Guild Wars 2

Justin ODell.9517:

What, you guys have never seen combined zero-based alternating length encoded binary optimized for ascii text?

Of all the threads on the forums, this has to be the most constructive one and most deserving of attention from the community and the developers. Thank you. Thank you so much.

This need to happen, soon.

Black powder have for far too long been overpowered. It’s been a cheap way to trade autoattacks, disrupt, and put space between melee wielding enemies.

For people saying that it did not matter because the enemy should not be walking inside a little circle that blinds, and hence reducing the pulses promotes less skilldependant gameplay; You are wrong.

Basicly since any half-decent player would not ever do that. Which only made the skill result in stale and boring gameplay, of course not in terms of the projectile itself and the skills combo attainabilites.

If you thought that was what differentiated the opponents and your skill, there’s something wrong with the optimization of your profession, build and gameplay.

This is a completely justified nerf, absolutely nothing to complain about other than the initative cost was not increased.

Bumping.

If someone want the best necromancer in the game (not even kittening kidding), hit DJ Ooce up.

If you play S/D and worry about survivability, you should stop worrying. Just use the dodges for you know, important incoming skills, instead of mindlessly spamming it

Sensotix.4106:

Please nerf pistol whip in the coming patch on the 15th of april.

Okay.

Sensotix.4106:

Imo “steal” is the issue.

Wait, what? If this is the case, the title of this topic should either be “Trickery Traitline” or “Sleight of Hand” since this is something completely seperate from pistol whip. If you think pistol whip is fine, then why have you whined so much about this specific weapon-skill?

For example; laughing at someone who says that this weapon skill/weapon set is already in a decent spot.

I’m just trying to understand you here. Have you been “Sizerized” regarding this opinion?

Going to bump this in a desperate attempt to get a developer to give us some information.

Grouch pls. <3

Kincaidia.3192:

End the discussion about cooldowns vs initiative costs. They are different systems. They have different drawbacks. On my warrior, I can use weapon skills 1-5, switch weapons and have 5 new available skills. On my thief, I can use only some of 1-5 skills, switch weapons and have only autoattack available.

That is the drawback of initiative. The plus side is skill reuse and no cool downs.

The way to balance it is by throttling initiative gain – and this was rebalanced last patch fairly extensively.

Good point.

But even though they are different systems, the initiative one is in my opinion, superior. Because of many reasons, and this is what I think is one. Just because they are different systems, doesnt mean that it shouldnt be a balance between them.

Narcarsis.5739:

As for the initiative lost (or not lost) on interrupt. The initiative system should cost the thief initiative at the start of the cast to promote proper thought and intelligent game play rather than spamming. This will punish bad or new thieves for wasting skills instead of using them at proper times or covering important casts with blinds/dazes/stuns/stealth. As for putting the skill on cooldown, I do not think that is a good idea. It will completely shut down the class in certain aspects and will go against the class resource system (initiative vs cooldowns).

-Caed

Thank you so much for posting Caed! Really happy to see the top-thief agree

I really want to keep this thread alive, since to be honest, even though theese discussions are healthy and constructive (keep it up!) there’s really no way for us to know if this is was really intended. The only thing we could hope for now is a developer posting, I’m not sure if they work on weekends, if that’s not the case,let’s keep this thread alive until monday!

Hey guys, I see that we are striving a bit off the profession chart here. Let’s try to keep it a bit more specific, and constructive. Drop the l2p arguments, and come with real ones instead.

Well, we don’t really know if it’s a bug, but it is something that seems to be very unclear. I also think this would shave down the thieves pressure in general, which fits the philosophy that A-Net has.

Hopefully a game designer, or Holy Grouch will descend from the heavens and bring clarity

Here a idea;

When a weapon-skill gets interrupted the thief looses;

X * 4 = [Intiative Lost]

X = [10s of Initative Regeneration] / 10 * 4

I’m not sure if this is the correct way to show it so to say, but this basicly means that when you have a cast time interrupted, you loose the corresponding initative that you would gain during the 4 seconds of cooldown you have on a skill when interrupted.

ens.9854:

Thieves rely on being able to use single skills many times per fight and within that space they are already fairly balanced—I don’t think upsetting things by suddenly giving them random cooldowns is the answer. If a skill is too strong, bring down the skill not the entire class

Sadly this is true at the moment, thieves do rely on being able to use single skills many times per fight. This is called spamming, this is what a lot of people think is the issue with the game.

