Fire Burst Damage-A Proposed Solution

[PerfectApproach]

Second off, about the damage increase you propose, well, it's not really balanced, is it? Hunters and Champs would go into neglect, and people would simply kick them and add more tanks in an attempt to make up for their new DPSers' squishiness.

Hmm. Possibly. But the idea is to give a nice reward (Highest DPS) for a high risk. It might involve making Fire RK's slightly more squishy (or in this case, leave us as squishy as we already are). Hunters and Champs will think twice about that extra 5% - 10% DPS if they have to worry about whether or not they will get one-shotted by a Grodbog Worker.

Thirdly, about hybrids, well, the thing is that both playstyles begin to suffer.

True. But Hunters and Champs are currently pulling it off. Jeez, even Burglars are pulling it off.

Fourth, about your FR revision...that'd make Fire RKs impossible to play at low levels.

Not sure I see how. When I leveled my noobie RK way back in November of 2008, I think the first 3 skills I got were Scribe's Spark (I think now replaced with CA), Fiery Rid, and Prelude to Hope. A spammable fire DoT and a spammable lightning skill that has decent crits (for a low level noob) sorta complement each other. I wouldn't anticipate any survivability issues. It would encourage kiting. I never used Fiery Rid DURING combat anyway... back then, it had an insanely long induction (3s? 4s?). I used it before combat as a pull skill. I'd do a prelude, set down a rock, throw a buff (if I had one), pull with FR, and start kiting. Actually, I just stood there like a noob, spamming Scribe's Spark and auto-attacking.

Having an instant-but-weakified FR would actually help low-level RK's because they could use it alongside CA during combat. It might CHANGE how low-level RK's operate, but I think "impossible" is a far stretch.

Fifth, making Fire all sustained DPS and Lightning all burst is kinda sorta counterintuitive to the whole 'RKs are the most flexible class' idea that we were sort of envisioned around.

I never really thought of RK's any more or less flexible than any other class. I don't think I ever remember it being marketed that way either. We could heal, or DPS. Admittedly, those are 2 major combat roles, so it is inherently flexible (especially more than a hunter), but MANY other classes can fill 2 combat roles. Wardens are being modified to fill 3 combat roles!

The main reason I'm so passionate about "no more burst in Fire" is because it takes away from the steady-DPS-ness of it. Essence of Flame is ALREADY a DoT that was converted to a burst skill. Smouldering Wrath is ALREADY 2 seconds shorter than it used to be. And again, those bursty lightning skills haven't gotten any less bursty simply because of being fire-traited. They're still there, freely available for use when a Fire-Traited RK needs to kill something quickly. No, they're not as effective as when lightning traited, but EC/Shocking Words/Essence of Storm will still 3-shot most trash. And in a raid, it's not like the RK is the ONLY DPS'er. There will be other people in the raid to depend on.

If we keep turning Fire skills into burst DPS, we won't have anymore steady-DPS skills. Wrath of Flame will simply be Fury of Storm with longer inductions and fewer crits.

And lastly, I'd like to finally make an up-front statement about why Fire needs some more burst capability:
I want to use skills that are thematically appropriate.

Simple as that. It's not as satisfying to use lightning when I want to be a Fire RK.

I can't help you there. Just because you don't want to use lightning skills doesn't mean we should change the class. Personally, I have no problem throwing out an EC or Shocking Words to help my hunter buddies with trash.

Edit: Aside from this, what do you think of my idea for Frost changes I added to the first post?

"...Sorry about that. Anyway, my proposal is:
1. Reduce Smouldering Wrath's channeling time to 5 seconds.
2. Have each (stackable) Master of Connotation buff reduce SW's channeling time by 1 second, and also make it give back 3% of max morale. (Stacks up to 5 times.) The buff could be wiped by using WoC or, possibly, Improved Sustaining Bolt.

So, from my napkin math on a level 53 RK using a neutral leg wep with 6 Fire traits, a hit with SW at 5 Master of Connotation would do 1984 damage, which is roughly the same as, for me, a T3 Essence of Flame devastating hit. This seems somewhat overpowered, which leads to part three.

3. Each Master of Connotation buff reduces SW damage by 3% and increases power cost by the same amount.

By adding this, SW becomes more situational. Rather than mashing it every time it comes on, we would have to save the instant version for times that require burst, and use the normal one elsewhere.

