Can we at least come to an agreement that the recent interviews are nothing short of embarrassing and not a form of communication with their players?
As long as we place the blame on the higher-ups who are in charge of controlling the flow of information and not on the individual devs who have been unfortunate enough to have been placed in the hot seat while under a gag order, then…
Yes, we can come to such agreement.
It would be helpful if people in the company didn’t feel like they’d get fired if they share what they’ve been doing without telling us what they are going to do.
We don’t hear details about what they’ve done often if at all. Things like scrapped efforts, ideas that fell through; we also don’t hear about things they will implement until “when it’s done”.
I see no valid reason (except fear) they can’t share what they’ve been doing without telling us what they will implement. For example regarding game modes, why not say, we’ve been experimenting with game modes, like VIP, CTF, KotH. Say they end up implementing some VIP concept later on, when they told us they were experimenting with the VIP concept they don’t have to tell us that this is what they’ll implement.
I’m just looking for honest communication, that’s semi-open. And it’d be nice if the devs didn’t have to seem like they’re trying to walk a tight rope with every conversation they have.
I do like the idea of doing some sort of ‘profession archetype’, or a way to visually see if they are a power/toughness/condi/ect spec build.
DO NOT do that, please! It would be gamebreaking! Think about it: the game has just begun, people head to mid, they see 2 enemy guards coming over, they know that one of them is PROBABLY dps and the other one is PROBABLY bunker, but they have to wait those 2-3 seconds to decide which will be the target.
Doing what you say would completely eliminate those “2-3 seconds”.
It’s ok to dinstinguish 2 guardians (for example) from the enemy team, it is NOT ok to dinstinguish them by build. The variation should just be used to distinguish one guardian from the other NOT to dinstinguish from one guardian’s build to the other.
2-3 seconds of a 15 minute match is now gamebreaking?
Regardless of perceived unrest by some about unclear communication, please continue communicating ANet.
Communicating vaguely and showing your community you want to communicate is much better than going dark.
Obviously where you can improve and refine your communications, please do, but don’t go back into a no information in or out tendency please and thank you.
I’m looking at the language used in the balance blog released for the feature pack and comparing it to the changes we know they want to implement via the Skill Bar episodes.
In addition to the nerfs thief is getting directly, it seems like thief will be nerfed indirectly by the lack of power creep it’s getting and the gains the other professions are getting in power creep. But it’s hard to say without knowing details around the elementalist, guardian, necromancer, and Mesmer changes.
Fyi OP, his shortbow would have also gotten him to the roof
It’s not one thing, it’s a lot of things. ANet seems to be addressing some items, hopefully as more features are announced they continue to address more.
Eh, I wouldn’t call it hybrid, it’s on the same level as the warrior rifle – bleed on autoattack while the rest of the set had nothing to do with conditions whatsoever. Since anet changed the warrior rifle to be more consistent, I think d/d should get the same treatment.
Poison on autoattack, Bleeding on Death Blossom, Cripple on Dancing Dagger. It also does good DD. It’s a hybrid sir, deal with it.
The problem with considering it hybrid is that, unlike any other hybrid build, it’s melee range on a squish profession.
Warrior hybrid is a sustainy build. Ele hybrid is sustainy. Engineer hybrid is ranged and sustainy.
Squishy and hybrid doesn’t go together, especially in melee range.
Err, you’re wrong. Every time you try to build damage as a Thief, you’ll end up to be squishy.
I did not mention building as damage.
Eh, I wouldn’t call it hybrid, it’s on the same level as the warrior rifle – bleed on autoattack while the rest of the set had nothing to do with conditions whatsoever. Since anet changed the warrior rifle to be more consistent, I think d/d should get the same treatment.
Poison on autoattack, Bleeding on Death Blossom, Cripple on Dancing Dagger. It also does good DD. It’s a hybrid sir, deal with it.
The problem with considering it hybrid is that, unlike any other hybrid build, it’s melee range on a squish profession.
Warrior hybrid is a sustainy build. Ele hybrid is sustainy. Engineer hybrid is ranged and sustainy.
Squishy and hybrid doesn’t go together, especially in melee range.
Infiltrator strike and Infiltrator’s arrow are overly abused by thieves due to a bug which sometimes allows them to shadowstep to places which are uneven. For example, hills, cliffs, and steps. In PvP they can shadowstep to steps which otherwise require a normal player to go around it to get to the top.
