50%, just to get topped off seconds later. This shouldn't be a thing. Healthbars should generally go downwards. > > > > > > > > > > > >snip > > > > > > But as I said, Anet went too far with reducing damage, increasing cooldowns, and nerfing damage on crowd control. Every time we reach a point where healthbars generally go downwards, people complain about the class(es) doing the damage. If every sustain decrease is met with an equal or greater damage decrease, the problem will never be fixed. > > > > > > > > > > > >snip > > > > > > > > > > The meta we had before was more like an FPS, it was more about predictions and reaction times. Fun, but not really what an MMO should be. So a-net started shifting it towards a different balance, where fights last longer, and lacking superior reaction times can be made up with good tactical decisions. > > > > > > > > > > > > > Not really? The nature of the sidenoder fights didnt really change. What changed is that fights that lasted 30 seconds to a minute on average now last 15 minutes on average unless +1d. Or in simpler terms, no one dies. > > > > > > > > > You need way lower damage, and even lower sustain to achive fights last a while but end with someone inevitably running or dying. The current sustain is too high for that. Ever time unranked matchmaking decides im the one fill up that last spot in a match with top 50 premades, I often spend the entire match rotating from fight to fight because we cannot kill anything. Sure healthbars go down, but whoever took my burst and went down to 40%-ish, gets covered in boons and healed back up to full in 2 seconds. > > > > > > > > No. If you want fights that last a while but end with someone inevitably running or dying, you simply need to revert every non-QoL change made since and including the february megapatch. Its as easy as that. If you just keep trying to cut damage and sustain more, you get a spammy game with no skill or tactics involved, that is so unfathomably boring I cant see why anyone would put themselves through it. > > > > > > > > > You do not solve this problem by buffing damage back so I can 100-0 instead of 100-40. Neither will a partial revert achive anything, who cares if my target got healed back from 20% instead of 40%? He's back to full... same outcome. > > > > > > > > Yes you do solve the problem by buffing damage back up. In fact, thats the *only* solution. > > > > > > > > > You solve it by not letting a target fully healing back after taking bursts like that. And that requires a radical cut to raw healing. One thing I liked about thief heals a few years back is how they healed almost nothing. You used Withdraw to evade something, not to actually heal yourself back up. Same with Hide in Shadows, it was mainly tool to maintain stealth... now it heals like double what it used to, just look at its version history. > > > > > > > > > > > > > What the hell are you talking about? Thief heals values *didnt really change* Hide in Shadows got a 15% raw healing buff because no one used it, but to put it in perspective, that changed the total healing from 6000 to 6806. All it got was *800 healing*. Meanwhile Mug provides 2000 healing, and thief doesnt even use it anymore. Thief healing now is *lower* than it was before. And yet thief is just as unkillable. Not because there is too much healing. But because there simply isnt nearly enough damage. > > > > > > > > > So TL,DR: too much raw healing, too much CC. It would do the game good if we cut both in half. > > > > > > > > In actuality its just too little damage. > > > > > > I'm honored to be answered twice, one will suffice next time though. > > > > > > > I missed that both posts were by you. My bad. > > > > > Nice long winded way of saying you want oneshot meta damage back. > > > > > > > I find it funny that people keep calling it the "oneshot meta". As if oneshots were a common occurence and not an extreme exception. > That was literally all I played. Most of what my friends played. Sure it needed some skill to identify your windows, or to pull off a mesmer shatter combo without using macros, but the person getting deleted within 0.5 seconds(or less, worldy impact oneshot lol) does not really care what goes into it. And those builds were not very good. Because it turns out if you put all your eggs in one basket, and the enemy then just activates an invuln or block skill, or hell, evades, youre kinda screwed. Funny thing is, you could probably still make builds like that right now. They just still wouldnt be bad. > So for me it was 100% of my matches which could skew my perception, but most of the time I had to watch out for enemies who could oneshot me, so eh... I'd say it was pretty common in plat 2/3 on EU roughly a year prior to this post. Being theoretically *able* to oneshot and it being a oneshot meta are 2 very different things. Its theoretically possible to get ToD'd in FighterZ, but that doesnt make FighterZ a ToD game, because it almost never actually happens. The threat is there, but you could avoid it just as easily. Thats why calling it a oneshot meta is silly. > > snip > > > Considering that we have a _medium damage&high sustain_ meta, I'd like you to explain how a _medium damage&below medium sustain_ scenario gameplay would be braindead and spammy, compared to what we have now. Cause I'm 100% sure the opposite will happen, so whats your reasoning? > > > > Yeah except thats not what we have. What we have is a medium-low sustain and *very* low damage meta. Damage right now is below the previous lowest point in the entire games history. What youre proposing is an *extremely* low sustain and *very* low damage meta. What do you think happens when you have a meta like that? Ive played games like that before. Its exactly what I said above. Its the *worst* kind of meta you can have by a wide margin. The only skill-based thing that remains is macro, and good luck getting macro to work in solo Q. > > Way to not answer the question. Round two: We measure effective damage(only stuff that lands) and we get the value X. We do the same for sustain(this is a hard science people, take notes this will be on the test) and we measure a value above X. Lowering sustain to the extent that its comfortably below X would be an improvement over the current meta according to me. You stated it would have the opposite effect. ELABORATE ON WHY. PLEASE. I did answer the question. The answer was one that goes against what youre saying, so you ignore it. But if you want that *specific* part answered, and not "is my solution the best possible one?" (its not, its a *lot* worse than just reverting), sure, I can answer that specific part as well. So right now there is obviously *no* skill involved in doing damage. You just spam off cooldown. Now, if you reduce sustain, that doesnt change of course. Doing damage remains entirely skillless. However, right now, since sustain is still actually at least worth a damn, instead of being essentially non-existent like you propose, there is *some* skill in interrupting key defensive and sustain skills in a situation where you outnumber (in a 1v1 theyre not dying either way). Your suggestion removes that last sliver of skill that exists. At that point all youre doing is turning PvP into little more than an auto-battler.