However, an incentive for using WoC would be needed to make wiping the buff possible. ( iSB could be used when low on power.) So, as I said in a later post's edit, it needs some beefing up.

4. WoC reduces Tactical Migitation by 5% per tier. Target range reduced to 1. Damage increased.
5. The Frost-burn trait makes WoC and Essay of Cold (see below) 3-target AoEs.
6. New skill: Essay of Cold-Places a tier 3 WoC debuff on the target and does 125% of WoC's damage. Gives nearby targets a tier 1 WoC debuff and does 33% of WoC's damage to them when using Frost-burn....."

Making the changes you proposed to Smouldering Wrath and all the Chill of Winter skills would require a lot of work, possibly some entirely new tech. From what I can see you want the following changes to Smouldering Wrath:
1) Progressive reduction in duration.
2) Progressive reduction in damage.
3) Progressive increase in power cost.

This is wrong on SO many levels. A 3s duration SmW that does less damage and uses more power is just... not right. Essentially, it becomes a cross between Essence of Flame and Epic Conclusion. Why not just use Essence of Flame and Epic Conclusion? And a reduction in damage? That's a pill I just can't swallow.

As to the Winter changes:
WoC reducing Tactical Mit is actually a really good idea. I like it. The range reduction is meh; would have no effect on targets that only do melee damage. I can see a range-reduction debuff being put SOMEWHERE though. I actually do like that idea. Just not tied to WoC.

WoC is already a 3-target skill.

Frozen Epilogue already applies a T3 WoC, in a frontal AOE. Not sure how many targets, but at least 3.

As to a new skill, Essay of Cold, I can conceivably see it as a counterpart to Essay of Fire. However, I never liked Essay of Fire from the beginning. It was a band-aid skill to begin with, and still is. And Essay of Fire and your Essay of Cold proposal contribute to an already-full skill bar. RK's have enough skills as it is: No New Skills!

[Therubor]

So, you're alright with having the fire line with less burst DPS (which is fair, and I understand the reasoning behind it, though I respectfully disagree), but you're also alright with having lightning be more sustainable DPS? I don't understand the reasoning behind folks that argue that fire should not have burst damage, but then are perfectly willing to accept lightning get a sizable boost to sustainability. To better balance, it seems better to provide the sustainability boost to lightning but not at the expense of heavily nerfing fire burst (I.e. changing IEoF to only 2-3 seconds of non-inductions, like Warth suggested). That way, it truly does become a matter of player preference.

I think it was Therubor, in this same thread, that commented that fire needs a touch more burst DPS than what Update 6 will provide if lightning is given more sustainability, even if it comes at a cost. I would agree with that. That, or I would propose shortening IEoF to a 45 second CD to allow for consistent burst DPS (with Essence of Flame/SW) needed in fights where burst is needed every ~45 seconds or so, if not a bit shorter.
@ Perfect Approach - Yes, Shocking Words/Essence of Storm/EC are still relatively hard hitting (assuming a crit in particular) fire-spec'd, but Bradegor is right with his last post. They won't be as hard hitting with the Update 6 changes, and they're still largely crit dependent, which isn't the fire line's strong suit.
What I see happening is that lightning will become the stronger choice for most of ToO aside from Saruman and possibly Kalbak, which largely appeals to RKs that prefer lightning, but will become a sore spot for those RKs that prefer fire.
At the end of the day, I prefer fire, but will ultimately trait whatever is most effective for the situation, and provides a good combination of burst and sustained DPS, and it sounds like lightning will do that.
While I can respect Z.C.'s decision to make both dps trait lines viable for end-game, I agree with the sentiment that we may be back to having most RKs trait lightning, which means I may need to make my FA
into a lightning stone (because my next FA will be a healing satchel) and use all of the seals I've amassed to acquire the lightning set. /Sigh.

No, PerfectApproach is not alright with Lightning having sustained damage, it'd seem. But he doesn't appear to be as vocal about it.

And yes, I kinda sorta started the thread, and it's, you know, about burst damage being solved.

But the thing about iEoF is that it doesn't really offer a feasible way for RKs to not have to factor doing burst damage into their rotation. That's my problem with it. There is no reason with the current, or even your proposed version, of iEoF, to not use the barrage of FRs that come with it. Burst for RKs should be a tool for use in emergencies only.

