Congratulations "balance" team, you've put the final nail in the coffin for cFB

[Massimoni.9453]

Not much to say here for anyone that follows the latest updates and numbers.

 

The last patch ended the life of cFB in instanced content. Now we have a build that is absolute a** to play after they "reworked" aka sucked the fun out of the spec by leaving us with a clunky combination of Engi kits and Thief initiative - probably two of the most disliked mechanics in the game - and a REVERT of QoL (I'm actually curious what has to go through a persons mind to think that this is a good idea) regarding mantras while sitting on a laughable benchmark of sub 37k. The best thing of all is that this benchmark is unrealistically high thanks to the build being melee and relying on long-lasting small-area AoE pulsing - in turn making it probably one of the if not THE worst meta DPS right now.

 

I just don't get what's so hard about decoupling qFB and cFB if you felt that the former was too strong despite its benchmark also being super unrealistic - you would never take the full DPS setup that was taken when producing the benchmark. Like just rearrange the traits so that you'd have to choose between quickness or a big chunk of burning damage boost, easy fix yet you prefer to just nuke the spec as a whole, completely ignoring what else is affected by it.

 

What I therefore want to see assuming you actually want people to enjoy all aspects of a spec:

- Revert the gameplay "overhaul" -> IMO a WAY better approach would've been to make you "unlock" the tomes through traits and just keep their mechanics as they were pre-patch. This way you could lock supports out of big damage and make cFB as a DPS do what it's supposed to do with it only being able to access the F1 tome

- Reintroduce the QoL on mantras -> not much to say here, I think everyone except hyper casuals that wanna look at some fancy casting animations will agree. There is zero fun in sitting there and doing nothing while your mantra recharges

- Decouple qFB and cFB to prevent situations like now -> extremely easy fix yet still not considered. qFB and cFB are too close to each other in DPS which is purely to the detriment of the latter

[Hotride.2187]

Yes to decoupling qcfb and cfb.

No to the mantra suggestion, I prefer the old (current) mantras.

I prefer the new tomes. I'm also fine with picking only one tome, but CDs will have to be tuned very well if you can no longer go into the tome at any point.

Edited May 14, 2023 by Hotride.2187

[draxynnic.3719]

3 hours ago, Massimoni.9453 said:

What I therefore want to see assuming you actually want people to enjoy all aspects of a spec:

- Revert the gameplay "overhaul" -> IMO a WAY better approach would've been to make you "unlock" the tomes through traits and just keep their mechanics as they were pre-patch. This way you could lock supports out of big damage and make cFB as a DPS do what it's supposed to do with it only being able to access the F1 tome

 

That'd be worse. You can pretty much play the overhauled version in the way you described already - just spend all your pages in tome 1 without holding anything back for the other tomes. Your suggestion would result in a lot of dead trait effects since guardian core traits assume the presence of three virtues.

I'd also note that it wasn't too long ago that cFB benched at ~37k and was still considered good due to having the ability to provide additional utility.

Decoupling cFB and qFB could help, sure, but cFB is still one of the relatively easy builds to get respectable DPS with.

[Massimoni.9453]

40 minutes ago, Hotride.2187 said:

Yes to decoupling qcfb and cfb.

No to the mantra suggestion, I prefer the old (current) mantras.

I prefer the new tomes. I'm also fine with picking only one tome, but CDs will have to be tuned very well if you can no longer go into the tome at any point.

From what I've seen and my personal opinion, the old QoL mantras were much more liked. Also you are definitely in the minority with your view on the new tomes. Question for personal interest: Do you raid? There doesn't seem to be a kp.me connected to your tag.

[Massimoni.9453]

47 minutes ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

Your suggestion would result in a lot of dead trait effects since guardian core traits assume the presence of three virtues.

Then that would be a rework that'd actually make sense. Not too sure if that would actually affect cFB tho as you only dip into the Virtue 1 traits anyways and HFB (and potentially qFB - depending on how that'd be implemented exactly) can still use the other tomes and therefore trait effects. Dead traits also aren't anything unseen, more like the opposite.

 

47 minutes ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

You can pretty much play the overhauled version in the way you described already - just spend all your pages in tome 1 without holding anything back for the other tomes.

