Imp. Fireball and Imp. Frostbolt damage coefficient changes

[Watto44]

From the test realm patchnotes:

Mages
- Each rank of "Improved Fireball" now reduces your spell damage
coefficient by 2%.
- Each rank of "Improved Frostbolt" now reduces your spell damage
coefficient by 2%.

As I understand this, it changes the +spell damage coefficient of an improved fireball from 1 to 0.9, and frostbolt's coffecient from 0.81 to 0.73.

Is that right? If so, it's certainly a reduction of a mage's DPS, but doesn't really seem worth all the hooplah that's on the official forums right now. IMO an understandable change given the +spell damage that is probably going to be attainable in level 70 raids.

I'm interested to hear other peoples' thoughts on this.:)

Disclaimer: I fail at theory-craft, I know this. Feel free to point out any mistakes I made. :blink:

[oldmandennis]

The sky is falling crew is mingling with the people who think this is a stupid kludge. Really, a talent that _decreases_ your DPM :blink:

[Artega]

The sky is falling crew is mingling with the people who think this is a stupid kludge. Really, a talent that _decreases_ your DPM :blink:

Wouldn't it remain the same, given that the talent reduces the cast time along with the coefficient? You'll be casting for a little less, but you'll also be casting a little faster than the untalented form.

[Tuftears]

Damage per mana, not damage per minute.:)

[Xanthix]

I can see why mages are upset over this, since it clearly means some amount of less damage, but I can agree with the change in spirit.

Improved Fireball/Frostbolt are so low in their respective trees, that you can probably assume that if you are casting the spell, you have the talent. So effectively the "base" mage spells are the improved versions. If encounters need to be tuned against fireball spam, they need to be tuned against improved fireballs, etc...

By that mindset, previously mages were actually getting a bonus to damage, since their damage coefficients were calculated using artificially longer spell cast times (since no one uses unimproved fireball etc). So now things are more consistent with the assumption that all mages have the improved versions of these spells.

Of course if they are going in that direction, perhaps they should just make the improved version of these spells into the base versions, and give mages new talents to replace the old ones. They did it for AE, and they could do the same thing for Corruption.

[Quark]

I can see why mages are upset over this, since it clearly means some amount of less damage, but I can agree with the change in spirit.

Improved Fireball/Frostbolt are so low in their respective trees, that you can probably assume that if you are casting the spell, you have the talent. So effectively the "base" mage spells are the improved versions. If encounters need to be tuned against fireball spam, they need to be tuned against improved fireballs, etc...

By that mindset, previously mages were actually getting a bonus to damage, since their damage coefficients were calculated using artificially longer spell cast times (since no one uses unimproved fireball etc). So now things are more consistent with the assumption that all mages have the improved versions of these spells.

That wasn't the mindset, though. If it was, other talents would have similarly changed (Shaman, Warlock with casting time spells, Rogues with the DPE equivalents of Imp Backstab and Imp Sinister Strike).

Of course if they are going in that direction, perhaps they should just make the improved version of these spells into the base versions, and give mages new talents to replace the old ones. They did it for AE, and they could do the same thing for Corruption.

The direction was to nerf mage damage. This happened to be the best way they could think of to do it. Me? I still think they messed up when they added so many damage talents to the Fire tree. So newer talents caused older ones to get nerfed.

[Delc]

The biggest issue Blizzard is facing right now with class balance is scaling. When the game was released they balanced the talents and spells around the gear that was available at the time. They did a decent job. What they didn't look at was what happened when they went from ilvl 60 blues to ilvl 120 epics. Some skills didn't scale at all (evis, arcane shot), while others scaled at huge rates (warrior damage with the old rage mechanic). With 2.0 they tried to hit a whole bunch of things at once, and in general nerfed and buffed things way more than they should have.

[oldmandennis]

The biggest problem I see with this "solution" is that it expending talent points will have a significant negative effect on your damage per mana.

I have not been paying close attention to the mages mana bars while in instances. I have to assume that mana usage is going to be a core mechanic for mages while raiding. If it is, then you may end up with the perverse situation where mages -skip- those talents to boost their damage per mana.

If mages can stack gear to the point where mana doesn't matter, then that's a whole other broken mechanic to deal with.

If mages damage is scaling too good with raid gear and buffs, the answer is to just reduce the coeffecient on the whole spell. Everything points to that number being possible to set independently, as opposed to derived by code from some formula.

Oh well, my mage is 22, with no damage gear to speak of. Sucks to be you!

[Artega]

The biggest problem I see with this "solution" is that it expending talent points will have a significant negative effect on your damage per mana.

I have not been paying close attention to the mages mana bars while in instances. I have to assume that mana usage is going to be a core mechanic for mages while raiding. If it is, then you may end up with the perverse situation where mages -skip- those talents to boost their damage per mana.

If mages can stack gear to the point where mana doesn't matter, then that's a whole other broken mechanic to deal with.

If mages damage is scaling too good with raid gear and buffs, the answer is to just reduce the coeffecient on the whole spell. Everything points to that number being possible to set independently, as opposed to derived by code from some formula.

Oh well, my mage is 22, with no damage gear to speak of. Sucks to be you!

I don't see anything wrong with the change. I don't think 0.5s is going to make a big difference when you're half-asleep and mashing your Fireball or Frostbolt button against a raid boss. It's a critical difference in PvP. Besides, Fire gets an Empowered Fireball talent (additional +15%), while Frost gets an Empowered Frostbolt talent (+10% damage, +5% crit.)

[oldmandennis]

I don't see anything wrong with the change. I don't think 0.5s is going to make a big difference when you're half-asleep and mashing your Fireball or Frostbolt button against a raid boss. It's a critical difference in PvP.

First off, that's a fairly condescending way to describe a pve mage. Second it's not remotely accurate at the high end. .5 seconds is 1/6 the cast of a frost bolt, ~20%. The idea that any 1/2 competent mage woln't notice the loss of 15-20% of their DPS is absurd on the face of it. As is the idea that they aren't going to miss a ~5% hit to their DPM when they take these talents.

I'm not saying mages don't need to be adjusted. I'm saying there has GOT to be a better way to go then turning your own talents against you. You know you'd scream bloody murder if improved intercept cut the range on it to 20 yards.

I have no idea why a flat reduction in the cooefficient for those spells isn't the way to go.

[TheDragoon]

You know you'd scream bloody murder if improved intercept cut the range on it to 20 yards.

Or increased the rage cost of it by 10. :)

[WimpySmurf]

By that mindset, previously mages were actually getting a bonus to damage, since their damage coefficients were calculated using artificially longer spell cast times (since no one uses unimproved fireball etc). So now things are more consistent with the assumption that all mages have the improved versions of these spells.

This type of use the current cast time mechanic exists with Flurry warriors. Part of the rage gain calculation is Weapon Speed, your current weapon speed. So while under flurry warriors don't see a 30% increase in rage/sec more like ~20%.

-WimpySmurf

[Xanthix]

This type of use the current cast time mechanic exists with Flurry warriors. Part of the rage gain calculation is Weapon Speed, your current weapon speed. So while under flurry warriors don't see a 30% increase in rage/sec more like ~20%.

-WimpySmurf

I don't quite understand rage machanics, but does this mean that warrior rage gains are dependent on current weapon speeds, as in, they are calculated dynamically and not calculated off base weapon speed (and therefore scaling with attack haste)?

If so, at least this mechanic is not unprecedented. Would there be any reason (consistency?) for Blizzard to change all abilities that talents reduce the casting time of, to also reduce the coefficient? For example, you can talent your Greater Heal down to 2.5 seconds, but then it gets the coefficient of a 2.5 spell and not a 3.0 one?

[Quark]

I have no idea why a flat reduction in the cooefficient for those spells isn't the way to go.

Well, as a possibility, this makes shooting a Frostbolt at a fire-immune mob not such a downgrade if you don't spend 5 points into Improved Frostbolt.

Anyway, I think you're making a mountain out of a molehill with this DPM thing. If you admitted yourself you don't even look at your mana bar, what purpose does it serve?

[Concillian]

I don't quite understand rage machanics, but does this mean that warrior rage gains are dependent on current weapon speeds, as in, they are calculated dynamically and not calculated off base weapon speed (and therefore scaling with attack haste)?

Yes, it's dynamic.

It used to be that when under flurry, you got 30% faster attacks and therefore ~30% more rage. The normalization formula takes "instantaneous" attack speed, so the rage gain is scaled down... to the point that it gives somewhere on the order of 5% more rage when flurried, even though you are doing ~30% more white damage.

[WimpySmurf]

I don't quite understand rage machanics, but does this mean that warrior rage gains are dependent on current weapon speeds, as in, they are calculated dynamically and not calculated off base weapon speed (and therefore scaling with attack haste)?

Haste causes the speed of a weapon to become smaller. So you end of getting less rage for a hit when you're under flurry compared to the same hit while not under flurry.

