Eyonix responds to hypothermia change.

[Swift]

http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=2366705803&pageNo=1&sid=1#4

The reasoning behind the nerf is completely unjustified, and its a bit sad that blizzard does not realize that almost nobody agreed with this nerf.

[Dimachaeri]

See, you don't get it. We know that the "pvp game designer" plays a warrior. That has already been confirmed and is obvious based on the continuous pvp changes this game has received. Mages are obviously underpowered in arenas, and could use buffs, but why did they get a nerf? It's simple: mages keep polymorphing warriors, skewing the view of mage's power in pvp. Why do warriors have plate, but do more damage than rogues, have great mobility, and a stronger anti-healing debuff? It's really all logical once you start thinking about things as if you played a warrior.

[buena]

That would explain why warlocks have been OP for so long

"Fear? What? Just zerker rage lol"

[Twisty]

Totally justified nerf. One of the most obvious overpowered spells that desperately needed to be looked at.... twice.








Not. Did I get anyone?!

[Tyveris]

After reading both responses from Drysc and Eyonix, you should only expect at least six more months of pain. They are completely lost when it comes to understanding the mage class. As soon as I read the 45 second hypothermia, I realized they had lost it.

Ding Druid 30 :)

[Ryan]

Mages are less presented in ALL brackets compared to priests, though more people play mage. Yet mage gets nerfed and priest buffed? If we should get anything in this patch it should be some help, especially in 2v2. These changes make no sense at all...

:) ding warlock 54

[Grup]

The most common combo I ever see in 3v3 is priest mage rogue. Closely followed by this is druid mage rogue. Warrior vs frost mage is arguably one of the most one-sided 1v1 matchups in the game (with frost mage in favor). Let's not be unrealistic here. By the way, it is foolish to compare priest vs mage numbers. Mages essentially have one role/spec that thrives in PvP, frost. Priests have two specs and two roles that both are great in PvP, shadow, and holy. It is like two classes in one, just because there are a lot of priests doesn't make them suddenly overpowered.

Mages are a great class, the problem is that they don't fit into many setups. Healer + warrior/warlock/rogue is what generally rules 2v2, and mage + shadow priest/warlock/rogue doesn't have much room for error. Imo, the nerf is fine, but mages could use some polishing, perhaps have something like frost trap. If you ice block, and don't last another 45 seconds, why shouldn't you die? F

A mage is on the top 5v5 on Bloodlust, also on #3. And #5. They are by no means an underpowered class, and probably have less raw numbers up at the top of arenas because, simply put, they take more coordination amongst their teammates to succeed. Will you find, say, an enhance shaman that high on any competitive team? No, you won't. Getting carried away with "this is OP, this is underpowered" talk is a little extreme.

[Rollyat]

The most common combo I ever see in 3v3 is priest mage rogue. Closely followed by this is druid mage rogue. Warrior vs frost mage is arguably one of the most one-sided 1v1 matchups in the game (with frost mage in favor). Let's not be unrealistic here. By the way, it is foolish to compare priest vs mage numbers. Mages essentially have one role/spec that thrives in PvP, frost. Priests have two specs and two roles that both are great in PvP, shadow, and holy. It is like two classes in one, just because there are a lot of priests doesn't make them suddenly overpowered.

Mages are a great class, the problem is that they don't fit into many setups. Healer + warrior/warlock/rogue is what generally rules 2v2, and mage + shadow priest/warlock/rogue doesn't have much room for error. Imo, the nerf is fine, but mages could use some polishing, perhaps have something like frost trap. If you ice block, and don't last another 45 seconds, why shouldn't you die? F

A mage is on the top 5v5 on Bloodlust, also on #3. And #5. They are by no means an underpowered class, and probably have less raw numbers up at the top of arenas because, simply put, they take more coordination amongst their teammates to succeed. Will you find, say, an enhance shaman that high on any competitive team? No, you won't. Getting carried away with "this is OP, this is underpowered" talk is a little extreme.

Play with a mage. I do for 2's, which is obviously their weakest bracket, but it gives me an opportunity to see all the weaknesses shine. The hypothermia change was unwarranted.

