what sort of trade off should firebrand get?

[Stand The Wall.6987]

I was thinking about locking them out of utility skills while using a tome but that's pretty brutal. if that were to be done then I think the tome cd nerf should be reverted.

[Arheundel.6451]

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:I was thinking about locking them out of utility skills while using a tome but that's pretty brutal. if that were to be done then I think the tome cd nerf should be reverted.

What about..you make firebrand an actual support by reworking Tome of Justice and offensive mantra like Flame and Truth...on top of removing axe? At the same time buff DragonHunter sustain/dmg abilities

[Vagrant.7206]

Give each tome the "engineer kit treatment."

That is, make all the skills do the same animation, with only 1 or 2 useful skills in each tome.

[ollbirtan.2915]

What about ----leaving FB kitten alone?

[Psycoprophet.8107]

@ollbirtan.2915 said:What about ----leaving FB kitten alone?

Umm fb is a huge part of the power creep problem especially in wvw so how about we dont.

[Oslaf Beinir.5842]

Guardian in its design of its elite specs compares to its core counter part the same way core necromancer compares to its elite specs in terms of functionality.death shroud, reaper shroud and sand shades all play different so the trade off is a completely different functionality. Guardian behaves the same way; Firebrand Tomes are kit skills with both resource and cooldowns, Dragonhunter's are active skills with powerful effects but long cast of each of them while core guard's are instant activate skills.

based on what happened to core necromancer shroud to give it an identity of its own I believe core guardian should receive the same treatment and have its core active functionality altered since what ties all the virtues across the specs are the identical passives which are kind of hard to change at this point in the game so the active part needs to be buffed and their shorter cooldown and instant nature are not enough.

so just leave FB and focus on giving core guard a better identity and at the same time give DH a buff.

[Jekkt.6045]

firebrand and dragonhunter trade off is that f skills have a casting time and are not instant. additionally, they have quite a longer cooldown compared to core f skills.

[Zephoid.4263]

Imo, make FB's weakness one of the core weaknesses guard has had since the the start of this game: strip swiftness off everything. Historically guard has had garbage swiftess and speed access. That fb essentially get it for free on multiple abilities removes that weakness. After playing probably 500 games as support fb, i can't exaggerate how important staying as mobile as possible is. You aren't a bunker, you do go down to sustained hits. However, having multiple CCs to create spacing then simply outrunning a pursuer has saved me tons of times. While swiftness is often something thats easy for other classes to gain and give it would be a distinct weakness for FB.

[Math.5123]

Like close to double cooldown on their virtues, also cast time on entering / exiting virtues? Like that kinda trade-off?

[Sigmoid.7082]

I think people are getting mixed up between what they think Anet meant by tradeoffs and what Anet actually meant by tradeoffs.From that standpoint Firebrand already has one.

[Revolution.5409]

FB must be able to use only 1 tome at a time.

[Stand The Wall.6987]

@Sigmoid.7082 said:I think people are getting mixed up between what they think Anet meant by tradeoffs and what Anet actually meant by tradeoffs.From that standpoint Firebrand already has one.

what sort of trade off is that?

[Sigmoid.7082]

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:

@Sigmoid.7082 said:I think people are getting mixed up between what they think Anet meant by tradeoffs and what Anet actually meant by tradeoffs.From that standpoint Firebrand already has one.

what sort of trade off is that?

Class mechanic changes.

Just like scourge and reaper are a trade off to core necro. Just like they change swipe and zerker losing regular bursts. Like both engi specs lose F5 toolbelt, chrono losing IP and distortion.

Like most of the things they targeted, changed or have slated for future changes were the specs where the elite spec, at a class mechanic level.. the stuff above your weapons skills, just added more to the base class and it in no way played differently. Like druid was just ranger with another form, zerker was just warrior with more bursts, chrono was just mesmer with another shatter, DD was just thief with more dodges.

If you don't think times are balanced then target cooldown, boons applied, number of pages available , healing values, damage values, conditions etc etc. But from the standpoint of the trade-offs they were trying to achieve firebrand already has one.

[Stand The Wall.6987]

@Sigmoid.7082 said:Class mechanic changes.

no dood. class mechanic changes aren't a trade off, especially when that class mech change is insanely strong. fb is an upgrade to core and dh in practically every way. there is little to no reason to use them in competitive modes.

[kin korn karn.9023]

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:

@Sigmoid.7082 said:Class mechanic changes.

no dood. class mechanic changes aren't a trade off, especially when that class mech change is insanely strong. fb is an upgrade to core and dh in practically every way. there is little to no reason to use them in competitive modes.