Please fix this since it is getting abused a lot in PvP.
Intended behavior doesn’t equal bug
I don’t have a problem with them adding new PvP rewards into the game. I don’t even care that they are exclusive to PvP.
The problem is that it took them 2 years to implement new in-game armors and they spent those precious resources on PvP which is not where the majority of players spend their time.
Additionally they are giving away $150,000 for a PvP tournament. just giving it away. That money could go into us getting us a new race, or new zones, or new weapons. But nope, it’s going to an unpopular poorly implemented part of the game. It isn’t even going to try and make PvP better, they are just trying to bribe people into playing a poorly designed unliked part of the game.
That money and those resources would have impacted many more players if it had been used to design armor for ALL aspects of the game, but it is being wasted on something that most players don’t care about.
Doesn’t PvE have numerous armor skins that you can’t get from PvP?
Just saying…
i now know why spvp didn’t take off as an esport after watching it for the first time yesterday.
the main problem is, you can’t see kitten in this game, unlike say LoL where you can clearly see what is going on.
spvp needs a better camera to view the action (those “attached camera spectate views” are horrible) , and the game mode needs to be changed to allow for better view.
The camera is a big issue for spectators.
Objects causing unexpected zooming is very annoying. Objects not gaining transparency for spectator’s to view more easily is something else that should be addressed.
I thought I heard China’s group was a full team like EU
hmmm really that hard to introduce 15 new death shroud skills ha?
The hard part is adding 15 skills to be available during combat when there are already 20 available.
You’re almost doubling the amount of tools available to the profession, which means all it’s existing utility skills and weapon skills need to be nerfed in various ways. Traits may need to be nerfed as well.
If you don’t go back and figure out what needs nerfed, then you’re just introducing an incredible amount of power creep.
Changes would require rebalancing all necro skills, not worth the effort to implement, as it will drastically change the way necro is played and put the profession in its entirity back into a discovery state.
Thief cooldowns should be doubled and initiative removed.
Aka, All weapon skills = auto attacks
-This nerf don’t make the build less spammy
-The only few builds that works on thieves are spammy builds. We searched for anything else but nobody found because there is nothing else.
Than make them less spammy, honestly you could reduce the dodge, stealth or blind spam by 30% and those builds would work exactly the same in PvP. The only difference would be that you could not spam those skills anymore. You would have to actually counterplay enemies and use those defense skills at the right moment. Those spam builds carry players to a higher ranking as they should be because the spam closes holes in their defense skills. For example I play alot engineer pvp and if I fight a good player that doesnt track enemy cooldowns its usually a thief. You wont find it on any other professions, even good thieves usually have no clue of all the cooldown timers because they automatically dodge, dodge, dodge or blind, blind, blind no matter what the enemy does. Another thing that hints at that problem is that you usually only find whine threads about condi necros and engis in the thief forum. The reason is because those builds can spam their damage even more than the thief can spam his defense so they eventually down in damage.
Guild Wars 2 is inherently spammy.
Thief’s combat model is driven by being able to expend your resources to use any of your tools at any moment within a certain frequency. It’s “spamminess” (with a tradeoff being squishiness) is core to it’s play, and a significant reason people choose to play it.
You will never remove a thief’s ability to use it’s abilities more frequently in the short term (at the cost of using them less frequently long term) without removing that playstyle from Guild Wars 2.
Punishment is loss of initiative.
Changing the existing behavior is optional, as thief is not OP (with the most obvious justification being that multi-thief comps have not been proven to be viable in equally skilled matchups).
There are obvious and better areas to focus development attention on, such as overly effective passive abilities.
The longbow and Dagger skins are great
I’m not sure if I’ve already posted this in the forums or not, if so apologies.
Please do something interesting with this skill.
My suggestion is to make it a skill that teleports you directly behind your target by making it a 1 second channeled block. During the channel you can also keep the option to throw the dancing dagger.
I’d start by experimenting with the cost at 3 and 1 for the block and dagger throw respectively. Put the max teleport range at 200 and only trigger the teleport when a melee range block occurs.
In order to make D/D viable you’ll have to change either Death Blossom, Dancing Dagger, or both. Since this affects P/D and S/D it will obvoiusly require more testing, but I feel its a more interesting approach to start with than just changing Death Blossom.
