Firebrands never forget what we once were

[Waffles.5632]

 

Long have we had our moment in the sun.

Gone, but not forgotten.

 

All jokes aside though, I am actually wanting to play firebrand again after reading the changes from the preview notes.

IMO they look fun and firebrand seems like it will be more dynamic now, going in and out of the tomes while managing the new way the page resource flows.

[Gaiawolf.8261]

I'm seriously gonna miss that wicked tome opening animation, would be cool if we could get the open book from the original tomes back while they are activated though.

EDIT: I apologize; I was incorrect. I watched the preview again, and the tome opening animation is still there. I am very happy about that. The original open tome graphic is still cooler tho. 😉

EDIT 2: Looked again, closer this time. The book opening animation is still there, but the character animations during it were cut out. The book just opens over your head now without the character doing anything.

Edited November 24, 2022 by Gaiawolf.8261

[Infusion.7149]

Unless it makes firebrand viable in PVP it really changes nothing: the last time I played firebrand in PVP it was when sagebrand was a thing. In PVE it will still likely be used anywhere power doesn't have a massive advantage ; in WVW you aren't dropping firebrand realistically.

[Gaiawolf.8261]

3 hours ago, Infusion.7149 said:

in WVW you aren't dropping firebrand realistically.

Except when roaming or trying to catch up with a group. 😅

[Lonewolf Kai.3682]

On 11/20/2022 at 12:51 PM, Gaiawolf.8261 said:

I'm seriously gonna miss that wicked tome opening animation, would be cool if we could get the open book from the original tomes back while they are activated though.

EDIT: I apologize; I was incorrect. I watched the preview again, and the tome opening animation is still there. I am very happy about that. The original open tome graphic is still cooler tho. 😉

 

Dude you scared me!!  Also, I like the current anim better myself.

[Gaiawolf.8261]

5 minutes ago, Lonewolf Kai.3682 said:

Dude you scared me!!  Also, I like the current anim better myself.

Yeah, sorry about that. People were spouting that it was removed in the twitch chat and Reddit, and like a fool, I believed them without checking. I went back and checked, the animation was still there in the stream.

[DanAlcedo.3281]

Its crazy that Firebrand gets nerfed so much but is still mandetory S Tier im WvW, with no other support be even close to it.

Man.. i hope every other support gets more buffs.

[Lonewolf Kai.3682]

On 11/22/2022 at 1:29 PM, DanAlcedo.3281 said:

Its crazy that Firebrand gets nerfed so much but is still mandetory S Tier im WvW, with no other support be even close to it.

Man.. i hope every other support gets more buffs.

Honestly, they’re going to have to get rid of FBs stab skills and quickness altogether. Buff it in other ways, like tome1

[Gaiawolf.8261]

I looked again at the Twitch feed a little closer this time. The book opening animation is still there, but the character animations during it were cut out. The book just opens over your head now without the character doing anything. A half nerf?

[Lonewolf Kai.3682]

1 hour ago, Gaiawolf.8261 said:

I looked again at the Twitch feed a little closer this time. The book opening animation is still there, but the character animations during it were cut out. The book just opens over your head now without the character doing anything. A half nerf?

Oh man. That sucks!

[Waffles.5632]

Yeah I too miss the old school mantra animations, and am gonna miss the book opening animations now as well.

Definitely a nerf imo because aesthetic and feel is an important part of any well designed class. It's why, IMO, a lot of EoD specs just miss the mark, because most are re-using old animations, the biggest offender being vindicator.

[ollbirtan.2915]

I mean, what did you guys expect from cmc "design philosophy"? We have a well designed class with traits that have perfect synergy that allows for variety of builds - core, dh, FB. Instead of actually brining other classes on the same level in terms of design and playability, the anet "devs" do what they always do - nuke the spec/class into the ground.  

[Kodama.6453]

3 hours ago, ollbirtan.2915 said:

I mean, what did you guys expect from cmc "design philosophy"? We have a well designed class with traits that have perfect synergy that allows for variety of builds - core, dh, FB. Instead of actually brining other classes on the same level in terms of design and playability, the anet "devs" do what they always do - nuke the spec/class into the ground.  

