Showing Highly Rated Posts By Kaon.7192:
Agreed.
Out of the 3 game modes, Stealth is least viable in sPvP, yet it’s also the only mode where this completely unjustified nerf has not be reverted.
It really is about time to change that.
How about allowing us to Mystic Forge 4 Superior Runes/Sigils to receive a random Superior Rune/Sigil in return? In a similar manner as we already can with Major Runes/Sigils.
I think this would give Superior Runes/Sigils a much better baseline price and keep the prices of the most desirable ones in check.
Current price disparity is a bit ridiculous at 10g+ for the most desirable ones and less than 1s for the least desirable ones. To put that in perspective, even most major Runes/Sigils cost 4s+ precisely because they have a chance of returning a random Superior Rune/Sigil in the MF.
As a Thief myself, I completely support this.
A missed backstab means the Thief messed up.
A blocked/evaded backstab means the Thief was outplayed.
In either case there needs to be opportunity costs involved in miss/block/evade considering the burst potential that backstab offers and how soon you can set up another one.
Honestly, the skill floor for running a zerker backstab thief build is simply too low right now precisely because of the way the stealth attack mechanic behaves on miss/block/evade. After this change we’ll probably see a better distinction between the scrubs and the real pros, which I welcome with open arms.
This would be a very welcome feature indeed.
I trade in high volume commodities almost exclusively and entering orders is so tedious that I only do it by muscle memory on my second screen while watching videos…
Being able to enter larger orders would also reduce the load on ANet’s servers as fewer requests are needed. This alone should be enough reason to implement it.
Oh I’m sorry, I didn’t read far enough into the page.
“New runes, sigils and amulets can be unlocked for your account with gold”
Do I have your permission to cry about this instead sir?
Good luck defending keeps on top of walls now.
We’ll only be able to hit people braindead enough to stand RIGHT NEXT TO THE WALL.
Well, on the bright side, we’ll likely see more Thieves in that group, not because we’re braindead, but because we can’t hit anything otherwise.
so do any of the thieves not do any attacking at all? because if i remember correctly when you spam 1 running behind someone and it finally hits you get 3 to 4 seconds of reveal as well.
why are you so bad that a 4 second reveal from a ranger will kill you. and it can’t even do anything while you’re stealthed.
if you’re so bad at the easiest class in the game then you need to roll a cleric guardian and have nothing but heal skills.From this point on, anyone who makes it clear they haven’t read anything I’ve said up until this point is just wasting their breath – more so than usual, as hard as that is to believe from the displayed lack of reading comprehension.
if you were any good you wouldn’t be kittening about something you already self inflict on yourself.
Inflicting Revealed on ourselves is a regulation mechanic for Stealth attacks. Analogous to an empty Adrenaline bar preventing Bursts or an empty Life Force bar for DS.
Having Revealed applied for x seconds by an enemy is a hard-counter, comparable to emptying the Adrenaline or Life Force bars for x seconds, effectively disabling the use of either of those mechanics for the duration.
Imagine if the undodgeable, instant-cast, 2000 range Sic Em had either of those effects instead of Revealed. And imagine if ANet has stated that they’re planning to implement other skills with such effects down the pipe.
What does this do for the viability of builds that revolve around these underlying mechanics? This is why reasonable Thieves are up in arms about this change.
(edited by Kaon.7192)
As we played with the stealth changed mentioned in the SotG, we recognized that in conjunction with the change to culling this was an unpredictable change to make. We also felt that it was too big of a hit to these stealth professions, so we ended up pulling that change in favor of just increasing revealed duration by 1 second.
I’m sorry, but an across the board 33% nerf to all stealth related abilities and traits is a much, much more drastic change than the nerf proposed in SotG. Something this drastic should not be rolled out at the same time as the culling changes, even if you had a good justification for why stealth is in need of such drastic changes to begin with (and if you do, I’m sure most of us in this forum would like to hear it).
If playing too much is a problem for you, you are in the same boat as many people who’ve battled non-online addiction. Just as tobacco and alcohol are still being sold, developers are going to keep adding “things to do” to games. I feel for anyone who feels out of control, as I’ve been there. However, asking the makers of the game to exercise control for you is not going to help you in the long run. Only you can control you.
Good luck.
Amen.
I used to be in the top 100 when the leaderboards first came out, completing just about every single available achievement all the time.
