mkultra55

I agree with you on many of the things you mentioned. Blizzard is obviously trying to increase their Subscriptions by giving all classes the "fun stuff". They also recognize that a Mage class will always have a nice population no matter how severley it is nerfed because of the resonance the class archetype has for the general population.

I think you can glean from the recent comments regarding Mage DPS and the new CC abilities given to other classes that Blizzard was content with where Mages were in relation to other classes because of the "other" things we contributed (AoE and CC primarily). Now that other classes are getting some CC we will (supposedly) be getting a DAMAGE BOOST. It is a silly notion that Theory crafters like Lhivera could foresee the problems Mages would encounter soon after TBC was released but that Blizz devs with all their tools and access caught with their pants down.

My problem with Blizzard's logic in this matter is how they ignore the effect their balancing has when it matters the most...during a Raid Boss encounter. As a simple example - Frostbolt's damage is balanced around it's snare. This is totally valid in a solo PVE, PVP or Trash mob encounter. On a Raid boss the snare is useless so Forstbolt's "Balance" is meaningless. There are countless examples like this (not all Mage related either)

I've always had doubts that Blizzard has the ability (or desire) to balance all the types of content they offer. Solo PVE, Small Group PVE, Raid PVE (Trash), Raid PVE (Boss), BG PVP and Arena PVP. All different through Blizzards own making.

 

mkultra55

Same here. I hope they learned from TBC and will let the game play out a bit into the End Game before making any serious changes. Buffs make people happy. Nerfs breed angst. ;-)

 

djm_mage

Not screwing up mages does not directly make them any more money, but I think that posters main point is that they will never fix mages until they believe that fixing mages will make them more money. Most of our skepticism come from how this game has changed and evolved or the years, most notably for this particular thread the whole mage warlock drama. Looking back at all classes and specs over the years there is only two ways to describe the dev's approach to scaling and balance, either completely and utterly grossly incompetent, or entirely lazy and uncaring. My guess is the first option, and that there is little to no testing at all when it comes to scaling in high end content.

Going back to the main point if this thread though, I am currently confident that yes, FrostFire Bolt will be getting all the lovely talents from both trees, Ignite, Ice Shards, stuns and snares, all that good stuff. I have mentioned it already in a previous post and I'll put it out there again, all of those talents apply to "fire damage spells" or "frost damage spells". Not to be confused with talents that say something like "Increase frost damage" or "Increase fire damage". So if FrostFire Bolt counts as being in both schools of magic, there is so far no reason for it not to get all the talents from the trees.

 

Arazan

I'm happy that they're giving a clear identity of what the mage's specialty it supposed to be, but I'm deeply saddened that they're making them into gimmicky aoe-bots with mediocre single-target damage.

As for confirmation as FFB being affected by both frost and fire talents, I'm going to go do some math about effective scaling coefficients and whatnot. Be back later.

 

Copernicus

Most of our skepticism comes from the big bad blue post by Kalgan just before TBC came out. From right after the Elemental Precision nerf (from 6% to 3%)...


Mages are in "fool me twice" mode now. Saying we're getting insane damage and will be #1 on damage meters means absolutely nothing. Saying that they're deliberately making the mage class less required for raids (everyone gets AE and CC now!) makes it even worse.

And from a game design standpoint, having a class or spec be the top-damage dealers by design doesn't work unless there's a large restriction on them. Currently, rogues are restricted in terms of a cap on melee groups. Only one melee group works bceuase of Shaman mechanics, so the most rogues that are useful as #1 DPS in the raid is 2-3. If classes are close to interchangeable (Mages/Warlocks/Ranged DPS) then the situation becomes one where a group brings the minimum number needed for buffs and stacks the hell out of the top damage. See Naxx for this, where mages and warriors dominated DPS meters and were stacked like crazy and Hunters/Warlocks were pushed to fewer slots.



I guess what I'm trying to say is this. My trust for Blizzard to understand how to buff mages is zero. And in terms of gameplay, making mages the top dogs with no drawbacks is a bad decision to make as well.

 

alvinrod

I think raid wide totems are going to be a fairly big deal as well. At least it solves the problem of stacking large numbers of shaman in the raid or requiring one for every group or needing two enhancement shamans. Totem range will still be an issue on some fights I suppose, but overall it makes things much more flexible. Getting Wrath or WoA totems even while not in the shamans group will help a lot. The only totem that seems really out of balance in this situation is Mana Tide which would give everyone in the raid 25% of their mana back over 12 seconds.