And now I'll adress this more comprehensively:

I don't want to have traits reference each other though, prefer something like "Scathing Retort - Added functionality. Calming Verse now reduces the channel time of Smouldering Wrath by 75%, and increases it's damage by 50%." There, burst if you want it.

However, I think the 6sec duration Smouldering Wrath that will be shipping will feel plenty bursty. IEoF into EF into Smouldering Wrath will be quite a bit of damage fast. I'm also all-right with the fire line having less burst, that is the preview of lightning. Fire has it's own advantages.

Not really sure what you meant by having traits reference each other. I put the whole mechanic proposal as a boost to the MoC trait, and possibly as a replacement for the current change for it. It'd be too weird if it was added to Scathing Retort. It's just the same skill getting two traits to boost it, really.

Please, please, please don't make CV do anything else. The changes in U6 are really nice, but more bonuses would make it the centerpiece of the RK. That's probably a bad thing.

And again, if Lightning's getting a rather nice boost to its sustained damage, please give Fire a touch of burst.

Thank you for your posts, a few more suggestions would be nice, and please keep it on topic.

[Therubor]

Making the changes you proposed to Smouldering Wrath and all the Chill of Winter skills would require a lot of work, possibly some entirely new tech. From what I can see you want the following changes to Smouldering Wrath:
1) Progressive reduction in duration.
2) Progressive reduction in damage.
3) Progressive increase in power cost.

This is wrong on SO many levels. A 3s duration SmW that does less damage and uses more power is just... not right. Essentially, it becomes a cross between Essence of Flame and Epic Conclusion. Why not just use Essence of Flame and Epic Conclusion? And a reduction in damage? That's a pill I just can't swallow.

As to the Winter changes:
WoC reducing Tactical Mit is actually a really good idea. I like it. The range reduction is meh; would have no effect on targets that only do melee damage. I can see a range-reduction debuff being put SOMEWHERE though. I actually do like that idea. Just not tied to WoC.

WoC is already a 3-target skill.

Frozen Epilogue already applies a T3 WoC, in a frontal AOE. Not sure how many targets, but at least 3.

As to a new skill, Essay of Cold, I can conceivably see it as a counterpart to Essay of Fire. However, I never liked Essay of Fire from the beginning. It was a band-aid skill to begin with, and still is. And Essay of Fire and your Essay of Cold proposal contribute to an already-full skill bar. RK's have enough skills as it is: No New Skills!

Okay, well, thanks for posting a suggestion and some constructive criticism. Apparently, I must've had a brain fart just before I got to the bottom. Sorry about that.

For another use of the word 'apparently', you misread my post. I said we should reduce the six second version of SW (the U6 version) to five seconds of induction (possibly combined with a slight damage nerf), then reduce it by one second per stacking MoC buff. The induction reduction would intensify the skill's DPS into a short period of time. I'll go back and edit the first post to clarify. I'm sorry. (again)

The reason for the power cost increase and damage reduction is to make the use of it in a situation where it is unneeded a very bad idea. If implemented by U6, the amount of burst used by Fire RKs would actually decrease.

And now to the Frost ideas:

Well, I'm rather flattered that someone supports the Tact Miti reduction for WoC. But, once again, we are caught in the throes of my terrible communication. Instead of doing more writing on this post, I've just edited the intial ideas. Also, the whole thingy of the first post is one whole change proposal.

My deepest apologies for doubleposting.

[PerfectApproach]

No, PerfectApproach is not alright with Lightning having sustained damage, it'd seem. But he doesn't appear to be as vocal about it.

You are correct. Way back before there was a Lothlorien, I was a RK just hitting level cap, at 60. In those days, EVERYONE traited for lightning because of the enormous crits (for the time). 6k EC hits were all the rage, and that was massive, considering the best tanks could barely hit 6000 morale with the top-end gear... which was the Moria Radiance gear! Remember Radiance? It also sucked down power like crazy. Creeps and Hunters whined so much that it was slowly and steadily nerfed into what we see now. Creeps and Hunters insisted the RK's were spamming it every 3 seconds, one-shotting everyone in sight, and self-healing the whole time. Of course, they were wrong, but they still won their battle; EC is now no longer Epic. It's more like "Pretty Cool Conclusion." It doesn't suck, but it's far from Epic.

I digress.

