Missed backstab delay

Missed backstab delay

in Thief

Posted by: ParanoidKami.2867

ParanoidKami.2867

I’ve noticed that when you miss your backstab there’s a large delay before you can try it again, which is incredibly annoying. I’ve tried stowing my weapon for canceling and that didn’t seem to get rid of it. Is there another way of getting rid of this delay? If not, can Anet fix it? It’s not like backstab does a lot of damage anymore.

Missed backstab delay

in Thief

Posted by: Jugglemonkey.8741

Jugglemonkey.8741

It’s intentional, all stealth attacks were given a 1s ICD in the 26th July patch and despite people questioning this it’s still here, so might as well get used to it I’m afraid.

Critical Kit, Thief.
Don’t follow me, unless you enjoy being chased by angry men with sticks.
Power Build Condi Build

Missed backstab delay

in Thief

Posted by: BlaqueFyre.5678

BlaqueFyre.5678

It needs to die in Hellfire

Still no reasons from Devs for why it was nerfed, but conveniently follows Helseth stomping Devs repeatedly in Pvp.

Missed backstab delay

in Thief

Posted by: Jugglemonkey.8741

Jugglemonkey.8741

It needs to die in Hellfire

Still no reasons from Devs for why it was nerfed, but conveniently follows Helseth stomping Devs repeatedly in Pvp.

Nothing about this surprises me haha xD

It was either introduced to balance rending shade (but putting a 3s cooldown on the trait would have made far more sense than nerfing stealth attacks in general, unless I’m missing something), or to balance something else that’s about to come out (ala feline grace nerf shortly before the release of daredevil). Either way, it’s made thief more clunky than before.

Critical Kit, Thief.
Don’t follow me, unless you enjoy being chased by angry men with sticks.
Power Build Condi Build

Missed backstab delay

in Thief

Posted by: DeceiverX.8361

DeceiverX.8361

RS doesn’t even need an ICD since it only procs when the hit lands/deals damage, which would normally reveal the thief for 3s/4s and thus be an effective ICD, anyways.

I see this as either preliminary “balance” for their next elite spec which will end up not having the Revealed debuff (#balance) or them just being absolutely clueless as to how stealth attacks really work.

Missed backstab delay

in Thief

Posted by: babazhook.6805

babazhook.6805

RS doesn’t even need an ICD since it only procs when the hit lands/deals damage, which would normally reveal the thief for 3s/4s and thus be an effective ICD, anyways.

I see this as either preliminary “balance” for their next elite spec which will end up not having the Revealed debuff (#balance) or them just being absolutely clueless as to how stealth attacks really work.

I wonder exactly on the mechanics of this ICD regarding RS.

Your statement accurate for most of attacks from stealth barring that wih P/x builds.

Sneak attack is 5 attacks that occur out of stealth. I wonder if each is considered a “stealth attack” thus resulting in the ICD to prevent the RS working 5 times. Outside of this thought I can think of no other reason for that ICD being added due to RS.

(edited by babazhook.6805)

Missed backstab delay

in Thief

Posted by: BlaqueFyre.5678

BlaqueFyre.5678

RS doesn’t even need an ICD since it only procs when the hit lands/deals damage, which would normally reveal the thief for 3s/4s and thus be an effective ICD, anyways.

I see this as either preliminary “balance” for their next elite spec which will end up not having the Revealed debuff (#balance) or them just being absolutely clueless as to how stealth attacks really work.

I wonder exactly on the mechanics of this ICD regarding RS.

Your statement accurate for most of attacks from stealth barring that wih P/x builds.

Sneak attack is 5 attacks that occur out of stealth. I wonder if each is considered a “stealth attack” thus resulting in the ICD to prevent the RS working 5 times. Outside of this thought I can think of no other reason for that ICD being added due to RS.

RS procs on only 1 hit from Sneak Attack not all of them, Sneak Attack is useful in burning through aegis to land the RS proc

Missed backstab delay

in Thief

Posted by: DeceiverX.8361

DeceiverX.8361

Correct. Further, if this was not the case, it would suggest that if the balancing was actually done just for procs of RS, the ICD would have been applied trait-side to begin with.

The change on all levels lacks any coherence.

