yeah i ran that same build for a while, cept i took the second off fireblast's CD instead, so i could do more burst on the GCD. in the end i missed imp. counterspell too much and felt like i didn't get that much out of impact, but it is a good build.
That's the thing, 17/0/44 makes you better at the things mages aren't customarily good at, such as countering resto druids and disc priests, and 0/x/41+ improves the areas where mages are already strong (focused damage, CC, and roots/snares). We already have a great matchup against warriors, impact and whatever frost talents you pick up past the forty-fourth just make it further lopsided.
In the end however i think improved counterspell just has too much versatility to trade in for an upgrade to your offensive spells. Without those 17 points in arcane you're pretty much limited to interrupting greater heals, flash heals, and cyclone, and you lose an important option in those tight situations where a four-second silence can decide the match.
I play 2vs2 with a rogue, and we're trying to break the 1850 but recently a couple of teams are giving us trouble.
The first problem is anything with a hunter in it, with the worst matchup being hunter and priest or any other healer really. The hunter will usually go for me and turn red the moment i try to shatter or get in close. I use iceblock but after that the hunter will still have a few seconds of bestial wrath left and somehow manages to shave like 4-5k off from my 10,5k hp. Even with his cd used up i still can't get into los of the healer and help slowing/snaring him for my rogue, because being in los of a hunter for a few seconds seems to spell death to any clothie (or me at least; i got 10,5k hp ~430 res).
Our second hate-opponents are the usual warlock/druid cookie cutters. Whatever we do we can't put enough pressure on the warlock or chase down the druid before the dots slowly eat us up.
We haven't been playing together for long so i think most losses are really contributed to the a lack of playing together/chaining ccs and interrupts correctly. But still I'd like to read your input on how a rogue/mage team can beat hunter+heal and druid+warlock.
That's the thing, 17/0/44 makes you better at the things mages aren't customarily good at, such as countering resto druids and disc priests, and 0/x/41+ improves the areas where mages are already strong (focused damage, CC, and roots/snares). We already have a great matchup against warriors, impact and whatever frost talents you pick up past the forty-fourth just make it further lopsided.
In the end however i think improved counterspell just has too much versatility to trade in for an upgrade to your offensive spells. Without those 17 points in arcane you're pretty much limited to interrupting greater heals, flash heals, and cyclone, and you lose an important option in those tight situations where a four-second silence can decide the match.
Honestly despite us having advantages vs warriors in 1 vs 1 situations, they can still be hell if they are backed up by a paladin, priest or another dps- and this is extremely common. I'm almost always trained by melee or hunters so giving up talents like permafrost, ice floes and arctic winds is almost not an option. It's not like druids never cast cyclones, and disc priests still have to use cast time heals when there is huge pressure on someone.
I just can't justify dropping a whopping 17 points for imp CS.
Honestly despite us having advantages vs warriors in 1 vs 1 situations, they can still be hell if they are backed up by a paladin, priest or another dps- and this is extremely common. I'm almost always trained by melee or hunters so giving up talents like permafrost, ice floes and arctic winds is almost not an option. It's not like druids never cast cyclones, and disc priests still have to use cast time heals when there is huge pressure on someone.
I just can't justify dropping a whopping 17 points for imp CS.
2nded. Basically you're dropping 10 pretty much worthless points into arcane to get imp CS and clearcasting.
Imp CS - pretty much an excuse for bad skills using counterspell.
Druids wont be shut down by thouse 4 seconds , their hots will keep their teamates.
Pretty much that is - everyone else is using cast time heals - shamans/priests/palas (esp palas) - its way better to have them
heal cs-ed than only silenced for 4s(3s if they have the talents for reduce duration).
Only exeption is if your target should be unable to use Nature swiftness , but that happening is pretty rare against good teams.
Wauw Borland can you even think outside the box for a second. I hardly ever miss a counterspell unless its a really good canceled casts or with a focus proc. However I still found it necessary to spec Imp CS just for the utility it gives. You won't be using it for a 4 second silence often but coupled with other cc's forcing another 4 seconds can be difference in getting a NS early or even a fast kill. I play RMP and its all about getting a good momentum to force cooldowns or force fast kill by coupling our abilities and chaining them, 4 silence silence after blind/fear etc is priceless for that.
And thats just 1 prime example, have you ever silenced a warlock and then still cant get a single frostbolt off because the pet + searing pain spam is just making your casts 9 seconds long, or a priest who got away and your rogue cant catch because he is out of cooldowns, think about not being able to dispell the nova for 4 seconds can mean the rogue back on him. The 4 second silence is very usefull and if you think its just for bad skills using cs try thinking about other purposes for CS.
Agreed that in 5on5 you might not need improved all the time, where better kiting/surviving is more often important but in 2v2 and 3v3 its to me a must have for clutch play.
I think it may depend what rating band you are playing in. What can seem worthless at mid levels can be decisive at higher levels. Also, depending on who your team-mates are will depend on how much emphasis you need to place on DPS, control or survivability. So, agree to disagree, whilst some will find improved counterspell very important for their game, others will find it less so.
I have to agree with you both tho Everyone has a reason to take it or not.
For me survivability is still before the counterspell silence and thouse 17 points put in frost and impact easy outdate the imp cs weight.
But it all ends up who you are tryng to finish and who you are teaming with as his CCs might have a synergy with yours.
By the way , i found that feeding the lock pet with clearcasts painfull.
If i dont get much magical buffs - i end up buff striped and then every clearcast is getting eaten during the course of the match.
Improved cs is not a crutch for people who suck at aiming cs -- if you miss an 8 second interrupt that locks the paladin bubble, you are not burning the other team down with the 4 second silence that doesn't. It is a powerful buff to your 8 second spell lock. There is a lot a mage can do in 4 seconds with only one school locked. A priest who has been interrupted wants to aoe fear now, not in 4 seconds. Shamans can't frost shock. Shadow priests can't shield (or heal). And sometimes a situational pre-silence is the only way to grab the initiative against someone, especially someone that can interrupt. But that's not bad aim, that's control. It's very strong control.
I think a mage somewhere on this forum once conjectured that your ability to perform without improved cs was dependent on your team's ability to let you personally say, "I give up against druids." Team size is a big part of this, which is one reason I think impact armor is more popular in fives.
Originally Posted by Kyth
The only true error is in not learning how to make your second kill better.
Honestly despite us having advantages vs warriors in 1 vs 1 situations, they can still be hell if they are backed up by a paladin, priest or another dps- and this is extremely common. I'm almost always trained by melee or hunters so giving up talents like permafrost, ice floes and arctic winds is almost not an option. It's not like druids never cast cyclones, and disc priests still have to use cast time heals when there is huge pressure on someone.
I just can't justify dropping a whopping 17 points for imp CS.
Exactly. Sure, I can rape a warrior if we both have all our cooldowns and all I am trying to do is kill the warrior. But when I am running around the arena chainsheeping, trying to stay in range for a time counterspell and removing CoT from my healers, with a warrior with blessing of freedom and a warlock pet spelllocking me the whole time, it just isn't the same thing as a mage v. warrior matchup.
And that is every arena for me. At a bare minimum I have a rogue or a warrior on me the entire match. More than likely I have hunter pet rogue, warlock pet warrior, warrior rogue, etc.
And my arena teams SUCK and are at a much lower bracket. I can not imagine what it is like for mages at the 2k level. Although maybe your teammates are better so there is less pressure on you. For me, though, I am under CONSTANT pressure the entire match.
Silence is a talent that at the high end can decisively win games. Win. Flat out, as in we would have instantly lost if I didn't have it. There are a lot of 2345 burst teams, very strong teams that take control early and deliver huge burst. You can't afford to wait for a timely CS on their healer, because your shaman is going to die in 2 seconds. Silence their dps. It's not only instant, it's off the global cooldown. Nothing about impact or permafrost outweigh this considerable advantage in reversing momentum.
It's a 4 second instaneous CC against any caster, instantly (did I mention instant?), without any diminishing returns or chance to break early. There are more than a few creative ways to use that ability.
I play 2vs2 with a rogue, and we're trying to break the 1850 but recently a couple of teams are giving us trouble.
The first problem is anything with a hunter in it, with the worst matchup being hunter and priest or any other healer really. The hunter will usually go for me and turn red the moment i try to shatter or get in close. I use iceblock but after that the hunter will still have a few seconds of bestial wrath left and somehow manages to shave like 4-5k off from my 10,5k hp. Even with his cd used up i still can't get into los of the healer and help slowing/snaring him for my rogue, because being in los of a hunter for a few seconds seems to spell death to any clothie (or me at least; i got 10,5k hp ~430 res).
Our second hate-opponents are the usual warlock/druid cookie cutters. Whatever we do we can't put enough pressure on the warlock or chase down the druid before the dots slowly eat us up.
We haven't been playing together for long so i think most losses are really contributed to the a lack of playing together/chaining ccs and interrupts correctly. But still I'd like to read your input on how a rogue/mage team can beat hunter+heal and druid+warlock.
I play 2's also with a Rogue. We don't have the best rating and therefore we might not be as knowledgeable but here's some feedback. It's rough. Mages can solo few classes, such as warriors for me, with ease and it can be near impossible, SL/SL locks w/ fel hunter, and so forth.
But what I can tell you is that hunters are the least of our worries. I don't want to stretch long but it basically means putting pressure on the hunter because we know hunters can kill rogues/mages easy with ranged, which means getting in their face, changing targets so hunter's will be confused. In other words, I mount up, go in w/ Ice Barrier and do all my frost nova/ice lance/fire blast/COC routine w/ elemental until my rogue is in place to stun. Rogue stuns, turn to the other target and sheep hunter's partner. Usually in these few seconds, hunter will pop TBW and send pet on me. When I start to take hits, the first arrow that hits me, I hit Ice Block, because I know 1 arrow will = a few more instant ones in the next few seconds that cause more damage and let my rogue just damage him as long as possible. Hunter will send pet on rogue and kite him around. I'll pop out and resheep if needed. And we'll just keep burning hunter down with my instant casts. If rogue needs help, he vanishes. May seem easier than it is but I don't let the hunter use his ranged. If it means being in his face so I can't cast either, it's fine cos his melee damage sucks. And in between his autoshot global cooldown and straying away from 5yrds, he'll get maybe an arcane shot. My instant cast damage > his melee damage and pet. I also buff up everything I have, Ice barrier before Frost Ward. I don't know if the arcane shot takes it away in the order of the most recent buff but it's just another thing that they have to take away.
There are other ways like instantly pop ice block/vanish and wait out TBW. With coldsnap/prep, we have cooldowns, hunter doesn't.
MM hunters are a bit harder IMO. They put out more damage and more CC with scatter/silencing, but they are prone to rogue stuns.
2v2's with a rogue is a lot of synergy and precision. Hoped that helped since no one was answering your post
For locks/druids. It's a bit harder and we don't always do too well but we usually sheep warlock instead of killing because the druid is a bit more of a threat. My partner stun locks pretty well and times his shivs, or some shit like that, so the druid pops into travel, he'll have the slow. Along with my imp slow talents, druids usually don't go away. They're pretty easy if they go bear, for me atleast b/c it's like a warrior, one charge stun on cooldown. Rogue will try to CC but it's mainly me here. Otherwise, the rogue just kills him quick if he goes into caster or cat. Now yeah, warlock is not really accounted here but one sheep and blind will usually do. Otherwise his DOT's won't eat us alive too much. We usually wait for full stack of them and cloak of shadows/ice block.
We usually have a problem with well-geared SL/SL lock with pally. Pally bubbles before warlock is getting low to heal so he doesn't get interrupted. Feedback?
I've been a reader to these forums for a while now, but this is my first official post here.
I'm seeking some advice on a good 5v5 arena spec. I've read through this whole thread, and it seems like the two predominant specs are either 17/0/44 or 0/8/53. Now, allow me to think a little outside of the box for a minute here. The spec I'm interested in trying out is a 5/10/46 build.
The reason for the 5 points in imp. AM is that I am using the MSD meta gem, and when it procs, my spell of choice for the most part will be a quick round of AM for that burst aspect (will only use it for a sheep if it's necessary). So to that end, I'm thinking having that round of AM be uninterruptable from dmg would be a good thing, if MSD procs, and there just so happens to be someone on me.
The 10 points in fire is for the MA+Impact combo, and the rest to help my Fireblast. I'm thinking the 2 points in Flamethrowing would be nice so I can hit people with Fireblast from a bit further away.
Now with the cookie-cutter 44 points in frost, this leaves me with 2 points to put into the frost tree. For now I stuck it into Frost Channeling, as I find myself running out of mana in probably 50% of the arena games I'm in (again, 5v5 games, so longer than 2's or 3's), so I'm thinking the reduced mana cost would be good. The other alternative would be 2/3 in imp. CoC for a bit more dmg from that.
Well regarding Lock+Pally, i find it's crucial to force an early bubble. This is usually accomplished by sapping the paladin and then unloading a full rogue stun + shatter combo on him, sometimes he will bubble right away with 50% hp left and heal to full, in that case you are at an advantage with 2x iceblock left vs a used bubble. You can iceblock and the rogue can use cloak of shadow and vanish to get out of combat and eat/bandage. In case the Paladin didn't bubble you can just counterspell his heal and lockout holy thereby opening an 8 second window to burst him down (which will usually only work against PvE geared paladins), or keep on dpsing him without burning any more cds forcing him to bubble a few seconds later (bubble gone anyway).
It's also possible to just sheep the paladin, because many warlocks don't have macros to dispell their teammate with the felpuppy, afterwards focus enough damage on the warlock to force the paladin to heal, and with a focustarget-counterspell macro it's very easy to stop that heal.
If you manage to save preperation and coldsnap for the second part of the fight, when the bubble is used allready, you should be at a clear advantage. Wether you focus on the warlock or the paladin then imho doesn't matter much, just make sure to have your focustarget set to the other one and sheep and blind him and interrupt heals/fears whenever cc breaks.
Regarding the odd 5/10/46 spec, i couldn't justify the small utility improved am bring against the nice stuff 5 more points in frost could get me. To put it another way when i'm getting pushback in 5on5 it's usually because i'm being focused by 3+ players, and standing still channeling arcane missiles without pushback just won't help in that situation. 10% more slow faster CoC cooldown and other things _would_ help when being the target in a 5on5.
The points beyond impact in the fire tree aren't really needed in 5on5 either, imho. The 3 arenas are all rather small and fireblast is such an exprensive spell, i can live without the range and the lower cd.
0/5/56 is the best 5on5 spec for me, but i bet you'll find people saying the same thing about 17/0/44 and 5on5.
It seems that mage representation at the top end has gone even further down since 2.3.2, what kind of sweeping changes can they make in 2.4 to fix this? Our representation in 2 vs 2 and any other combo than RMP in 3 vs 3 is non existent, and 2346 and hunter/lock 5 vs 5 teams becoming popular mages are losing power in that bracket too.
Surely the biggest problem at the moment it's just too easy to focus a mage. Purged, we're so damn squishy, the influx of ShS rogues has made even melee kiting harder than ever, and and a focused mage is a locked down mage - only mana inefficient instants are getting used.
It also seems like even with the new emerald we still lack any form of lastability compared to other mana based classes. The most annoying thing for me is that if it boils down to a 1 vs 1 with me and another mana based class, it's almost always more beneficial for them than me if we both drink - yet I don't have a choice.
I'm not sure what your point is. The top team in 5v5 in Europe has a mage, the top team in 3v3 in Europe has a mage, the number 7 rated player in Europe is a mage. OK, so in 2v2 mage teams struggle, but so do most classes as there are few combos that are really strong in that bracket, even so there are 2v2 teams with a mage that have a team rating over 2200.
Blizzard are not about to balance arenas for 2v2, and there are a few classes that are more deserving of some love for 5v5.
I'm not sure what your point is. The top team in 5v5 in Europe has a mage, the top team in 3v3 in Europe has a mage, the number 7 rated player in Europe is a mage. OK, so in 2v2 mage teams struggle, but so do most classes as there are few combos that are really strong in that bracket, even so there are 2v2 teams with a mage that have a team rating over 2200.
Blizzard are not about to balance arenas for 2v2, and there are a few classes that are more deserving of some love for 5v5.
It doesnt really matter when those mages arent in the competitive battle groups. ie there are no mages in 5v5 bg9 top 10 or they've low personal ratings aka have played before not playing now. When DB and 2346 are top teams only possible option for mage is the RPM continued: rogue fel lock priest druid/shaman fmage.
RMP has allready lost its status in 3v3 just take a peek to bg9 and its pretty clear it isnt exactly the most powerful combination anymore.
I do know there is skill outside cyclone (eu) and bloodlust (us) but those are the places with most good teams. They can really show what reigns what not. If 2345 is dominating some BG it doesnt mean it would do so in most others, just shows that the bg lacks DB and 2346 which will reap havoc against 2345. Mages arent the best possible class considering 5v5 or 3v3. Warlocks are allmost allways better option.
The main problem is that after blowing cooldowns mages arent putting enough pressure anymore. The pet can be easily killed and focusing on mage prevents it. Ye sure mages do loads of dmg if left alone, but who would? By going to mage the dmg and cc is totally shut down and purged mage is quite easy kill in the end.
I'm not sure what your point is. The top team in 5v5 in Europe has a mage, the top team in 3v3 in Europe has a mage, the number 7 rated player in Europe is a mage. OK, so in 2v2 mage teams struggle, but so do most classes as there are few combos that are really strong in that bracket, even so there are 2v2 teams with a mage that have a team rating over 2200.
Blizzard are not about to balance arenas for 2v2, and there are a few classes that are more deserving of some love for 5v5.
Looking at individual teams with mages is not proving anything, looking at the overall picture there is a huge lack of representation compared to population. RMP is absurdly popular for a reason - it's the only 3 vs 3 team that replacing the mage is not advantageous, and being the most popular combo everyone is expecting it and trying to counter it, and as mentioned it's already losing headway on BG9.
It isn't 'most' classes that struggle in 2 vs 2, it's paladins, shaman and mages - the same classes that only have 1 truly viable 3 vs 3 combo and the 3 classes that without doubt need changes in 2.4 hence my original post.
Population is not necessarily relevant, just because there are a lot of mages does not mean there are a lot of pvp mages. There are even more warriors, which shifts the normalised population chart to a "balanced" representation, yet clearly warriors are a preferred class for every normal 5v5 composition. As far as what is actually being used, mage representation in 5s is about where it should be.
No, mages very recently received a major buff in the form of Icy Veins and a substantial improvement to mana regen. There's no cause for alarm at this point, we're easily one of if not the most dangerous offensive classes in the game.
Population is not necessarily relevant, just because there are a lot of mages does not mean there are a lot of pvp mages. There are even more warriors, which shifts the normalised population chart to a "balanced" representation, yet clearly warriors are a preferred class for every normal 5v5 composition. As far as what is actually being used, mage representation in 5s is about where it should be.
No, mages very recently received a major buff in the form of Icy Veins and a substantial improvement to mana regen. There's no cause for alarm at this point, we're easily one of if not the most dangerous offensive classes in the game.
No mages arent in 5's where they should be. Every combination prefers wl over mage, even after buffs. Why?
Crysalid: They both have their pros/cons, but when it comes down to it warlocks are just superior. After lust/heroism is down warlocks are better at keeping pressure going, where as after the mage uses both Water Elementals....yeah.
Im not really onlyone ranting about how mages arent really up the bar in 5's. The population doesnt show how good mages are in top teams. Its a bit annoying to try to play as a mage knowing that being in the top isnt really an option.
EDIT: We're good not denying it but some classes just fare way better than us. And that needs fixing.
It seems that mage representation at the top end has gone even further down since 2.3.2, what kind of sweeping changes can they make in 2.4 to fix this?
I reject your thesis statement and your supporting evidence. Vontre/Vhairi provided a much more compelling snapshot of mage population than one BG's ranking page. Even granting your assertion that "mage representation at the top end has gone even further down since 2.3.2", that in and of itself is not grounds for a buff. Certainly the few weeks since the last major buff (itself several weeks following another major buff) aren't enough time to warrant "sweeping changes" without a carefully constructed and thoroughly explained argument.
Originally Posted by Vermis
EDIT: We're good not denying it but some classes just fare way better than us. And that needs fixing.
This is tripe: "We're not the best class in the game. And that needs fixing."
I'd really like to have a relevant magecraft-related contribution to this "discussion" but I can't see anything other than incomplete evidence coupled with sloppy conclusions and no real supporting arguments. Perhaps if you shared your specific difficulties in arena games the EJ community mages could provide you with useful feedback. If you want in-game help, the only thing I can think of is more PvP loot.
Originally Posted by Kyth
The only true error is in not learning how to make your second kill better.
I reject your thesis statement and your supporting evidence. Vontre/Vhairi provided a much more compelling snapshot of mage population than one BG's ranking page. Even granting your assertion that "mage representation at the top end has gone even further down since 2.3.2", that in and of itself is not grounds for a buff. Certainly the few weeks since the last major buff (itself several weeks following another major buff) aren't enough time to warrant "sweeping changes" without a carefully constructed and thoroughly explained argument.
This is tripe: "We're not the best class in the game. And that needs fixing."
I'd really like to have a relevant magecraft-related contribution to this "discussion" but I can't see anything other than incomplete evidence coupled with sloppy conclusions and no real supporting arguments. Perhaps if you shared your specific difficulties in arena games the EJ community mages could provide you with useful feedback. If you want in-game help, the only thing I can think of is more PvP loot.
He explained in his post what the problem with mages in top 5v5 teams are, but you were to busy trying to sound intelligent in your reply to comprehend this. Just to spell out his argument for you: Every top team would do better with a warlock in a mage's spot in the current 5v5 metagame. Read his link to the CAPSLOCKCREW interview for specific reasons why this is so.
The biggest problem with mages is that their scariest damage only comes when they have their feet planted, whereas other classes who would compete for a mages spot on an arena team can continue dpsing in situations where a mage has to go mobile.
A warlock can snap off instant dots on the entire opposing team, while running away while taking 20% less damage via soullink, while still doing respectable damage, and even have the ability to heal themselves a bit. Fear is a better overall cc than sheep (can't sheep dotted people, fear doesn't heal) Spell lock on fel puppies has a shorter cooldown than counterspell and can be done regardless of whether or not the warlock is cc'd or midcast on another spell never mind curse of tongues making counters easier to time.
A hunter can stand in there and take damage while rifling away at a distant enemy where a mage would be seeing nothing put pushbacks, sting mana off healers, keep healers in combat via pet, have instant crowd control even on the run from traps (2 second arming time yes I know, but can't be interrupted) Scatter shot and silencing shot give you more control over healers than counterspell.
Overall there isn't much that a mage can contribute to a 5v5 that can't be done better by another class, a warlock offers more control with comparable damage, less burst but better dpm, and infinite mana for long fights. Hunters offer more control over healers, comparable burst, better longevity, and mana sting to boot.
I think what needs to happen is for blizzard to decide what our role really is we can do alot of things well but we really aren't the best at anything anymore. Personally I would like to see our control options change, we have the best ways out there to avoid warriors but none of it is nearly as effective against other classes.
1. Blink means nothing against other casters, rogues will just deadly throw you, blinking to a hunter just means you eat a 1.8k raptor strike, blinking away means your a moron and are about to die. Maybe have blink drop target the way feign death does, it gains utility to prevent spellcasts and maybe buys you a second or two if getting focus fired.
2. Frost nova has gained more of an offensive feel than a defensive due to shatter however as a defensive utility it's fairs a little better than blink, great against warriors, decent against rogues but cloak of skill, vanish, deadly throw interrupting spellcasts and shadowstep all make not nearly as effective, it doesn't defend you at all vs casters and druids/paly's can shapeshift or cleanse it respectively.
Maybe if frost nova had a mechanic similar to warrior intimidating shout where the person they are targeting is feared but stays in place while everyone else in range takes off, instead of fear though your target would be completely frozen the way hunter traps do preventing all actions and just freezing everyone else in range in the traditional fashion.
I reject your thesis statement and your supporting evidence. Vontre/Vhairi provided a much more compelling snapshot of mage population than one BG's ranking page. Even granting your assertion that "mage representation at the top end has gone even further down since 2.3.2", that in and of itself is not grounds for a buff. Certainly the few weeks since the last major buff (itself several weeks following another major buff) aren't enough time to warrant "sweeping changes" without a carefully constructed and thoroughly explained argument.
I think you'll find that 'compelling' data is also a month old. Since then hunters have gained in momentum which directly impacts mages, both because hunters are often direct competition for spots on a lineup and because they destroy opposing mages to bits - not to mention the recent rise of the 2346.
Looking at the very top end is actually a great way to tell how strong a class is. At the toppest of top end where people will reroll a second priest just for the racials, people don't settle with just playing the classes their friends happen to play or what is immediately available. If mages aren't popular at the highest level it's because there are simply better options.
01/11/08, 7:41 AM
Everyone has a reason to take it or not.
Similar Threads