> @"Bazsi.2734" said: > > @"UNOwen.7132" said: > > > @"Bazsi.2734" said: > > > > @"Kuma.1503" said: > > > > > @"Bazsi.2734" said: > > > > > > @"Kuma.1503" said: > > > > > > Instead of nerfing sustain again, we need to bring damage back up a tad and reduce the cooldown of #2 skills. Both of these changes were done to slow down the game, make choices more deliberate, but they went too far in their intended goal. > > > > > > > > > > > > Lower weapon cooldowns, raise damage across the board. Bring damage back to heavily telegraphed CC skills like Executioner's slap, Prime light poke, drop the squeaker, big ol' fart, and backscratcher. > > > > > > > > > > > > Each of these tweaks should have followed the feb patch. > > > > > > > > > > > > We've need to stop trying to solve issues by nerfing what's directly in front of our face and instead ask how it got there in the first place. > > > > > > > > > > Both damage and sustain were so high that attrition style gameplay did not exist. You stacked vitality/thoughness (or both) to survive oneshots, not to deal with pressure. > > > > > Damage was drasticly lowered in february, and then some. Oneshots are gone from competetive PvP, they are banished to unranked meme build status. > > > > > Which was the purpose of the patch, good on A-net. However sustain bunkers are a thing now. You sit on the node(often with 1 another bunker buddy of yours), and you rotate through your defenses. It almost doesn't matter whats trying to attack you. As long as you move out of the most concentrated AoE-s and avoid getting 5v2-d, you can easily draw any fight out to eternity. > > > > > Sustain is too high, period. The gamemode is about holding/contesting nodes, if any build can just sit on it, it's bad for the game. There should be an intricate dance of jumping on/off the capture point to hold, avoiding pressure, faking out bursts, coordinating spikes... not this braindead "lets just tank everything while we spam defensive rotation and heals" that most of my matches with plat 2+ players devolve into. > > > > > > > > > > I'd propose to shift supports from raw healing towards damage mitigation. Of course every support could still heal some, but guardians could excel at spamming protection/aegis, necromancers could be the king of condition transfers, druids could mix healing with outgoing buffs/mightstacks etc. > > > > > > > > > > The point would be that once you land damage, it matters. Currently the initial midfight 4v4 can go on for minutes. People dipping below 50%, just to get topped off seconds later. This shouldn't be a thing. Healthbars should generally go downwards. > > > > > > > >snip > > > > But as I said, Anet went too far with reducing damage, increasing cooldowns, and nerfing damage on crowd control. Every time we reach a point where healthbars generally go downwards, people complain about the class(es) doing the damage. If every sustain decrease is met with an equal or greater damage decrease, the problem will never be fixed. > > > > > > > >snip > > > > > > The meta we had before was more like an FPS, it was more about predictions and reaction times. Fun, but not really what an MMO should be. So a-net started shifting it towards a different balance, where fights last longer, and lacking superior reaction times can be made up with good tactical decisions. > > > > > > > Not really? The nature of the sidenoder fights didnt really change. What changed is that fights that lasted 30 seconds to a minute on average now last 15 minutes on average unless +1d. Or in simpler terms, no one dies. > > > > > You need way lower damage, and even lower sustain to achive fights last a while but end with someone inevitably running or dying. The current sustain is too high for that. Ever time unranked matchmaking decides im the one fill up that last spot in a match with top 50 premades, I often spend the entire match rotating from fight to fight because we cannot kill anything. Sure healthbars go down, but whoever took my burst and went down to 40%-ish, gets covered in boons and healed back up to full in 2 seconds. > > > > No. If you want fights that last a while but end with someone inevitably running or dying, you simply need to revert every non-QoL change made since and including the february megapatch. Its as easy as that. If you just keep trying to cut damage and sustain more, you get a spammy game with no skill or tactics involved, that is so unfathomably boring I cant see why anyone would put themselves through it. > > > > > You do not solve this problem by buffing damage back so I can 100-0 instead of 100-40. Neither will a partial revert achive anything, who cares if my target got healed back from 20% instead of 40%? He's back to full... same outcome. > > > > Yes you do solve the problem by buffing damage back up. In fact, thats the *only* solution. > > > > > You solve it by not letting a target fully healing back after taking bursts like that. And that requires a radical cut to raw healing. One thing I liked about thief heals a few years back is how they healed almost nothing. You used Withdraw to evade something, not to actually heal yourself back up. Same with Hide in Shadows, it was mainly tool to maintain stealth... now it heals like double what it used to, just look at its version history. > > > > > > > What the hell are you talking about? Thief heals values *didnt really change* Hide in Shadows got a 15% raw healing buff because no one used it, but to put it in perspective, that changed the total healing from 6000 to 6806. All it got was *800 healing*. Meanwhile Mug provides 2000 healing, and thief doesnt even use it anymore. Thief healing now is *lower* than it was before. And yet thief is just as unkillable. Not because there is too much healing. But because there simply isnt nearly enough damage. > > > > > So TL,DR: too much raw healing, too much CC. It would do the game good if we cut both in half. > > > > In actuality its just too little damage. > > I'm honored to be answered twice, one will suffice next time though. > I missed that both posts were by you. My bad. > Nice long winded way of saying you want oneshot meta damage back. > I find it funny that people keep calling it the "oneshot meta". As if oneshots were a common occurence and not an extreme exception. Like yeah, sure, if you got ganked by 3 people as anything other than a bunker, you got oneshot back then. If you get ganked by 3 people as anything other than a bunker right now, *you still get oneshot*. And outside of being ganked? Oneshots didnt really happen. No what I want back is a skillful meta where enemies actually died, where cooldowns and timing mattered, and you couldnt just spam your skills completely devoid of thought. > I think I explained myself clearly. With lower levels of damage, you can still get kills/force disengages if the sustain is even lower. You didn't refute it in any way, you just wrote "but damage though" 3 different ways. > Oh sure. That is true. The problem is that the way you get kills and force disengages if damage is that much lower and sustain is that much lower is completely *devoid* of skill. The meta you envision is a meta where you just spam everything off cooldown. There is no point actually timing your skills, they all dont do a lot of damage, its more important to maximise your potential DPS since all damage sticks, rather than timing them to exploit gaps in their defense. No point going for valuable interrupts either. They can just recast that ability in a few seconds, and youre not killing them by then. GW2s PvP as a whole would devolve even further into facerolling as the optimal playstyle. > Considering that we have a _medium damage&high sustain_ meta, I'd like you to explain how a _medium damage&below medium sustain_ scenario gameplay would be braindead and spammy, compared to what we have now. Cause I'm 100% sure the opposite will happen, so whats your reasoning? Yeah except thats not what we have. What we have is a medium-low sustain and *very* low damage meta. Damage right now is below the previous lowest point in the entire games history. What youre proposing is an *extremely* low sustain and *very* low damage meta. What do you think happens when you have a meta like that? Ive played games like that before. Its exactly what I said above. Its the *worst* kind of meta you can have by a wide margin. The only skill-based thing that remains is macro, and good luck getting macro to work in solo Q.