If you’re asking about D/P, stagger your burst. Mirror blade is obvious. Shatter at a different moment than when you mirror blade. If you choose to be unpredictable you can have an advantage vs D/P. Daze chain from cry of frustration, and invulnerable from distortion can assure you victory. Chaos storm and chaos armor will bide you time in between shatter attempts.
Vs S/D I can’t really say what the best way to handle them is as I rarely play as S/D, but if I were a Mesmer I would consider eating a flanking strike and shattering at the same time they damage me. You might also consider shattering when you see a larcenous strike.
gz, now many professions can just stand in the blackpowder and nuke you down …. really wonder why you have to change the interval up 100% .
Perma-blind sucks, sure, but if ppl are to stupid to not move out of the field they should get a disadvantage.Safestomping with a blinding field will now also be gone . ( well we have too much QQ about that in the past time i guess )
But hey, we got 1 1/2 secs of stability on a useless GM Trait which will cost ONLY 6 ini and a dagger offhand to access it and then reveal us so we can “safe”-stomp .
This is true, this is especially bad for the Ranger v Thief matchup. I’m worried that if we get stuck in reveal after a backstab to down a ranger that we’ll go down to pet + ranger down state attacks, plus they can guarentee themselves the interrupt.
We’ll be more likely to be on lower health with the ranger buffs incoming.
Warrior, Guardian and Engi will also present similar issues as they’ll all be able to land their knock skills.
This might be a deal breaker for my original stance.
Thinking this through, one additional change I’d make to black powder besides the 2 second interval and blind upon first entering the field is to reduce the cost to 4 initiative.
This is because the skill will be weaker, and not viable for stomping, which is especially impactful in 2v2 and 1v1 scenarios.
At a cost of 4 initiative, we can spend 8 to double cast it and still land our stomps, we may have to wait a moment to doublecast it, but at least we wouldn’t be finished off everytime we’re low on health.
The stomp aspect of this skill is important. If every profession is able to clear their blind and and interrupt our stomp, then just like team fights, we may not have a viable way to land a stomp with pistol offhand. The reason thief would lose the opportunity to stomp is because of how squishy it is. Ranger, Guardian, Engi, and Warrior would all potentially be able to finish bringing us down if we attempt to stomp, and since most offhand dagger thieves run HiS, which is on a 30 second cooldown, it’s unlikely to be ready as a stomp utility.
Not being able to stomp in at least 2v2s and 1v1s would be unfortunate in my opinion, it’s already not viable in team fights, I like seeing my finishers land.
Something else to think about that I thought of, with the high initiative cost of 9 initiative (smoke field + leap finisher) to land a stomp, thieves will feel compelled to be at least 3 into trickery. This prevents thieves from being able to pick two grandmasters trait lines besides trickery and one other.
Also regarding the weakening of black powder and my suggestions, I think dropping the initiative to 4 is likely too low a cost. A cost of 5 with the blind upon crossing the field seems better.
Agreed. I would even pay a one-time (or yearly, or whatever) fee in gems to have a pass to a restricted area with a bank and a TP. Just stop making me load 2-3 maps every time i have to do something.
Do you think this would cause any uproar in the community if we did a change like this, and if it did can you think of a better way to implement it?
I think you guys would know the answer to this better than any of us. Personally I would say, given the situations players in the PvP community are in, that yes it would cause an uproar.
You guys can probably compare data on rl money spent on the game between those who pvp frequently and those who don’t though.
If I recall correctly ANet removed gemstore items for tournament participation. That doesn’t mean the situation hasn’t changed in the past year though.
gz, now many professions can just stand in the blackpowder and nuke you down …. really wonder why you have to change the interval up 100% .
Perma-blind sucks, sure, but if ppl are to stupid to not move out of the field they should get a disadvantage.Safestomping with a blinding field will now also be gone . ( well we have too much QQ about that in the past time i guess )
But hey, we got 1 1/2 secs of stability on a useless GM Trait which will cost ONLY 6 ini and a dagger offhand to access it and then reveal us so we can “safe”-stomp .
This is true, this is especially bad for the Ranger v Thief matchup. I’m worried that if we get stuck in reveal after a backstab to down a ranger that we’ll go down to pet + ranger down state attacks, plus they can guarentee themselves the interrupt.