Basically Rage gain looks like this:

Rage = Damage_Done*constantA + WeaponSpeed*ConstantB

constantA changes based upon the lvl of the warrior and the mob (at lvl60 is ~1.6% at lvl70 ~1.3%)
constantB is based upon which hand and if the hit is a crit (*2 if it's a crit) (MH 1.25, OH 0.625)

So basically if Flurry is active then the WeaponSpeed of your weapon is 70% of the listed speed which reduces the amount of rage you get from that half of the equation.

For example if you hit with a 2.5 speed weapon you'd get 3.125 rage for the right half of equation. If you're under flurry then you'd get (2.5*0.7)*1.25 = 2.1875 rage for that hit (for the weapon speed portion).

Hopefully that helps.

-WimpySmurf

[oldmandennis]

If you admitted yourself you don't even look at your mana bar, what purpose does it serve?

I am acutely aware of _my_ mana bar, and the healer mana bars while tanking. I don't really watch the mage ones, other then to check that they are full before pulling a boss.

If you have a longish gear check fight, a 5% loss in DPM is noticeable. If there aren't any fights that stretch a mages mana pool, then the mechanic is fundamentally broken and needs to be reworked.

Weren't you the one complaining a while back that a BETA talent that never saw the light of day was a 1% drop in DPS on tank and spank fights? (weren't you using the now discredited "one roll specials" system to do your math too?).

[Quark]

If you have a longish gear check fight, a 5% loss in DPM is noticeable. If there aren't any fights that stretch a mages mana pool, then the mechanic is fundamentally broken and needs to be reworked.

And this isn't a way to rework it? In any longish fight, mages already have an acute advantage in the mana pool. Evocation and Mana gems are huge, and Mage Armor is also very significant.

Weren't you the one complaining a while back that a BETA talent that never saw the light of day was a 1% drop in DPS on tank and spank fights?

It was more than 1%, it was a 41 point talent, and DPS is much more important than DPM. If your DPS is bad, you're bad. If your DPM is bad, drink a mana pot. Ever read on the consumables debate? You can make mana consumption completely irrelevant with consumables. And do you suppose that the talent changing might have had something to do with Rogues actively complaining about it?

(weren't you using the now discredited "one roll specials" system to do your math too?).

Aye, as was everyone else, as it was the only evidenced system we had at the time, evidence that included posts from Blizzard about the roll system. Don't forget the talent was changed before the new theory came out, which made us further assume we were right.

[oldmandennis]

No, DPS does not trump all. Total damage done trumps all. For rogues it is fairly simple, because their cycles are so short and you can pretty much say total damage = DPSxtime. For other classes it's not so simple. To use an old world example, you would definitely want these talents for Huhu, but might not want them for the much longer twin emps.

I would say anytime you wish you didn't have a talent, that talent needs a look at.

Neither you or I have any idea what raiding mages will look like as far as mana consumption. I have yet to see a new version of dark runes or wipper roots. It also depends very much on how the fights are. A tank and spank fight with a 10 or a 15 min enrage could be one that sends people to the mage trainer to remove these talents.

Gems, Mage Armor, and Evocation are irrelevant. The comparison is between a mage who has taken the improved talents in the tree of his choice and one who hasn't. Both of those mages will get the same benefit from those.

And do you suppose that the talent changing might have had something to do with Rogues actively complaining about it?

My theory is that it is part of the continuing rebalancing of various classes DPS. Let me understand your theory... you did a bunch of math in a vacuum that turned out to be wrong, and made a bunch of complaining posts about it. The developers may not be able to think through all the ramifications of their changes, but they sure as hell can see that you are wrong. They make the change anyways, and in your ego you assume it was your complaining that forced their hand - despite the fact that the premise of it was fundamentally wrong. Then, when another class gets a nerf in the dead of night, with no chance to respond and they don't like how its done, they are making a mountain out of a molehill.:blink:

[Quark]

Who cares if there's never a new mana-based consumable in the game? The ones already there can easily triple your mana regeneration in a fight, making mana irrelevant. The minimal DPM cost of the Improved talents, therefore, is unimportant.

My theory is that it is part of the continuing rebalancing of various classes DPS. Let me understand your theory... you did a bunch of math in a vacuum that turned out to be wrong, and made a bunch of complaining posts about it. The developers may not be able to think through all the ramifications of their changes, but they sure as hell can see that you are wrong. They make the change anyways, and in your ego you assume it was your complaining that forced their hand - despite the fact that the premise of it was fundamentally wrong. Then, when another class gets a nerf in the dead of night, with no chance to respond and they don't like how its done, they are making a mountain out of a molehill.:blink:

The talent sucked, plain and simple, even if the math was wrong. There was no upside to it, whatsoever. Now there is. You cannot possible argue that Improved Fireball sucks. Even with no +spelldamage and no other talents, it's a 40 DPS increase, easy.