Guardian = Firebrand? What about other specs?

[Zaret.1450]

On 10/5/2022 at 9:30 PM, Varolite.7615 said:

Its good to see that ANET is listening to feedbacks but it seems that guardian specs (Willbender / DH) has been left behind as no one bothers to care about the class anymore. There are merely few feedbacks on the class and it seems that every patch notes guardian has nothing in it except for slight nerfs to FB.

 

On openworld / fractals / raids, you will rarely see a willbender & DH anymore and mostly its FB as a quickness / heal provider. 

 

On PVP - willbenders / DH also is almost non-existent anymore. DH is used but it is outclassed almost by everyone, there is a decline on core guard as well due to the superior support of tempest, and FB well forget about it..

 

On WVW - FB (again) is a must due to stability provider, there are no classes that can replace these yet. Other than that DH once more received a nerf on traps after nerfing their ranged damaged just months back. Core / willbender again has no use except to roam.

 

FB has taken away all the fun in playing other specs of guardian, everyone seemed to think that guardian is the favorite child but in reality its only FB. 

Hopefully some positive change can be made for the other specs to be viable again. 

In raids and pve overall dh willbender and most power builds need a buff so they can realy compete against condis.

pvp i dont play so i cant talk

as for wvw dh is good in fights, at least it looks like it is meta now, fb is fb of course, and willbender, well willbender was made for roaming, really, it is a monster in wvw roaming it can obliterate you in a second and run away like a thief  sw2 teleport is insane.

Now fb is too good, and it is too good for the game and the class, its not sane to have something as good as this, tomes are absurd and mantras are strong too, it just shines too brightly.

[Saiyan.1704]

On 10/5/2022 at 2:30 PM, Varolite.7615 said:

On PVP - willbenders / DH also is almost non-existent anymore. DH is used but it is outclassed almost by everyone, there is a decline on core guard as well due to the superior support of tempest, and FB well forget about it..

 

 

I'll agree that WB is (what's lower than trash tier?) pretty bad in sPvP but DH isn't outclassed by almost everyone... for starters condi DH soft counters engi while so many other classes have issues engaging engi. I only play condi or condi hybrid DH and I do pretty decently as a solo player. Nearly Plat every season which isn't bad considering I am mostly a soloQ player.

[Gehenna.3625]

On 10/13/2022 at 10:08 AM, Kulvar.1239 said:

Only change I see for FB is Mantra of Solace going from 3 to 2 charges and healing for more.

It still has 3 charges. Did you mean Mantra of Liberation? That one did go from 3 to 2 charges but also got a hefty cooldown to recharge those charges.

[draxynnic.3719]

14 minutes ago, Gehenna.3625 said:

It still has 3 charges. Did you mean Mantra of Liberation? That one did go from 3 to 2 charges but also got a hefty cooldown to recharge those charges.

I think Kulvar was presenting that as a possible change that could reduce boon output while retaining self-healing output.

[Gehenna.3625]

13 minutes ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

I think Kulvar was presenting that as a possible change that could reduce boon output while retaining self-healing output.

ah right, that would explain it

[Batalix.2873]

IMO, Firebrand is the "scholar" espec, so I'm not sure why it wants to be a condi DPS on top of being a very strong boon provider and healer. It (and Specter and Harbinger) should be taking some tips from Druid by maybe using unique weapons for utility/mobility/healing rather than strict DPS.

 

Remove physical damage from axe 2 and axe 3, and make axe 3 pull allies toward you, not enemies. That way FBs could lean into a narrower support role with a tool to rescue DPS from standing in the bad stuff, while eliminating some of their generalist aspects.

[otto.5684]

1 hour ago, CourtJester.5908 said:

IMO, Firebrand is the "scholar" espec, so I'm not sure why it wants to be a condi DPS on top of being a very strong boon provider and healer. It (and Specter and Harbinger) should be taking some tips from Druid by maybe using unique weapons for utility/mobility/healing rather than strict DPS.

 

Remove physical damage from axe 2 and axe 3, and make axe 3 pull allies toward you, not enemies. That way FBs could lean into a narrower support role with a tool to rescue DPS from standing in the bad stuff, while eliminating some of their generalist aspects.