> @"Bazsi.2734" said: > > @"Kuma.1503" said: > > > @"Bazsi.2734" said: > > > > @"Kuma.1503" said: > > > > Instead of nerfing sustain again, we need to bring damage back up a tad and reduce the cooldown of #2 skills. Both of these changes were done to slow down the game, make choices more deliberate, but they went too far in their intended goal. > > > > > > > > Lower weapon cooldowns, raise damage across the board. Bring damage back to heavily telegraphed CC skills like Executioner's slap, Prime light poke, drop the squeaker, big ol' fart, and backscratcher. > > > > > > > > Each of these tweaks should have followed the feb patch. > > > > > > > > We've need to stop trying to solve issues by nerfing what's directly in front of our face and instead ask how it got there in the first place. > > > > > > Both damage and sustain were so high that attrition style gameplay did not exist. You stacked vitality/thoughness (or both) to survive oneshots, not to deal with pressure. > > > Damage was drasticly lowered in february, and then some. Oneshots are gone from competetive PvP, they are banished to unranked meme build status. > > > Which was the purpose of the patch, good on A-net. However sustain bunkers are a thing now. You sit on the node(often with 1 another bunker buddy of yours), and you rotate through your defenses. It almost doesn't matter whats trying to attack you. As long as you move out of the most concentrated AoE-s and avoid getting 5v2-d, you can easily draw any fight out to eternity. > > > Sustain is too high, period. The gamemode is about holding/contesting nodes, if any build can just sit on it, it's bad for the game. There should be an intricate dance of jumping on/off the capture point to hold, avoiding pressure, faking out bursts, coordinating spikes... not this braindead "lets just tank everything while we spam defensive rotation and heals" that most of my matches with plat 2+ players devolve into. > > > > > > I'd propose to shift supports from raw healing towards damage mitigation. Of course every support could still heal some, but guardians could excel at spamming protection/aegis, necromancers could be the king of condition transfers, druids could mix healing with outgoing buffs/mightstacks etc. > > > > > > The point would be that once you land damage, it matters. Currently the initial midfight 4v4 can go on for minutes. People dipping below 50%, just to get topped off seconds later. This shouldn't be a thing. Healthbars should generally go downwards. > > > >snip > > But as I said, Anet went too far with reducing damage, increasing cooldowns, and nerfing damage on crowd control. Every time we reach a point where healthbars generally go downwards, people complain about the class(es) doing the damage. If every sustain decrease is met with an equal or greater damage decrease, the problem will never be fixed. > > > >snip > > The meta we had before was more like an FPS, it was more about predictions and reaction times. Fun, but not really what an MMO should be. So a-net started shifting it towards a different balance, where fights last longer, and lacking superior reaction times can be made up with good tactical decisions. > Not really? The nature of the sidenoder fights didnt really change. What changed is that fights that lasted 30 seconds to a minute on average now last 15 minutes on average unless +1d. Or in simpler terms, no one dies. > You need way lower damage, and even lower sustain to achive fights last a while but end with someone inevitably running or dying. The current sustain is too high for that. Ever time unranked matchmaking decides im the one fill up that last spot in a match with top 50 premades, I often spend the entire match rotating from fight to fight because we cannot kill anything. Sure healthbars go down, but whoever took my burst and went down to 40%-ish, gets covered in boons and healed back up to full in 2 seconds. No. If you want fights that last a while but end with someone inevitably running or dying, you simply need to revert every non-QoL change made since and including the february megapatch. Its as easy as that. If you just keep trying to cut damage and sustain more, you get a spammy game with no skill or tactics involved, that is so unfathomably boring I cant see why anyone would put themselves through it. > You do not solve this problem by buffing damage back so I can 100-0 instead of 100-40. Neither will a partial revert achive anything, who cares if my target got healed back from 20% instead of 40%? He's back to full... same outcome. Yes you do solve the problem by buffing damage back up. In fact, thats the *only* solution. > You solve it by not letting a target fully healing back after taking bursts like that. And that requires a radical cut to raw healing. One thing I liked about thief heals a few years back is how they healed almost nothing. You used Withdraw to evade something, not to actually heal yourself back up. Same with Hide in Shadows, it was mainly tool to maintain stealth... now it heals like double what it used to, just look at its version history. > What the hell are you talking about? Thief heals values *didnt really change* Hide in Shadows got a 15% raw healing buff because no one used it, but to put it in perspective, that changed the total healing from 6000 to 6806. All it got was *800 healing*. Meanwhile Mug provides 2000 healing, and thief doesnt even use it anymore. Thief healing now is *lower* than it was before. And yet thief is just as unkillable. Not because there is too much healing. But because there simply isnt nearly enough damage. > So TL,DR: too much raw healing, too much CC. It would do the game good if we cut both in half. In actuality its just too little damage.

