Suggestion for countering permastealth thieves/dead-eyes.

[Exzen.2976]

51 minutes ago, shrew.3059 said:

The counterplay to Stealth is tactical awareness.

There should be a counter to stealth by allowing all players of all classes to be able to reveal, in the same way they can stunbreak a knockdown, cleanse a condition etc. Or simply not allow large stacking of stealth the prevent it.

 

Tactical awareness? No. It's not a counter. It helps, sure. But isn't a counter when you literally can't hit the enemy player and have no idea where they are, when they might reappear, engage etc. I am not talking about low amounts of stealth here and there for reposition and misdirection. But high uptime in stealth doesn't allow for counterplay without aoe reveals.

 

I do know how stealth works, how it can be used, its strength and limitations. I have played many hours on thief (it used to be my main class) and have used it a lot in roaming in wvw. Given that knowledge, I believe it is overpowered - I am coming at it from this side, not from a "thief killed me QQ" point of view. 

 

Thieves can use stealth alongside their kit to essentially negate all attacks against them. You clearly don't understand what a good thief player can do with it. 

 

Imagine a class having access to permanent barrier on no cooldown. This would be overpowered but according to your argument, barrier doesn't kill anything, so wouldn't affect the outcome of the fight...  even though it clearly does. It is exactly the same argument. 

Edited September 10, 2021 by Exzen.2976

[shrew.3059]

9 minutes ago, Exzen.2976 said:

There is plenty of evidence and isn't just People losing to thieves and qqing. Some people posting here are good players with lots of experience and some of us are perfectly capable of killing most thieves. Even if a thief dies, it doesn't mean that permastealth is fair. 

 

Also when People do post actual evidence they get nasty comments from People in the thread.

 

You just disagree with or ignore "evidence" and then produce your own "evidence" based on your own experience - which is just as biased as mine is.

 

Thieves are dominant in smallscale/roaming in WvW, which you don't care about and dismiss because its not something you care about. There's a whole section to it in metabattle and there are still plenty of people in wvw that enjoy smallscale/roaming. If you check the meta on roaming, thieves do dominate it. Fact. 

 

You are entitled to your own opinion (as we all are), but statements like yours above, where you dismiss everyone else's and try and position it as fact, is completely unfair.

 

I haven’t really presented any evidence because the onus is not on me to build a counterargument against an unsubstantiated claim. You say Stealth is broken, but the actual evidence presented is what exactly? Evidence isn’t why you think it’s broken, it’s about showing the in-game effects of brokenness.

 

I think Roaming is great fun and should be a supported role in WvW. Thieves being good at Roaming isn’t breaking WvW, and ANet has a responsibility to the entire game mode, not just one niche.

 

If we take builds on Metabattle as evidence of dominance over a game mode, what about Rangers? Are they also overpowered since they have as many builds as Thieves? At best you could say Thieves excel at Roaming in WvW and Decapping in sPvP. What does the world look like after we nerf Stealth? What are Thieves good at now? Do Rangers just become the premier Roaming profession?

[shrew.3059]

24 minutes ago, Exzen.2976 said:

Thieves can use stealth alongside their kit to essentially negate all attacks against them. You clearly don't understand what a good thief player can do with it. 

 

What a good player can do with Stealth is not the point; a good player can beat a bad player with anything. A bad player can keep a zerg up by mashing keys, should that be nerfed first?

 

My understanding isn’t the problem either, especially since that seems dependent on my agreeing with you. The problem is people wanting to beat players who are better than them. People getting killed by Thieves now and still going to get killed by Thieves with another magic Reveal button, because they aren’t good enough at the game. Stealth isn’t stopping great players from winning fights, it’s stopping mediocre players from beating other mediocre players.

[Exzen.2976]

18 minutes ago, shrew.3059 said:

What a good player can do with Stealth is not the point

Haha, no, this is exactly the point.

I also put a video link up as evidence and got nasty comments for it 😄 Seems like a lose lose situation if we cannot provide evidence without being insulted for it.

I fundamentally disagree with you on every level of your argument. I don't see any reason to continue this. You are entitled to your opinion, but it is just your opinion, not fact. 

Edited September 10, 2021 by Exzen.2976

[shrew.3059]

3 minutes ago, Exzen.2976 said:

This is exactly the point.

 

But skilled non-Thieves can kill Thieves. If an unskilled Thief could kill a skilled player using just Stealth, then we’d have an issue. Is that what we’re debating?