Core power burst was strong enough to get two nerfs in the past year or so.

[Azure The Heartless.3261]

Make all their moves that grant them blocks grant barrier instead.Make their barrier degen at a custom rate, slower than normal.

((Its probably a horrible idea, but I like how it sounds. If there's a part in there that works feel free to mangle it into something better.))

[Emberheart.8426]

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:

@Sigmoid.7082 said:Class mechanic changes.

no dood. class mechanic changes aren't a trade off, especially when that class mech change is insanely strong. fb is an upgrade to core and dh in practically every way. there is little to no reason to use them in competitive modes.

Elite specs are generally quite a bit stronger than core, but many still technically have trade-offs. For an easy example take reaper shroud. While it is definitely better than core shroud, you still lose a few things, like the ranged capability and the less rapid life force consumption. The reason why Firebrand's trade-off is not real in any way is because you do not actually lose your supportive virtues. Their effects are just baked into some of the tome abilities, and on top of that you gain much more support. You do not lose anything at all.

[Ragnar.4257]

@Ganathar.4956 said:

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:

@Sigmoid.7082 said:Class mechanic changes.

no dood. class mechanic changes aren't a trade off, especially when that class mech change is insanely strong. fb is an upgrade to core and dh in practically every way. there is little to no reason to use them in competitive modes.

Elite specs are generally quite a bit stronger than core, but many still technically have trade-offs. For an easy example take reaper shroud. While it is definitely better than core shroud, you still lose a few things, like the ranged capability and the less rapid life force consumption. The reason why Firebrand's trade-off is not real in any way is because you do not actually lose your supportive virtues. Their effects are just baked into some of the tome abilities, and on top of that you gain much more support. You do not lose anything at all.

Well.... you do.

On core, being able to blind with insta-cast F1, or pop it for might/retal during a burst, or for extra burn during a burst, or more recently the traited immobilize, was a big part of core-guard play. FB cannot do that.

This was a big part of why core-guard was preferred as the DPS spec over FB, because the cast-times on FB seriously handicap your ability to burst.

I'm not saying FB is totally fine and doesn't need tuning down. But it does already have certain trade-offs.

This is different to certain other elite-specs that literally take nothing away from core.

[Sigmoid.7082]

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:

@Sigmoid.7082 said:Class mechanic changes.

no dood. class mechanic changes aren't a trade off, especially when that class mech change is insanely strong. fb is an upgrade to core and dh in practically every way. there is little to no reason to use them in competitive modes.

Thanks for ignoring the rest of the post and proving my original point:

@Sigmoid.7082 said:I think people are getting mixed up between what they think Anet meant by tradeoffs and what Anet actually meant by tradeoffs.

A spec being too strong or weak ==/== it doesn't have a trade off by the definition that Anet set out.

To use the example of necromancer, by choosing an elite specialization, you lose access to your core Death Shroud abilities, but you gain different abilities. This is a clear >trade-off.

[Ragnar.4257]

Let me make this super simple for you.

If I trade you $10 for €100, that is in no way a fair or equal trade.

But.

Just because I have made a profit, that does not mean that no trade has occurred. I'm still now without my $10.

[Derm.4932]

From Anet's perspective FB already has a tradeoff. Their definition of not having a tradeoff purely means they retain all previous class mechanics and then gain some. If class mechanics are replaced, even if the replacement is vastly superior in everyway, then it counts as a tradeoff from their perspective.

Their example - from April patch notes

To use the example of necromancer, by choosing an elite specialization, you lose access to your core Death Shroud abilities, but you gain different abilities. This is a clear trade-off. In the case of elite specializations like druid, herald, chronomancer, berserker, or scrapper, this type of trade-off isn't possible because the specialization adds a completely new ability.

In that sense FB already has a tradeoff - you lose core virtues and gain different skills(tomes). This clearly fits their example with necro losing death shroud abilities but gaining other shroud abilities.

I agree FB needs a nerf, but it's a question of power level, not tradeoff.

[Aeolus.3615]

@Stand The Wall.6987 said:I was thinking about locking them out of utility skills while using a tome but that's pretty brutal. if that were to be done then I think the tome cd nerf should be reverted.

Sounds good would help the spam reducing and players have to be more carefully.

Altough some book skills would have to be nerfed and others buffed.

[ZDragon.3046]

@Derm.4932 said:From Anet's perspective FB already has a tradeoff. Their definition of not having a tradeoff purely means they retain all previous class mechanics and then gain some. If class mechanics are replaced, even if the replacement is vastly superior in everyway, then it counts as a tradeoff from their perspective.

