Thief - VenomShare

The second weapon set is missing. Share thief is defenitily a good build but won't make its way on the meta because of how fast conditions get cleandes on zerg. Thief on WvW is not meant to be in the zerg but more likely to roam around the zerg wich means it's a roaming build. I think Zerg Builds are only for melee builds but I might be wrong, for sure it needs to be defined on the Wiki.--Billaboong (talk) 16:58, 23 August 2014 (UTC)

The meta is GWEN, it won't make it there. But Venomshare is getting buffed soon and we should provide some builds for every class in every section, so it's definitely good to have it here. --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 17:02, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
Suprisingly, the conditions are actually hard to remove since it's applied by multiple consecutive applications. Once you clear all of your conditions, someone else will tag you with a new set the next second. But regardless, if you're party is forced to blow all of their cleanses in the first 2-3 seconds of engagement, then you've already put them in a disadvantage. Furthermore, I think that the difficulty/ease of cleansing venomshare should be though of as proportionate which will put it closer in the context of a real zerg battle. From my experience (Numbers are crude but somewhat reasonable IMO) 1 Vshare thief is viable for every 10 enemy players (1:10) ratio. I think it's fair to say that if you don't scale the # of players running X build to the # of the zerg, you get skewed results. Also, if you zerging with a thief, you should not be trying to roam around a 30+ zerg with likely less than 15 fps trying to pick off light classes which is almost futile given the rally mechanic and the unlikely chance that you can safely channel a finisher without being killed. Thieves can contribute a massive amount of blast finishers with their shortbow, meaning you should be inside the group. Don't forget, skelk venom is a pretty big party heal if you think about it.Nailuj (talk) 18:15, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
This would work on a 10 vs 10 fight, but imagina a zerg vs zerg: everyone runs -40 condi removal, they use Cleasing Ire wich cleans conditions and reduct duration. Then there are guardians with Save Youreelf wich cleans all condi from allies. Add ele with water skill 5 wich grants regen every second and clean conditions because of tue traits. In large scale zerg conditions aren't trustable, while they're excellent for small scale WvW. Still remain a good build. --Billaboong (talk) 23:21, 23 August 2014 (UTC)
The -40% duration and even the -36% reduction is falling out of use due to the increase of prices in the past few months or so. As I said, if you scale the # of venomshare thieves to the number of enemy players in the zerg, you will get identical results due to the 5man cap on skills. Also, it's hard to 'cleanse' a venomshare thief because conditions are applied consecutively, you can cleanse conditions briefly, but if someone tags you, you're back to having 6 conditions on you and venomshare recharge is quicker or about the same as most major cleansing skills.
Prices for every item in the game is raisong simply because more gold is earned every day. There is a reason if necros and engi (kings of conditions) are used for well power and the second one isn't used in WvW zergs.. Conditions aren't viable in large scale zergs. --Billaboong (talk) 13:38, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

I recommend going Shortbow/Shortbow to abuse Sigil of Energy, especially since you lack Signet of Agility. Also grabbing at least 1 stun breaker even if it's in the optional will help immensely.

Shadowstep Shadowstep
Deception. Shadowstep to target area. Becomes Shadow Return which returns you to your starting area and cures three conditions.
Stun-Break.pngBreaks stun
Range.pngRange: 1,200

would probably be the best option. I don't know which venom you should drop for it. Probably the player choice between Ice Drake and Devourer since Skale is to strong to drop in a venom build. ----Human icon.png Dantes (talk) 18:36, 24 August 2014 (UTC)

I honestly cannot believe how high this build is being rated so far. It's not that great on T1. It works maybe between a group of 5 to 10 players. Anything over 25 and it quickly becomes less effective than running a roaming build and skirting the zerg to pick off the over-extended/downed players. I say this even with the future balance changes coming. Venom share simply sucks.

Considering this is a venomshare build, however, I still have some criticisms (assuming T1 zerg again): to make this effective we'd need to

  • focus on power over condition damage to maximise armor-ignoring leeches
  • choose spider venom for it's extra hits
  • contemplate a variant as 40604 so you can boon-strip and support your party instead of just providing venoms to people

That being said this build is good. Just can't believe it's in the "great" category right now. Heaven forbid someone subjectively decides this is meta for thieves in zergs (again in T1 here). If choosing a swap weapon set I would recommend another shortbow (as dantes suggests) or sword/dagger because the cleave/s2 port and crippling s4 make it quite viable in a zerg melee train.

How about the idea on choosing soldier's/cleric's/magi's over carrion's, just focusing on the heals from venoms/blast finishers on water for this build? Only skale venom does any reasonable condition damage, and that one improves direct damage anyways. Leeching venoms also scales with power. There is simply too much condi cleanse and too shitty condis applied by venoms for a condi-gear set to make sense. This is ANet's fault, straight up. Were we running in a small group with this build it would make more sense to run condi.

