Jump to content
  • Sign Up

Exitus.3297

Members
  • Posts

    183
  • Joined

  • Last visited

Exitus.3297's Achievements

  1. I more or less agree with the OP on this. To add context for what I'm about to say, I quit the game shortly after they dropped the patch increasing the Shortbow cost from 6 to 8 in PvP and WvW. Straight up uninstalled the game and went to other games. I came back to the forums today because I was curious to see if maybe the balancing has gotten any better. Clearly it hasn't To be clear, I didn't leave the game because they nerfed Thieves, specifically Shortbow 5. I left because that particular change along with several other changes in prior patches pretty much showed me the balance team has no idea what they are doing, in my opinion. I don't mean that to insult them, I literally mean they don't know what they are doing. Thieves need to have their skill expression maximized while having their crutches removed, but for some reason ANet keeps making changes that minimize a Thief's skill expression while inadvertently making their crutches mandatory, with rare exception. One example that everyone brings up is Shadow Arts. At the time before I left, nearly *everyone* knew that Shadow Arts was a massive crutch, specifically Shadow's Rejuvenation. Shadow Arts already did things to extend stealth duration, but Shadow's Rejuvenation in particular took the cake because it refunded enough Initiative that perma-stealth was achievable without that much sacrifice. Without Shadow Arts, Perma-stealth was sorta achievable, but it would drain the Thief's resources so it ended up being a give-take. Shadow's Rejuvenation took that concept and threw it out the window. Combine that with the healing in stealth and it pretty much meant a Thief could reset any fight by just waiting and *no one* enjoys fighting against this. It also broke sPvP because a Thief could perma-stealth across the battlefield and appear wherever they wanted and still have enough resources to fight. They could have neutered this one trait and I would have been okay with it. Happy with it even. How did ANet fix this? They nerfed Shortbow 5. So not only did they not address the crutch, they solidified pigeon-holing Thieves into Trickery even more than before. I also checked Acrobatics and they *still* haven't touched the auto-proc traits. Remember when a bunch of players said "Don't worry those traits are just placeholders for them to rework them." I said from the beginning if ANet intended to that they would have done it. So ANet borderline made half of the Acrobatics traitline unusable and then proceeded to leave them there. Trickery is still mandatory after this many years AND is even more mandatory now due to the Initiative cost increases on skills. They made Trickery the "Initiative" traitline instead of the "Steal" traitline. Wanna know something? I remember back before they overhauled the traitlines before you could have 3 full traitlines. Back then, *every* traitline had a way for the Thief to manage their initiative significantly, not just Trickery. This included both Deadly Arts and Critical Strikes. Despite natural Ini regen actually being slower back then (0.75 per second instead of 1 per second), no one felt forced to grab Trickery because there were ways to gain Initaitive in every tree. They just had different ways of restoring Initiative that reflected their playstyle (E.G. getting crits restored Initiative every couple of seconds in Critical Strikes). While I get other class mains have felt the same way about their class at one point or another (Mesmers and Warriors come to mind in previous updates), I play every class and Thieves have always seemed to get this weird treatment. Not in the sense they are/were undertuned, but that the class itself is constantly pigeon-holed into one thing or another back to back Players will cry that a particular thing about the Thief is OP, then ANet seems to approach the issue in the most haphazard way possible. Thieves move on to the next thing in line, then Players do the same thing again. Repeat this process ad nauseam and here we are. I think this was the only game I have ever played where I loathed seeing the game update notes, because I knew once I read them there would be maybe 1 or 2 things that made sense and a plethora of things that made no sense because they "fixed" a problem in a weird way or threw in a completely irrelevant thing out of left-field. After awhile I decided that I'm not coming back for more. So yes, OP, Thieves should basically "riot." In my case, I just left the game altogether because I'm tired of dealing with it. I'm tired of adjusting my build, finding something that feels good that I genuinely enjoy, then having to switch to something else because ANet decided to "Balance it". Good luck to anyone who still plays and I hope things improve.
