Portal   Forum   Members   Market   Gallery   Events

frost versus fire

Discussion in 'Character Building' started by Jakeman, Apr 23, 2007.

  1. Jakeman

    Jakeman MSC Founder and Donator

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2000
    Messages:
    25,756
    Likes Received:
    27
    Market Rating:
    16
    I am not going in the direction of armory profiles. If that takes away from my position then so be it. I prefer general arguments because they aren't subject to confusion over minutia. Even my general argument about threat was confused by Wulf. It becomes increasingly difficult to maintain a good discussion when we start arguing over smaller and smaller facets of the issue. I am willing to go that route in troll threads of mine, but that is not my goal in this case.

    Fire mages don't argue armory profiles to support their observations because they feel confident in their ability to do #1 dmg, and so do I. Threads like this in support of fire mages usually have a little bit of math followed by the conclusion that no one can beat fire. Then a frost mage like me comes in and is asked for specifics out of disbelief as if starting with the conclusion that fire must necessarily do more dmg. I prefer a more scientific approach that doesn't begin with a conclusion.

    You will notice that I have not addressed all counterarguments. If something can be countered then you can expect me to do so. Otherwise I simply accept the validity of the opposing argument and move on. Some of my arguments have been successfully countered so I have been falling back on other arguments like threat, an argument which so far has not been countered from what I can see. If I have accepted your counters and you have accepted mine, then we might be done with the discussion.

    We can safely assume that dmg = threat when comparing a fire mage and a frost mage in the same group / raid since both of them have 10% threat reduction in talents and both will have the same pally blessings. I have never grouped with a shaman that used his threat totem.

    And I have accepted those stated reasons. Granted that both of our raw dps arguments have some fudge room, but I am content to accept your arguments with the fudge since mine are also caked with it. But the "strict dps" arguments ignore my point about the threat ceiling which seems better equipped to explain my observation. Can we agree that my threat ceiling argument is valid?
     
  2. Lurk

    Lurk Peasant and Donator

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2000
    Messages:
    2,586
    Likes Received:
    47
    Market Rating:
    0
    A zero threat damage source is a powerful thing to have, no doubt, and as I said the WE is the single biggest factor of a frost build that allows it to be competitive.

    I am not convinced the threat aspect is decisive. Many 10/48/3 mages do just fine topping damage meters regardless of the "threat ceiling." I maintain that the ceiling can be made a non-factor, but that it is dependent on those in the raid. There will be the times when a string of mage crits coincides with a string of tank misses/parries, but if as a rule a fire mage is holding back so as not to pull aggro I'd speculate 1 of 3 things:

    1. The mage outgears the tank by too wide a margin.
    2. The tank sucks.
    3. The mage sucks.
     
  3. Wulf

    Wulf MSC Knight and Donator

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2000
    Messages:
    4,856
    Likes Received:
    10
    Market Rating:
    0
    I will admit that this whole thing becomes rather pointless in the next patch, since Frosts base damage is being brought in line with Fires. Basically they are slowly becoming elemental mirrors of each other. Frost represents more of a safe route, while fire the more dangerous one. One has a 41 point talent that does a farm house falling on a witches worth of damage, and the other a farm house thrown at a witch plank by planks worth. Either way... I just love being a Mage. :D
     
  4. Lurk

    Lurk Peasant and Donator

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2000
    Messages:
    2,586
    Likes Received:
    47
    Market Rating:
    0
    Are you talking about the buff to Arctic Winds?

    The idea is there's supposed to be a tradeoff between specs. I choose to sacrifice the survivability and control of Frost, and the burst damage potential of Arcane, for the higher sustained DPS of Fire. All things being equal, if a hard to kill Frostie or a 3-minute Arcane mage can match my minute-to-minute DPS potential, that is bad design IMO. What has a Frost mage given up?

    Homogeneity between classes and specs is boring. Then the game becomes a choice of which spell effect is your favorite color.

    EDIT: For the theorycrafting geeks, 2.1 mage calcs with various specs:

    http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=96123972&sid=1
     
    Last edited: Apr 26, 2007
  5. Jakeman

    Jakeman MSC Founder and Donator

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2000
    Messages:
    25,756
    Likes Received:
    27
    Market Rating:
    16
    I have found that the latest version of theorycraft overstates my frost numbers by a large amount.
     
  6. Lurk

    Lurk Peasant and Donator

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2000
    Messages:
    2,586
    Likes Received:
    47
    Market Rating:
    0
    If you're talking about the mod, yeah I remember reading that it does not calculate damage scaling correctly, or something like that.
     
  7. Jakeman

    Jakeman MSC Founder and Donator

    Joined:
    Feb 26, 2000
    Messages:
    25,756
    Likes Received:
    27
    Market Rating:
    16
    The latest Artic Winds change (+5% frost damage) is having an interesting effect on the mage community. The usual damage calculations still put fire on top, but people are ignoring that and trying frost anyways just because the talent sounds good. Now many people are coming to the conclusion that frost can dps just fine whereas before it couldn't. No one is really providing any good arguments as to why that is, it's just an unsupported statement based on a desire to justify a talent that sounds good.

    5% damage is nice but it isn't huge. That equates to about 80 damage for me. This sudden change of opinion about frost seems unjustified in the rational sense which was used to come to the opposite conclusion before. If it's good now then it was barely less good before, but still in line with current judgments.

    Many people also seem to have abandoned the absolute arguments in favor of "good enough" arguments for frost. What about their precious calculations?

    People are also expressing new opinions about old frost talents that haven't changed or were changed very little. I see lots of praise about winter's chill and emp frostbolt rolled into threads about frost's new damage (two talents which haven't chagned). People act like 175 more HP on ice barrier is huge. And the bug fixes to the water elementals are treated like buffs (it did the same damage prepatch and had enough mana to last 90% of the duration instead of 100%, very marginal. Plus the bugginess where it wouldn't attack could be learned to be avoided through timely manual targetting.)

    I don't think any conclusions can be drawn from this recent shift towards frost. People are whimsical.
     
  8. Lurk

    Lurk Peasant and Donator

    Joined:
    Jul 19, 2000
    Messages:
    2,586
    Likes Received:
    47
    Market Rating:
    0
    Necromancy ftw.

    I saw a post on the WoW forums that made me think of this thread. The poster is Lhivera, an avid theorycrafter who admits that while Fire does better in theory, he is nonetheless a Frost mage.

     

Hitometer: 53,594,231 since 1995