I'll go ahead and speculate that we'll see a hypothermia like mechanic added to Bloodlust to remove the temptation of stacking shamans for that or giving bloodlusts to only one DPS group. Even without this, however, the totem change goes a long way to raid balancing.

The comments about mage DPS being improved is reassuring. Some have already pointed out that this was said at the start of TBC as well, but I think we were in a different position at that point. We had just come out of Naxx where fire DPS was incredible, but a lot of that had to do with game mechanics which were considered broken and fixed. I think that they've realized that we're the underdogs now and try to fix things. Maybe we'll end up as the broken PvE DPS class that does too much damage this time around.

 

Phren

Perhaps it is just me but when I read that statement from Chilton all I see is that our AoE damage will be increased. Our direct damage could stay the same as it is now in comparison to other classes. With how little Blizz has said in regards to the mage class in the last 10 months it is hard to get any understanding of where they are in their thinking.

 

Lhivera

I think it actually doesn't. The sheer number of talents that affect it compensate for the lack of a -cast time talent. It's a little futile to try and run hard numbers right now, since so much is in flux, but I did some quick math a couple weeks ago based on the assumption that it would be affected by everything except Arctic Winds, and elementalist spec FFB came out easily competitive with deep Fire Fireball and deep Frost Frostbolt.


So as the data solidifies we'll keep running the numbers and see how things look. We predicted trouble accurately during TBC beta, so we'll just have to rely on our own predictions again in WotLK.

At Veridian Dynamics, we can even make radishes so spicy, people can't eat them. But we're not, because people can't eat them.

 

Arazan

Okay, so I just got done surfing through the D3 site (woohoo!) and was about to start doing some of the math on scaling, but I just realized that I have no idea what the cast time of FFB is (videos I've seen of it make me think it's 3.5 seconds), nor do we know if they're going to give FFB the same 10% coefficient knock as frostbolt because it has a snare.

Anyone know this info... or at least what the base cast time of FFB is?

EDIT: Nevermind, found Lhiv's confirmation that it's 3.0 seconds.

 

Lhivera

3.0 seconds, yes, and the coefficient penalty is 0.95, not 0.9. So the coefficient should be 81.43%.

At Veridian Dynamics, we can even make radishes so spicy, people can't eat them. But we're not, because people can't eat them.

 

PSGarak

Wouldn't some of that coefficient get lost to the DoT component? I'm ashamed to admit as a warlock, but I'm not very up-to-date on mixed nuke-DoT scaling. Does the DoT take away from the nuke scaling at all, or is it just less than dur/15 because the nuke stole it?

http://sig.gamerdna.com/quizzes/INFL...erks/Garak.png

 

Lhivera

I'm assuming it works more like the Fireball DOT, which does not benefit from damage gear and hence does not change the coefficient on the DD portion of the spell.

At Veridian Dynamics, we can even make radishes so spicy, people can't eat them. But we're not, because people can't eat them.

 

alvinrod

The only problem is that our AoE is extremely limited. Flamestrike would be better if it worked more like SoC in that you target some mob with it so that it falls on the mob rather than putting down a target area and then watching the mobs be moved partially out of your target area.

Blizzard is only really useful if you pick up the frost talents for it. I'd rather see them give blizzard at least part of the snare without talents and up the damage of the spell. Otherwise it's only situationally useful, and that's if you're frost spec.

The pretty much covers it for our ranged AoE options. One isn't spammable and the other is suboptimal damage output and only has any amount of utility if we dump at least 13 points into frost. Our AoE is fine if we can get next to the mobs, but if we have to stay far away from them, we're at a seriously disadvantage.

Of the AoE that we have for point blank range, only Arcane Explosion can be spammed. Both Blastwave and Dragon's Breath have long cooldowns that prevent them from being used more than once or twice per AoE pack. Living bomb will add a nice supplement to AE spam, but based on the numbers it has right now, it's nothing spectacular. That's not to say our instant cast fire spells aren't useful, they have some great utility such as using DB to take the heat off of a tank for a second or two or BW to slow the mobs movement speed, but for damage purposes they're not all that great for sustained AoE.

Most of it really comes down to encounter design. There are fights like Felmyst where mage AoE really shines and then there are fights like M'uru where it's really worthless. Blizzard can up our damage caps all they want, but unless the encounter design is friendly to mage AoE mechanics then all the extra damage in the world isn't going to amount to much.

The only thing I'd really want is Flame Strike with a SoC like mechanic and a shorter DoT portion that makes the spell more friendly for spamming. Of course it won't be as good as SoC against moving targets, but it will go a long way towards making it a better and more flexible spell. Allowing blizzard to crit would also make it a great AoE option for frost mages who sink points into shatter and frostbite as it's one of the things that really plagues that spell.

I think our abilities need to be rethought slightly before they bother to just increase the damage.

 

Niv

I remember when the alpha talents where intially leaked, a new ranged fire aoe spell was shown along with Shatter Shield, FFB, etc. I didn't think about it again until I saw the Witch Doctor's Fire Bomb ability on the D3 site. I wonder if it was truly a new ability in the works or perhaps just a mob ability. We still have three unknown trainable spells so who knows.

 

Arazan

Fuck me, you serious? I just got done doing all the math, did it for both no coefficient loss and for a .1 coefficient loss. Damnit... okay, editing it. It'll be up in a minute.


EDIT:

The problem with FFB is that, while we know all talents that affect frost or fire spells will simultaneously affect FFB, we don't know if it'll be the same from debuffs. That is, will FFB be simultaneously affected by Improved Scorch and Frozen Rune Weapon? If FFB ends up dealing fire damage, will it be affected by Winter's Chill? So I'm going to do two calculations here... one assuming that FFB is the mega-wad-blowing-bundle-of-awesomeness that I hope it is, and that it's affected by all frost OR fire debuffs, and one assuming it's an A or B thing. Actually make that three sets of calculations, one for all buffs, one for all fire, and one for all frost. Actually, I'll be doing a lot of different calculations since I'm doing scaling with different builds and given debuffs... anyway- as a special note here, I don't believe that Winter's Grasp has any chance of making it to live, so I'm going to be doing these calculations without it.

Relative Talents/Debuffs:

Generic (will always affect FFB):

AI: Arcane Instability (+3% damage, +3% crit)
ArP: Arcane Potency (normalized +3% crit)
AP: Arcane Power (normalized +2.5% damage)
SP: Spell Power (+50% critical damage bonus)
PS: Potent Spirit (estimated + 2% crit)
AM: Arcane Mind (estimated +1% crit)
MF: Molten Fury (normalized +4% damage)
BO: Burnout (+25% critical damage bonus)
PY: Pyromaniac (+3% crit)
FP: Fire Power (+10% damage)
CM: Critical Mass (+6% crit)
IGN: Ignite (40% critical damage redone)
IS: Ice Shards (+100% critical damage bonus)
PI: Piercing Ice (+6% damage)
IV: Icy Veins (normalized 2% damage bonus, note: it's a slight underestimate)
AW: Arctic Winds (+5% damage)
MM: Mind Mastery (estimated +3% damage... I know it's a poor estimate, but a poor estimate is about the best I can do here)
CB: Combustion (+5% crit... you get 3 autocrits every 3 minutes, or 3 autocrits per 60 casts, which is 5%)
PF: Playing With Fire (+3% damage)
HS: Hot Streak (estimated +3% crit. Realistically, cube your current crit in decimal form and that's the benefit hot streak gives you... but as this is all hypothetical, that's nasty... and I don't feel like doing calculus here, hence the estimate. Note that for any FFB build, 3% crit for hot streak is a SERIOUS lowball... and as you gear up Hot Streak becomes more and more beneficial. Hell, if you have 40% crit, which wouldn't at all be hard for a FFB build, hot streak gives you over 6% crit...)

