Guild Wars 2

Dee Jay.2460:

You don’t seem to understand what snowballing is.

Snowballing is rewarding the already dominant team with even more benefits, thus making them even harder to overcome. Another snowballing mechanic were the olb Orbs for example because the winning side with more people could also claim more orbs and thus become even harder to defeat.

Just killing your enemies in a normal situation isn’t snowballing. It’s just regular PvP.

Normally you’d have to dedicate a fraction of your forces for a short time toward manually reviving downed-players. A winning side does not have to do this because rally does the job for them.

And btw. you don’t have to subscribe to mine line of reasoning. You just have to actually play the game to see this effect in action thousands of times, every day. If you’re gonna deny the snowballing nature of downed-state and rally then there’s really nothing left to discuss. Because it’s the most blatant example of such a mechanic in any game to date.

???

???

???

When you have growing tangible benefits over your oponent is what you are referring to with your original snowballing comment, no?

Numbers are tangible, how does a growing disparity in numbers in favor of one team not display your definition of snowballing? The defeated state is the core of what you are referring to when it comes to numbers advantage. Rallying is a supplemental mechanic off defeat, that compounds numbers advantages, but it’s not rally that is the core to this numbers advantage.

It’s the total amount of players and the defeated state that are the core, rallying is something extra, that only comes into play when people are downed and a defeat occurs.

By saying “Just killing your enemies in a normal situation isn’t snowballing. It’s just regular PvP.”, you’re saying scaling the numbers to your advantage isn’t scaling the numbers to your advantage. That makes no sense.

I agree with the following:
“Normally you’d have to dedicate a fraction of your forces for a short time toward manually reviving downed-players. A winning side does not have to do this because rally does the job for them.”
But there’s no problem with this assuming equal numbers, as both sides are perfectly capable of utilizing this functionality.

People are trying to say there’s a problem, because smaller forces in WvW can’t take on big zergs, but let’s actually look at what’s going on in this situation…

A smaller force is taking on a larger force. There’s where the imbalance lies, not with the rally tagging mechanic. As has been mentioned previously the rally tagging mechanic just makes it easier for the larger force to up their downed up, but that doesn’t make the rally mechanic broken or imbalanced, it just accentuates the numbers imbalance of a smaller force going up against a larger force.

In 5v5 pvp there’s no inherent numbers advantage, which makes the mechanic balanced overall. In WvW numbers are rarely equal and is where the more valid complaints come from.

Khezekiah Bellamy.5016:

it is that way to prevent players from left clicking and activating something they dont want to activate yet. such as the lava buckets during dredge fractal boss or miss firing a trebuchet

That doesn’t make sense as a response to the bug, because there’s nothing to click when interactable objects aren’t around.

runeblade.7514:

Solori.6025:

Dee Jay.2460:

I just wanted to point out just how poorly designed Black Powder specifically and Blind spam in general is balanced in this game.

Blind essentially negates a hit that would otherwise be a successful attack. It wastes the cooldown and is in all cases a very powerful mitigation mechanic. It is something that could be applies every 10-20 seconds in a balanced environment, but it can’t be something that is spammed non stop.

It’s especially problematic when combined with Thieves because you need a successful attack in order to clear the blind effect. And hitting a stealthed target is a matter of luck. Classes that rely almost exclusively on physical melee damage have virtually NO WAY of ever hitting a semi-competent Thief who uses Black Powder and Shadow Shot in a sensible manner. Nada.

Berserker Stance gives you 8 seconds of condition immunity and thus a break from the constant blind spa. But those 8 seconds are easy enough to kite/stealth for any Thief, and then it’s back to immunity.

I have both a Thief and a Warrior and I’ve been on both ends of this battle a number of times. Frankly I can’t think of many other abilities that are such a hard-counter to an entire class. If I’m smart enough to avoid Berserker Stance I am virtually immune to any Warrior melee build. It’s really quite a joke.

Blind was conceived….and should be, a situational condition. It should not be something that can be spammed and reapplied every few seconds, especially not by a class that gives you no opportunity to cleanse it.

Cleansing Ire..

Longbow

berserker stance.