> @"Bazsi.2734" said: > > @"Kuma.1503" said: > > Instead of nerfing sustain again, we need to bring damage back up a tad and reduce the cooldown of #2 skills. Both of these changes were done to slow down the game, make choices more deliberate, but they went too far in their intended goal. > > > > Lower weapon cooldowns, raise damage across the board. Bring damage back to heavily telegraphed CC skills like Executioner's slap, Prime light poke, drop the squeaker, big ol' fart, and backscratcher. > > > > Each of these tweaks should have followed the feb patch. > > > > We've need to stop trying to solve issues by nerfing what's directly in front of our face and instead ask how it got there in the first place. > > Both damage and sustain were so high that attrition style gameplay did not exist. You stacked vitality/thoughness (or both) to survive oneshots, not to deal with pressure. Except thats wrong on both counts. The few builds that stacked vitality/toughness (other than the standard marauders) did so specifically for *long* fights. And no, attrition style gameplay did exist. In fact it was the default. Duels between sidenoders usually lasted 30 seconds to a minute. They ended, unlike now, but not very quickly. > Damage was drasticly lowered in february, and then some. Oneshots are gone from competetive PvP, they are banished to unranked meme build status. The only true "one-shots" that existed back then still exist. Burst still exists. That hasnt changed. What has changed is that in an even fight, whereas fights lasted for about a minute before, they are endless now. > Which was the purpose of the patch, good on A-net. However sustain bunkers are a thing now. You sit on the node(often with 1 another bunker buddy of yours), and you rotate through your defenses. It almost doesn't matter whats trying to attack you. As long as you move out of the most concentrated AoE-s and avoid getting 5v2-d, you can easily draw any fight out to eternity. They always were a thing. The difference is that before you could kill them. Now you cant. And for that matter, sustain bunkers dont *really* exist now, because there is no point. *Everyone* is effectively a "sustain bunker" because of how pathetically low damage is. *Full zerkers Holosmith* is a bloody sustain bunker. > Sustain is too high, period. The gamemode is about holding/contesting nodes, if any build can just sit on it, it's bad for the game. There should be an intricate dance of jumping on/off the capture point to hold, avoiding pressure, faking out bursts, coordinating spikes... not this braindead "lets just tank everything while we spam defensive rotation and heals" that most of my matches with plat 2+ players devolve into. > Sustain is "too high" is the symptom, not the cause. The problem is that *damage* is much too low. Even the healing a regular build can put out is enough to survive endlessly. Thats the problem. If you just nerf all healing, then the result is just that the game gets even more braindead and unfun. The game would devolve even moreso into spamming everything you have off cooldown. If you want that intricate dance, then you simply need to revert the february megapatch. > I'd propose to shift supports from raw healing towards damage mitigation. Of course every support could still heal some, but guardians could excel at spamming protection/aegis, necromancers could be the king of condition transfers, druids could mix healing with outgoing buffs/mightstacks etc. > Without nerfing, that would change nothing. If you nerf, you run into the issue above. > The point would be that once you land damage, it matters. Currently the initial midfight 4v4 can go on for minutes. People dipping below 50%, just to get topped off seconds later. This shouldn't be a thing. Healthbars should generally go downwards. The issue is once again that *damage* is too low, not that healing is too high. Healthbars should generally go downwards, but that cant happen if everyone hits like a wet noodle.

> @"Leonidrex.5649" said: > holly kitten, imagine if mesmers said mesmer was deleted from the game after not winning MAT kitten once. god daaamn, you would be seeing mat every month for a year ;p To be fair, thief is a class that, if it is playable, its a mandatory 1 of in any team. Still, a single MAT is not enough of a data point.

I mean if the next big change isnt a complete revert of everything other than bugfixes since and including the february megapatch, I just wouldnt particularly care about it.