CoS: Curse of Shadow (+10% damage)
MI: Misery (+5% damage)
TW: Totem of Wrath (+3% crit)
WA: Wrath of Air Totem (estimated +2% damage, note that's a very odd estimate, and a definite underball... but I didn't want to completely count it out... and as they haven't put it new ranks of WoA and we don't know relative spelldamage values... basically don't bitch and let's just call it +2% for the sake of easier math)

Specific (may not always affect FFB):

IS: Improved Scorch (+15% fire damage)
WC: Winter's Chill (+10% frost crit)
FW: Frozen Rune Weapon (+10% frost damage)

Okay... that's all the talents and debuffs I can think of that could affect FFB. First and foremost, we're ignoring resists for this math. Second, note that I'm leaving crit as a variable... between 0/30/41, 0/33/38, and 47/10/14 type builds, crit will change. A lot. Third, note that all things above marked as "normalized" are calculated last, even after crit. "Normalized" talents and abilities can't be factored in the same way as talents like Fire Power, since their affect is one that's averaged. A fire mage will actually gain more than +20% damage when Molten Fury is active, since crit modifiers are >2.0... he WILL gain +20% DPS, but DPS and damage scaling are different things. Again, I understand that this isn't perfect, but it's the best I can do without breaking out my old calculus book and flipping to the last few chapters. Oh and one last note, when I say "magic number", it's the product of all the non-normalized damage-boosting talents. For instance, everything in the first calculation between Fire Power and Frozen Rune Weapon multiplies to the magic number, 1.824570005.


So, the high hopes (assuming all talents, buffs, debuffs, etc affect FFB regardless of what damage type is dealt), AND assuming that FFB has a 0.8143 coefficient:

0/33/38:

{ [ ( 780 + 0.8143 * X ) * 1.1 FP * 1.06 PI * 1.05 AW * 1.1 CoS * 1.05 MI * 1.02 WA * 1.15 IS * 1.1 FW ] * [ 2.8 * ( C + 0.03 PY + 0.06 CM + 0.10 WC + 0.03 TW + 0.05 CB ] } * 1.04 * 1.02

(Magic Number: 1.824570005)

Simplified:

( 1510 + 1.5761 * X ) * [ 1 + 2.8 * ( C + .2864 )



0/30/41:

{ [ ( 780 + 0.8143 * X ) * 1.1 FP * 1.06 PI * 1.05 AW * 1.1 CoS * 1.05 MI * 1.02 WA * 1.15 IS * 1.1 FW ] * [ 2.8 * ( C + 0.03 PY + 0.06 CM + 0.10 WC + 0.03 TW ] } * 1.02

(Magic Number: 1.824570005)

Simplified:

( 1452 + 1.5155 * X ) * [ 1 + 2.8 * ( C + .2244 ) ]



47/10/14 (assuming you're leeching IS and WC):

{ [ ( 780 + 0.8143 * X ) * 1.06 PI * 1.03 AI * 1.025 AP * 1.03 MM * 1.1 CoS * 1.05 MI * 1.02 WA * 1.15 IS * 1.1 FW ] * 3.15 * ( C + .03 AI + .03 ArP + 0.02 PS + 0.01 AM + 0.10 WC + 0.03 TW ) } * 1.02


(Magic Number: 1.717816863)

Simplified:

( 1367 + 1.4268 * X ) * [ 1 + 3.15 * ( C + .2244 ) ]


^^ That's REALLY shocking to me. The deep arcane build is assuming that you're leeching improved scorch AND winter's chill, but it still scales pretty poorly... but just has prettier numbers.


0/50/21 (assuming you're leeching WC):

{ [ ( 780 + 0.8143 * X ) * 1.1 FP * 1.06 PI * 1.03 PF * 1.1 CoS * 1.05 MI * 1.02 WA * 1.15 IS * 1.1 FW ] * [ 2.975 * ( C + 0.03 PY + 0.06 CM + 0.10 WC + 0.03 TW + 0.05 CB + 0.03 HS ] } * 1.04 * 1.02

(Magic Number: 1.789816291)

Simplified:

( 1481 + 1.5461* X ) * [ 1 + 2.975 * ( C + .3182) ]


Now let's assume that FFB isn't affected by all three of improved scorch, frozen rune weapon, and winter's chill. As we're talking about decent crit modifiers, FFB should always be doing frost damage given that the debuffs are all that matters. So we're basically doing all the same calculations except without improved scorch:


0/33/38:

{ [ ( 780 + 0.8143 * X ) * 1.1 FP * 1.06 PI * 1.05 AW * 1.1 CoS * 1.05 MI * 1.02 WA * 1.1 FW ] * [ 2.8 * ( C + 0.03 PY + 0.06 CM + 0.10 WC + 0.03 TW + 0.05 CB ] } * 1.04 * 1.02

(Magic Number: 1.586582613)

Simplified:

( 1313 + 1.3705 * X ) * [ 1 + 2.8 * ( C + .2864 ) ]



0/30/41:

{ [ ( 780 + 0.8143 * X ) * 1.1 FP * 1.06 PI * 1.05 AW * 1.1 CoS * 1.05 MI * 1.02 WA * 1.1 FW ] * [ 2.8 * ( C + 0.03 PY + 0.06 CM + 0.10 WC + 0.03 TW ] } * 1.02

(Magic Number: 1.586582613)

Simplified:

( 1262 + 1.3178* X ) * [ 1 + 2.8 * ( C + .2244 ) ]



47/10/14 (assuming you're leeching IS and WC):

{ [ ( 780 + 0.8143 * X ) * 1.06 PI * 1.03 AI * 1.025 AP * 1.03 MM * 1.1 CoS * 1.05 MI * 1.02 WA * 1.1 FW ] * 3.15 * ( C + .03 AI + .03 ArP + 0.02 PS + 0.01 AM + 0.10 WC + 0.03 TW ) } * 1.02

(Magic Number: 1.493753793)

Simplified:

( 1188 + 1.2407 * X ) * [ 1 + 3.15 * ( C + .2244 ) ]



0/50/21 (assuming you're leeching WC):

{ [ ( 780 + 0.8143 * X ) * 1.1 FP * 1.06 PI * 1.03 PF * 1.1 CoS * 1.05 MI * 1.02 WA * 1.1 FW ] * [ 2.975 * ( C + 0.03 PY + 0.06 CM + 0.10 WC + 0.03 TW + 0.05 CB + 0.03 HS ] } * 1.04 * 1.02

(Magic Number: 1.556361992)

Simplified:

( 1288 + 1.3444* X ) * [ 1 + 2.975 * ( C + .3182) ]






Okay, now here's how you should use these numbers: assume a level of crit from gear, plug that in for C. Ignore the modified base damage and multiply it out, and you'll get the realistic coefficient... OR keep the modified base damage, plug in a level of spelldamage for X, and you'll get the average damage of a frostfire bolt. Then divide that number by 3 and you'll get expected DPS.



As a pre-emptive warning: these numbers are NOT PERFECT! If you disagree with any of my methodology, any of my assumptions, or any of my estimates, please do so in a kind manner!

 

alvinrod

Why you assume that WC will not always affect FfB? It's wording states that it increases the critical strike chance of your frost spells by 10% when full stacked. Assuming that talent wording suggests consistent behavior (which isn't always true) and that FfB also counts as a frost spell in order to take advantage of IS and PI, is there any reason it also wouldn't receive the increased critical strike chance from WC?

I also believe that AW would only apply if the bolt deals frost damage as it states that it increases all frost damage caused rather than the damage of frost spells. This should be moved into the situational category along with scorch and the DK debuff.

I think you also overvalued combustion. It gives you 3 extra crits, but there's no guarantee that they wouldn't have crit without using combustion. I think most TC has valued it as around 1.5% crit, but you'd have to go looking for it.

I also didn't notice the inclusion of WG in your calculations either, which would make a noticeable difference even if only one mage were actually applying the debuff.

I wouldn't bother trying to calculate Mind Mastery in terms of value as a damage coefficient either. Just assume that with the talent you'll have an extra 200 spell damage or some other guess and make note of it. You can then just add that into the formula later.

Hot Streak may also be more difficult to model as any build the includes both it and shatter while another mage applies WG would increase the effectiveness of the talent. Such an arrangement is probably highly unlikely, but the results may be interesting.

 

Arazan

It's a debuff on your target. It just depends exactly what they mean by "more vulnerable" in the FFB clause... if it's purely to dodge damage immunity like we hope, then all debuffs will count regardless of whether it hits for frost or fire damage.

If, however "more vulnerable" actually takes the target's immunities AND debuffs into account, it would be a poor assumption to think that something like winter's chill will always be counted, while something like improved scorch won't always be counted.

Also, I specifically mentioned that I don't think WG will make it into live, hence me not doing any calculations figuring it in. IF WG does make it to live, no matter how you spec your frost or fire mage you will auto#1 dps, and imo 33/38 will be the only viable spec for it because you will absolutely NEED the threat reduxes of both frost channeling and burning soul because you will be doing such an insane amount of damage that you'll need the double-thread-redux action with FFB.