That apparently doesn't result in the optimal DPS though, otherwise the benchmarks would do so also. Now it's just more or less guessing when your skills are back - unless you wanna couple it with Purging Flames off cooldown which you do NOT want to do thanks to boss movement - and if you wanna max DPS you have to dip in and out at what feels random times to get your Tome 1 Skill 2 going. As a cFB main who perfected the playstyle and hit benchmark on a regular, the class just didn't feel fun anymore after the rework, even when just using the old playstyle.

47 minutes ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

I'd also note that it wasn't too long ago that cFB benched at ~37k and was still considered good due to having the ability to provide additional utility.

Well, circumstances were completely different back then. First of all you still had your other unnerfed tomes back then and also 37k was much more competitive than it is now with everything shooting up to 40k+. Stating the absolute number makes no sense when you don't factor in the alternatives. if everything was doing 5k and cFB 37k it'd be OP as all hell, yet nowadays people just smirk at it. I can just play e.g. Spellbreaker or the likes and have a straight up much better spec.

47 minutes ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

but cFB is still one of the relatively easy builds to get respectable DPS with.

I don't see how that point holds any relevance when the theoretical maximum sucks already. Killing a build when played competitively but saying the LI variant is still okay (which I kinda doubt with all the LI variants around) doesn't help at all. Heck, there are 40k+ LI weavers around which are so easy I doubt anyone would have problems with them.

 

 

Edited May 14, 2023 by Massimoni.9453

[draxynnic.3719]

53 minutes ago, Massimoni.9453 said:

Then that would be a rework that'd actually make sense. Not too sure if that would actually affect cFB tho as you only dip into the Virtue 1 traits anyways and HFB (and potentially qFB - depending on how that'd be implemented exactly) can still use the other tomes and therefore trait effects. Dead traits also aren't anything unseen, more like the opposite.

It's a problem when some of those traits and class features are things you can't opt out of, at least not without opting out of a traitline altogether. Personally, I really don't see any benefit to a "you can only have one tome" system over the current one, especially since it would do nothing to achieve the proposed splitting between cfb and qfb (both would use Justice anyway). But it would hurt both HB and the damage firebrand's ability to make clutch plays.

53 minutes ago, Massimoni.9453 said:

 

That apparently doesn't result in the optimal DPS though, otherwise the benchmarks would do so also. Now it's just more or less guessing when your skills are back - unless you wanna couple it with Purging Flames off cooldown which you do NOT want to do thanks to boss movement - and if you wanna max DPS you have to dip in and out at what feels random times to get your Tome 1 Skill 2 going. As a cFB main who perfected the playstyle and hit benchmark on a regular, the class just didn't feel fun anymore after the rework, even when just using the old playstyle.

Seem to recall that the optimal DPS did involve draining your tome pages, and then using them in threes when the skills are back. Thing is, though, in practice it's better to save your skills just in case, and it's possible that more recent rotations reflect that.

53 minutes ago, Massimoni.9453 said:

Well, circumstances were completely different back then. First of all you still had your other unnerfed tomes back then and also 37k was much more competitive than it is now with everything shooting up to 40k+. Stating the absolute number makes no sense when you don't factor in the alternatives. if everything was doing 5k and cFB 37k it'd be OP as all hell, yet nowadays people just smirk at it. I can just play e.g. Spellbreaker or the likes and have a straight up much better spec.

I don't see how that point holds any relevance when the theoretical maximum sucks already. Killing a build when played competitively but saying the LI variant is still okay (which I kinda doubt with all the LI variants around) doesn't help at all. Heck, there are 40k+ LI weavers around which are so easy I doubt anyone would have problems with them.

 

 

There were 40K builds back then, too. The reason why firebrand was considered to be good was that it combined high condition burst with the ability to provide other utility when needed, either through the other tomes, or through bringing other utility skills at a small DPS loss. The latter is still true. The former is... well, using another tome isn't free apart from having a period where you're not using weapon skills any more, but the flipside is that tome 3 is no longer on a minute-plus cooldown, which actually makes it a lot more likely that a key skill will be available when you need it. Virtuoso benches at around 38k, and it's still considered to be borderline OP by many thanks to its reliability, sustainability, potential utility, and ease of use. Firebrand at around 37k was, and probably still is now, in about the same boat.

