Guild Wars 2

Can someone please elaborate on what this means?

Rune of Vampirism: Updated the sixth tier ability (mist form) to activate when struck while under 25% health, and profession-specific skills are no longer usable.

What are these “profession-specific skills”?

Thank you.

dDuff.3860:

Didn’t read topic, but as I said about a half a year ago: “steal has to be trated to become at least useful class mechanic”
Look, now you have to put at least 4 traits into steal for it to become superior thief ability, but without traiting it is a shadowstep+1 ability on a 35 sec cd being close to useless.

In my opinion, at least mug and thrill of the crime should be Baseline, not sleight of hand, because it bring whole new level to steal,

Probably, we can merge bountiful and SoH, because these traits combine and synergize very well. Actually if you take SoH there is no reason to not take Bountiful.

In perfect world it would be all 4 traits: mug, bouuntiful, thirll of the crime, SoH merged in one trait to open thief some viable build diversity, because now you either go 4 steal traits with full trickery lane bound to particular ones + mug, or you can’t play the game succesfully and meta is not the reason.

You might be up to something here. We should explore this more.

evilapprentice.6379:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Even if the disparity is only .5 sec, it is enough to favor taking Trickery because it is still better in the long run.

No, that just isn’t true. In the current system, if the difference between 6 trickery steal and 0 trickery steal was .5 sec, or even 5 full seconds, you’d see a lot more 6/6/2/0/0 variants running around.

I don’t know, but having an interrupt .5s sooner is very appealing.

It’s unfortunate that the previewed CS and Acro lines are pretty bad, but assuming they’re brought in line with DA, SA and Trickery, a 3-5s difference between traited and untraited steal won’t be enough to make trickery a “must have” line.

Trickery still have a trump card though — cleanse on Trick skills, so it might still be a “must have” in conjunction with SA.

Every class gains some CD reduction on their class skills from their class line (unless I’m mistaken), so I can’t imagine eliminating it completely, even if Anets trait design heavily favors lowering the CD of steal as much as you can as a player.

I don’t think they’ll be willing to reduce the base CD then have CDR from somewhere else. A flat -10s CD should be enough seeing that most build are running SoH anyway.

The only thing that might pose a problem with a lower CD is the new Descend into Shadows, where BP triggers on steal causing AoE blind and stealth. Albeit this is already a problem if the Thief spec’d for both SA and Trickery. IMO, I think BP on Steal is a bad idea and I hope they change that.

While I agree this feels powerful on paper, I’m not willing to call anything OP until the expansion. It’s obvious that the landscape is changing pretty drastically for most classes, and we haven’t even seen most of the specializations yet. I’m excited for thieves potentially being able to drop SR as a required utility in team play, assuming DiS can perform a similar function (hell, it could even replace SoH for interrupting stomps, if trickery wasn’t a psuedo-mandatory traitline).

I don’t know if it warrants to be called OP, but with DiS + 20s Steal — it might pose a problem. And yes I also think that DiS might replace SoH for anti-stomp only because in order for SoH to work, BT needs to also be spec-ed — it frees up a spec point. And if ArenaNet did what you suggests, making BT a baseline…I’d like it, but knowing ArenaNet, they might nerf us some place else, so it’s worrisome.

Archon.6481:

What?

So, “Any seasoned Thief can see what’s wrong with the OP’s suggestion.” = “this is not how you make suggestions.”?

Umm, no. Those two sentences have no relation to each other. The first sentence is clearly an appeal to experience: that only experienced players would understand why this is bad.

No, that’s you jumping to conclusion. The statement means what exactly as it is written.

Just look through this thread and you’ll read the responses coming from seasoned Thieves — then compare that to the OP’s. It’s really that simple.

Sir Vincent III.1286:

In fact, I am demanding more of his opinion to support his suggestion.

You can do so without being so hostile to the OP.

There is no hostily on what I’ve posted. That is you jumping to conclusion, that some how have clouded your understanding. I know it’s blunt, but there is no hostility in it I assure you.

Well I reread the above and realized that it wasn’t an appeal to experience, but more of an unsubstantiated assertion. My apologies. However, you seem very sure that this idea is bad for thief, yet you still have not supported this other than claiming that it “will break the thief”, which is actually a reworded version of the original claim that it’s a bad idea.

I’m sure that the OP knows that it is bad that’s why he used the mesmer’s GM as his reasoning — and that reason isn’t good enough.

Let’s put it this way. Will the OP make this same suggestion if the changes didn’t happen for the mesmers? If so, what would be his reasoning then?

The fact remains that the only reason he made this suggestion is because of what changes the mesmers will have — which is a bad idea.

“you’ll soon realize why this is not a good suggestion”: this statement implies that the suggestion is definitely bad

Any suggestion without supports is bad. Unless you can justify why it is good — it’s bad.