[Exzen.2976]

25 minutes ago, shrew.3059 said:

The problem is people wanting to beat players who are better than them

You think this is why I am arguing this? Wow. What evidence do you have for this? 

[Exzen.2976]

1 minute ago, shrew.3059 said:

 

But skilled non-Thieves can kill Thieves. If an unskilled Thief could kill a skilled player using just Stealth, then we’d have an issue. Is that what we’re debating?

No, a skilled non thief player can't kill a skilled permastealth thief, unless they make a mistake. The thief player will either win the fight or escape unless they get too greedy (which is a mistake).

[shrew.3059]

Just now, Exzen.2976 said:

No, a skilled non thief player can't kill a skilled permastealth thief, unless they make a mistake. The thief player will either win the fight or escape unless they get too greedy (which is a mistake).

 

Progress! Here are my issues:

 

1. Escaping is not winning; these two things are not the same and should not be conflated. The win condition for an encounter may be an objective or it may be killing your opponent, but merely surviving doesn’t count as a meaningful win because every time a Thief escapes, it’s a draw. Moreover, if they run away, they don’t hold the objective so they lose if that was the goal.

 

2. Capitalising on a mistake is how all skilled players beat all other skilled players. Are you suggesting a skilled non-Thief should beat a skilled Thief even if they don’t make a mistake?

 

3. Unless you mean it’s impossible for a non-Thief to survive a fight with a skilled Thief, which is dubious.

[shrew.3059]

19 minutes ago, Exzen.2976 said:

I fundamentally disagree with you on every level of your argument. I don't see any reason to continue this. You are entitled to your opinion, but it is just your opinion, not fact. 

 

Fair enough, I’m sure you have better things to do than argue with strangers on the internet!

 

And of course it’s my opinion, we’re just batting around opinions here. There are no real “facts” when it comes to game balance because the desired outcomes are all conventional/normative. If ANet wanted the game to be “Guardians win everything, always” then a game that delivered that would be balanced by its own rules, but probably not much fun.

[shrew.3059]

15 minutes ago, Exzen.2976 said:

You think this is why I am arguing this? Wow. What evidence do you have for this? 

 

It’s more speculation than a strong claim, or at least an estimation. When I watch high level PvP, I don’t get the sense that encounters are overly lopsided, but that could be because of the skill level involved and the game mode. Without matchmaking in WvW, you have huge disparities in player skill and so players can be frustrated by seemingly unbeatable mechanics that require a lot more understanding than “oh no condis, time to cleanse”. SLB burst, for example, must be hugely frustrating for new players when they get 100-0 from over 1000 yards away. Once you understand it and the build that powers it, it’s no longer as threatening.

[Exzen.2976]

Just now, shrew.3059 said:

 

It’s more speculation than a strong claim, or at least an estimation. When I watch high level PvP, I don’t get the sense that encounters are overly lopsided, but that could be because of the skill level involved and the game mode. Without matchmaking in WvW, you have huge disparities in player skill and so players can be frustrated by seemingly unbeatable mechanics that require a lot more understanding than “oh no condis, time to cleanse”. SLB burst, for example, must be hugely frustrating for new players when they get 100-0 from over 1000 yards away. Once you understand it and the build that powers it, it’s no longer as threatening.

sPvP is balanced very differently and is irrelevant in these discussions.

[Psycoprophet.8107]

42 minutes ago, Exzen.2976 said:

No, a skilled non thief player can't kill a skilled permastealth thief, unless they make a mistake. The thief player will either win the fight or escape unless they get too greedy (which is a mistake).

Really cuz I kill thieves all the time in wvw with three buttons on both me slb and rev(rev takes more clicks). Sic em, knock back and rapid fire.....dead. rev reveal sw5,sw4 and sw1 and sword 3 when they run. I also use to wreck them often on core guard and dh when I played guard alot. Only class I've had issues with thief on was warrior due to their blinds but I still managed to down a significant percentage of thieves trying to pick me off in wvw thanks to magebane and proper awareness and knowledge of the thief class. If u see a black powder near u cleave in it,  so many times I've cleaved or used arc divider inside the black powder ring to find the thief appear in downstate. If u cleave the black powder ring chances are thief either has 3 secs to burst or will be forced to use blinding powder or a port.

All u thief/stealth complainers need to ask yourself this, why is their a large majority of us players who can deal with thieves to the point we don't view them as problems yet u guys can't seem to....... and before u guys say we'll its not that I can't deal with them because I actually can it just their mechanics are broken, well if they are infact broken u nor anyone else could deal with them the majorityof the time but this is most definitelynot the case, instead it's more likely stealth is not broken given the things within the game to deal with the mechanic but instead a very annoying mechanic to deal with which is teefs MO.