[otto.5684]

While I understand the logic behind the changes.  every change since the tomes rework was either in the wrong direction or poorly implemented. The result is a jumbled, incoherent mess, that is really annoying to play in pve and dead in spvp. And now also not well performing in pve.

And what is most annoying, is that this is taking unnecessary dev time, that could have spent on other underperforming aspects of guardian. At least WB and DH dps are decent, after 5 patches. Maybe one day, also in pvp…

Edited May 14, 2023 by otto.5684

[Massimoni.9453]

4 hours ago, draxynnic.3719 said:

Virtuoso benches at around 38k, and it's still considered to be borderline OP by many thanks to its reliability, sustainability, potential utility, and ease of use. Firebrand at around 37k was, and probably still is now, in about the same boat.

Besides that I personally don't believe Virtuoso to be borderline OP, those two specs are nowhere near comparable. Let alone that Virtuoso can actually hit the benchmark in real fights thanks to being like 95% ranged and doesn't have to pray for the boss not moving, that it has alot more utility on the full DPS kit than cFB does (which is basically none), has great passive HP regen and stuff like instant, passive invuln which together puts it into a completely different league from cFB - the list goes on, this was just from the top of my head -, which at most can slot one great utility while sacrificing even more of its already extremely lackluster and unworthwhile (if this is even a word) DPS. Heck, Virtuoso probably loses less DPS than cFB when you wanna slot CC or Stability with mantras.

[Hotride.2187]

7 hours ago, Massimoni.9453 said:

From what I've seen and my personal opinion, the old QoL mantras were much more liked.

Don't think so.

Quote

Also you are definitely in the minority with your view on the new tomes.

Don't think so again.

Quote

Question for personal interest: Do you raid? There doesn't seem to be a kp.me connected to your tag.

I only run fractals. On hfb I wouldn't go back to the old tomes even if you paid me money (maybe if I had to do wvw zergs again, obviously cause the stab got nerfed into the ground). On qcfb/cfb I don't care either way.

Edited May 14, 2023 by Hotride.2187

[Massimoni.9453]

18 hours ago, Hotride.2187 said:

I only run fractals. On hfb

Well, that explains everything. HFB is the one and only variation of Firebrand I can see where the tome change would be welcome. On DPS specs it gutted the rotation and made it extremely unfun to play thanks to completely unnecessary clunkiness. Everyone I've talked to or been in contact with one way or the other is greatly disappointed in the tome rework and I've yet to meet a single other person except yourself apparently that likes cFB now better than before with the classic, clear and smooth rotation where having to balance pages and guessing cooldowns wasn't a thing.

[MikSki.9481]

First time for you?

I can safely say that every single class or maybe even spec was opressed the way you see firebrand now. You have so many great dps classes to play, even within guardian profession, go out of your little bubble and explore other builds and wait in line for your favorite spec buffs. I imagine guardian will be low priority for them on buff list since it was meta pretty much since it arrived in PoF. And by design, firebrand is more of a support spec, maybe it's okay its finally not doing 40k as dps.

[Hotride.2187]

19 hours ago, Massimoni.9453 said:

On DPS specs it gutted the rotation and made it extremely unfun to play thanks to completely unnecessary clunkiness. Everyone I've talked to or been in contact with one way or the other is greatly disappointed in the tome rework and I've yet to meet a single other person except yourself apparently that likes cFB now better than before with the classic, clear and smooth rotation where having to balance pages and guessing cooldowns wasn't a thing.

As I said, for cfb/qcfb I don't care either way. It even makes more sense to have only F1 there, since then your support capabilities are more in line with what the rest of dps builds can do (i.e. you sort of must take support utilities and lose dps). I've already commented on the first tome rework thread, choosing 1 tome would have made more sense if the goal was to nerf cfb support capabilities.

But having played hfb with the new tomes, I want the tomes the way they are. Correct me of I'm wrong (as I've said I've barely done raids and strikes) but it was an off-healer in raids before, now its actually a meta heal build (though ofc changes to target caps for boons and healing also have to do with that; but being able to go into F2 and F3 at any point is huge).

I don't share the obsession with rotations that raid players seem to have.  You can't pick another build if you want to loop a rotation (IMO like a zombie)? I'm sure there are enough builds for that. I picked up FB for wvw, there the only problem with the new tomes is the stab nerfs (and I'm pretty sure the F3 stab is not coming back even if we get the old tomes back). And in open world who really cares about not being able to execute a fluid rotation? If FB existed in conquest, the new tomes are good there too.

Might as well rename the topic as "cfb in raids/strikes". Which to me is no less niche than wvw (where cfb doesn't even exist, much less having a coffin or new nails in it).

Edited May 16, 2023 by Hotride.2187

[draxynnic.3719]

On 5/15/2023 at 5:53 AM, Massimoni.9453 said:

Besides that I personally don't believe Virtuoso to be borderline OP, those two specs are nowhere near comparable. Let alone that Virtuoso can actually hit the benchmark in real fights thanks to being like 95% ranged and doesn't have to pray for the boss not moving, that it has alot more utility on the full DPS kit than cFB does (which is basically none), has great passive HP regen and stuff like instant, passive invuln which together puts it into a completely different league from cFB - the list goes on, this was just from the top of my head -, which at most can slot one great utility while sacrificing even more of its already extremely lackluster and unworthwhile (if this is even a word) DPS. Heck, Virtuoso probably loses less DPS than cFB when you wanna slot CC or Stability with mantras.

I tend to roll my eyes at people who say that range doesn't matter, but cfb isn't hurt that much. It has a ranged weapon, unlike some (switching is a DPS loss, but some builds go to zero damage if forced to range, cfb has a few things they can throw and can save resources on the rest), and as long as you don't use your fields at the wrong time (which can also happen to virtuoso), it's a fairly simple build to run, with a 'rotation' that is mostly just a matter of knowing priorities, and not needing silly things like aftercast cancels to actually get those numbers.

cfb is normally providing protection and resolution, and whatever the elite skill generates. From memory, dropping anything except Purging Flames is only about a thousand or so DPS, and the right utility skill for the right boss can have a much bigger effect on the smoothness of your run then a few thousand points of personal DPS.

[Massimoni.9453]

2 hours ago, MikSki.9481 said:

go out of your little bubble and explore other builds

I can't tell you how much I love those bubble accusations. If you actually saw my account stats, you'd retract that statement in an instant mate, especially as I can't even remember the last time I've actively played cFB. I AM playing completely different specs, that doesn't mean I can't argue for having my love cFB as a viable alternative. I've had many builds I played and enjoyed on different classes nerfed over the years, yet almost none of them were nuked into oblivion like cFB was the last few patches - that doesn't just refer to its DPS - for absolutely zero reason aside from pleasing the hyper-casual open-world event farming crowd who have absolutely no clue about the build and its downsides.

Edited May 16, 2023 by Massimoni.9453

[Batalix.2873]

CFB is still benching 37k on Snowcrows/YouTube after the update?

 

Also, while I agree that slapping initiative on it was an odd choice, I am never going to complain about Firebrand nerfs. Classes with as much inherent support utility as FB and Mech should not do competitive DPS. And imo if the game actually wanted to be interesting and have distinct espec design, FB would do hardly any DPS at all.

[Gaiawolf.8261]

12 hours ago, Batalix.2873 said:

CFB is still benching 37k on Snowcrows/YouTube after the update?

 

Also, while I agree that slapping initiative on it was an odd choice, I am never going to complain about Firebrand nerfs. Classes with as much inherent support utility as FB and Mech should not do competitive DPS. And imo if the game actually wanted to be interesting and have distinct espec design, FB would do hardly any DPS at all.

A class all about burning enemies away and purging corruption through fire that doesn't do damage? How odd. I mean, you know healbrand is just a type of build you can choose, right? The name of the espec is FIREbrand. 

Quote

 

"Let the ancient magics of Vabbi burn away our foes."

Firebrands harness the power of ancient Vabbian tomes to burn away impurities and conquer their foes. Each tome contains raw, powerful magic and must be used with patience and care.

— In-game description

 

 

Edited May 17, 2023 by Gaiawolf.8261

[The Boz.2038]

27 minutes ago, Gaiawolf.8261 said:

that doesn't do damage?

 

12 hours ago, Batalix.2873 said:

benching 37k

...bruh...

[Gaiawolf.8261]

23 minutes ago, The Boz.2038 said:

 

...bruh...

Oh I'm fine with 37k. I was responding to this:

Quote

And imo if the game actually wanted to be interesting and have distinct espec design, FB would do hardly any DPS at all.

 

[The Boz.2038]

Ah?
Yeah, well, there's always that strain of "everyone has all the expansions for free and never needs to unlock anything and all the stat swaps are free and I really like Final Fantasy" thought. 

We mostly let them play in the kiddie pool and don't let them disturb the rest of us.

[Batalix.2873]

4 hours ago, Gaiawolf.8261 said:

A class all about burning enemies away and purging corruption through fire that doesn't do damage? How odd. I mean, you know healbrand is just a type of build you can choose, right? The name of the espec is FIREbrand. 

 

 

I know, kind of cringey, isn't it? A book-thumper that is obsessed with burning anything they deem "impure".

I don't deny that part of FB's problem is baked into it's design and the fact that burninating was clearly tacked on later in development. Arguably FB was the worst thing to happen to the game, using deliberate conceptual overreach to justify support especs doing damage and starting the homogenized, overgeneralized, "DPS support" espec design we are converging toward.

If you like that job fantasy, that's...your problem. I'm not impressed by FB and think the books, mantras, and rune-carving are far more interesting and defining aspects of the concept that it seems both the devs and the players forgot existed out of short-sighted DPS-obsessiveness.

[Gaiawolf.8261]

23 hours ago, Batalix.2873 said:

 

I know, kind of cringey, isn't it? A book-thumper that is obsessed with burning anything they deem "impure".

I don't deny that part of FB's problem is baked into it's design and the fact that burninating was clearly tacked on later in development. Arguably FB was the worst thing to happen to the game, using deliberate conceptual overreach to justify support especs doing damage and starting the homogenized, overgeneralized, "DPS support" espec design we are converging toward.

If you like that job fantasy, that's...your problem. I'm not impressed by FB and think the books, mantras, and rune-carving are far more interesting and defining aspects of the concept that it seems both the devs and the players forgot existed out of short-sighted DPS-obsessiveness.

I'm of the contrary mind, actually. I like when games give me the option to be more adaptive and versatile with the concepts choices available. It lets me build the character I want around them and delve into the game's lore even more. On my own terms, no less. The versatile nature of this design lets me lean into GW2's soft play between roles, giving me skills to adapt and fall in where needed.  

I don't know if FB's design helped solidify Anet's stance for adding more roles and versatility to previous elites specs that were over-specialized, but if so, I'd argue it was best thing to happen to the game! Being able to design my character, marrying the concept I'm going for with a playstyle I like and the roles I want to perform, including hybrid roles, is much more important to me than some balance challenges the tryhards whine about. Forced class and role identity is much less important to me than giving me the tools to develop my own character identity and playstyle, even if that means it's harder to balance.

That's how GW2's combat system was designed anyway, with less structure on roles while letting you soft play between them. HOT started to lose sight of that, and since then they are slowly correcting that mistake. I'm keen to see how they open those promised options for druid and deadeye in June. I will admit FB was over-tuned in versatility compared to other specs before December 2022, though! I just wish the fix was bit less clunky, but I can live with it.

Edited May 18, 2023 by Gaiawolf.8261

[Nephalem.8921]

On 5/14/2023 at 4:21 PM, Massimoni.9453 said:

From what I've seen and my personal opinion, the old QoL mantras were much more liked. Also you are definitely in the minority with your view on the new tomes. Question for personal interest: Do you raid? There doesn't seem to be a kp.me connected to your tag.

Mantras and old tomes were much more liked by the op chase crowd. Old mantras made it extremely easy to provide perma quick since you could just delay a charge by 12sec without reducing uptime since they charged up to 3 stacks.

Saw it with my guild fb. Had no problem providing quick with fb before but could not play any other spec at all because other quick supports like herald or scrapper can not just not use their quick skills for 10sec.