You have too many ways to deal with blind, as a warrior
If a thief were to try this with me I would use zerk stance and hit him while being immune..
It is really amazing how much damage a warrior can dish out in 8 seconds.

Even when that stance is up, you can remove blind ( and conditions for that matter) faster than any other class in game right now because of 1 trait.

But for the sake of pistol off hand.
because I already dislike thieves.
Why I wouldnt mind blinding powder being a dark field that pulsed every 3 seconds

instant uselessness and balance..

what do you think guys?

Sounds good in paper. But in practice a thief would stealth away and wait for Zerker stance to go down. They have the DPS to outdamage the Healing sig healing. There is no rush for them.

I’d swap to shortbow for 10 seconds to keep that health from regenerating fully. It boggles my mind when warriors choose to fight inside of blackpowder, you can skirt around field while still meleeing a thief, because melee cleave has enough range to do so. I notice a lot of guardians do the same thing. Any other class, like a Mesmer, ranger, thief, elementalist, etc. that are running melee I notice very few people stand in black powder. Not sure why the heavies I fight have a tendency to stand in it and the other professions rarely do so.

Dee Jay.2460:

Shockwave.1230:

Zoxea.9564:

Rally is a feature “Anti-PvP”. You can give 1000 positive arguments, it is and will remain a feature “Anti-PvP”.

2v1, i fight vs 2 players, a mate is touched by my 2 opponents but don’t fight and run in other point. I down my 2 opponents, i have 10/15% HP, my mate is dead in other point in the map, my 2 opponents is up by rally, i’m killed, i lose my fight…

Other example, WWW, 20v50. You and your 19 mates have down 15 opponents on 50. A player (noob or other, the number 21) is touched by opponents and killed. It’s 15 opponents up. The job is totally ruined by ONE player. (This example is valid with a Moa, and this is not a joke)

All positive arguments are cleared for these reasons.

I’m ok with down and finisher, but for rallybot, no, it’s anti-PvP.

You can do the same thing to the enemy team. If you don’t find it fun that’s different than it being unfair. Fun is not universal though, what you don’t find fun other people do.

The end result is always a snowball effect though.

The winning team gets a further boost by rallying their downed players in the process of killing enemies.

Have you ever seen a GvG where the teams burn each other down 1 by 1? It barely ever happens. It’s normally the first 2-3 kills that decide the outcome thanks to the snowballing nature of rally/downed-state.

It is bad in every way. It has no positive side-effects unless you consider “noob friendliness” because it provides safety in numbers good thing.

It also means that team-fights are all about rallying/finishing and really not so much about the actual combat. And frankly that’s just stupid because that’s not what PvP should be about.

The argument put forth isn’t even an argument about rallying. For example, killing your enemies results in a snowball effect, because you now have more players than the enemy team now. This is bad because targeting makes this noob friendly where all you have to do is ctrl + t and focus someone down. The more you focus target, the more snowbally combat becomes. It also means that team fights are all about focus targeting and not so much about the actual combat, and frankly that’s just stupid because that’s not what PvP should be about.

Another example, killing your enemies results in a snowball effect, because you now have more players than the enemy team. This is bad because damage is so prevelent from autoattacks and low recharge skills that the team with the most readily available defenses makes it all noob friendly where all you have to do is build for more defenses than the other team while spamming your offensive skills, and frankly that’s just stupid because that’s not what PvP should be about.

You are arguing that snowballing is the issue, but snowballing is a result of enemies being defeated, not rally tagging. Downed allies are still in play.

Zoxea.9564:

Shockwave.1230:

I like unbalanced fast-food.

Each his own. But unbalanced feature is a unbalanced feature.

It’s not unbalanced/unfair as previously explained. Both sides can utilize this. You just don’t like the big swing in momentum that follows when it isn’t beneficial to you.

Instead of constantly complaining, bashing everything you can about the feature, and anyone that disagrees with you, come up with potential solutions with examples. For example, “I think rally should have a 5 man cap, because in WvW you do all this work down enemies from a zerg. We’ve downed 20 players before and one of ours was defeated then nearly all 20 of the enemies were rezed. A 5 man cap wouldn’t impact PvP or a lot of PvE, or just apply the cap to WvW”

Yada yada yada…

So it’s potentially hidden, lingering UI element that’s blocking the left click and drag.

