Combustion/CM overnerfs. Raidbots confirmed!

Please refer to Lhivera's post, http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/7320452176 with your parses, be they fire, frost, or arcane. Thank you.

*Fire mage dps ihas now plumetted, and shows no signs of stopping the descent. Dead last is soon to come. Examples:

http://raidbots.com/dpsbot/Overall_DPS/25N/all/7/30/default/

http://raidbots.com/dpsbot/Overall_DPS/10N/all/7/30/default/

http://raidbots.com/dpsbot/Overall_DPS/10H/all/7/30/default/

http://raidbots.com/dpsbot/Overall_DPS/25H/all/7/30/default/

Look around for yourselves. Seems we weren't overreacting.*


Disclaimer: I'm not arguing that fire mages or mages as a whole shouldn't be nerfed, in fact I believe that everyone should be on par with each other to create a much more competetive raiding environment, but this is obviously impossible. I'm arguing against a massive nerf into the ground and out of viability that was hotfixed sneakily and without any prior testing.

Anway, onto the meat...

Interestingly enough, our 22+ page thread on our class forum addressing concerns has been deleted. No feedback yet, however. Probably due to the lead systems developer stating that he doesn't read class forums anymore. Apparently developers actually read Damage Dealing because it offers very valuable opinions such as "cry more" and "I don't see what the big deal is" from people that have no idea how mages work because they have never touched them before, and are glad to see them at the bottom of the chart by virtue of their past success.

Mage
Fire
The periodic damage from Combustion has been reduced by 50%.
The critical strike chance multiplier from Critical Mass has been reduced to 1.25 (was 1.5).


This effectively brought fire mages from first to last overnight. Geared mages (item level 490+) are seeing at minimum an 8% (essentially 4600 or some odd critical rating disappearing) decrease in crit, causing a snowball effect calculating at 15-25% dps decrease. This is because it causes more casts of fireball/scorch that do not crit, leading to less usage of pyroblast, leading to pitiful ignites, and this coupled with the combustion nerf makes absolutely horrid combustion ticks (it is now on par with level 85 combustion ticks), not to mention it also nerfing our tier bonuses (+8% damage on a spell we'll be using a lot less often and -20% cooldown on a spell that just recieved a -50% damage nerf) all compounded screws us over. This makes us no longer viable for progression raiding.

According to http://www.noxxic.com/wow/dps-rankings/realistic-dps which is calculated using a beta simulationcraft build that supports the hotfix, item level 496 fire mages are now ranked last. Please note the blurb at the top of the page stating "These DPS estimates are based on a modified single target (no cleave) fight with regular movement, raid-wide stuns, and player distraction. This is a more realistic fight that highlights each specs maximum DPS under typical raid conditions. The Realistic DPS simulation is run across 10000 iterations with a variable fight length of 360 - 540 sec and a non-optimal use of raid buffs."

So obviously, while this isn't 100% accurate due to varying level of player skill, global usage, cooldown stacking, and RNG, it is still representative of the overnerf we just recieved.
Edited by Kawaiidesu on 12/7/2012 8:59 PM PST
Reply Quote
90 Undead Death Knight
6800
Sucks to be in the bottom of the board? It might of been an overnerf and might mess up all your gemming/reforging when switching to another spec but I agree 100% with the hotfix. Boomkins are living a terrible life for all MoP and previous expansions being lowest dps on the board with some clunky mechanics and a not so great AoE.

You can switch to another spec and start competing for the top of the boards again but a chicken can't really switch specs until getting a complete new set of gear for feral. Fire mages were pulling some crazy high dps and once we proceed further into tier, mages crit will scale even better and they'd have no more competition.

oh no, you dropped 20% of your overall dps!! better cancel my sub. Until they fix the other dps specs, let fire feel some pain.
Reply Quote
Sucks to be in the bottom of the board? It might of been an overnerf and might mess up all your gemming/reforging when switching to another spec but I agree 100% with the hotfix. Boomkins are living a terrible life for all MoP and previous expansions being lowest dps on the board with some clunky mechanics and a not so great AoE.