It took quite a leap from my side to rid myself of this destructive habit, but ever since I did, I’ve been able to spend less time in the game and enjoy the time that I do spend in the game so much more.
If you don’t genuinely enjoy the AP hunting that’s required to keep up with the top dogs on the Leaderboards, you’re really better off stopping on your own accord before you eventually grow resentment towards the game.
Seriously, give letting go a try.
(edited by Kaon.7192)
Also notice that nothing changed, from the time that a Dev posted in the general forum about asking for suggestions. Why bother asking for suggestions if you are going to do what you want anyways?
This is by far my biggest complaint too. I have seen absolutely zero changes to what they said they were implementing after a month of feedback.
I don’t think giving other classes the Revealed status is an acceptable way to provide counter-play to invisibility.
Revealed, as a self-regulation mechanic on Thieves for Stealth attacks, is perfectly fine. However, when given to other classes to apply on Thieves, Revealed becomes a hard-counter to the Stealth mechanic, completely disabling the mechanic and all it’s related effects and abilities and traits that depend on it. Revealed disables an entire traitline of utility effects for the Thief and disables the Thief’s best burst/control/condi abilities (Stealth attacks), severely crippling any Thief built around any of the above aspects.
Hard counters should not exist in a balanced game, because they result in rock-paper-scissors interaction between classes and builds that are simply not fun for the player on the wrong side of the equation.
The fact that hard-counters do not exist currently in GW2 for any other major mechanic for any class is what I consider to be one of the most impressive accomplishments in the design and balance of the PvP aspect of the game. This will no longer be the case once Revealed becomes available to other classes.
I would like to suggest an alternative to Revealed in the form of another effect that specifically counters invisibility, rather than the entire Stealth mechanic. Let’s call it “Detected” for now.
The Detected effect will make the Thief fully visible and targetable for its duration, but will not prevent the Thief from entering the Stealth state itself like Revealed does. This effect will provide counter-play to the invisibility aspect of the Stealth mechanic, but will still allow Thieves to go into the Stealth state to gain the effect of any traits he built for and to access stealth attacks that are a key component of a majority of Thief builds.
In other words, Detected would be a soft-counter to the invisibility aspect of Stealth, but will not hard-counter the entirety of the Stealth mechanic like enemy-induced Revealed would. Detected should be implemented in place of Revealed in the upcoming Sic Em change, and in the previously implemented Stealth Traps in WvW, and in any similar anti-stealth skills going forward.
I feel this would be provide counter-play to invisibility while being much fairer to Thief builds that rely on the Stealth mechanic.
Thoughts?
Posted this in the main GW2 discussions forum. If they’re dead set on providing counter-play to stealth, might as well try to suggest something a bit more reasonable than a hard-counter like Revealed…
I really hope there is a good justification behind this that I’m not seeing (i.e. not just to enforce time-gating of progression).
Legendaries are the prestige items, while Ascended are utility items for the most part (extra stats). It doesn’t make any sense to limit trade on the utility items while allowing prestige to be flat-out bought, thereby ridding them of any prestige they may have had. This is pure hypocrisy from where I see it.
If you want to time-gate vertical progression, the least you could do is allow players with spare time to capitalize on it, and give others the possibility to acquire it through trade. The time-gate will still serve its purpose even if the end result is tradeable. The burden of time will just be better distributed toward those who can afford to expend the time.
(edited by Kaon.7192)
Also we need a range indicator that actually works.
When you put down the trap the range indicator is always red unless you have a target selected, in which case it would always show as in range because target selection itself is capped at less than 10k units.
The range indicator for these types of skills should be based on the distance between the player and the trap (or the player who set off the trap), instead of on the distance between the player and the currently selected target.
Vertical progression without stat progression? You do know that Infusions have stats too right? And when they mean Infusion will be the new vertical progression, they mean that newer Infusions introduced will have higher rarities, Agony resistance, AND stats.
So instead of a gear treadmill, we’ll have an infusion treadmill. I’m still hoping they would come around on this but it doesn’t look like it will be happening judging from the responses in the AMA
You can quickly strafe left and right at a distance to make Liadri’s projectiles miss you completely, in case you’re having trouble sustaining yourself in phase 1. Wells and visions always appear in the same positions relative to the first well, so memorize these locations and head toward them immediately after throwing to minimize your phase 1 time. Don’t be afraid to stand in the AoE if you need to in order to save time, and practice your dodge timing. Also, to save even more time in phase 1, you can actually pull visions into wells, and they will turn into an orb without exploding in your face if you position yourself correctly.
