(Un)Official Arcanist/Summmoner Feedback Thread

[Kevee]

Ifrit's main issue is his attack delay. Although I'm not confident that his attacks working properly would make up for contagion

It won't.

I said it in another topic somewhere, and I don't want it to be removed, but Contagion has to be removed to get any real balance between pets.

[Sylari]

I said it in another topic somewhere, and I don't want it to be removed, but Contagion has to be removed to get any real balance between pets.

Contagion is certainly awesome, but the main issues are Ifrit's various mechanical quirks and radiant shield. It's not really that extreme.

[Kevee]

Contagion is certainly awesome, but the main issues are Ifrit's various mechanical quirks and radiant shield. It's not really that extreme.

It is. There is virtually no fight where, even if Ifrit did the same ST damage, you would use him.

Not one.

Ifrit would have to be able to out-damage Garuda AND contagion for him to be relevant(both ST and AoE), and then that would just polarize it the other way.

Pets need to be re-worked, have definable roles, and be reduced to a 2.5s cast(with reduced MP cost) for us to see use of other, or multiple, summons.
Garuda should be AoE, Ifrit should be ST, and Titan should be the solo/tank pet. With defined roles, and being able to switch them, it becomes a system where you use the proper pets as needed.

At the least, pets need a DEFINED role. On top of this, ALL pets need to be effected by Foe Requiem--Not just Garuda.

[PriyaJugulataris]

So just give Ifrit a temporary damage buff (or enemy damage debuff) that stacks based off DoTs. It reinforces the whole Range=Safer, Melee=Riskier argument. Further more, while the former requires the summoner to keep all his/her DoTs up always, the latter would be something summoners would use in key situations and save a lot of tanks grief.

[Dyvid]

I think Ifrit should get Enfire that also has a chance to apply a burn DoT.

Titan really needs to be able to grab AoE hate faster for back up tanking. Maybe have it as a mechanic where my hate transfers to him when summoned.

[Kevee]

So just give Ifrit a temporary damage buff (or enemy damage debuff) that stacks based off DoTs. It reinforces the whole Range=Safer, Melee=Riskier argument. Further more, while the former requires the summoner to keep all his/her DoTs up always, the latter would be something summoners would use in key situations and save a lot of tanks grief.

Yes, and how would that balance ranged vs. melee, and contagions utility with bane?

[jars]

enkindle would be a fun and powerful ability if the cooldown wasn't so absurd. dropping it down to a more reasonable level isn't going to blow up summoners to some broken level.

[PriyaJugulataris]

Contagion+Bane solidifies usage of Garuda in AoE situations. I'm not trying to contest that, Garuda wants that for AoE.
However for single target, granted if the damage is a significant jump, it encourages Ifrit usage and summoners having to think about placement. I'd throw him on Caduceus on the side, ADS possibly (would be harder thanks to the Boss central AoE's but possibly still manageable, granted debate with Garuda constant ranged and Ifrit semi-often DPS). Turn 4 is AoE so Garuda only and I haven't been to Twintania yet but I imagine I'd go Garuda for that.
So actually looking back, you're right there are still balance issues. Ifrit also is going to need a change a radiant shield change to something (perhaps damage deduction when not main target?), but while my idea didn't solve the debate, it still makes Ifrit more viable in situations then before.

[Kevee]

enkindle would be a fun and powerful ability if the cooldown wasn't so absurd. dropping it down to a more reasonable level isn't going to blow up summoners to some broken level.

Yes it would.

Contagion+Bane solidifies usage of Garuda in AoE situations. I'm not trying to contest that, Garuda wants that for AoE.
However for single target, granted if the damage is a significant jump, it encourages Ifrit usage and summoners having to think about placement. I'd throw him on Caduceus on the side, ADS possibly (would be harder thanks to the Boss central AoE's but possibly still manageable, granted debate with Garuda constant ranged and Ifrit semi-often DPS). Turn 4 is AoE so Garuda only and I haven't been to Twintania yet but I imagine I'd go Garuda for that.
So actually looking back, you're right there are still balance issues. Ifrit also is going to need a change a radiant shield change to something (perhaps damage deduction when not main target?), but while my idea didn't solve the debate, it still makes Ifrit more viable in situations then before.

See, even on Turn 1 Garuda has more functional use. It can switch between the snakes whenever, can help with slimes if you do that. You can DoT+Contagion and then switch and DoT the other snake. Ifrit would only see use if you massively out-gear the fight, don't need to keep the snakes even, and don't bother with the slimes.

Not to mention if you don't have a MNK, that means no damage boost for Ifrit, and Ifrit would always have to stay on the same target as the MNK.

[Ardan]

Wasn't it confirmed that Ifrit's melee attacks count as blunt, piercing and slashing?