I’ve attached a screenshot of the general vacinity where if I left-click and drag the camera won’t move.

I play in windowed mode.

Looks like when a pet is dead and a ranger is down the ranger is immune to projectiles during lick wounds since they hit the pet and the pet is invincible.

Isn’t the pet supposed to be interruptable?

I’ve noticed this for a few weeks, that I’m using my down skill 2 when I don’t want to as I go down while pressing skill 2 to attack before I’m down.

Was this reverted with the feature patch?

Can it be unreverted?

DD needs a change to skill 3 or some lesser used trait revamps in order to see wider use.

As it stands, why wouldn’t you play P/D if you want a dps hybrid, or D/P or S/D if you want direct damage?

The answer is because you’re gimping yourself, in my personal opinion.

Locuz.2651:

Shockwave.1230:

Does anyone feel this adds value to a match?

I personally don’t.

It is counterproductive actually. 99% of all new players cap points with 2-3 or chase single thieves around the map with 3 players untill he is dead. Simply because they only care about personal score.

Its because the system “teaches” them to act like this.

/yes @

Shockwave.1230 agrees with Locuz.2651

Neurophen.9738:

Sure. Most GW1 &2, skills have: activation time, after cast and cool down. The cool down and the after cast start after the skill has been cast. This means the maximum number of times that skill can be activated per second is 1 / activation time +max(after cast, cool down)

If the cooldown <= after cast then it simply would make no difference. I’m suggesting more like a 1s CD on skills (not auto attacks) surely that would be a DPS nerf? No because initiative isn’t a limitless pool you can’t just spam them endlessly. I’m suggesting the CDs would be set so that the same number of skill activations and auto attacks would happen over time.

This would in no way be a DPS nerf. Heck if it was I’d be fine increacing the damage on the individual attacks propotionally to compensate.

I hope you agree it’d possible to do this. The benefit would be that interrupts now put skills (not auto attacks) on kitten cool down just like every other class.

Why do this? All it would prevent is people from double tapping skills, which is necessary at times, like when you need to cluster bomb like crazy on rezers.

Has it been suggested that warriors stand outside the blind field? Their attacks encompass the entire diameter of the field.

Murtygale.2635:

So, I know we have all been down this road before, but theifs need some fixin. I went solo que the other day, and the other team was hardly a challenge, save for two glass theives that never seperated. About 30k burst, stealth and they are gone. After observing their behavior, it was obvious they knew eachother. So I’m not asking for a stealth nerf, I’m not asking for a damage nerf, but something needs to change. I asked a friend of mine to try this out with me the other day, and we found out that we could effectively 2v5 the other team, and let the other three do what they please. If the 5 opponents were smart they’d drop aoe everywhere, and sometimes just group up and stack tight, but that would never work. Whenever we spotted the weakling, we ganked him and ran/stealthed, grouped up in about 5 sec and dropped SR alternating in a safe place. At this point, its 2v4, with 3 of our guys capping/running orb/trebbing, and one of theirs spawning; in other words, its gg.
I suggest, that a threshold of damage intake reveal stealth, perhaps 20%. Or even, amplify the effects on stealthed enemies, not damaging typed, I mean triggered effects, being cc removes stealth, or make all triggerable aoes actually hit stealthed enemies, like necro marks. In the end, we will still be able to stealth, and still be able to deal 30k damage, but the dual theif pairing is far beyond rediculous when done correctly.
Shouldnt every class have a chance to 2v1? Even for 5 seconds? Shouldn’t your teammates have a chance to damage the theifs before they stealth after their kill?
The mechanic needs to change, an alternate suggestion is that a new status is applied upon being attacked out of stealth that lasts 1s, that eliminates incoming stealthed damage, so that multiple sources can be predicted or at least mitigated. Normally if you see two enemies you prepare for a 2v1, roaming in spvp you are prepared to support a larger battle or 1v1 another, but an unpredictable 2v1 is more than just a technicality. Or, a 5 second status that makes the next stealthed attack a glancing blow.