This is probably the worst idea regarding FB. Not only that, it indicates a lack of understanding of the game as a whole. There is no trinity system. Pure support, that does nothing else, does not exist, and never will. And pulling allies is… an amazing idea. I am sure that will never be abused or used idiotically 🙄

[Batalix.2873]

3 hours ago, otto.5684 said:

This is probably the worst idea regarding FB. Not only that, it indicates a lack of understanding of the game as a whole. There is no trinity system. Pure support, that does nothing else, does not exist, and never will. And pulling allies is… an amazing idea. I am sure that will never be abused or used idiotically 🙄

 

This, ironically, displays an entire lack of understanding of the game as a whole. Just because there is no trinity system doesn't mean that there aren't various roles and degrees of utility within support builds. And just because a game claims to have no defined roles doesn't mean it is good design to have "good at everything" jobs like FB and Mech with no meaningful limitations.

 

Not to mention, have you ever actually paid attention to how much damage support and heal builds do in organized group content? We don't bring them along for DPS, we bring them for overall robustness.

 

Guardian has two totally decent DPS jobs; the only reason Firebrand supercedes them is because it can do sizeable DPS alongside its incredibly versatile times and mantras. I didn't say it should do no DPS, merely that for being quite literally and figuratively the most literate espec with regard to on-demand boon application, it could stand to do only a fraction of that and still be an extremely good support pick.

 

Not to mention, flavorfully it makes sense for the book job to, idunno, find more creative ways to participate in battle than burning things, which is precisely the opposite of what I would expect a bibliophile to be doing.

EDIT: Furthermore, especs have a strong trend of using weapons in unique and unconventional ways. Using an axe as a crook would be imo more interesting than just as another axe. Plus, you are forgetting that FB still has decent access to DPS bursts through time 1, and frankly I think it would be far more interesting to play an espec where the weapon is only for protection/movement while I attacked with a book.

(Also rescue in FFXIV is a very good tool for guiding inexperienced players in raids and group content. It is also an endless source of hilarity.)

Edited October 25, 2022 by CourtJester.5908

[draxynnic.3719]

Claims other people don't understand how the game works.

Doesn't realise that the proposal to turn axe into a pure support weapon would just mean that people would use sword instead.

Putting aside the specific implementation, though, the idea that a support elite specialisation should be pure support regardless of stats is still bad. Being a pure healer is accessed by using healer stats. However, being a pure healer also makes it quite painful to play that elite specialisation in open world (which has historically been a big problem for druid), giving people less opportunity to practice it before actually hitting endgame content.

And, yeah, pulling players and NPCs with green names would absolutely be used for trolling, and possibly outright fifth-column activity in WvW.

[otto.5684]

8 hours ago, CourtJester.5908 said:

 

This, ironically, displays an entire lack of understanding of the game as a whole. Just because there is no trinity system doesn't mean that there aren't various roles and degrees of utility within support builds. And just because a game claims to have no defined roles doesn't mean it is good design to have "good at everything" jobs like FB and Mech with no meaningful limitations.

 

Not to mention, have you ever actually paid attention to how much damage support and heal builds do in organized group content? We don't bring them along for DPS, we bring them for overall robustness.

 

Guardian has two totally decent DPS jobs; the only reason Firebrand supercedes them is because it can do sizeable DPS alongside its incredibly versatile times and mantras. I didn't say it should do no DPS, merely that for being quite literally and figuratively the most literate espec with regard to on-demand boon application, it could stand to do only a fraction of that and still be an extremely good support pick.

 

Not to mention, flavorfully it makes sense for the book job to, idunno, find more creative ways to participate in battle than burning things, which is precisely the opposite of what I would expect a bibliophile to be doing.

EDIT: Furthermore, especs have a strong trend of using weapons in unique and unconventional ways. Using an axe as a crook would be imo more interesting than just as another axe. Plus, you are forgetting that FB still has decent access to DPS bursts through time 1, and frankly I think it would be far more interesting to play an espec where the weapon is only for protection/movement while I attacked with a book.

(Also rescue in FFXIV is a very good tool for guiding inexperienced players in raids and group content. It is also an endless source of hilarity.)

You clearly don’t play or understand FB. FB dps does not use any support mantra except the heal. Activating tome of resolve or judgment comes at a significant dps. And even at top conditions, FB dps peaks at 36k dps which is far from top dps.