[Windwalk]

I'm pretty sure this is because Kalgan plays a warrior.

[Gihelle]

The class that the lead developer plays has no counters and is topping all the arena brackets?

Working as intended.

I agree that the Hypothermia change was stupid and uneeded. The only reason would be to make Warriors even more strong (because Frost Mages still had a chance against them). From a Warlock POV, Ice Block was annoying, but the increased time on the Hypothermia debuff is pathetic.

GG Blizz.

[Vilu]

Hypothermia nerf is highly justified.

Just like the blue posted, it's ridicilously easy for the mage/his team to fill the gap of 'nololblock'. Currently, mages are unkillable (unless they're extremely bad players, but what's the point on balancing the game around that?) and hence very bad targets in the race for first blood in arena.
This makes them nigh untouchable, which obviously nobody should be. 15 more seconds time to overcome the immense defenses mages have atleast gives a chance to go after the mage. Good teams will still survive it, but bad ones might end up with giving up first blood.

PS. Ofcourse the devs buff the classes they play.
Carry on.

[Tyveris]

Hypothermia nerf is highly justified.

Just like the blue posted, it's ridicilously easy for the mage/his team to fill the gap of 'nololblock'. Currently, mages are unkillable (unless they're extremely bad players, but what's the point on balancing the game around that?) and hence very bad targets in the race for first blood in arena.
This makes them nigh untouchable, which obviously nobody should be. 15 more seconds time to overcome the immense defenses mages have atleast gives a chance to go after the mage. Good teams will still survive it, but bad ones might end up with giving up first blood.

PS. Ofcourse the devs buff the classes they play.
Carry on.
Mages are far from unkillable. If they get themselves out of position, with a well timed mass dispel, it is completely feasible. I think the complaints here from mages are plenty justified considering the dev's reactions to the mage inquiries on the buffs.

"Mage-Warrior is the most one sided matchup in the game"
It is no worse than Warlock-Mage.

[Ultimecia]

Forgive me brothers, I went to the dark side.

[Swift]

"Mage-Warrior is the most one sided matchup in the game"
It is no worse than Warlock-Mage.

He also forgets to mention that a warrior with heals/dispels is easily better than a mage, while a mage with dispels/heals can almost lose a 2v1 to a warlock. Also, warriors who use spell reflect well can beat many mages.

[Tyveris]

He also forgets to mention that a warrior with heals/dispels is easily better than a mage, while a mage with dispels/heals can almost lose a 2v1 to a warlock. Also, warriors who use spell reflect well can beat many mages.
Regardless, I could handle being the weakest class if the devs wouldn't throw random curve ball nerfs at us for 1v1 balance (something the game is not supposed to be balanced around).

And the kicker, when we ask why, they give us asshole responses like:

Eyonix: "Keeping feedback constructive is to your own advantage. I promise you."
Drysc: "You forgot about the 10 buffs mages got."

[Alphatier]

This is the funniest thread ever.
Mages being part of 2345
Mages being part of the holy trinity
Mages being part of healer / warlock / mage
Mages being part of rogue / mage or warlock / mage

Yea, exactly, there are no combos at all where a mage shines.

I hate to see people always seeing the negative. Why don't you start to see the positive, for once. You are a good class. You are viable in PvE as well as in PvP.

And please stop whining about Kalgan being a warrior. Warrior aren't like the super masters of the universe. It's funny that mages say that, their obvious counter-class. You shouldn't even need hypothermia once against a warrior. And if you do, you are grouping up with the wrong partners, sorry for that, but you can't chose freely.
But when mages say that warriors are overpowered in every bracket (lol), what should rogues say?
It's like warlocks QQing about mages

[Xasha]

It doesn't really matter that Mages are impossible to kill w/o a Priest, because if you interrupt or CC them properly they'll either be ineffective, or they'll just go OOM and no longer pose a threat.

Honestly I really don't see why the second nerf was needed, the first one was quite enough (and that one was justified). The nerfing would only be necessary if Mages were dominating 2s (since that's where its most powerful IMO), but they are far from being viable in 2s, so...