Just a quick question, have you ever seen a lonely portal at a point, then suddenly it glows. You’re expecting a mesmer to port throught right?

Ever had 3 enemies port through and gank you? Sounds pretty similar to a surprise 2v1.

Does anyone feel this adds value to a match?

I personally don’t.

OP try to keep bugs on the down low, and just report them in game.

We can now expect to see every warrior having an extra 160 power now regardless of build

Grimwolf.7163:

It’d be kinda cool if someone could refute the issues I’ve addressed with it, instead of just saying “I like the style.”
Because that doesn’t change the fact its ridiculously broken.

Initiative is not broken. It’s just different. If you want a quantified refute, here’s one I’ve done before.

Over 60 seconds a thief has 72 initiative to use on weapon skills. On average it’s about 4 initiative per skills 2-4. Which means you can use about 18 2-4 skills over 1 minute. Any other profession has weapon swaps, death shroud, attunement, kits, etc. For weapon skills 2-4 and they all use recharge. Every profession can use 2 times as many skills as a thief over 60 seconds.

What this clearly shows is that every other prof has the 2-4 skills more readily available than the thief, this shows that ever other profession is broken compared to the thief when you look at weapon skill usage based on resource available within a silo.

Zoxea.9564:

Rally is a feature “Anti-PvP”. You can give 1000 positive arguments, it is and will remain a feature “Anti-PvP”.

2v1, i fight vs 2 players, a mate is touched by my 2 opponents but don’t fight and run in other point. I down my 2 opponents, i have 10/15% HP, my mate is dead in other point in the map, my 2 opponents is up by rally, i’m killed, i lose my fight…

Other example, WWW, 20v50. You and your 19 mates have down 15 opponents on 50. A player (noob or other, the number 21) is touched by opponents and killed. It’s 15 opponents up. The job is totally ruined by ONE player. (This example is valid with a Moa, and this is not a joke)

All positive arguments are cleared for these reasons.

I’m ok with down and finisher, but for rallybot, no, it’s anti-PvP.

You can do the same thing to the enemy team. If you don’t find it fun that’s different than it being unfair. Fun is not universal though, what you don’t find fun other people do.

I should also bring up that I’ve taken my pvp newcomer friends/guildies into custom arenas without progression to teach them the basics of PvP. It doesn’t take but a few matches and an easy to play build to get them off and running.

Another thing I should bring up, that’s less of one, but still an issue are alt accounts. What then? Skilled driver, but since the account hasn’t been proven you restrict their pvp access? Seriously?

I don’t think anyone suggesting a rank/level requirement to do tourney’s understands that Hotjoin and Tourney’s are played extremely differently.

I go to hotjoin, because I know people aren’t serious, and are largely more casual not intending to be more competitive.

Hotjoin is where I test play professions and builds I’m not used to, I don’t play to win the match, I play to win fights, seeking out different professions to learn a build, whether they’re on point or not.

I see other people doing this as well. Putting a competitive person in a more casual environment isn’t the right call. Additionally what will newer pvper’s do who want to form up with their friends and guildies? Jump into a hotjoin server with 3-5 open slots, hope that the other 5-7 people don’t join the teams in a way that y’all are separated? Really?

Even entertaining the idea of these kinds of restrictions to tourney PvP seems incredibly dumb (for lack of a better word I can think of) in my personal opinion. The player/team rating systems just need their improvements is all, we’ve already got the influx of players due to rewards that will help with matchmaking.

There’s a few viable concepts

1. Glass cannon
2. Evade tank
3. Ranged Hybrid DPS

You can mix each of these somewhat if you want, and there’s multiple weapon sets to achieve 1 and 2. The third is Pistol/Dagger exclusively.

Klocknov.8219:

Shockwave, you have to work for it, just like you have to work towards getting a commander badge. Thus why I said 10. You need to be 11 and have 250 badges before you can get a commanders badge, why not add a lvl 10 PvP rank to being able to enter tourneys? Or what about the rank pre-raq for Gift of Battle? It requires you to be rank 14 in WvW to get.