 

Quick brand is solid, but it does not provide much might. And is not even top dps among quick supports. Harbinger and Herald already put higher damage. Maybe even warrior and Catalyst. The only thing going for FB is it can provide aegis every long once in a while and stability. Even here it has competition, Herald. and the others quickness support builds offer other advantages. 
 

FB is very good (except in spvp), however, trying to paint it as a significantly OPed elite is 1 year late to the party.

[eldrevo.1746]

24 minutes ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

Putting aside the specific implementation, though, the idea that a support elite specialisation should be pure support regardless of stats is still bad. Being a pure healer is accessed by using healer stats.

Agreed. I'd rather see some valid DPS options for Druid, than other purely support-oriented specs.

The versatility of buildcrafting is the name of the game, and while some weapons can have a specific niche (power or condi DPS focused, supportive, melee or ranged focused etc.), in ideal world an elite spec weapon should cover most of the builds intended for that spec.

[Batalix.2873]

4 minutes ago, eldrevo.1746 said:

Agreed. I'd rather see some valid DPS options for Druid, than other purely support-oriented specs.

The versatility of buildcrafting is the name of the game, and while some weapons can have a specific niche (power or condi DPS focused, supportive, melee or ranged focused etc.), in ideal world an elite spec weapon should cover most of the builds intended for that spec.

 

There is a decent DPS spec for druid, it's called condi druid. You take shortbow and axe/torch instead of staff. Great all-arounder.

 

36 minutes ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

Claims other people don't understand how the game works.

Doesn't realise that the proposal to turn axe into a pure support weapon would just mean that people would use sword instead.

Putting aside the specific implementation, though, the idea that a support elite specialisation should be pure support regardless of stats is still bad. Being a pure healer is accessed by using healer stats. However, being a pure healer also makes it quite painful to play that elite specialisation in open world (which has historically been a big problem for druid), giving people less opportunity to practice it before actually hitting endgame content.

And, yeah, pulling players and NPCs with green names would absolutely be used for trolling, and possibly outright fifth-column activity in WvW.

 

Forcing players to choose between healing-crook axe and a power sword in a *support* espec that primarily only rewards condi damage through times and mantras would actually be an interesting and balanced design decision compared to what we have now. Especially if sword damage coefficients (and other power coefficients) were substantially tuned down on FB.

 

We are at a point now where the issues Druid used to represent have been mostly mitigated by the addition of more especs per profession.

 Don't want to play low-DPS support utility with a low-damage weapon? You have Soulbeast and Untamed you can swap to. You have Dragonhunter and Willbender that can be your DPS specs, instead of Firebrand doing literally everything and being synonymous with Guardian at this point.

 

Furthermore, I think the "no trinity, everything needs DPS viable" is a kitten poor attitude to take that actually is having the effect of lowering job diversity. It is just turning every espec into DPS roles with too much lazily tacked-on boon support that (a) doesn't fit their class identities very well and (b) still often doesn't perform as well as overbuilt support builds that can still do decent DPS (35k DPS is still huge when most open world content and casual raids/strikes are comfortably cleared with 10k DPS...Mech itself is also proof of how much a non-argument DPS in the 30ks is not a handicap when you bring overly accessible utility).

 

There are 27 specs in the game. GW2 is built out enough that we can afford to have more Druid-like, low-DPS pure support builds and still have plenty to play with. Firebrand, being an actual librarian with literally (and literally literally) *the whole library* of support boons through tomes and mantras, is the best candidate flavorfully to be retooled into pure support. Making it rely almost completely on tomes and spells for damage would be a flavor knockout and align so much better with its job fantasy. Firebrand is also, balance-wise, the espec that needs some aspects of its kit removed or nerfed away for being too good at everything. Contrariwise, Guardian is really lacking for a strong healer espec identity as a matter of espec diversity, as well as leaving niches for DH and WB to exist at all.

 

Furthermore, a loss of weapon damage on a couple abilities is ultimately not tampering with the core of Firebrand's identity. Ultimately a very minor tweak that has no impact on the bulk of Firebrand's kit with tomes and mantras. If the loss of your DPS kitten would completely invalidate the job for you, what do you even legitimately appreciate about it other than it is easy AF?

[eldrevo.1746]

2 hours ago, CourtJester.5908 said:

There is a decent DPS spec for druid, it's called condi druid. You take shortbow and axe/torch instead of staff. Great all-arounder.