EDIT:

They specifically stated at WWI that FFB would receive all talent bonuses from frost spell talents AND fire spell talents, so even though Fire Power says "increases the damage of fire spells..." it will make FFB hit harder, even if FFB hits for frost. Also, I could have left MM as an extra variable, but the whole point was that I wanted to make the numbers as simple as possible. I wanted to boil the stuff down to where all you really needed to consider was crit and damage. I may have over-valued Combustion, but in all honesty it doesn't change a whole lot. If you're really concerned that Combustion is skewing your numbers, just drop a percentage point or two off the crit part of the equation. That part of the formula is the easy part.


EDIT 2:


I know numbers are pretty meaningless without reference so here's a quick workup I did for Fireball and Frostbolt:




10/50/11 Fireball:

{ [ ( 1010 + 1.15 * X ) * 1.1 FP * 1.1 CoS * 1.05 MI * 1.02 WA * 1.15 IS ] * [ 2.275 * ( C + 0.03 PY + 0.06 CM + 0.03 TW + 0.05 CB + 0.03 HS ] } * 1.04 * 1.02

(Magic Number: 1.4902965)

Simplified:

( 1597 + 1.8180* X ) * [ 1 + 2.275 * ( C + .2122) ]



0/60/11 Fireball:

{ [ ( 1010 + 1.15 * X ) * 1.1 FP * 1.1 CoS * 1.05 MI * 1.02 WA * 1.15 IS * 1.03 PF ] * [ 2.275 * ( C + 0.03 PY + 0.06 CM + 0.03 TW + 0.05 CB + 0.03 HS ] } * 1.04 * 1.02

(Magic Number: 1.535005395)

Simplified:

( 1645 + 1.8726* X ) * [ 1 + 2.275 * ( C + .2122) ]



10/0/61 Frostbolt:

[ ( 830 + .9143 * X ) * 1.06 PI * 1.05 AW * 1.05 CtB * 1.1 FW * 1.1 CoS * 1.05 MI * 1.02 WA ] * 2.0 * ( C + .03 TW + 0.05 EF + .10 WC ) * 1.02

(Magic Number: 1.514465222)

Simplified:

( 1282 + 1.4124 * X ) * [ 1 + 2 * ( C + .1836 ) ]




Don't forget that frostbolt is a 2.5 second cast whereas fireball and FFB are a 3.0 second cast, so if frostbolt looks underwhelming at first that's probably why.




EDIT2:

Some sad news for FFB hopefuls, here's some plugged in scalars:

Assuming 10% crit from gear, you get the following:

FFB Always benefitting from Imp Scorch / Winter's Chill / Frozen Rune Weapon:

0/33/38: 3.281314
0/30/41: 2.934493
47/10/14 (assuming you're leeching IS and WC): 2.929734
0/50/21 (assuming you're leeching WC): 3.469673

FFB NOT Simultaneously Benefitting from IS/WC/FW:

0/33/38: 2.853271
0/30/41: 2.514784
47/10/14 (assuming you're leeching IS and WC): 2.508522
0/50/21 (assuming you're leeching WC): 3.017029

10/50/11 Fireball: 3.109244
0/60/11 Fireball: 3.202624
10/0/61 Frostbolt: 2.213613 (2.656336 per 3 seconds)


Assuming 15% crit from gear:

FFB Always benefitting from Imp Scorch / Winter's Chill / Frozen Rune Weapon:

0/33/38: 3.501968
0/30/41: 3.104229
47/10/14 (assuming you're leeching IS and WC): 3.109511
0/50/21 (assuming you're leeching WC): 3.699655

FFB NOT Simultaneously Benefitting from IS/WC/FW:

0/33/38: 3.045141
0/30/41: 2.699296
47/10/14 (assuming you're leeching IS and WC): 2.703932
0/50/21 (assuming you're leeching WC): 3.217008

10/50/11 Fireball: 3.316041
0/60/11 Fireball: 3.415632
10/0/61 Frostbolt: 2.354753 (2.825703 per 3 seconds)

 

◊ Kaubel

I triple dog dare someone to make one more "Blizzard is stupid and has no idea what they're doing" inference.