On the second phase, the AoE is always in an hourglass shape that alternates in a 90 degrees rotation. This means that the next safe spot will always be at 90 degrees in either direction from the previous safe spot. These safe spots are important because throwing the orb roots you for a rather significant amount of time, so you want to be in one of these when throwing in phase 2 because you cannot dodge to cancel the throwing animation.
As soon as the current AoE falls, you should approach the next safe spot (90 degrees to your left or right) that has a well in or near it, and kite/DPS Liadri while guiding the visions into the nearest well. If no well is nearby, use the opportunity to DPS Liadri instead until the AoE falls.
Once a vision has turned into an orb, pick up the orb and move to the next safe spot before throwing. When there are visions around it, use your AoE CC’s to stun/slow/push Liadri and the visions.
The only real sources of uncertainty here are the random pulls and your DPS on Liadri. There is not much you can do about the former, but with enough attempts eventually things will work out as long as you have the latter covered.
(edited by Kaon.7192)
Something I’ve posted from another thread. These are probably out of scope for the Dec 10 patch, but should be kept in mind and discussed for future Thief changes:
Condition transfer is definitely something that should be explored more for Thieves as a condi removal option (Dancing dagger is 1 obvious skill candidate). It would alleviate much of our problem with lack of condi removal options, poor access to critical condi’s like burning and even fits well with the Thief theme IMO. Mesmers could benefit from some more condi transfer options too.
Boon steal definitely needs to be explored further also. The following themes should be looked into:
1. Let it scale to the number of boons a target currently has so that it can effectively punish boon spamming while not disproportionally penalize classes that make strategic use of fewer numbers of important boons.
2. Each boon steal skill/trait needs to define exactly what category of boons it can steal (Offensive or Defensive), and within each of these categories there must be a pre-defined priority list rather than the almost random manner that it’s determined at the moment. This will make it possible for skilled Thieves to make strategic use of even very limited boon stealing capabilities, rather than being forced to spray and pray against most boon bunkers.
I tentatively suggest the following priority lists (from high to low):
Offensive: Might → Fury → Retal → Swiftness
Defensive: Aegis → Stability → Protection → Vigor → Regen
In a similar vein I think conditions could benefit from categorization and prioritizing in terms of removal as well.
Tentative priorities:
Damaging: Confusion → Burning → Bleed → Poison → Torment
Utility: Fear → Immob → Weakness → Chill → Cripple → Vuln → Blind
Removal skills can then be used to target specific conditions of a certain category.
(edited by Kaon.7192)
1) Give a bit of karma. Because isn’t that how karma is supposed to work?
2) Give event participation credit. Probably on the same level as several mob kills.
Thoughts?
Very nice list.
The only thing I would add to it would be the ability to make complete custom builds and allowing us to swap between them on demand when not in a match.
This is definitely one of the worst problems plaguing the game right now.
Stagnation of aesthetics choices is not healthy for a game whose endgame is based mostly on grinding for aesthetics.
See my signature for what I think would be the ideal solution:
TL;DR: Give the community the tools and infrastructure, and we’ll make better skins at a faster pace than any professional team of artists anyone can possibly assemble, as has been proven in other games like Dota 2 and TF2. Players will have an endless supply of great skins to choose from and progress towards. Content Creators get acclaim and income from popular skin creations. And ANet gets a majority share of the revenue from selling skins on the Gem store, and can turn their in-house artists’ focus to creating timed content-related skins and artwork, which is a much better use of their time.
I thought I’d make a quick bump of this thread, seeing as Guild Wars 2 is still stagnating in terms of cosmetics.
In the past few months, we’ve had a handful of new weapon skins and even less armors, with widely varying levels of reception.
In the same period, the Steam workshop for Dota 2 and TF2 have had thousands upon thousands of new submissions, and have no problems sustaining their player bases through 100% horizontal progression.
In the mean time, Everquest Next, a very promising upcoming MMO, has also announced that it will feature a user created content store.
If you weren’t taking this idea seriously before, I’d say it’s time for a reassessment.