Well yeah, it is a decent support/dps hybrid for when you need just a little bit of healing in a group encounter or in the open world... But it's still far from pure flexibility like DPS firebrand, DPS specter, DPS scourge...

[Frayze.4620]

I think that in all honesty, to get back build variation on guardian beyond “I play DH because I like the theme” types, you would have to turn it into something almost unrecognisable. It’s simply too versatile with the way tomes currently work skd so there’s very little reason to play anything else. That, coupled with not the best numbers on any spec, limit the amount of motivation to switch as well. I’m not trying to suggest that fb should be nerfed, even though I am not a guard main. I’m saying that in order to get the other specs into a better position, fb needs to lose some of its strength in tomes.

[Batalix.2873]

7 hours ago, eldrevo.1746 said:

Well yeah, it is a decent support/dps hybrid for when you need just a little bit of healing in a group encounter or in the open world... But it's still far from pure flexibility like DPS firebrand, DPS specter, DPS scourge...

 

Again, I think the trick to rebalancing these specs is looking at what their archetype is as a concept and pruning away the things that don't best align with their identity and unique game feel. And what I mean by archetype is, if you dig past the visuals, the lore, the weird naming conventions, nearly every espec in the game is just an implementation of a classic RPG job trope. Reaper is Dark Knight/Death Knight; Chronomancer is Time Mage; Soul Beast is Blue Mage/"the Kirby"; Catalyst is a shaman/geomancer; etc. etc. And I think there is a very good argument that the most broken builds in the game simply do not fully embrace their archetype, which requires admitting that they do not need the full functionality of a core generalist on top of their respective gimmicks.

 

Firebrand (The one that must fall)

- Unique Identity: Scholar, running with Guardian's runes and making a spellcaster based on inscriptions and incantations.

- Harmonious design: tomes and mantras, the most "booksmart" espec that knows nearly every boon under the sun.

- Superfluous/dissonant design: damage-dealing, particularly anything that doesn't come from spells/books.

- Solution: nerf damage coefficients and make axe function even more like a wand/crook than yet another axe. Let Firebrand be the easy source of boons it wants to be, but at the cost of not even worth making benchmarks for like Druid.

 

Scourge (I will sacrifice you for the greater good, baby boy)

- Unique Identity: Priest, taking Necro's resurrection, curses, and condi-transfer skills to a new level and adding the ability to preserve/mummify things in sand.

- Harmonious design: sand shades being able to convert condis/boons (purification/curses), sand barrier preserves your team.

- Superfluous/dissonant design: while not as bad as Firebrand, I also don't consider all the condi damage to be core to Scourge's concept.

- Solution: find ways to heavily reduce condition damage. Allow some small torment and fire bursts, but overall scale it back, maybe lean further into fire "purging" more than doing damage. It also in general Scourge is just in need of strict damage number reductions as a "ranged tax" so this accomplishes double duty of focusing the identity on "embalming/cursing" while also cutting off the head of one of the ranged DPS tall poppies that control the meta.

 

And you can take this philosophy and apply it to the other specs.

 

Specter (honestly haven't played yet but will take a stab)

- Unique Identity: Assassin, amplifying Thief's shadow magic and poison concepts.

- Harmonious design: shroud and condition damage

- Superfluous/dissonant design: healing, what sort of assassin heals?

- Solution: remove heals and leave Specter to provide stealthy boons, thief is probably the profession that least suits any sort of heal espec, and with 8 other professions there are plenty. Keep ST support, but make it boons, not heals.

 

Mechanist (The other one that must fall)

- Unique Identity: Puppeteer. It's just a golemancer.

- Harmonious design: a tanky pet that can extend your attack range, Engi's version of a "ranged" build.

- Superfluous/dissonant design: you, the player. Specifically, both you and your mech being about 3/4 of a tank+DPS+support each, making for 1.5x effectiveness and the flexibility of being able to delegate and source from multiple points on the field.

- Solution: Remove you as a point of damage. Have all attacks come from the mech, even your weaponskill attacks (make mech mimic them with jade tech). Also consider removing your own access to utilities other than sigils so that you have to still keep the mech close enough to protect your squishy body.

 

For contrast:

 

Virtuoso

- Unique Identity: Psychic/Psion

- Harmonious design: spoilers, all of it.

