Stealth removed on missed attacks/reflects

[Gotejjeken.1267]

On 7/15/2021 at 3:18 PM, Obtena.7952 said:

Maybe ... that is yet to be determined. I mean, you say it like a fact with no explanation or care for why the status quo exists. How do you think THAT conversation is going to go?

 

It's like arguing with a circle...

 

I think what we've come to discover over the nearly nine years of game existence is that stealth is poorly implemented.  You may disagree with this under 'intended design' but sometimes 'intended design' turns out to be problematic (see: cars prior to when safety belts were required).  

 

It's not even like breaking stealth on a miss is unfair, it's basic logic.  If I sneak up behind you and start whiffing a knife I think you are going to turn around and ask wtf I'm doing.  This applies everywhere in life...ever heard of 'one shot one kill'? It's because you only get one shot as a sniper and you're revealed.  

 

What would be unfair is breaking stealth on getting hit; specifically for this game because of the amount of wonton AoE.  If that were implemented I'd agree it'd be very unfair.  

 

As for compensation, thief specifically already has plenty of bonuses that apply to hits from stealth (gaining might, boon rip, etc.) so I'm not sure they need anything.  

[Obtena.7952]

11 hours ago, Gotejjeken.1267 said:

I think what we've come to discover over the nearly nine years of game existence is that stealth is poorly implemented. 

And you think making it reveal on miss is the answer? I certainly don't. 

 

The only reason you think it's like 'arguing in a circle' is because I made some reasonable points to why I don't think this should happen and you ignored them and you just reiterated the same point that everyone else made ... because 'logical' to reveal on miss even though you don't know what 'logic' Anet has decided to use for their stealth implementation. 

Edited July 18, 2021 by Obtena.7952

[Lazze.9870]

I don't care about stealth not revealing on missed attacks. It's the thief's blind spam on top of it which is infuriating.

Edited July 19, 2021 by Lazze.9870

[Gotejjeken.1267]

5 hours ago, Obtena.7952 said:

And you think making it reveal on miss is the answer? I certainly don't. 

 

The only reason you think it's like 'arguing in a circle' is because I made some reasonable points to why I don't think this should happen and you ignored them and you just reiterated the same point that everyone else made ... because 'logical' to reveal on miss even though you don't know what 'logic' Anet has decided to use for their stealth implementation. 

 

What reasonable points? That you don't want to be punished for missing?

 

Anet's logic on the subject is very clear--stealth is meant for squishier classes to have options for engaging / disengaging.  At the time of creation (i.e. 2012) there were few ways to really abuse the mechanic, but fast forward to now and there are too many ways to abuse it, and it's spread too far among classes that don't really need it.

 

For your compensation argument--even though I don't think it is needed--a successful attack out of stealth could do more damage because of the penalty for missing (i.e. being revealed for 1-2s).  I don't love this because it would infact create an imbalance for classes like thief that have too many out of stealth evade abilities already, but it would satisfy the earlier argument about compensation (assuming 'missing' is a penalty and not just being careless).  

[Obtena.7952]

2 minutes ago, Gotejjeken.1267 said:

 

Anet's logic on the subject is very clear--stealth is meant for squishier classes to have options for engaging / disengaging. 

... and if you miss ... you did neither of those things. Again, if you are going to add more reveal mechanics to ingame actions, then you ALSO need to consider changing stealth mechanics for similar ingame actions. 

Edited July 18, 2021 by Obtena.7952

[Gotejjeken.1267]

6 hours ago, Obtena.7952 said:

... and if you miss ... you did neither of those things. Again, if you are going to add more reveal mechanics to ingame actions, then you ALSO need to consider changing stealth mechanics for similar ingame actions. 

 

I believe 'git gud' is appropriate here.  

 

Where is this argument on the ranger forums for Hunter's Shot btw? If you miss, if it is blocked, etc. you do NOT get the stealth.  How is this fair? 

[Obtena.7952]

16 minutes ago, Gotejjeken.1267 said:

 

I believe 'git gud' is appropriate here.  

Well, git gud has nothing to do with revealing when missing ... because the status quo is that you AREN'T revealed when you miss. I mean, if you are suggesting that performance should be linked to stealth and reveal states, then the OP suggestion is severely lacking on how good performance affects those things. 

 

Quote

Where is this argument on the ranger forums for Hunter's Shot btw? If you miss, if it is blocked, etc. you do NOT get the stealth.  How is this fair? 

