Malus.2184

If you never wanted one then what was the reason to engage? If I was wrong then I would just be wrong and objective reality would show that without you neding to ever interfere.

That's the reason it's a case study with a model group to exemplify the case. You make an impossible ideal to 'solve' the case. Statistically speaking, DE has a binary outcome of either success or failure, or 50/50 if you want. Where a group lies in that binary depends on their performance. This means that once enough players have 'cracked the code' the success rate will trend towards 100%. People who've yet to 'crack the code' will fall into the failure binary. Either results occur due to the mixing of those two groups. You see this exemplified in other metas that once people know how to do it the success rate increase dramatically. The other EoD metas are good examples of this. When people had no idea what to do they would often fail. Once people familiarised themselves with them the success rate rose exponentially. The same effect should be seen in DE, yet it sits at 60% currently. This is the statistical oddity that needs to be examined. In the above case, everyone in the group has 'cracked the code' so their success rate should be 100%. ANet has only said that the success rate is 60% instead of the overall success rate being 60%. This makes extrapolating the group's success rate into a simple 6/4 split relevant. The internal factors are all there to allow for a 100% success rate, so the only factors that can give this number in the other direction are external ones. Aka. the RNG. I'll give an anecdotal example, I led an utter pug group with around average performance, we go both Break Bars at respectively 61% and 41%. The effect of this is that while the Break Bars are up the damage done to Soo-Won is reduced by 100%. In this situation we could either deal with the Break Bars and enjoy 5-sec of increased DPS before she phased and the remaining 25-sec was lost. Or we could let it time out and it would take 8-sec before she phased. Due to the internal CD of that ability the two you get on average was gone. This resulted in 50-sec lost increased DPS. The encounter timed out when she was at 5% health. That 5% health would had been gone if the Break Bars had appeared at 59% and 39% health instead. This is the reason that no one can really get a consistent performance on her, unless their performance is so big that they can succeed despite the mechanics. Sure, this might only have a 1% chance of happening and due to the Large Numbers effect once you have, for example, a 1000 instances it will have happened ten times. And you're out of luck if you have an averagely performing group and you're in one of those ten instances as nothing you can do can affect the outcome.

It's case group a case study means that everything is the exact same from each instance, composition, performance, etc.

So, what you're stating is, "they already did something and is never gonna do anything further"? I also never even expressed an argument that you needed raid prep, I checked my post history in order to see of I had done so by accident. So you saying that I said it is making a straw version of me that you can put any ridiculous opinion on that you then look better arguing against. So, since you only seem to want to add dishonesty to the discussion let me treat you never posting again with an "oh no...Anyway."

The case group is one with average performance instead of one with good performance (I define good performance as so good that the group can succeed despite the mechanics). You had to create a straw version of it that you then responded to. That might work with someone who pays less attention to rhetoric than I do. Someone else might have taken this post as you asking the question. In reality, you asked yourself a different question that looked alike that you then answered.

Is this post a "stop thinking about DE and go do something else"? I'm asking honestly since I've no idea what your post stated as it was to me just words strung together.

You missed the general point while you on the individual level is correct. For the purpose of this example the case group will be a constant one that does it regurlarly. The level of performance is within the lower strate of being able to succeed at the meta. Their performance is at a constant average level over 10 fights. They succeed at six and fails at four. Nothing changes about their performance- What gives them four failures when they were showing the exact same performance that gave them six successes?

That's my common sense, notice that the builds that are on pages like Metabattle and the like follow another common sense where you can always swap Skills before a combat. Appearently nothing ever adds and people are supposed to have perfect recall over what a mob is able to do. At least both needs to be true in order for their methods in absurum ad reductio to make any sense. And there are people who've played the game for considerably less time than 10 years. Only the expansion stories can be done in about two month each just using the average time that a person uses in games every week, which is eight hours.

As I said, what you think is common sense is different from person to person. I, for example, think that it's common sense that all open-world builds should have contextual utility since you never know what you'll run into. I also never said you were a toxic guy. I said that your attitude was utter poison to new players. You're a person first who have ideas and take action second, and the ideas you've expressed up to now are objectively toxic and subjectively goes against my common sense. Does that make it clear how come the 'common sense' argument is so ridiculously bad? If you expect others to show common sense they'll fail because the common sense you feel that they should have is what you think common sense is. This is also the first time you brought up communication as you expected that people should have a build from X. That's a demand instead of a communication. There's also no interaction in what you said other than "get this," since there's no explanation of what the reason people should get it is or the reason they should get it in the first place. You say one thing and the expressed values in what you say can only be executed in a vastly different manner if followed. I fully believe that you believe in the value of your statements. That's subjectively after all, and it does nothing to change that objectively the effect of your statements are faulty according to every theory that explains how engagement in activity should be created.