- Superfluous/dissonant design: maybe lacking real obstacles toward its singular DPS focus.

- Solution: Nerf numbers, give it a ranged tax, would still do plenty for newbs to have fun. Otherwise no real changes needed

[Eekasqueak.7850]

No ally pulls, the axe pull is fine, pulling enemies towards allies is already a support function same as the pull on mesmer's focus. Firebrand doesn't need any major reworks, better that they just bring up versatility on other supports at this point really.

[draxynnic.3719]

6 hours ago, Eekasqueak.7850 said:

No ally pulls, the axe pull is fine, pulling enemies towards allies is already a support function same as the pull on mesmer's focus. Firebrand doesn't need any major reworks, better that they just bring up versatility on other supports at this point really.

Plus, nerfing DPS on firebrand isn't going to help dragonhunter and willbender at all, because their problem is not that they're being outcompeted by firebrand. It's that they're just plain bad in instanced PvE content at the moment. Nerfing firebrand DPS without buffing power guardian would just kick guardian out of DPS roles altogether.

 

Keeping the specialisations viable in solo PvE (which pure supports are not) means that the specialisation is still a viable option at lower levels of play, which means people actually get the opportunity to learn how it functions, which can be converted to playing it in support roles.

 

In the context of this thread, there's nothing wrong with condi firebrand. It has relatively low DPS for a DPS role, in exchange for having some built-in support aspects, and it's probably a little easier to play. Similar comments apply to quickbrand at the moment. The reason the others aren't being used is that they're basically selfish DPS builds (as selfish as anything on a guardian chassis can be) that don't actually bring good DPS. Give them a bit more damage (without also buffing firebrand) and people might start switching to them when they need to fill a DPS role rather than sticking on firebrand or switching to another profession altogether.

 

The reason why firebrand has a DPS weapon rather than a support weapon, unlike druid, is that guardian already HAD multiple support weapons, but what it was missing was a condi weapon that didn't rely purely on Justice procs. If condi willbender was improved it could possibly fit (back) into a pure condi DPS role, but firebrand was deliberately intended to give guardian a condition damage option at the time.

Edited October 26, 2022 by draxynnic.3719

[Batalix.2873]

7 hours ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

Plus, nerfing DPS on firebrand isn't going to help dragonhunter and willbender at all, because their problem is not that they're being outcompeted by firebrand. It's that they're just plain bad in instanced PvE content at the moment. Nerfing firebrand DPS without buffing power guardian would just kick guardian out of DPS roles altogether.

 

Keeping the specialisations viable in solo PvE (which pure supports are not) means that the specialisation is still a viable option at lower levels of play, which means people actually get the opportunity to learn how it functions, which can be converted to playing it in support roles.

 

In the context of this thread, there's nothing wrong with condi firebrand. It has relatively low DPS for a DPS role, in exchange for having some built-in support aspects, and it's probably a little easier to play. Similar comments apply to quickbrand at the moment. The reason the others aren't being used is that they're basically selfish DPS builds (as selfish as anything on a guardian chassis can be) that don't actually bring good DPS. Give them a bit more damage (without also buffing firebrand) and people might start switching to them when they need to fill a DPS role rather than sticking on firebrand or switching to another profession altogether.

 

The reason why firebrand has a DPS weapon rather than a support weapon, unlike druid, is that guardian already HAD multiple support weapons, but what it was missing was a condi weapon that didn't rely purely on Justice procs. If condi willbender was improved it could possibly fit (back) into a pure condi DPS role, but firebrand was deliberately intended to give guardian a condition damage option at the time.

 

1) I do also think that DH and WB should receive targeted buffs in addition to FB being nerfed. In fact I would argue both are necessary, and just whataboutisming the other Guardian specs does not excuse FB being broken and needing to define a narrower niche.

 

2) Condi FB has only marginally low DPS, but even anything above 20k is still quite good and far more than it needs or deserves. Druid isn't benched on SnowCrows at all, and if you actually looked at the support utility and overall job identity of especs, Firebrand is perhaps the most "support-capable" job that doesn't want, nor need, to be a benchable DPS. I would order it just behind Druid for least-weapon-damage-dependent concept (*concept*, not *execution of that concept that everyone now religiously takes for granted*), about on par with Herald and just a tad ahead of Scourge.