Firebrand literally got handed free damage, boons and healing all by just slotting in the elite spec, not even having to invest a single trait to get these tomes, they were all baseline....

And they also didn't compete with each other before, each tome has it's own pages so there was really no reason not to use the free utility the spec came with when it was needed.

That's not good design in my book. If everyone would have been brought up to that standard, then every class would do everything (damage, boon support, heal support) at the same time. That is quite the absolute opposite of what a specialization should be.

[Ruisenior.6342]

On 11/26/2022 at 2:52 PM, Kodama.6453 said:

That's not good design in my book. If everyone would have been brought up to that standard, then every class would do everything (damage, boon support, heal support) at the same time.

       Thats just what i expect from a game that claims to have removed the trinity. So yes they should bring every other spec to Firebrand pre nerf standards, granting every single spec all tools needed to do everything on its own way.

On 11/26/2022 at 11:36 AM, ollbirtan.2915 said:

I mean, what did you guys expect from cmc "design philosophy"? We have a well designed class with traits that have perfect synergy that allows for variety of builds - core, dh, FB. Instead of actually brining other classes on the same level in terms of design and playability, the anet "devs" do what they always do - nuke the spec/class into the ground.  

     Maybe past times were better 😞 

Edited November 28, 2022 by Ruisenior.6342

[Lord Trejgon.2809]

1 hour ago, Ruisenior.6342 said:

 Thats just what i expect from a game that claims to have removed the trinity.

Except they never said they are "removing the trinity", they said they are removing tank-healer-dps trinity and replacing it with their own of damage-control-support.

[Gaiawolf.8261]

1 hour ago, Lord Trejgon.2809 said:

Except they never said they are "removing the trinity", they said they are removing tank-healer-dps trinity and replacing it with their own of damage-control-support.

I don't remember this. From my recollection, gw2 was marketed as a game where classes didn't have defined roles and each was mostly self-sufficient. This was explained why each class was given its own dedicated healing skill and utility skills. The design was builds and skills like gw, not roles with holes. 

Along with the b2p model, it's the biggest reason I chose gw2 over it's competitors. 

[Kodama.6453]

3 hours ago, Ruisenior.6342 said:

 Thats just what i expect from a game that claims to have removed the trinity. So yes they should bring every other spec to Firebrand pre nerf standards, granting every single spec all tools needed to do everything on its own way.

The idea is that every class should be able to fill any role they want if they build for it.

Hence why thief, for example, got a healing spec this turn, because healing was not something they could realistically provide to a group in a strike or raid. Or ranger getting a CC and tank heavy spec with untamed, since they were lacking in tank features before.

No class should be able to do all these things with just one single build. That's why firebrand was bad design, it always brought boons, healing and damage, no matter what. With the coming changes, they are still versatile in the sense that they can focus their build in either direction. But they have to chose now on what they want to focus and if they want to provide boons, for example, then they have to sacrifice some of their damage (or healing) for that.

[Telgum.6071]

On 11/26/2022 at 11:36 AM, ollbirtan.2915 said:

I mean, what did you guys expect from cmc "design philosophy"? We have a well designed class with traits that have perfect synergy that allows for variety of builds - core, dh, FB. Instead of actually brining other classes on the same level in terms of design and playability, the anet "devs" do what they always do - nuke the spec/class into the ground.  

I wouldn't call "well designed" a specialization that is just a bloated mess of boon spam.

[Ruisenior.6342]

2 hours ago, Kodama.6453 said:

The idea is that every class should be able to fill any role they want if they build for it.

Hence why thief, for example, got a healing spec this turn, because healing was not something they could realistically provide to a group in a strike or raid. Or ranger getting a CC and tank heavy spec with untamed, since they were lacking in tank features before.

No class should be able to do all these things with just one single build. That's why firebrand was bad design, it always brought boons, healing and damage, no matter what. With the coming changes, they are still versatile in the sense that they can focus their build in either direction. But they have to chose now on what they want to focus and if they want to provide boons, for example, then they have to sacrifice some of their damage (or healing) for that.

    But the celestial build that you are targeting couldn't be a proper healer (mediocre on that department) nor a proper dps, it was just an excelent boon provider plus some damage.

   So yes to become a healfirebrand you should 'build for it' sacrificing all your damage to achieve it, same goes to the dps version. 