Edited September 10, 2021 by Psycoprophet.8107

[shrew.3059]

2 minutes ago, Exzen.2976 said:

sPvP is balanced very differently and is irrelevant in these discussions.

 

Semi-relevant, because either you balance Thieves in PvE because of WvW, or you move WvW over to a sPvP ruleset, or you create a third ruleset for WvW.

 

Not against the latter two, honestly. But changing one profession’s balance in two game modes because of its perceived performance in a one of them is a big step. Moreover, it’s relevant because it involves players fighting each other without any matchmaking, so it’s going to produce wildly unfair results compared to sPvP even if the skills themselves are all balanced.

[Exzen.2976]

15 minutes ago, shrew.3059 said:

 

Progress! Here are my issues:

 

1. Escaping is not winning; these two things are not the same and should not be conflated. The win condition for an encounter may be an objective or it may be killing your opponent, but merely surviving doesn’t count as a meaningful win because every time a Thief escapes, it’s a draw. Moreover, if they run away, they don’t hold the objective so they lose if that was the goal.

 

2. Capitalising on a mistake is how all skilled players beat all other skilled players. Are you suggesting a skilled non-Thief should beat a skilled Thief even if they don’t make a mistake?

 

3. Unless you mean it’s impossible for a non-Thief to survive a fight with a skilled Thief, which is dubious.

1. Yes escaping is not a "win". It is also not a "draw" either. A good thief can essentially be unkillable if they play it correctly.

 

2. Yes and no. Capitalising on a mistake is important. But having to rely on a mistake doesn't mean you also have the opportunity to outplay them. You can outplay someone without them making a mistake. You can't outplay a permastealth thief. They have to make a mistake for you to kill them.

 

3. No, but it is heavily and unfairly stacked in their favour if they are a permastealth thief due to a overpowered mechanic. I am not talking about Thief in general, just the permastealth builds. Sw/D thief is fine imo.

 

17 minutes ago, shrew.3059 said:

Fair enough, I’m sure you have better things to do than argue with strangers on the internet!

We probably all do. Anyway, I respect you for having a reasonable debate without the need to throw petty insults. I don't agree with your points but I expect that is mutual. 

[subversiontwo.7501]

1 hour ago, shrew.3059 said:

 You say Stealth is broken, but the actual evidence presented is what exactly? Evidence isn’t why you think it’s broken, it’s about showing the in-game effects of brokenness.

 

I think Roaming is great fun and should be a supported role in WvW. Thieves being good at Roaming isn’t breaking WvW, and ANet has a responsibility to the entire game mode, not just one niche.

I kind of drifted off from this thread yesterday because I can't keep up with all the posts you guys are making, but I have read up on most of them. I think you had a handful of posts that were good but now you're not really arguing from a place of honesty anymore. I think that there is plenty of "evidence" that is more than anectotal and discussion simply does not progress due to it getting ignored and misdirected.

What evidence are you looking for relating to which argument?

Uptimes:

That stealth can be maintained to an incredibly high uptime? I think that is commonly accepted among all of us. It is easily demonstrable by just demonstrating black powder and heartseeker stealth uptimes relative initiative pool and regeneration. It isn't really a point of contention. Instead the discussion directs over to whether that has any value in and of itself - or - the discussion gets directed into why Thief has stealth and what it doesn't have.

Comparisons:

However, it is a fair remark to bring up that whatever else it gets compared to does not have those uptimes. I don't think that is a point of contention either, is it? If Warriors could block as much as Thieves stealth they would be incredibly powerful and Warrior block uptimes have been nerfed still. Clearly, things can be nerfed. Even weaker yet powerful things like boons rarely have those uptimes. For example, one thing that makes BoonBeast powerful is that its protection levels can hit similar uptimes and its mechanics at least in part similarily circumvents ripping counterplay. However, that is also an outlier and it isn't even as strong, yet I wouldn't die on a hill (as you put it) to preserve that trait as a crutch if it became a larger balance issue. That build also devotes an entire statline into that beyond the traits. In fact, that is a common theme important here that other classes have far more trade-offs.

Synergies:

Stealth has been allowed to be traited to some sort of one-all solution to problems and that is why we have this positive feedback loop of initiative bonus -> stealth -> mobility on so many Thief builds. That sits ontop of a resource system (initiative) that is superior, traited better and I think that is not a point of contention either. I can explain if needed. Also, from a balance perspective we generally do not argue what "good" or "bad" players do with it, we argue what can be done with it. It's not like "average" behaviour is unimportant, but possibility is far more important. How it impacts is fair though, whether we talk synergies or behaviour.