“In Team Fortress 2, just to be really clear, the community itself makes ten times as much content as we do. We have people who are making $500,000 a year selling things in the workshop. We can’t compete with our own customers. Our customers have defeated us, not by a little but by a lot. They’re buiding content that’s just as good or better than what we’re building and they’re building it at a spectacular rate.”
-Gabe Newell at the DICE summit.
(edited by Kaon.7192)
What I really don’t get is why they limit Bank slots to 8…
Just take my money already…
I think the forums would greatly benefit from this addition.
I know that it is possible to easily navigate from 1 dev response to the next, but in many threads, finding that first response is practically impossible due to their lengths.
Please add a link near the beginning of the thread to jump to the first Dev response where one is available.
Excuse me if this has been suggested before or if there is already a way to do this.
So the DAOC system is refered to as Stealth despite the fact that you can be conditionally seen while it’s active, is it not?
Haha nice try, but its because their stealth has failed at that close distance. I’ve discussed this many times over the years, at least for the person in question. There is a bit of duality there however.
I dont see them changing stealth that drastically at this point. They seem to like playing with “revealed” more than anything.
Same here. Giving ways to counter stealth through utilities (i.e. Sic ’Em) would probably be better than reworking the whole mechanic entirely, especially since a lot of balancing considerations for the thief include the nature of the current mechanic.
In my humble opinion, this is ABSOLUTELY the wrong way to deal with Stealth for the reasons outlined here: https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/game/gw2/Counter-Invisibility-not-Stealth/
TL;DR: existence of hard counters makes the mechanic completely unreliable and thus unviable in competitive settings, where Stealth is already plenty unviable
If Legendaries are tradeable, the same should apply for Ascended items.
But ANets wants everybody to waste time grinding for the stat advantage, so that’s never going to happen. This is one of the most appalling inconsistencies in the game IMO.
(edited by Kaon.7192)
Don’t really want to bother wasting any more time on providing feedback that nobody will read, so I’m just gonna quote my rant from another thread.
Why do I get the feeling that each and every single one of these new traits will be at least as much of a grind as the 25 SP healing skills?
Being disadvantaged in terms of trait/skill build options is no better than being disadvantaged in terms of gear/stats.
All sPvP had going for it was the fact that everybody had access to the same build options regardless of how much or little time you had to spend grinding. This simple ideal is at the foundation of any truly competitive e-sports game.
Well, if sPvP wasn’t already a joke before, it certainly is now. Very funny, ANet.
For the record, I did try to provide constructive feedback when the 25 SP healing skills rolled out. Much good that did.
For me, the greatest appeal for sPvP in this game is the ideal that everybody should be able to compete on a level playing field regardless of time investment.
Please don’t make sPvP players, new or old, grind their way to equality.
(edited by Kaon.7192)
Not death blossom but in that fractal with the jumping platforms, I used heartseeker 1 too many times on a dying harpy and leaped to my death. =/
Completely agreed on all points, especially the ridiculous implementation of the burning proc traits for engy and necro.
From one of my previous posts here:
https://forum-en.gw2archive.eu/forum/pvp/pvp/Suggestion-for-Dhuumfire-Incindiary-Powder/first#post2322558
“I think these two traits should instead of activating on the first crit that happens to land (which is unpredictable for the wielder and unavoidable for the recipient), they should grant an effect, like the leeching effect you get from Sigil of Leeching, that makes your next attack burn.
This would add a lot more depth to the mechanics of these two traits, freeing the wielder from having to rely on the RNG nature of crits to land this important condition, and give the recipient a slight visual cue, and a chance of avoiding the attack (the previous version of the trait is unavoidable because eventually a crit WILL land and burn you no matter how well you play)."
Or better yet, each one is categorized into short/medium/long and you have to get one of each. Then it’ll average it out versus having those short ones where you get swamp, snow and volcanic, and then the long one with cliffside, asura, and dredge.
That’s what they are doing this patch.
“Fractals are now weighted according to their length and difficulty. Easier fractals will always show up earlier in the run, with more difficult ones coming later.”
The issue with this is that the “long” ones are all inflated in length with artificial time gates that do nothing besides waste players’ time. They need to be rebalanced to make it 15 minutes of very engaging and dynamic content, not 15 minutes of fun content plus 30 minutes of mindless boss DPS’ing and trash slapping.
Of course don’t implement a time limit like the Tequatl revamp. That’d only be artificial difficulty and shouldn’t be implemented at least until condi DPS is fixed and support made much more potent in PvE.