 

3) I agree with you that at the time of release, it made sense to give Guardian a damage weapon. However I disagree firstly that, if that was the aim, they paired it with an everyman librarian concept that knows how to apply all the boons on command. It was a splayed, incoherent concept from the beginning. And I secondly point out that retrospect and more espec options is a perfect situation to consider going back and removing questionable decisions like that. Now that WB *can* be Guardian's DPS spec with a little buffing (and has little to offer outside of that), Firebrand can now be reined in to be Guardian's heal spec, which is more aligned with its concept anyway.

Most FB players either go healbrand or quickbrand, neither of which require or involve much weapon use anyway. Very few people would actually miss a DPS FB, and I think heavily nerfing one or three of the most problematic everyman specs is much preferable for making all 27 specs able to do everything, which would dilute job identity into samey mush because the devs have really strict restrictions on combat interfacing: 5 weapons, 5 profession skills, 5 utilities. There are only so many permutations they can make everyman jobs before they start to repeat gimmicks and play feel, and I guarantee that spot-cleaning Mech and FB (and maybe Scourge and Specter) will preserve a "very good system" more than bringing some 20 jobs up to a samey level of non-engagement.

Edited October 26, 2022 by CourtJester.5908

[draxynnic.3719]

First, it's not whataboutism when the two alleged problems are linked. Your proposed solution to the alleged problem would have the effect of making the guardian DPS problem WORSE, since it would shift them from having only one credible DPS option for instanced content to having no such options. Whataboutism usually applies to situations where the only link between the two issues is that resources spent on one cannot then be spent on the other, not when a solution to one actively makes the other worse. If someone proposed building more coal power stations to solve a power supply issue, it wouldn't be whataboutism for someone to say that this makes CO2 emission targets harder to reach, because it's not saying "your problem is insignificant compared to this other problem that I'm going to say you should be focusing on instead", it's pointing out that the proposed solution to one problem has a direct impact on the other.

 

Second, onto the substance of the discussion:

 

I really don't buy into the "specialisations need to be specialised" argument. When one build gets too dominant, sure, that's a problem, but despite the name, elite specialisations are more like subclasses: they offer a new way to play the profession. I don't think it's appropriate to say "oh, but if you want to use this particular set of tools, you HAVE to be playing support". Even if condi willbender, or some other future condi-focused guardian elite specialisation, becomes the best condition DPS build in the game, it's still not going to have the same general style as firebrand does (a condi willbender won't have the same ability to strike multiple targets as firebrand tome 1 does), nor does it allow people to realistically play it in open world and solo content and therefore develop skills that can then be brought into more difficult content. Not to mention that your philosophy would also kill quickbrand, making healbrand the only viable form.

 

Sorry, but we have stats to decide whether you're going to be a healer or not. People should be allowed to play firebrand as a DPS or solo build if they want to, albeit one with a bit less damage to account for built-in support elements and its ability to hit a wide area (we could argue over whether 36k is low enough, but your "even anything above 20k is still quite good and far more than it needs or deserves" indicates that what you want is a complete butchering). Same with tempest, scrapper, mechanist (you heard me, it might still be a little too strong but it doesn't deserve to be butchered either), every rev elite specialisation since they can all theoretically be set up as healers, druid (yes, druid), spectre, and anything else that could be labelled as a 'support spec'. 

 

I do find it amusing that you've gone from saying that there is a "decent DPS spec for druid", and then pointing out a few posts later that you won't find it on snowcrows (or, incidentally, hardstuck. Guildjen has a hybrid druid for open world). You don't even find it on metabattle... until and unless you go into the competitive sections. Why? Because, let's face it, there's a "decent DPS spec" for core ranger, whether condi or power. The only thing druid really adds except lots and lots of healing is lots and lots of immobilise and a bit of CC which, funnily enough, are mostly useful in competitive modes, and when you need that control in a raid-like environment, you could just as easily get it from a support druid. Sure, you can make condi druid work in PvE, but that's because core condi ranger (and core power ranger) is good enough that you can throw most of a traitline down the drain and not be completely crippled. It's not something you'd actually recommend anyone do except for the explicit purpose of practicing druid so you can use it somewhere else.