Supplies:

Something similar can be said for the supply-discussion. That we even have anti-thief siege and upgrades in this game is an admittance from the developer that they have not balanced these things properly. We don't have anti-block siege or whatever else. It's not really a point of contention. I think we all agree on it, yet discussion directs into that it exists and whether we should have it or whether it is good in a larger balance perspective gets ignored.

One level up - Engagement:

That is the larger discussion that stealth fits into - escapeability and engagement control - the same pattern repeats itself there. I don't think that there is an actual point of contention here. Again, it is more so that it directs into discussions where people argue whether that has any value of its own, how that impacts the mode, whether small scale is a mode of its own and so forth. However, like has been brought up a couple times now, that is mostly misdirection or dishonest argumentation, ie., arguing that large scale dominates when oneself mostly engages in small scale - arguing that being overpowered in small scale should be a compensation for (possibly) being underpowered in large scale and so on. That's not honest, that's wanting to keep ones cake for the things one prefer to do. There are also people like me comming in here, pointing out that any such balance on a more global level is poor balance because it is harder to maintain and harder to get right.

One more level up - Environment:

That's how we end up at your last comment. Obviously if something is too good at small scale it should be addressed the same way as if something is too good at large scale. It's not honest trying to supplant a discussion of too good with good. I don't think that is a point of contention either. I think we agree that Thieves should be good at stealth (or mobility). Where we disagree is how good or to what balance. There are clearly differences between volumes of 25% and 250%. Things commonly agreed upon to be balance issues at large scale has been adressed. Those classes and/or mechanics did get nerfed, over and over. The only things that muddles that discussion is that people have a tendency to simplify or even misdirect here too. That larger scale may be more important or engages more players does not make small scale unimportant. People use 1v1 as a substitute for small scale or for roaming. That's simplification that omits a large portion of the balance. Other people bring up sPvP and that is misdirection in a thread about WvW. In sPvP many things about the Thief is balanced by the nature of sPvP design, rules, maps, objectives and gameplay. A +1 role is very different in a 5v5 and a 5v4 game for example. WvW is very rarely 5v5.

Edited September 10, 2021 by subversiontwo.7501

[Exzen.2976]

5 minutes ago, Psycoprophet.8107 said:

Really cuz I kill thieves all the time in wvw with three buttons on both me slb and rev. Sic em, knock back and rapid fire.....dead. rev reveal sw5,sw4 and sw1 and sword 3 when they run. I also use to wreck them often on core guard and dh when I played guard alot. Only class I've had issues with thief on was warrior due to their blinds but I still managed to down a significant percentage of thieves trying to pick me off in wvw thanks to magebane and proper awareness and knowledge of the thief class. I see a black powder near u cleave in it,  so many times I've cleaved or aec divider inside the black powder ring to find the thief appear in downstate. If u cleave the black powder ring chances are thief either has 3 secs to burst or will be forced to use blinding powder or a port.

All u thief complainers need to ask useless this, why is their a large majority of us players who can deal with thieves to the point we don't view them as problems yet u guys can't seem to....... and before u guys say we'll its not that I can't deal with them because I actually can it just their mechanics are broken, well if they are intact broken u nor anyone could deal with them, instead it's more likely stealth is not broken given the the things with in the game to deal with the mechanic but instead a very annoying mechanic to deal with which is teefs MO.

I am talking about good Thieves abusing permastealth. And while you have and I have both killed plenty of thieves - a skilled permastealth thief shouldn't really be killed by a sic em rapid fire combo and certainly not by a power rev. Just because some players aren't as skilled doesn't make the mechanic less overpowered. Also, you have chosen 4 classes there in your argument that have reveals. Not all classes do. This is also part of the argument. It's not balanced. 

[shrew.3059]

1 minute ago, Exzen.2976 said:

1. Yes escaping is not a "win". It is also not a "draw" either. A good thief can essentially be unkillable if they play it correctly.

 

2. Yes and no. Capitalising on a mistake is important. But having to rely on a mistake doesn't mean you also have the opportunity to outplay them. You can outplay someone without them making a mistake. You can't outplay a permastealth thief. They have to make a mistake for you to kill them.

 

3. No, but it is heavily and unfairly stacked in their favour if they are a permastealth thief due to a overpowered mechanic. I am not talking about Thief in general, just the permastealth builds. Sw/D thief is fine imo.