(edited by Kaon.7192)
I’m glad this post is gaining traction, because my own post (made in April 2013) raising almost the exact same concerns died in a whimper.
I’m guessing after a whole year, the consequences of the lack of agility when it comes to balancing has finally started to sink in…
In my opinion, one of the biggest problems plaguing sPvP in this game is the feeling of stagnation caused by month-long delays between balance passes combined with ANet’s balancing philosophy of making small, incremental changes each pass.
Most successful eSport games have balance passes that are for the most part small, but always frequent. GW2 only has half of the equation for their balancing process, because for some reason, ANet has decided to tie the timing of balances passes to the timing of their major feature/content releases. And this, I believe, is the root cause of most of the frustration in the sPvP playerbase.
The first step to addressing this would be to completely disassociate balance timing and feature/content delivery timing. Features and content require rigorous internal testing to iron out potential game breaking bugs, which makes them time consuming by nature. Balance, however, (at least the subtle approach to balance that ANet is striving for) is heavily dependent on agility, the rate at which your team can repeat the cycle of evaluating customer feedback and the current balance state, introducing meaningful changes, polishing away issues, and reiterating into the next release.
It would be risky to jump into a new process right away for with a still relatively inexperienced team. So I recommend setting up public test servers to experiment with a more agile balancing process (weekly/bi-weekly maximum), that would allow players to try out changes in the pipeline, give early input, and discover issues that simply cannot be detected in controlled QA environments. This should be a similar infrastructure to what ANet’s internal QA team operates on, but on a much larger scale.
Having these servers could vastly improve the quality of the balance changes in the monthly releases (until you make the full transition), eliminate much of the stagnation problem for players who choose to partake in these servers (which I imagine will be a fairly significant portion of the sPvP player base), and provide a chance for ANet to improve transparency when it comes to making balance decisions.
Eventually, as ANet becomes more used to the weekly balance passes, they should transition into a more agile balance process for the main servers as well. The experience gained from the test servers should help ease the transition.
Any thoughts?
Bumping this post I made 6 months ago because sadly it’s even more relevant now than when I posted it…
We need more agile balance passes to quickly bring the meta into a playable baseline state. This last balance pass changed practically nothing. And from the looks of it you’ll be waiting another month at minimum before making any further balance changes.
This combination of small incremental changes and long waits in between balance passes is what’s killing player enthusiasm for sPvP right now.
Instead of pushing a handful of small changes and then doing absolutely nothing for months waiting for the meta to develop, learn to be more adaptive and reactive in your development process. Consistently observe player feedback and continuously push small incremental changes to improve lackluster builds and playstyles, and always be ready to do SOMETHING (again, small incremental changes) to shave down builds that becomes out of line within a short timeframe of its dominance. Be sure to always prioritize the latter to avoid power creep, i.e. stop waiting for other overpowered builds to emerge to match the previously overpowered builds and using these types of builds as your standard measure for viability.
Do this in a public test server if you’re not confident with rolling things out at a faster pace in the main servers. I’m sure plenty of sPvPers such as myself will be happy to be your guinea pigs when given the choice.
(edited by Kaon.7192)
No, I am saying that I don’t want the balance of the thief held hostage by a 15 point minor in critical strikes so we need to take that initiative away from there and put it into the base class mechanics, which is exactly what we are doing.
Jon
This is a reasonable enough change IMO. Dependence of Thief builds on the CS line needs to be reduced to allow for better build variety and the only way to do that while avoiding power creep is by increasing Thief’s base effectiveness and reducing the effectiveness of certain traits in the CS line. There is no other way around it. Whether these changes go too far or not enough, however, is certainly up for debate.
Regarding Shadow Return, how about taking a similar approach and removing it from Sword altogether (change Inf to a leap finisher maybe?), and add Shadow Return as an F2 for our class mechanic Steal, adding a Stun Breaking/condi removal component?
This would accomplish the following:
1. Allow all Thief builds access to a more readily available Stun Breaker (that we really need due to being shoehorned into Zerker builds to be useful to our teams and the lack of Stability access), making other weaponsets approach pre-nerf S/x in viability
2. Give Thieves at least 1 Stun Breaker regardless of what utilities they need to bring on their bar (Venom share anyone?)
