Talk:Final Thrust

' The third'? One would assume, that there will be multiple chain skills and Sever - Gash - Final Thrust isn't the only one. --Naoroji 22:02, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

Feel free to reword it, I just wanted to get it up there that it is attached to Sever Artery and Gash. I mean it to say something like this is the third skill in the warrior sword sever artery, gash, final thrust chain.--Corsair@Yarrr 22:09, 9 June 2010 (UTC)

it's hard to be sure this early, but i got the idea that sever artery, gash, and final thrust would only be usable in the chain, so IMO it seems a been wasteful to use a new article for each. to me it seems the names of the attacks are little more than names to individual parts of one big skill. but as i said, we don't know if they will only be in this change.Akbaroth 03:01, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

The three skills take up 1 skill slot, but they are separate skills, with different effects. Basically, I use sever artery on one person, and it turns into gash. I can then choose to switch targets and use sever again, attack with gash and turn it into final thrust, or use a different skill and reset it back to sever artery.--Corsair@Yarrr 03:31, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

still, since they are activated by the same skill, i feel we should just keep one page for the whole combo.Akbaroth 06:37, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Corsair, I don't think putting a different attack in between will effect the chain all that much. I'm hoping they'll be comparable to the Assassin's GW1 combos @ just one point; the game remembers how far along you were in a combo versus that specific target. Like you could do a Lead Attack, Off-Hand Attack, then do Wild Blow (per example) and only then use a Dual Attack. At least,... I think that was possible xD. --Naoroji 22:46, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Its been confirmed at GW2G, I'm looking for the post right now.--Corsair@Yarrr 22:53, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Found, here. it should probably be added as a reference to the chain page.--Corsair@Yarrr 22:59, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Oooooh, no wonder I've been wrong about chains all along, there's been an explanation I've missed! D: Thanks, Corsair. --Naoroji 23:01, 10 June 2010 (UTC)

Combine

• For 6
  • Sever Artery Chain 5
  • Sever Artery Gash Final Thrust chain 1
• Against 4
  • All 3 pages + a chain page w/ links 3
  • as is 1

Well, I thought about what Akbaroth has said, and I do believe that these three pages should be combined. As they are so tightly linked together it does make sense. The only problem is deciding what to name the page. We could try Sever Chain, Sever Artery → Gash → Final Thrust, or something completely different. Thoughts, for, against? Oh, and the current pages should be left as redirects.--Corsair@Yarrr 18:58, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

'Sever Artery chain' sounds fine to me. --hexal 19:04, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

In my opinion, it should not be Sever Chain. If anything, Sever Artery Chain, or even just Sever Artery, as that is the name of the skill in it's unused state. --208.105.170.7 19:05, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

If we combine the articles, which I think we should for the same reasons that were suggested, my suggestion for the name is "Sever Artery (chain)."-- Shew ♠♠♠ 19:10, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Did Anet confirmed that Gash and FT were only available through the chain? Chriskang 19:15, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

^ That is what I am wondering as well. It seems to me that the skills are still separate skills not one skill. Perhaps we can document both the skills and the chain? --hnzdvn 19:28, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

I support that too. 3 pages for skills and a 4th for the chain with transclusions of the others. Chriskang 19:38, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

Gash and Final Strike are ONLY available through the chain. here is the link to confirmation. It has to go one two three, do re me in order for it to work. --Corsair@Yarrr 19:39, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

What I'mma be wondering is this: will Final Thrust/Gash/Sever Artery be available on their own/in other chains/both? Zolann The Irreverent 21:48, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

All four works for me. Leave our options open for when we get more information in the future.

@Zolann It is possible I guess, but the weapon skills are profession specific and the same for every weapon. So I doubt it very much. -- Aspectacle  22:04, 11 June 2010 (UTC)

There's no need to have a chain. It's like making a page on GWW for gw1:Unsuspecting Strike, gw1:Wild Strike, and gw1:Death Blossom combination, then making a page for gw1:Unsuspecting Strike, gw1:Fox Fangs, and gw1:Death Blossom. Along with every other combination. It is just three skills that can be used in a chain. Just like in GW1 - Gash needs bleeding and Final Thrust needs enemies at lower life. Do we have pages on GWW for all the combinations in the game (both dagger chains and not)? Not at all. So why do we need a page for it here? Just have a note "Gash works best/only after using Sever Artery." And so forth. -- Konig/talk 00:13, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

There are core difference here to GW1; Chain is an actual skill type describing skills that work in a specific defined chain, these skills reside in the same slot on the weapon part of the skill bar, you can't get to final thrust without first using the other two skills on the target(I could use final thrust whenever I wanted to in GW1 if I had the adrenaline). Such skill chaining in GW1 was loosely defined, now these skills are very closely tied to each other. -- Aspectacle  00:24, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

May I ask where your source is? I still think a combination beyond a mention on the chain page is unnecessary, whether your right or wrong. -- Konig/talk 00:26, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) GW2.com has the relevant info.here is a little bit more.--Corsair@Yarrr 00:28, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

