(Un)Official Arcanist/Summmoner Feedback Thread

[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?

[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.