Page 18 of 42 FirstFirst ...
8
16
17
18
19
20
28
... LastLast
  1. #341
    The only reason the Glyph o Combust is stronger is because at pull in theory you can have Alter Time, Meta Proc, Trinkets Proc, Hero, Lightweave proc and a pot going. Under those conditions you get a combust doing significantly better damage than at any point later in the fight.

    Which kind of surprises me from the Blizzard front as they have repeatedly said how they hate mandatory Glyphs, and that one there is a no-brainer as it is currently when it comes to mandatory.

    They should remove that Glyph, it addresses the main culprit causing huge numbers from fire mages at the top of the gear spectrum. We would still get the stars to align on the pull, just won't get to abuse that alignment via a Glyph.

    As to crit levels, CM needs to scale inversely as a flat percentage once at level 90 (before then just give them top number). Consensus seems to be 35% crit smooth's out fire RNG. The Goal of CM should be to keep a fire mage at 35% crit until gear handles the 35% plateau, after which it has no value to the mage. Please note 35% is just the number I commonly see thrown around, could be 30 or 25 or 33, whatever Blizzard believes is the balance point.

    CM would then bump any fire mage under 35% crit to 35% crit and any mage at or over 35% would receive no bump from CM. Or whatever balance point picked.

    Doing that to CM eliminates the stupidity of a fire mage with 50% crit before CM landing at 65% crit after CM, instead they would be at 50% with CM adding no benefit.

    Edit - clarity
    Last edited by gallamann; 2013-07-17 at 10:06 PM.

  2. #342
    Elemental Lord Polarthief's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    (USA) Florida
    Posts
    8,036
    Quote Originally Posted by gallamann View Post
    Which kind of surprises me from the Blizzard front as they have repeatedly said how they hate mandatory Glyphs, and that one there is a no-brainer as currently when it come to mandatory.
    Same with Ice Lance and Icy Veins glyphs for Frost, too. Both their talent and glyph designs for Mages were an utter failure in that regard, as neither aspect was deemed "mandatory".

    Progression pre-nerfed: [T17] 6/7H; 0/10N

  3. #343
    Brewmaster Methusula's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    1,310
    One of the issues I have with them removing the Combustion glyph, is that it is Fire's only CD. It is very forgettable without the glyph, but under the right circumstances, OP with it. Sounds like a microcosm of fire as it relates to gear to me...

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by gallamann View Post
    The only reason the Glyph o Combust is stronger is because at pull in theory you can have Alter Time, Meta Proc, Trinkets Proc, Hero, Lightweave proc and a pot going. Under those conditions you get a combust doing significantly better damage than at any point later in the fight.

    Which kind of surprises me from the Blizzard front as they have repeatedly said how they hate mandatory Glyphs, and that one there is a no-brainer as it is currently when it comes to mandatory.

    They should remove that Glyph, it addresses the main culprit causing huge numbers from fire mages at the top of the gear spectrum. We would still get the stars to align on the pull, just won't get to abuse that alignment via a Glyph.

    As to crit levels, CM needs to scale inversely as a flat percentage once at level 90 (before then just give them top number). Consensus seems to be 35% crit smooth's out fire RNG. The Goal of CM should be to keep a fire mage at 35% crit until gear handles the 35% plateau, after which it has no value to the mage. Please note 35% is just the number I commonly see thrown around, could be 30 or 25 or 33, whatever Blizzard believes is the balance point.

    CM would then bump any fire mage under 35% crit to 35% crit and any mage at or over 35% would receive no bump from CM. Or whatever balance point picked.

    Doing that to CM eliminates the stupidity of a fire mage with 50% crit before CM landing at 65% crit after CM, instead they would be at 50% with CM adding no benefit.

    Edit - clarity
    You must not have read my post 3 pages ago about this idea.

  4. #344
    Quote Originally Posted by Vynestra View Post
    First of all no it's not about me being a better player, it's about me being able to play the spec I like and it actually being viable. Right now as it stands fire is way too strong. If I want to be brought to my raids in 5.4 right now I'd have to be fire. If there are no changes or the changes are not that great, and nothing to balance out arcanes lack of movement I may be FORCED to go a spec I HATE because blizzard can't balance their damned classes.

    Let me ask you how would you feel if you played fire the whole expansion and absolutely HATE arcane and can't stand it, but arcane does over 100k more dps than fire, would you sit there and be like "Oh well dps doesn't matter when we're hitting enrage times, I am just gonna lolololohavefun and play the spec I want!" If you are a progression raider I HIGHLY doubt that'd be your response.

    It's easy to fling mud when your spec is the one sitting pretty, while mine is the one that easily may be un-viable next patch. You can't really talk unless your sitting in mine, or other arcane mages shoes. I hate fire, as it's obvious. It's going to steamroll arcane because arcane has no movement whatsoever, I want to play the spec I really like and enjoy in raids without it being un-viable. Right now fire and arcane are about neck and neck. If they could find a way to keep it that way I'd be pretty damn happy. That's why I am asking for nerfs, so fire is brought down to the level of arcane.