Having a base-line entry is a good thing for certain things, and tourny PvP would be a good idea to stick at least a small pre-req so you don’t push players in that don’t know the game mode. If MMR worked better it wouldn’t be as big as an issue, but being as if you have no MMR it doesn’t treat you as if your rank 1 or 9000 it just throws you in right away and you either get lucky and win and start out with a high rank or lose and drop to the lower ranks. Thus continuing the process of not really learning minus maybe a few basics as those first few matches hit.

So if you want to call that a forced grind, tell me how long did it take you to get to 10? I know I was 10 in the first few days of owning GW2 and that was before the initial gem tourneys were around.

I have no idea how long it takes to get to r10.

What I do know is that this is not an issue. It creates a melting pot, where people are exposed to ragers and educaters about rank disparity, which you can love or hate. In the end it won’t matter once MMR is refined or Ladders are rolled out.

Now everyone loves turtles AND trees together

Carighan.6758:

Am I alone in thinking Initiative is an interesting mechanic? And I don’t even have a Thief but hey, good for them that they have a global pool of shared cooldowns.

Not alone, you’ll just find supporters don’t feel a need to defend it on the forums. There’s a few who speak up on the forums about the merits of what’s already in game in an attempt to balance out forum inevitable negativity, which happens because it’s the best outlet people have.

Force people to grind in order to PvP? What is this WoW?

Seems to me that this isn’t something that just applies to the thief profession.

Dee Jay.2460:

How Rally/Downed-State came to be:

1. Let’s not have a trinity
2. Hmm, dying right away kind of sucks though. It’s too punishing.
3. Let’s have downed-state where everyone can heal you in 2 seconds.
4. But what when you’re solo?
5. Oh, great idea. You “rally” if you manage to kill someone before you die.
6. That’s cool, yeah.
7. Test and tune it exclusively in PvE.
8. Copy + Paste into sPvP and WvW.
9. Ignore the god awful game-play implication it has.
10. Pretend it’s still a cool feature.
11. Ignore constant criticism.

12. Listen to positive feedback about rally

I think the critics are the one’s ignoring that there are two sides to this

Rally is fine as is.

Too late to change anyways if you don’t like the design, but people like me do.

Celestial, strength/krait have made it a lot stronger. Like any ranged condi build it’s low risk, and high reward.

Mark Katzbach.9084:

The ArenaNet tag functions the same as a guild tag, because it is one. To fly the tag, we have to rep the ArenaNet guild. So, no, we can’t rep a guild and display the tag at the same time. Anywhere you would normally see somebody’s guild tag, you would see the ArenaNet tag, if an employee is representing the company guild.

What happens when y’all get more than 500 employees?

Will you be expanding guild sizes for everyone? :]

When ANet is done with the Sylvari being in the spot light and put the Humans in the spotlight we may see more lore around the 6 gods, but until then don’t hold your breath expecting to hear anything about DoA, UW, or FoW

You were fighting a Sword/Dagger or Sword/Pistol Thief.

Your best bet would have been to use portal to port back and forth between below and above at the same times he was.

You should also cast your phantasms to let them deal with him while you time his movements to apply your condi’s and apply your own damage. They will chase him down below or up above what you lie in wait at the other end.

You can also spread out your illusions and use your diversion shatter to apply a chain of dazes for 2-3 seconds. Also apply any other dazes you have, this will force him to blow his stun breaks.

Taci.8125:

Simon.3794:

you can’t know whos the top 1 player, because score doesn’t mean anything, usually a top player in a losing team arent highest scored, some times yes, but mostly no.

Yeah, I know score isnt accurate on saying who’s done better but it would be an incentive for people to do things.

No semi afkers players on points will do better on score than someone really trying to win the game though.

Incentivizing people to do “things” even wrong things instead of winning? Why?

Kurrilino.2706:

JJBigs.8456:

war/guard have ample stabo.

---

Just came by here.
I am over 30 and casual gamer. Would you mind explaining what that is ?
You kids are insane

Stab = Stability, not sure why the post uses stabo

Sons.5493:

CobaltSixty.1542:

Sons.5493:

Also, please don’t bother answering, lel use stability, lel stunbreaks, lel dodges. This not a solo problem but more of a team gameplay issue.