That is the big thing. Some people will take any level of critique as being toxicity directed towards them since in their personal narrative they're perfect. In addition to that, being critique, even though it's objectively good if delivered in the form of consctructive critique is subjectively considered a social faux pas. It's the same reason people seldom admits to having made a mistake. Instead of learning from it they just think it makes them look weak, and since they never admitted it and thus never become aware of what exactly they did wrong, they'll continue repeating it. TLDR Even with the softest tone people can percieve what you say as toxic due to them being biased towards believing that. There's nothing you can do about that. And for the over all health of the group give them a warning in /w and ifd they persist yeet them from the group. As the leader of a group you're responsible for the rest of the people's in it mental wellbeing, instead of just having to coddle one person.

Built-in, yes. Part of their DPS rotation in the most cases? Also yes. You're technically correct in what you say. And being 'technically correct' always means 'contextually wrong.' So while they have utility they have little contextual utility if they also have to keep their performance up.

Starting point, that I agree with. A new person or no knowledge will take it as gospel since they've nothing else to go by. The attitude of the person I responded to expressed that it was the end-all-be-all since they expressed that was all that new players needed.

I'll just quote this since it's relevant to my counter-argument. There's no RNG toning down in the next patch, just a bug fix of a bug that appeared when something else was fixed. You saying that they should just use Metabattle is an argument that defeats itself once you look closer at what Metabattle offers. I'll define a label here since I'll use it a lot in my argument: Contextual utility: the ability to quickly deal CC damage to a Defiance bar. Contextual utility are abilities that are either outside the DPS rotation or on such a short cooldown that it hardly matters. With that said. The builds from Snowcrows, Metabattle, et al. open-world only offer top DPS, and top DPS seldom includes any contextual utility. Metabattle is a little bit better at this as it offers alternatives in skill selection of "take X if Y is needed." They mever avtually explain what they do, so new players unaware of their importance will just go for the best DPS-build. The irony is that in their structure the sites like that creates the bad players they wish to prevent as the players who follow their advice blindly will take things because someone else told them and/or follow a described sequence of events regardless of them being contextually appropriate in order to follow the rotation they've been given. DPS will fall apart if they stray as they're repeating from rote memory instead of adapting, and they'll have little to none contextual utility unless the build by chance includes it, such as the Toolbelt Skill for Hardlight Arena on the open-world Power Holosmith build.

Hopyfully better stories as narratively the whole Dragon Cycle has objectively been a massive hinderence for the story. And the LS shows this, everything aside from LS s1 and s2 has treated any threat other than the dragons as secondary and unimportant at best. Example: The White Mantle presented in the Raids is a lot more threatening than the White Mantle presented in LS s3 who were used as a stepping stone to get to Balthazar in order to present the villain for PoF.

Between those two extremes is the category of 'average players,' and the objective reality is that average players even with good organization is utterly dependent on the RNG factor of that fight. This objectively makes the meta, according to any theory about activity structure, frustrating instead of challenging as the result can differ wildly even with the same performance shown by the players in the 'average' category. The belief behind your opinion is objectively wrong

This is the wrong conclusion. People will keep trying even if they fail if they feel that they have a chance to succeed. Due to the RNG, unless your performance is rated in the above average, then RNG decides whether you fail or succeed and that will feel either frustrating or utterly hollow. Only a child or someone in a child-like mental state like to win by default as they think that their own abilities led them to success as they simply know too little to recognize the context. The human mind have a better time dealing with a close failure that it had control over than it does with getting handed an easy win. The TLDR is that DE is frustrating instead of difficult as there are so many things that the players ultimately have no control over. Making success or failure utterly arbitrarily decided by the game unless your performance is so high that you can succeed despite the mechanics instead of because of them.

Some build works best by using Celestial Gear. An example is the Mechanist Condi Boon Support build that uses Celestial since it needs a little bit of everything.