In those days, EVERYONE was traited lightning. It did higher DPS than fire and it was mobile. Power consumption wasn't even thought of; we all thought "That's what LM's and pots are for." I think I was the only person on the server, at that time, who deliberately traited for fire, and stayed that way. And I've been fire-traited ever since. I think I've maybe traited for lightning 3 times since Lothlorien was released. Which was a LOOONG time ago. I did it because I was convinced it wasn't the pariah it was made out to be. And it really wasn't. Once I had it mastered, I was actually out-DPS'ing most lightning RK's. The GOOD, well-equipped lightning RK's could still top me, and they certainly had other advantages, but I was slingin' fire and sipping power doing it.

Eventually, all the lightning RK's started complaining that LM's weren't passing enough power, or that Self-Motivation didn't return enough power, and that Lightning used too much power... And again, Zombie Columbus gave them what they wanted, instead of what they needed. Power consumption was reduced, and damage with it, until lightning could be used in long raid-boss fights. Wrath of Flame was all but forgotten. Until RoI. Now EVERYONE is a fire RK. OMGZ SPAMMABLE FIRE SKILLS I WANT ONE! Ugh...

So no, I really don't care what Zombie does with Lightning skills anymore. I don't play that damage line, and there are plenty of other people who do. Some are even good at it. Let them complain if they think that Lightning is "too sustainable." If I were them, I'd gladly sacrifice some extra power usage for bigger crits. Other people got those changes made; let other people unmake them. For me, lightning was ruined a LONG time ago. That ship has sailed.

But fire is how I have played my RK for a VERY long time, and seeing it screwed around and completely messed up really sucks for me. And that is why I'm vocal about not having bursty Fire skills, and don't give a rat's tail about lightning. I don't play lightning. I don't really put myself into a position where I should have any kind of opinion on lightning. Look for loki84 (Kalymnor) on the forums. He'll tell you all about lightning. One of the best I know.

[Therubor]

That was an extremely heartfelt-looking post. Just needed to say that.

[Sizzling]

You are correct. Way back before there was a Lothlorien...
+ some words.
.

I enjoyed reading this post as well.
On a side note, my complaint of not understanding the reasoning behind folks that argue that fire should not have burst damage, but then are willing to accept lightning get a sizable boost to sustainability was not directed at you or anyone else in particular. It was meant as a general observation.

[Bradegor]

I enjoyed reading this post as well.
On a side note, my complaint of not understanding the reasoning behind folks that argue that fire should not have burst damage, but then are willing to accept lightning get a sizable boost to sustainability was not directed at you or anyone else in particular. It was meant as a general observation.

This makes sense. Lightning RKs want to keep zap zap in the Moors while still be able to do all the PvE, raid content. As it always be. People tends to get used to what they have always done.

Still i see an issue about Lightning threat, but who knows, maybe ZC will fix it and we all will forget about Fire forever and will come back to Lightning, as it should be :P

[Telcharan]

I'm not particularly concerned with the current state of things. There are a limited number of fights where true burst damage is required, and I don't mind having to trait back and forth between fire and lightning to be the most effective in different fights. Money is really quite cheap these days. Lightning getting increased efficiency for long fights isn't too much of a bad thing, there are other things that differentiate it from fire.

Really, as I see it aggro could be the biggest difference between them in this patch instead of power. With the loss of CV, DF becomes our only true consistent threat reduction, and assuming that its aggro reduction has been increased with its damage it will become truly invaluable. The cumulative effect of using the legendary version constantly over a long boss fight could very well mean the difference between having to hold back constantly and being able to go all out the whole time, and in a DPS race the last thing you want to do is hold back because the tank is having aggro troubles.

[Sizzling]

Still i see an issue about Lightning threat, but who knows, maybe ZC will fix it and we all will forget about Fire forever and will come back to Lightning, as it should be :P

I hope that was sarcasm on your part! Based on your post history on fire, I will be hopeful that it was sarcasm!
I'm just throwing a hissy fit at the moment, and am lamenting (irritated) over the changes to burst fire capability. I'm also further irritated that those players that argue that fire shouldn't have burst capability are the same people that will support lightning having more overall sustainability.. Clearly those people just want to have their cake and eat it too! And darn it, why can't I continue to have my cake and it eat too as a fire-spec'd RK?
Maybe I'll try to embrace rationality/reasonableness between now and Monday, so I can see the fire changes in a fresh, unbiased light. Some of the changes do sound promising, at least.
Edit: @ Telcharan, agree entirely that threat management may be the largest deciding factor. Hopefully, it will be less of an issue than we think..