What you believe is fair or not is irrelevant to how the game works.  How things work on Ranger has no relevance to how similar things work on thieves. It's interesting that you bring that up though ... because it goes to exactly what I was saying earlier in the thread about how thieves access stealth. 

Edited July 19, 2021 by Obtena.7952

[Gotejjeken.1267]

2 hours ago, Obtena.7952 said:

Well, git gud has nothing to do with revealing when missing ... because the status quo is that you AREN'T revealed when you miss. I mean, if you are suggesting that performance should be linked to stealth and reveal states, then the OP suggestion is severely lacking on how good performance affects those things. 

 

What you believe is fair or not is irrelevant to how the game works.  How things work on Ranger has no relevance to how similar things work on thieves. It's interesting that you bring that up though ... because it goes to exactly what I was saying earlier in the thread about how thieves access stealth. 

 

I'm not too concerned on the OPs comments on the matter, the debate here is simply that you should be punished for missing an attack in stealth.  I've even given suggestion for how good performance could impact things, and stated even those really aren't needed on the classes that utilize attacks out of stealth the most (you may think I mean thief here, but one-shot engi is far, far more egregious to me).  

 

Anyway, I see most thieves access stealth by leaping into a smoke field...what does that have to do with hunter's shot? The point was we already have a skill that does what you are arguing against--punishing for missing.  Because if you miss hunter's shot the skill essentially does nothing, where by your argument the 'miss' is the punishment, so where is the compensation? Is the logical conclusion that hunter's shot should put you in stealth no matter what because that is what the skill is intended to do? 

 

Finally I don't recall the topic being thief specific in terms of stealth, it's simply any stealth and any blocked attempt at an attack should cause a reveal.  You may be bringing thieves specifically into it as you have special allegiance to them, that I'm unsure of.  

[Obtena.7952]

9 hours ago, Gotejjeken.1267 said:

 

I'm not too concerned on the OPs comments on the matter, the debate here is simply that you should be punished for missing an attack in stealth. 

Sure ... and the punishment is that you missed ... the same punishment you get when someone misses with any other attack in the game. If you want to talk about hunter's shot, start a thread on it in the Ranger forum. I see little relation between what happens on the different skills between classes, stealth or no stealth, so I don't know why you keep trying to compare them.   

 

 

Edited July 19, 2021 by Obtena.7952

[Gotejjeken.1267]

3 hours ago, Obtena.7952 said:

Sure ... and the punishment is that you missed ... the same punishment you get when someone misses with any other attack in the game. If you want to talk about hunter's shot, start a thread on it in the Ranger forum. I see little relation between what happens on the different skills between classes, stealth or no stealth, so I don't know why you keep trying to compare them.   

 

 

 

Admitting defeat is fine you know.  

[Obtena.7952]

8 minutes ago, Gotejjeken.1267 said:

 

Admitting defeat is fine you know.  

Sure, but there isn't any defeat because the my position on the matter is already the status quo. It's the task of the proponents to argue the need for the change to be considered because the effort to make that change has to be balanced against it's value. No such requirement exists for those in opposition, because nothing needs to be done for the status quo to persist.

Edited July 19, 2021 by Obtena.7952

[Gotejjeken.1267]

42 minutes ago, Obtena.7952 said:

Sure, but there isn't any defeat because the my position on the matter is already the status quo. It's the task of the proponents to argue the need for the change to be considered because the effort to make that change has to be balanced against it's value. No such requirement exists for those in opposition, because nothing needs to be done for the status quo to persist.

 

But you have to explain how if I miss Hunter's Shot I get punished for missing and punished by not getting stealth, thus double punished.  The same argument as if you are in stealth and miss and then are revealed--same double punishment logic.  

 

There's nothing about being revealed on missing in stealth that's outside the status quo here as double punishment already exists.  

[Sobx.1758]

23 minutes ago, Gotejjeken.1267 said:

But you have to explain how if I miss Hunter's Shot I get punished for missing and punished by not getting stealth, thus double punished.

Sorry, but I don't see how one is relevant to the other. If you miss stealth -or any other- attacks, you also don't get their effects, that's the norm. I don't see how missing a "gain stealth on hit" skill has anything to do with what you two are arguing about.

[Gotejjeken.1267]

19 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

Sorry, but I don't see how one is relevant to the other. If you miss stealth -or any other- attacks, you also don't get their effects, that's the norm. I don't see how missing a "gain stealth on hit" skill has anything to do with what you two are arguing about.