 

We probably all do. Anyway, I respect you for having a reasonable debate without the need to throw petty insults. I don't agree with your points but I expect that is mutual. 

 

1. Definitely. But the reason I call it a draw is because being unkillable is not a meaningful goal if you cannot kill in return or control territory.

 

2. I slightly disagree on this point. For me, outplaying isn’t just waiting for a mistake, it’s also baiting mistakes, it’s about forcing your opponent into tactical corners where you control all the exit points. It’s about knowing when and how to withdraw, and which fights are winnable given your build and your opponent’s build. Assuming players of equal skill and zero mistakes, it will probably come down to the nuances of build (which itself is a type of skill), but that’s rare. Can a Thief recover from a mistake more easily than some professions? Yes, and less well than others. Some builds are going to be weaker to a perfectly played Thief, but that’s how it be.

 

3. Perhaps our disagreement is more about whether or not a profession should be allowed to be permanently stealthed, and less about what the effects of that are practically. I think the effects are minimal, but I could also see permastealth being pushed to a higher skill cap than it is currently which woukd make it less accessible to low skilled players and something high skill players would really have to work for. This would create more opportunities for mistakes (and counterplay) but preserve the reward for skilled play.

 

While I disagree with you currently, I’m still here because I’m hoping to have my mind potentially changed. Since it’s unlikely ANet cares what we think, the only upside of these discussions are learning more about the game!

[Exzen.2976]

1 minute ago, shrew.3059 said:

While I disagree with you currently, I’m still here because I’m hoping to have my mind potentially changed. Since it’s unlikely ANet cares what we think, the only upside of these discussions are learning more about the game

Are you EU or NA? Perhaps at some point we will meet in game - it is easier to show sometimes rather than explain in words

[shrew.3059]

21 minutes ago, subversiontwo.7501 said:

I kind of drifted off from this thread yesterday because I can't keep up with all the posts you guys are making, but I have read up on most of them. I think you had a handful of posts that were good but now you're not really arguing from a place of honesty anymore.

Uptimes:

What evidence are you looking for relating to which argument? That stealth can be maintained to an incredibly high uptime? I think that is commonly accepted among all of us. It is easily demonstrable by just demonstrating black powder and heartseeker stealth uptimes relative initiative pool and regeneration. It isn't really a point of contention. Instead the discussion directs over to whether that has any value in and of itself - or - the discussion gets directed into why Thief has stealth and what it doesn't have.

Comparative uptimes:

However, it is a fair remark to bring up that whatever else it gets compared to does not have those uptimes. I don't think that is a point of contention either, is it? If Warriors could block as much as Thieves stealth they would be incredibly powerful and Warrior block uptimes have been nerfed still. Clearly, things can be nerfed. Even weaker yet powerful things like boons rarely have those uptimes. For example, one thing that makes BoonBeast powerful is that its protection levels can hit similar uptimes and its mechanics at least in part similarily circumvents ripping counterplay. However, that is also an outlier and it isn't even as strong, yet I wouldn't die on a hill (as you put it) to preserve that trait as a crutch if it became a larger balance issue. That build also devotes an entire statline into that beyond the traits. In fact, that is a common theme important here that other classes have far more trade-offs. Stealth has been allowed to be traited to some sort of one-all solution to problems and that is why we have this positive feedback loop of initiative bonus -> stealth -> mobility on so many Thief builds. That sits ontop of a resource system (initiative) that is superior, traited more and I think that is not a point of contention either. I can explain if needed.

Supplies:

Something similar can be said for the supply-discussion. That we even have anti-thief siege and upgrades in this game is an admittance from the developer that they have not balanced these things properly. We don't have anti-block siege or whatever else. It's not really a point of contention. I think we all agree on it, yet discussion directs into that it exists and whether we should have it or whether it is good in a larger balance perspective gets ignored.

One level up - Engagement:

That is the larger discussion that stealth fits into - escapeability and engagement control - the same pattern repeats itself there. I don't think that there is an actual point of contention here. Again, it is more so that it directs into discussions where people argue whether that has any value of its own, how that impacts the mode, whether small scale is a mode of its own and so forth. However, like has been brought up a couple times now, that is mostly misdirection or dishonest argumentation, ie., arguing that large scale dominates when oneself mostly engages in small scale - arguing that being overpowered in small scale should be a compensation for (possibly) being underpowered in large scale and so on. That's not honest, that's wanting to keep ones cake for the things one prefer to do. There are also people like me comming in here, pointing out that any such balance on a more global level is poor balance because it is harder to maintain and harder to get right.