I.e. don’t respond with counters to my argument.

More like, don’t respond obvious answers that do not solve the issue.

I don’t understand the issue. The problem is that there are players that can time the chaining of CC? Why is this a problem?

Stab is a DoT effect, you can’t be CC’ed. Also, why put yourself in a position where you can be chain CC’ed without punishing the opposing team with cleave/AoE from your own team?

Also, do profs not have invuln’s, dodges, blinds, blocks, and evades, on top of stab to avoid CC?

If you are out of the numerous above counters, why not rotate out of the front line with someone else until you have some things come off cooldown?

Maybe OP just hasn’t thought of these things? Idk, I don’t see an issue, I see an opportunity to learn.

Drarnor Kunoram.5180:

RyuDragnier.9476:

You mean when somebody is stealthed while downed? They’re pretty easy to find…unless you mean being stomped while the opponent is stealthed, which is a different problem altogether.

Not easy to find when they stealth and die to bleeds or similar.

Not saying I agree it’s a problem, just saying it can be exceedingly difficult sometimes to find them.

It’s easy for classes with chains on skill 1. Classes like the elementalist, engi, and ranged weapons make it hard.

Downstate saves feel pretty clutch imo. As is people being able to delay and save themselves, setup cleave situations, rally off kills, etc is all very fun.

Basket of Boxes.1976:

Shockwave.1230:

Here’s what people aren’t understanding. Revealed being added to meta skills means teams can stack or chain revealed on thieves/Mesmer to prevent them from ever using stealth . What’s the result? Stealth being a mechanic that isn’t viable. This is counter to the design of the thief, and some Mesmer skills/traits.

If you are talking about PvP teams are maximum 5 people and if you think teams are going to bring multiple engis or rangers with sic em to counter thief and mesmer stealth you are out of your mind.

As soon as there’s 1 viable meta skill or trait that does reveal, every single mono class player is going to cry about how their class needs a skill or trait to put reveal on thieves and mesmers too.

All you’re setting yourself up for by adding reveal to the meta is more QQ from professions that don’t have it.

Even that 1 viable meta skill to inflict reveal will force thieves into using more short bow in team fights. It’ll make Hide in Shadows too risky to take over withdraw. If a thief engages in melee expect a reveal to be put on him, followed by a chained reveal so he can’t stealth for 8 seconds on top of the 4 he likely engaged with.

Giving teams viable meta skills with 8 seconds of revealed between 2+ ptofessions is a sure way to remove dagger thieves from the meta. S/D potentially goes away too. Leaving pistol whip the most viable option on paper. As for mesmers, expect similar tactics when people realize you have decoy, prestige, or MI.

Here’s what people aren’t understanding. Revealed being added to meta skills means teams can stack or chain revealed on thieves/Mesmer to prevent them from ever using stealth . What’s the result? Stealth being a mechanic that isn’t viable. This is counter to the design of the thief, and some Mesmer skills/traits.

Basket of Boxes.1976:

The people opposing this idea must not know what utility goggles do, at the moment they are fairly useless unless you are using a SD build. Although it is a stun break a condi based engi would have to give up either a kit or elixir S just so they can stop a thief from stealthing for 4 seconds.

Adding reveal to sick ‘em did not make it so every single ranger added it on their utility bar, in fact I have barely ever seen it used. Adding reveal to sick em’ also didn’t remove thieves from the current meta and adding it to utility goggles wouldn’t either.

This would give SD engis a chance against thieves though as they wouldn’t have to worry about the blind from black powder and could also keep the thief visible a bit longer to land some blows. Thieves SHOULD eat SD engis alive as long as they avoid the initial burst, this change would at least give the eng a chance.

EDIT
After thinking about it since the introduction of reveal on sick em’ I have had it used on me exactly one time on my thief and all I had to do was shadow step out of range and wait a few seconds to stealth when the reveal ran out. Reveal in a 1 v 1 is extremely situational and only really useful if you have the thief beat and don’t want them getting away, it in no way would make engis any more “op” than they already are.

