[Talents] Dec 11 Frostbomb Hotfix

[Aquamonkey]

I'm sorry, but your link still shows Mages (the entire class) making up 9.8% of the total arena representation...which is perfectly fine, only 0.71 above what it should be for perfect balance in the game.

But he has a point, Frost Mages are several times higher than other dps casters in 2200+.

[Elegiac]

I really wish they would stop balancing us around arenas....might as well start balancing around duels, if you want to go that route.

[Chodus]

I really wish they would stop balancing us around arenas....might as well start balancing around duels, if you want to go that route.

Great logic. Not sure if trolling.

Anyways, this change will just warrent more interactive and cooperative teamplay between members that have blanket silences just like mage counterspell to prevent a dispel (priest silence, garrote, strang, etc.). This kind of frost bomb change promotes teamplay is exactly why they don't balance around duels.

Obviously timing will also play a factor but between a deep and chained blanket (or two) your bomb should detonate with full damage. Watch the pro circuit on streams. Promise you mages are far from dead.

[celinamuna]

I really wish they would stop balancing us around arenas....might as well start balancing around duels, if you want to go that route.

Not sure how this affects PvE....

[Softbottom]

it's about god damn time.

[Pyrion]

I like this change, I played at lower mmr for caps this Tuesday (EU, so patch day is Wednesday) and it was just sick how easy I (not we, I) killed people, I know that it wouldn't have been as easy on higher rating but it was still a very high amount of damage. But I think that this nerf justifies the last nerf that added 1 sec to the detonation time to be reverted.

[Swizzle]

But he has a point, Frost Mages are several times higher than other dps casters in 2200+.

So? You have to note that those DPS casters (other than Locks) have healing specs, which are far more sought after and are faster to gear, meaning that a hybrid casters rep will usually be lower than the only viable PvP spec for a casting pure.

[thialves1985]

Oh no! I cant kill ppl with 1 shot anymore
They need to give me another instant kill spell (maybe a atomic bomb that will explode all enemies in my LOS)
Welcome to the jungle, baby.

Can i see a lolBR here?

[Aquamonkey]

So? You have to note that those DPS casters (other than Locks) have healing specs, which are far more sought after and are faster to gear, meaning that a hybrid casters rep will usually be lower than the only viable PvP spec for a casting pure.

What does that have to do with anything? That chart is for % representation among all classes and specs. If say boomkin was better than frost mage, it would be higher represented regardless of it being a hybrid class. Frost Mage is more represented than most of the healing specs. Frost Mage is .1% behind the entire Priest class. Highest representation for Priest is Shadow. Highest representation for Monk is WW.

[Swizzle]

What does that have to do with anything? That chart is for % representation among all classes and specs. If say boomkin was better than frost mage, it would be higher represented regardless of it being a hybrid class. Frost Mage is more represented than most of the healing specs. Frost Mage is .1% behind the entire Priest class. Highest representation for Priest is Shadow. Highest representation for Monk is WW.

Because Mages have only one spec to PvP as...so of course the numbers for the SPEC are going to reflect that. Again, the entire class is fine, just look at the actual distribution graph and not the percentages alone. Mages are slightly above average, but not nearly as OP as people make them out to be.

[Aquamonkey]

Because Mages have only one spec to PvP as...so of course the numbers for the SPEC are going to reflect that. Again, the entire class is fine, just look at the actual distribution graph and not the percentages alone. Mages are slightly above average, but not nearly as OP as people make them out to be.

Ok, Mages have average representation among all the classes. But this is what makes them OP (I know sounds counter-intuitive). Warriors and healing classes (minus priests) are clearly OP by being higher than 9%. But this is a zero-sum game, which means the classes higher than 9% representation have to take it from other classes. Mages being at 9.9% makes them significantly higher than classes without healing specs because they didn't get pushed down.

[Deleted]

Wow, you managed to double contradict yourself in the same post. ( which itself, makes no sense at all )

[Aquamonkey]

Wow, you managed to double contradict yourself in the same post. ( which itself, makes no sense at all )

If mages weren't OP, their representation would be pushed below 9% by the other classes that are over represented.

Here's a simple example. You have 3 things: A, B, and C. Perfect balance would be each of them at 33.3%. But A gets more representation and is at 50%. Now if the B and C were equal, they'd each be 25%. But they aren't equal. B is still at 33.3% and C is 16.7%. While B would appear to still meet the average of everything being balanced, it is significantly better than C.

[Swizzle]

If mages weren't OP, their representation would be pushed below 9% by the other classes that are over represented.

Here's a simple example. You have 3 things: A, B, and C. Perfect balance would be each of them at 33.3%. But A gets more representation and is at 50%. Now if the B and C were equal, they'd each be 25%. But they aren't equal. B is still at 33.3% and C is 16.7%. While B would appear to still meet the average of everything being balanced, it is significantly better than C.

...okay...but that is of no fault of B, it's of A. So, I really don't get the point you're making. Every actual statistic I've looked at has Mages at the mid-point, with some classes simply just not being well represented (Monks specifically). The solution isn't to nerf Mages, it's to fix the problems of the classes at the bottom.