You’re saying that this little “but or not” is unimportant, but i think changing would also present change in gameplay for thieves. Even though you rely on having to active your skills many times, one can do it good, and one can do it bad. And the consequence of doing it bad would also result in a lack of initative, and with that, survivability.

We can make thief what it is supposed to be, harder to play, more punishing and also by that, more rewarding.

Evilek.5690:

ens.9854:

This is working as intended. Skills only go on full cooldown if they are interrupted after an effect takes place. This is why most heals only go on a short cooldown while shelter/ether renewal etc go on full cooldown if interrupted. The same applies to churning earth—although the blast is delayed, it immediately applies a cripple field and thus gets a full cd if interrupted. The dragon tooth thing is a bug* (it only has a 6s cd anyway though)

Part of the effect of heartseeker is the movement ability. This is why initiative is subtracted immediately upon activation and not upon completion

Yep

Interupt work only vs spell with CD and channel cast, no vs isnta cast spells. When you interupt channel Thief spell Thief lose initiative. Thief has two chanell spells who cost innitiative (Unload and Pisolwhip) interupt works only vs Unload because PistolWhip has evade effect.

Thats all and no this is not bug.

Well maybe I got it wrong when I said “channel”, I meant more specificly so called “cast time”. Look at my posts above and you should hopefully understand what I mean

ens.9854:

This is working as intended. Skills only go on full cooldown if they are interrupted after an effect takes place. This is why most heals only go on a 5 second cooldown while shelter/ether renewal etc go on full cooldown if interrupted. The same applies to churning earth—although the blast is delayed, it immediately applies a cripple field and thus gets a full cd if interrupted. The dragon tooth thing is a bug*

Part of the effect of heartseeker is the movement ability. This is why initiative is subtracted immediately upon activation and not upon completion

I see what you mean here mate. But if you think that it is working as intended, do you also think that a 3s cooldown should not be there when other professions try to cast a weapon skill and gets interrupetd, for example cleansing wave of the elementalist? Why is everything so inconsistent, so to say?

Basicly, according to your reasoning, there should be no 3s-cooldown when a skill that does not have a effect whilst being channeled is interrupted, and if one does, it should go on “full” cooldown.

Should;

A; Those kind of weapon skills, like cleansing wave for an example, go on NO cooldown since thieves does not loose ANY intiative when a skill like that is interrupted,

or

B; Should the intiative that it took to activate the skill be lost?

I think, you could only pick one option in this case.

Thank you for the posts, Karsaib, Shad and Phanta!

I’m hoping to bring some attention to this as there’s so much focus on specificly pistolwhip right now, some more actually fundamental mechanics might be forgotten.

I personally think that implementing some kind of initiative loss would present more counterplay against thieves.

And for the people who are really effing upset about pistol whip and seems to think it is the only think making thief what is right now, think about it this way;

You can no longer cancel the cast time of pistol whip without not loosing the initative. You have to be more precise and careful about when you press the button, compared to what it is right now. It’s a start, aint it?

Hello!

So I have finally managed to make video about a issue with thief that a lot of people either seem to be unaware of, or maybe opposite to me, doesnt think it matters that much.

I would be glad if you could take two minutes and watch this VIDEO, and give your opinion on the topic. But before you do, I’ll give you a disclaimer about the horrific video quality, though it is what I am able to play with on this trusty laptop. The audio is there though, and if my english is beyond comprehension, there’s also some subtitles for you.

Some points to be regarded and discussed;

• Was this maybe intended for the thief? Why is that so?

• Heartseeker is the only spell where the initiative loss applies.

• Should it be like that for all weapon cast-time weapon skills?

• Yes?
• No?
• Why?