One more level up - Environment:

That's how we end up at your last comment. Obviously if something is too good at small scale it should be addressed the same way as if something is too good at large scale. It's not honest trying to supplant a discussion of too good with good. I don't think that is a point of contention either. I think we agree that Thieves should be good at stealth (or mobility). Where we disagree is how good or to what balance. There are clearly differences between volumes of 25% and 250%. Things commonly agreed upon to be balance issues at large scale has been adressed. Those classes and/or mechanics did get nerfed, over and over. The only things that muddles that discussion is that people have a tendency to simplify or even misdirect here too. That larger scale may be more important or engages more players does not make small scale unimportant. People use 1v1 as a substitute for small scale or for roaming. That's simplification that omits a large portion of the balance. Other people bring up sPvP and that is misdirection in a thread about WvW. In sPvP many things about the Thief is balanced by the nature of sPvP design, rules, maps, objectives and gameplay. A +1 role is very different in a 5v5 and a 5v4 game for example. WvW is very rarely 5v5.

 

This is the type of post I was looking for and I’m sorry if I missed it previously. My thoughts, should you want them:

 

Uptimes are not contested by me. It’s easy to maintain permastealth, agreed.

 

Comparing Stealth to Block is perhaps not the best analogy, because Thieves are not invulnerable while Stealthed and that’s not a small difference. Maybe stacking Protection would be the closest comparison, but I don’t have any strong feelings about that in WvW at the moment.

 

Anti-stealth traps in WvW is not and admittance of bad design and despite your other excellent points, this is worth slapping down a little. One cannot ask for counterplay to a mechanic, be given counterplay, and then use that counterplay to argue that clearly there is a problem because that counterplay exists. If anything, that could simply be ANet admitting there are differences between PvE and WvW re: Stealth and these are addressed with the traps, end of story. This doesn’t invalidate the overall point you’re making, but it’s not a good argument!

 

To the charge of intellectual dishonesty, be fair to your interlocutors. They aren’t claiming that it’s okay to be OP in one niche because they aren’t represented in another, they are disputing the claim that Thieves are over-represented in because they are OP, rather as evidence for that being their contribution. They are also rightfully worried that without this role, they’ll have nothing to contribute.

 

But yes, the question is where to balance. But also what to balance first. And this has always been my point: Stealth seems singled out as the most broken mechanic in the game, and yet despite that contention, it has failed to break any of the game modes. This doesn’t mean it should not be readjusted, it’s merely a question of the intention. If the intention is to reduce the amount of Thieves Roaming, this seems like an underhanded motive for the claim. If the intention is to increase the skill cap so Stealth isn’t so easily “abused”, it prompts a better discussion of what this “abuse” entails and what it is breaking in small scale WvW.

 

I can’t speak for others, but my problem is that I don’t really see what the world post-Stealth nerf looks like; whose gameplay is improved, what additional options does this unlock, what content is made richer? If the goal is to just move power around the board to make some players happier and others sadder, this is pointless. If nerfing Stealth open up new opportunities for all players, that’s what I want to hear.

[shrew.3059]

16 minutes ago, Exzen.2976 said:

Are you EU or NA? Perhaps at some point we will meet in game - it is easier to show sometimes rather than explain in words

 

EU. Although I’m unlikely to believe Stealth is overpowered through a demonstration, I’m more likely to think you are really good at Thief. Happy to be proven wrong though (about the first thing).

[Exzen.2976]

8 minutes ago, shrew.3059 said:

 

EU. Although I’m unlikely to believe Stealth is overpowered through a demonstration, I’m more likely to think you are really good at Thief. Happy to be proven wrong though (about the first thing).

Hehe 🙂 I'll look out for you ingame maybe. 

[Dawdler.8521]

I've been lazily reading the last 2 pages now and while most go through one ear and out the other all on my mind is... 

I wonder if stealth being "no issue" line up with downstate being "an issue" for the same thieves?

[DeceiverX.8361]

On 9/7/2021 at 5:47 PM, Exzen.2976 said:

I'll echo Solemn's comments as another ele main - who doesn't play with permanent protection, regeneration, stab, full condition cleanse, only 1 invuln, mara/valk/zerk but I do use projectile hate since its pretty much mandatory for roaming on ele. The lack of reveals on ele definitely hurts.

 

I also find playing thief much easier/more effective and find stealth in general completely op. I have videos of killing people 1vX with just an offhand dagger, no mainhand or second weapon set. Says a lot about the strength of the class that you don't even need stealth attacks or even auto attacks.

