Stealth needs to be reduced in effectiveness

[Azure The Heartless.3261]

Me reading this thread knowing full well they won't rework stealth and not getting in any arguments because I learned my lesson

 

[Solo.6873]

Anet: Whats wrong now guys?

Forums: Stealth is a little too strong, can you nerf durations?

Anet: Sure thing bud, we value you, as a player 😄

Anet: " All skills that apply reveal now have an increased cooldown to 60s  and apply self stun for 4 seconds."

Anet: See....We appreciate you.. You're welcome..

[Malus.2184]

22 hours ago, bq pd.2148 said:

so what? the tricks still dont make stealth more overpowered in wvw than it is pvp.

You really need to actually read what I write rather than what you think I write, so I'll repeat it in caps. IN WvW ZERGS STEALTH IS DECIDEDLY UNDERPOWERED AS THE THIEF JUST GETS BLOWN UP INSTANTLY WITH ALL THE AoE FLYING AROUND THAT STEALTH OFFERS NO PROTECTION AGAINST.

[bq pd.2148]

On 7/19/2024 at 3:26 PM, Malus.2184 said:

You really need to actually read what I write rather than what you think I write, so I'll repeat it in caps. IN WvW ZERGS STEALTH IS DECIDEDLY UNDERPOWERED AS THE THIEF JUST GETS BLOWN UP INSTANTLY WITH ALL THE AoE FLYING AROUND THAT STEALTH OFFERS NO PROTECTION AGAINST.

this has nothing to do with the chain of quotes you have replied to. now i am certain that you are just a troll.

[Malus.2184]

1 hour ago, bq pd.2148 said:

this has nothing to do with the chain of quotes you have replied to. now i am certain that you are just a troll.

It was my opening statement. You are the one who's been trying to argue for something else. For what reason should I answer something in context to your ramblings when your ramblings had no context to my original post?

Will you argue that Stealth is universally useful?

[ArcanistSeven.8720]

On 7/19/2024 at 6:26 AM, Malus.2184 said:

You really need to actually read what I write rather than what you think I write, so I'll repeat it in caps. IN WvW ZERGS STEALTH IS DECIDEDLY UNDERPOWERED AS THE THIEF JUST GETS BLOWN UP INSTANTLY WITH ALL THE AoE FLYING AROUND THAT STEALTH OFFERS NO PROTECTION AGAINST.

lol who tf is taking thief for zerg stealth it sucks? just take an engi with stealth gyro for mobile stealth or mesmer for mass invis because its WAY faster than thief group stealth application and you dont risk revealing yourself. hell ranger smokescale can make a smoke field and just have the zerg blast it. there is no reason to take a thief into a zerg other than to give the enemy a free loot bag.

Edited August 15 by ArcanistSeven.8720

[Malus.2184]

21 hours ago, ArcanistSeven.8720 said:

lol who tf is taking thief for zerg stealth it sucks? just take an engi with stealth gyro for mobile stealth or mesmer for mass invis because its WAY faster than thief group stealth application and you dont risk revealing yourself. hell ranger smokescale can make a smoke field and just have the zerg blast it. there is no reason to take a thief into a zerg other than to give the enemy a free loot bag.

I know. That's the reason I say it's simultaneously overpowered and underpowered.

[kash.9213]

On 8/15/2024 at 4:47 AM, ArcanistSeven.8720 said:

lol who tf is taking thief for zerg stealth it sucks? just take an engi with stealth gyro for mobile stealth or mesmer for mass invis because its WAY faster than thief group stealth application and you dont risk revealing yourself. hell ranger smokescale can make a smoke field and just have the zerg blast it. there is no reason to take a thief into a zerg other than to give the enemy a free loot bag.

I spend a lot of time in blobs covering and healing. Some templates are great in zergs. I agree though, I wouldn't rely on thief for group stealth upkeep. I hardly even stealth for Barrier and protection anymore since I get clutch protection from other sources more consistently. There's stuff you can get from group stealth but heals, barrier, speed, and whatever else isn't a great return for how hard it can hit the budgeting on your resource pools and other classes are more ready and proficient with group stealth for masking map movement. 