[Pharaun]

I don't see the point in the nerf, but I also don't see how this is because of K's warrior - if that were the case you'd think something more along the lines of a frost nova / snare / sheep nerf...

[Tyveris]

Mages being part of rogue / mage or warlock / mage


Rogue / Mage is barely viable. Warlock / Mage is only viable because of the warlock. We are not a powerful 2v2 class at all. Check the stats: http://vhairi.blogspot.com/

This change will hurt a lot in that bracket which leads us to wonder why? the responses we are getting are frustrating and indicate that it is being balanced around 1v1.

In regards to the negativity, it is a result of the way the devs are reacting to our questions on their changes. If you haven't seen how Eyonix and Drysc have responded to the questions about "why", you should check it out. It is adding to our frustration level.

[anubis]

From a shadow priests perspective (which is what I usually am) I've always thought it's pretty lame that the CD on hypothermia is shorter than my silence. so if I'm fighting a good frost mage, they'll almost always just IB my silence, and then when I go to silence again when the CD is up they're able to just IB out of it again with cold snap.

Lame imo.

[Duraeas]

I find myself wondering if any people at Blizzard play PvP at the higher levels of competition. Some may say "of course", but I don't think its necessarily the case. It would certainly explain why certain classes get buffed/nerfed with no preceding complaints by the general player base. This recent nerf is an example. Say Kalgan's Warrior was unable to kill a very good Mage: "Oh, their survivability is too high", when in reality they just didn't have a team with Freedom, or with a competent dispeller. I'm not saying this is what happened, but I think this can be used to explain a lot of inconsistencies.

Paladin's recently received huge nerfs to BoSac and BoF. Freedom is easily dispelled, but I won't argue that point. Sacrifice was a way to compensate for our complete lack of an instantly-cast or time-efficient 1.5 second heal. However, from a Mage's point of view, all you see is a class that you can't polymorph. It's impossible to see the real balances of this game in PvP until you play every class at a fairly high level of play. The best you can hope for is that your class has someone in the company playing it. Sadly, for Paladins this isn't the case. Not entire sure if it's the case for Mages either.

[Tyveris]

From a shadow priests perspective (which is what I usually am) I've always thought it's pretty lame that the CD on hypothermia is shorter than my silence. so if I'm fighting a good frost mage, they'll almost always just IB my silence, and then when I go to silence again when the CD is up they're able to just IB out of it again with cold snap.

Lame imo.
Again, the issue is Blizzard is not supposed to be making balance changes around 1v1. This is the line they have been using whenever anyone brings up warlock 1v1 balance.

[anubis]

Again, the issue is Blizzard is not supposed to be making balance changes around 1v1. This is the line they have been using whenever anyone brings up warlock 1v1 balance.

If the game was balanced at the 1v1 level wouldn't the same hold true for larger scale fights?

[Tyveris]

If the game was balanced at the 1v1 level wouldn't the same hold true for larger scale fights?
Oh I agree it should be more balanced at the 1v1 level, but they have consistently stated that they are not balancing for 1v1.

[anubis]

Oh okay I misunderstood you.

[Stonz]

While I don't really care whether hypothermia is nerfed or not, the suggestion that mages are one of the weakest classes in PvP is pretty far-fetched in my opinion.

Yes, Arcane/Fire mages are pretty crappy in PvP, but Frost Mages are certainly on the stronger side of the balance line. Excellent damage, fantastic cc, roots, snares and overall survivability.

I honestly believe they are the most powerful class that noone complains about, which makes them balanced in my eyes.

Frost mages don't need any more help in PvP, and they probably don't need nerfs either.

[buena]

Mages WERE and still will be a very difficult-to-kill first target. Yet this was balanced with the fact that they require standing still, not being hit, continued GCDs, and continued LoS in order to consistently output damage. And with the fact that they quickly run out of mana while doing so.