 

Zaldinar

Speaking as someone who often (is defends the right word?) defends Blizzards action, inaction, stance, lack of stance, etc on the WoW Mage forums...

I'm in the military, until a week after it happened, and it hasn't been reversed yet, it may as well have not happened in the first place. Simply stating that they recognize the issues we've been bringing forth does not necessarily indicate that they will actually fix them. I enjoy being optimistic, but your challenge is ill advised given the history of what we've seen from Blizzard when it comes to announcements such as this.

Now, a year down the road, a betas worth of testing, a release, and the first tier of WotLK raiding being farmed out, certainly if the announcements hold true at that point then I'd be completely in concurrence with you. But for now we don't have enough information to change anything other than we know that they have publicly acknowledged what we view as issues.

To truly model the game, we first must research it.
http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/th...icId=109841969
Proven TheoryCrafting Stuff, chain casting in a PTR near you soon.

 

alvinrod

I think you misunderstood what I meant. FfB is believed to count as both a fire and a frost spell for the purpose of determining by which talents it is affected. For that reason any talent that says "your fire spells" or "your frost spells" can be considered to affect FfB. When a talent says "increases your fire damage", "increases your frost damage", or something similar it specifically means that the damage is only increased if a spell deals that type of damage regardless of the school in which that spell is, at least that is my understanding of how the mechanics work.

Because WC is applied by frost spells and increases the critical chance of frost spells, it will always affect FfB regardless of whether it deals fire or frost damage. If the mob were frost immune I imagine that the debuff would not be applied. Otherwise, as long as the debuff is up, FfB should always benefit from it.

The improved scorch debuff and arctic winds talent only enhance fire and frost damage respectively. Therefore I imagine that if the FfB deals frost damage, it does not receive the benefit from improved scorch and that if it deals fire damage it does not receive the benefit from arctic winds or the death knight's frozen rune weapon debuff. These mention specifically that they increase a certain type of damage, which FfB may not always deal.

 

Arazan

Right but Frostfire Bolt is listed as a base fire spell that can deal frost damage, so by that logic it should never be affected by Piercing Ice, Winter's Chill, or Frost Channeling, as it's not a frost spell but a fire spell.

I think Arctic Winds suffers from PWTS: Poorly Worded Talent Syndrome.

 

◊ manly

As I pointed out many times over the months, it is my belief that blizzard tested and balanced raid dps accordingly, but did not consider the possibility of 0/21/40 build for warlocks to exist, thus never double-checked the dps with it. Take other warlock builds, and the numbers are far more in line with what you would probably expect to see, or at least have enough disincentives to make it unattractive.

Log on with different model:
1- Create a character of the desired model. Log on/off.
2- At character selection screen, select your actual character; mouseover the new, desired model character, and hold down left click; hit enter and release left click at the same time.
bug Arcane Potency only applies to the first Arcane Missile bolt.

 

Hairy

Has anyone theorycrafted a heavy arcane spec such as 51/10/10? Yarr! Tools :: Mage 8472

You could do arcane blast x3, frostfire bolt x2, arcane barrage, or abx3, abar, ffb, ffb, abar with some haste. This would be a fun spec, using frostfire bolts for the extra crit chance on clearcast procs, and weaving in frostfire bolts on netherwind procs. Threat shouldnt be an issue since most of the damage is arcane, however you would be saddled to 30 yard range without flamethrowing. Also it would be a pretty nifty build for mobility fights.

Im curious to see how it would compare to the current arcane/frostbolt build.

 

◊ Kyth

If that were true, I'd think (hope?) they'd be addressing it in WotLK (god knows as a lock I wish they would, demonic sac is stupid so low in demonology) but they haven't yet.


My personal theory for the "oops" was VT being so key for warlock dps. At the start of TBC, only mages would get spriests and it was a hard sell in most guilds because "just lifetap" wasn't understood beyond locks as the dps loss that it was. It's not surprising that Blizzard also missed that same key point.

A spriest is around a ~5% boost to lock dps if I remember my numbers right.

Officer of <Fusion>
http://www.stratfu.com/ - StratFu: Strategies, Guides, Movies, and Tips for Wrath Raiding

 

Jarlyn

I don't follow the lock threads extensively, but I thought they were trying fairly hard (if still unsuccessfully, at this point) to push locks away from DS/Destro builds?