 

Essentially a missing a gain stealth on hit skill is the inverse of missing a lose stealth on hit skill, if that makes sense.  So the argument here is if we have skills that 'punish' you for missing by not giving its effect, than the standard is there for having a mechanic that 'punishes' you for missing by losing an effect (i.e. stealth).  

 

As an aside, I don't really agree with missing as being 'punishment' (rather poor play), just attempting to frame this discussion in that light since that is how it was going.  

[Sobx.1758]

2 minutes ago, Gotejjeken.1267 said:

Essentially a missing a gain stealth on hit skill is the inverse of missing a lose stealth on hit skill, if that makes sense.  So the argument here is if we have skills that 'punish' you for missing by not giving its effect, than the standard is there for having a mechanic that 'punishes' you for missing by losing an effect (i.e. stealth).  

Doesn't make sense to me. "Gain stealth on hit" is just "effect on hit" like any other. Both stealth and non-stealth attacks have those and both don't affect the target if you miss. One has nothing to do with the other.

 

2 minutes ago, Gotejjeken.1267 said:

As an aside, I don't really agree with missing as being 'punishment' (rather poor play), just attempting to frame this discussion in that light since that is how it was going.  

Cool, I'm not taking sides in this, just letting you know that your example is disconnected from what you're trying to show. If you miss a skill with blind or immob, it also doesn't blind or immob. Do you also gain/lose any of those effects, because apparently that would be the inverse you're trying to propose here? No, they don't, because missing a skill with effect on hit has nothing to do with how the effect itself behaves in different situations.

 

[Gotejjeken.1267]

20 minutes ago, Sobx.1758 said:

Doesn't make sense to me. "Gain stealth on hit" is just "effect on hit" like any other. Both stealth and non-stealth attacks have those and both don't affect the target if you miss. One has nothing to do with the other.

 

Cool, I'm not taking sides in this, just letting you know that your example is disconnected from what you're trying to show. If you miss a skill with blind or immob, it also doesn't blind or immob. Do you also gain/lose any of those effects, because apparently that would be the inverse you're trying to propose here? No, they don't, because missing a skill with effect on hit has nothing to do with how the effect itself behaves in different situations.

 

 

Think you are thinking too hard about this debate--because the initial premise really didn't make sense to begin with; that is, 'missing' is 'punishment'.  The hunter's shot remarks were to prove if missing is initial punishment then there are plenty of situations where 'additional punishment' happens (outside of missed damage).

 

More specific to inverses and your condi examples, blind specifically behaves this way--you can miss and have it removed, you don't need to wait it out or connect with an attack.  

 

The point of all this being, there is precedent in the game currently for removing stealth on a miss.  

[Sobx.1758]

11 minutes ago, Gotejjeken.1267 said:

Think you are thinking too hard about this debate--because the initial premise really didn't make sense to begin with; that is, 'missing' is 'punishment'.  The hunter's shot remarks were to prove if missing is initial punishment then there are plenty of situations where 'additional punishment' happens (outside of missed damage).

 

More specific to inverses and your condi examples, blind specifically behaves this way--you can miss and have it removed, you don't need to wait it out or connect with an attack.  

 

The point of all this being, there is precedent in the game currently for removing stealth on a miss.  

No worries, I didn't even read most of it, let alone spent a lot of time thinking about it. Your example is just irrelevant to what you're trying to show, it does nothing for your side of the argument. I don't need to think about it hard, because it's rather obvious. If you understand what you said was nonsense, then don't try to hit back with "I think you are thinking too hard about this", but instead just start using relevant arguments, that's all. If you don't understand it, then maybe you actually need to think about it a little harder.

 

As I said, I don't intend to take sides here, it's just that saying "it should lose stealth, because missing a skill with gain stealth effect doesn't grant the effect" is nonsense. And no, missing a skill with any onhit effect not granting that effect isn't "a precedent for removing stealth on a miss".

Edited July 19, 2021 by Sobx.1758

[Gotejjeken.1267]

1 hour ago, Sobx.1758 said:

No worries, I didn't even read most of it, let alone spent a lot of time thinking about it. Your example is just irrelevant to what you're trying to show, it does nothing for your side of the argument. I don't need to think about it hard, because it's rather obvious. If you understand what you said was nonsense, then don't try to hit back with "I think you are thinking too hard about this", but instead just start using relevant arguments, that's all. If you don't understand it, then maybe you actually need to think about it a little harder.

 

As I said, I don't intend to take sides here, it's just that saying "it should lose stealth, because missing a skill with gain stealth effect doesn't grant the effect" is nonsense. And no, missing a skill with any onhit effect not granting that effect isn't "a precedent for removing stealth on a miss".

 

I'll entertain a bit longer since you admit you didn't read most of it--but both situations to me are identical. 

 

You can't just spam a skill like hunter's shot and still get stealth, and so you shouldn't be able to spam attacks (or worse have them blocked, etc.) in stealth and get to keep that stealth.  Both should be treated as skilled play, and if they aren't then give on-hit skills like hunter's shot activation whether they hit or not.

Edited July 19, 2021 by Gotejjeken.1267

[Salt Mode.3780]

A miss attack is a action that should reveal you. Most games that do have the stealth mechanic reveals you as you take a combat action not if the attack had missed or hit. 

 

Thieves or any stealth class should not get away with missing an attack and still stay in stealth. 

 

Again missed attack is a combat action that is initiated and thus should be treated as such.

Edited July 19, 2021 by Salt Mode.3780

[Sobx.1758]

1 hour ago, Gotejjeken.1267 said:

 

I'll entertain a bit longer since you admit you didn't read most of it--but both situations to me are identical. 

 

You can't just spam a skill like hunter's shot and still get stealth, and so you shouldn't be able to spam attacks (or worse have them blocked, etc.) in stealth and get to keep that stealth.  Both should be treated as skilled play, and if they aren't then give on-hit skills like hunter's shot activation whether they hit or not.

When you miss an attack, it doesn't do what it should do -deal dmg and apply related effects. That's the same as other skills with on-hit effects. Maybe the issue here is that you only know one stealth attack, so here's the example: https://wiki.guildwars2.com/wiki/Tactical_Strike -you miss it, you don't apply related effects, same as in your example. Applying stealth is just applying another effect, not sure how you're still not understanding this concept.

 

Anyways, I won't bother with this anymore, have fun with irrelevant comparisons, w/e 😄

Edited July 19, 2021 by Sobx.1758

[Zacchary.6183]

I got a better idea. Give every profession an initiative mechanic. That way they can feel the dread of resource management instead of mindlessly going through their rotations.

[The Boz.2038]

9 minutes ago, Zacchary.6183 said:

mindlessly going through their rotations

Yeah, urmh, Initiative with no CD is the thing that results in just spamming a skill as a "rotation"

But sure, Okay. Revenants say hi.

[Obtena.7952]

5 hours ago, Gotejjeken.1267 said:

 

But you have to explain how ...

I don't have to explain anything because missing an attack doesn't need an extra level of 'punishment' just because someone is stealthed .. and clearly, I'M not the only one that thinks that way because that's not how the game has worked for 9 years already ... so no explanation required ... just some humility on your part to realize the idea isn't as good as you think it is.

 

Also, Hunter's Shot has no relevance to whether you are revealed on a miss or not, so there isn't a reason to continually try and talk about it. I'm not being lead down some path of irrelevant discussion so you get to believe whatever you want to say.  

Edited July 19, 2021 by Obtena.7952

[Zacchary.6183]

57 minutes ago, The Boz.2038 said:

 spamming a skill as a "rotation"

Until you are out of initiative.

[Cynz.9437]

I wonder how many people know that thieves already get punished for missing an attack? Stealth attacks go on CD so the thief either loses stealth because it runs out or has to stack more of it thus using resources, be it it initiative (thus putting weapon skills on CD) or utility (using long CDs).

 

Why not punish other classes for missing an attack analog to thief mechanics? If enemy misses an attack all their spells should receive 10+ sec CD. Lets see how well it would play it. Not fun eh?

 

Also invisibility =/= invulnerability. Stealth does not disable damage. I honestly can't understand why some here claim that enemy won't take damage when being in stealth. Do you guys even play this game?

 

The common complain is always the same: people don't want to deal with stealth. Well we had builds in the past that did not rely on stealth and instead on evasion (because it is all thieves get from Anet). Guess what? People cried about evasion. So in the end of the day, why doesn't OP and some complainers here just admit they want a free loot bag and are not interested in balance at all.

Edited July 21, 2021 by Cynz.9437