Remember when people thought Firebrand was trash in PvP

[Morwath.9817]

@R E F L H E X.8413 said:Your two firebrand logic dont make sense unless you mean putting one at home so he can actually be rewarded for playing well instead of being trash tier.

Foooo, it's not two Firebrands logic, but two Monks logic.Monks by design would be completly broken in Conquest. Quaggan gonna lose his mind...

[R E F L H E X.8413]

1. Noone ran two monks in 4v4. One played perfectly was adequate.
2. Making fights better at mid still leaves mid open when the other team starts to die which does happen.

Monks are not broken in conquest they make the team situations more enjoyable.

[Morwath.9817]

@R E F L H E X.8413 said:

1. Noone ran two monks in 4v4.
2. Making fights better at mid still leaves mid open when the other team starts to die which does happen.

...but we play Conquest not 4v4 RA/TA, not sure why Quaggan has to remind this to you.Do you consider Chrono Bunker meta fun? Because Monks were better than Chrono Bunkers as they could keep alive not only themselves but also allies.

We don't need buffs to Firebrand/Mirage/Scrouge/Holosmith, but nerfs as they are overperforming.If you want to see more viable supporters, maybe you should ask about buffs for Tempest/Ventari/Shout Warrior etc?

[R E F L H E X.8413]

I never played the chrono bunker meta because I quit the game pre-hot and then played again right before pof as I dont like conquest, no healers, or using the same weapon skills for years on end.

If the mid fights a little longer so we can have better quality of matches thats not a big deal really to argue this is insanity.

The monks being good also meant that the other classes were able to run really really offensive specs unlike warrior who should be using two defensive traitlines if I remember right.

Firebrand is anything but overperforming like the other guy said its good but it ends at good. Overperforming would mean it would be able to handle everything thrown at it and more and its far far from that.