[Deleted]

I'm sorry, but your link still shows Mages (the entire class) making up 9.8% of the total arena representation...which is perfectly fine, only 0.71 above what it should be for perfect balance in the game.

You didn't get my point. I was merely stating that the frost specialization itself was overrepresentated, and in general even greater than 2-3 times higher represenated than other caster specs (which many of you seemed to disbelieve on page 1).
Second of all mages are above the median when it comes to representation. You cant just assume that 1/11th representation for all classes would be balanced, when class populations isnt spread evenly, and even then healer classes has to be overrepresentated if Blizzard wants to aim for consistent 1 or 2 healer setups in 3v3.

For example if you look on the global representation you would notice that 9,3% of all players play a mage, whereas 9,9% of all players above 2,2k in 3v3 are playing a mage. That itself would be an overrepresentation, however only a marginal one.
If you want to go even deeper into the analysis you have to exclude healer classes, and then you would realise that only warriors are better representated than mages (and hunters almost as well representated as mages, but keep in mind the stampede bug), out of 6 classes in total. And even then both hunters and warriors are a more played class than mages (if you accumulate the %global numbers of all 3 specs for all 3 classes).

So yes, mages were in a top spot for dps slots on arena teams before the hotfix, hence why the hotfix was seemingly justified.

[Aquamonkey]

...okay...but that is of no fault of B, it's of A. So, I really don't get the point you're making. Every actual statistic I've looked at has Mages at the mid-point, with some classes simply just not being well represented (Monks specifically). The solution isn't to nerf Mages, it's to fix the problems of the classes at the bottom.

I'm just saying it's outperforming the things it's outperforming. If it was on par with non-healing classes, it would be under 9% just like the rest of them. Besides, I think the 9% class representation metric is inherently flawed (see below).

(I'm going to refer to hybrids to mean only classes with healing specs. I'm going to lump tank specs in with DPS and hence War/DKs as purely DPS classes.)

One could argue that a flat 11-way split would be ideal so each class is equally represented. You mentioned hybrids, which is where the problem with this metric comes in. If hybrids were exactly 9%, some portion of that would be for healers. By necessity, the DPS specs for hybrids would have to be less than 9%. But if their DPS specs were equally viable as pure DPS classes, the hybrids would have to have to be more than 9%.

An alternative is an even 34-way split between every possible spec, which is impractical and would destroy PvE balance.

IMO, the ideal balance would be split 16-ways. 11 for each class' DPS role plus 5 healing roles. This way, each class has an equal DPS representation and each hybrid has an equal healing representation. This would put DPS classes at 6.25% and hybrids at 12.5%. (I considered how this would have to be weighted for never needing more than 1 healer on a 3v3 team, but it just so happens to work out as 2:1 DPS:healer ratio as it is. I know some teams don't use healers and some teams use Disc Priest with another healer. But on aggregate, I think this would be pretty fair.)

[Spectral]

This is a bit irritating for PvE, but our on demand burst AoE will still be quite impressive, so I'm not too worried about that.

Will people still be taking the Fire Blast Glyph in PvP? Even with the damage lost, being able to force a Shatter still seems pretty powerful for certain contexts. Will you take it in Arena? Rated BGs? Random BGs?

[Aet3ra]

sorry if it was answered already, but when this fix will go live?

[zomgDPS]

Will people still be taking the Fire Blast Glyph in PvP? Even with the damage lost, being able to force a Shatter still seems pretty powerful for certain contexts.

The PvP outcry about this nerf is actually an interesting topic in itself.

The real issue people seem to be having surrounds 'the healer's dispel' problem. People assert one or two things will happen:

1) The opponent healer will just 'sit' on his dispel, since it shares a cd approx to that of frost bomb. He will save it for when the mage needs to burst. However, since mages in pvp (especially concerning their usefulness) are so closely tied to their burst, this strategy effectively neutralizes mages in pvp.

2) The only effective way to pvp as a mage given 1) will be to try to kill the healer. Healers, in general, are very powerful right now. A point which hurts the mages twofold; first, since it is only through killing healers do mages even be relevant in pvp, and secondly, since healing in pvp is so powerful as it is, anything a mage does outside burst is meaningless, which, as it so happens, is exactly what is causing point 1) to exist.

This way, its a problem that feeds into itself, exacerbating the issue further.


Really though, the net effect of this nerf will be positive, if nothing else, but for the fact that it removes the over-reliance of mage pvp on a glyph. 'No glyph should be mandatory' is, iirc, a design goal of blizz. If we are lucky, this change might also end up shining a light on the real issues mages have in pvp, namely, how useless they are outside of their cds/burst, especially the Arcane spec.

Either way, its a win.

[Darcyn]

If mages weren't OP, their representation would be pushed below 9% by the other classes that are over represented.

Here's a simple example. You have 3 things: A, B, and C. Perfect balance would be each of them at 33.3%. But A gets more representation and is at 50%. Now if the B and C were equal, they'd each be 25%. But they aren't equal. B is still at 33.3% and C is 16.7%. While B would appear to still meet the average of everything being balanced, it is significantly better than C.

Let me ask you a question. Do you think monks and rogues are fine and other classe should be balanced around them? If yes your logic is totally right. If not its terribly wrong.