“My statement is expressing that the OP’s opinion is lacking support.”: This statement implies that the suggestion can be good, but lacks substantiation.

Exactly! That’s why my first post begins with this;

Sir Vincent III.1286:

It would have been a better topic if the premise of the topic has backing of a very reasonable and applicable suggestion.

These two statements have incompatible conclusions: if the idea is definitely bad then it cannot be good, thus substantiation would be irrelevant as it cannot be proven to be good.

No, you jumped to the wrong conclusion. It is bad by default.

This is not like “good idea unless proven bad” — this is more like “good idea and this is why”.

It is bad because of lack of support or thought process on why he believes it to be a good idea. In other words, we don’t know where he is coming from or what’s his angle on this —- until now, nothing to substantiate his belief that this is a good idea.

So far others have provided thoughts on what can be done as compromise because they know that SoH as a baseline as-is is bad.

If history had taught us anything, when ArenaNet buff something, they severely nerf something else — just look at what happen to iniatives and opportunist.

So having SoH as-is as baseline will mean that ArenaNet will nerf something else we might not want to be nerfed.

Idk what it is you’re trying to say, nor do I think that this is an indicator that you’re wrong, but please carefully articulate your position so that it does not create ambiguities for you to prevaricate with and create confusion.

I don’t find anything I have posted confusing. The problem here is that you already went on defensive mode that anything I say you perceive to be hostile.

Maugetarr.6823:

evilapprentice.6379:

Maugetarr.6823:

evilapprentice.6379:

Sadrien.3470:

Let’s consider the benefits of SoH being baseline and the problems.

Pros:
Opens the ability for thieves to play 6066 which have extremely strong surviavbility + damage and cc ( is this really a pro ???)
Cons:
Will make thieves stronger as a class which will affect balance as they are already very strong.
Makes 10 stacks of confusion on steal possible ( destroying balance because no other class can do that on a under 30s CD. )
Ruins gm choice in trickery line.

If you currently think “thieves are very strong”, we’re playing different games. Go watch terrorsquads video where he explains how a thiefs only role is to cap unguarded points, contribute to uneven fights, and avoid 1v1’s entirely (unless of course you’re fighting a mesmer or another thief). Your analysis also completely ignored the current issue with SoH.

When I first saw this thread, I agreed that SoH didn’t need to become baseline. The more I thought about it however, I began to see the problem. So many of thiefs strong traits are tied to steal that it’s almost impossible not to take SoH just for the 20% CD reduction. It’s not even as if you can take a spec that doesn’t use steal traits – in the new system, you’re taking at least 1 of the following lines – DA, SA, or Trickery (ignoring the new specialization at the moment), and in each of those trees the traits tied to steal are better than their counterparts (though it be different when the changes go live, of course). With Acro being a little UP and CS being pure crap (again, that may change), you’re probably taking all 3.

That being said, the answer isn’t just to make SoH baseline. Instead, I’d like to propose a compromise. Add the following to the new baseline steal
- Steal 1 boon and grant it to the thief themself.
- Steal CD reduced by 10%
- Steal dazes for .25s

Redesign the following traits
Bountiful theft – steal now rips a second boon, grants vigor, and shares everything with up to 5 allies in the radius (So a traited BT in this proposed system works exactly like it does now)
SoH – Lots of possibilities here, but it needs to be redesigned, and does not include any further reduction to steals CD.

Now thieves are not forced into Trickery just for the CD reduction of SoH, and thieves can still interrupt stability stomps, but without trickery you can use Aegis to counterplay it.

Not sure we need the 0.25 daze baseline, but I like the idea of the CD reduction being rolled into baseline while the trickery line still includes a reduction (like how they’re doing to attunment swapping). A single boon would also be nice, but I think the CD reduction is the most important part of balancing out the GM traits in that line.

You are correct.

Removing the CD reduction from SoH and making it baseline makes it so that Trickery is no longer psuedo-required.

The other changes I suggested were to give other trait lines (CS, Acro, SA) a fighting chance – even with the CD reduction baseline, trickery is a no-brainer for any viable thief build after DA. Adding the other effects to baseline makes it so that you can ignore trickery and still retain a small portion of its usefulness.

If steal baseline were 25 seconds and they implemented the new lead attacks, the disparity between traited and non-traited steal would certainly be reduced.

25/1.15=~21.75

Even if the disparity is only .5 sec, it is enough to favor taking Trickery because it is still better in the long run.

The best course of action is to completely eliminate the disparity and give the lower cool down to all spec. 30sec CD is outdated and was based on a system that never made it out of beta. 20sec CD, with no other ways for CDR is, IMO, the right number since most of the time Steal aren’t used as soon as it became available anyway, so having a longer cooldown only unnecessarily limits our capability. We’re Thief, we should be able to steal as often as we can.

The only thing that might pose a problem with a lower CD is the new Descend into Shadows, where BP triggers on steal causing AoE blind and stealth. Albeit this is already a problem if the Thief spec’d for both SA and Trickery. IMO, I think BP on Steal is a bad idea and I hope they change that.

Gabriell.4856:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Archon.6481:

Not that I agree with SoH behind made baseline, but your ad hominem is getting annoying. You keep saying that what he’s suggesting is obviously bad and you’re using that as “evidence” that he doesn’t know what he’s talking about. This is ad hominem and appeal to ridicule. If you’re not going to contribute to the discussion and just insult people then just please stop.

Can you kindly point where I made an ad hom?

The whole time I was talking about how this discussion would have been better if the OP gave use more information on why he think SoH as base line is a good idea instead of using a “me too” reason just because Mesmer had their GM in baseline.

Gabriell.4856:

I mean this one:

“My opinion is different. I’m willing to bet 2 cents that the new elite spec will not have any condi clear. With what we know about the new condi buff, ticking for 2K+, condi clear will be mandatory. This will force us to spec into trickery, deadly arts, and shadow arts or acro. Basically, the same crap as now.”

That doesn’t support your suggestion though. What does this response has to do with making SoH baseline?

By the way, what do you mean by “break the thief profession?” You basically did what I did in my OP. Made a statement without any reason or why… lol.

Every Thief can see what’s wrong with this and a couple of them already posted it..no point on repeating it.

And if you haven’t read it, I posted this also.

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Giving a trait line advantage by reducing Steal’s CD is dumb IMO, because just like now, every build spec Trickery for this reason alone.

Why not just reduce the Steal CD to 20sec and be done with it instead of adding it to the base line. This way every build can benefit from this, not just Trickery.

Then they can make SoH to only add daze on Steal so the choice is either add daze or confusion — instead of obviously picking SoH because of the CDR.

Then you agree with me…at least partially. Seems like a win to me.

But then again, "it would have been a better if the premise of your counter suggestion has backing of a very reasonable and applicable suggestion. Unfortunately, using “everyone does it” to support your suggestion doesn’t really opens up a really good discussion.

If you really gave yourself enough time to think about this, you’ll soon realize why this is not a good suggestion.

Exactly, how does this response stengthen your argument? This is yet another “me too” response because I’ve already used it.

Turk.5460:

MethaneGas.8357:

Sir Vincent III is just grumpy he didn’t get his butter this morning.

I learned from this thread that this is because Jrunyon is using Vincent’s butter knife.

lol…nice one.

To be honest, I’ve duel a lot of power P/D in WvW using my S/D + P/P set and they are not that impressive. It’s just too easy to counter. However, a Dire P/D wrecks my build every time. I’m simply speaking from experience.

Archon.6481:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Can you kindly point where I made an ad hom?

Sure.

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Any seasoned Thief can see what’s wrong with the OP’s suggestion.

You said that a seasoned thief would understand why this is a bad idea, and because the OP does not, he is therefore not a seasoned thief. If he is not seasoned then he must be a new player who does not know what he is talking about. This is an appeal to experience, which means you are saying his argument is not valid because he does not have your desired experience threshold.

My statement is about the OP’s suggestion, not about his inexperience. The statement simply means is that, this is not how you make suggestions. You can’t just says, “I want this because they have it”, that’s not how you start a discussion.

To use an analogy: I am a “seasoned thief”. I have ~1.7k hours as thief. If I were to say that I think the OP’s idea is a good idea, what would your argument be? You are excluding the OP’s opinion because you think he is new.

I am excluding the OP’s opinion? You got that all wrong. In fact, I am demanding more of his opinion to support his suggestion. He needs to provide the thought process on why he thinks his suggestion is a good idea.

Sir Vincent III.1286:

And the non-existence information about why you think it will not break the Thief is evidence enough that you have not thought about this thoroughly.

This is another appeal to experience.

Yours is jumping to conclusion.

Sir Vincent III.1286:

If you really gave yourself enough time to think about this, you’ll soon realize why this is not a good suggestion.

Here you completely ignored the OP’s opinion and dismissed it bad without giving an argument as to why. That is an appeal to ridicule.

Again, you’re jumping to conclusion. My statement is expressing that the OP’s opinion is lacking support. If you look at other’s post, they provide a PRO and CON, meaning they have thought their post thoroughly.

So…where’s the ad hom?

Forcing D/D to play against the meta will surely make it look bad, but I have not seen a team that uses Thief’s high burst instead they use Thief as a Pony Express delivery guy. As long as this perception and use of talent remains the same, we’ll see more and more boring tournament games. I’ve seen teams uses Warrior as a bruiser and can’t to wonder why they’re not using Thief instead.

I understand and acknowledge all the weakness of the weapon set, however most of the flaw only exists because it was given a job that only certain weapon set can fulfill.

Jrunyon.3012:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Then you’re using it wrong.

Why in the world would you pick a weapon set that scales poorly with power?

Idk what else this is besides you calling power bad.

I’m talking about the “weapon set that scales poorly with power”. No where there I’ve ever said that “power” is “bad”.

I don’t play condition thief because it’s cheesy and promotes bad play habits. I don’t play Necro because I don’t particularly enjoy the class. I play power because I like the risk associated with it and the reward of seeing high numbers.

Repeating myself;

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Like I said, you can keep using the butterknife since you find it to be useful and it works for you, but it doesn’t change the fact that you are using it wrong because there’s a better way to drive the screw and the butter knife is designed to cut butter.

All I said to OP was power does work with p/d, which you concede that it does indeed work. Telling me I am wrong for playing a class the way I want to play, that isn’t “meta” and ridiculing me for it is low, especially when it came from nowhere and added nothing to the conversation.

There are weapon sets that are designed to work well with certain build, just like the butterknife is designed to cut butter and not to drive screws.

You keep playing your “only one way is right” meta builds and I’ll stick to playing builds I actually enjoy.

But please do not claim that “P/D doesn’t have to be a condition set at all.” because it is designed to be exactly that.

The S/D part of your build gives you the illusion that P/D also works in a power build. Hybrid maybe, but not straight up power.

Archon.6481:

Not that I agree with SoH behind made baseline, but your ad hominem is getting annoying. You keep saying that what he’s suggesting is obviously bad and you’re using that as “evidence” that he doesn’t know what he’s talking about. This is ad hominem and appeal to ridicule. If you’re not going to contribute to the discussion and just insult people then just please stop.

Can you kindly point where I made an ad hom?

The whole time I was talking about how this discussion would have been better if the OP gave use more information on why he think SoH as base line is a good idea instead of using a “me too” reason just because Mesmer had their GM in baseline.

Gabriell.4856:

I mean this one:

“My opinion is different. I’m willing to bet 2 cents that the new elite spec will not have any condi clear. With what we know about the new condi buff, ticking for 2K+, condi clear will be mandatory. This will force us to spec into trickery, deadly arts, and shadow arts or acro. Basically, the same crap as now.”

That doesn’t support your suggestion though. What does this response has to do with making SoH baseline?

By the way, what do you mean by “break the thief profession?” You basically did what I did in my OP. Made a statement without any reason or why… lol.

Every Thief can see what’s wrong with this and a couple of them already posted it..no point on repeating it.

And if you haven’t read it, I posted this also.

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Giving a trait line advantage by reducing Steal’s CD is dumb IMO, because just like now, every build spec Trickery for this reason alone.

Why not just reduce the Steal CD to 20sec and be done with it instead of adding it to the base line. This way every build can benefit from this, not just Trickery.

Then they can make SoH to only add daze on Steal so the choice is either add daze or confusion — instead of obviously picking SoH because of the CDR.

Jrunyon.3012:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

I’m not arguing about its capability, just like the butter knife. My point is why use a butter knife when a screwdriver is designed to fulfill the task?

But there I think is where you are wrong, and is the whole basis for this discussion.

I don’t believe that P/D was “designed” as a strictly condition set. Aside from bleeds and torment (which was added almost a year after launch btw and is the more powerful condition) the set doesn’t even have that much condition application, and is carried by the fact that you can stack bleeds quickly.

The introduction of Torment is evidence that this weapon set is designed for condition damage.

Do I deny that it is good at being a cheesy no brain condi machine gun? No. But to say it was designed only for that and using it any other way is wrong is close minded, especially when you haven’t come up with any valid points as to why power is bad besides “other things do the job better”.

When did I ever said that “power is bad”?

Like I said, you can keep using the butterknife since you find it to be useful and it works for you, but it doesn’t change the fact that you are using it wrong because there’s a better way to drive the screw and the butter knife is designed to cut butter.

I might be using a butter knife, but why would you use a screwdriver when you can use a power drill? (Necro)

This statement only makes your choice look even worst, I hope you realize that.

Ensign.2189:

It’s not because people aren’t creative or aren’t trying it or are utterly single minded – hell, you can hop in a hotjoin (without matchmaking!) or jump on a smurf and will see tons of D/D around. It’s being played, a lot. It’s simply a huge handicap to whoever is playing it, and no one has been able to make it work well enough to get within shouting distance of tournament level player.

I agree that D/D is lacking defensive skills and the nerf on CnD made it undesirable, but is the real reason why people aren’t using is because it is really useless or just because it was nerfed and people are simply boycotting it?

Hotjoin will not prove or disprove anything since it is unorganized and lacking leadership. In a more organized team with team-captain and coach, I’m sure it would be a meta-breaking strategy with the right players if they actually put an effort into it.

Right now, all tournament matches are closely identical because everyone is practically doing the same thing — it’s bland and boring since all teams have similar team composition doing the same exact strategy.

Jrunyon.3012:

Turk.5460:

I don’t think Jrunyun is using only P/D. He’s probably doing D/P as the other set, and that sounds like it would work out pretty ok.

S/p actually lol.

Now that makes more sense for a power build.

Gabriell.4856:

Read my prior post. That is my reason for making SoH baseline.

You mean this one?

Gabriell.4856:

When you compare Kleptomanic to 25% more daze, dps, confusion, and invul….making sleight of hand a base line trait seems justified.

That is not within the scope of reasonable only because this change will break the Thief profession. And the non-existence information about why you think it will not break the Thief is evidence enough that you have not thought about this thoroughly.

Ensign.2189:

D/D is far inferior to D/P at +1ing fights as it has no ability to enter a fight from stealth without burning cooldowns, which increases their threat dramatically.

Other professions +1 fights without stealth, why is that a requirement for Thieves? How about S/D +1 fights?

I think the problem here is the perception that the Thief has to be in stealth to +1 fight, which is absolutely not true.

S/D is superior because of spammable immobilize and faster rotations.

Immob is hardly “spammable”, that’s a misnomer.

In terms of damage, D/D is full offensive. But in terms of utility, it’s a toss up between D/P and S/D — that’s why these two are preferred.

D/D has an advantage against foes that are asleep (and don’t respond in the 1s between the C&D landing and the backstab), terrible (and out of cooldowns), or running bad builds (that run out of responses to a C&D before the thief gets bored). It is utterly irrelevant in competitive play.

Exaggeration much. Depending in team composition and strategy, but if the team builds around in setting things up so that their D/D can finish the opponent off, then you’ll see more of D/D. The only limiting factor in sPvP is the perception that there’s only one way to win a match. However, I don’t blame them since this is what ArenaNet wants.

Correct. Even when specced and played perfectly, they are clearly and markedly inferior to S/D and D/P builds, and largely inferior to S/P.

The only deciding factor is utility skills, which I agree, S/D has immob and cleanse, D/P has blind and interrupt — but in terms of damage, D/D has 5 skills that are pure damage.

So if the goal of +1 is to burst down the target, then one could only wonder why not take D/D.

This is why the population of D/D thieves in competitive PvP matches is exactly zero.

Which is sad really.

It struggles in 2v1 situations for reasons mentioned above. While it has a stronger burst against, say, weak players fighting a berserker staff elementalist for zergs, it is markedly inferior to competent players are hard to kill targets like D/D eles and cele rifle engineers. It is also weaker 1v1 than D/P thieves (particularly 20606, and also clearly against 60206), S/D (20066 badly, 26006 slightly).

I agree when it comes to a well rounded weapon set, but the D/Ds damage output is simply undeniable.

D/D exists to style on prey on weaker players outside of matchmaking in WvW, and on builds made for zerging instead of skirmishing. It has no place at all in sPvP.

I suspect that it might show up in sPvP after the expack.

Jrunyon.3012:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

The bulk of the damage of P/D comes from bleed from auto, bleed from sneak, and torment from skill #3

I’m not saying that P/D can’t be used as power, even a butter knife can be used as a screwdriver.

Get my point?

So your point is that there is only one way to play thief and all of the other ways should be discouraged, great attitude right there.

Sure, a butter knife can unscrew a screw, but screwdriver can do it better.

Why even play thief when warrior does everything much better?

Very good and very valid question.

Shadow Strike scales immensely with power, I often get 5 – 7k bursts from literally pressing one button on squishy targets, not to mention it puts me out of range of melee counter attack and applies torment on top of it.

I’m not arguing about its capability, just like the butter knife. My point is why use a butter knife when a screwdriver is designed to fulfill the task?

It’s not the other options aren’t available.

Giving a trait line advantage by reducing Steal’s CD is dumb IMO, because just like now, every build spec Trickery for this reason alone.

Why not just reduce the Steal CD to 20sec and be done with it instead of adding it to the base line. This way every build can benefit from this, not just Trickery.

Then they can make SoH to only add daze on Steal so the choice is either add daze or confusion — instead of obviously picking SoH because of the CDR.

The bulk of the damage of P/D comes from bleed from auto, bleed from sneak, and torment from skill #3

I’m not saying that P/D can’t be used as power, even a butter knife can be used as a screwdriver.

Get my point?

Jrunyon.3012:

P/D doesn’t have to be a condition set at all. I have been having great success with power roaming in wvw.

Then you’re using it wrong.

Why in the world would you pick a weapon set that scales poorly with power?

Ensign.2189:

1) D/D relies on opposing aggression to be effective. ~snip~

What kind of Thief are you if you’re being kited? I mean serious ly? Anyone who chose to use D/D knows how to use CnD.