    That's not even including all the movement next tier. How is arcane supposed to survive the heavy movement fights? With an un-sure future for my spec and class I am hoping that arcane will be somewhat viable, amongst heavy movement and that fire will not only be adjusted by that arcane will be given something to move.




    Stop it? Stop worrying I am going to have to drop my spec next tier, and go fire. And play a spec I hate if I want to raid? If I want to help my raid progress? No. I won't stop it. I am damn passionate about this game and raiding. And I want the spec I play to atleast be viable, and for that to happen arcane needs buffs to movement, and fire needs nerfs.
    If you were playing arcane without lots of gear you were already gimping your raid. I see mages all the time brag about Frost when I had bad rng on H jin rokh and would have parsed #2 as Frost yet people still play inferior specs. People should play whatever spec is the strongest giving their raid the highest dps/dmg but people care more about themselves than the raid.

  5. #345
    Dreadlord
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Germany/BW
    Posts
    901
    You were proven so often wrong. Please stop this and celebrate our new mastery : )

  6. #346
    Elemental Lord Polarthief's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    (USA) Florida
    Posts
    8,036
    Quote Originally Posted by citizenpete View Post
    You were proven so often wrong. Please stop this and celebrate our new mastery : )
    For Frost? It's just gonna make us spam IL more often in addition to BF and FB both having gotten some significant nerfs.

    Progression pre-nerfed: [T17] 6/7H; 0/10N

  7. #347
    Quote Originally Posted by Polarthief View Post
    For Frost? It's just gonna make us spam IL more often in addition to BF and FB both having gotten some significant nerfs.
    Frostbolt doesn't benefit from its stacking debuff anymore, but it benefits from mastery now, which should translate into a buff. Ice lance no longer benefits from mastery, but it received a compensatory ~29-30% buff to its damage (slight buff or nerf depending on how much mastery you have).

    FFB and WB will do slightly less damage since the new mastery's baseline is lower (+12% instead of +16%), assuming the mastery -> % damage conversion stays the same, but this should be more than canceled out by the previously mentioned buff to frostbolt.
    Last edited by Nitwit; 2013-07-18 at 12:01 AM.

  8. #348
    Brewmaster Methusula's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    1,310
    The Frost change essentially looks like we get Ignite that can only be applied via Ice Lances. How awesome...

  9. #349
    Elemental Lord Polarthief's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    (USA) Florida
    Posts
    8,036
    Quote Originally Posted by Nitwit View Post
    Frostbolt doesn't benefit from its stacking debuff anymore, but it benefits from mastery now, which should translate into a buff. Ice lance no longer benefits from mastery, but it received a compensatory ~29-30% buff to its damage (slight buff or nerf depending on how much mastery you have).

    FFB and WB will do slightly less damage since the new mastery's baseline is lower (+12% instead of +16%), assuming the mastery -> % damage conversion stays the same, but this should be more than canceled out by the previously mentioned buff to frostbolt.
    How is Frostbolt a buff if FFB and WB is a nerf? o_O;

    Progression pre-nerfed: [T17] 6/7H; 0/10N

  10. #350
    Quote Originally Posted by Methusula View Post
    The Frost change essentially looks like we get Ignite that can only be applied via Ice Lances. How awesome...
    And won't take into account icelance damage.. but guess that's were the buff for icelance comes in.. all in all its pretty much like ignite, which means added ramp up time for frost.. well till first ice lance that is.


    On the side note, seeing that the gear next patch is around the same as now.. A CM nerf wouldn't hurt anything but progression and we would be in the same situation at T16 BiS..

  11. #351
    Quote Originally Posted by Polarthief View Post
    How is Frostbolt a buff if FFB and WB is a nerf? o_O;
    The nerf to FFB and WB is pretty small (16 -> 12% base mastery), but the buff to frostbolt is potentially rather decent (15% lost from the stacking debuff, but gains (12 + mastery conversion)%).

  12. #352
    Quote Originally Posted by Nitwit View Post
    The nerf to FFB and WB is pretty small (16 -> 12% base mastery), but the buff to frostbolt is potentially rather decent (15% lost from the stacking debuff, but gains (12 + mastery conversion)%).
    considering FFB and WB do more damage combined than Frostbolt.. You need quite some mastery until you see it as a buff, but then you also face the fact that Ice Lance no longer gains from mastery, which is a nerf to ice lance then. So all in all, this made mastery worse than better, but guess they can buff the numbers a bit to compensate..

  13. #353
    Elemental Lord Polarthief's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    (USA) Florida
    Posts
    8,036
    Quote Originally Posted by Nitwit View Post
    The nerf to FFB and WB is pretty small (16 -> 12% base mastery), but the buff to frostbolt is potentially rather decent (15% lost from the stacking debuff, but gains (12 + mastery conversion)%).
    That's like saying scaling Ignite higher is a buff to Fireball when your Fireball Ignites are usually pretty pitiful anyways.

