Sir Vincent III.1286 Posted November 1, 2019 Share Posted November 1, 2019 > @"NorthernRedStar.3054" said: > > @"Sir Vincent III.1286" said: > > It's not like they haven't done this before, else we wouldn't even have new weapons and weapon skills. > > You're comparing apples to pineapples. > What's the difference between a new weapon and redesigned weapon? Nothing. It's not apple vs pineapple. You're misrepresenting my point. > > @"Sir Vincent III.1286" said: > > That doesn't explain anything. It seems that you're dismissing the idea for the sake of dismissing it without any valid reason on your part why you're dismissing it. > > It's a very common reasoning between some development and update decisions, when concerned with existing players' reactions. Granted, not really that relevant here, I'll give you that. > Question: How many times have they redesigned weapon skills despite player reaction? Answer: Too many to count. Your argument has no basis. If you want to look at ArenaNet's track record, they don't give a Skritt to player reaction. > > @"Sir Vincent III.1286" said: > > Obviously that design is flawed. It has been flawed from the very beginning and I have given several example where this design have failed. So far, you have not shown any support to your claims. > > This isn't about me trying to prove my superiority over you. It's just me trying to envision and explain the reasoning behind the devs' involvement or lack of thereof. It's easier to swap wheels for an existing card, based on a need, than to re-invent a new type of a car. Even if the original design was lacking. > Right. So by that logic, your engine is burning fuel at low RPM and you rather change the tires instead of rebuilding the engine. Wow, that's smart! /smh Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Psycoprophet.8107 Posted November 1, 2019 Share Posted November 1, 2019 It would be a simple change on their end and would add so much build deversity. I bet a few new builds alone would surface if ini was 15 baseline. If I'm doing any stealth build id be more inclined to use different variations of cs,da and acro with sa than I would trickery if it didnt offer the 3 needed ini. I dont need basically any other traits in the line lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KrHome.1920 Posted November 1, 2019 Share Posted November 1, 2019 > @"Alatar.7364" said: > _(also make ini-pols separate for each weapon set)_ Yeah give every thief an instant double sb5, double vault, dp5,2 combo, double rifle4 etc. on weaponswap - no matter what he did before. Great idea! That won't cause issues at all. That thief community... 15 ini baseline is a ridiculous idea because picking trickery prevents you from just picking deadly arts, critical strikes, elite spec on any build for completely broken damage numbers without any skill spam tradeoffs. The only meaningful thing you would lose is a bit of steal utility which you don't need when you can burst like crazy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NorthernRedStar.3054 Posted November 1, 2019 Author Share Posted November 1, 2019 > @"KrHome.1920" said: > > @"Alatar.7364" said: > > _(also make ini-pols separate for each weapon set)_ > Yeah give every thief an instant double sb5, double vault, dp5,2 combo, double rifle4 etc. on weaponswap - no matter what he did before. Great idea! That won't cause issues at all. > > That thief community... > > 15 ini baseline is a ridiculous idea because picking trickery prevents you from just picking deadly arts, critical strikes, elite spec on any build for completely broken damage numbers without any skill spam tradeoffs. The only meaningful thing you would lose is a bit of steal utility which you don't need when you can burst like crazy. > I mean, I doubt anyone here thinks (or suggests) that no numbers would have to changed. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Psycoprophet.8107 Posted November 1, 2019 Share Posted November 1, 2019 > @"KrHome.1920" said: > > @"Alatar.7364" said: > > _(also make ini-pols separate for each weapon set)_ > Yeah give every thief an instant double sb5, double vault, dp5,2 combo, double rifle4 etc. on weaponswap - no matter what he did before. Great idea! That won't cause issues at all. > > That thief community... > > 15 ini baseline is a ridiculous idea because picking trickery prevents you from just picking deadly arts, critical strikes, elite spec on any build for completely broken damage numbers without any skill spam tradeoffs. The only meaningful thing you would lose is a bit of steal utility which you don't need when you can burst like crazy. > Are u ok? Were saying make 15 ini baseline and changing preparedness to something else not giving ini. U sound like a person who never has played thief and are deathly against them having g anything nice haha. Thief has 15 ini with trickery so it wouldnt be any more spammy and yeah it open up buld variety. Right now with coat of skills 12 ini is a handicap to any build not that ud obviously mind. U prob anti thief cuz u play? Guessing thief counters it haha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sobx.1758 Posted November 1, 2019 Share Posted November 1, 2019 > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > @"KrHome.1920" said: > > > @"Alatar.7364" said: > > > _(also make ini-pols separate for each weapon set)_ > > Yeah give every thief an instant double sb5, double vault, dp5,2 combo, double rifle4 etc. on weaponswap - no matter what he did before. Great idea! That won't cause issues at all. > > > > That thief community... > > > > 15 ini baseline is a ridiculous idea because picking trickery prevents you from just picking deadly arts, critical strikes, elite spec on any build for completely broken damage numbers without any skill spam tradeoffs. The only meaningful thing you would lose is a bit of steal utility which you don't need when you can burst like crazy. > > > > Are u ok? > Were saying make 15 ini baseline and changing preparedness to something else not giving ini. U sound like a person who never has played thief and are deathly against them having g anything nice haha. Thief has 15 ini with trickery so it wouldnt be any more spammy and yeah it open up buld variety. Right now with coat of skills 12 ini is a handicap to any build not that ud obviously mind. U prob anti thief cuz u play? Guessing thief counters it haha He quote what he was answering to and it was this fragment: **(also make ini-pols separate for each weapon set)** And his answer to that is for the most part valid. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Psycoprophet.8107 Posted November 1, 2019 Share Posted November 1, 2019 > @"Sobx.1758" said: > > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > > @"KrHome.1920" said: > > > > @"Alatar.7364" said: > > > > _(also make ini-pols separate for each weapon set)_ > > > Yeah give every thief an instant double sb5, double vault, dp5,2 combo, double rifle4 etc. on weaponswap - no matter what he did before. Great idea! That won't cause issues at all. > > > > > > That thief community... > > > > > > 15 ini baseline is a ridiculous idea because picking trickery prevents you from just picking deadly arts, critical strikes, elite spec on any build for completely broken damage numbers without any skill spam tradeoffs. The only meaningful thing you would lose is a bit of steal utility which you don't need when you can burst like crazy. > > > > > > > Are u ok? > > Were saying make 15 ini baseline and changing preparedness to something else not giving ini. U sound like a person who never has played thief and are deathly against them having g anything nice haha. Thief has 15 ini with trickery so it wouldnt be any more spammy and yeah it open up buld variety. Right now with coat of skills 12 ini is a handicap to any build not that ud obviously mind. U prob anti thief cuz u play? Guessing thief counters it haha > > He quote what he was answering to and it was this fragment: **(also make ini-pols separate for each weapon set)** > > And his answer to that is for the most part valid. Oh my bad yeah as sweet as that would be that would definitely not be balanced haha Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alatar.7364 Posted November 1, 2019 Share Posted November 1, 2019 > @"Sobx.1758" said: > > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > > @"KrHome.1920" said: > > > > @"Alatar.7364" said: > > > > _(also make ini-pols separate for each weapon set)_ > > > Yeah give every thief an instant double sb5, double vault, dp5,2 combo, double rifle4 etc. on weaponswap - no matter what he did before. Great idea! That won't cause issues at all. > > > > > > That thief community... > > > > > > 15 ini baseline is a ridiculous idea because picking trickery prevents you from just picking deadly arts, critical strikes, elite spec on any build for completely broken damage numbers without any skill spam tradeoffs. The only meaningful thing you would lose is a bit of steal utility which you don't need when you can burst like crazy. > > > > > > > Are u ok? > > Were saying make 15 ini baseline and changing preparedness to something else not giving ini. U sound like a person who never has played thief and are deathly against them having g anything nice haha. Thief has 15 ini with trickery so it wouldnt be any more spammy and yeah it open up buld variety. Right now with coat of skills 12 ini is a handicap to any build not that ud obviously mind. U prob anti thief cuz u play? Guessing thief counters it haha > > He quote what he was answering