Isn’t the meta strategy for Thieves are to +1 fights? Then D/D is far superior to D/P in this regard only because it is a fully offensive skill set.

CnD+BS > BP+HS+BS in terms of damage output.

2) D/D is very, very reliant on Shadow Arts to be effective. ~snip~

You don’t need SA. You can run the same build that S/D player uses and be really effective.

It’s a hard to master, niche build in a 1v1 duel in the middle of nowhere.

That’s not the weapon set’s problem…it is a L2P issue.

It doesn’t rotate or +1 nearly as well as a 60206 Panic Strike thief,

What are you talking about? If any weapon set that has the ability to take a target from 100% to < 50% that would be D/D.

+1 fights is the D/D specialty.

and doesn’t duel nearly as well as a 20606 Shadow Arts DP.

You’re the one who said that D/D relies on SA, yet with full SA they still fall short?

I never miss a CnD, evaded sure, but not miss.

20606 D/D is an unfavorable, if winnable, match-up against 60206 Panic Strike D/P in a duel, but simply gets dumpstered by 20606 D/P (it simply cannot keep up and struggles with the blinds).

D/D is not for dueling. It’s main purpose is to +1 fights and bring down the target as fast as possible.

Yes fighting against a D/P would suck, the same problem S/D has to deal with when fighting against D/P.

It also, again, drops off quickly as your opponent gets better – you can probably land a C&D on me when I’m sipping kittentails late at night, but good luck hitting a C&D on Toker or anyone else with superb mechanics with any reliability.

You’re thinking in terms of 1v1 when the purpose of D/D is to 2v1 fights.

Archon.6481:

…should thief be granted similar baseline changes?

The answer is an obvious “No!”. This is what I’m saying, the “reason” behind the suggestion is not well thought off.

I think this a reasonable question.

Question = reasonable.
Suggestion = not reasonable.

But you go and say that you think this would be better if it had the backing of a reasonable and applicable suggestion, yet you don’t justify yourself when you say this idea is obviously had.

There is nothing to justify. The topic is lacking information to why the OP is making this suggestion without thinking about the repercussion.

Any seasoned Thief can see what’s wrong with the OP’s suggestion.

It would have been a better topic if the premise of the topic has backing of a very reasonable and applicable suggestion. Unfortunately, using “me too” to support your suggestion doesn’t really opens up a really good discussion.

If you really gave yourself enough time to think about this, you’ll soon realize why this is not a good suggestion.

apocom.3172:

CnD has a damage multiplicator of 1.5 in pve and 1.0 in pvp.

Mainly this, CnD damage is ridiculous in WvW.

Softspoken.2410:

I’d appreciate something like this. Trip wire in particular could also just have an internal counter that causes the trap to break after it targets 5 different opponents. If you do it that way, the duration could be a lot longer than a 1-second window, which makes its effect a little more consistent.

You need to stay within the flavor of traps, meaning, you can’t have counters or, in this case, it would be called charges. Once a trap is triggered, there will be an effect and it will require to be reset (re-cast) to have it trigger again.

Functionally, your idea is great, but it wouldn’t be a “trap” in GW2’s world.

There’s already been suggestions about this. The idea was to create a field when the trap is triggered.

For example;
Trip Wire – knocks down the foe that triggers the trap, then it will create an Oil Slick field for 1-2s (Oils slick field knocks down moving foes in the area).

However, since our traps are so horrible in comparison to Ranger’s and Guardian’s, it’s better to bring Caltrops instead.

Rannith.9068:

This picture explains it all. I have a freaking gtx 960 and a FX 8370 8 core. Arena Net you need to fix your game. All my other games run extremely well except for GW2. I have quit this game because this is unacceptable.

Your Core clock and Memory clock is too low. According to Nvidia, it should be 1127MHz and 7GHz, respectively — and you have 405Mhz on both.

You might want to diagnose your setup because your numbers are just wrong.

Envyme.6018:

I’ve been seeing lately that the current meta for thieves have become D/P.

20066 S/D is great at rotation strategy but is awful when it comes to out-numbering fights. The shift to 26006 D/P is to make sure that when the Thief +1 a fight, they can take out the target ASAP. However, the trade-off is that the Thief would be too squishy to roam…so the Vamp Rune is picked as a cover for this weakness.

Also, it is with no doubt that the D/P do have the higher damage in terms of bursting an opponent, whereas the S/D can provide the player with substantial sustain with adequate damage.

The advantage of D/P over S/D is obvious; higher rate of attacks (meaning more crit procs), backstab and heartseeker.

Nevertheless, the comparison between these two builds do have its pros and cons but I have yet to understand why D/P have become the current meta for thieves lately.