 

I don't think anyone (well most people) wants thief to be unplayable, but it would be good if they were fun to fight and balanced. I.e. not having to fight near a tower or sentry/not having to use an item to reveal/using reveal skills (if they are even available to the class, rip ele). I am also aware that other classes have access to stealth - engi can be a problem with grenades etc, but really the main culprit is thief due to the easy access.

 

I also think the reveal from sentries and towers etc is really bad design and should never have been introduced. 

 

I'm not sure blight is the answer, but a full stealth rework would be much healthier for the game - as long as this also involved reworking and balancing classes like thief that rely heavily on stealth. 

The problem here is he's comparing the best/optimal and only really competitive thief build which is indeed justifiably OP depending on the context, to a suboptimal ele build, and you're saying thief is easy based on a collection of hand-picked videos chaining CnD endlessly against what are objectively bad opponents when you do an analysis of the recorded gameplay. 

Anyone winning fights by AA'ing while playing a thief is playing against bad opponents.  Full stop.  Necro dagger AA is better.  Anyone winning fights by endlessly chaining CnD is also playing against bad opponents who don't understand the concept of dodging and burning their feet every 3 seconds. 

The thief has the same problem as most professions where its good builds are relying on something broken and not that hard, while it has less diversity than most other professions, and its other options are among some of the lowest-performing game-wide. 

That's where most of the complaints are derived from - the thief has literally been SA D/P with stints of S/D Acro since launch with the same exact game play pattern, and historically any attempts to build and move away from "engage, stealth, reset, repeat" get pushed into unplayable territory pretty quickly above the skill level of solo zerglings. 

The thief is held back by SA D/P DrD and is why people complain.  But D/P DrD is not the entire embodiment of thief.  It's like complaining core Engi is OP because of Scrapper. 

[Exzen.2976]

24 minutes ago, DeceiverX.8361 said:

The problem here is he's comparing the best/optimal and only really competitive thief build which is indeed justifiably OP depending on the context, to a suboptimal ele build, and you're saying thief is easy based on a collection of hand-picked videos chaining CnD endlessly against what are objectively bad opponents when you do an analysis of the recorded gameplay. 

Anyone winning fights by AA'ing while playing a thief is playing against bad opponents.  Full stop.  Necro dagger AA is better.  Anyone winning fights by endlessly chaining CnD is also playing against bad opponents who don't understand the concept of dodging and burning their feet every 3 seconds. 

The thief has the same problem as most professions where its good builds are relying on something broken and not that hard, while it has less diversity than most other professions, and its other options are among some of the lowest-performing game-wide. 

That's where most of the complaints are derived from - the thief has literally been SA D/P with stints of S/D Acro since launch with the same exact game play pattern, and historically any attempts to build and move away from "engage, stealth, reset, repeat" get pushed into unplayable territory pretty quickly above the skill level of solo zerglings. 

The thief is held back by SA D/P DrD and is why people complain.  But D/P DrD is not the entire embodiment of thief.  It's like complaining core Engi is OP because of Scrapper. 

I agree with you completely. The point of the video is that it is carried so hard by shadow arts and stealth. Not saying they are good players and the build and gameplay are beyond stupid. But you shouldn't be able to win a 1v3 regardless of how bad the players are without a mainhand weapon.

 

Not saying Thief needs a nerf all round. I only have an issue with permastealth, not thief in general, which I have said a few times here. I also don't have an issue with short duration stealth for misdirection and repositioning. It's when it is able to be infinitely or near infinitely stacked it becomes an issue.

 

It would be great to see more diversity on thief at the expense of permastealth.

Edited September 10, 2021 by Exzen.2976

[subversiontwo.7501]

2 hours ago, shrew.3059 said:

Comparing Stealth to Block is perhaps not the best analogy.

Agreed, but keep in mind that it is not me making the comparison, it is me responding to it and outlining why it indeed is a poor comparison. Over years of discussing these issues, it is one of the most common arguments from the side wishing to preserve the status quo (used to shut down the discussion), in this thread and elsewhere.

 

Quote

One cannot ask for counterplay to a mechanic, be given counterplay, and then use that counterplay to argue that clearly there is a problem because that counterplay exists

Possibly not, but one can easily argue that it is poor class balance because siege simply isn't class balance. For me its a purity of purpose thing. It is a band aid, the way that relinking isn't alliances. It is an inferior system. The extension of it is that I recon that it makes it more difficult for the developers to manage overall balance issues. That's how it is bad design.