[Lithril Ashwalker.6230]

I can deal with reduced stealth uptime if: revealed is removed in exchange for allowing only 1 stealth skill activation leaving no room for a miss, removing aura stacking and all distortion stacking, invulnerable stacking. If they remain they last as long as the longest stealth

[Malus.2184]

4 hours ago, Lithril Ashwalker.6230 said:

I can deal with reduced stealth uptime if: revealed is removed in exchange for allowing only 1 stealth skill activation leaving no room for a miss, removing aura stacking and all distortion stacking, invulnerable stacking. If they remain they last as long as the longest stealth

Context, while annoying they ALL have a far longer CD than being able to use an ability that grants you Stealth.

[Jugglemonkey.8741]

On 7/16/2024 at 8:36 PM, Malus.2184 said:

Separate matches, a Thief in each, both managed to remain 100% Stealthed except when they were attacked, since a lot of my skills require a target then they're effectively immune to those skills. As for attacking the void with weapon skills that's a bad solution.

They're not immune if you use the skill queue effectively, especially with projectiles. I can reliably land recalled axes on a thief after they've stealthed and that requires a target too, so if you think about your kit you should be able to find something that functions similarly that can punish thieves after they've stealthed. 

On 7/16/2024 at 8:36 PM, Malus.2184 said:

Stealth should have a Grace Period that counted from when the Stealth was exited and the duration of this Grace Period should be dependent on the skill's Stealth duration rather than time spent in Stealth. During the Grave period, a player is unable to enter Stealth. They can still get everything else from the skill or trait save for the Stealth effect.

No one should be able to be effectively unattackable for 100% of the time you fight them since that's a severely unentertaining fight for those on the receiving end.

Stealth already does have a grace period, it's called revealed. The thief cannot stealth for 3s after attacking from stealth. A thief that is in 100% stealth by definition is not fighting you.

On 7/16/2024 at 8:36 PM, Malus.2184 said:

Personally, I plan to do the PvP needed for the Bonus event completion and then wait until the next PvP Rush to go into PvP again.

You can increase the rewards all you want and that'll change nothing about the fact that people will only reluctantly do things they dislike and everyone dislikes being a punching bag without having any means to fight back. Stealth Detection is in availability too limited in this game and mechanically too effective to be readily available since it completely shuts down the stealth haver.

For their loss of Stealth Thieves should be compensated with more health and more ways to gain things like Protection. That would also make them viable in pvE since Stealth there is of questionable worth while also making them viable for zerg where Stealth is utterly useless with the amount of AoE damage flying around.

Stealth and reveal are by definition rock paper scissors type balancing, you're right to point that out. I don't know how long you have been playing for, but before the addition of deadeye with PoF, the HoT roaming meta for thieves was pretty anti stealth in general. This was due to how oppressive reveal was when combined with "blink and you'll miss it" type power builds that could kill a thief almost instantly, meaning that if you relied on stealth and you got revealed when you didn't expect it, you died. That changed with the release of deadeye since shadow meld used to cleanse revealed, but my point is that the binary nature of stealth cuts both ways and not necessarily in the thief's favour. 

I'd have no issues with stealth being reduced across the board if 1) some of the nerfs to evade uptime brought in after HoT were reverted, giving thief stronger bruiser playstyles that don't rely on stealth, and 2) reveal effects were either shortened in duration or changed to the marked effect that WvW sentries use: If you enter stealth for 2s you get revealed for a substantial duration. That gives some measure of counterplay for the thief in what is currently a rock paper scissors type deal while also providing value for the opponent by forcing the thief to play more aggressively than they'd maybe like to. 

Edited August 19 by Jugglemonkey.8741

[Malus.2184]

22 hours ago, Jugglemonkey.8741 said:

They're not immune if you use the skill queue effectively, especially with projectiles. I can reliably land recalled axes on a thief after they've stealthed and that requires a target too, so if you think about your kit you should be able to find something that functions similarly that can punish thieves after they've stealthed. 

Stealth already does have a grace period, it's called revealed. The thief cannot stealth for 3s after attacking from stealth. A thief that is in 100% stealth by definition is not fighting you.