[Bradegor]

I hope that was sarcasm on your part! Based on your post history on fire, I will be hopeful that it was sarcasm!
I'm just throwing a hissy fit at the moment, and am lamenting (irritated) over the changes to burst fire capability. I'm also further irritated that those players that argue that fire shouldn't have burst capability are the same people that will support lightning having more overall sustainability.. Clearly those people just want to have their cake and eat it too! And darn it, why can't I continue to have my cake and it eat too as a fire-spec'd RK?
Maybe I'll try to embrace rationality/reasonableness between now and Monday, so I can see the fire changes in a fresh, unbiased light. Some of the changes do sound promising, at least.

It is sarcasm indeed, there the emoticon, but i still wouldn´t mind to swith to Lightning as i have been playing before RoI; i will use whatever is more effective for raiding.

The real question is ... is ZC going to reimburse me all my ToO Fire set and my 1st ager Fire runestone, for their Lightning counterparts? If he does, then i´m totally fine :P

[revoked]

I want my seals back from the Draigoch set, which will now be entirely useless. I went for healing and lightning ToO sets, since I heal more often than dps and I liked the reduction on IEoF cooldown. I've almost never used my lightning set and now have to get the fire set as well....though i may be going back to lightning, which will make me sad. On BR, however, my fire dps still parses significantly higher than my lightning dps.

[Raven-EU]

I'm just throwing a hissy fit at the moment, and am lamenting (irritated) over the changes to burst fire capability. <snip>

First off, this is not a complaint against you Sizzling, it's directed against everyone who talks about "burst" as if it is a well defined thing.

On BR I've seen Essay of Fire hit for 10k. Given a 2 second induction that's 5k DPS. Is that burst? Heck yes it is! But it probably doesn't match up to the "burst" that everyone else is talking about. Smouldering Wrath ticks 7 times and can hit for 2k+ each tick. That's 14k damage over 6.5 seconds, is that "burst"? Heck yes, but probably not what you're thinking about. Combine the two with some nice alignment of stars and you're talking about almost 25k damage in 9 seconds. Is that "burst"?

I think that when talking about "burst" we need to be a lot more specific. Instead of "burst", say I need to be able to do 17k damage in less than 10 seconds, or 17k/10s for short . We also need to be clear on wether it's burst on a "cold" target (e.g. add spawn) or a "hot" target (need to burn off this bubble ASAP) as there is quite a difference between those two. So this is what we should say: I need to make 17k/10s on a cold target or it's a wipe. And this is what we shouldn't say: We'll wipe unless we get "burst capability" in fire.

Oh, and we need to specify how often we need that "burst". Frozen Epilogue is a nice burst damage but it's on a very long cooldown. If we keep talking about "burst" as some kind of mythical (or well defined, for that matter) entity we'll just dig ourselves into a rut, arguing over whos burst is the proper burst.

Edit: @ Telcharan, agree entirely that threat management may be the largest deciding factor. Hopefully, it will be less of an issue than we think..

This, I think, is the biggest difference between fire and lightning: Fire has threat reduction built into the capstone whereas lightning only have Distracting Winds (and Distracting Flames). I do hope they'll buff the threat reduction riffler so we at least get some way to mitigate our threat in lightning at the start of fights. And that the threat reduction from Distrcting Flames is high enough.

Edit : Spelling and grammar...

[Bradegor]

Burst is called depending on necesities. As i said, any thing that lets me kill an elhudan in 8 seconds is fine (and they have like 18k morale, if my memory is still working). I don´t need the ubberness of the hunters burst, i just need that to be midly competent and to do my job in Shadow T2, where really matters. Sure, i could use also some burst in Acid T2, actually ... i will need it. But i take elhudan killing as the perfect example of how much burst a raiding RK needs.

Btw, i would love to read about 1 min/2 mins parses of new Fire and Lightning builds. I bet they will be closer now.

[Raven-EU]

Burst is called depending on necesities.

Which is exactly why we cannot and should not talk of "burst" as a have/have-not function of any DPS line. It's always situational and the "burst" needed for situation A might not be enough for situation B and will be overkill for situation C. Speaking about "burst" and not giving numbers is basically just venting hot air (pun intended as we're talking about fire spec)

As i said, any thing that lets me kill an elhudan in 8 seconds is fine (and they have like 18k morale, if my memory is still working).

