How would you change famished? i think famished is a great talent, it just shouldn’t synergise so well with a safe melee attack or a safe ultimate. Also the downside of famished is literally less melee damage, but firesword circumvents this entirly. Changing famished will just result in bw’s range being nerfed.
Also without famished the synergy with her defensive talent + the stagger on it is alot. It should be one of the 2; either give her constant uptime on her talent, or give big stagger and temp hp.
Which is why i like the idea, as it would accomplish that. without either nerfing famished, or nerfing firesword making it useless. It would be a nerf, no doubt, but it wouldn’t gut the firesword, it would just make it balanced. Bw has everything currently, great melee damage, safety, cc, ranged dmg, mobility.
Playing bw with crowbill or dagger is already a bit more balanced, and how it should be tbh.
To be really honest, I don’t know how to change FF in such a way that it only affects Flamesword and not the other weapons. But, like I also said, I don’t really feel FF Flamesword is super problematic. It’s a really powerful build, no doubt, but it doesn’t trivialize content and it isn’t unfun to play when a teammate uses it. And definitely not compared to the other top tier builds in the game. On a related note: I think that stuff like FF Beamstaff is way more “problematic” than FF Flamesword. So to re-state: I think the problem lies with FF. And as a matter of principal: When a talent causes issues, I’d rather the talent is removed than the weapon is made to suck for other builds.
In case the consensus is that Flamesword needs to change regardless: I’d make the DoT on H1 only tick once instead of twice, while adding more DoTs to other attacks (and maybe 2 ticks on H2?). That way you half the damage of H1 but compensate it on other attacks. No DoT at all on a flaming claw attack while having it on normal sword strikes just seems really weird and counter-intuitive to me.
You are absolutely correct that the argument “Build X is more problematic than build Y, therefore build Y has no problems.” is a bad argument. What I meant to say, however, was that I don’t consider FF BW with Flamesword a real problematic build in the first place, not that itsn’t a problem because there are more powerful builds around to compare it to. I meant to say that it is powerful-but-not-too-overpowered, basically. So yeah, that’s probably where our main difference in views comes from.
Personally, I think the combination of Fire Sword and Famished Flames is broken. A spellcaster with strong and safe defense, insane melee dps, a strong active skill every 40 seconds to control the crowd, damaga reduction and world down-burning range all combined in one build? I think Battle Wizard deserves a weaker melee play.
The issue only arises in combination of both Famished Flames and Fire Sword. Famished Flames with any other weapon is not an issue so the problem lies within the Fire Sword. There are different possibilities to solve this. First one would be to just reduce the stagger of the heavy attacks which are for a 1H sword absurdly strong. But for some reason noone mentioned it, so I just assume people cant bear the thought of getting rid of the THP generator.
Which leaves us with the second possibility, reducing the DPS. Personally, I think high cleave attacks shouldn’t have dot effects by default (maybe getting them through a talent like Flense might be okay). Therefore, we could either:
completely remove the fire dot from the heavies and set it to the lights or
give fire dot on Fire Sword and chance factor of like 25 % to trigger or
drastically reduce the cone for the fire attack which currently sets everything ablaze in a 120-150 Â° arc without cleave limit
Only issue with removing the DoT is the visual. I mean, she’s literally slapping the soul out of rats with fire.
If the goal is to make it good dps but not a famished BW exclusive, then, maybe, it deserves a creative rework, like how a few of the weapons got in the last beta?
So, seems like the important part is to give it better lights and remove how the current H1 works. Maybe H1 can be removed altogether? Make it H2 with a slap as a follow up (with an appropriate damage profile). Go the extra mile and make the follow up combo into light 3 and you’ll have a weapon that still matches Sienna’s fiery personality that hopefully feels good on all classes without being only strong on BW.
Personally, I’d rather it just stay, but i figure there’s a reason this thread is only about firesword and not dagger’s h1 as well.
I don’t think firesword needs to go this far in changes. The heavy 1 can stay. The bash is pretty strong on its own. It would just require some ‘risk’ to proc her defensive talent or make use of famished, without it all being in 1 attack, more spread across attacks, which would in turn make every attack more used on the weapon.
The bash on dagger doesnt have the same amount of enemies it can hit. Fire swords bash is HUGE, dagger is just a fraction. I guess dagger also doesn’t have (or has a very high) cleave limit, so it could be argued dagger can be strong on hordes in a straight line in a tunnel.
The reason dagger isn’t a focus is because no one just spams H1 exclusively with dagger to get the maximum value out of the weapon
as said above, the H1 on dagger isn’t quite as effective but also the light attacks are used by characters like Pyro or UC for hordeclearing and the heavy 2 is used for armour. On BW you don’t have as much melee power so you don’t get the same value out of it, opting into famished just makes it even worse in that regard.
Your suggestion is a good start, and I’m not totally against it, but I actually enjoy the burning from that attack, and I think it’s what makes the Weapon more suitable to her than a lot of her others, which only burn on specific attacks.
I was honestly thinking of making it go the other way, and have the 2nd Heavy Attack Cleave Elites. So it plays more like a 2H Mace, but with DoT spam. Maybe making the animation a little more ‘magic’ to give the impression that it’s somehow an enchanted attack making it deal more cleave.
(nerf it first) Could turn H1 into 2H Mace H1 (with burning), that’s capped on how many enemies it can ignite, this makes using the H2 more viable for damage output, and puts a delay on reaching the super Cleave Attack (You don’t gain ‘pure Power’ as BW, so having too much Cleave with H1 wouldn’t become an issue).