 

But while the recent changes have improved things a bit (by making CA less reliant on healing allies, and reducing the penalty on your pet), it's still pretty close to being a handicap if you don't have allies to heal, even if you're on a DPS gearset. Sure, you can heal yourself with CA, but (similar to firebrand tomes 2 and 3) you also drop your DPS close to zero in the process. This is less of a problem now that druid is no longer the only ranger elite specialisation, to be sure, but I still don't think it's a good thing that druid is pretty close to being confined to be only used for group content only - there are people who aren't at that stage yet who might like the theme and want to try it out, and people who are inclined to take it to competitive or endgame content have less of an opportunity to practice it on their own unless they accept that they're handicapping whatever other PvE goal they might be working on for the sake of that practice.

 

Druid being as laser-focused on support as it is is, to me, a far bigger problem than other "support specs" having versatility, and not one I want to see spread to other specs.

 

And let's be real here: Guardian has enough support weapons. Staff is support. Mace is support. Hammer is basically tanking/support. We don't need another such weapon that doesn't get used because it's in a field that's already highly competitive. Druid got a support weapon because core ranger doesn't have a support weapon apart from boons on warhorn, so that's what druid needed. Firebrand got a condi weapon because guardian already had enough support weapons.

[Eekasqueak.7850]

Specs being able to do more not less leads to more fun gameplay imo, being pigeon-holed into a single thing isn't fun for anyone and I don't think firebrand is in a place where it needs more nerfs. The benchmark is with allies and is lower than specter which is the closest analogue which it sacrificing a bit of DPS compared to specter so it can have a bit more utility is fine. They need to make other supports better to play and able to do more too, and they 100% need to buff DH and WB at the very least. Honestly starting to think you have some kind of personal grudge against the class for how bad you want them to make it.

[Batalix.2873]

11 hours ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

First, it's not whataboutism when the two alleged problems are linked. Your proposed solution to the alleged problem would have the effect of making the guardian DPS problem WORSE, since it would shift them from having only one credible DPS option for instanced content to having no such options. Whataboutism usually applies to situations where the only link between the two issues is that resources spent on one cannot then be spent on the other, not when a solution to one actively makes the other worse. If someone proposed building more coal power stations to solve a power supply issue, it wouldn't be whataboutism for someone to say that this makes CO2 emission targets harder to reach, because it's not saying "your problem is insignificant compared to this other problem that I'm going to say you should be focusing on instead", it's pointing out that the proposed solution to one problem has a direct impact on the other.

 

Second, onto the substance of the discussion:

 

I really don't buy into the "specialisations need to be specialised" argument. When one build gets too dominant, sure, that's a problem, but despite the name, elite specialisations are more like subclasses: they offer a new way to play the profession. I don't think it's appropriate to say "oh, but if you want to use this particular set of tools, you HAVE to be playing support". Even if condi willbender, or some other future condi-focused guardian elite specialisation, becomes the best condition DPS build in the game, it's still not going to have the same general style as firebrand does (a condi willbender won't have the same ability to strike multiple targets as firebrand tome 1 does), nor does it allow people to realistically play it in open world and solo content and therefore develop skills that can then be brought into more difficult content. Not to mention that your philosophy would also kill quickbrand, making healbrand the only viable form.

 

Sorry, but we have stats to decide whether you're going to be a healer or not. People should be allowed to play firebrand as a DPS or solo build if they want to, albeit one with a bit less damage to account for built-in support elements and its ability to hit a wide area (we could argue over whether 36k is low enough, but your "even anything above 20k is still quite good and far more than it needs or deserves" indicates that what you want is a complete butchering). Same with tempest, scrapper, mechanist (you heard me, it might still be a little too strong but it doesn't deserve to be butchered either), every rev elite specialisation since they can all theoretically be set up as healers, druid (yes, druid), spectre, and anything else that could be labelled as a 'support spec'. 

 

I do find it amusing that you've gone from saying that there is a "decent DPS spec for druid", and then pointing out a few posts later that you won't find it on snowcrows (or, incidentally, hardstuck. Guildjen has a hybrid druid for open world). You don't even find it on metabattle... until and unless you go into the competitive sections. Why? Because, let's face it, there's a "decent DPS spec" for core ranger, whether condi or power. The only thing druid really adds except lots and lots of healing is lots and lots of immobilise and a bit of CC which, funnily enough, are mostly useful in competitive modes, and when you need that control in a raid-like environment, you could just as easily get it from a support druid. Sure, you can make condi druid work in PvE, but that's because core condi ranger (and core power ranger) is good enough that you can throw most of a traitline down the drain and not be completely crippled. It's not something you'd actually recommend anyone do except for the explicit purpose of practicing druid so you can use it somewhere else.