I play both a thief and engi about equally as mains and I see no problem with giving engis and every class for that matter a skill that gives reveal status. There is a good chance taking these reveal utilities would be useless 90% of the time and therefore leave the class worse off then if they just took a better ability.

If any meta skill has an AoE revealed added, Shadow Refuge and Mass Invisibility goes away as useless skills. If lots of professions have targeted reveals added, glass thieves no longer exist and Decoy, Torch, and Mass Invisibility are removed from the Mesmer meta.

For all the complaints about thief and mesmer people must be overlooking that they are to GW2 conquest what Monk and Ritualistic are to GW1 GvG. They are the the squishy most crucial components of team comps.

Allowing for the trinity to exist instantly makes it the most effective way to play the game, meaning the metas in each game mode will shift to accomodate it and effectively remove what ANet did in the first place with their design of the new trinity.

GW2 is designed to be a game of all dps classes, with minor attention being paid to support and control roles.

They should, in my opinion, do more things like Power Block pre-smiter’s boon nerfing it, to allow for more diversity. Adding a shutdown aspect to combat has it’s place, but it can’t be as strong as a 10 second shutdown on everything. The new areas Power Block allowed for putting on cool down should only be allowed to be impacted 3ish seconds at most.

Piogre.2164:

Dante.8456:

I don’t believe skills being added to detect stealth is healthy because I don’t believe anyone should be forced to carry a skill in one of their utilities purely to counter a single broken mechanic that another profession can exploit.

Gotta say I agree- Make the burning particle effect visible on stealthed players and be done with it. Burning is available on every class (in varying degrees, of course), doesn’t damage the other things attached to stealth the way revealed does (thieves can still stealth and get the associated trait bonuses for it) and the stealthers have a reasonable chance to cleanse it.

All this would do is make the meta include more burning and push mesmers and thieves out of the meta, since stealth would be useless in a heavy burn meta.

ANet is going to be getting rid of their current leaderboards for a ladder system.

ANet has also readopted the “when it’s ready” mantra, so you’ll hear more about it at that time.

GW1 arenas were annihilation, any GW1 players asking for TDM were likely referring to annihilation.

The ESL 2v2’s and I believe the upcoming 3v3s are and will be annihilation. If you’d like to experience it OP, try working towards participating in those if possible.

Utility Goggles revealing stealth would make sense if the engi could give them to everyone in the vicinity.

Warrior does the role of sniper better than Thief

Thief does the role of ranged assassin better than warrior bcs of shadow steps

Just a thought that doesn’t just apply to this feature,

If esport features become the focus, maybe more of the esport crowd would gain more interest.

RushandCash.7835:

http://en.gw2skills.net/editor/?fZAQNAsYVl0Mp7plOxyJ8PNBNBt9EGeE0NAFovoA-TZRBwARODA02fQzhAgcZAAPAAA

how do you think about this build??its what i’m useing

Try speccing for quickness when using S/D. Sigil of Rage and Critical Strikes Trait X. Your evade windows are shorter, but your damage output is faster.

Wasbunny.6531:

I also think the OP has a good point. There’s really no reason that slotting a signet (or any consumables for that matter) should give any sort of handicap, however slight. If I’m fighting a full signet warrior for instance I know I don’t have to worry about a Bola or a Bull’s Charge. I can also see when those signets get popped.

Mesmers are probably the most effected since their clones don’t have any of the signet or consumable icons, thus making it extremely easy to tell the player from their clones.

This only matters prefight as you know what utilities someone has as they use them. This design decisions is important for PvP, changing it is not a good idea when this information is heavily utilized.

Any position can be justified. I can justify ANet’s implementation or the OP’s suggestion. Ultimately, this has always existed, there’s no reason to change it due to whim of some people’s opinions, considering the amount of work that SHOULD go into redoing the effectiveness of signets if this information is no longer communicated via the UI.

RedSpectrum.1975:

Lux.7169:

When you don’t even realize you press 5 when you down someone.

Holy cow I thought I was the only one! “I don’t remember pressing black powder…”

This happened to me when I started using S/D, but then I realized it didn’t matter.