As dantes said above, definitely think one stun breaker is important, even if running with a guardian in the party. Hoelbrak runes as an alternative make sense. Adding usage for the utility like blasting fire fields while taking down doors etc all help explain why this is a good build. All in all though, venomshare is just too weak. Condi cleanse is so built-in to the upper tier zergs that you just won't do any damage or put any pressure on the enemy zerg with this build. Minimal effect. This build would do better in a small-group roaming category. Will wait for new patch to see how this develops. « Chase ♥ ♥ ♥ » 05:23, 4 September 2014 (UTC)

Version 2.0[edit]

Been trying this version out. I really think we should consider it as a variant trait set up. The heal and stun breaker are very important imo. If the player has stability from guardians I would swap the shadowstep to caltrops (maybe), but still like it for faster positioning when regrouping on heals. Have tried valkyrie+str runes and soldier+melandru runes. Currently testing cleric's+monk runes. But I would seriously consider these utility/trait changes. IMO this build's pro is controlling the zerg. Condition damage has no place in it. Signet of malice is incredibly powerful when placing SB 4 on downed enemies. However withdraw was another very good choice. « Chase ♥ ♥ ♥ » 20:07, 4 November 2014 (UTC)

Condition Damage Gear[edit]

This build has a lot of condition damage but doesn't really apply that many conditions that do damage. At max it does a few bleeds, it has poison but other players will also apply poison and torment which is on a long cool down. The other condis it does apply don't cause damage so all that carrion gear is unnecessary. If I were to take a condition damage character into a zerg I'd take my necro or engie as they can spam far more condis much faster (though there is a argument whether condi damage even belongs in wvw zergs as stated above). I think the build needs some tweaking, perhaps taking power rather then condi damage for a start. Daniel(talk) 16:26, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

Yep, condi gear on this build is definitely holding it back imo. « Chase ♥ ♥ ♥ » 22:50, 26 January 2015 (UTC)

SB + Power over Single Target Dire Set[edit]

Was a much better choice than p/d and dire for a zerg. Also now there are no stun breaks whatsoever. I'm afraid in Pug zergs you rarely get the stability you want even on T1 servers. Heck even with organized guilds they sometimes don't afford you stability. These changes are worse imo « Chase ♥ ♥ ♥ » 02:08, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Tried to revert the edits in one go and for some reason nothing happened.. so I had to go through 1 by 1 but I think it looks fine now. --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 16:11, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
I don't think you understand how broken condition duration is. I changed the build to the one that guilds have been using for over a month. The argument can be made for going into Power instead of Condi, but if you're not investing in condition duration, you're doing it wrong. --Haru ✯✯✯ 20:26, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
I agree on condi duration, but had not tested it with venoms shared. It should be maximized in this build, if working properly. However, I recommend power and shortbow for faster applications to multiple targets and better dps. None of the condis do significant damage, and I think it's good to run with either a stunbreaker/aoe stealth even in gvg. « Chase ♥ ♥ ♥ » 20:46, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
Condi duration does make sense. It's just that the site has a rather huge traffic nowadays, sorry for the edit rollbacks but I wanted to change back gear before someone actually invests too much gold into buying the possibly wrong pieces (as there is an ongoing discussion about which is the best choice so let's not change things around for a bit). Rolled back other edits too in case something doesn't sync up but the main thing is the gear question. --Necromancer Icon Color.pngHanz(talk) 20:50, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

This is what I run for this build. Even in organized group comps I feel this is a very powerful set up. You can strip stability and give it to your allies. You should be in SB most of the time. If you have to clear condis you have elite (but sometimes you use it for your allies) and can enter stealth via D/P stacking. I basically hit things, use up all the venoms, pew pew from the back lines, stack stealth in D/P, venoms off CD and spread them again. It's 100% condi duration (the site incorrectly attributes +10% on sb when it is 20% actually) and could hit the cap with different runes as well. I have run this with traveler's as well so that's allowed me to use koi cakes and normal stones on the cheap. I would recommend putting this build up for venom share. I also toyed with Superior Sigil of Incapacitation as well over +10% when using koi cakes and trav runes. That's a pretty funny set up as well. « Chase ♥ ♥ ♥ » 21:03, 5 March 2015 (UTC)

Your version is strictly inferior to correctly maximizing condition duration. I made both sets Giver's so you can see the correct condition duration modifier:
Your job is not to do damage individually. Your job as a Venom Share thief is to apply buffs to 5 teammates who can do more collectively than you can yourself. Overall, it's not that amazing of a build and it's easy to counter. --Haru ✯✯✯ 21:31, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
Condi duration is capped at 100% I'm pretty sure, the tool tip just incorrectly reflects the numbers « Chase ♥ ♥ ♥ » 22:01, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
Further evidence where Nike thought it did work and it was shown in comments that it didn't. This reminds people that theorycrafting isn't all there is to making a build strictly better or not xP Also still need to check if the condi duration is source based or player based. I know the condi damage and healing power is source based becuase I've tested that myself before. « Chase ♥ ♥ ♥ » 22:12, 5 March 2015 (UTC)
I'll test it with my guild soon. --Haru ✯✯✯ 02:24, 6 March 2015 (UTC)

What happened to the old version?[edit]

Why is there only 4 points in the first line? Venomshare without XII is a staple trait in the build. Bountiful threat should be removed, it's far inferior to 1 extra hit on all venoms.

Venoms can be coordinated to annihilate a player with stability. Your job would be to steal to them when the burst is called so they're fully vulnerable to basi. It is already listed as a variant. The extra 3 initiative also helps stealthing yourself or allies. « Chase ♥ ♥ ♥ » 12:01, 4 May 2015 (UTC)