In other words, mages are hard to kill but not extremely effective. Any nerf to survivability risks upsetting that balance, particularly since they are far less effective still when targeted - frostbolting becomes impossible and polymorphing difficult. I don't think 15 more seconds is a deal breaker, but it's pushing pretty close. If mages get too much easier to kill, they won't be worth bringing at all because they will be consistantly targeted and their effectiveness will drop drastically. They are only balanced because their strong survivability skills make them a poor choice of target, allowing them to operate freely.

I am also surprised that priests are listed as a class that deserves to be nerfed more than mages. Of the 5 characters I play competitive arena with, I feel my priest (BR spec) is the weakest. My druid would be a more effective character than him in nearly any situation.

Priests and mages have in common that they are relatively straightforward in their effectiveness but have some big downsides that can be used to counter them. For priests this is their utter lack of self-defense or mobility, for mages it is their dependence on interruption-free time to cast and line of sight. For this reason I feel that as strategy evolves and players get better and better at arena, priests and mages will be more and more passed by. Largely in favor of druids and warlocks.

As a final opinion, ice mage vs warrior is no longer the most one sided matchup in WoW - that's a leftover thought from 60. The most one sided matchup is probably warlock vs ele shaman or warlock vs fire mage, but warlock vs anything-with-a-mana-pool is pretty close.

[Grup]

Rogue / Mage is barely viable. Warlock / Mage is only viable because of the warlock. We are not a powerful 2v2 class at all. Check the stats: http://vhairi.blogspot.com/

This change will hurt a lot in that bracket which leads us to wonder why? the responses we are getting are frustrating and indicate that it is being balanced around 1v1.

In regards to the negativity, it is a result of the way the devs are reacting to our questions on their changes. If you haven't seen how Eyonix and Drysc have responded to the questions about "why", you should check it out. It is adding to our frustration level.

Barely viable?

http://www.wowarmory.com/team-info.xml?r=Archimonde&ts=2&t=Carpe+Diem+Forever&select=Carpe+Diem+Forever

Don't forget shadow priest/frost mage, a fairly godly 2v2 when played right.

http://www.wowarmory.com/team-info.xml?r=Anub%27arak&ts=2&t=iceblink+and+icelove&select=iceblink+and+ic

http://www.wowarmory.com/team-info.xml?r=Archimonde&ts=2&t=we+r+Yongari+u+r+Korea&select=we+r+Yongari+u

Most high rated 2v2 shaman teams also include a warlock...so you could basically say the same thing about shaman and warlocks making those teams viable. I think we can all agree that warlocks are pretty godly in 2v2. I think both shaman and mages have a few problems, survivability is not one of them. Really, frost mages had ridiculous survivability as it is, and warriors already got a big nerf with the BoF change (dispel it?).

[Genkei]

Oh okay I misunderstood you.

Hi anubis!

[buena]

For 3v3 and 5v5, brackets where they are more balanced, mages and warlocks have basically the same role: DPS one target while controlling others. They can both do this effectively, though with different advantages.

Mage
Better at controlling melee
More potential DPS spike
Harder to kill
Harder to lock down

Warlock
Better at controlling casters
Better at controlling healers
Can drain mana
Doesn't run out of mana
More durable and permanent pet to keep enemies in combat
More useful conjured item
Can do high damage without casting


These current advantages are fairly close to balanced, so that player skill and team composition should be the determining factor in who fills this role. Warlocks have more advantages but mages have a couple very big ones, specifically:

Harder to kill
Harder to lock down

Ice block is a large part of both of these advantages. I use it to counter control as much if not more than I use it to counter damage targeting. And part of the reason for that is because it is such a good survival skill that few teams target me.

Any nerf to ice block is a nerf to the core advantages that make mages equivalent to warlocks as a DPS/CC class in 3v3 and 5v5. A truly significant nerf would result in mages simply being inferior to warlocks for this role. But is 15 seconds longer hypothermia significant or not? Only time can really tell - my personal inclination is that it isn't quite dealbreaking, but it's pushing awfully close. The moment mages go from "ignore or CC" to "valid kill target" in the minds of enemies, they lose a ton of effectiveness in both of their duel roles.

[Cynik]

Retiring my mage from 2v2 permanently....
If your class starts with "War-" 2v2 is for you !