to and it was this fragment: **(also make ini-pols separate for each weapon set)** > > And his answer to that is for the most part valid. It is valid if people look at it with lack of imagination, yes. Ini would not be shared among same weapons, only different sets. Double Sb5 and Rifle4? How is that an issue? Thief could always run away from a fight and its what thief has been doing for past several years, running away. Double Vault? Valid, but as I said thief can't 1v1, if the Thief went X/Staff instead of mandatory X/Sb then he is dead no matter the Ini-pol. And before someone mentions it, recently nerfed Staff Thief worked because it was Staff/Staff _(and even then was a side-node bunker rather than proper duelist)_, so as I said, it would not work with same weapons. If we wanted to explore that Idea more and try to make Trickery still a valid option _(which it would still be despite following idea)_ to stop people from running DA/CS/Elite then the _Separate Ini-pol_ could be a trait that would replace _Prepardness_ in Trickery. Thief would now have 15 Ini _(as it always should have since 12 is borderline unplayable)_ but would still need Trickery for Separate-ini pols. Disregarding anyones opinion about Baseline Ini, the undeniable truth is that Trickery is absolutely ruining Thief build diversity, and by definition possible roles, I run around with CS/DA/Trickery on some DMG oriented core builds and my dmg is still behind almost every other Power builds unless I decide to go full yolo-backstab burst that either magically lands its burst in this world of blocks, invuls, blinds and random dodges or is useless for next 20 seconds, nonetheless if people fear that changing the baseline would skyrocket Thief dmg, then by all means adjust what needs to be adjusted just don't forget to adjust/nerf Warriors random 10k hits on a Demo amulet, Holos 6k AAs with twice the attack reach of any other melee, etc. etc. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dDuff.3860 Posted November 1, 2019 Share Posted November 1, 2019 Ok guys, listen: If you make preparedness baseline, it'll automatically buff trickery more, because you'll have to put something in its place, and unless it'll be sort of debuff, it'll be a buff to trickery. The idea here, is to rebalance weapon skills based on 15 baseline ini pool, adding 1 ini cost to abilities that currently cost 3,4,5 initiatve. So minor trait will reduce each ability ini cost by 1. That way we have 15 base ini pool shared to any thief build without buffing current trickery very hard. Personally, I don't find this idea perfect, but buffing trickery which is obligatory — even worse. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Psycoprophet.8107 Posted November 1, 2019 Share Posted November 1, 2019 > @"dDuff.3860" said: > Ok guys, listen: > If you make preparedness baseline, it'll automatically buff trickery more, because you'll have to put something in its place, and unless it'll be sort of debuff, it'll be a buff to trickery. > > The idea here, is to rebalance weapon skills based on 15 baseline ini pool, adding 1 ini cost to abilities that currently cost 3,4,5 initiatve. So minor trait will reduce each ability ini cost by 1. > That way we have 15 base ini pool shared to any thief build without buffing current trickery very hard. > > Personally, I don't find this idea perfect, but buffing trickery which is obligatory — even worse. What? So anything but prepardness is a buff to trickery? Um I dont follow that logic at all. If they put some ok buffing trait in its place it be a nerf compared to losing 3 ini if were talking specifically trickery line Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Ubi.4136 Posted November 1, 2019 Share Posted November 1, 2019 Honestly, they should just rework thief, remove initiative altogether, and give the skills actual cooldowns like everyone else. (I think the same should be done to rev too). Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
dDuff.3860 Posted November 1, 2019 Share Posted November 1, 2019 > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > @"dDuff.3860" said: > > Ok guys, listen: > > If you make preparedness baseline, it'll automatically buff trickery more, because you'll have to put something in its place, and unless it'll be sort of debuff, it'll be a buff to trickery. > > > > The idea here, is to rebalance weapon skills based on 15 baseline ini pool, adding 1 ini cost to abilities that currently cost 3,4,5 initiatve. So minor trait will reduce each ability ini cost by 1. > > That way we have 15 base ini pool shared to any thief build without buffing current trickery very hard. > > > > Personally, I don't find this idea perfect, but buffing trickery which is obligatory — even worse. > > What? So anything but prepardness is a buff to trickery? Um I dont follow that logic at all. If they put some ok buffing trait in its place it be a nerf compared to losing 3 ini if were talking specifically trickery line So, when you make something baseline it becomes available to any build despite traitlines taken. This is what ppl say about making preparedness (15 initiative pool) baseline. If and when this happens, preparedness is gone, and the trait space is open for anything. If you put there anything, even the least possible value, it will still be a buff to trickery, because it'll remain bonus from 15 initiative baseline and will have another added value from "new trait" Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
