The Assassin's Demise: A Lament

2 pages Page 2
Perfected Shadow
Perfected Shadow
Wilds Pathfinder
#24
Quote: Originally Posted by ~ Dan ~ I read it, and he didn't mention PvE. He talked about SF yes, but his summary of the sin being dead could easily have been applying to PvP. The summary was this:

Quote: Originally Posted by OP
"What?" I hear you cry. "How can this be? The Assassin is one of the most-played classes in the game!" To which I offer one simple reply, which is likely to get me summarily banned from further postings in this forum (but what fun is life without risks?): the PermaFormer isn't a true Assassin. Yes I even re-read the whole post again, his argument was that the assassin class is dead because of perma SF. I.e. his summary only applies to pve, as I pointed out earlier.

Quote:
But in any case, for PvE you still have AP caller, A/D crit scythe, moebius. That's 3 very different builds. Good enough. Indeed, but after SF dies, sins would be unwanted simply because most pugs still stand by 'nukers'. But that's their loss I guess.
Shanks R Us
Shanks R Us
Krytan Explorer
#25
Ever since perma started becoming popular [back before the "nerf" anet did making it more annoying" I've been using it to run in PvE. Mainly around the Tyrian continent. I don't do the end game shit as much as others.

Also, my assassin is my main. He is in no way shape or form my "perma," he's my assassin. Yes most of the things I tend to do nowadays usually involve the use of SF, but be honest with yourself, 58 day old man. What else is there to do? Just because the skill is good is no reason to hate on it. Just because it works well enough to make it "dominate" a class, as you say, is no reason to bash on it. It should just inspire you to make one yourself, stop crying about everyone else doing it, and stop making ridiculous flame-bait threads.
_Nihilist_
_Nihilist_
Will Bull's Strike for $!
#26
Quote: Originally Posted by Shanks R Us Just because the skill is good is no reason to hate on it. Just because it works well enough to make it "dominate" a class, as you say, is no reason to bash on it. It should just inspire you to make one yourself, stop crying about everyone else doing it, and stop making ridiculous flame-bait threads. 1) You're right, Shanks, if a skill is good, there is no reason to hate it. What you fail to realize, though, is that Shadow Form isn't good, it's broken. Ask any player who understands the game mechanics at all. Near-invulnerability is never a good concept in a game where death happens.

2) The OP did make an Assassin, it was his/her first character.

3) The OP explained his/her stance, and frankly, not many solid arguments against the original complaint have been raised. I don't see how that makes the Thread flame-bait, unless you take into account the fact that PermaSF abusers are going to get upset, and gladly try to make this Thread a flame war.

4) Just because the skill balancers didn't do their research and didn't take into account how absolutely absurd it was to allow fully maintainable near-invulnerability onto the stage doesn't mean that what they did was a good decision.

5) There is nothing wrong with using SF. It is a skill that exists in GW. It has existed since Factions. However, when it was first released, you paid a price for having a short time of near-invulnerability... when it ended, you lost all but 5...50 health, now, you can maintain it indefinitely, getting all of the benefits without suffering the downsides. That is ABUSING a skill, not using it.
Bobby2
Bobby2
Furnace Stoker
#27
Quote: Originally Posted by _Nihilist_ View Post
5) There is nothing wrong with using SF. It is a skill that exists in GW. It has existed since Factions. However, when it was first released, you paid a price for having a short time of near-invulnerability... when it ended, you lost all but 5...50 health, now, you can maintain it indefinitely, getting all of the benefits without suffering the downsides. That is ABUSING a skill, not using it. You can't blame players for utilising a skill to its fullest potential. If anything, blame the developers for allowing this to be possible.

btw, everyone knows ANet is perfectly okay with the situation. Indefinite SF still exists (after token lolnerfs), and despite popular belief the developers are neither blind nor deaf.
dotryok
dotryok
Ascalonian Squire
#29
Personally my GvG team run a sin that run WC ganker buid (OwZjgod8IOsZFWCz4z/OHTwuB) might even use a but that is one of the only times i really see sins in PvP. just to throw this out there my defition of PvP is HA, TA, and GvG...lol all the rest i call noob PvP stuff