You can switch to another spec and start competing for the top of the boards again but a chicken can't really switch specs until getting a complete new set of gear for feral. Fire mages were pulling some crazy high dps and once we proceed further into tier, mages crit will scale even better and they'd have no more competition.

oh no, you dropped 20% of your overall dps!! better cancel my sub. Until they fix the other dps specs, let fire feel some pain.


Very constructive, thank you for your post. You weren't absolutely predictable at all. I wasn't arguing that fire mages shouldn't be nerfed at all, I was arguing against a gross overnerfing with no prior testing in a sneaky hotfix completely out of the blue. Why are you complaining about your own spec to justify a different spec being nerfed into invalidation? Shouldn't you instead be arguing that you get buffed? By the way, boomkins have far more raid utility than a mage.
Edited by Kawaiidesu on 12/2/2012 8:14 AM PST
Reply Quote
90 Night Elf Hunter
6750
It says a lot about a class when their biggest complaint is that they now only have TWO of the top THREE highest DPS specs in the game and their biggest qualifier is the spec that took the nerf bat was "not too OP".

Really, it's an amazing viewpoint that not another single class in this game could imagine having.

I wish my class had a SINGLE DPS spec represented in the top 10...

[shakes head and walks away]
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Warlock
10620
I'm actually seeing either a slight increase, or no change for Fire in normal and heroic overall. Granted, more data is needed, but I'm not seeing this "sky is falling" mentality having merit yet.
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Death Knight
10960
Deaf and Cortland need to stop with their mage envy long enough to actually comprehend what the OP was saying, which looks to be more or less valid.

Maybe fire needed a nerf, maybe it didn't. I don't actually care. (It did, but not part of the point). In either case it was still a horrible move to make such an enormous change to the most popular mage spec in a hotfix. Put yourself in their shoes. My OS is 2H frost. I've already spent some valor upgrading my 2H weapon. If I was handed a nerf tomorrow that pushed DW miles ahead of 2H I'd be fairly pissed, regardless of the justifications. In order to remain effective I'd have to spend considerable effort changing specs and some gear and many resources would be wasted as a result.

The real questions is why on earth didn't they start making these nerfs on the PTR pre 5.1? It isn't like fire dps wasn't just as gross 4 weeks ago. There is no reason for a nerf, buff, or any change of this magnitude (excluding bug-fixes) to be made in a hotfix. It's bad process by the developers.
Edited by Arrastos on 12/2/2012 8:48 AM PST
Reply Quote
90 Gnome Mage
3450

The real questions is why on earth didn't they start making these nerfs on the PTR pre 5.1? It isn't like fire dps wasn't just as gross 4 weeks ago. There is no reason for a nerf, buff, or any change of this magnitude to be made in a hotfix. It's bad process by the developers.


Someone gets it.
Reply Quote
Deaf and Cortland need to stop with their mage envy long enough to actually comprehend what the OP was saying, which looks to be more or less valid.

Maybe fire needed a nerf, maybe it didn't. I don't actually care. (It did, but not part of the point). In either case it was still a horrible move to make such an enormous change to the most popular mage spec in a hotfix. Put yourself in their shoes. My OS is 2H frost. I've already spent some valor upgrading my 2H weapon. If I was handed a nerf tomorrow that pushed DW miles ahead of 2H I'd be fairly pissed, regardless of the justifications. In order to remain effective I'd have to spend considerable effort changing specs and some gear and many resources would be wasted as a result.

The real questions is why on earth didn't they start making these nerfs on the PTR pre 5.1? It isn't like fire dps wasn't just as gross 4 weeks ago. There is no reason for a nerf, buff, or any change of this magnitude (excluding bug-fixes) to be made in a hotfix. It's bad process by the developers.


Precisely. I know that haste and mastery pretty much swap values when you change from 2h to DW, and vice versa. Also, what if you just enjoy the flow of 2 hand and like to see big numbers as opposed to a steady stream of smaller numbers that DW is? Things like that.

