[Feedback] Petition to return Fire to Lightning conversion to Cindertouch gloves

What’s the comprehensive list of archetypes affected by this change and how much of an auto pick were the gloves on those builds?

So the question is, how many builds were killed by the glove change vs. how many builds would be enabled by the helm change. Given that sets do not usually include gloves but do usually include helms, I would say more for the former than for the latter.

1 Like

I agree, though I have yet to see evidence of any of the former.

FWIW, It’s not as though I never used these on my Lightning Cyclone builds either. Now I don’t. The builds still function, so obviously the gloves were not essential for me.

If your build can still do the main campaign ultimate, then it hasn’t been broken…:clown_face:

1 Like

Lol at the poll results.

As if this is news, if your build is “broken” by an update, present your evidence, emphasis on evidence.

Don’t bother making polls to revert changes. They will not be considered even if it’s overwhelmingly in your favor.


Just about every non-LD lightning build.

Cyclone. Both elementalist and shieldbreaker just lost like 10% total dmg. Lightning sorcerers of all kind.

You guys always say “evidence.” What does it even mean? A video where I can’t kill Darrius Cronley? You know that will not happen because of -10% total dmg.

Faction gear builds also “function.” So basically everything “functions” at a certain level. There can be no “evidence” of things “not functioning” because it’s the level on which they function that changes not the duality of “functions-not functions”. You guys are shutting down all feedback with this one word “evidence.”

It’s because if you like lightning you click yes, if fire then no. So 50/50. And then there is a small minority of those who like and play all dmg types. I bet they mostly clicked yes. Fire already had very good gloves Wyrmscales packing big oa so Cindertouches do not add much to the fire type outside of the proc, and this change took away a whole lot lightning demolitionist synergy.

Good idea.

1 Like

Was there any evidence and/or research that Fire gloves needed another pair when they have Wyrmbones, Handguards of Justice and Gauntlets of Ignaffar? Or did someone just suggest “Hey, you know what would be cool - to remove conversion from Cindertouch?” and you went with it? Because just by looking at Lightning meta you can see that those gloves is an important puzzle piece to a lot of Lightning builds. And Lightning meta is less than hot after all the nerfs you gave it.

Here is a piece of evidence:

Top PRM build that you yourself have nerfed multiple times (the most awkward nerf changing the damage split to 70/30% in favour of Fire despite Invoker being thematically bi-elemental set). Damage split before gloves nerfs:

Overwhelmingly Fire despite conversion and Lightning devotions.

Damage split after gloves nerf:


(should be higher with Iskandra’s relic proc but distribution would be the same of course).

I have deleted the videos of my runs but I have no problems recording it again. Give me 15 minutes.

1 Like

I’m glad you confirmed my math.

10% is not “make or break.”

If a 5:00-5:30 build got BTFO to 8:00+, we can talk. I don’t think a 10% damage loss will do that.

If you need me, I’m still crying over the 25% damage loss of my AFK build.

Sure, it will not make or break builds. But why punish a whole lot of builds with -10% total dmg just so that another dmg type can have a new proc they don’t need?

Furthermore, the core stat that made Cindertouches (actually it was the convesion that really made them) was the big oa. And that was already available to fire from Wyrmbones. So fire isn’t really getting anything new here. And Wyrmbones still beat Cinders because of 4 ranks to core demo skills and much needed for fire rotation cast speed.

And fire EoR will probably keep using Justice because attack speed is tight. But I don’t know. Anyway, if fire EoR needed gloves, why not make new ones instead of ruining a very good pick from another dmg type? EDIT: what am I saying, the mod stayed, ofc fire EoR can’t use Cinders lol. So what exactly is this change for? Fire CT doesn’t need those ranks, this change does not bring anything new to the fire type.

So we end up in a situation where we have two almost identical fire gloves: Cinders and Wyrmbones, and two almost identical lightning gloves: Cinders and Thundertouch. Doesn’t sound very “diversity” does it?


That just shows how poorly you understand the meta or how endgame balance works, mate. Like that time you said that “disruption resist is not important”. Even 5% performance drop can break a build, 10% is pretty huge.

And again, that flawed logic that undeserved nerf does not need any explanation whatsoever and that somehow you are not hearing or conviniently ignoring the fact that Fire already has practically identical gloves in a form of Wyrmbone but everyone whose builds suffered this 10% performance drop - they have to explain shit.

Anyway, back to the proofs. Here are two runs I recorded just now, @Zantai :

6:02 with somewhat favourable mutators and 6:22 with somewhat unfavourable.

That’s ~30-40 seconds drop from before the nerf:

Now, before anyone says “but it’s 6 minutes hurr-durr what are you complaining about”. This is a super min-maxed spec that I have piloted a million times. And it simply stopped making sense because with the way damage is split on Invoker (unfair split towards Fire even after multiple Lightning meta nerfs) Fire spec will be always faster and safer. So -1 to PRM’s build diversity. And that’s just PRM MH.

To reiterate, for a casual player 10% performance drop would make a difference between being comfortable with a build and dying with it a lot.

I even received messages after this nerf regarding my build’s performance, lol:


I do remember that confusion when i was trying to learn about Disruption Resist…

What about @banana_peel suggestion to bring it back but on a different pair of gloves?

On disruption resist. There’s this guy named Grava who is already enough of a pain in the ass.

we were referencing a different topic where this kind of thing was being discussed, but the topic here being about Cindertouch conversion, i dont want what i said to start a trend and get others off topic. Sorry!

To me, any build that is “gutted” by a loss of 25% conversion on a single item is at least one of the following:
a) Extremely niche in the first place
b) Reliant on some wonky shenanigans to achieve any notable level of conversion
c) Built by someone who is afraid of any and all changes to the game
d) Is a claim made by someone with a very skewed definition of the word “gutted”

As @Ceno said, if we’re talking about a 5-minute build suddenly rocketing up to 8+ minutes, that’s a pretty significant change (albeit one that affects an extremely small portion of GD’s overall playerbase). If we’re talking about a build that’s literally no longer possible due to an entire set’s identity being altered, that’s also a pretty significant change (I swear I’m not still bitter about the Iskandra Set change :stuck_out_tongue:). I also don’t understand the “muh build diversity ded” argument when we literally just got handed a massive pile of new MIs to go play with TBQH.

This entire thread and its associated poll feels like petty QQ’ing at the absolute best to me.


Which still raises the question of why fire needs this when it has multiple gloves already, of which I find wyrmbone to be superior to cindertouch in many cases anyway.

proceeds to post 2 videos in the 6 minute range after the 10% nerf

Seems perfectly alive and well to me.

That’s an interesting way to call one of the main tools of creating (endgame)builds in this game.

Conversion exists thus it was meant to be used. Right now the only way to achieve 100% fire -> lightning generic conversion with an off-hand is to use one particular helmet, cornerstone slot for many builds.

Any build that needed full fire -> lightning conversion with helmet slot locked has lost huge amount of effective damage after this change.

1 Like

10%. /10chars

So, you are again going to conviniently ingore all other arguments and repeat your own faulty statement? Ok then, good input, mate.