We’ll be more likely to be on lower health with the ranger buffs incoming.
Warrior, Guardian and Engi will also present similar issues as they’ll all be able to land their knock skills.
This might be a deal breaker for my original stance.
Thinking this through, one additional change I’d make to black powder besides the 2 second interval and blind upon first entering the field is to reduce the cost to 4 initiative.
This is because the skill will be weaker, and not viable for stomping, which is especially impactful in 2v2 and 1v1 scenarios.
At a cost of 4 initiative, we can spend 8 to double cast it and still land our stomps, we may have to wait a moment to doublecast it, but at least we wouldn’t be finished off everytime we’re low on health.
The stomp aspect of this skill is important. If every profession is able to clear their blind and and interrupt our stomp, then just like team fights, we may not have a viable way to land a stomp with pistol offhand. The reason thief would lose the opportunity to stomp is because of how squishy it is. Ranger, Guardian, Engi, and Warrior would all potentially be able to finish bringing us down if we attempt to stomp, and since most offhand dagger thieves run HiS, which is on a 30 second cooldown, it’s unlikely to be ready as a stomp utility.
Not being able to stomp in at least 2v2s and 1v1s would be unfortunate in my opinion, it’s already not viable in team fights, I like seeing my finishers land.
(edited by Shockwave.1230)
gz, now many professions can just stand in the blackpowder and nuke you down …. really wonder why you have to change the interval up 100% .
Perma-blind sucks, sure, but if ppl are to stupid to not move out of the field they should get a disadvantage.Safestomping with a blinding field will now also be gone . ( well we have too much QQ about that in the past time i guess )
But hey, we got 1 1/2 secs of stability on a useless GM Trait which will cost ONLY 6 ini and a dagger offhand to access it and then reveal us so we can “safe”-stomp .
This is true, this is especially bad for the Ranger v Thief matchup. I’m worried that if we get stuck in reveal after a backstab to down a ranger that we’ll go down to pet + ranger down state attacks, plus they can guarentee themselves the interrupt.
We’ll be more likely to be on lower health with the ranger buffs incoming.
Warrior, Guardian and Engi will also present similar issues as they’ll all be able to land their knock skills.
This might be a deal breaker for my original stance.
I am A Okay with the less frequent blinding while in the field.
That said one of the boons of the field is that when you pull someone through it you can reliably count on a blind being applied.
I would add one addition proposal to the skill change to keep this reliable blind, and that’s to add behavior similar to ring of fire’s burning, so that when an enemy first enters the field, a blind is applied.
Bug fixes and a feline grace nerf is all I want to see.
About the original post,
Black powder only has one blind that is highly probable to hit. This skill can be spammed 3 times over about 3 seconds (asumming 15 available initiative and factoring in cast times). Players simply attack from outside the BP to land attacks
Shadow shot also has one blind that is highly probable to hit. This skill can be spammed 5 times over about 5 seconds (asumming 15 available initiative and factoring in cast times).
After spamming for 5 seconds, the thief has no blinds. What issue is being identified in the OP?
Dodge, move and play the game. Are you kittened or do you only play thief and are blind? Thief s if any class already have a lot of active defenses . You got a kitten load of blinds and jumps and you still moan how to survive. What the hell. UHHH … QQ I actually had to COMMIT to an action like every other class. QQ I can’t kitten up and be instantly gone again. QQ my mistakes actually stick to me QQ .
Seriously. Stop. You clearly don’t know how this game works.I really am awe struck by the stupidity of this entire statement. I usually try my best to stray away from such statements on the forums, but I’m really getting fed up with unjustified thief QQ. A bad thief will not survive at all period. if my CnDs dont connect due to an extremely wide range of possibilities, I am beyond vulnerable. And mistakes are very noticeable on thief. if I mess up in a fight, there’s a very good chance that it’s going to bite me in the kitten unless I can work around my mistake. Same with other classes, although classes such as warrior and guardian and much more forgiving. And a 10s revealed would completely destroy thief. period. There’s nothing we could do for 10 whole seconds to stay alive w/o stealth like other classes can. it is our means of survival, with he exemption of Evade builds, but people complain about those too.. Seriously, is there anything we can do for you guys to not hate us?