Please, try to keep the thread constructive and on a decent level of seriousness. Keep to the topic of the initative system regarding interrupts. There is a lot more to that system, like not being affected by chill and such, but hey, let’s save that for another thread shall we?

Thank you in advance!
/nyqwist

http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=H_Jd9u345w8

Edit 1;

Here a idea;
When a weapon-skill gets interrupted the thief looses;
X * 4 = [Intiative Lost]
X = [10s of Initative Regeneration] / 10 * 4
I’m not sure if this is the correct way to show it so to say, but this basicly means that when you have a cast time interrupted, you loose the corresponding initative that you would gain during the 4 seconds of cooldown you have on a skill when interrupted.

Dahkeus.8243:

Ok, here are my arguments:
1) Interrupting a weapon skill isn’t a big deal.
2) Interrupting a HS when a thief is stealthing for 5 seconds would be much, much, much more punishing than just kicking a regular attack skill of another profession for 5 seconds.
3) Reducing the ini pool of a thief is counterplay, even if you wish it was more penalizing than it is.

But you see, that’s not arguments, that’s statements. But I’ll respond to them anyways

1. It is a big deal. You should simply understand that by interrupting a skill that’s supposed to be used for a purpose will ofcourse put that specific person in a un-optimal spot that he doesnt wanna be in for 3 seconds. This could range from a elementalist that needs to remove those last ticks of burning from a dying ally with cleansing wave, to a mesmer interrupting a stomp or ress with illusionary wave.

2. Yes, this is true. The dagger mainhand is in a better spot balance-wise compared to the sword, where the real issue is. Ofcourse, that doesnt make the concept of being able to activate the skill again fine, though it is a lot more punishing.

3. But I qoute myself;

The initiative loss only applies on channeling movement skills (heartseeker). So called “stationary” channel skills are left with the initiative remained, for example, pistol whip, black powder, choking gas, body shot and in a way, flanking strike. This obviously means that the interrupt is in a way, useless.

A three second cooldown is a lot of time for a glasscannon. Imagine a S/P thief not being able to PW for three seconds, what kind of counterplay that would present. If it would atleast consume the 5 initiative, you would have to be somewhat more careful about the mindless spamming.

It seems like you are a thief, mainly playing dagger-pistol which you want to defend. I would agree that it’s more balanced than S/X and more counterplay exists as well, but there is no way that interrupting black powder measures up the efficieny of doing so to other professions.

Dahkeus.8243:

Thief seems to be the flavor of the month for the forums to complain about. Some of these complaints are based on legitimate concerns, but there’s also a lot of random complaint threads that are really just riding that wave of dissent with nonsense like this one.

Oh, so you feel like my post was nothing but nonsense? It’s simply the truth, thieves are not even close to as affected by interrupts as the other professions are.

I’m a open minded person, if you’re going to throw out theese kind of things and actually do have some arguments or a bit of reason behind what you’re saying I can change my mind. The problem is that you don’t, at the moment atleast

MIrra.3604:

Oh well, let me ask you how do you interupt a guardian shelter?

You can use the traited fearmark as a necromancer to interrupt the guardians shelter.

MIrra.3604:

nyqwist.2360:

MIrra.3604:

Interrupt on a thief will cancel the attack and COST the thief the init to cast it.

Not really, it basicly only applies on heartseeker. It would also apply on flanking strike, but that’s a evade, so it doesnt

You saying PW is not interruptable?

Ah, I guess i didnt make it clear that it was the iniative part that’s not true, even though you can interrupt it and cancel the attack. Read my post, I have some more information there. My bad

MIrra.3604:

Interrupt on a thief will cancel the attack and COST the thief the init to cast it.

Not really, it basicly only applies on heartseeker. It would also apply on flanking strike, but that’s a evade, so it doesnt

I’m just going to state what I think about it too;

It’s stupid.

A-Net probably thought that having to activate the skill again when interrupted would be enough as a “punishment” since you would have to spend twice as much initiative for one skill, as the initiative acts like a resource instead of a cooldown.