This on the other hand is a perfect specification of the "Short-term maximized damage capacity" (or burst) needed for this situation: 18k in 8 seconds on a cold target. It's quantified and well presented! It's clean, it's neat and it lets everyone know what we're talking about. I like that.

Saying we don't have "burst" means nada, saying we cannot generate 18k damage in 8 seconds or less says lots.

[Sizzling]

First off...

+ words

Fair enough, and good points. For me, then, and having this entirely from a raid perspective, burst generally depends on the wing and it is almost always needed on a cold target with no pre-existing dots. If I were to be reasonable, however, admittedly you don't necessarily need burst DPS from fire, though that statement is also largely dependent on the group make-up and the strategy used. That statement is also contingent on how quickly you can ramp up fire damage to it's fullest potency on a single target (boss) post Update 6. IEoF was originally designed to address that, from my understanding, by allowing a near full array of all dots available on a single target in 5 seconds, thus decreasing the ramp-up time needed to reach full potency. Having IEoF provide a huge boost to ridiculous burst damage was simply a bonus, and one that is hard to give up.
For those circumstances that absolutely need burst damage, we can simply use the harder hitting lightning skills, as Perfect Approach mentioned, and that combined with the assistance provided from the raid generally suffices.. It has worked for me, to some degree, when my hard-hitting fire skills (Essence of Flame/SW/IEoF) are on CD.

For Shadow, which is the wing that is the most problematic for burst DPS needed, it's roughly 18k in 8-10 seconds on a fresh target depending on positioning of the boss, etc. Further, the mobs that need that burst DPS spawn roughly every ~35-45 seconds, depending on how quickly the group reaches boss morale thresholds. In general, however, I've found myself just using lightning on these adds, with the assistance from two additional ranged classes (usually hunters), and it works well as they cover for my lack of high burst if IEoF/SW are on CD, which they usually are. Further, if you're going for challenge, chances are that aside from the defilers/glooms, you'll be on the boss most of the time anyway, so burst becomes somewhat less of an issue.
For Acid, it largely depends on the strategy. For an all-out Zerg of the boss in under ~1.75 minutes (minute and fourth-five seconds) fire will not necessarily need burst if it can still ramp up to full potency within ~10-15 seconds or so. For the AoE all the adds down strategy as quick as you can, fire may still win out due to higher AoE performance, but lightning may fair just as strong particularly if the group has more of a controlled strategy of high single-target DPS on each mob, bringing them down to a certain threshold. Lightning may be the better option for Acid overall with Update 6, particularly because you won't necessarily have a lot of time to maintain dots on the boss, while focusing fire on adds. If you aren't doing a Zerg strategy, then you'll be needing burst damage on 6 adds every ~50 seconds or so. Lightning will clearly win out in that strategy.
For Lightning, it's a flat <4 min fight with no adds to worry about killing, etc. No burst needed here.
For Fire/Frost, it really depends on the strategy. At this point, and without worrying about challenge, most groups are probably just doing a zerg of both giants, and worrying about the adds at the very end, and mostly ignoring the gathered rage mechanic needed for challenge. So, again, I think for me it will be more about about how quickly fire can ramp up on a single-target.
For Saruman, it should still be a no-brainer with Update 6... Fire should always be the way to trait for that fight, particularly on 2.

To sum up, perhaps what I'm most concerned about is how quickly a player can ramp up multiple dots on a single target with the changes. To be fair, I haven't grouped in bullroarer at all fire-traited, so I honestly have no idea how it will perform in raid settings. I imagine we'll still be able to have all possible dots on a target in a few seconds, we just won't have as many dots (I.e. Less fiery ridicules)
As long as the net overall damage hasnt been reduced, and I can still parse as high as I can now fire-traited, the changes to fire should be interesting.. And the IEoF nerf shouldn't matter as much. I highly doubt I'll be using SW on adds, however - I wouldn't benefit from the boosts/changes there by using it on a fresh target with no pre-existing dots. What does that mean then? It means I'll have very little fire "burst" damage at all, outside of Essence of Flame. That's less of an issue for me, perhaps, due to the way my kinship works. But will I miss seeing a whole flurry of dots very quickly on a target post Update 6? Yep, but it won't necessarily be needed as long as fire retains it's overall potency.