Missed backstab delay

in Thief

Posted by: babazhook.6805

babazhook.6805

RS doesn’t even need an ICD since it only procs when the hit lands/deals damage, which would normally reveal the thief for 3s/4s and thus be an effective ICD, anyways.

I see this as either preliminary “balance” for their next elite spec which will end up not having the Revealed debuff (#balance) or them just being absolutely clueless as to how stealth attacks really work.

I wonder exactly on the mechanics of this ICD regarding RS.

Your statement accurate for most of attacks from stealth barring that wih P/x builds.

Sneak attack is 5 attacks that occur out of stealth. I wonder if each is considered a “stealth attack” thus resulting in the ICD to prevent the RS working 5 times. Outside of this thought I can think of no other reason for that ICD being added due to RS.

RS procs on only 1 hit from Sneak Attack not all of them, Sneak Attack is useful in burning through aegis to land the RS proc

I am aware RS works only once from a sneak attack. I suggested the only reason for the ICD that i can see that would be related to RS is were it NOT there it would proc 5 times.

Missed backstab delay

in Thief

Posted by: BlaqueFyre.5678

BlaqueFyre.5678

RS doesn’t even need an ICD since it only procs when the hit lands/deals damage, which would normally reveal the thief for 3s/4s and thus be an effective ICD, anyways.

I see this as either preliminary “balance” for their next elite spec which will end up not having the Revealed debuff (#balance) or them just being absolutely clueless as to how stealth attacks really work.

I wonder exactly on the mechanics of this ICD regarding RS.

Your statement accurate for most of attacks from stealth barring that wih P/x builds.

Sneak attack is 5 attacks that occur out of stealth. I wonder if each is considered a “stealth attack” thus resulting in the ICD to prevent the RS working 5 times. Outside of this thought I can think of no other reason for that ICD being added due to RS.

RS procs on only 1 hit from Sneak Attack not all of them, Sneak Attack is useful in burning through aegis to land the RS proc

I am aware RS works only once from a sneak attack. I suggested the only reason for the ICD that i can see that would be related to RS is were it NOT there it would proc 5 times.

There is no ICD on the trait or on a hit, and it doesn’t proc 5 times. So what are you tying to say this statement makes no sense.

Missed backstab delay

in Thief

Posted by: babazhook.6805

babazhook.6805

RS doesn’t even need an ICD since it only procs when the hit lands/deals damage, which would normally reveal the thief for 3s/4s and thus be an effective ICD, anyways.

I see this as either preliminary “balance” for their next elite spec which will end up not having the Revealed debuff (#balance) or them just being absolutely clueless as to how stealth attacks really work.

I wonder exactly on the mechanics of this ICD regarding RS.

Your statement accurate for most of attacks from stealth barring that wih P/x builds.

Sneak attack is 5 attacks that occur out of stealth. I wonder if each is considered a “stealth attack” thus resulting in the ICD to prevent the RS working 5 times. Outside of this thought I can think of no other reason for that ICD being added due to RS.

RS procs on only 1 hit from Sneak Attack not all of them, Sneak Attack is useful in burning through aegis to land the RS proc

I am aware RS works only once from a sneak attack. I suggested the only reason for the ICD that i can see that would be related to RS is were it NOT there it would proc 5 times.

There is no ICD on the trait or on a hit, and it doesn’t proc 5 times. So what are you tying to say this statement makes no sense.

You are not reading what I wrote.

1>It was suggested a long time ago that the ICD was added to stealth attacks in order to address issues with RS. I disagreed then suggesting if that the case it would have been better just to put that ICD on the RS trait itself.

2>RS procs on all attacks from stealth ,> Most attacks from stealth are a single attack outside those with P/x pistol mainhand. These attacks are 5 attacks.

3>I am suggesting that without an ICD it possible that all 5 attacks from sneak attack would proc as Stealth attacks. All other attacks are single attacks and do a reveal meaning there no chance there could be more then one proc.

As example on P/P unload IF there was no cooldown on a sigil of strength all 8 shots could proc might meaning one unload could generate 8 sigil sourced might stacks. Due to that cooldown an Unload can generate at most 2 stacks from that particular sigil.