The tome change was a MASSIVE buff for heal firebrand while it nerfed dps fb utility. Exactly how its surposed to be. Hfb is a utility monster with new tomes. So again who hates on tome changes? Mostly players who hate pressing buttons or enjoyed their op state. No investment stab, reflect, condi cleanse and full heal. Balance not found.

Dps fb is a tad too weak now but qfb is fine now. Still a utility monster. The tome changes improved heal firebrand massively but sadly most fb players just do not see it. You have no investment perma regen on hfb now and can reflect on demand without wall...

[Buran.3796]

^ Tomes now have both cooldowns in skills and  "initiative" costs as requirements, so they work as the weapon skills from Thief but with the added problem of having to deal with cooldwons.

   I'm not against the changes in the tomes, but on the other hand the backpedaling in mantras made them (more) useless in PvP, a feat hard to accomplish since it was already the worst spec in the game mode (at which no one was using the spec). I s also weird the way in which nerfed WB's alacrity, another build that no one was using.

   My point is: while ANet has clear goals when they make balance changes their method of implementation is usually to throw things against a wall and to see what sticks, which is a terrible way yto do the things, usually ending in undesired side effects, bugs or both.

   The main problem is that they never had a realm of test, so the empyric trials always happens in the final game.

[Massimoni.9453]

On 5/17/2023 at 12:19 AM, Batalix.2873 said:

Classes with as much inherent support utility as FB and Mech should not do competitive DPS.

I am actually completely baffled by that statement. Are you actually saying that full DPS Firebrands can f*ck themselves right from the get-go because they could potentially bring some nice utility?? First of all if you look at the kit cFB has to use to even achieve that pathetic and unrealistic benchmark of <37k, you'd see that it is one of the worst in the game, bringing nothing besides tiny amounts of CC and an okay-ish pull, and don't even start with muh Tomes 2 & 3, after the tomes sharing pages change that argument is completely dead. Secondly FB already drops down to non-competitive DPS if you - for whatever reason - decided to use any of the utility (in which case I'd rather tell my supports to maybe do their job). As far as I remember, even switching out your signet drops you by ~2k DPS which would currently place you at roughly 34,8k DPS... I'd be completely fine if the decision was made harder by shifting more to stuff like the signet, as me as a pure DPS cFB doesn't care about the options of utility.

 

18 hours ago, Nephalem.8921 said:

Saw it with my guild fb. Had no problem providing quick with fb before but could not play any other spec at all because other quick supports like herald or scrapper can not just not use their quick skills for 10sec.

How is that an argument that your guild mate apparently is too bad to play other quickness builds? If he/she doesn't even manage that I highly doubt that he/she takes care of not blasting the quickness cone through the boss into nothingness. The instablast mantras are balanced by their inferior application area which is made harder by the build being melee. There is no going AFK on the boss with 360 radius, you actually gotta pay attention to your positioning if you want your sub to get nice quickness coverage if they aren't all perfectly stacked on the boss.

 

18 hours ago, Nephalem.8921 said:

So again who hates on tome changes? Mostly players who hate pressing buttons or enjoyed their op state.

Hmm, maybe the ones that aren't playing HFB, which is basically what this whole thread is about??? Also how is it OP that the build had better gameplay flow before the change? The build required the same amount of button presses if not even more before the change just that its gameplay was very fluid and fun.

 

18 hours ago, Nephalem.8921 said:

No investment stab, reflect, condi cleanse and full heal. Balance not found.

Why are you even refering to the build in the state before the removal of utility on the tomes? That was a separate step before the gameplay change and literally no one here except for you had even talked about how we wanted that back. As the absolute majority of your answer targets qFB and HFB while the thread is solely about cFB, I don't see how this even belongs here.

Edited May 19, 2023 by Massimoni.9453

[zealex.9410]

On 5/14/2023 at 5:21 PM, Massimoni.9453 said:

From what I've seen and my personal opinion, the old QoL mantras were much more liked. Also you are definitely in the minority with your view on the new tomes. Question for personal interest: Do you raid? There doesn't seem to be a kp.me connected to your tag.

I do raid and i like the current mantras, they are more interactive/have more going on than the previous itteration. 

I like the old tome 1 rotation more but that being said the utility of having access at tome skills whenever i want is a very big pro over the last itteration, in some way new tomes make fb better than it was before.