3. Make it easier for you to balance SR since Steal is a cooldown based mechanic
4. Make Steal inherently useful as more than just a gap closer and situational utility tool without traiting for it
5. Add a survivability aspect to the Trickery line so that it could be a viable alternative to Acrobatics
While we’re on the topic of Steal, please also consider removing the ability to use Stolen Items from F1, and add a F3 that will be populated with an Offensive item, and F4 that will be populated as a Defensive item when F1 is used. A Thief can then choose to between one of these two items to activate based on the situation at hand, or to Steal again with an unobstructed F1 without using F3 or F4 if he needs to use Steal itself to reroll F3 and F4 or to activate traited effects.
These changes would make untraited Steal a much more robust mechanic on par with the usefulness of other class mechanics that don’t require traits to be class-defining.
(edited by Kaon.7192)
5s weapon swap is an advantage exclusive of warriors, that could be granted for free, without spend trait points.
Thieves could chain insane combos without significative CD, if swap weapon every 5s.
We share the same initiative bar between weapons. There is no tangible difference between using a skill on one weapon and chaining it with another vs chaining two skills on the same weapon.
We are expending the same amount of resources either way. The only difference that a 5 second weaponswap cooldown would bring is the added flexibility of being able to choose to spend resources on the other weapon sooner.
Only with CD based weapon skills does it become a tangible advantage, since some cooldowns on weapon skills fall below 9 seconds, meaning you can activate them more often if weaponswap CD was lower. This is why the Arcane tree that shortens Attunement swap cooldown is so important for Elementalists.
(edited by Kaon.7192)
I’ve had this problem for quite a long time and it’s one of the most serious issues plaguing the trading post right now. Productivity grinds to a halt when you’re selling more than a few thousand pieces of a commodity because of this issue. I’m really surprised that the devs are apparently not aware of this issue yet?
100% reproducible from the steps below:
1. Have 2000 of any single item in your inventory (8 full stacks).
2. Go to the Sell tab of trading post
3. Choose the item you have 2000 of and list it for selling at a price
4. Sell the rest of them using the add to lowest listing function, clicking the sell button as fast as you can
Actual Results:
4. Depending on how quickly you listed the items, at the 6 or 7th stack (500 or 250 left), you will encounter the error.
This seems to be the effect of some sort of flood control algorithm, as you will be able to post new orders if you wait a while. If this behavior is intentional, there really should be a more informative error message than what we have right now. Having such a flood control system for selling but not buying just doesn’t make sense to me though, so I’d wager this is a bug.
Dual Pistol Thief.
I lol’d and then remembered how badly I wanted to play one back when this game first released…
I like mixing endgame and mid-level content together. I like that as a mostly solo player because you can happen across interesting, not every-day fights.
Look past the overflow for just one moment, because the overflow is as big a problem for everyone involved.
In a few months, I as a solo player leveling in Sparkfly Fen can come across an organized group staging for this encounter. I can decide to hang around take part in the encounter, too. That’s GOOD. You wouldnt have that if it was instanced.
Right now, I, as a solo player leveling in Sparkfly Fen, can come across an organized group staging for this encounter. I can decide to hang around and take part in the encounter too by manning one of the turrets. I will spam 1 at mobs for the entire fight because that makes me feel bad-kitten and I don’t know any better, and effectively cut down everybody’s chance of success by a good 1/6th. A few more people like me on the turrets and we’ll have bone walls popping up every few seconds! And that is GOOD.
?
(edited by Kaon.7192)
I remember a Dev saying something about a tie breaker involving total individual scores.
So Kiel supporters…
How does it feel to have supported the Scarlet fractal?
Mostly decent changes, but the Vigor aspect of it is woefully inconsistent.
Guardians and Mesmers still have perma Vigor kitten pt minor traits while Ele’s exact same trait is moved to Master, and Engy and Thief can no longer maintain perma vigor through traits alone.
Consistency is important in making balance changes.
On a related note: “… We don’t like classes having permanent Vigor …”
So then why exactly are these Vigor on Crit traits, that essentially grant perma vigor with even a tiny amount of extra boon duration, completely unchanged?
Lastly, Shadow Return and Evasion are two of the ONLY viable defensive mechanics for Thieves in sPvP (Stealth is not viable since you loose the ability to contest points). Both are certainly slightly over the top in the current meta, but nerfing both in the same patch is definitely a bad idea and could have massive implications for Thief viability in sPvP.