    You should remember that nowadays we have specs like harbinger that are able to top damage charts while providing perma quickness building full 'viper+nightmererunes' XD

      Like me and others on this thread said, every single class should aim to be something like firebrand prenerf. Opinions like yours just killed the best spec this game had to offer.

[Sagedurk.7358]

On 11/26/2022 at 11:36 AM, ollbirtan.2915 said:

I mean, what did you guys expect from cmc "design philosophy"? We have a well designed class with traits that have perfect synergy that allows for variety of builds - core, dh, FB. Instead of actually brining other classes on the same level in terms of design and playability, the anet "devs" do what they always do - nuke the spec/class into the ground.  

Good. Maybe now Guardian won't be equated with Firebrand anymore.

Oh no, Firebrand is finally being put in its place after years and years of being so strong?

Are you aware of Willbender existing at all? DH has been in a sad state for a long time.

And what's happening in tomorrow's patch? They both get buffed.

 

If they actually nuked Guardian, I would be more livid as a Willbender main than the Firebrands.

Willbender had 4 good months. Then the June patch happened. Willbender used to have more build variety than Firebrand, and suddenly, only the condi dps build had meta relevancy. 5 months later and Willbender is brought back from a sad, forgotten state in some capacity at all. It has sucked during a longer period than it has been good. 

 

If you don't want Firebrand to be nerfed, start by helping get the rest of Guardian to the same level. 

Cause Firebrand has been the exception, not the rule. It's even the only Guardian with virtues that don't act like virtues.

Firebrand replaced virtues with weapon conjuration. While DH made the virtues physical and WB made them movement based.

 

 

And on the topic of Firebrand. Heal Alac Willbender has a higher raw healing output, but that means jack kitten due to how versatile Firebrand has ALWAYS been, even though they're both guardians. To give you some perspective of the gap between them: Snowcrows hasn't updated their Healbender build since July. It's not even a complete build. The description still has Lorem Ipsum text. I alone has theorycrafted Healbender further than what you can see on SC. That's how big of a gap there is between healbender and healbrand.

 

Remember when they nerfed a core condi trait for the single purpose to curb quickbrand's dps? That affected condi Willbender, a nerf it definitely didn't need.

You want to complain about Firebrand? Willbender can't even give Alacrity without traiting Battle Presence, which is absolute pain for power alac, cause now you have to rely on aegis for your damage potential instead of resolution. Not to mention having to drop Tyrant's Momentum for Phoenix Protocol. Oh, and also, Absolute Resolve get's downgraded to a measly 3 condi removal on F2 activation when traited with Phoenix Protocol, because PP replaces the healing with regen, which doesn't get affected at all by AR.

 

 

Imagine if Firebrand needed to rely on BP for quickness, or have broken trait interactions. Or having trouble providing full might stacks. You know, the ONLY guardian utility skill that gives might, is the quickness mantra on Firebrand. Willbender has a trait, Holy Reckoning, that can't be shared to allies.

 

 

Nerf Firebrand to the level of current Willbender, and maybe then people will realize the actual state of the class and not just the state of Firebrand. There's a single reason I have for not wanting Firebrand to be in a state like the rest of Guardian, which is the lack of resolution on other healers, which would affect power Guardian.

 

Imagine saying that Guardian is well designed as a whole when we have a big gap between Willbender and Firebrand. The "variety" of builds have always been firebrand, firebrand, and more firebrand, unless you count the one Power DH build we've had, as well as the 4 Willbender builds that existed for 4 months, and a footnote for the obscure Healbender. Willbender alone has more variety than Firebrand, but absolutely no one cares about it. Power DPS, Condi DPS, Power Alac, Condi Alac, Heal Alac. And as I mentioned, the whole elite spec hasn't had a good run of even half a year.

Willbender would need absolute insane utilities in order to compete with Healbrand.

Want to bring Willbender up to Firebrand's level? Crank Physicals up to 11 and make them have some sort of utility, make the virtues have multiple charges so they can be used multiple times like Firebrand, make the master WB traits sharable by default as well as proper trait interaction and PP being party-wide by default, and tweak the numbers. Cause unless you make Willbender into Firebrand 2, it won't compete as a healer, due to the versatility that Firebrand has. The alac builds barely give any sort of boons outside of alac. That ain't the case for quickbrand.