> @"KrHome.1920" said: > > @"UNOwen.7132" said: > > The problem is a passive defense traitline isnt going to solve Thieves defense issues. Thieves issue is poor *active* defenses. You can make an Engineer build that has massive damage reduction and is more or less a walking wall, that aint gonna save it if it doesnt have good active defenses. It worked as a defensive traitline. *That* is why it was useless. > Thief has the best active defenses (dodges, mobility, stealth) in the game. It is THE active defense class. And that's the reason why it has fight presence issues, because active defense and offense at the same time are limited - which is good! Dodges or other active evades, that can deal damage (various dodge modifying traits in the game or skills like unrelenting assault) are stupid design, because they can't be punished with counter-damage application. > No it doesnt. Stealth and mobility are not active defenses, and as for dodges, here is the funny thing: Thieves dodges are about average at *best*. D/P Thief has only the baseline dodges everyone has, and 1-2 utility skills with *long* cooldowns that provide dodges. S/D has more, but is unplayable for other reasons. Compare that to Warrior, to Elementalist, to Revenant, to Ranger, to Engineer, to even *Mesmer*. And thats just dodges. The other classes also get blocks, and invuln, and pseudo-invuln, which thief doesnt get. The only class that has *worse* active defenses than thief is Necro. And unless Necro is playing a draintank style (which thief also obviously has no access to), then yeah, Necro cant survive without a support. No, thief is not "THE" active defense class (thats Warrior), nor is that the reason thief is bad at fighting (quite the opposite, the fact that thieves active defenses suck is the reason thief is bad at fighting). Now what you might be confused by is that thief doesnt usually die. But thats not because thieves active defenses are good. Its because thief is good at running away from a fight, and never stays in a fight since if thief does stay in a fight, he dies. But running away is not an active defense. Its not a defense at all. Its avoiding the fight alltogether. > Damage reduction is a passive defense. That's the main concept of armor as a passive defense. You can tank more damage (passive) while attacking (active). Thief is either attacking (active) or evading, disengaging, stealthing (active). No, thief goes in, bursts, then runs away. It doesnt have good defense, so running away is all it can do. Give thief better passive defenses, and that doesnt change. It cant do draintank like Necro does, and without that, more passive defense isnt going to save you.

> @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > @"UNOwen.7132" said: > > > @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > > > @"UNOwen.7132" said: > > > > (...) > > > > That wouldnt really help, thief usually jumps in with steal, so by the time you would have that cue, its already too late. > > > > > > What? No, they don't. Steal probably is the one most powerful interrupt in the game. Save it if you can! > > > > > > > It is, but without it you cant burst out of stealth reliably, and it does add quite a fair amount of damage, so you still end up using it for that most of the time. > > Usually in +1 situations, simply shadowshot+backstab is fine. But I admit, it might be a good option in some situations. Shadowshot + backstab results in the opponent dodging/blocking your backstab, and you losing all your burst if theyre any good. Its too slow and predictable.

> @"Megametzler.5729" said: > > @"UNOwen.7132" said: > > (...) > > That wouldnt really help, thief usually jumps in with steal, so by the time you would have that cue, its already too late. > > What? No, they don't. Steal probably is the one most powerful interrupt in the game. Save it if you can! > It is, but without it you cant burst out of stealth reliably, and it does add quite a fair amount of damage, so you still end up using it for that most of the time.

> @"Fueki.4753" said: > > @"UNOwen.7132" said: > > Thats what it used to be. It was useless. > That's why I wrote "properly work". > If it was useless it didn't properly work. > Oh no, it worked properly. The problem is a passive defense traitline isnt going to solve Thieves defense issues. Thieves issue is poor *active* defenses. You can make an Engineer build that has massive damage reduction and is more or less a walking wall, that aint gonna save it if it doesnt have good active defenses. It worked as a defensive traitline. *That* is why it was useless. > > @"saerni.2584" said: > > SA was always a stealth line. > > It's that people just don't like fighting stealth gameplay. > > And this is why I think Shadow Arts is in dire need of a complete rework, along side with the Stealth mechanic itself to make it even slightly less unfair to fight against. Stealth offers far too much with hardly any drawbacks. I mean stealth is pretty much only good when used out of active combat, as its too easily punished otherwise. And Im not entirely sure how you fix that. Even if you slap on a max duration (Which you should), it will will be useful for bursting unexpectedly. > It doesn't even have a minor visual or audible clue when someone is stealthed nearby, which it ought to have. > That wouldnt really help, thief usually jumps in with steal, so by the time you would have that cue, its already too late.

> @"Fueki.4753" said: > > @"anjo.6143" said: > > > @"Fueki.4753" said: > > > You forgot the option of "A nerf was needed, but the the thing that needs nerfs was untouched." > > > > > > Thief needs nerfs, but in the Stealth department. > > > No other part of Thief (except maybe Consume Ectoplasm) needed the nerfs it got this month. > > > > Thief is a paper, you spit on them and they die, without stealth (that COSTS A LOOOOOT of initiative), thief wouldnt survive against everysingle class for more then 5 secs. > > > > Thief cant 1x1 against nobody, except mes on high plat+ or other thief, so what you want more? > > So thief will not be able to make decaps from UNGUARDED nodes or disengage too? Why a person would play such a class? > > If they reworked Shadow Arts to properly work as a defensive trait line, rather than being over-stuffed with stealth junk, Thief would have more survivability. > > Thats what it used to be. It was useless. So they made it into a damage traitline, and only now does it see play. Traits wouldnt fix thieves survivability issues, as they mostly come down to poor active defenses.