I made this reply in a seperate thread. I think it bears repeating here

The DE fight is horrible and an average group even with good organization are dependent on the RNG to be with them to have a chance of success, The fight needs to be redesigned from the ground up. The physical models already exist and it would be massive undertaking to design a new set, so this suggestion will use assets that already exists. Narrative of the fight: Soo-Won has lost control to the Void and needs to be supressed in order to win control back. Practical layout of the fight: You fight Soo-Won, her being corrupted by Void is only shown by her having a shadowy hue and summoning the minions of the other dragons. It's also heavily RNG dependent on the order and appearence of her three RNG abilities. It's especially fatal of the Break Bar appears at either 61% and 41%, it did both times in a run I had, all damage is reduced to zero until the bar disappears. If broken it offers at most 5-sec on increased damage. The group lost 50-sec of increased damage. And the squad was by all account an average pug-group that had good organisation. General overview of my suggested changes inspired by the HT encounter. 1. She only uses her three abilities a maximum of two times each. At certain health tresholds she's unable to use the Defiance Bar one until the next phase with her attackable begins. 2. Her health is increased to counter that she'll no longer flit around the place. 3. If her tail appears while the Exposed effect is active the tail inherits whatever timer is left of it. 4. Killing a tail will shave off some of Soo-Won's health. Her health is increased to offset this. 5. The real meat of the RNG will come from what offensive ability of the six dragon energies she'll use. - Fist or tail slam. Both needs to have the tsunami effect since the tail slam is pretty much "whatever" right now. This would be the Soo-Won option. - Fire patches taken from Primordus as inspired by that sequence in HT only no big one and the smaller one appear underneath a random player. - Giant tendril in the middle from Mordremoth. Sends out a shockwave that if it hits yeets the player hit off the platform regardless of where they stand and inflicts huge damage. In that order so all that awaits people if they go down while in the air is a long fall. - Branded Strips ala Kralkatorik in HT. This could cover half the platform, similar to when Soo-Won moves. - Sky lasers ala Jormag in HT. - Zhaitan should have fields similar to those that target players randomly in HT that they then have to run away from the main group to drop. The damage on them should be so horrendous that if they're dropped in the group it's GG. This is a kind of random people can stomach as it represents something they can react to and do something about to avoid instead of the game going "kitten you!" and giving them RNG that will cause them to lose.This also compliments the narrative of the players needing to beat some sense into her before the final confrontation. The RNG that would be put in would be something where if a player falls prey to it they can work on becoming better at avoiding failing at that again. Right now, there's nothing any player can do other than pushing bigger DPS if she decides to move several times in a row and thus completely negate the mechanic by having a high DPS. And then people are succeeding despite the mechanics instead of because of them, and that's an extremely bad design situation to be in. As it is now you effectively needs to by highly above average in playing in order to offset the RNG instead of being able to use it to their advantage. This sets an artificial barrier of entry for the encounter that the average player feel they would be unable to pass. While this is only anecdotal several people in my guilds have said that after they got their eggs they've never set foot in the zone ever again. Aside from a few dedicated groups that are self-selecting as they only attract above average players Jade Sea is effectively dead content as it stands right now. No amount of reward increase could ever bring people back. What people ultimately want is a fair challenge instead of more bling, and right now DE can be extremely unfair due to the RNG that are outside the players' control. The rest of the fight can remain the way it is right now without any issues with RNG cropping up as those phases are, while they can be hard, ultimately fair. If players fails at them it's because of their abilities. They have an influence on those and can improve upon what they can do if they fail at them. In short, they have influence over the conditions that led to their failure. And that is a lot more important for people's desire to do the encounter than any increased reward. Even with it giving an Ancient Summoning Stone a lot of people are still "kitten this!" Again. This is anecdotal, it's just a sentiment I see a lot. It's also one that I feel myself and I fall into the category of above average players.

I already addressed that in a previous post and one example does nothing to counter the general trend even though you think it's the ultimate argument. There are to my knowledge two non-combo AoE stealths, Mesmer thing and Sneak Gyro. They're used ahead of the fight so usage of individual Stealth would have no effect on it other than trolling, and if you really want to do that then a mini does the job a lot better.

How so? Unless you actually put support down it's just a statement based on intuitive thinking.

Yes I can, as I find your argument rhetorically dishonest and would rather expose the dishonesty of it than giving it validity by arguing against in away that takes it serious. The las thing you said is an argument. How would you compensante Stealth under a Grace-period since you implicitly in that counter- argument means that Stealth would be unviable.

"I'm an exception therefore your argument is invalid." Are you an exception? Yes. Do the posters in this thread in average ascribe to this being about Thieves? Yes. Your posts are an outlier that helps to create the average.

I find it interesting how people automatically think that stealth = Thief. While Thieves and their Elite Specs use Stealth the most there are other builds thay can make excessively use of Stealth. The Ranger comes to mind. This is a suggestion about Stealth as a mechanic rather than the Specs who use it. Watchtower = stationary, you need to lure the Stealth user there. Guards at flags = stationary and you need to have it for it to work. I find this suggestion since it's completely useless since if you're jumped by a stealth user while taking the flaf it exerbates the issue since now you're fighting 2v1.. Target Painter Trap = https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Target_Painter_Trap, requires that you have enough badges in order to keep stocked. While it's unlikely that you're lacking currency to buy one it can happen. The flipside of this is if there's a Grace-period to using Stealth then the Target Painter effect could be changed to have no effect on Stealth at all, which would be fair.

Again, technically correct. This is the relevant portion of the entry. Reading that I see multiple ways to get around Revealed 1. Apply Condi damage. 2. Never break Stealth, which is far from difficult since since Stealth seldom lasts long. And letting it pass while attacking at the exact moment is doanle unlesss you have heavy ping. The hypothetical is that it prevent people from Stealth->attacking all the time. Practically it does no such thing as the asy way to circumvent this, untill you can plink them down, is to only do big attacks with a time between them and otherwise kite them. You're going by this hypothetically curbing the behaviour. Practically it can easily be circumvented. If a Reveal effect was placed on the player depending on the nominal duration of the Stealth, instead of an arbitrary one decided by the game mode that's easily circumventable, then it would make a practical difference as the ways to circumvent getting the Revealed effect would be gone. Basically, you get affected by Revealed by a non-guard in WvW, the reason is you. In a sPvP match the effect means more as organised teams are often on some sort of VC and can call for backup and they're forced to stay at one node due to how the scoring work. In WvW you seldom have a team or VC when roaming, and the score nodes themselves are fire-and-forget. There's no reason to stay other than to gank.