Stealth and reveal are by definition rock paper scissors type balancing, you're right to point that out. I don't know how long you have been playing for, but before the addition of deadeye with PoF, the HoT roaming meta for thieves was pretty anti stealth in general. This was due to how oppressive reveal was when combined with "blink and you'll miss it" type power builds that could kill a thief almost instantly, meaning that if you relied on stealth and you got revealed when you didn't expect it, you died. That changed with the release of deadeye since shadow meld used to cleanse revealed, but my point is that the binary nature of stealth cuts both ways and not necessarily in the thief's favour. 

I'd have no issues with stealth being reduced across the board if 1) some of the nerfs to evade uptime brought in after HoT were reverted, giving thief stronger bruiser playstyles that don't rely on stealth, and 2) reveal effects were either shortened in duration or changed to the marked effect that WvW sentries use: If you enter stealth for 2s you get revealed for a substantial duration. That gives some measure of counterplay for the thief in what is currently a rock paper scissors type deal while also providing value for the opponent by forcing the thief to play more aggressively than they'd maybe like to. 

The kit I have requires targets to work, so no.

As for your second argument, I'm stupefied that you never bothered to read any of  my other posts and just emotionally reacted to this one /s
I already covered this. They just need to wait until the stealth goes off, then attack in the same moment and then they can go right into Stealth again. Anyone with enough Stealth abilities can do this. If you regularly fight Stealth users who reveal themselves as well then your "git gud" screed should be aimed at them. My issue has nothing to do with low-end stealth users. My issue is with middling stealth-used since stealth at high-end play is fairly useless due to the coordination and the fact that if you look at Thieves the wrong way they explode with the pitiful amount of HP they have.

This should tell you something. Namely, that's it's too good in lower play and acts like a gatekeeper ability to be able to get to higher play where you seldom see stealth users, and if you do they tend to be Specters if non-ranger because Specter can survive getting looked at without having to resort to Stealth. Stealth needs to be changed to be just overall worse and Thieves who rely heavily on Stealth out of all the Classes need to be compensated in some way to be able to have the protection without Stealth.

[kash.9213]

22 minutes ago, Malus.2184 said:

The kit I have requires targets to work, so no.

As for your second argument, I'm stupefied that you never bothered to read any of  my other posts and just emotionally reacted to this one /s
I already covered this. They just need to wait until the stealth goes off, then attack in the same moment and then they can go right into Stealth again. Anyone with enough Stealth abilities can do this. If you regularly fight Stealth users who reveal themselves as well then your "git gud" screed should be aimed at them. My issue has nothing to do with low-end stealth users. My issue is with middling stealth-used since stealth at high-end play is fairly useless due to the coordination and the fact that if you look at Thieves the wrong way they explode with the pitiful amount of HP they have.

This should tell you something. Namely, that's it's too good in lower play and acts like a gatekeeper ability to be able to get to higher play where you seldom see stealth users, and if you do they tend to be Specters if non-ranger because Specter can survive getting looked at without having to resort to Stealth. Stealth needs to be changed to be just overall worse and Thieves who rely heavily on Stealth out of all the Classes need to be compensated in some way to be able to have the protection without Stealth.

I don't think Stealth needs to be changed to be overall worse, it just needs to be more specialized. It should be a heavier decision to use your resource pools to set up an approach for a strong or even dominating opening sequence or to mask direction during map travel. But then Anet needs to refrain from making Stealth attacks worse and improve some of them considerably. 

If they keep stealth kind of frequently accessed, then there should be an opacity filtering visual reveal on the Stealthed character that scales per proximity to enemies with maybe a second or two of residual in and out delay.

Another option is to just leave it alone mostly but adjust a few problem builds or combos because stealth in this game is pretty reasonable, considering the steps and resources it takes, and compared to other games. 

[Jugglemonkey.8741]

2 hours ago, Malus.2184 said:

The kit I have requires targets to work, so no.

My axes also require a target. That's my point, there's ways to work around it if you know your kit, as attacks that require a target can still hit a target in stealth as long as they were not in stealth when you pressed the button. That's where the skill queue is useful.

2 hours ago, Malus.2184 said:

As for your second argument, I'm stupefied that you never bothered to read any of  my other posts and just emotionally reacted to this one /s
I already covered this. They just need to wait until the stealth goes off, then attack in the same moment and then they can go right into Stealth again. Anyone with enough Stealth abilities can do this. If you regularly fight Stealth users who reveal themselves as well then your "git gud" screed should be aimed at them. My issue has nothing to do with low-end stealth users. My issue is with middling stealth-used since stealth at high-end play is fairly useless due to the coordination and the fact that if you look at Thieves the wrong way they explode with the pitiful amount of HP they have.

I don't know what was emotional about my post, but sure lol.

My point still stands though, a thief that is in 100% stealth is not fighting you. If the thief is restealthing with the same attack they are chipping you down with, or attacking at the end of stealth then immediately restealthing, they can be countered by counting one, two, then dodging. If they do anything else they will either be revealed or lose stealth naturally, and that gives you your window to attack. Try playing thief and learning how long they can stealth for with each build, that should give you a sense of when they are vulnerable. 

2 hours ago, Malus.2184 said:

This should tell you something. Namely, that's it's too good in lower play and acts like a gatekeeper ability to be able to get to higher play where you seldom see stealth users, and if you do they tend to be Specters if non-ranger because Specter can survive getting looked at without having to resort to Stealth. Stealth needs to be changed to be just overall worse and Thieves who rely heavily on Stealth out of all the Classes need to be compensated in some way to be able to have the protection without Stealth.

It's something that you have to learn to counter by altering your play, and not just spamming rotations. That's a good thing imo, and I wish more things in the game worked that way. Also, not quite sure where you're getting the lower play thing from since most competent thief players I see streaming on twitch are playing deadeye right now. But okay. 

[Lithril Ashwalker.6230]

1 hour ago, Jugglemonkey.8741 said:

My axes also require a target. That's my point, there's ways to work around it if you know your kit, as attacks that require a target can still hit a target in stealth as long as they were not in stealth when you pressed the button. That's where the skill queue is useful.

I don't know what was emotional about my post, but sure lol.

My point still stands though, a thief that is in 100% stealth is not fighting you. If the thief is restealthing with the same attack they are chipping you down with, or attacking at the end of stealth then immediately restealthing, they can be countered by counting one, two, then dodging. If they do anything else they will either be revealed or lose stealth naturally, and that gives you your window to attack. Try playing thief and learning how long they can stealth for with each build, that should give you a sense of when they are vulnerable. 

It's something that you have to learn to counter by altering your play, and not just spamming rotations. That's a good thing imo, and I wish more things in the game worked that way. Also, not quite sure where you're getting the lower play thing from since most competent thief players I see streaming on twitch are playing deadeye right now. But okay. 

i still dont get why ranger gets this panthers prowl buff on account of pulsing damage...when we already went down this road on old thief traps that were 1 shot but the runes were nerfed to NOT grant stealth....now thief has preparations that pulse damage and wheres our panther prowl?!

but oh nooo, we get shadow meld nerfed to no longer remove revealed, but we cant really use it against rangers now because despite it now ignoring reveal, they can still hit us with a stealth attack. this is biased asf on anets balance team. unfair

[Malus.2184]

8 hours ago, Jugglemonkey.8741 said:

My point still stands though, a thief that is in 100% stealth is not fighting you. If the thief is restealthing with the same attack they are chipping you down with, or attacking at the end of stealth then immediately restealthing, they can be countered by counting one, two, then dodging. If they do anything else they will either be revealed or lose stealth naturally, and that gives you your window to attack. Try playing thief and learning how long they can stealth for with each build, that should give you a sense of when they are vulnerable. 

1. That's a technically correct argument which is the worst kind of argument as it's a lie by omission since you have to omit the context. In this case, you still count as being in combat so you're still in combat, aka. the fight is on.

2. This is either a straight-up lie or you're truly playing against Thieves that are utterly incompetent. Thieves can hit incredibly hard when they attack out of stealth and if they hit that sweet spot where the game due to latency thinks they're in Stealth while the Stealth has run out the can hit hard and then immediately Stealth.

3. Shame that you in context either need to count that one-two incredibly fast or slow since there's stealth with a duration of more or less than two seconds. If all stealth was two seconds only then stealth would be much less of an issue than it is.

[Malus.2184]

10 hours ago, kash.9213 said:

I don't think Stealth needs to be changed to be overall worse, it just needs to be more specialized. It should be a heavier decision to use your resource pools to set up an approach for a strong or even dominating opening sequence or to mask direction during map travel. But then Anet needs to refrain from making Stealth attacks worse and improve some of them considerably. 

That would solve nothing. It would just make the issue less of a problem and the problem would still persist just in a lessened way. It also solved nothing on the other end as Thieves still would be fragile due to their low Health. They need Stealth to make up for their low pool because if you catch them out of stealth they explode with some focus fire, or in WvW they explode just from being in proximity of zerg AoE.

The issue with stealth is on both ends of the spectrum.

[Jugglemonkey.8741]

  

3 hours ago, Malus.2184 said:

1. That's a technically correct argument which is the worst kind of argument as it's a lie by omission since you have to omit the context. In this case, you still count as being in combat so you're still in combat, aka. the fight is on.

*sigh*

So, ignoring for a moment the fact that defining fighting someone by being in the combat state excludes all context of what the opponent is actually doing (they could be running full tilt to the other side of the map to get away from you and yet still "fighting" you by this definition); I could easily point to your opening statement and say that that is a lie by omission, considering you said this:

On 7/16/2024 at 8:36 PM, Malus.2184 said:

No one should be able to be effectively unattackable for 100% of the time you fight them since that's a severely unentertaining fight for those on the receiving end.

....and then redefined your argument to this.....

3 hours ago, Malus.2184 said:

2. This is either a straight-up lie or you're truly playing against Thieves that are utterly incompetent. Thieves can hit incredibly hard when they attack out of stealth and if they hit that sweet spot where the game due to latency thinks they're in Stealth while the Stealth has run out the can hit hard and then immediately Stealth.

A thief that is attacking out of stealth, or after the stealth has ran out, is by definition leaving stealth in order to attack. This means; 

1. They are predictable in their timings if you know their kit.

2. They are not unattackable 100% of the time, by definition. 

3. They are vulnerable when they attack, meaning things like AoE skills and damage on swap sigils and traits can be timed for maximum effect without needing a target, allowing for targeted skills to be used when the thief is recovering. 

This is to say nothing about the difficulty of the timing required to land your sweet spot attack in the first place when considering latency and player reaction times (backstab has a 0.25 second cast time, tactical strike does not have a listed cast time according to the wiki but is also very fast), the fact you'd need to use steal or shadow shot to ensure a melee hit while staying out of AoE range before the strike (meaning not every melee sneak attack from stealth can operate like this without an obvious tell), and the fact that the most problematic ranged skill for this kind of tactic, death's judgement, already reveals the user on cast, meaning this is a non issue. 

The reason I didn't frame your original argument as a lie by omission is because I'm assuming that you're arguing in good faith, that you are not making intentionally incorrect statements and that we simply disagree. I'd appreciate some reciprocity here. I'm also assuming that you're talking about the sneak attack mechanic exclusively here, because if you're talking about any attack from stealth being too strong then I genuinely don't know what to tell you. 

3 hours ago, Malus.2184 said:

3. Shame that you in context either need to count that one-two incredibly fast or slow since there's stealth with a duration of more or less than two seconds. If all stealth was two seconds only then stealth would be much less of an issue than it is.

Yes, stealth from different sources has different durations. That's why I said you need to play the class, pay attention to what weapons and elite spec the opponent is using and learn what they can and cannot do. So far you have made no mention of what build you're talking about so your argument also lacks that context. 

15 hours ago, Malus.2184 said:

This should tell you something. Namely, that's it's too good in lower play and acts like a gatekeeper ability to be able to get to higher play where you seldom see stealth users, and if you do they tend to be Specters if non-ranger because Specter can survive getting looked at without having to resort to Stealth. Stealth needs to be changed to be just overall worse and Thieves who rely heavily on Stealth out of all the Classes need to be compensated in some way to be able to have the protection without Stealth.

I was nice about this before, but if I'm being blunt: by your own argument, struggling with something that is strong at lower skill levels but useless at higher skill levels is almost a textbook example of a L2P issue. Many classes have builds that are strong in low skill tiers but weak against organised teams, and they don't need changing any more than thief does. 

Your assertion that stealth is useless in higher tiers is also plain wrong, considering deadeye has been meta at high skill levels for some time now. Here's an example of stealth play in the monthly automated tournament from a well known thief streamer: https://www.twitch.tv/videos/2228541176

[kash.9213]

8 hours ago, Malus.2184 said:

That would solve nothing. It would just make the issue less of a problem and the problem would still persist just in a lessened way. It also solved nothing on the other end as Thieves still would be fragile due to their low Health. They need Stealth to make up for their low pool because if you catch them out of stealth they explode with some focus fire, or in WvW they explode just from being in proximity of zerg AoE.

The issue with stealth is on both ends of the spectrum.

I'm not sure where to go from there. What I described is pretty classic stealth mechanics going back further than even GW1. High risk and possible high reward requiring alert and deliberate gameplay and likely methodical preparation seems like it would be an advantage to both players, like many games involving stealth before this one. 

In WvW I use mobility, positioning, and reading body language or ground signs and map pings to protect my Health Pool. Stealth is a compliment to the rest of my mitigation, and it can drop aggro sometimes but I need to be in there landing stuff and I'm going to get tagged still. It is stronger in smaller scale and can be a pain with some builds if someone wants to be a pain, but there's a lot of map to find someone in later from another angle. 

My main templates are for covering or running interception for people and groups in large fights. I do pull focus fire a lot once I'm identified as the one keeping people up or putting stops to the other sides plays. I've had to make build choices for that though regarding my kit and stats. I just don't use stealth a lot where I'm usually at when I log in for a few unless it makes sense in the moment so maybe my take isn't very applicable but that's how I see things from my end. 

[Malus.2184]

2 hours ago, kash.9213 said:

I'm not sure where to go from there. What I described is pretty classic stealth mechanics going back further than even GW1. High risk and possible high reward requiring alert and deliberate gameplay and likely methodical preparation seems like it would be an advantage to both players, like many games involving stealth before this one. 

In WvW I use mobility, positioning, and reading body language or ground signs and map pings to protect my Health Pool. Stealth is a compliment to the rest of my mitigation, and it can drop aggro sometimes but I need to be in there landing stuff and I'm going to get tagged still. It is stronger in smaller scale and can be a pain with some builds if someone wants to be a pain, but there's a lot of map to find someone in later from another angle. 

My main templates are for covering or running interception for people and groups in large fights. I do pull focus fire a lot once I'm identified as the one keeping people up or putting stops to the other sides plays. I've had to make build choices for that though regarding my kit and stats. I just don't use stealth a lot where I'm usually at when I log in for a few unless it makes sense in the moment so maybe my take isn't very applicable but that's how I see things from my end. 

Appeals to tradition are extremely weak arguments. Many things were always done in one way and then suddenly changed. Cars used to have no seatbelts. They never had them until a law forced them to have and, I think pretty much all the car producers were up in arms about it. All electronic, handheld devices had proprietary charging devices, that was just how it always had been until a law made them all have USB-C as standard., etc., etc.

Many things were always one way until they were changed to something a lot better.

[kash.9213]

1 minute ago, Malus.2184 said:

Appeals to tradition are extremely weak arguments. Many things were always done in one way and then suddenly changed. Cars used to have no seatbelts. They never had them until a law forced them to have and, I think pretty much all the car producers were up in arms about it. All electronic, handheld devices had proprietary charging devices, that was just how it always had been until a law made them all have USB-C as standard., etc., etc.

Many things were always one way until they were changed to something a lot better.

I'm not appealing to tradition. I'm talking about time tested mechanics, but I also gave suggestions for updating those mechanics a little. So, now I'm not sure what you're asking for or what you're arguing towards. I hope you find what you're looking for. 

[Malus.2184]

6 hours ago, Jugglemonkey.8741 said:

  

*sigh*

So, ignoring for a moment the fact that defining fighting someone by being in the combat state excludes all context of what the opponent is actually doing (they could be running full tilt to the other side of the map to get away from you and yet still "fighting" you by this definition); I could easily point to your opening statement and say that that is a lie by omission, considering you said this:

....and then redefined your argument to this.....

A thief that is attacking out of stealth, or after the stealth has ran out, is by definition leaving stealth in order to attack. This means; 

1. They are predictable in their timings if you know their kit.

2. They are not unattackable 100% of the time, by definition. 

3. They are vulnerable when they attack, meaning things like AoE skills and damage on swap sigils and traits can be timed for maximum effect without needing a target, allowing for targeted skills to be used when the thief is recovering. 

This is to say nothing about the difficulty of the timing required to land your sweet spot attack in the first place when considering latency and player reaction times (backstab has a 0.25 second cast time, tactical strike does not have a listed cast time according to the wiki but is also very fast), the fact you'd need to use steal or shadow shot to ensure a melee hit while staying out of AoE range before the strike (meaning not every melee sneak attack from stealth can operate like this without an obvious tell), and the fact that the most problematic ranged skill for this kind of tactic, death's judgement, already reveals the user on cast, meaning this is a non issue. 

The reason I didn't frame your original argument as a lie by omission is because I'm assuming that you're arguing in good faith, that you are not making intentionally incorrect statements and that we simply disagree. I'd appreciate some reciprocity here. I'm also assuming that you're talking about the sneak attack mechanic exclusively here, because if you're talking about any attack from stealth being too strong then I genuinely don't know what to tell you. 

Yes, stealth from different sources has different durations. That's why I said you need to play the class, pay attention to what weapons and elite spec the opponent is using and learn what they can and cannot do. So far you have made no mention of what build you're talking about so your argument also lacks that context. 

I was nice about this before, but if I'm being blunt: by your own argument, struggling with something that is strong at lower skill levels but useless at higher skill levels is almost a textbook example of a L2P issue. Many classes have builds that are strong in low skill tiers but weak against organised teams, and they don't need changing any more than thief does. 

Your assertion that stealth is useless in higher tiers is also plain wrong, considering deadeye has been meta at high skill levels for some time now. Here's an example of stealth play in the monthly automated tournament from a well known thief streamer: https://www.twitch.tv/videos/2228541176

You are utterly correct. If I threw a punch at you and missed we would still be fighting, if we were momentarily hiding from each other to catch our breaths we would still be fighting. *Fighting* is a concept rather than a label. *In combat' is a label rather than a concept since we've attached a subcultural meaning to 'combat' as something where all the sides are somewhat evenly matched.

1. Do you know what a meta breaker is? As I said, people with no experience are less of an issue, than people with experience are. They're also 'walls' for new players and they can easily change stuff for the lolz purely because they engage in gatekeeping new players whether it's intentional or accidental.

2. Just because you've been lucky and always drawn players with little to no skill has no impact on me doing the same. Your experience is nowhere near what my experience is.

You were being nice? Do you know what the Juggernaut Engineer build is? That's an objective example of "too good at entry and too bad to ever see high-end play" that has nothing to do with skill or anything like that.

[Malus.2184]

4 minutes ago, kash.9213 said:

I'm not appealing to tradition. I'm talking about time tested mechanics, but I also gave suggestions for updating those mechanics a little. So, now I'm not sure what you're asking for or what you're arguing towards. I hope you find what you're looking for. 

That's literally an appeal to tradition. If I peel everything away that you justify it with I'm left with, "It has always been this way so there's no reason to change it now."

[kash.9213]

1 hour ago, Malus.2184 said:

That's literally an appeal to tradition. If I peel everything away that you justify it with I'm left with, "It has always been this way so there's no reason to change it now."

I feel like at this point you just want the last word regardless of how off the mark you are. So, I'll leave you to it. 

[Malus.2184]

10 hours ago, kash.9213 said:

I feel like at this point you just want the last word regardless of how off the mark you are. So, I'll leave you to it. 

Your argument for "off the mark" was an expression of "It has always been like that way." I seriously wonder if you'd have the same stance about something you could see the flaw in and wanted  changed?