 

Quote

To the charge of intellectual dishonesty, be fair to your interlocutors. They aren’t claiming that it’s okay to be OP /.../. They are also rightfully worried that without this role, they’ll have nothing to contribute.

This is a point we outright disagree on. They are in threads conserving a highly debatable mechanic and balance. They are not creating constructive threads about improvements elsewhere. How it is used is important. Even in this thread the remarks about large scale are not used constructively by those players. If you rummage through this thread you should see that the constructive remarks for other sides of the Thief mostly comes from me. It suggests that for alot of people posting this isn't even about preserving the class, it is about preserving the balance of specific builds and they are seemingly not playing the other things.

I think that speaks volumes of this thread as well, because if I speak to someone and they sharply drop off once the discussion moves from D/P, SA traits, trickery synergy or stacking shadow steps to staves and swords - what am I talking to then? A Thief? or a stealth (ab)user? It's an interesting parallel into the closing about use and abuse. It also suggests why these topics often attracts so much spite if players hinge their entire existance on the specific mechanics under fire; not their class or the health of their content of choice.

 

Quote

 

If the intention is to reduce the amount of Thieves Roaming, this seems like an underhanded motive for the claim. If the intention is to increase the skill cap so Stealth isn’t so easily “abused”, it prompts a better discussion of what this “abuse” entails and what it is breaking in small scale WvW.

 

I can’t speak for others, but my problem is that I don’t really see what the world post-Stealth nerf looks like; whose gameplay is improved, what additional options does this unlock, what content is made richer? If the goal is to just move power around the board to make some players happier and others sadder, this is pointless. If nerfing Stealth open up new opportunities for all players, that’s what I want to hear.

 

I smashed together your last two paragraphs here because I think they help each other answer the question.

The issue isn't primarily that Thieves are becomming overrepresented in smaller scale gameplay (even if vast overrepresentation is inherently bad), the issue is why. What impact does the engagement balance have? Well, it quite frankly makes other people stop trying and stop playing. The most important thing is having a target pool. If the balance suggests that it is a poor idea attempting to catch a Thief then people will stop.

Quote

 

[!] I'll qoute myself here to get the expand button, because I can't seem to /spoiler this tangent

Perhaps a bit of a lefthanded example, but I've made similar remarks for large scale balance between range and melee in the past or why the EotM map is a bad map. I dislike a range-leaning meta because it translates into less content (mediated through defensive behaviours or where risk is not aptly rewarded) and more exclusive content (range have roles in melee metas, not mirrored the other way around). If a smaller scale meta is dominated by invisibility in setups, avoidance and escapability resulting in less overall aggression and kills it ultimately leads to less overall content and fewer players attempting to create it. For example, Thief-Thief combat can be fun with agressive players having the tools to counter themselves but can also be incredibly boring with no one taking the initiative.

In fact, the post-february balance having some balance issues with condition builds have been a bit of a blessing in disguise because those builds can often stalemate power Thieves (not entering into the condi Thief discussion) and with that trades better into the balance than a wholly power-dominated meta. However, it is still boring stalemates that make people quit or try less and it is also a question of two wrongs not making a right. There are indeed more outliers than just Thief even in just small scale. However, none of it has much of a positive impact. However this thread is about stealth and its context, not about immobilisation and its context or the balance of other specifics like Renegade shortbow skills or Necro shroud management.

 

It also provides specific tools with which to troll, bully or abuse other players. Some of it somewhat benign but still an issue (eg., having a midtier of players balanced to excel at targeting beginners; Holorifle Engineers got nerfed for this specific reason, LB2 Rangers could possibly be or have already been but there is still a fair ground for discussion on it and serveral aforementioned condi builds could be given the same treatment).

Some of it outright malign (eg., having multiple players, provided these tools, specifically targeting players of some reputation or just making "ganking" [or kicking down overall] far too profilerific at the expense of more equal situations or punching up). This is where things may become a bit anecdotal because things like stealth and mobility can be (and is) used to punch up. However, if it becomes too powerful and easy to do you are not really punching up anymore as that is meant to be somewhat challenging. Outnumbering opponents shouldn't be a sure win but it should be a factor for healthy content balance. At least in my oppinion though I guess that is debatable.

Whether something caters more or less to use or abuse is an important and interesting discussion overall. If you balance or design gameplay content that should be a tenet governing your decisions. It's another example of the relationship between what players do and what players can do.

Edited September 10, 2021 by subversiontwo.7501