But mainly, yes, I also really do not understand why they didn't test these things on the PTR. It could be that they knew that mages would be upset about these changes if they were proposed on the PTR and implemented for some time, so they just saved them for a hotfix. Or maybe it's just ineptitude at game design. I really hope it was neither, and just a fluke.
Reply Quote
MVP - World of Warcraft
90 Human Mage
10015
It's simming as about a 12% decrease, which looks a lot more severe than was needed to me. I think I might have tried reducing critical mass to 1.35 instead of 1.25, and Combustion to 0.75 instead of 0.5 of Ignite tick damage.

That said, GC tweets made it clear they're watching the numbers; if Fire has taken a nose dive when they see next week's numbers, I imagine we'll see further adjustments. Declaring the spec deceased isn't really productive or realistic. Next week's raid stats may show it to be wounded, but if so, it can be patched up.
________________________________________________
Find answers to questions about Mage mechanics in
Lhivera’s Compendium • http://lhiveras-library.com/compendium
Edited by Lhivera on 12/2/2012 8:59 AM PST
Reply Quote
90 Pandaren Priest
6370
12/02/2012 08:56 AMPosted by Lhivera
That said, GC tweets made it clear they're watching the numbers; if Fire has taken a nose dive when they see next week's numbers, I imagine we'll see further adjustments. Declaring the spec deceased isn't really productive or realistic. Next week's raid stats may show it to be wounded, but if so, it can be patched up.


I'm interested to see what happens. The sims have fire taking a pretty huge hit, but we know how accurate sims are compared to what really happens.
Edited by Dictainabox on 12/2/2012 9:09 AM PST
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Warlock
10620
Oh, I understand the "flow and feel" argument completely, and think it was kind of a jerk move on Blizz's part to throw the change in so close to the patch date, but sometimes they try different things to avoid it and they all fail, so it happens. I can't think of a single class where it hasn't happened at least once.

The numbers side still need more data, but the claim that fire DPS as taken a significant hit doesn't seem to be backed up yet. It very well may, we're not a week in yet, but it'd have to take a fairly radicalshift from the trend that's going currently. Mages seem to have slowed down a bit, but they've not stalled. Now, a player's personal DPS may be down a bit because they may or may not handle the change as easily as others, but as a total it seems mages are sill improving.
Reply Quote
It's simming as about a 12% decrease, which looks a lot more severe than was needed to me. I think I might have tried reducing critical mass to 1.35 instead of 1.25, and Combustion to 0.75 instead of 0.5 of Ignite tick damage.

That said, GC tweets made it clear they're watching the numbers; if Fire has taken a nose dive when they see next week's numbers, I imagine we'll see further adjustments. Declaring the spec deceased isn't really productive or realistic. Next week's raid stats may show it to be wounded, but if so, it can be patched up.


Exactly, and the higher your gear gets the harder the nerfs hit. I would actually suggest those changes, something similar with number tweaking, or just a reduction on the spell damage coefficients on the primary nukes, as to not interrupt the flow of the spec or the ramping up factor that makes it so fun. I'm really not sure how they are ignorant to simulation or internal testing results, being a billion dollar company and all. It's plain to see how results will be next week, so why can't they just fix it now? Why make people suffer through playing a spec they know will not be viable in terms of pushing progression enrage timers just to prove that it's not viable when it's all calculable? And why can't they admit they made a big mistake by not testing these things on the PTR when they had the idea for such massive changes while it was happening?
Reply Quote
90 Night Elf Hunter
6750
I think it's just because Mage's haven't been through this type of thing for so long that they are having such a hard time with it.

Blizzard RARELY uses the PTR to dial in class abilities. Honestly I am not even sure WHAT they use the PTR for, because many of the issues players report on the PTR go unheeded and make their way into live. This happens to every class and every spec of every class. Mage's just never cared before because they were always on the top of the pile when the dust settled (and sometimes, as was the case with Fire, they were on top by a country mile).

Hey, Hunters went through this when we somehow ended up going live with the Zoo bug. It was MASSIVELY OP and was dealt with accordingly. Then Blizz also decided to nerf our oldest baseline talent that defines the BM spec (BW) because so much QQ was going on over that bug. So I get where you guys are coming from.

Nobody is disagreeing that re-speccing is a huge pain and a waste of resources. I 100% understand that frustration and honestly I do sympathize. I also understand what it's like to not be able to play the spec you have grown to enjoy most because it's DPS is less than another spec (do you HONESTLY think I like playing BM??).

I think where the disconnect comes into play is when Mage's are acting like their class was just rendered unplayable because ONE of their specs in no longer in the top 3 for DPS. You still have the most cared for and powerful class in WoW and you have to realize that almost any other class would trade with you in a heartbeat (having Blizzards unyielding devotion to your class that is).

So, in summary, I am sympathetic to your plight to a degree...but there has to be a reality check in the Mage community at some point.
Reply Quote
12/02/2012 09:02 AMPosted by Dictainabox
That said, GC tweets made it clear they're watching the numbers; if Fire has taken a nose dive when they see next week's numbers, I imagine we'll see further adjustments. Declaring the spec deceased isn't really productive or realistic. Next week's raid stats may show it to be wounded, but if so, it can be patched up.


I'm interested to see what happens. The sims have fire taking a pretty huge hit, but we know how accurate seems are compared to what really happens.


I really do not understand why people have a tendency to disregard simulations. They are a calculated median from many, many reiterations. That's far more accurate than one weeks worth of parses, where RNG may be a factor for most people (they could have gotten lucky with some crits, or very unlucky.)
Reply Quote
I think it's just because Mage's haven't been through this type of thing for so long that they are having such a hard time with it.

Blizzard RARELY uses the PTR to dial in class abilities. Honestly I am not even sure WHAT they use the PTR for, because many of the issues players report on the PTR go unheeded and make their way into live. This happens to every class and every spec of every class. Mage's just never cared before because they were always on the top of the pile when the dust settled (and sometimes, as was the case with Fire, they were on top by a country mile).

Hey, Hunters went through this when we somehow ended up going live with the Zoo bug. It was MASSIVELY OP and was dealt with accordingly. Then Blizz also decided to nerf our oldest baseline talent that defines the BM spec (BW) because so much QQ was going on over that bug. So I get where you guys are coming from.

Nobody is disagreeing that re-speccing is a huge pain and a waste of resources. I 100% understand that frustration and honestly I do sympathize. I also understand what it's like to not be able to play the spec you have grown to enjoy most because it's DPS is less than another spec (do you HONESTLY think I like playing BM??).

I think where the disconnect comes into play is when Mage's are acting like their class was just rendered unplayable because ONE of their specs in no longer in the top 3 for DPS. You still have the most cared for and powerful class in WoW and you have to realize that almost any other class would trade with you in a heartbeat (having Blizzards unyielding devotion to your class that is).

So, in summary, I am sympathetic to your plight to a degree...but there has to be a reality check in the Mage community at some point.


Honestly at this point you are completely not worth talking to. Other people may have more patience than me when it comes to these things, but I'm done responding to you.
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Warlock
10620


I'm interested to see what happens. The sims have fire taking a pretty huge hit, but we know how accurate seems are compared to what really happens.


I really do not understand why people have a tendency to disregard simulations. They are a calculated median from many, many reiterations. That's far more accurate than one weeks worth of parses, where RNG may be a factor for most people (they could have gotten lucky with some crits, or very unlucky.)


Simulations a.) play with superhuman reflexes, able to take the most advantage of every proc and ability, b.) are subject to action lists that may or may not be ideal, and c.) are not representative of the actual raid environment. Granted, people have tried to code in human error, lag, target swaps, adds, etc., but it is still at best only marginally related to an actual raid encounter. It's useful to see where scaling points are, and how much damage you can put out if you're allowed to cast perfectly, but little beyond that.

Edit: Now in comparison to reviewing logs, what most people should do when looking for actual trends is compare all logs to top performers, raid sizes, and fights to see if there are trends among all or none. What most people actually do is look or the log sample set that represents their opinion. Looking over everything thats available, the sim doesn't yet reflect the raiding environment.
Edited by Belledanna on 12/2/2012 9:16 AM PST
Reply Quote
90 Pandaren Priest
6370


I'm interested to see what happens. The sims have fire taking a pretty huge hit, but we know how accurate seems are compared to what really happens.