This post is not about stealth, this post is about how thieves have semi-immunity to chill. We want to discuss how thieves should be penalize by this condition. There are various ways that the thief could be penalized for example:
- if the thief is chilled make him deal -xx% damage (if initiative regeneration is not slowed down).
- root the thief and freeze him and make his movement slow down to 100%.
- chill should stop utility skill recharge to +90% or even 100% to compensate for the semi immunity.
Nobody will disagree that there is a problem with chill affecting thieves. Now, consider this hypothetical scenario:
- imagine for a moment if warriors were semi-immune to blind. What if warriors could connect a hit 50/50 even when blinded?
I can think of lots of ways to fix the chill problem; one of the easiest solutions I think would be to get rid off the -xx% skill cool down for ALL classes. That way everyone would be affected by just -66% speed.
Thief is not semi immune to chill. All skills with recharge on thief are impacted by chill. Four weapon skills simply do not have a recharge as they do on other professions.
For those 4 skills per weapon they use initiative, which is a global pool between weapon swaps.
The most basic conclusion an initiative hater would come to is that the current behavior is unfair, and since thieves have a global cooldown between 2 weapons the 66% penality to recharges should be cut in half for initiative to 33%.
The above stance is still not a fair implementation, because on other professions not all 4 weapon skills are simultaneously put on recharge when chill is applied.
In other words in order for a global 33% reduction from chill on initiative to be fair it’s the equivalent of all 2-4 weapon skills on all in combat skill swap options simulatenously being on cooldown.
Reality is that the above scenario is an extremely rare occurance in a pvp scenario. As players will regularly have some 2-4 weapon skills on cooldown, while others are ready for use.
The elementalist, engineer, necromancer, and transformation skills add further complication to the fairness of a global initiative charge rate reduction, as they all add more skill pool options to consider.
These are some of the problem that initiative haters need to solve in order to present a logical argument that makes sense for making chill impact initiative recharge.
The variables mentioned above indicate that there could potentially be some impact from chill on the initiative recharge rate that would be fair, but it’s such a complicated problem to solve that it may not be worth solving, especially when there’s the potential for the fair solution’s impact to be less than 10% on initiative recharge.
Asking for core mechanic changes to a profession requires changes across the board to the profession.
These are not tweaks. The changes requested in the OP have a significant impact in viability vs engi, ele, and necro, in regard to chill. Additionally, locking a thief out of a weapon skill for 5 Seconds on interrupt has such a significant impact on a fight that it’ll mean a loss in the form of giving up of positioning or being down. The interrupt change would be especially devastating in conquest structured pvp. S/D Skill 3 being on cool down because of a larcenous interrupt means you have to give up positioning and or stealth. D/P black powder, shadow shot, or heart seeker being interrupted has more leeway, but can be equally devastating.
Other balance changes are coming, likely in September. The thief’s core mechanics, don’t need to be adjusted. It creates a playstyle that is different and one that numerous people enjoy.
If you feel a particular match-ups are unfair, then address that, not how the entire profession plays.
Because the buffs look so strong I’m trying out Ranger and the current incarnation of the build. It’s already really strong. I feel like I’ll be swapping from thief to this once the buffs roll out, assuming thief doesn’t get buffs as well. Looks like there could be a new apex roamer so far, I feel bad for mesmers if they don’t get buffed.
I’m getting skyhammer over and over and over and over (4 times in a row so far). I don’t need the maps removed from arenas, I just want to be able to choose what maps I play on.
I don’t like skyhammer. The map can be so heavily built around that it doesn’t feel like real pvp.
You guys might as well get ready to complain more, because I guarantee you that by the end of all these changes Engineers and Rangers are not going to be the only ones with a “reveal” ability. Counter-play for stealth spam is being implemented. You Thieves are just going to have to learn to adapt and overcome.
This just would mean stealth wouldn’t be viable and everyone will be running something else, like Acro Trickery S/D for example.
D/P thief vs Utility Goggles is the Hardest Hard counter I’ve ever seen in this game.
To be honest, it really only hard counters a one-trick-pony build you see commonly in WvW. So I’m personally okay with it having a simple counter to it. The real issue to these counters is how it plays into the 2/6/0/0/6 build. Fortunately trickery d/p doesn’t rely so heavily on stealth as an SA build, but it DOES use stealth. If this skill, or other skills like this, becomes a “thing” we’ll probably see more s/d thieves in WvW. Hopefully, on the spvp side of things, all this means for D/P thieves is more time in shortbow.