Theoretically that would be perfectly fine, but in reality it is not. Because of two reasons;

1. You loose initiative, not pressure or not survivability. Whilst initiative equals this, it’s first when you’re on ZERO that the consequences will apply. It’s easy to disengage before this happens.

2. The initiative loss only applies on channeling movement skills (heartseeker). So called “stationary” channel skills are left with the initiative remained, for example, pistol whip, black powder, choking gas and body shot. This obviously means that the interrupt is in a way, useless.

A three second cooldown is a lot of time for a glasscannon. Imagine a S/P thief not being able to PW for three seconds, what kind of counterplay that would present. If it would atleast consume the 5 initiative, you would have to be somewhat more careful about the mindless spamming.

Weapon skills are also not affected by chill, which is a huge deal as well.

It’s been said so many times that the initative system is broken, which is true. I think it’s a innovative system which could be balanced to a great state, but as it is right now, I would rather have thief as it is removed.

I’ve mained thief for a decent while on a decent level, so I would say my opinions are decently credible.

No weapon skills are put on CD when interrupted.

It’s by design, not a bug.

Hopefully calling the balance team blind and ignorant won’t be enough QQ-fuel for the moderators to delete the thread.

+1 As always, Vuh.

Thedenofsin.7340:

snip

i love you

good game

well played

RaZaC.1963:

No Thiefs

:(

+1

I sometimes mute a Gw2 stream, since the mere complexity and mass of actions in this game is probably way more than any caster could comprehend and mediate to the viewers. There’s times where just watching a game and discussing through VoIP with other players is more enjoyable than the commentary.

But then again, the commentary is supposed to be simple and understandable for people who arent even into sPvP that much. But I do think that he should have a co-caster which is a top-player, someone who can recognize tactics and explain things on a deeper level, because that’s something Blu simply isnt able to do right now, not to mention any of his co-casters.

Then again, there’s always room for improvement. I mean, a acrobatic thief spamming “Disabling Shot” and Blu says; Nice dodging there… There’s need for more recognitizion of actual great gameplay, yes, but I think that Blu clearly proved that with he is ready to commit in whatever way is needed to get there.

The dude has given a lot to the community, so come on, instead of making a 15-min video blaming the downfall of the whole scene on him, atleast keep the critique a bit more constructive and compact.

It’s the least for him, and best for the community, that we could do.

noobftw.9654:

Does blind counter longbow F1, traps, caltrop? Hence, blind affect LESS condi gameplay. Prove it wrong again word by word pls will you?

Once again;

The counterplay is in the application, not the condition itself.
Conditionclasses rely on their cooldowns, not their autoattack.
Hence when a cooldown is blinded they have to wait for it to return, as for power, you need to attack once, and then go ham again without any waiting whatsoever.

And I do not see why you think that just because blind doesnt counter three of the skills in this game (two of them never/barely used) it would mean that it any less affects conditions? It’s not that there exists a few condition-based skills that cant be countered by blinds, it’s the fact that the ones that can be are much, much more significant which makes it a kind of counter.

One condition/boon that only counter condi but leave power dmg alone.

1. I don’t need to, the actual mutual conditions/boons are enough to counter it, not to speak of “Runes of the Lyssa”. The power-specific counter-conditions, is simply neccessary, otherwise power would be too strong. Though I personally think weakness and chill is a tad too strong, the conditions are there, and they should be.

one condition/boon that punishes passive game play.

2. Once again, I don’t need to. This gameplay counters itself, so to say. If you’re just going to stand still and play passively, you will be more useless than someone that’s active. It’s what differs good players from bad. There’s no condition/needed to punish this. If you and your team (even though I doubt you have one) cant manage a necromancer standing on a ledge and spamming, you should seek advice, not complain.

Regardless, you’re either a troll or a ignorant player, either way there’s no point in trying to repeat myself when you’re simply incapable to take in the words I have written.

noobftw.9654:

Snip
Counter that.

There’s no need to “counter” something that’s not true. You’re kittening stupid, that’s the only thing i’ve come to realize reading your rant of one chromosome too little.

1. Blinds counter necromancers, which is the heaviest condition class in the game.
2. There should be counterplay to all mechanics.