Ever since they nerfed Flanking Strike in both cost and hit requirement to trigger LS, it became difficult to counter other builds. The cost itself is simply punishing and not very rewarding — the damage and animation are just lazily implemented.

With D/P, if you go roam with a Guardian or Ele, you’re sure to take a node in no time — but it depends on your team strategy. Just look at oRNG, their 3 guys form a solid team in defending a node while their Guardian and Thief roam together.

IMO, solo roaming will phase out for now and probably return after the expack.

Zero Day.2594:

Highlie.7641:

Nerf: Zero day.2594
Why: This thread is the only reason to visit the thief forum.
Suggested nerf: reduce posting’s 33 or 50% (number’s generated by arena net)

Oh they have, through infractions and flood control, I once had to wait 30 minutes between posts. But that was alleviated for some reason. Did I learn my lesson? Yes. If I have something mean to say, think about it, and rephrase it in a way that the idiot won’t understand.

Like a backstab…stealthy and painful.

Zero Day.2594:

yolo swaggins.2570:

Zero Day.2594:

yolo swaggins.2570:

ronpierce.2760:

You’re really going to suggest the person WITHOUT stealth has any leverage against the invisible guy with “mind games”? Come on man… You’re just being silly now…

Nobody said you weren’t going to work for your kill.

<uninstalls the game> WTF kind of game is this?!?!

Welcome to Dark Souls Wars 2.

I thought this was Hello Kitty Online. kitten it, been wasting my time… Peace guys!

Stick around…we’re getting there — one nerf at a time.

Suggestions like this is what…grr..me.

I’ll refrain.

This is old news.

You guys are forgetting that we now have access to Resistance. If this BowGuard goes meta, we can always trait for Guarded Initiation. Steal (Mug) will put Resistance on us so triggering this trap will negate the damage.

Auesis.7301:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Hexalot.8194:

Turamarth.3248:

Could become dangerous if one is careless. Fortunately the revealed lasts only 1 second if I read the tooltip correctly.

Looking at Dulphy’s notes, you are right it’s a 1 second reveal. But the trap also pulses for one second intervals so you’ll be revealed as long as you stay in the traps radius of effect. :-)

No problem…they have a trap that sucks you in and slows you down.

Absolutely not worth losing Renewed Focus unless you want to die horribly, though.

In a team comp when someone else is watching your back, it is good to have. It keeps your team away from harm…but of course, this is within the context of the HoT PvE where mobs raiding at night. It is quite obvious that this spec is not PvP worthy.

Snakebyte.2804:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Hexalot.8194:

Turamarth.3248:

Could become dangerous if one is careless. Fortunately the revealed lasts only 1 second if I read the tooltip correctly.

Looking at Dulphy’s notes, you are right it’s a 1 second reveal. But the trap also pulses for one second intervals so you’ll be revealed as long as you stay in the traps radius of effect. :-)

No problem…they have a trap that sucks you in and slows you down.

Bro, if they have to equip two utilities just to effectively end your stealth, you win at the end of the day.

Yes it’s true, but nothing is stopping anyone from actually doing it.

Hexalot.8194:

Turamarth.3248:

Could become dangerous if one is careless. Fortunately the revealed lasts only 1 second if I read the tooltip correctly.

Looking at Dulphy’s notes, you are right it’s a 1 second reveal. But the trap also pulses for one second intervals so you’ll be revealed as long as you stay in the traps radius of effect. :-)

No problem…they have a trap that sucks you in and slows you down.

S/D is really good in certain Fractal…but that’s about it.

Sealreth.1425:

I know many of you will I say I should just adjust, and honestly I can not agree more.. but there is a limit to that, what is happening here is a cool system with tons of options, being trimmed down to a minimum, a shell, a shadow of its former ways. (unless I miss interpreted it all.)

That’s not entirely accurate. Looking at Acrobatics where you used to spend only 2 points in, you now have access to the full trait line. This is a great way to expand the profession.

I run 50036 build, but after the expansion, I can now run 60066 where I have access to traits I previously have to give up.

Also having Resilience of Shadow as a minor (if they keep this forever) is a big plus since it no longer competes with Shadow’s Rejuvenation for the GM slot. Your overall survival as an SA user just improved by 100%.

The only annoying thing that will take time to get used to is the Blinding Powder all over the place. BP on fall, BP on Steal, BP on low life, etc. I mean, that’s just stupid and needs to be addressed.

Other than that, I am quite sure that your D/D build will see a lot of improvements in terms of survivability.

First of all Guardian is a Soldier, not an Adventurer, per classification of professions.

Second, due to this definition, Guardian don’t hunt, they protect, thus the “hunter” part of the name doesn’t make sense in the world of Tyria.

Third, the name Guardian derived from the word “guardia” meansing a watch, a guard, a sentry, or warden.

So what are the most appropriate names?