I'm for combining all of the pages into one. Considering these skills only take up on slot, and it seems you can't use gash or final thrust without using sever artery first, I think we should merge them all into a sever artery chain page unless we get more info. Eive Windgrace 00:46, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

I still think a note is all that is needed. 4 pages is completely unnecessary. These skills may take the same slot, but they are still different skills and - most importantly - is it that you need to hit the same target, or can you use Sever Artery, change target, use Gash, change target, use Final Thrust? All I can find is that you need to use them in order. -- Konig/talk 01:10, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

In my opinion: Make the chain pages "skill1 skill2 skill3 chain" and have pages "skill1", "skill2", and "skill3" redirect to that page. Manifold 05:31, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

The way I read it, you have to use all of them on one target, changing targets will reset the skill. Likewise, using a skill in between them will also cause it to reset. They may be separate skills, but they take up the same slot and NEED the previous skill to work, with nothing in between them. Its not the same as sin attacks in GW, since those were variable, you could mix and match them any way you wanted. These are permanent pieces of the warrior sword main hand.--Corsair@Yarrr 05:34, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Imo, it should be called 'Sever Artery → Gash → Final Thrust', for being correct. Then, we can REDIRECT all pages like Sever, Sever Artery, Sever artery, Gash, Final Thrust, Final thrust, Sever chain, Sever Artery chain, Sever artery chain. Might be a lot of redirects for just one page, but still, imo, that's the correct way to do it. --Naoroji 09:14, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

"Gash and Final Strike are ONLY available through the chain. here is the link to confirmation." I still fail to see where the confirmation is in this link. Anet never stated that Final Thrust won't be available as a profession specific skill or that it won't be part of another chain. Chriskang 12:45, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

What I meant by that was, that you can't use final thrust or gash without first using sever artery. In the context of that link, that is correct.

Now, lets reason through this. Thrusting requires a sword, try thrusting with an axe, hammer, or mace and it doesn't do much. Next, a great sword, because of its size, is difficult to do a thrust with. Thrusting also implies one target, while the great sword has been confirmed to do lots of AoE damage, that doesn't rule it out but makes it more unlikely. As a profession specific skill, we run into similar problems, what kind of weapon are you wielding. Final thrust with a bow is silly, as is a gun. Now I ask you, why would they feel the need to re-use skills? These weapons are unique enough that you could easily not re-use a single skill between them. Likewise, having them also double as a profession specific skill is lazy, why would they do that?--Corsair@Yarrr 15:57, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

You remember they already did this with Factions, right? Several skills from Prophecies were duplicated with a different name, like gw1:Earthquake/gw1:Dragon's Stomp. I'm not saying they're gonna do it again, just that for now we have no proof that Gash and FT are exclusive to the chain. Also, the link to GW2.com that you provided earlier Corsair clearly states that a chain is "a set of three skills that share a single skill slot". In other words: they just share a slot but they are different skills. If we start saying that different skills should be on a single page just because they share a slot, then why not create a single page for all elite skills? And another one for all healing skills? Furthermore, I'm no expert but I suspect that having several different skills on a page would seriously mess up the DPL parser. Chriskang 19:02, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) They share the same slot at the SAME TIME. Unlike healing and elite skills, or other weapon skills, these ones inhabit that skill slot without any other changes, effectively adding 2 skills to a sword warrior's skillbar. As for duplicate skills, they will get their own page as they are NOT THE SAME. They may have the same effects but their names are different. I also find that highly unlikely because we won't have stand alone campaigns anymore, everything will be expansions after GW2. Oh, and we do have a page for all elite skills, and all healing skills on GWW, or at least I'm pretty damn sure we do.--Corsair@Yarrr 19:34, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

We still don't need a page for every chain. People may prefer to know just what one skill does. We can list all of the chains here and have less confusion. No one except those who know of the naming system will ever search for a page titled "Sever Artery → Gash → Final Thrust" - they'll just go to the skill they want and get redirect. It might be one chain but it is still three skills, and we can list the bloody chain in the Chain page like this one already is. It's unnecessary to the point of redundancy to have a page for the chain - whether or not there are pages for the skills. It might make less space on the wiki, but that's all it will do, it won't make searching easier for the common wiki'er or player, it won't make much sense (honestly, think of how you're going to set up 3 different skills into one page and make it nice and clean - this includes descriptions, scalings, notes, trivia, similar skills, images, etc. - you'll have three of each so why bother with it on a single page where it'll be more confusing?), we'll already have the chain mentioned elsewhere, and a note on 3 pages serves the same purpose as this proposed chain. It's completely unnecessary and while it might make sense for you, all of which are wiki'ers and are the ones making it so of course it makes sense for you - but will it make sense for the casual player? Will it make sense for those just browsing through? NO! It'll become confusing. So just keep it separate and, in turn, easier to both manage and understand. -- Konig/talk 21:12, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

If The Game Isn't Even Out Yet Why Are We Arguing About This.--Icyyy Blue 21:21, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Because we know they exist already.--h. moo. 21:23, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

If Everyone Knows Typing Like This Makes The Eyes Hurt Why Are You. --Naoroji 21:34, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

What?--Icyyy Blue 21:35, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

In other words, please refrain from capitalizing every single word :p You might be obsessed by it, but grow yourself loose of the habit :p ---Chaos?- (moo!) -- 21:54, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

(Reset indent) Ok. Iccy has a point. We don't have all of the information available to make a good decision for merge or many at this point. There are attributes and behaviours of the skills we don't yet know despite the annoucement. There are probably different skill mechanics still to come for other professions (assassins? o0) we can probably decide best when we have all of the information. -- Aspectacle  22:09, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Quickly skimmed over the discussion, so if this has already been suggested, ignore me, I fail. But why not just give every skill its own page, and have a skill chain box somewhere on the page, showing the complete, relevant chain? --Sirrush 23:07, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

That's what is there at the moment. I think that is sufficient for the meantime until we have all the information to make a better decision. -- Aspectacle  23:30, 12 June 2010 (UTC)

Though it is true that the skills exist, we don't know near enough about them. Three separate skills do deserve their own and unique pages so that is what I'm suggesting. There can perhaps be a different page for chains of skills, but we don't know what other chains will work out. I think 3 pages for the skills would be the best course of action, with perhaps a mention on each page in regards to the chain...I just read the post by Sirrush and realized that my post is redundant, I should probably read the entire discussion before adding my 2 cents ;) Venom20 16:24, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

Personaly 'The Artery Thrust' has a nice ring to it. And i say, like many have before, 1 page for each skill and 1 page for the chain.--Neil • 16:29, 13 June 2010 (UTC)

I also agree in making one page for each of the skills and one page for that chain with links to each other. That way it makes it a lot easier for people to navigate through the skills and chains. Hasselmannen 08:18, 15 June 2010 (UTC)

Cleave

"does extra damage versus foes whose health is below 50%" how does this work in different scenarios?

• A. target is below 50% hp. cleaved enemy is above 50% hp.
• B. target is above 50% hp. cleaved enemy is below 50% hp.

would the enemy receiving cleave dmg take extra dmg in both scenario A and B? (does the calculation only consider your main target's hp? or are there individual checks?) —The preceding unsigned comment was added by 24.6.176.183 (talk • contribs) at 00:20, 24 January 2014 (UTC).

co-efficient

2007 power, unconditional hit is 824 which translates to 320 difference and a 15% co-eff. page lists a 1.5(or a 50%) co-eff. not sure how to edit simple decimal miss-location error? conditional damage is doubled as normally shown...sorta 50.245.236.33 04:10, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

I've never looked at coefficient calculations, but if you're sure that its 0.15 then just go to http://wiki.guildwars2.com/index.php?title=Final_Thrust&action=edit and swap {{skill fact|damage|504|coefficient=1.5}} for {{skill fact|damage|504|coefficient=0.15}}. -Chieftain Alex 09:15, 4 August 2015 (UTC)

ok so i feel like i edited a few engineer's pages co-ef wrong and i almost did this one. i'm noticing that every skills base damage is increased due to the new 1k power baseline affecting it. this leads me to believe there's 3 ways to input the co-eff: 1) as a multiplier hidden that requires testing to find out. 2) as a multiplier from total power. and (now perfered as i feel like i did #2 mistakenly on other pages) 3) the rate of increase per power greater than base so values above 1000 power. this topic is on wrong page sorta but...

to be back on track, the new co eff's will be either method #2-> (1172-533)/2200= 0.29 [rounded] and (2344-1066)/2200= 0.58 [rounded] or method #3-> (1172-533)/(2200-1000)= 0.5325 and (2344-1066)/(2200-1000)= 1.065

oh hey the bonus is indeed double the unconditional... but there's something else that method #3 documenting shows... tool tip damage is completely from power. sorry for the noobness if that wasn't rocket science. 50.245.236.33 04:34, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

We have a formula here, which describes tooltip damage as (weapon strength)*(power)*(coefficient)/2600. 2600 is the armor value, which in practice can vary of course. Getting the coefficient is easy to determine if you know the weapon strength, which is 922 for Kits. Changing the power in your build and comparing the damage is not doing anything, since power is always directly proportional to damage, according to the formula. Tyndel (talk) 04:52, 22 September 2015 (UTC)

tooltip turns some of those into constants to make things easier to "read" on players in-game though. also a lot of tooltips are now off on the wiki because of new baseline power of 1000. weapon strength we (the wiki and fans) already recorded weapon's average constant, and you listed the armor constant. so only thing to show on wiki is the changes in power which IS the co-eff. so... what am i doing wrong?50.245.236.33 18:37, 22 September 2015 (UTC)