Let me explain something to you here, boy. It’s not the condition damage itself that’s supposed to be countered, it’s the application of it. When it’s there, it will either do damage or be cleansed. Blinds do counter conditions.

You don’t need a kittening game mechanic to counter passive play and a void of movement, you’ll just be focused as you stand and kitten around like a kitten on drugs.

tl;dr You’re wrong.

Just going to mention how the “Acrobatics” traitline combined with the shortbows “Disabling Shot” and S/D “Flanking Strike” offers a ridiculous defense for a -glasscannon- whilst pressuring a target.

Agreed, though evades might be more prioritized above backstab on the list of nerfs.

A full rework is not needed. Decrease the damage. Evades can surely be fun and good for a defensive purpose, if you can use it efficiently. Though it’s when combined with the current amount of damage that this becomes too strong.

If people want to mindlessly spam dodges and have endless sustain, let them do that, but please do not give them the ability to pressure targets like a actual glass DPS would do.

The “Signet of Spite” is too rewarding for what you actually have to do in my opinion.

You can press one button, and if you want to be sure that it lands, combine it with a fear to create a massive clusterkitten of chaos for your target. You could also combine it with a “Epedemic” in order to further spread the AIDS to the enemy team.

If you would also like to cleanse this, most people who are not using Lyssa runes or have their elite on cooldown, often have to use almost all their condition cleanses, which will leave you totally open to the rest of the 18 abilities.

Even though it is highly telegraphed, it brings too much to the game with the push of one button.

Jumper.9482:

nyqwist.2360:

Jumper,

You are proposing some pretty good changes. But what I would like to ask you, and I think it’s important that you make it clear with a yes or no, does this game actually need more buffs? Is thief really a priority when it comes to balance?

If I remember correctly, ANET has stated that they think the power creep of the game is currently at a good spot, using bunker Guardian as the reference point.

To answer your first question: Yes. Many of these skills and weapon sets are laughable—take Dancing Dagger for example. I can sit there and use full +initiative and +damage traits and utilities and spam a 4x bounce Dancing Dagger as hard as I can. It won’t be able to out-dps a Warrior’s, or even Guardian’s passive heal. Or I could play condition Pistol mainhand and spend an hour attacking them and do no damage. If ANET says this is balanced, then it only makes sense Thief (excluding D/P Trickery and S/D Acrobatic) needs to come up to their level.

Is Thief a priority? Well that depends on what game balance means to you.
Does it mean multiple viable builds and weapon sets, equal in strengths for each class?
Or to go even further and say each build must be balanced within each weapon set and no weapon set like the current S/P or P/P should exist only using 1-2 skills using very little skill or tactic?
Or is it simply the best possible build, leaving only 1 with slight or no variation for each class, if infact, said builds are balanced against the other 7 builds (classes)?

Because when it comes to Thief, we are much closer to the latter.

Great answer Jumper.

Though in my opinion, things like spamming #1 on pistol from a safe distance kind of should be “bad” (not that it needs a buff right now, since it’s completely unviable even in kittening hotjoins).

I think something you need to consider is the reward for the skill it takes to pull something off. There’s been many of theese things in the past, like 100-blades, S/P thief, bunker elementalist and HGH engineer that has been way too efficient compared to the playstyle. I think that simply changing the numbers of a skill is illogical, you should add some feature to it, that demands mechanical skill or some kind of tactical deployment in order to make the game more interesting and intriguing.

Jumper,

You are proposing some pretty good changes. But what I would like to ask you, and I think it’s important that you make it clear with a yes or no, does this game actually need more buffs? Is thief really a priority when it comes to balance?

Experience does not equal skill. The learning curve is different from induvidual to induvidual. If you find games uneven, the matchmakingsystem might not be working as it should, but your proposed change will not solve anything.

Just wanted to pop by and tell you that the changes you proposed for the thief does nothing but promote the spammy, passive, AI gameplay together with random dodges that this game needs to get rid off. I honestly disagree with all those suggestions.

Zelulose.8695:

nyqwist.2360. I understand your frustration but you are on the losing side here when saying perma stealth needs to be nerfed it doesn’t.