And also i run PvE sin ...i get bored and just put skills together on a build and run with it in HM but that is just me
_Nihilist_
_Nihilist_
Will Bull's Strike for $!
#31
Quote: Originally Posted by Bobby2 View Post The use of the word 'abuse' is incorrect. No it's not. Check dictionary.com:
Quote:
to use wrongly or improperly; misuse And yes, PermaSF is abuse. It is a skill that has an intended downside/adverse affect, and by using a loophole that allows the positive to be gained without suffering the negative, it is misuse.
Bobby2
Bobby2
Furnace Stoker
#32
The devs fully intended permaSF to be possible. By what (whose) standards is it 'wrong' or 'improper', then?
BlackSephir
BlackSephir
Forge Runner
#35
And SF causes health lose IF it ends.
Damn, you'd think a dervish would know how enchantments work.

Quote: SF was not intended to be maintained. It's been maintainable since Nightfall, Deadly Paradox and Arcane Echo my. I think even AN would've noticed since then and taken some action if it wasn't supposed to be maintained.
BlackSephir
BlackSephir
Forge Runner
#37
Quote: Originally Posted by Tenebrae View Post Yes because like we all know , Anet doesnt make mistakes and if they do , they make things right in an update in less than 2 days. Yes, because leaving something game-breaking unfixed for ~3 years is something even AN is capable of doing.

Quote:
No , it shouldnt be mantained Becaaaauuuuseee?
Obsidian Flesh also shouldn't be maintainable- after all it recharges longer than it lasts.
SF is broken, but your "IT SHOULDNT BE MAINTANABLE BECAUSE THIS WAY YOU CAN MAINTAIN IT" is idiotic, stupid and moronic.
Tenebrae
Tenebrae
Forge Runner
#38
Quote: Originally Posted by BlackSephir View Post Yes, because leaving something game-breaking unfixed for ~3 years is something even AN is capable of doing. No , because as you can see , they did.

Quote: Originally Posted by BlackSephir View Post
Becaaaauuuuseee?
Obsidian Flesh also shouldn't be maintainable- after all it recharges longer than it lasts. Because you say so ? are you comparing Obsidian to SF ? LMAO. Dude check the effects and the downsides ..... what do they have in common ? Being elite and "can not be target of enemy spells" thats it.

BlackSephir
BlackSephir
Forge Runner
#39
Quote: Originally Posted by Tenebrae View Post No , because as you can see , they did.
They didn't because when perma SF was first possible dungeons and uwsc didn't exist.

Quote: Because you say so ? Because the game's mechanics say so, junior.
Quote:
are you comparing Obsidian to SF ? LMAO. Dude check the effects and the downsides ..... what do they have in common ? Being elite and "can not be target of enemy spells" thats it. You have absolutely no idea what the hell I'm talking about, do you? I know the downsides and I'm not talking if/how they're game breaking. I'm saying that maintaining an enchant (or a stance) is fine. Of course the difference is too subtle for you.
Quote:
No , it shouldnt be maintanable , everyone knows it , EVERYONE knows THAT and its "invincible" effect is what makes it broken. Scream and insult me but you are not changing that fact. It honestly feels like I'm dealing with a big headed kid who's drooling on his keyboard.
If everyone knew that enchants shouldn't be maintainable there wouldn't be such enchants in the game. And lo, behold, there are. Even without cutting their recharge time.
Tenebrae
Tenebrae
Forge Runner
#40
Quote: Originally Posted by BlackSephir View Post Because the game's mechanics say so, junior. You cant argue nothing in favor of SF with "game mechanics" on the same sentence and no , im too far away of your "junior" state kiddo.

Quote: Originally Posted by BlackSephir View Post You have absolutely no idea what the hell I'm talking about, do you? I know the downsides and I'm not talking if/how they're game breaking. I'm saying that maintaining an enchant (or a stance) is fine. Of course the difference is too subtle for you. You are like a fish out of the water. Maintaining a stance has nothing to do here even Deadly Paradox exists , maintaining enchants is fine .... some of them are bonds but when that enchant prevents 90%+ of ench removal and makes you almost invincible NO , hell no , is not fine. Maybe the difference between any enchant and SF is too little for you but for the rest of the world .... is not.

Quote: Originally Posted by BlackSephir View Post