Their example - from April patch notes

To use the example of necromancer, by choosing an elite specialization, you lose access to your core Death Shroud abilities, but you gain different abilities. This is a clear trade-off. In the case of elite specializations like druid, herald, chronomancer, berserker, or scrapper, this type of trade-off isn't possible because the specialization adds a completely new ability.

In that sense FB already has a tradeoff - you lose core virtues and gain different skills(tomes). This clearly fits their example with necro losing death shroud abilities but gaining other shroud abilities.

I agree FB needs a nerf, but it's a question of power level, not tradeoff.

I agree with all of thisFirebrand already does indeed have a trade offit loses insta cast skills (which are still great when you combo them)For skills that have cast times and cant really be combo'ed as easily.

That said this post makes it easier to see classes that do not have a trade off still or the trade is not dominate enough.SoulbeastHoloScrapperMirage

Its a matter of how effective firebrand is right now not a matter of if it needs a trade off or not.Personally i would start withI say start with the mantras reduce the charges by 1 possibly increase the effect of the final charge a bit to compensate.Tomes.... just bring those down across the board a lil bit.

Thats just my opinion though.

[Stand The Wall.6987]

@Derm.4932 said:From Anet's perspective FB already has a tradeoff. Their definition of not having a tradeoff purely means they retain all previous class mechanics and then gain some. If class mechanics are replaced, even if the replacement is vastly superior in everyway, then it counts as a tradeoff from their perspective.

ah. well I guess I can understand that point of view altho I still disagree with it completely. when you think about it these supposed trade offs are actually just shuffled around. f1 blind > mantra of truth and now its 100x stronger. f2 condi clear > lolk > mantra, tome f2+f3, f3 stunbreak > lolk > mantra, tome f3. fb doesn't lose anything, they gain it 100 times over. now I suppose this can be attributed to power levels, but does that mean the only way to balance fb is to nerf it into uselessness? to me the definition of a trade off means that yes you can have something powerful, but while you're using it your possibilities are reduced. it does not mean ok here is this new thing that is 100x more powerful then the old one, trade off is that its new. that makes no sense.

[mortrialus.3062]

Honestly I think a lot of the problem can be solved just from designing the elite specializations more carefully as a whole. You don't even need to brute force in trade offs to certain specializations, especially ones that aren't meta and don't have a place in the game.

Take Druid and Scrapper before their initial reworks and the introductions of trade offs. The thing with Druid in PvP is that by taking Druid, you are so tunnel visioned into nothing but additional healing that you will and can never do as much damage as a core ranger, let alone a soulbeast. That right there is a legitimate trade off, built into the very foundation of the specialization through it's utilities, traits, and even weapon. Scrapper before it's rework was much the same, taking Scrapper without any additional trade off defines you as having noticeably sacrificed your damage for more active mitigation and you could never do as much damage as a core engineer. Are they perfect trades off that don't power creep? Well, not necessarily but that could be solved with targeting individual traits, weapon skills, and utilities just like any other over performing specialization.

Now let's compare pre-rework scrapper to something like Holosmith. Holosmith was announced as a very high damage elite specialization that is so risky to play it's in danger of blowing itself up. This wouldn't be inherently bad design or negatively power creeping the game if by going Holosmith you inherently had less defense and sustain of a core engineer and paled in comparison to a scrapper. But look at all the stuff that doesn't just increase your damage built into holosmith; Immensely Higher sustain than core with Heat Therapy. Condition Conversion through Prismatic Converter. Additional active mitigation with both Photon Wall and Spectrum Shield, easier and higher stability uptime than scrapper. Massive Protection uptime with Hard Light Arena. All of this on top of a kit that gives excellent damage beyond was a core engineer is going to be able to do, with double melee range so it's very easy to land, and great mobility beyond what a core Engineer can do as as well when synergized with other core engineer traits and utilities.

Firebrand is basically in the Holosmith camp rather than the Druid or the Scrapper camp. I feel like the people who designed Firebrand initially looked at it like "Well Dragon Hunter really boosts your power damage in PvE. But they don't have an option for either Condition Damage or Healing Support or Party Quickness so let's have Firebrand do all of that." and here we are. Similar problem with Mirage. Yeah it's supposed to be an evasive condition skirmisher, and it does becomes that, but why does it also have all this -20% condition duration on it? And all this protection uptime?

A lot of problems with builds right now can be solved by making them a lot more focused in what they are supposed to do. More similar in design to things such as Druid, DH, OG Scrapper, away from things such as Mirage, OG and pre-trade off Chrono, Firebrand, Holosmith, and Soulbeast that just sort of do a whole lot of everything.