Mate I’m sorry, was this just a thread were you wanted to be helpful and inform players about something possibly useful? If that’s the case I apologize, my mindset is automaticly set to a standard, thought it was another “QQ-thread” were you showed the community supposedly extremely OP features.

I apologize.

Zelulose.8695:

nyqwist.2360:

Zelulose.8695:

If the stealther can take out a tank it might be viable for capping points in a thief vs tank setting.

Can you please elaborate how the kitten going in stealth for 30 seconds are going to kill a tank quicker, or help the thief capture a point?

No no I’m saying If the thief can kill and then cap after the kill, he can use the stealth as a means for taking down tanks. For example, If it takes a thief 30sec to take down a tank. (the time it takes for their longest healing skill to recharge. A glass cannon would die while the thief with stealth can use a small frame of his stealth to heal up an eventually take down the tank. (Regardless of stealth, a point can,t be capped with the tank on it XD) If you put your mind to it, allot of stuff can be used in tpvp. I’m sure there are other ways to use stealth.

I have almost absolutely no clue about what you’re talking about, but to me it seems like you’re trying to say that having this 30s stealth would give you some kind of advantage when fighting, since your healing skill would be refreshed when you get out of it.

Well I’m sorry, but that’s really kittening stupid. You see, the alternative would be simply disengaging and get out of combat. You would regenerate your full health, and be fighting again, probably before this “30s stealth” would have gone out.

But that’s really not the point you see. In high-end gameplay there’s simply no possibility for a member on a team to disappear for thirty seconds. If there is a fight going on, leaving it for so long will often result in simply wasting your time going in again since the fight will be lost. As a D/P thief, you might as well could have died, respawned in 15s and returned to say, mid or far point in 15s. As someone else before me said, it’s simply useless, one less player for thirty seconds on that team.

Prolonged periods of stealth is certainly something that needs to be nerfed, but you’re having the wrong take on it, it’s not that you could stack stealth for yourself as a thief and wait for your heal. It’s more about smoke fields in general. With blast finishers, you can stack stealth up to the duration of a shadow refuge (10s) and more without any issue at all. What does 3 or 4 members of a team randomly popping up anywhere on the map bring to the game? Is that really fine even though there’s no real counterplay to it?

Zelulose.8695:

If the stealther can take out a tank it might be viable for capping points in a thief vs tank setting.

Can you please elaborate how the kitten going in stealth for 30 seconds are going to kill a tank quicker, or help the thief capture a point?

One of the best satires I have ever read.

Thank you for the laugh!

Oh well. Let’s wait for another year for a functioning matchmaking system.

A good bit of constructive critisism from a anonymous source.

A player, and a mighty fine member of the community;

This game has officially been released for a year now, and a lot of the problems that have plagued the game back then, still continue to do so.

Incentive, there is no real reason to play the game, the rewards are subpar, the glory rank curve is unrealistic, there is no unique rewards that are really sought after, the leader boards still make no sense to me to this day, there is no way to establish how many points you loose or gain.
There are no real unique titles to be had, apart from the previous qualifier points system, and even than there was no real mention that they would be giving away titles for it.
If you aren’t playing to be competitive in the game, than there is no real incentive, there is no real way of showing off those 500 hours you had spent playing spvp.

The Bridge, by this I mean the connection that is meant to be formed between spvp and pve; because to the best of my knowledge the reason that the developers refuse to split pve and spvp balance, is so that a player coming from pve will not be surprised between the vast difference of his character in pve and pvp, but in order to that you need to be attracting the pve side of the game to come to spvp. In that regard ArenaNet failed, there has never been a reason for a pve player to come over to pvp, there were no rewards, titles, pets….there was nothing a pve player could gain from coming to pvp, infact it was a waste of their time.
Creating a symbiotic relationship between pve and pvp was paramount, if pvp players had a lot to gain from going to pve, than things should be true for pve players coming to pvp.