I really do not understand why people have a tendency to disregard simulations. They are a calculated median from many, many reiterations. That's far more accurate than one weeks worth of parses, where RNG may be a factor for most people (they could have gotten lucky with some crits, or very unlucky.)


Because a simulated environment is not what matters. What matters is the actual performance in raids. Your statement about a weeks worth of parses is a huge overgeneralization. It says nothing about the number of data points. Further, the whole point of "a week's worth of parses" is that the large number of points smooths out the RNG from pull to pull. Let's see what happens this week. If the actual results bear out the mages complaints, I will jump on the buff train with you.
Edited by Dictainabox on 12/2/2012 9:13 AM PST
Reply Quote

Simulations a.) play with superhuman reflexes, able to take the most advantage of every proc and ability, b.) are subject to action lists that may or may not be ideal, and c.) are not representative of the actual raid environment. Granted, people have tried to code in human error, lag, target swaps, adds, etc., but it is still at best only marginally related to an actual raid encounter. It's useful to see where scaling points are, and how much damage you can put out if you're allowed to cast perfectly, but little beyond that.


A) They use every global, if that's what you mean. They actually do not use optimal cooldown usage or proc advantage.
B) They typically are, that's the entire point.
C) They use data from raids to approximate movement and maximum time available spent casting. Lag, target swaps, adds, etc. are all working, the only thing that remains is player error.

So in reality, they can be used to prevent players who are highly unlikely to make mistakes form having to suffer through a week of raiding suboptimally to prove a point that has already been calcualted. WoW is a game of numbers, by the way.


Because a simulated environment is not what matters. What matters is the actual performance in raids. Your statement about a weeks worth of parses is a huge overgeneralization. It says nothing about the number of data points. Further, the whole point of "a week's worth of parses" is that the large number of points smooths out the RNG from pull to pull. Let's see what happens this week. If the actual results bear out the mages complaints, I will jump on the buff train with you.


The parses will be far more varied because of individual player skill and being able to take advantage of procs and cooldowns. The vast majority of players can not reach simulated dps because of their skill, not maximizing their casting time, or not being able to wave cooldowns and trinkets, things like that. Absolutely everybody, unless they get extremely lucky, will parse at bare minimum 10% lower than they did in the previous week, with that gaining in the higher item levels. I am 100% sure that I will sim 20-25% lower than in my previous week, placing me at the bottom, making me not viable for progression raiding. I'm just trying to avoid a week of awful raiding just to say "I told you so."
Edited by Kawaiidesu on 12/2/2012 9:22 AM PST
Reply Quote
12/02/2012 09:07 AMPosted by Kawaiidesu


I'm interested to see what happens. The sims have fire taking a pretty huge hit, but we know how accurate seems are compared to what really happens.


I really do not understand why people have a tendency to disregard simulations. They are a calculated median from many, many reiterations. That's far more accurate than one weeks worth of parses, where RNG may be a factor for most people (they could have gotten lucky with some crits, or very unlucky.)


Because sims have been giving too many goofy results for too long. I just don't really trust them anymore. They still are. I flatly do not believe how arcane is simming, for example.

At any rate we will have all the confirmation we need within the next week as actual parses come in. I fully expect those to show that fire is indeed in a bad place. It's much better to argue with real data than simulated data.
Reply Quote
90 Night Elf Hunter
6750


So, in summary, I am sympathetic to your plight to a degree...but there has to be a reality check in the Mage community at some point.


Honestly at this point you are completely not worth talking to. Other people may have more patience than me when it comes to these things, but I'm done responding to you.


Your prerogative. I am simply trying to share a different viewpoint than one you are accustomed to hearing.

Best of luck.
Reply Quote

Please report any Code of Conduct violations, including:

Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.

Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.

Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.

Forums Code of Conduct

Report Post # written by

Reason
Explain (256 characters max)
Submit Cancel

Reported!

[Close]