In a fight with an engie, you usually heavily rely on shortbow anyway. Also, there is quite a sacrifice for an engie to take utility goggles over elixer s. Warriors have a way more commanding presence than a thief.
What you would commonly see in a teamfight is a person stealthing a person more appropriate for ressing, and then have the thief put pressure on the engie because nades hurt on anyone just facetanking them while ressing. So it’s not like the engies are most likely going to get free harass.
This is especially disheartening for me, because I prefer D/P over S/D or S/P.
I’m with you. D/P is just way better than S/D or S/P and we definitely don’t see many D/P players as S/D players in spvp, but I’m still waiting to see the other changes before I make up my mind. Regardless, I play way more dota than guild wars now-a-days anyway.
Don’t forget that utility goggles gives blind immunity to engineers, which is has a heavy presence on D/P via shadow shot and black powder. That’s the other reason the counter is so hard.
Viable forced Reveals are scary for stealth in the meta. Stealth could be completely pushed out, because down saves with stealth can be countered by analyze.
D/P thief vs Utility Goggles is the Hardest Hard counter I’ve ever seen in this game. When equipping 1 skill completely counters a build, I think that’s an issue. You won’t be able to survive long enough in that 1v1 for your team to rotate to you if they’re not already with you, so you’ll always have to give up that capture point in that situation. One of the things that allows D/P to be strong is stealth lets you bail, if there’s an obvious situation where you need to bail out and you get Analyzed, then you have no defense and you’re done.
In team fights, people know to use focus. So I would fully expect Analyze to be used as someone is about to go down, or when someone goes down. This removes the stealth rez utility from Mesmers, Thieves, and Engineers. Because the rez utility from engineers is removed, you’ll see people choosing to take Utility Goggles over Elixir S.
I’m mostly worried about how much a viable forced reveal will create a rock, paper, scissors setup in team comps. “The enemy comp has a thief/mesmer? Better take Analyze.”
On the other side of that, “The enemy comp has an engineer? Our thief/mesmer better not run much stealth, if any.” This is especially disheartening for me, because I prefer D/P over S/D or S/P.
- Utility Goggles – Analyze – this ability now 6s of revealed in addition to the vulnerability it applies.
This is incredibly scary. Elixir S, Mass Invisibility, and Shadow Refuge might be useless for saving downed players now.
I’m worried this skill will push all stealth out of the meta, because it’s actually viable, unlike “Sic ’em”.
Also Utility Goggles completely hard counters D/P thief, with immunity to blind and a forced reveal, which can be used after a black powder is noticed to give engi’s the benefit of flight ahead of the thief’s initiative without them being able to stealth. Engi’s already do counter thieves very hard anyways though.
I don’t know what the thief version of power creep will be, but at this point it seems like everyone will be playing S/D Crit or Acro after this update.
Thieves aren’t unstoppable.
Imo the profession simply forces you to be a better player in order to be viable, therefore you’ll find people that actually play thief tend to be stronger players.
Interrupt and drop target bind that doesn’t open the escape menu plz
Besides doing backstab techniques as a topic, I’d also be interested in your take on when the best time to use steal is. I find it differs depending on the matchup.
If you do a guide, touching on techniques to land backstab would be a good topic
SB3 is better, but you still can’t dodge during the moonwalk, which should be an option, except for Acro thieves.
Just keep AI builds from hard countering player builds and I’m a happy camper.
I’m very much a mono classer, I only jump into another class a couple days out of a month. I won’t play turrets because I don’t like AI, I don’t like playing against turrets, because I don’t like AI. I won’t play MM because I don’t like AI. I don’t like playing against MMs because I don’t like AI. I like playing against Dps guardians and other engi builds because they are players that offer me a challenge even though they hard counter me, they’re not AI.
What it comes down to is AI shouldn’t be effective in a PvP environment. And there’s no reason to make an AI build hard counter any player build.
Exactly, they are 100% passive, and here you are complaining that immobile turrets that require overcharge control, because you feel it “counters you hard” and is “the biggest pain” to you personally.