    No, it's a Mastery change (and I'd probably say buff) and a significant buff addon to Ice Lance.

    I see what you're saying, but I disagree because the damage isn't being applied TO Frostbolt.

    Progression pre-nerfed: [T17] 6/7H; 0/10N

  14. #354
    I think their problem is not so much massive fire damage, but more the big gap in DPS between perfect play and imperfect play. It's okay to have an advantage on DPS if you carefully micromanage things like pots, trinkets, AT and combust, just not a massive advantage. So a simple solution would be just reducing the proportion of damage combustion makes up in the first place, and increasing damage elsewhere. Or reducing the amount combustion benefits from those various short term buffs.
    Quote Originally Posted by Tojara View Post
    Look Batman really isn't an accurate source by any means
    Quote Originally Posted by Hooked View Post
    It is a fact, not just something I made up.

  15. #355
    Dreadlord
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Germany/BW
    Posts
    901
    Well, as soon as you have 5 stacks and no FoF proc, the oldest of the Icicles launch by itself and you simply gain a new one. So it works like our old mastery, you don´t have to care for it. But just think of our opener, trinkets and Alter Time. You have so much proccs, that you technicaly can´t store 5 stacks for Alter Time during burst.

    The most scary thing is still the debuff for Ice Lance and Waterbolt. Really hope they get rid of it in the next patch cycles.

    Btw the Icicles cast time (instant) is affected by haste but has no GCD.

    Really think we lost the last of our beloved frost flavour (cataclysm style, especially like it was in firelands). You never ever will store a FoF IL unless you have to "Icicle an add down" or something.


    It´s a first step for me, I have to test it and then we´ll see. But I really hope and pray Blizzard get rid of the debuff!

    *Edit* Not channel, the Icicles are has no GCD but they are affected by haste
    Last edited by citizenpete; 2013-07-18 at 01:14 AM.

  16. #356
    Elemental Lord Polarthief's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    (USA) Florida
    Posts
    8,036
    Quote Originally Posted by citizenpete View Post
    Well, as soon as you have 5 stacks and no FoF proc, the oldest of the Icicles launch by itself and you simply gain a new one. So it works like our old mastery, you don´t have to care for it. But just think of our opener, trinkets and Alter Time. You have so much proccs, that you technicaly can´t store 5 stacks for Alter Time during burst.

    The most scary thing is still the debuff for Ice Lance and Waterbolt. Really hope they get rid of it in the next patch cycles.

    Btw the Icicles cast time (channel) is affected by haste.
    Source for the bolded part? How do you know it'll work like that? I HIGHLY doubt it will be as you say it is.

    We can only hope.

    Channel? What in the hell are you talking about?

    Progression pre-nerfed: [T17] 6/7H; 0/10N

  17. #357
    Dreadlord
    Join Date
    Jan 2011
    Location
    Germany/BW
    Posts
    901
    Lhiv worte a guide and a short Q&A for the whole new mastery. It works exactly like I described it : )

  18. #358
    Quote Originally Posted by Polarthief View Post
    Source for the bolded part? How do you know it'll work like that? I HIGHLY doubt it will be as you say it is.

    We can only hope.

    Channel? What in the hell are you talking about?
    Do you even go on the PTR to test things? He's clearly telling you how it works and that someone else's theory of how it works is correct. Going to be honest I dislike reading your negativity for mages.

  19. #359
    I don't like the part where 12% of the WB is stored as an icicle, WB damage is no where near stellar. Going to have to re-copy my mage over and try these changes out.

  20. #360
    Elemental Lord Polarthief's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2009
    Location
    (USA) Florida
    Posts
    8,036
    Quote Originally Posted by SuperSirius View Post
    Do you even go on the PTR to test things? He's clearly telling you how it works and that someone else's theory of how it works is correct. Going to be honest I dislike reading your negativity for mages.
    Sorry but the PTR doesn't even HAVE these changes yet, otherwise, I would have already tested them. He's going based off Lhivera's information of which still has yet to be tested. Before attacking me about how I haven't tested things (which, again, I plan to once PTR is up and also plan to post all information I can get so the lazies can just read it instead of doing it themselves), you should do some research yourself and realize that it's not even up yet. No one but people working for Blizzard as well as some of the MVPs/Inner Circle people have this information (us now too because Lhivera posted it).

    As far as the "channel" goes, you don't actually cast the Icicles.

    How is this "negativity for Mages" when I'm asking someone for some proof? Since then, he has given me Lhivera's website and I have even contacted Lhivera myself and we had a nice little chat about how this stuff is all insider information which will be readily available to us once this PTR build actually goes live. I got pretty annoyed that he posted information (which again, wasn't even HIS) about how things are going to work, claiming it to be what it really is with no proof or source until later.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by gallamann View Post
    I don't like the part where 12% of the WB is stored as an icicle, WB damage is no where near stellar. Going to have to re-copy my mage over and try these changes out.
    Copy now, but you'll be waiting a bit until this build hits.

    Progression pre-nerfed: [T17] 6/7H; 0/10N

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •