PLEASE stop increasing the initiative cost

[TheDeafGuy.4519]

Anet seems to forget that thieves BASELINE initiative is 12, and they just increased choking gas initiative once again, another reason to pigeonhold thief into baselining trickery. 1 choking gas is now over 50% of our baseline initiative. I understand it's an extremely powerful spell, but please, either remove the unblockable affect, make it so it takes 3 stacks of poison before it triggers again, OR just revert the cost back to 4 inititiative and have it not daze anymore, I really don't care. The initiate cost increase on our abilities ruins the point of the thief class being able to reuse the same weapon abilities without cooldowns creating a unique playstyle based on what skills we want to actively reuse during dueling or team fights. Please. Anet think carefully about this nerf and advise nerfing our skills in different ways rather than just increasing initiative costs

[NorthernRedStar.3054]

They won't stop until thief is a 1-1-1 decap -bot.

[Psycoprophet.8107]

@NorthernRedStar.3054 said:They won't stop until thief is a 1-1-1 decap -bot.

Kinda already is, almost all weapon kits are spam 2 skills and some autos lol.

[Xenji.4907]

I think the high initiative is to prevent spaming thief happening. I would suggest Anet to do next is increase the rate of initiative to regenerate so that way a thief with great timing will be rewarded.

[mrauls.6519]

Remove the CC and make it 4 again

[TheDeafGuy.4519]

@Xenji.4907 said:I think the high initiative is to prevent spamming thief happening. I would suggest Anet to do next is increase the rate of initiative to regenerate so that way a thief with great timing will be rewarded.

I was thinking of something similar too, an increased initiative regen rate may increase the dueling aspect of thief without giving them the ability to spam abilities back to back when they arrive with a full initiative bar to a +1 or team fight. if you don't shortbow 5 everywhere, lmao. But at the current rate of initiative regen, these insanely high costs is going to leave us vulnerable and only able to auto more often on the side, and increasing our baseline initiative is basically just the opposite of increasing our costs. However, a slight increase in our initiative would still give us some power back with the initiative cost nerfs still taking effect if we run out of initiative with our current regen rate, if that makes sense

[Psycoprophet.8107]

@"mrauls.6519" said:Remove the CC and make it 4 again

This^ imagine any thief build not running prepardness trying to use skills that require 6-7 ini. So a thief can spam 2 maybe 3 skills using up all his weapon resources across both weapons before he has to wait for ini to regen. Soon ini will be a handicap vs cd's.

[TheDeafGuy.4519]

@Psycoprophet.8107 said:

@"mrauls.6519" said:Remove the CC and make it 4 again

This^ imagine any thief build not running prepardness trying to use skills that require 6-7 ini. So a thief can spam 2 maybe 3 skills using up all his weapon resources across both weapons before he has to wait for ini to regen. Soon ini will be a handicap vs cd's.

In this case, you literally can't even spam choking gas twice in a row without waiting half a sec and having preparedness.

[Psycoprophet.8107]

@TheDeafGuy.4519 said:

@Psycoprophet.8107 said:

@"mrauls.6519" said:Remove the CC and make it 4 again

This^ imagine any thief build not running prepardness trying to use skills that require 6-7 ini. So a thief can spam 2 maybe 3 skills using up all his weapon resources across both weapons before he has to wait for ini to regen. Soon ini will be a handicap vs cd's.

In this case, you literally can't even spam choking gas twice in a row without waiting half a sec and having preparedness.

No nor can u use choking gas swap weaponset and use any skill requiring 6 ini either without a short duration in between unlike every other class.The team should be looking for ways to keep thief in line while LOWERING Ini cost to alleviate its ridiculous reliance on preparedness thus increasing build diversity and allowing what I'm sure the whole purpose to ini's design was intended to do which would be offord the thief freedom vs cd's.I donno, u guys praise this team but I don't feel much defence as far as quality of changes.

[Kulvar.1239]

Put a damn cooldown on the skill and leave initiative alone ?

[TheDeafGuy.4519]

@Kulvar.1239 said:Put a kitten cooldown on the skill and leave initiative alone ?

Like 100% serious when I say this, I'd rather have the skill go on a 15 second cooldown, but let me save my 7 initiative

[Psycoprophet.8107]

@TheDeafGuy.4519 said:

@Kulvar.1239 said:Put a kitten cooldown on the skill and leave initiative alone ?

Like 100% serious when I say this, I'd rather have the skill go on a 15 second cooldown, but let me save my 7 initiative

Honestly I'd rather at this point just go with CD on all skills but have synergy like ranger gs where some skills lower others if they hit.

[Eugchriss.2046]

I made a thread 6 months ago about thief initiative in which I suggest the idea of "the more you spamm the more it cost" concept. Then the thief police came and shut me down. Now here we are.Enjoy!

[UNOwen.7132]

@"Eugchriss.2046" said:I made a thread 6 months ago about thief initiative in which I suggest the idea of "the more you spamm the more it cost" concept. Then the thief police came and shut me down. Now here we are.Enjoy!

Because it was a terrible idea? The fact that they went for another terrible idea doesnt change that fact (And your idea is still a lot worse).

[TheDeafGuy.4519]

@"Eugchriss.2046" said:I made a thread 6 months ago about thief initiative in which I suggest the idea of "the more you spamm the more it cost" concept. Then the thief police came and shut me down. Now here we are.Enjoy!

Its still a terrible idea, what spammy abilities are putting you in your grave? Just wondering

I also do want to say, some initiative cost increase is fine, but every time you increase initiative you're not really addressing the problem of its spammability significantly with its first set of nerfs already in place, so you're not really decreasing the spamability all that much with the second pair of initiative nerfs.for example theoretically, if heartstreeker cost 1 initiative and we have a baseline initiative of 15 WITH TRICKERY, you can spam it more than 15 times in a row accounting regen. But lets take regen out of the equation too, and use

Heartseeker with 1 initiative = 15 spam attacksHeartseeker with 2 initiative = 7 spam attacksHeartseeker with 3 initiative = 5 spam attacksHeart seeker with 4 initiative = 3 spam attacksHeart seeker with 5 initiative = 3 Spam attacks

As you can see, the spamability decreases significantly after the first initiative cost, so the spamabilitiy isn't the problem, once we reach an okay level of spamability which I honestly feel like we achieved with the 6 initiative, it hurt but was a powerful ability, so it was understandable from a different perspective. However, increasing it to 7 initiative doesn't really reduce its "spamability" of the ability, if i wanted to spam it, all it did was have to make me wait 0.5 - 1 second more between each cast from its old "spamability" lets be real, this abilitiy already wasn't spammable with 6 initiative, you get 2 off then have to wait and can get another off, with full initiative and preparedness, which isn't realistic if the thief is roaming.

In conclusion, you didn't really reduce the spamability all that much with an ability that already has a high initiative cost, all you did was nerf thief in general by taking away initiative from other resources it could be using it with, at this point, I don't even want to use choking gas, unless I really think it would be useful given the situation, as it just removes 7 initiative from my bar for a POSSIBLY USEFUL aoe unblockable DAZE.

[Eugchriss.2046]

@UNOwen.7132 said:

@"Eugchriss.2046" said:I made a thread 6 months ago about thief initiative in which I suggest the idea of "the more you spamm the more it cost" concept. Then the thief police came and shut me down. Now here we are.Enjoy!

Because it was a terrible idea? The fact that they went for another terrible idea doesnt change that fact (And your idea is still a lot worse).Maybe because it s my idea, but I really don t find it terrible, like not really. The only terrible thing is that it would have created a huge gap between good thieves and bad thieves. It would automatically balance spamming, because it s a risk/reward like idea.Since Both idea are terrible, what do you suggest then to avoid having thief spamming skills? (and don t tell me buff the others skills set)

[Raider.4283]

What was the reasoning behind the change? You could only use it twice anyway with full initiative, so the third timd take a bit longer?

Trickery is a must for every build already.

Pointless change for the sake of balance.

[UNOwen.7132]

@Eugchriss.2046 said:

@UNOwen.7132 said:

@Eugchriss.2046 said:I made a thread 6 months ago about thief initiative in which I suggest the idea of "the more you spamm the more it cost" concept. Then the thief police came and shut me down. Now here we are.Enjoy!

Because it was a terrible idea? The fact that they went for another terrible idea doesnt change that fact (And your idea is still a lot worse).Maybe because it s my idea, but I really don t find it terrible, like not really. The only terrible thing is that it would have created a huge gap between good thieves and bad thieves. It would automatically balance spamming, because it s a risk/reward like idea.Since Both idea are terrible, what do you suggest then to avoid having thief spamming skills? (and don t tell me buff the others skills set)

It is because its your idea. It is really terrible. It wouldnt have created a gap at all. The part youre missing is that thief doesnt "spam". Using the same ability several times isnt "spamming", thats the point of the initiative system. Thieves already dont "spam" skills. There is no problem to fix.

[TheDeafGuy.4519]

@Eugchriss.2046 said:

@UNOwen.7132 said:

@Eugchriss.2046 said:I made a thread 6 months ago about thief initiative in which I suggest the idea of "the more you spamm the more it cost" concept. Then the thief police came and shut me down. Now here we are.Enjoy!

Because it was a terrible idea? The fact that they went for another terrible idea doesnt change that fact (And your idea is still a lot worse).Maybe because it s my idea, but I really don t find it terrible, like not really. The only terrible thing is that it would have created a huge gap between good thieves and bad thieves. It would automatically balance spamming, because it s a risk/reward like idea.Since Both idea are terrible, what do you suggest then to avoid having thief spamming skills? (and don t tell me buff the others skills set)

Because of whats the point of punishing a thief for using spam able abilities, it's literally the reason the class exists. Its like saying revenants cant spam their utility skills in risk of having a higher energy cost on the second time they use it. Now, I understand revenants already have high energy costs and can't really spam the same utility skill twice, plus they have upkeeped mixed in too and cooldown form herald, so not really a valid comparison, but what about banish enchantment, what if you wanted to cast that twice in a row? So with this setup, you're saying a thief can blackpowder outside of a fight, but should be punished for spamming leap finishers in his blackpowder to stealth up? Even though hes using up more than half of his resource bar in doing so already.

[Stand The Wall.6987]

yeah this is a ridiculous trend, and i'm a known teef hater.

[Tao.5096]

Thank you for such a wonderful change.

Now we need Infiltrator's Arrow to use 10 initiative.It's too OP.

thanks.

[LucianTheAngelic.7054]

@"TheDeafGuy.4519" said:

I made a thread 6 months ago about thief initiative in which I suggest the idea of "the more you spamm the more it cost" concept. Then the thief police came and shut me down. Now here we are.Enjoy!

Its still a terrible idea, what spammy abilities are putting you in your grave? Just wondering

I also do want to say, some initiative cost increase is fine, but every time you increase initiative you're not really addressing the problem of its spammability significantly with its first set of nerfs already in place, so you're not really decreasing the spamability all that much with the second pair of initiative nerfs.for example theoretically, if heartstreeker cost 1 initiative and we have a baseline initiative of 15 WITH TRICKERY, you can spam it more than 15 times in a row accounting regen. But lets take regen out of the equation too, and use

Heartseeker with 1 initiative = 15 spam attacksHeartseeker with 2 initiative = 7 spam attacksHeartseeker with 3 initiative = 5 spam attacksHeart seeker with 4 initiative = 3 spam attacksHeart seeker with 5 initiative = 3 Spam attacks

As you can see, the spamability decreases significantly after the first initiative cost, so the spamabilitiy isn't the problem, once we reach an okay level of spamability which I honestly feel like we achieved with the 6 initiative, it hurt but was a powerful ability, so it was understandable from a different perspective. However, increasing it to 7 initiative doesn't really reduce its "spamability" of the ability, if i wanted to spam it, all it did was have to make me wait 0.5 - 1 second more between each cast from its old "spamability" lets be real, this abilitiy already wasn't spammable with 6 initiative, you get 2 off then have to wait and can get another off, with full initiative and preparedness, which isn't realistic if the thief is roaming.

In conclusion, you didn't really reduce the spamability all that much with an ability that already has a high initiative cost, all you did was nerf thief in general by taking away initiative from other resources it could be using it with, at this point, I don't even want to use choking gas, unless I really think it would be useful given the situation, as it just removes 7 initiative from my bar for a POSSIBLY USEFUL aoe unblockable DAZE.

This is great analysis.

Honestly remove the CC and return it to 4 Ini at this point, or reduce the daze duration to .25s or .5s and bring it to 5 or 6.

[Eugchriss.2046]

@UNOwen.7132 @"TheDeafGuy.4519"Well, "using the same ability several time" is indeed not spamming but using the same ability several time in a row IS spamming. And right there is the strength of my idea: if you were already not spamming it would have 0, quedal, net, nada impact on you. It s impact increases with your spamming rate.And no, the point of the initiative system is not spamming. That s YOUR INTERPRETATION. If that was the case, they would have implemented an initiative system per skill (kind of ammo-system we have now). Even worse, thief would have had only 1 skill per weapon to make that goal easier to achieve.The point of initiative system is to allow the user, as long as he has the resources, to use whatever weapon skill he wants, in whatever order he wants, whenever he feels appropriate to do so. That includes using the same skill again and again. Although the initiative system allows that, using the same skill over and over is (one of) the flaw(s) of that system.The fact that anet decides to increase initiative cost prooves what I am saying: spamming is not what was in the mind of the people who designed the initiative system.

What amaze me the most is that you guys find my idea stupid whilst I think that it has 0 downsides and only comes with advantages like:

1. since the initiative is meant to grow, the base initiative cost will necessarily be low
2. if you were already not spamming you fully benefit 1.
3. if you were a spammer then you will half benefit 1.
4. It will improve the risk/reward decision. "Is it the right window to spam heartseeker?" If it is, well gg. If it s not you just "wasted" 2-3 additional initiatives because of a bad decision.

Anyway, I am done and I don t really care about thief actually. It was just an idea which crossed my mind on how to nerf a behaviour without nerfing the class. But some of you think the behaviour is actually part of the class. Good luck with that.

[Psycoprophet.8107]

It's pretty silly that on base line ini if u use gas and swap immediately to 2nd melee weapon any skills that are 6 ini put u over ur max ini so in some circumstances because anets bandaid fixes u cant even use 2 skills immediately after another cuz to high of costs unless u wait a couple secs in between for in regen. That's ridiculous. In general using lower ini skills with a skill that's high ini anets u 2 or three consecutive attacks which is still bad.

[lare.5129]

TIP: try play by used skills not by keyborad, but by selecting by mouse from panel. It wll give visions that energy is enough.