More viable on higher difficulties (more Elite damage and CC for all Sienna’s Careers)
Gives Sienna her first super Cleave Weapon (makes more sense to me, since other than Unchained, her only super Cleave would likely come from magic, Fire Sword suits this best)
Would basically make it a 2H Mace/2H Sword hybrid, but with DoT damage instead of pure Cleave
The reason being that the Heavy 1 is quite unique and I think it suits her well. I’d rather have a visually and mechanically unique style of attacking over what would basically be 1H Sword: 2 fire boogaloo.
It may also be weird for the only huge sweeping fire attack not to set enemies on fire.
The problem with a lot of 1H Weapons rn, is that they’re getting stuck with low Elite Cleave, and low Stagger too. Heavy Attacking Weapons tend to have more of both. If your change went live, I would likely just play Flail.
Also on Pyro/Unchained this Weapon is just good for survival, and supporting friends. It doesn’t really make sense to make it essentially do a tiny amount of damage just because it synergizes so well on BW. She also doesn’t have a Shield Weapon or a 2H Mace or a 2H Sword, I feel like atm Fire Sword is filling all of those huge Cleave/Stagger gaps for her.
Additionally, the Lights could be made to be more single-target to reflect 2H Mace*, and mix up the move set. Dealing more damage to Armoured too, later in the chain.
This. I do throw some Heavy 2 in when there’s no Elites, but other than that, it’s just spamming H1. I don’t even try Lights (maybe a Push-Attack here and there). My suggestion would keep the identity and feel of the Weapon, but also with the single-target focus of Lights, gives you a reason to use them too.
I agree with this. The main reason Flamesword “needs” to be changed, is because with Famished Flames its fighting style becomes H1-blockcancel-repeat. But there is no other Sienna build where you exclusively use that strategy. On every other Sienna build you use the rest of its attack set as well. The Flamesword itself has a really cool and unique moveset and identity, with a clear trade of downsides (armor damage) vs. benefits (safety and utility, good vs. hordes). I like it a lot. I’d say there’s no reason to mess with it just because a single talent exists that interacts with it in an unfavorable way. Nobody would want the Flamesword to change if Famished Flames didn’t exist. I’d rather FF was removed, even. That’s the problem here, not the Flamesword.
That’s not true. Without famished i only use heavy 1> light 1 repeat or heavy 1> heavy 2, or block cancel/qq. Even when i use it on unchained i do that. On pyro i never use it. I never use it’s light attacks, unless i’m missing out on doing so, on some insane dps without famished that is.
I second this. Why does Famished Flames have to affect melee-induced burns? Its synergy with Flamesword’s H1 is just too good. Flamesword might be what the Rapier is for WHC: a weapon that synergizes extremely well with many mechanics available to the career.
Well do people see the problem with Fire Sword the level of Stagger (and cleave similar to Flense) it does or is it the damage that BW is capable of doing with it? It’s essentially an unlimited Cleave shotgun blast that feeds you silly amounts of THP.
In my opinion, the only thing wrong with it is that that attack is so strong, is spammable, and the rest of the attacks are garbage.
I’d much rather see the usefulness of the Weapon spread more evenly, which would require a nerf to that Heavy 1 regardless of how you do it, and make the damage more sustained through attack chains, so that you don’t just block-cancel.
It would also make the Weapon more versatile for the other Careers. E.g. Unchained could still use it instead of a Shield Weapon, and actually do more with it.
I’d still use it. I like it a lot on BW with a Bolt Staff on Volcanic Force or even Lingering Flames, or with the same weapon choices on Unchained as well, actually. I don’t really play Pyro often, but I can see how it synergises poorly with her kit.
Also, I’m still not convinced there even is a big problem to solve in the first place. FF BW with Flamesword is powerful, but it’s not game breakingly powerful, and it’s not unfun to play together with one. It’s great vs. hordes and it’s quite safe and tanky, but against Super Armor and Berserkers you are not very effective. Is the playstyle one-dimensional and a bit gimmicky? Yes. But if you feel that way, why not just play something else? BW alone has plenty of other viable builds. Why mess with the weapon in such a way that it becomen counter-intuitive and messes with other builds?
seriously though, it wouldn’t become counter intuitive or change anything. all it would change is removing firedots from heavy 1 and add it to light attacks. I dont see how this would change the weapon. Yes you would have to do some more attacks to have acces to your defensive and famished synergy. If people find that too much of a nerf, then we could also add the damaging fire dot to light attacks and keep fire dot on heavy 1 but make it not do any damage, just proc her defense talents.
This would not change anything about the existing combo’s or nerf the weapon with famished. This is literally the best change in my eyes. (yes technically a nerf, but you know)
I generally agree, though I wonder if its light attacks might be a little ineffective at getting burn dots going. Perhaps the lights could be given more cleave and/or armour sliding to compensate somewhat? Seems appropriate enough for a super heated blade.
I think its fine that the downside would be that it cannot apply its dots to multiple armored and/or elites. Where you actually have to choose to either apply dots or do damage with heavy attacks. So you either go heavy 1 > heavy 2 for control+damage or you do heavy > light for control + dot, where you can do heavy 1 > heavy 2 after doing the light one. In reality this would most likely happen when not using famished but are using the defensive talent, and when ur using famished you would probably just do heavy 1 > light. The difference is that you wouldn’t be able to ignite an entire horde in 1 or a couple swings, and you would also be a bit more vulnerable by doing so.
I agree that’d be fine for FF BW, but I’m not convinced it isn’t too much of a nerf for her other classes, since even without famished the flame dot is accounting for a lot of the overall damage its outputting. I’d be worried about that just turning it into even more of a BW only weapon.