> @"Sigmoid.7082" said: > > @"UNOwen.7132" said: > > > @"Yasai.3549" said: > > > 48k over 32 hits. > > > Each tick was around 1.5k damage. > > > > > > So yu basically sat there and ate 1.5k damage per second instead of yu know, cleansing it and moving away. > > > Aight, it's clear here that Guardians need to be nerfed guys. > > > > Man do so many people seriously not know how death recap works? Its not 1.5k damage per second, or per tick. Its 1.5k damage per *stack*. If he had 10 stacks, then 3 seconds would be 30 hits. Yeesh. > > How are we reaching 1.5k a stack? Only thing I can't figure out here. The condi *damage* in death recap is often messy. Dont ask me why though, I dont really know. Might have something to do with damage resistances?

> @"Yasai.3549" said: > 48k over 32 hits. > Each tick was around 1.5k damage. > > So yu basically sat there and ate 1.5k damage per second instead of yu know, cleansing it and moving away. > Aight, it's clear here that Guardians need to be nerfed guys. Man do so many people seriously not know how death recap works? Its not 1.5k damage per second, or per tick. Its 1.5k damage per *stack*. If he had 10 stacks, then 3 seconds would be 30 hits. Yeesh.

> @"Leonidrex.5649" said: > > @"UNOwen.7132" said: > > > @"Leonidrex.5649" said: > > > > @"UNOwen.7132" said: > > > > > @"Leonidrex.5649" said: > > > > > @"UNOwen.7132" you are doing this thing where you assume you are right again > > > > > > > > > > > > > Yes, how dare I assume that the thing I tested and confirmed is true ... is true. What, are you also telling this to the scientists who confirmed that theropods have feathers? Its called the scientific method mate. But then again, seems youre still hung up about being duped and tripling down even after being shown that you were duped. > > > > > > https://imgur.com/gallery/8XRgX6s > > > this is 2 stacks of burning and 4 stacks of bleeding > > > awaiting apology > > > > Wait, you show a screenshot confirming what I said, and you assume it ... denies what I said? Count the burning ticks. Thats 8 ticks. Now according to you, that means 8 hits. Instead it shows 24 hits. Is it possible you miscounted the burning stacks, which were 3, and got hit for 3 burning 8 times. Like, idk, 3\*8=*24*? Funny how things do be lining up. Likewise, bleeding shows 20 hits over 4 ticks. Once again, if we assume you miscounted and it was 5 bleeding stacks, that would give us 4\*5=*20*. Once again, it oddly lines up perfectly. > > my bad, I read through your first post where you explained it poorly. > https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Rocket_Kick -> its 2 burning My guess is you mightve had the firearm trait. The one that causes burning on crit. Would also explain the stray bleeding procs, as those are also in the same traitline. > what I want you to realize is that death recap is kitten that doesnt show the full story, and combat log is what actually matters > Oh no, death recap is a mess. I dont disagree. But it does actually get the hits right. Its the damage thats, at times, off. Which is probably the case here.

> @"Dadnir.5038" said: > > @"UNOwen.7132" said: > > > @"Dadnir.5038" said: > > > So... It's screenshot reading time: > > > Burn: 48690 damage; 32 hits > > > Translated, it mean that you took 32 hits of burn which mean that the 48k were applied over 32 seconds for an average burn damage of 1521.5 damage per seconds. > > > > > > > ... what? Ok apparently not everyone knows how condis work in death recap. When it says 32 hits, that doesnt mean 32 *ticks of damage*. Thats means he took damage from 32 stacks of burn in total. If you were to get 100 stacks of burning applied to you, downing you in one tick, and finishing you off in another tick, that wouldnt show as 2 hits. It would show as *200* hits. So no, its actually 15600 damage per second-ish. > > > > > It also mean that technically, over those 3 seconds you claim were enough to down you, you took an average of 4563.5 damage which may be close to half your total health pool if you are an thief, guardian or elementalist without any ressource investment into vitality. (Obviously those number are as unrealistic as your own because they do not take into account possible burn burst, like your's does not take into account the simple fact that you took those 48k over 32 hits but it does have the merit to put things into perspective). > > > > > > > Same mistake as above. He took an average of 45635 instead. Thats more than the entire lifetotal of a full tank warrior. Significantly more, actually. > > > > > Cheer up, over the same time frame, you could have taken the same amount of power damage from any AA in game. > > > > Same mistake once more. In reality, no power build can maintain 15k dps over 3 seconds. Im not sure any can even reach 30k burst in 2 seconds. > > I think you might have to consider that you're wrong here. Why would the report even work like that? It doesn't make sense at all. > The report never give you the number of stacks you had on you. It's called "hits" for a good reason. It doesn't either give you the duration of the fight. No report will give you the "potential damage" of a maximum number of condition stack. It would be like having the report give you the potential damage of power skills as if your opponent was in a light armor without any damage reduction: nonsense. Oh and in case you want something like this in video form, [here]( ). Notice how the death recap says 52 hits of poison, but the entire fight doesnt even last 52 seconds, let alone the poison. But he does get 9 stacks of poison ticking for a few seconds from just the poison grenade. And a few stray poison ticks here and there. That would suddenly make 52 hits a lot more explainable.

> @"Leonidrex.5649" said: > > @"UNOwen.7132" said: > > > @"Leonidrex.5649" said: > > > @"UNOwen.7132" you are doing this thing where you assume you are right again > > > > > > > Yes, how dare I assume that the thing I tested and confirmed is true ... is true. What, are you also telling this to the scientists who confirmed that theropods have feathers? Its called the scientific method mate. But then again, seems youre still hung up about being duped and tripling down even after being shown that you were duped. > > https://imgur.com/gallery/8XRgX6s > this is 2 stacks of burning and 4 stacks of bleeding > awaiting apology Wait, you show a screenshot confirming what I said, and you assume it ... denies what I said? Count the burning ticks. Thats 8 ticks. Now according to you, that means 8 hits. Instead it shows 24 hits. Is it possible you miscounted the burning stacks, which were 3, and got hit for 3 burning 8 times. Like, idk, 3\*8=*24*? Funny how things do be lining up. Likewise, bleeding shows 20 hits over 4 ticks. Once again, if we assume you miscounted and it was 5 bleeding stacks, that would give us 4\*5=*20*. Once again, it oddly lines up perfectly.

> @"Leonidrex.5649" said: > @"UNOwen.7132" you are doing this thing where you assume you are right again > Yes, how dare I assume that the thing I tested and confirmed is true ... is true. What, are you also telling this to the scientists who confirmed that theropods have feathers? Its called the scientific method mate. But then again, seems youre still hung up about being duped and tripling down even after being shown that you were duped.

> @"Ragnar.4257" said: > > @"UNOwen.7132" said: > > > @"Dadnir.5038" said: > > > So... It's screenshot reading time: > > > Burn: 48690 damage; 32 hits > > > Translated, it mean that you took 32 hits of burn which mean that the 48k were applied over 32 seconds for an average burn damage of 1521.5 damage per seconds. > > > > > > > ... what? Ok apparently not everyone knows how condis work in death recap. When it says 32 hits, that doesnt mean 32 *ticks of damage*. Thats means he took damage from 32 stacks of burn in total. If you were to get 100 stacks of burning applied to you, downing you in one tick, and finishing you off in another tick, that wouldnt show as 2 hits. It would show as *200* hits. So no, its actually 15600 damage per second-ish. > > > > > It also mean that technically, over those 3 seconds you claim were enough to down you, you took an average of 4563.5 damage which may be close to half your total health pool if you are an thief, guardian or elementalist without any ressource investment into vitality. (Obviously those number are as unrealistic as your own because they do not take into account possible burn burst, like your's does not take into account the simple fact that you took those 48k over 32 hits but it does have the merit to put things into perspective). > > > > > > > Same mistake as above. He took an average of 45635 instead. Thats more than the entire lifetotal of a full tank warrior. Significantly more, actually. > > > > > Cheer up, over the same time frame, you could have taken the same amount of power damage from any AA in game. > > > > Same mistake once more. In reality, no power build can maintain 15k dps over 3 seconds. Im not sure any can even reach 30k burst in 2 seconds. > > For that to make sense, each stack of burn would do 1520 damage per tick (48690/32 = 1520). > > There is no build possible in PvP that can make a single burn stack tick for that much. Not even 1/3rd of that amount. > > Anyone looking at the Death Breakdown for serious analysis is never going to learn anything useful. It's buggy asf. > True, the damage seems a bit off, though not by as much as you seem to imply. Burn guard can get up to 500+ damage per burn tick. > If we assume he really did take that much damage over 3 seconds, that must mean he had 30+ burn stacks on him. To reach that, a DH has to hit you 90, yes, NINETY, times. How are you managing to get hit 90 times in such a short window? And if a power build hit you 90 times, would you expect to still be alive? Uh, no? Did you forget that Guardians virtue passive isnt the only source of burning? I mean, hell, even ignoring the spirit weapon, or any of the other burn skills, its also a lot of multihitting abilities that hit for very little individually.

> @"Dadnir.5038" said: > > @"UNOwen.7132" said: > > > @"Dadnir.5038" said: > > > So... It's screenshot reading time: > > > Burn: 48690 damage; 32 hits > > > Translated, it mean that you took 32 hits of burn which mean that the 48k were applied over 32 seconds for an average burn damage of 1521.5 damage per seconds. > > > > > > > ... what? Ok apparently not everyone knows how condis work in death recap. When it says 32 hits, that doesnt mean 32 *ticks of damage*. Thats means he took damage from 32 stacks of burn in total. If you were to get 100 stacks of burning applied to you, downing you in one tick, and finishing you off in another tick, that wouldnt show as 2 hits. It would show as *200* hits. So no, its actually 15600 damage per second-ish. > > > > > It also mean that technically, over those 3 seconds you claim were enough to down you, you took an average of 4563.5 damage which may be close to half your total health pool if you are an thief, guardian or elementalist without any ressource investment into vitality. (Obviously those number are as unrealistic as your own because they do not take into account possible burn burst, like your's does not take into account the simple fact that you took those 48k over 32 hits but it does have the merit to put things into perspective). > > > > > > > Same mistake as above. He took an average of 45635 instead. Thats more than the entire lifetotal of a full tank warrior. Significantly more, actually. > > > > > Cheer up, over the same time frame, you could have taken the same amount of power damage from any AA in game. > > > > Same mistake once more. In reality, no power build can maintain 15k dps over 3 seconds. Im not sure any can even reach 30k burst in 2 seconds. > > I think you might have to consider that you're wrong here. Why would the report even work like that? It doesn't make sense at all. > The report never give you the number of stacks you had on you. It's called "hits" for a good reason. It doesn't either give you the duration of the fight. No report will give you the "potential damage" of a maximum number of condition stack. It would be like having the report give you the potential damage of power skills as if your opponent was in a light armor without any damage reduction: nonsense. I dont have to consider it, because I know thats how it works. Why would the report work like that? Because it makes more sense. Each stack does its own damage, its just combined for simplicity. Each stack does a hit per second. So thats just how its shown. But if you want to know how I know, have you ever been killed by a power Holo, and noticed that in the death log, you had 5, 6, all the way up to *8* hits of burning? If it worked the way you think it works, that wouldnt make any sense. Holo doesnt put burning for 8 seconds on you. It barely uses burning at all, since its a power build. Except, there is one ability that has incidental burning. Photon Blitz. Every single of the 8 hits of Photon Blitz applies burning. And very usefully for our purposes, they each last 1 second. If it worked the way you assumed it worked, then a full photon blitz burning would show up as 1, maybe 2 hits. But it shows up as up to *8*.