  2. I mean I like the idea of interrupts being rewarding in some additional way, but I do think you are underestimating 3 initiative. Where would this be? A passive on Headshot or Tactical Strike or a trait in one of the other trees? Personally, when it comes to initiative, I Would like to see some initiative-return mechanics implemented into the other trees like they used to. Back in Vanilla I didn't even run Trickery because I didn't need to; Shadow Arts had a trait that refunded 2 initiative upon entering stealth (not camping it) and Critical Strikes had a passive where critting every now and again would give 1 initiative. These traits no longer exist so Trickery is basically mandatory...
  3. Honestly I would rather they stop with shortsighted nerfs and actually address the roots of the problem. I personally would ask they revert/lessen the IA nerf and take a look at the Perma-stealth traits of Shadow Arts, namely Shadow's Rejuvenation and Shadow's Embrace, that have become such a crutch. P.S. I also personally disagreed with the Mirage treatment; I was however less vocal about it because I'm not as experienced with Mesmers as I am Thieves.
  4. It is when a rev can port 600 range and do 6k dmg by the side, which can go through walls.And it's also a difference how a skill is used. Deathstrike is often used aggressively and applies pressure. Whereas Infiltrator Strike is our means to get away. Which means we decided that the fight is lost for us and we use up all our initiative to do so. Why did it get nerfed? Because pepegas cry that "the thief got away" and they didn't "feel good". Then pls nerf all other mobility skills as well. Most of the classes outrun or outstealth thievs. I agree that the higher cost might be okay for sPvP, because if one team has a thief (that doesn't suck) and the other team doesn't, they can outrotate them and have easier and faster decaps, which makes it "unfair". But even that is a stretch... but I might give it to you... For WvW the change is just dumb. And as other said. Thieves will find another way to replace that or play some other builds or weapon sets. I'm already curious when the crying for another skill will start.Maybe Sword 2? Shadowstep OP? Dash? Too much dmg? My suggestion to all thief hater. Make one yourself and play. I bet you 1000g your view will change from "nerf OP thief plxxx" to "thief need a buff".Balance is not about how good or bad you feel for winning or losing an encounter. hey hey hey, who can " Most of the classes outrun or outstealth thievs. " ?please im really curious. goes back to lurkingIn longer, drawn out "races" I can't think of many classes who can keep up with the Thief. In shorter bursts, there are some classes that keep up with the Thief at least for a little while. Even if a class can't keep up with the Thief in terms of mobility 100% and instead just barely trail behind, that doesn't mean the Thief is safe. Rangers immediately come to mind due to their mobility with the Sword or Greatsword combined with the range on their Longbow. Guardians have a number of blinks that are good for chasing, and if they went DH they also can use Longbow or their Spear class skill to pull the Thief back. Warriors can be deceptively mobile with the Greatsword and Dagger, and they can keep the Thief in a bad spot if they run Magebane Tether. I can list a few more examples, but the point is that in short bursts other classes can keep up with the Thief for a time, at least long enough for it to matter. This is important in sPvP as well because it means these classes can rotate almost as well as the Thief in terms of going from node to node. Keep in mind I'm not saying any of these classes outrun the Thief or even match them as a general rule; I'm saying they can keep up for long enough in some circumstances for it to matter. It is also important to note that these classes, while not being able to keep up in terms of raw mobility, will still have cooldowns to expend after using them because they don't have to manage resources the same way a Thief does.