 

 

Complain about Firebrand all you want, at least you're not a Willbender! Learn to accept that Guardian ain't the golden child

[vee.5609]

There was no single golden child other than GW1 getting folks addicted to the game. The current game has a long history flip-flopping on balance-patches. Every patch people of favored-class-X claims another class should be nurfed more than their class cuz a,b,c reasons. Wakeup and realize that anet would rather see folks argue on the forums over class-balances than give 1,5,10,mega-player content. The lack of QA that is given is a joke; it all feels rushed and the lack of in-game polling vs having folks respond in the forums speaks volumes in itself.

 

Anet did mention that DH was going to be retired in the last April-fools thread; the joke was the "DH" part, the reality is that it seems the whole gamestyles for all classes get to be thrown in the dumpster and set on fire. Your best bet if you want to be heard is to simply stop playing guardian if it no longer suites your interest; why do something that is not fun (not including work here).

 

I'd like to actually see some true basic stats, normalized on player game-time per class/elite specialization and basic questions regarding thoughts of previous/planned balance patches; but that does not exist in-game either.

 

[EveningTempo.4796]

On 11/28/2022 at 4:19 PM, Sagedurk.7358 said:

Willbender had 4 good months.

The general sentiment is that willbender was always worse than any other alac healer/dps.

[Funky.4861]

Many of the comments in this thread aged like milk...

[Lord Trejgon.2809]

On 11/28/2022 at 3:42 PM, Gaiawolf.8261 said:

I don't remember this. From my recollection, gw2 was marketed as a game where classes didn't have defined roles and each was mostly self-sufficient. This was explained why each class was given its own dedicated healing skill and utility skills. The design was builds and skills like gw, not roles with holes. 

Along with the b2p model, it's the biggest reason I chose gw2 over it's competitors. 

Ok, first off - sorry for being very late with this response, had some irl crash down and didn't have time to look at the forums.

What you are saying and what I have said is not mutually exclusive, and in fact, you are correct, as it was a design choice to not have the class stuck to a specific role, but be flexible and be able to quickly adapt to whatever need is necessary to perform within the "new trinity" they were creating (control, support, damage).

I tried to track down the original combat interview that have introduced those concepts I was talking about, it happened in pre-release, before they announced guardian profession, (I remember even writing a blog for a local fanpage that was breaking down Guardian announcement in light of that interview, and why despite popular belief it was not going to be pure support class), but I am finding myself unable to find the original interview - all the traces I could find have ultimately led me to websites that have since shut down, and in one case to a 404 error on one of AN pages. I did found a reference to the concepts from that interview, from Colin, in a clarification to dev stream from 2015:

Quote

We like the way combat works right now, we really don't plan to change it much other than add more options with elite specs. It works the way we intended: you can play control, support, and DPS actively.

source: https://www.tentonhammer.com/news/guild-wars-2-colin-johanson-clarifies-his-points-of-interest-comment

 

[Gaiawolf.8261]

1 hour ago, Lord Trejgon.2809 said:

Ok, first off - sorry for being very late with this response, had some irl crash down and didn't have time to look at the forums.

What you are saying and what I have said is not mutually exclusive, and in fact, you are correct, as it was a design choice to not have the class stuck to a specific role, but be flexible and be able to quickly adapt to whatever need is necessary to perform within the "new trinity" they were creating (control, support, damage).

I tried to track down the original combat interview that have introduced those concepts I was talking about, it happened in pre-release, before they announced guardian profession, (I remember even writing a blog for a local fanpage that was breaking down Guardian announcement in light of that interview, and why despite popular belief it was not going to be pure support class), but I am finding myself unable to find the original interview - all the traces I could find have ultimately led me to websites that have since shut down, and in one case to a 404 error on one of AN pages. I did found a reference to the concepts from that interview, from Colin, in a clarification to dev stream from 2015:

source: https://www.tentonhammer.com/news/guild-wars-2-colin-johanson-clarifies-his-points-of-interest-comment

 

Thanks for that. I think I remember that interview. I like their concept for the guardian, but still rolled a mesmer first because this is kitten Guild Wars! LOL