1) Light Warden
2) Light Watchman
3) Light Keeper
4) Light Protector
5) Light Sleeper

There is nothing “dragon” nor “hunter” about the Guardian.

Advent.6193:

Man. I can see this one hitting the Nerf List on Day 1.
“Thief makes self into Lootbag with blowdart, News at 11.”

It’s perfect.

Advent.6193:

Which would result in Bards. Hmmm, Banner or Consecration skills for that one, Sir Vincent?

No, we’ll be using the Warhorn as Blowpipe that shoots poison dart so that we have a 1200 range weapon —albeit the shape of the Warhorn is bended upward, it’s perfect for Thieves. It’s a 1200 ranged weapon that cannot harm anyone other than the Thief.

Shezu Tsukai.8291:

After careful study of the Longbow, trapping Guardian “Dragonhunter”; I believe thieves will get a scepter in the off hand and be named Jester!

All skills will revolve around new channeled condition, hilarious laughter.

Which places target’s skills on recharge, slowly reduces stamina all while the Jester is dancing poorly and unable to do any real damage.

I doubt it because that makes so much sense.

Following the Guardian trend, we’ll get the Warhorn. Every Thief needs a Warhorn.

Noha.3749:

But yes, situational at best is not enough, although i do believe we are the cause of this cele/sentinel meta.

Oh I believe it. A lot of nerfs to the Thief and buffs to other professions are made to create the current meta. ArenaNet doesn’t want the Thief to do what it does best — burst damage — because according to them and many other players, it’s unfair. There should be a counter play. So the Thief is reduced to stand in the sideline throwing chairs into the ring — when they should be jumping off the rope landing with their elbow to take some one out.

Razelesh.1035:

I propose the change that a Venom charge will only be used up if what you hit/would have hit if not for evades, misses, blocks, you name it, would actually have been affected by the venom. This would prevent you from wasting it on things like walls, crates, downed players (which I personally think should be affected by it) and other things that it wouldn’t have had an effect on anyways.

You mean “roll back the nerf”?

Maugetarr.6823:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Maugetarr.6823:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Eodwen.2613:

really?! I yell kitten it failed again!

How does it fail you? I mainly use it for interrupt because if I want to get close to my target I just walk towards them. :/

“Obstructed”

’cause blades of grass in between you and the target.

Strangely enough, I’ve been using ScorpWire for as long as I can remember but that never happen to me. I can even pull people down from the rampart.

Well, if you watch that weaponless dueling video again, you can see it happen right around 30 seconds. There is at least 1 short pull against a mesmer later and maybe another obstructed again (didn’t feel like watching the entire video again), but Scorpion wire messes up enough that I don’t usually include it on my bar.

I believe you, there’s enough complaints about it — it’s just that I’ve never experienced it.

lol @ “Dragonhunter”, very creative … so everyone else fighting the Claw of Jormag are chopped liver.

Sagat.3285:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Frightlight.3796:

How would that work for static discharge? Its an ability that does damage for using toolbelt skills that has to be traited for..ugh this is confusing

They’ve done this before on Mug (Thief trait) that prevents it from crit-ing.

They compensated with healing but Mug is not a “skill”. Are we going to add healing to all of them power,condition based etc? I am not being sarcastic I don’t like the idea of crit and ferocity was going to far but many specs survive due to it.

All I’m saying is that it is doable that they have done it before. Any balancing issue is beyond the point I’m responding to.

Frightlight.3796:

How would that work for static discharge? Its an ability that does damage for using toolbelt skills that has to be traited for..ugh this is confusing

They’ve done this before on Mug (Thief trait) that prevents it from crit-ing.

Maugetarr.6823:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Eodwen.2613:

really?! I yell kitten it failed again!

How does it fail you? I mainly use it for interrupt because if I want to get close to my target I just walk towards them. :/

“Obstructed”

’cause blades of grass in between you and the target.

Strangely enough, I’ve been using ScorpWire for as long as I can remember but that never happen to me. I can even pull people down from the rampart.

Brother Grimm.5176:

I’m guessing $29.99 USD.

You do realize that they are not going to release the game as soon as they announce the price and that it WILL be available for purchase beyond the release date……right?

At the current rate of information we are getting and the state of the Traits they have shown so far, thy would probably announce the price some time around GW2 3rd year anniversary (if the rumor is to be believed).

Player.8373:

Sir Vincent III.1286:

Disgallion.3908:

Thief need more buffs than nerfs guys, wake up.

What game are you playing? You can never nerf [thief] Necro enough.

Corrected it ^^

Given that this is a Thief forum, your “correction” is incorrect.

Necro is getting a greatsword…that is not a nerf.

A Thief would be happy to have a greatsword even if it doesn’t come with weapon skills — weapon skills will only give ArenaNet reason to nerf Thief so might as well not have them in the first place. No skills, no nerfs = happy Thief.