  5. It's one use, then waiting for initiative, then using it a second time. Your pool is 15, so you need to wait a second for the initiative and then you can cast it a second time. You might also use a combo with IA + SA/Signet but that might not be 100% reliable. You misunderstand with the idea that this is an 8 second cool down. That is a shared resource pool with all other weapon skills. So when you reduce that pool by 8 points you can more accurately say you add a cooldown equal to every skills individual point value equal to or below its point value. Of course, that's an oversimplification too because initiative is not a traditional cooldown. But, let's get into the weeds as it were. A player has 15 initiative traited. Every time you use a skill you should think about this calculation: (15 - Initiative Currently Expended + Available Raw Initiative) - Cost of Weapon Skill If the above number is negative you need to wait for initiative. This means, effectively, your weapon skill is on cooldown. Now, because all your skills have different costs some skills will be on cooldown, while others won't. The disadvantage is that, while you can use other less optimal weapon skills, using those skills will serve to increase the cooldown of more optimal skills also. The larger the "Cost of Weapon Skill" is the more likely you will be to find subsequent uses of higher cost skills locked out. Thief doesn't have cool downs so much as thief sometimes has cool downs when initiative is lower than skills require. So when you add 2 initiative to a 6 point skill it isn't the same as adding 2 to a 4 point skill. That's because the higher the cost the greater chance of it locking out a greater number of skills. Not all use cases involve full initiative with lots of available initiative regeneration. If you have 10 initiative and use an 8 initiative skill you are now limited to a 2 initiative skill (meaning practically all skills are on cooldown). Which brings me to the "Effective Universal Cooldown" balancing test. That is: (Cost of Desired Skill - (Available Initiative + Initiative Boosts) < or > (Opportunity Cost of Waiting) In plain language, the time to regenerate initiative to use the skill that is optimal for the situation NOW is weighed against the choice between waiting and spending initiative on another skill. However, that choice is difficult because it means the skill you can't cast NOW also won't be available for both the original time period AND the time period of whatever substitute skill. So the choice is really the question of "how badly do I need to use this skill in the immediate future?" The more you need to use a skill (which for a teleport may be critical because you need to decap or +1 ASAP) the more you effectively can't use other skills because you can't afford to cut into your pool. So "wait for initiative" unlike waiting for cool downs on other professions means auto attacking while you wait. Which is all to say that you can't speak of this as an 8 second cool down unless you ignore the unique initiative system on a fundamental level. This is probably the best way I have ever seen someone explain Initiative in detail.
  6. It's one use, then waiting for initiative, then using it a second time. Your pool is 15, so you need to wait a second for the initiative and then you can cast it a second time. You might also use a combo with IA + SA/Signet but that might not be 100% reliable. You misunderstand with the idea that this is an 8 second cool down. That is a shared resource pool with all other weapon skills. So when you reduce that pool by 8 points you can more accurately say you add a cooldown equal to every skills individual point value equal to or below its point value. Of course, that's an oversimplification too because initiative is not a traditional cooldown. But, let's get into the weeds as it were. A player has 15 initiative traited. Every time you use a skill you should think about this calculation: (15 - Initiative Currently Expended + Available Raw Initiative) - Cost of Weapon Skill If the above number is negative you need to wait for initiative. This means, effectively, your weapon skill is on cooldown. Now, because all your skills have different costs some skills will be on cooldown, while others won't. The disadvantage is that, while you can use other less optimal weapon skills, using those skills will serve to increase the cooldown of more optimal skills also. The larger the "Cost of Weapon Skill" is the more likely you will be to find subsequent uses of higher cost skills locked out. Thief doesn't have cool downs so much as thief sometimes has cool downs when initiative is lower than skills require. So when you add 2 initiative to a 6 point skill it isn't the same as adding 2 to a 4 point skill. That's because the higher the cost the greater chance of it locking out a greater