 

But while the recent changes have improved things a bit (by making CA less reliant on healing allies, and reducing the penalty on your pet), it's still pretty close to being a handicap if you don't have allies to heal, even if you're on a DPS gearset. Sure, you can heal yourself with CA, but (similar to firebrand tomes 2 and 3) you also drop your DPS close to zero in the process. This is less of a problem now that druid is no longer the only ranger elite specialisation, to be sure, but I still don't think it's a good thing that druid is pretty close to being confined to be only used for group content only - there are people who aren't at that stage yet who might like the theme and want to try it out, and people who are inclined to take it to competitive or endgame content have less of an opportunity to practice it on their own unless they accept that they're handicapping whatever other PvE goal they might be working on for the sake of that practice.

 

Druid being as laser-focused on support as it is is, to me, a far bigger problem than other "support specs" having versatility, and not one I want to see spread to other specs.

 

And let's be real here: Guardian has enough support weapons. Staff is support. Mace is support. Hammer is basically tanking/support. We don't need another such weapon that doesn't get used because it's in a field that's already highly competitive. Druid got a support weapon because core ranger doesn't have a support weapon apart from boons on warhorn, so that's what druid needed. Firebrand got a condi weapon because guardian already had enough support weapons.

 

First off, that rule about whataboutism is totally arbitrary and incorrect here. Whataboutism is drawing attention away from one issue with related criticisms about a different issue, in an attempt to invalidate the initial criticism. You are trying to shut down arguments about the profound problem that is firebrand by claiming that "the *real* and *bigger* problem is DH and WB needing buffs. I have acknowledged your countercriticisms as valid, but just because other especs have problems does not mean Firebrand does not *also have problems*. Not to mention, I proposed a solution wherein all three could be retooled to make for a more balanced set of Guardian especs, to which you shut it down just because you have a rigid notion of what Firebrand should be and do.

 

Regarding condi ranger, get your head out of your kitten. Content in this game is not so hard as to make less-than-optimal builds valid. DPS in the 15k to 20k range, even less, is still totally doable in raid content, especially if you bring alacrity or quickness. Content is overwhelmingly clearable if you respect mechanics. The only reason a "meta" exists and people like you trash builds is because antisocial puggers don't want to actually have to communicate and collaborate with strangers. That's not a build problem, that is a community and personal growth problem.

 

The most played profession after the rifle mech nerf, and for many years prior to EoD, with a WHOPPING 22 percent of total espec representation in raids. Heal druid sees a reasonable amount of play while doing virtually no weapon damage, and the only time that was ever a problem was when there were only 9 especs and no comparables. There is absolutely no reason why Firebrand needs to continue being a damage dealer, and yes I do want to butcher its DPS output because myopic fanboys do not consider anything other than DPS a valid metric of quality. Nor do people like you seem to even register the fact that ONE IN FIVE jobs on the raid/WvW field are Firebrand.

 

There are 26 other especs, and you are choosing to stand on this hill at the cost of the health of job diversity and design. You refuse to even consider allowing one or two more especs (particularly the most problematic espec alongside Mech) to be refined into purer healer archetypes, nor even consider the fact that maybe it is okay that Guardian (still with, as you have observed, two DPS especs, buffing notwithstanding) is more heal-focused generally because it is the "defensive tank" as its unique niche contrasting against Warrior as "attack tank" and Revenant as "speed tank". Willbender now does condi damage, so any argument for FB needed to keep that as a central feature are just arguments from tradition and favoritism.

 

What I am reading from you is a whole lot of defensiveness and frankly poor arguments protecting an overpowered class simply because you care more about your own ease of play than the health of the other 26 especs. Firebrand would still be great without a damage weapon. I'm surprised at the level of defensiveness I am seeing though, because frankly FB doesn't use axe as much as other especs use their weapons due to tomes, and on top of that it's three attacks aren't especially satisfying as damaging attacks anyway.

Your ideas are not holistic in the slightest. They are comparatively shallow flailing in defense of self-interest at the cost of the greater work and community. I think I've made my point here so I will not be responding further.

Edited October 27, 2022 by CourtJester.5908