So the end game is to draw enough attention to AI builds that everyone starts running them, I’ve managed to get a couple engi ‘s I play with to run the build even though they find it more boring, they go on about how they only have 9 skills on their bar they can use and it feels like they are auto attacking too much of the time in rifle. Anyways By getting attention onto AI builds now hopefully they will be flooding the ToL2, which everyone’s eyes will be on. Hopefully that influences more people to run AI builds. Because I feel they are too strong (mostly bcs they hard counter me, but I also don’t like the idea of losing because of passive AI (which to be fair aren’t 100% passive)) , and hopefully if it shakes out they are taking over the meta, and heavily used in ToL2. I get the feeling AI comps will get further into the bracket than what is wanted, and if they do hopefully that draws enough attention to them that they get nerfed into not being a viable playstyle, bcs I want to play players in PvP not AI. It’ll just such if I run into those AI comps in ToL.
Yet it is okay for you to have ambush and thieves guild. Makes your argument a bit one sided.
Who would run those? It’s A I, and not even well designed AI like Illusions that are more like an attack skill (phantasms) and resource to be consumed.
How is the healing not noticeable? I play a D/P thief. 1v1 and 2v2s vs turret engi is the biggest pain to deal with besides Mm. It’s better for me to not take those fights, because they counter me so hard. I haven’t seen other power glass specs having luck against A I builds, except maybe Acro Trickery S/D
Turrets have ~7,5k HP (Thumper more, Healing less).
They cannot dodge in any way. They heal 5% of their HP every 3 seconds, that’s 375HP, for 125HP/s regenerated.Now I don’t know about you, but that’s a very insignificant amount for me, considering how fast they go down.
And that’s assuming a tiny minority of fights – you shouldn’t want to fight in a situation where that Engineer can play to her strengths in the first place, instead bring 2-3 people to shove the engi off, and then when she returns engage her so that she cannot deploy the turrets in an ideal setup.
But really, the healing is negligible. And this is the buffed version, used to be much weaker. :P
Also consider turrets can’t be crit. Which is where a lot of glass builds get their damage. So not only do turrets deal more damage to glass builds, but they resist all their crit damage and dont git hit by crit procs, which is even more damage reduction. So that 325 health per 3 seconds feels like a lot more than that to me, especially when they are spaced well and cluster bomb doesn’t cleave them much if at all.
I don’t mind getting hard countered by dps guards, a good hambow, other engi builds, etc. But I can’t stand losing to to something that’s not a player.
The turrets I’m fighting against are usually self healing, they potentially have the other trait to for beefier turrets too.
See, this sounds a bit made-up, as the healing is so slow it’s basically not noticeable.
How is the healing not noticeable? I play a D/P thief. 1v1 and 2v2s vs turret engi is the biggest pain to deal with besides Mm. It’s better for me to not take those fights, because they counter me so hard. I haven’t seen other power glass specs having luck against A I builds, except maybe Acro Trickery S/D
No they do not.
The turrets are glass, and easy to kill. As well they do very little damage unless they are actively triggered, making active play the only choice, as it should be, and eleviating passive play.
The turrets I’m fighting against are usually self healing, they potentially have the other trait to for beefier turrets too.
Additionally the MM’s I fight heal their minions.
AI don’t do little damage either. I’ll post a screen shot of them auto attacking my thief when I get a chance.
That active being the only choice statement is one of the biggest setups I’ve ever seen in a forum post. Of course active play is your only choice you don’t choose for the passive damage to be inflicted it just is.
Why should builds that constantly keep the user in a low risk situation, while putting the opponent constantly in a high risk situation, while requiring little thought and little reflexes even exist?
Because they don’t. Unless you genuinely think that turrets put you into a high-risk situation instead of the engineer, and then… well… yeah.
They do in 1v1s and 2v2s unless you have hard counters to the turret build (like staff ele). ANet has stated in their recent ready up that they don’t want to have hard counters existing, though we all know they still do.
Why should builds that constantly keep the user in a low risk situation, while putting the opponent constantly in a high risk situation, while requiring little thought and little reflexes even exist?
The risk reward on A I builds is currently dumb, in my eyes it doesn’t take much to operate them either.
Not affiliated with ArenaNet or NCSOFT. No support is provided.
All assets, page layout, visual style belong to ArenaNet and are used solely to replicate the original design and preserve the original look and feel.
Contact /u/e-scrape-artist on reddit if you encounter a bug.