Willow flame problem

[zhangsheng]

I personally don't like the changes to Willow Flame in the current version, especially the added cooldown. I don't think this skill is supermodel, nor should it be nerfed so much.

[-Variant]

Cool downs don't actually address the problem much, they take more time to use.

I'd rather the cost be higher with their damage staying the same. Or lowering the damage and keeping the cost. Either or, just no cooldowns please, waiting isn't fun!

[Fufuji]

Frost fire is fine. Please let it be.

Shadow fire is seriously underwhelmed. Needs a buff to make it actually useful in boss battles.

[Yuuko]

I think upping the cost without addressing the limit is pointless.  What if you make it 10 or 15 ember cost?  They can have 400+ in their inventory.  All you do by upping cost is force Willow to farm and carry stacks to perform.  I don't like the idea of taxing Willow so much time.

I'd rather address the max ember value and balance from there.  With a cap of 40 embers on hand a cost of 5 starts to mean something.  It gives Willow the option to burst her whole stack for great effect and be burnt out when its done - or be more careful in when to use the spells.

The CD has to go.  That is no fun for anyone.

I wouldn't be opposed to making embers a little harder to get, maybe a chance drop like 50% per ember instead of always giving it all ?  It decreases efficiency of the oft complained about combustion farming.

Could also cut the affinity spell damage in half, combined with "refueling" her lighter with either a pure brilliance or a pure horror which adds +100% planar damage to the affinity spell.  This delays the spike in damage, and I like the idea of her burning the essence of her side for power - like she is always a risk and destructive even to her allies.

[Yuuko]

1 minute ago, Reecitz said:

I personally feel like you are too paranoid of the "memes" that you claim will appear regarding Willow.

Also, are you saying that the access to embers isn't restricted enough? Is the loss of inventory space not a good enough downside, backpack or not? Does there need to be more "insignificant creatures"? There are still some mobs who physically cannot be set on fire. 

Well, first off - the memes hit and we're now at a 20 second cd.  That is the spell as it is now.  Obliviously Klei believed the initial version was too strong or they wouldn't have gone so far.

I do think in her first iteration she was top tier.  There is nothing wrong that, or with reducing her to b or even c rank.  I don't need Willow to be staring in every show, taking over every server.  I just want her to be able to play like Willow, and be impactful enough to justify her over Wilson.

So in seeking to roll back the 20 second cd I am posing what concessions I would make *instead*

[grm9]

Just now, Shosuko said:

Well, first off - the memes hit and we're now at a 20 second cd.  That is the spell as it is now.  Obliviously Klei believed the initial version was too strong or they wouldn't have gone so far.

I do think in her first iteration she was top tier.  There is nothing wrong that, or with reducing her to b or even c rank.  I don't need Willow to be staring in every show, taking over every server.  I just want her to be able to play like Willow, and be impactful enough to justify her over Wilson.

So in seeking to roll back the 20 second cd I am posing what concessions I would make *instead*

lunar fire was situational and was only really useful against BQ and FW, there was no need to nerf it at all 

[Withinafootof]

Willow actually lacks the ability to defeat bosses, and the ability to increase damage by 25% is not very useful. Not only is the time short, but many bosses cannot be ignited. After adding CD to the Moon Fire, for many bosses, Willow is similar to a character with a 1.0 attack multiplier, while other characters with skill trees have a basic way to increase damage. Klei should improve Willow's ability to face bosses

[Yuuko]

15 minutes ago, Reecitz said:

And I personally feel like what you're "proposing" is a "Wortox but slightly better" solution. 

If, I repeat, IF there is no other option, I will settle for an ember cap on some conditions. But I know for a FACT there are more creative routes to take, or at least ones not as punishing, especially if they don't even warrant such a punishment in the first place. 

I saw one person suggest that holding too many embers could occasionally cause Willow to start a fire near her, in reference to her DS single-player counterpart. 

idk, saying its "wortox but better" is a poor argument.  Maxwell got spells, Wendy had a follower, is Bernie "abi but worse" ? Are her spells "Maxwell but fire" ?

imo - capping embers is natural in the same way capping souls is natural.  That "item" already serves as a mana bar for character.  Its not uncommon to have a limit to mana as a balancing factor to limit spell use.  imo its the most natural thing, and I'm kinda surprised it was released without an upper limit (aside from inventory size)

The embers are not a literal physical thing anyway.  I see no reason why it cannot be limited.  They can also have them dissipate immediately if they are ever dropped.

I also thinking asking for large, dramatic changes such as complete re-works of systems requiring new assets is a lot to ask when this is likely to go live this or next week judging from the feast themed art work.  Unless what Klei has made is totally off base, we should look at what they've made and stick pretty closely to it.  Its a bit unrealistic to expect them to shift so dramatically.

[arubaro]

1 hour ago, Reecitz said:

After all, detractors constantly complain how easy it is to obtain embers

they think it is because they watched a YT video of someone using c_give()...