IF the coding of sneak attack sees EACH of the 5 shots from that skill as a stealth attack, then without a cooldown there could be 5 procs resulting in 10 boons stolen.

I am not stating THIS the reason for it. I am saying that if Sneak attacks coding has all 5 of those attacks coded as “A stealth attack” , then a 1 second ICD would ensure only one could proc and that the only reason I can see for that ICD being added due to RS.

I also stated I do not believe this WAS the reason for that ICD. I am just suggesting the only possible reason I could see for it being added tdue to RS.

>>Rending Shade.

>>Steal boons from enemies you strike with stealth attacks. Incoming damage from enemies without boons is reduced.

So is sneak attack 1 strike from stealth or 5 strikes from stealth?

(edited by babazhook.6805)

Missed backstab delay

in Thief

Posted by: emkelly.2371

emkelly.2371

Not that any of that matters anyway. There was no valid reason for the ICD anyway. Even if five attacks some how came from stealth that’s just pulling 5 booms which most classes could just replace anyway. In my opinion Anet only put an ICD on the stealth attack so that players would have a reason to buy HOT. Think about it. Before this core this was still viable. Now thief is useless without dare devil.

Ps: A net, if you are reading this, I’m on to you, and I’m calling you out. The minute you start nerfing classes to force players to spend more money instead of creating actual good and original content that we want you have lost me as a customer…

As proof I cite the following:

  • you nerfed spirits on rangers just before HOT. Then HOT comes out and druid is a support spec…which means spirits become useless..
  • you absolutely gutted warriors, then HOT comes out and berserker became only viable option, but you were forced to make changes when the entire community came together to protest….
  • the same can be said about other professions , and the pattern is clear, whenever you want us to spend money you purposefully nerf something and then either introduce something that we now need to be viable again, or you nerf something for no reason knowing that the new content will suddenly be needed.

(edited by emkelly.2371)

Missed backstab delay

in Thief

Posted by: babazhook.6805

babazhook.6805

Not that any of that matters anyway. There was no valid reason for the ICD anyway. Even if five attacks some how came from stealth that’s just pulling 5 booms which most classes could just replace anyway. In my opinion Anet only put an ICD on the stealth attack so that players would have a reason to buy HOT. Think about it. Before this core this was still viable. Now thief is useless without dare devil.

Ps: A net, if you are reading this, I’m on to you, and I’m calling you out. The minute you start nerfing classes to force players to spend more money instead of creating actual good and original content that we want you have lost me as a customer…

As proof I cite the following:

  • you nerfed spirits on rangers just before HOT. Then HOT comes out and druid is a support spec…which means spirits become useless..
  • you absolutely gutted warriors, then HOT comes out and berserker became only viable option, but you were forced to make changes when the entire community came together to protest….
  • the same can be said about other professions , and the pattern is clear, whenever you want us to spend money you purposefully nerf something and then either introduce something that we now need to be viable again, or you nerf something for no reason knowing that the new content will suddenly be needed.

No it is TEN boons if each attack counted as a strike as RS removes 2 boons per strike. Added to that it appears itsteals full stacks. if this was indeed the reason for it, that would be a very powerful trait > Even if the enemy could reapply, you are still running around with those boons. If those many stacks of might were buried under other higher prioroty boons, a ten boon steal would get them with one attack.

Again i think there might be other reasons for that ICD and lean towards those. I am merely accepting the possibility it there due to RS and until we see that expansion or get some word from ANET our opinions as to the reasons why are speculation.

(edited by babazhook.6805)

Missed backstab delay

in Thief

Posted by: Shadowstep.6049

Shadowstep.6049

The change never made sense to anyone, even to players that don’t even play thief, especially given current state of classes. What happened prior to this nerf?

- DHs were crying rivers that thieves can break one of their myriad of blocks (aegis) from stealth
- anet team got destroyed in pvp match by helseth playing thief on stream https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=dWZ9lkbK_2U

What did Anet do? Nerfed all weapon sets (even sets that were extremely underused) from the class that has been bottom feeder (in mid tier at best, if you were top player) for 4 seasons now. This change alone speaks tomes about balancing team.

#NotSubjectiveAtAll #BeatDatDeadHorse