kash.9213 Posted November 1, 2019 Share Posted November 1, 2019 > @"Ubi.4136" said: > **Honestly**, they should just rework thief, **remove initiative altogether**, and give the skills actual cooldowns like everyone else. (I think the same should be done to rev too). Good thing you're being honest so we know it's legitimately a bad idea. "let's get rid of thief and make a different class that's just like other classes thief players wanted to avoid". Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Psycoprophet.8107 Posted November 1, 2019 Share Posted November 1, 2019 > @"dDuff.3860" said: > > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > > @"dDuff.3860" said: > > > Ok guys, listen: > > > If you make preparedness baseline, it'll automatically buff trickery more, because you'll have to put something in its place, and unless it'll be sort of debuff, it'll be a buff to trickery. > > > > > > The idea here, is to rebalance weapon skills based on 15 baseline ini pool, adding 1 ini cost to abilities that currently cost 3,4,5 initiatve. So minor trait will reduce each ability ini cost by 1. > > > That way we have 15 base ini pool shared to any thief build without buffing current trickery very hard. > > > > > > Personally, I don't find this idea perfect, but buffing trickery which is obligatory — even worse. > > > > What? So anything but prepardness is a buff to trickery? Um I dont follow that logic at all. If they put some ok buffing trait in its place it be a nerf compared to losing 3 ini if were talking specifically trickery line > > So, when you make something baseline it becomes available to any build despite traitlines taken. This is what ppl say about making preparedness (15 initiative pool) baseline. If and when this happens, preparedness is gone, and the trait space is open for anything. If you put there anything, even the least possible value, it will still be a buff to trickery, because it'll remain bonus from 15 initiative baseline and will have another added value from "new trait" No. It will remain a buff to thief as a whole but not to trickery line specially. If u put a add 90% dps after dodge for 20 seconds than I'd say it's a buff to the line lol if u changed the trait to something useful but not OP than it wouldn't be game breaking and a lot of build deversity would open up for thief. Having such a mandatory trait shouldn't have been a thing anyway. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sir Vincent III.1286 Posted November 1, 2019 Share Posted November 1, 2019 > @"KrHome.1920" said: > > @"Alatar.7364" said: > > _(also make ini-pols separate for each weapon set)_ > Yeah give every thief an instant double sb5, double vault, dp5,2 combo, double rifle4 etc. on weaponswap - no matter what he did before. Great idea! That won't cause issues at all. > > That thief community... > > 15 ini baseline is a ridiculous idea because picking **trickery prevents you from just picking deadly arts, critical strikes, elite spec **on any build for completely broken damage numbers without any skill spam tradeoffs. The only meaningful thing you would lose is a bit of steal utility which you don't need when you can burst like crazy. > Will that be really the case though? That seems over-simplistic. Although +3 initiative is nice and all, that's not the only reason to take Trickery. Whether +3 Init becomes a baseline, I'll still use Trickery in my other builds due to Klepto, Trickster, and Sleight. I used to support this change, but it doesn't solve the problem of Initiative drought on weapon swap. While other professions can use all skills on weapon swap, Thief cannot once Initiatives are depleted. IMO, the dual cost I've suggested is a good trade off. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sobx.1758 Posted November 1, 2019 Share Posted November 1, 2019 > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > @"dDuff.3860" said: > > > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > > > @"dDuff.3860" said: > > > > Ok guys, listen: > > > > If you make preparedness baseline, it'll automatically buff trickery more, because you'll have to put something in its place, and unless it'll be sort of debuff, it'll be a buff to trickery. > > > > > > > > The idea here, is to rebalance weapon skills based on 15 baseline ini pool, adding 1 ini cost to abilities that currently cost 3,4,5 initiatve. So minor trait will reduce each ability ini cost by 1. > > > > That way we have 15 base ini pool shared to any thief build without buffing current trickery very hard. > > > > > > > > Personally, I don't find this idea perfect, but buffing trickery which is obligatory — even worse. > > > > > > What? So anything but prepardness is a buff to trickery? Um I dont follow that logic at all. If they put some ok buffing trait in its place it be a nerf compared to losing 3 ini if were talking specifically trickery line > > > > So, when you make something baseline it becomes available to any build despite traitlines taken. This is what ppl say about making preparedness (15 initiative pool) baseline. If and when this happens, preparedness is gone, and the trait space is open for anything. If you put there anything, even the least possible value, it will still be a buff to trickery, because it'll remain bonus from 15 initiative baseline and will have another added value from "new trait" > > No. It will remain a buff to thief as a whole but not to trickery line specially. If u put a add 90% dps after dodge for 20 seconds than I'd say it's a buff to the line lol if u changed the trait to something useful but not OP than it wouldn't be game breaking and a lot of build deversity would open up for thief. Having such a mandatory trait shouldn't have been a thing anyway. You're both correct, it would be a buff to all specs, including trickery :D It being a buff to trickery (yes, as well as to other specs) aside, I still don't think it's needed or deserved. It would be convenient, but it's nowhere near the argument needed to buff a class. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Psycoprophet.8107 Posted November 1, 2019 Share Posted November 1, 2019 > @"Sobx.1758" said: > > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > > @"dDuff.3860" said: > > > > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > > > > @"dDuff.3860" said: > > > > > Ok guys, listen: > > > > > If you make preparedness baseline, it'll automatically buff trickery more, because you'll have to put something in its place, and unless it'll be sort of debuff, it'll be a buff to trickery. > > > > > > > > > > The idea here, is to rebalance weapon skills based on 15 baseline ini pool, adding 1 ini cost to abilities that currently cost 3,4,5 initiatve. So minor trait will reduce each ability ini cost by 1. > > > > > That way we have 15 base ini pool shared to any thief build without buffing current trickery very hard. > > > > > > > > > > Personally, I don't find this idea perfect, but buffing trickery which is obligatory — even worse. > > > > > > > > What? So anything but prepardness is a buff to trickery? Um I dont follow that logic at all. If they put some ok buffing trait in its place it be a nerf compared to losing 3 ini if were talking specifically trickery line > > > > > > So, when you make something baseline it becomes available to any build despite traitlines taken. This is what ppl say about making preparedness (15 initiative pool) baseline. If and when this happens, preparedness is gone, and the trait space is open for anything. If you put there anything, even the least possible value, it will still be a buff to trickery, because it'll remain bonus from 15 initiative baseline and will have another added value from "new trait" > > > > No. It will remain a buff to thief as a whole but not to trickery line specially. If u put a add 90% dps after dodge for 20 seconds than I'd say it's a buff to the line lol if u changed the trait to something useful but not OP than it wouldn't be game breaking and a lot of build deversity would open up for thief. Having such a mandatory trait shouldn't have been a thing anyway. > > You're both correct, it would be a buff to all specs, including trickery :D > > It being a buff to trickery (yes, as well as to other specs) aside, I still don't think it's needed or deserved. It would be convenient, but it's nowhere near the argument needed to buff a class. But if the trait replacing preparedness is less useful than preparedness than trickery line itself would be nerfed while builds not using trickery would be buffed by baseline ini increase thus increasing build diversity as more possible builds would be viable. And no d/p and p/p are not to viable these days lol Just sayin lol Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crab Fear.1624 Posted November 2, 2019 Share Posted November 2, 2019 > @"Sobx.1758" said: > Nah, it's not really needed or deserved. > > It's a buff, sure, but that's not enough of a justification to impletement something. :D It is needed and deserved :D Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sobx.1758 Posted November 2, 2019 Share Posted November 2, 2019 > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > @"Sobx.1758" said: > > > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > > > @"dDuff.3860" said: > > > > > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > > > > > @"dDuff.3860" said: > > > > > > Ok guys, listen: > > > > > > If you make preparedness baseline, it'll automatically buff trickery more, because you'll have to put something in its place, and unless it'll be sort of debuff, it'll be a buff to trickery. > > > > > > > > > > > > The idea here, is to rebalance weapon skills based on 15 baseline ini pool, adding 1 ini cost to abilities that currently cost 3,4,5 initiatve. So minor trait will reduce each ability ini cost by 1. > > > > > > That way we have 15 base ini pool shared to any thief build without buffing current trickery very hard. > > > > > > > > > > > > Personally, I don't find this idea perfect, but buffing trickery which is obligatory — even worse. > > > > > > > > > > What? So anything but prepardness is a buff to trickery? Um I dont follow that logic at all. If they put some ok buffing trait in its place it be a nerf compared to losing 3 ini if were talking specifically trickery line > > > > > > > > So, when you make something baseline it becomes available to any build despite traitlines taken. This is what ppl say about making preparedness (15 initiative pool) baseline. If and when this happens, preparedness is gone, and the trait space is open for anything. If you put there anything, even the least possible value, it will still be a buff to trickery, because it'll remain bonus from 15 initiative baseline and will have another added value from "new trait" > > > > > > No. It will remain a buff to thief as a whole but not to trickery line specially. If u put a add 90% dps after dodge for 20 seconds than I'd say it's a buff to the line lol if u changed the trait to something useful but not OP than it wouldn't be game breaking and a lot of build deversity would open up for thief. Having such a mandatory trait shouldn't have been a thing anyway. > > > > You're both correct, it would be a buff to all specs, including trickery :D > > > > It being a buff to trickery (yes, as well as to other specs) aside, I still don't think it's needed or deserved. It would be convenient, but it's nowhere near the argument needed to buff a class. > > But if the trait replacing preparedness is less useful than preparedness than trickery line itself would be nerfed while builds not using trickery would be buffed by baseline ini increase thus increasing build diversity as more possible builds would be viable. And no d/p and p/p are not to viable these days lol > Just sayin lol Ok, but we can easly argue that if the "replacing trait" will be stronger, then it's a buff. Under the ideal circumstances, it would get replaced with something of the same power level in which case it's still a buff and OP never wrote anything about nerfing trickery (I think, didn't bother to check :D). If nerfing trickery is what we're after, then it can be done without pulling any trait out to buff the whole class for no good reason. > @"Alatar.7364" said: > > @"Sobx.1758" said: > > > @"Psycoprophet.8107" said: > > > > @"KrHome.1920" said: > > > > > @"Alatar.7364" said: > > > > > _(also make ini-pols separate for each weapon set)_ > > > > Yeah give every thief an instant double sb5, double vault, dp5,2 combo, double rifle4 etc. on weaponswap - no matter what he did before. Great idea! That won't cause issues at all. > > > > > > > > That thief community... > > > > > > > > 15 ini baseline is a ridiculous idea because picking trickery prevents you from just picking deadly arts, critical strikes, elite spec on any build for completely broken damage numbers without any skill spam tradeoffs. The only meaningful thing you would lose is a bit of steal utility which you don't need when you can burst like crazy. > > > > > > > > > > Are u ok? > > > Were saying make 15 ini baseline and changing preparedness to something else not giving ini. U sound like a person who never has played thief and are deathly against them having g anything nice haha. Thief has 15 ini with trickery so it wouldnt be any more spammy and yeah it open up buld variety. Right now with coat of skills 12 ini is a handicap to any build not that ud obviously mind. U prob anti thief cuz u play? Guessing thief counters it haha > > > > He quote what he was answering to and it was this fragment: **(also make ini-pols separate for each weapon set)** > > > > And his answer to that is for the most part valid. > > It is valid if people look at it with lack of imagination, yes. > Ini would not be shared among same weapons, only different sets. Ah, so now we're preteding that refilling ini on weapon swap wouldn't be an absurd buff to the class if we're not talking about 2 same weapons? :lol: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sobx.1758 Posted November 2, 2019 Share Posted November 2, 2019 > @"Crab Fear.1624" said: > > @"Sobx.1758" said: > > Nah, it's not really needed or deserved. > > > > It's a buff, sure, but that's not enough of a justification to impletement something. :D > > It is needed and deserved :D Ok. How? Why? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crab Fear.1624 Posted November 2, 2019 Share Posted November 2, 2019 > @"Sobx.1758" said: > > @"Crab Fear.1624" said: > > > @"Sobx.1758" said: > > > Nah, it's not really needed or deserved. > > > > > > It's a buff, sure, but that's not enough of a justification to impletement something. :D > > > > It is needed and deserved :D > > Ok. How? Why? Whatever the reason you said it is not, take the exact opposite of that and there you go. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sobx.1758 Posted November 2, 2019 Share Posted November 2, 2019 > @"Crab Fear.1624" said: > > @"Sobx.1758" said: > > > @"Crab Fear.1624" said: > > > > @"Sobx.1758" said: > > > > Nah, it's not really needed or deserved. > > > > > > > > It's a buff, sure, but that's not enough of a justification to impletement something. :D > > > > > > It is needed and deserved :D > > > > Ok. How? Why? > > Whatever the reason you said it is not, take the exact opposite of that and there you go. Wow, great talk. The thing here is that OP (and apparently you) is comming up with the idea of a buff for a class, so it's mostly your responsibility to justify why you're proposing it in the first place. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Crab Fear.1624 Posted November 2, 2019 Share Posted November 2, 2019 > @"Sobx.1758" said: > > @"Crab Fear.1624" said: > > > @"Sobx.1758" said: > > > > @"Crab Fear.1624" said: > > > > > @"Sobx.1758" said: > > > > > Nah, it's not really needed or deserved. > > > > > > > > > > It's a buff, sure, but that's not enough of a justification to impletement something. :D > > > > > > > > It is needed and deserved :D > > > > > > Ok. How? Why? > > > > Whatever the reason you said it is not, take the exact opposite of that and there you go. > > Wow, great talk. The thing here is that OP (and apparently you) is comming up with the idea of a buff for a class, so it's mostly your responsibility to justify why you're proposing it in the first place. I'm talking at your pace. You say no without justification. We are not talking about whether it exists or not, so both of us would be responsible for justifying our opinion. I assumed you must have had some good justification to say no with such authority, and in such line of thinking, the only logical conclusion was to state my reasoning was the opposite. I could be wrong about your reasoning, but since you presented none, I felt obligated to create one myself that suited my needs. Feel free to explain why you believe thief doesn't need baseline 15 initiative, and then we can have proper discourse. Otherwise every reply to your reply will be of reciprocal caliber. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Kageseigi.2150 Posted November 2, 2019 Share Posted November 2, 2019 > @"dDuff.3860" said: > if you make preparedness baseline, you're buffing trickery, which is already mandatory for any thief pvp build (because you have to put something else instead of this minor trait) Buffing Trickery isn't necessarily a bad thing if the Thief as a whole gets such a big buff also. Those three extra initiative are what makes it a pain to play non-Trickery builds. It just throws everything off... timing especially. There are many ways to play Thief, but having to alter your counting of initiative shouldn't be one of them. If you were to compare it to shooting, it would be like moving through a course with two different sized magazines for the same gun. You need to be able to focus on tactical movements and hitting targets, not on which magazine you've got loaded. If anything, there should be a (trade-off) trait that lowers the amount of initiative from the standard 15 to 12, but in return, all initiative skills hit 20% harder. > @"Curennos.9307" said: > Also - I think part of what makes Trickery so required is the meta of other classes. Steal becomes extremely powerful, but **needed**, due to the amount of protection and stability floating around. Being able to remove protection on your opponent - who would otherwise have near perma prot - or remove it in time for your burst, is extremely powerful. If anet toned down the amount of boonspam, it could justify changes to Slight of Hand/Bountiful Theft without it being an outright nerf. Trickster has always been my solution to condition cleansing. Seeing that I played Core Dagger/Pistol for so long before I got the expansions, I didn't have many options without hitting like a wet noodle if I took Shadow Arts. I always had Withdraw, Roll for Initiative, and Shadow Step slotted. That's 2-3 stun breaks, 3 general condition cleansing skills, along with a lot of movement-impairing condition removal. If I wanted more, I would take Haste or Scorpion Wire. Burst of Agility and Daggerstorm are also useful. The problem with Trickster, of course, is losing Bountiful Theft. Personally, I do not like the Thief's boon-removal/stealing capability to be so limited. It's called a **THIEF**, for crying out loud. Personally, I would make Bountiful Theft's boon-stealing baseline on Steal. And perhaps replace Bountiful Theft with a nullification-trait that removes every remaining boon from the target. I'd also add boon-stealing ability to more weapon skills... across all weapon sets... or at least melee weapons. If you want to go even further, perhaps have each weapon skill remove a specific boon... an anti-boon skill, if you will. For example... * Heartseeker could remove Regeneration * Death Blossom could remove Resistance * Dancing Dagger could remove Swiftness * Cloak and Dagger could remove Protection * Headshot could remove Stability (guaranteeing an interrupt) * Black Powder could remove Retaliation > @"KrHome.1920" said: > Yeah give every thief an instant double sb5, double vault, dp5,2 combo, double rifle4 etc. on weaponswap - no matter what he did before. Great idea! That won't cause issues at all. Yeah, because everyone's afraid of a double Shortbow or Rifle Thief! Or a Thief that is living in Stealth. Vaults and Unloads are the worst that would happen. But Staff just got hammered, and Pistol/Pistol is extremely lacking. Compared to the firepower that everyone else has along with versatility, this is hardly the worst change that could be made. The real problem is that most Thieves are locked into a single weapon set because Shortbow is absolutely required. Because without the Shortbow, the Thief may as well not exist in PvP. Double Vaults and Unloads may just be enough to counter the lack of mobility. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Alatar.7364 Posted November 2, 2019 Share Posted November 2, 2019 > @"Sobx.1758" said: > Ah, so now we're preteding that refilling ini on weapon swap wouldn't be an absurd buff to the class if we're not talking about 2 same weapons? :lol: I wonder what do you think would suddenly happen? Thief is **incredibly** easy to nuke in split second. You think implementing my change would make it absurd? How? You would lose to some S/D & P/P? Not even turned-off washing machine could EVER lose to that. Thief could swap to Sb5 and run away? They already do and its terribly depriving the profession out of Role options. Yes, there are other options/combinations, but I have explicitly said everything can be adjusted/nerfed **IF** it would be implemented, not just traits but Builds too, like Condi S/D, etc. Warrior has a 5sec CD weapon swap and practically all of its skills deal nuke levels of dmg, all while happily wearing a heavy armor + Demo amulet. When players are creating Thief profession, they are greeted with a sweet description of _"They're deadly in one-on-one combat using their agility, acrobatic fighting style, (...)"_, so tell me how is it absurd that such a profession is the weakest 1v1 in the game with one of the weakest DMG in game with a mechanics that constantly locks it out of all of its weapon abilities across both weapon sets, but at the same time there is a Warrior with it's nuts dmg, nuts sustain, nuts Rampage and a **VERY** good mobility. Why is it absurd that Thief would be allowed to be what it was meant to be, instead of forever +1/decap for which I suggested removal of Sb5 all together. The change I suggested _(but don't intend on)_ wouldn't suddenly make Thief OP or good at 1v1s or probably even Teamfights, it would just give it diversity/chance/options, especially if trait-lines would be adjusted accordingly. Thief is not a fighter/duelist for a good reason, you can't say it would be absurd to give it same chances as professions that were not even described as deadly combatants unlike Thief. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Create an account or sign in to comment
You need to be a member in order to leave a comment
Create an account
Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!
Register a new accountSign in
Already have an account? Sign in here.
Sign In Now