number of skills. Not all use cases involve full initiative with lots of available initiative regeneration. If you have 10 initiative and use an 8 initiative skill you are now limited to a 2 initiative skill (meaning practically all skills are on cooldown). Which brings me to the "Effective Universal Cooldown" balancing test. That is: (Cost of Desired Skill - (Available Initiative + Initiative Boosts) < or > (Opportunity Cost of Waiting) In plain language, the time to regenerate initiative to use the skill that is optimal for the situation NOW is weighed against the choice between waiting and spending initiative on another skill. However, that choice is difficult because it means the skill you can't cast NOW also won't be available for both the original time period AND the time period of whatever substitute skill. So the choice is really the question of "how badly do I need to use this skill in the immediate future?" The more you need to use a skill (which for a teleport may be critical because you need to decap or +1 ASAP) the more you effectively can't use other skills because you can't afford to cut into your pool. So "wait for initiative" unlike waiting for cool downs on other professions means auto attacking while you wait. Which is all to say that you can't speak of this as an 8 second cool down unless you ignore the unique initiative system on a fundamental level. My point still is that IA was overperforming and the nerf on it was deserved. Thieves can still stealth on the fly(to disengage, engage or regen initiave safely), they still have the best mobility, they still have the most evades of any class so yeah they shouldn't spam IA 3 times in 4 secs like before patch traveling 2700 range without any utilities, only weapon. After the patch thieves still have sb and shadowstep to travel around the map, the only difference now is that you have to use utilities too like other classes instead of weapon only to travel that fast and that's how it should be. As long as people can't understand how broken this was, they will never be satisfied when something gets nerfed. IA was never overperforming. I would like you to find me some evidence of anyone anywhere arguing this seriously. I even did some legwork for you and found literally a single forum post from a year ago where the OP was arguing for a significant nerf to IA: https://en-forum.guildwars2.com/discussion/88551/its-time-to-address-infiltrators-arrow The OP got ratio'd by nearly everyone in the responses because his arguments were faulty, including that Thieves have the best Mobility and therefor must be nerfed. With all due respect, you seem to be falling into the same trap. It isn't a question of whether or not the Thief has the best mobility; it's a question of whether they have too much mobility, and how it should be solved if they do. Just like it isn't a question of whether a class has the most damage, most team utility or most survivability. It's just a question of it being too much. Things are allowed to be strong as long as they aren't too strong, or at least brought in line by some kind of weakness. Yes, IA was strong, but so far no one has brought forth any decent arguments as to why it was too strong. Reiterating what others before me have said, using IA costs resources in a pool other weapon skills share, and none of it is returned just by swapping weapons. Any resources they spend on going from Point A to Point B or C is going to be resources they have to wait for before doing damage. Other classes that can keep up with the Thief to a decent degree do not have to make such compromises, but at the same time their kits don't allow them to. That's what makes the Thief unique. Even if anyone did bring forth valid arguments, I don't see how upping the initiative cost to 3 quarters of the Thief's base initiative bar is a valid solution. Now that problem of initiative management when using shortbow is going to be a lot more of a problem, pigeon-holing them into Trickery even harder. You are right about one thing: Thieves are still going to be the most mobile class in the game. Like I said in my OP, Thieves are going to find ways around the nerfs. Whether they swap to perma-stealthing with Shadow's Rejuvenation to balance out the Initiative cost or mashing Heartseeker across the landscape (450 range Leap for 3 initiative), they are going to figure it out, and nobody, not even the Thief players themselves, are going to like it. EDIT: Grammar.
  7. In my personal opinion, they need to revert the nerfs (at least to Infiltrator's Arrow, but maybe also Signet) and actually address the problems that Thieves create. One big example I hear, including from other Thieves, is camping stealth (not spamming, camping). This likely means addressing the traits in Shadow Arts that cater to stealth camping (with Shadow's Rejuvenation being the big one).