Balance, now I understand that this is a difficult one, and I don’t blame the developers for making mistakes, the only thing was how long it took to react to the mistakes that had been made; you need only look at your forums to see how your player base is reacting to those problems.
I do believe that balancing will always be an issue; but talk to your community take their idea’s, try to fix the problems at the fastest rate possible, balancing should not stop for anything.

Public Test Realm, make one available, that will greatly assist in the previous problem.

Community, talk to your player base, assist people that are trying to promote your game, create excitement I assure you nothing makes a player happier than knowing that they have taken a step to assist the game they enjoy playing so much. If I was you ArenaNet I would be down on my knee’s because you have the most disgustingly amazing community; a community that rose to the occasion more so than the company that owns the game.

Dear lord if there is something that angers me; its the fact that the community promoted your game, setup streams, leagues, some even invested their own personal money to make things better, they provide loads of constructive feedback day by day. I really want to stress, this community is awesome, you guys are the best, there’s never been such a friendly community, that are willing to band together for a game they all enjoy, even if this game fails you guys succeeded.

Helseth, Supcutie, Countless and Xeph.
Denshee and Phantaram.
Caed and, if you dare, Vanish.
Zombi and Symbolic.
Battosai and Niah.
Azhene and Lord Nag.
Teldo and Teldo.
Rippii and Fredz I guess?
There’s not a lot of long-time competetive warriors around, that’s what I think atleast.

I tried to divide the names into some kind of pre-patch profession pool.

I bet that every single one of theese players are worth listening to, they have a deep understanding about sPvP tactics and competetive play, the classes and builds with all of their pros’ and cons’. Getting two or three of theese wouldnt be too hard right?

Just make sure to get Helseth in there. Entertaining.

Allie Murdock.8152:

Firstly, we have no qualm or rivalry with Helseth.

While we definitely appreciate it when players are vocal and provide feedback, excessive hyperbole does not help us to understand the fundamental issue.

So basicly, if you state a opinion about something through media that you guys don’t think is constructive, you can expect that post being moved to linkville?

The treatment of this situation seems a little unique. I mean, there’s a post on the first page containing a link to a 9-minute video of solo-Q warrior gameplay, and countless other ones. All seemingly staying where they are.

No qualm or rivalry my kitten .

By the way, is not the forums a place for the actual players in the first place, actually stating their opinion and creating constructive discussions in that way?

When players are speaking about fundamental flaws of the game in order to rise awareness of it, removing those posts that are actually way above the avarage one is not the way to go. But, removing it, combined with the lack of change regarding theese flaws themselfs kind of makes it look like you’re either closing your eyes to the problem, or, that you actually have some kind of qualm or rivalry with the player in question.

It makes you look bad.

Just a tad upset, but censorship could be a big deal.

This game, the meta, is absolutely void of skill at the moment. Period. That’s the issue.

The most stupid and easily played builds are the most rewarding. That’s something A-Net have to change, before any kind of interesting #esport can be built up.

Made a post myself before I saw this one, bleh.
All valid points.

Xeph.4513:

sorrow.2364:

How can the profession which brings the best team utility and ridiculous skills unviable in tournament play?

It is viable, but the meta tells you that you shouldn’t play Mesmer.

Once ArenaNet will tone down conditions on Necro and spirits on Ranger, as they will surely do, we’ll come back to the Mesmer-Guardian-Engi-Thief-Ele meta, so TP can jump to the bandwagon as they always did, Necro and Ranger will be unviable again, everyone is happy and the previous state of the things is preserved.

There is even a better solution, give Mesmer more damage, more control and more utility. Like, increase the shatter damage to deal 20k+ damage, increase Moa duration to 20s and make Illusion of Life an unconditional ress. So Memser will be broken OP again in tPvP and everyone is happy, again.

Why are you so bitter ?

It’s your fault Xeph, everything is, just accept it.

Team Paragdim = Illuminati

Fact.

• S Tier
  =Necromancer
  -Thief

• A Tier
  +Guardian
  +Ranger
  =Engineer

• B Tier
  +Elementalist
  =Mesmer

• C Tier
  +Warrior

If it wasnt for the S/D build of Thief and the Spirit Ranger, things would look a little different in comparison to what it is right now.