> @"Dadnir.5038" said: > So... It's screenshot reading time: > Burn: 48690 damage; 32 hits > Translated, it mean that you took 32 hits of burn which mean that the 48k were applied over 32 seconds for an average burn damage of 1521.5 damage per seconds. > ... what? Ok apparently not everyone knows how condis work in death recap. When it says 32 hits, that doesnt mean 32 *ticks of damage*. Thats means he took damage from 32 stacks of burn in total. If you were to get 100 stacks of burning applied to you, downing you in one tick, and finishing you off in another tick, that wouldnt show as 2 hits. It would show as *200* hits. So no, its actually 15600 damage per second-ish. > It also mean that technically, over those 3 seconds you claim were enough to down you, you took an average of 4563.5 damage which may be close to half your total health pool if you are an thief, guardian or elementalist without any ressource investment into vitality. (Obviously those number are as unrealistic as your own because they do not take into account possible burn burst, like your's does not take into account the simple fact that you took those 48k over 32 hits but it does have the merit to put things into perspective). > Same mistake as above. He took an average of 45635 instead. Thats more than the entire lifetotal of a full tank warrior. Significantly more, actually. > Cheer up, over the same time frame, you could have taken the same amount of power damage from any AA in game. Same mistake once more. In reality, no power build can maintain 15k dps over 3 seconds. Im not sure any can even reach 30k burst in 2 seconds.

> @"Yasai.3549" said: > > @"UNOwen.7132" said: > > > Theyre not. DA used to be fine but its bad now, and acrobatics and critical strikes are in fact unplayable, though for different reasons. Granted, not like DA plays any different to SA. > > DA is still pretty good, but it has been demoted to "use if yu have the slot for it" which makes it really only used on Core Thief. > SA is just up there with Trickery right now : Too good to not use, too many benefits to ignore. > The issue is that DA is inferior damage-wise to both DD and SA. The only reason youd ever pick DA is because you either dont have HoT, or youre playing S/D which doesnt use stealth attacks at all. > To not use SA is to lose an Emergency Stealth from using a Heal Skill, to lose cleanse while in Stealth, to lose Venom Siphon, to lose Boon Steal on Stealth attack now that Bountiful Thief has been nerfed. > Oh you wouldnt particularly miss most of those. The cleanse in stealth is pretty damn weak as is, and people are often not even using it. The stealth on heal skill is not terrible, but not worth a traitline, and the boon rip is nice, but now that its just 1 stolen boon, not imperative. No the main reason you pick SA is because its the most consistent damage traitline in its slot. DA does less damage, CS is completely unreliable to the point where it will *usually* do less damage as well.

> @"TrollingDemigod.3041" said: > > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > Well turns out most people disagree with u about what fun lol, turns out players like to feel powerful on their chosen class. Soon after the big lazy de-powercreep patch the pvp population plummeted. In 6 yrs I havent seen the pvp and wvw population so low. The games has been in a steady decline for yrs but as soon as the heavy blanket nerfs happened it was only a few months and pvp was basically dead. > > Obviously something's wrong and it's no coincidence the population left when it did. They should roll back to pre feb patch and nerf the outliers where they need nerfed and then continue nerfing individual outliers as needed while maintaining a builds viability. The feb patch everyone thought was magical was actually a lazy doomsday patch that killed the game despite some warnings given,, great job. > The real decline started with HoT powercreep, the lovely unkillable chronobunkers which everyone loved. > No new content, no reason to play, no rewards, nothing, why would people even want to play it? > If A-net would rollback to pre-feb patch then it they would just shot themselves in a knee once again, why would they do that? Game would be unhealthy once again and % nerfs here and there won't fix a kitten bad design of e-speces. Because the game was, and I know this is shocking, *better* pre-february patch. The february patch killed PvP, and most of peoples complaints go down to it. Sure, if you wanted to nerf specific things, do so, but instead they introduced major powerdip (basically like powercreep, except inverse and ***MUCH*** worse for the game), and killed build diversity. > They've brought so much broken stuff to the game, it would be much faster if they just rollback everything to 2012 game release state. I mean if you want to undo powercreep, just change back to 2014 PvP. Spoiler: Were currently in a state where everyone is *weaker* than they were in 2014. Thats how bad the powerdip is. > Game with each patch runs somehow worse than it did before, I really don't know what they're doing with their game engine, but it must be some real mess if some changes not even aimed at classes will screw them somehow. > The biggest issue with Feb patch is not the patch itself, but the lack of follow-up changes. No, the biggest issue *was* the patch itself. There were follow-up changes. They keep nerfing the new "overperforming" build, and every time it fails to fix the problems, and more players leave. Because you cant fix the issue with nerfs. What needed to be done is to either roll back the february patch as soon as it became clear that it was an unmitigated disaster, or acknowledge that they *completely* overshot their target, and start buffing and partially rolling back changes. Nerfing further is just doubling down on the issues that made the february patch a disaster to begin with.