  8. I know, I know. Another thread on this topic. Just hear me out. Let me first start by saying that the nerf to Consume Plasma is fine because Mesmers have an incredibly difficult time vs Thieves, so this should help them out a bit. I'm still indifferent on Essence Sap due to how big the nerf was but it was pretty strong so I don't see a big problem. With that out of the way, I want to get into why the change to Infiltrator's Arrow and Signet of Agility is shortsighted. Players have already pointed out the issue of the 8 initiative cost being clunky due to the Thief only having up to 15 initiative to begin with, and that is with the Trickery traitline which they were already pigeonholed into to begin with. To add to that, Mobility isn't just a staple of the Thief; it is what is keeping them relevant. Taking it away or severely hampering without giving them something elsewhere to make up for it at least a little bit puts Thief players in position where they don't know what direction you want them to go in. The fact that the Signet of Agility got nerfed along with it just compounds that confusion because it just tells Thieves you want them to be less mobile, but you don't want them to fight as well either. But there is even more at play here. Either Thieves are going to toss Shortbow, or find a way around the cost. I'm going to specifically address the latter. What do you guys think Thieves will do to make up the cost in Initiative to keep Shortbow relevant? They are going to find a way to make up the cost, and that cost happens to be made up for by Shadow's Rejuvenation. Thieves that avoided this trait are now going to feel obligated to take it, whereas before it was just a really strong (and imho a crutch) trait. This is because Shortbow 5, without the use of other Initiative regen sources, took 6 seconds to regen the initiative they need to fire off a single Infiltrator's Arrow. Now it takes 8 seconds. Shadow's Rejuvenation gives 1 Initiative every 3 seconds (or 2 per 6, totaling 8 initiative over 6 seconds), meaning it perfectly makes up the increased cost as long as a Thief camps stealth when they are running around. That means you are going to see Thieves camp stealth more, not less. This is further compounded by the Signet of Agility nerf because they won't be able to sustain fights now. This trait also happens to be the reason why Thieves were able to do so much while still stacking stealth. It mitigated the decision of choosing stealth over mobility/damage because a Thief could stack stealth with Black Powder, Blinding Powder and Heartseekers and get a bunch of their initiative back. This trait by itself is why Thieves can Perma-stealth with very few to no cooldowns. Now it's going to be nigh-mandatory along with Trickery. Part of the reason I write this is because I am seeing a lot of people in the forums saying that the nerfs are good because the Thief needed nerfs for the sake of needing nerfs. I see alot of those same people complaining about stealth uptime on the Thief. I am telling everyone right now that this change is going to make that problem worse.
  9. For what it's worth; I've never seen an Anet dev play thief. N-E-V-E-R. I knew about the upcoming Consume Plasma nerf, but I had no idea they'd also be nerfing Sap Essence (one of the few remaining actually hard-hitting thief skills). I'm confused as to why, if Signet of Agility was such an issue , they couldn't just up the cooldown by 5-10 seconds? Then again, considering how limited its use is with its current cooldown as things stand... And people are actually out there talking about it as this 'superb condi cleanse', when it literally only does that while granting an added (now half a ) dodge. It's not like it's a stun break. I really am not much of a fan of deadeye's gameplay pattern. But that's the road Anet's pigeonholing me onto. Pretty much. The most frustrating to me personally isn't even the nerfs in and of themselves. That's dumbfounding, but what's frustrating to me personally are the non-thief players that just seem to think this change is warranted on sole basis that Thieves needed a nerf. They don't realize what the consequence of this change is going to be. Either Thieves are going to keep using Shortbow and find a way around the cost, or they won't use Shortbow and find another means of Mobility. I know some Deadeyes that got really good with Death's Retreat that are probably going to be fine. As for the Thieves that will keep using Shortbow, I can almost guarantee they are all going to do the same thing. It now takes 8 seconds instead of 6 seconds to regen the initiative to cast Shortbow (assuming there are no other sources of Ini regen). Guess which trait happens to restore 1 Initiative every 3 seconds? Shadow's Rejuvenation. When before it was an optional trait that was just really strong (and imho was a crutch, but that's just me) will now be borderline mandatory to make up the difference. That means Thieves are going to spending a lot more time in stealth to get that bonus. What's super ironic is that the same players that are saying the nerf is justified are the same ones that are complaining about the stealth uptime, not realizing what they've just done.
  10. When my friend told me about the nerfs, I seriously thought he was trolling. Then I looked at them and not only did they nerf Infiltrator's Arrow, gutting its mobility, they did it in the most uncreative way possible. On top of that, instead of giving Thieves something to work with in terms of defense to compensate for said nerf in mobility, they nerfed their defense. These nerfs were completely out of the blue. If I had to guess where they were gunna nerf the Thief next, I would said it would have been Shadow Arts due to how much some of the traits that contribute to perma-stealthing are used as a crutch. It isn't even just about these nerfs (or how out of the blue they are). Remember back on the February Patch when they basically annihilated the Acrobatics traitline, giving the only decent traits 300 seconds? Remember back when everyone was saying that they are just going to be "placeholders" until they can find something better to do with them? They're still there, untouched, virtually unusable in any PvP scenario. Meanwhile, in the land of Deadeye, their PvP rotation literally consists of spamming Skirmisher's Shot over and over until they hit 7 Malice with Maleficent 7, get off a stealth attack, and rinse and repeat ad nauseam. It has been this way since February and it has yet to be touched. The sad part is that the only reason Deadeyes do this is because it is the only realistic way they can do significant damage. I could go on Then the OP mentioned that there are no Devs that play Thief. I have no idea how true this is, but at this point I don't doubt it. No Dev in their right mind who even plays Thief would even let this slide. I thought for awhile about what other alternatives I could take, and to be quite honest. I'm a Thief main, and I primarily play this game for the PvP. I want the game to work. I want Thieves to be in a good spot, but not overpowered. I was willing to give this balance team a chance, but I think I'm just done with this game now. It's obvious based on the balance team's trend that ongoing balance issues are going to get ignored, while pumping out changes that don't make any sense. (P.S, to the OP, Most of the people I know who swapped out of Thief went to Power Rev or Holosmith, mostly the former)
  11. Thanks for the responses everyone! And yeah, it is for WvW.
  12. Silly question:I am thinking of changing servers to join up with some friends. Would changing servers have any affect on my latency/ping due to different server locations? Or are they all located at the same location? Thanks!
  13. Fine. Whatever makes Deadeye less braindead and less frustrating to fight. I only suggested those changes because people constantly complain about pointing issues but providing no solutions. I personally don't care what happens so long as 2 spam stops.
  14. Pretty much... That is also why I don't want the class nerfed outright; just the damage shifted elsewhere. I could imagine shifting the damage of Double Tap to something like 1100 to 1200-ish tooltip damage in sPvP (assuming Berserker + Scholar) and Three Round burst going up to just around 1400-ish tooltip damage, and perhaps lowering their initiative cost by 1 because raising it from 4 to 6 seemed like overkill to me. That would justify lowering the damage on Skirmisher's Shot so it isn't a life-raft as you describe. I don't really care that Deadeye's do the damage that they do, I just want it to come from a place that makes sense. You say you "don't want the class nerfed outright; just the damage shifted elsewhere" along with "I don't really care that Deadeye's do the damage that they do".You realize that increasing reveal for 1s completely goes against your statement right? Reveal is what determines the damage output for the whole spec.You can't dps the same when you touch the malice pump and dump system that is the very design of the spec. When you increase reveal by 1s from 3s to 4s, that's a whole second where you will either just auto attack to save ini (laughable dmg on auto attack #1 ->dps crashes down) or lose out ini by #2 again because you couldn't DJ on 3rd second. This can lead you to being not able to M7 on time again after initial refund -> dps crashes down. You do realize I was specifically referring to just those abilities right? You do realize I said nothing about overall dps and specifically referred to the raw damage dealt by abilities right?If you are going to come to a forum to sound smart, at least address the issue I put forward instead of taking what I said and twisting it to prove a point. My point is literally just this: Spamming 2 alongside M7 to both build Malice and deal reliable, solid damage without the need to kneel or properly manage initiative is braindead to play as. Please tell me how it is healthy design for Skirmisher's Shot to be the DEs go-to button for literally everything including damage (which also happens to pierce), Cripple AND Malice build up. When mixed with the fact that no class can even properly punish the Deadeye for making a mistake (due to the combination the 3s Reveal on Rifle skills and Stealth on dodge) makes them just plain obnoxious to play against even if it isn't necessarily good in a competitive scene, because it takes a second or so to even get close enough to do anything to them. However, I also recognized (as @ASP.8093 pointed out) that Deadeyes are reliant on Skirmisher's Shot in its current state because of how poor of state both of the 3 skills are in (which are supposed to be their non-stealth damaging skills). So I suggested shifting the damage from Skirmisher's Shot to Double Tap and Three Round Burst whilst also reducing their initiative cost so nerfing the damage of Skirmisher's Shot can be justified. The general idea is to make Skirmisher's Shot the smarter choice to use in some circumstances while making the 3 skills (kneeling or standing) the smarter choice in other circumstances. If they're overall DPS come out roughly the same, even with some other adjustments, then that's fine. Don't rage at people for trying to sound smart if you're dropping nonsense like that. People mostly ignore DE's unless maybe it's d/p + shortbow and try to stay ready for Daredevils and Core. Take some control skills.I didn't rage... I returned their tone back at them. I tend to do that and maybe I shouldn't, but it gets frustrating when people take only a portion of what I'm saying while my primary point gets blatantly ignored. But tis the interwebs. I have been playing Deadeye with Flickering Shadow. Daredevils don't do much to me unless I get needlessly aggressive and that seems to be the trend when I happen across a Deadeye on any character I play. You boldfaced the part where I said "no class can properly punish the deadeye for making a mistake" as my nonsense. I may seem like I am going overboard with the tone, but there is a reason I inserted the word "properly." Perhaps I should have been more specific in that particular post that classes can punish the Deadeye for making a mistake, but with the Deadeye's current kit it is easy to not make mistakes, and any mistakes they do make does not typically result in their death as long as they disengage. As I mentioned in my first post, they CAN be dealt with. It's just needlessly frustrating. I don't get how it is so difficult to understand that all I'm saying is that it is frustrating to fight and too easy to play due to Skirmisher Shot spam, Stealth on dodge and reduced Revealed duration.
  15. Pretty much... That is also why I don't want the class nerfed outright; just the damage shifted elsewhere. I could imagine shifting the damage of Double Tap to something like 1100 to 1200-ish tooltip damage in sPvP (assuming Berserker + Scholar) and Three Round burst going up to just around 1400-ish tooltip damage, and perhaps lowering their initiative cost by 1 because raising it from 4 to 6 seemed like overkill to me. That would justify lowering the damage on Skirmisher's Shot so it isn't a life-raft as you describe. I don't really care that Deadeye's do the damage that they do, I just want it to come from a place that makes sense. You say you "don't want the class nerfed outright; just the damage shifted elsewhere" along with "I don't really care that Deadeye's do the damage that they do".You realize that increasing reveal for 1s completely goes against your statement right? Reveal is what determines the damage output for the whole spec.You can't dps the same when you touch the malice pump and dump system that is the very design of the spec. When you increase reveal by 1s from 3s to 4s, that's a whole second where you will either just auto attack to save ini (laughable dmg on auto attack #1 ->dps crashes down) or lose out ini by #2 again because you couldn't DJ on 3rd second. This can lead you to being not able to M7 on time again after initial refund -> dps crashes down.You do realize I was specifically referring to just those abilities right? You do realize I said nothing about overall dps and specifically referred to the raw damage dealt by abilities right?If you are going to come to a forum to sound smart, at least address the issue I put forward instead of taking what I said and twisting it to prove a point. My point is literally just this: Spamming 2 alongside M7 to both build Malice and deal reliable, solid damage without the need to kneel or properly manage initiative is braindead to play as. Please tell me how it is healthy design for Skirmisher's Shot to be the DEs go-to button for literally everything including damage (which also happens to pierce), Cripple AND Malice build up. When mixed with the fact that no class can even properly punish the Deadeye for making a mistake (due to the combination the 3s Reveal on Rifle skills and Stealth on dodge) makes them just plain obnoxious to play against even if it isn't necessarily good in a competitive scene, because it takes a second or so to even get close enough to do anything to them. However, I also recognized (as @ASP.8093 pointed out) that Deadeyes are reliant on Skirmisher's Shot in its current state because of how poor of state both of the 3 skills are in (which are supposed to be their non-stealth damaging skills). So I suggested shifting the damage from Skirmisher's Shot to Double Tap and Three Round Burst whilst also reducing their initiative cost so nerfing the damage of Skirmisher's Shot can be justified. The general idea is to make Skirmisher's Shot the smarter choice to use in some circumstances while making the 3 skills (kneeling or standing) the smarter choice in other circumstances. If they're overall DPS come out roughly the same, even with some other adjustments, then that's fine.
×
×
  • Create New...