Didn't Blizzard mention EXACTLY this issue when they started talking about class redesigns? Dispel protection was turning into an arms race that was just a step or two away from rogues getting dispel protection for their poisons. So they removed most of the protections and jacked the cost of dispels sky high (And made dispels fire off whether or not there was anything to dispel) to try and force a balancing act and some choice/consequences into the whole affair.

Whether that was successful or not is open to debate, but something tells me asking for dispel protection isn't going to happen. Remember too that every DoT the opposing healer dispels is that much less mana he has to keep his allies up.

@Ilmyrn

Have you played against even a middling resto shaman lately? yeah, they ONLY dispel. Thats it. Thank god for the nerfs they're getting in 4.1. good grief.

@Ilmyrn

I can agree that there doesn't need to exist an arms race between the power of dispels and dispel protection. In an ideal game, Unstable Affliction's and Vampiric Touch's dispel proc wouldn't exist -- nor would Flame Shocks, because people always forget that elemental has one too.

But, I cannot agree with you that it is debatable that dispels are currently too strong. It is rather clear that dispels are far too powerful in PvP right now.

Here's something to think about. Dispel Magic costs 16% of a priest's base mana pool, and it removes 2 harmful effects from a player. Immolate costs 8% of the warlock's base mana pool and Corruption costs 6%. So, by expending 16% mana, the priest negates the damage from spells that cost 14% mana. That isn't an expensive choice.

And then you have to factor in healing costs. Flash Heal and Greater Heal both cost a priest more mana than Dispel Magic would. The only way that they would conserve mana by healing instead of dispeling is through the use of Heal, which is only 9% base mana (and then whatever less after talents.) Further, allowing Immolate to stay on the target would increase the damage than target takes, which would in turn require more healing.

So, unless a single Heal is going to mitigate all the damage from Immolate and Conflag, plus any additional damage gained to the warlock's other spells via talents or natural benefits such as with Incinerate, then the most mana conservative method of healing is to use Dispel Magic.

Yes, in the sort term of trading off Immolate with Dispel Magic, the priest would run out faster, but in the long term, they end up conserving more mana because they have to cast fewer healing spells in order to keep a player alive, and they don't run the risk of being interrupted. In short, there is no down side to using dispels, every other option is worse.

As I see it, the problem is less that Immolate is vulnerable to dispels, but that Conflagrate is. If the dispel just prevents damage, that strikes me as 100% fair as a vulnerability of the Lock class, but the lack of a key element of the Destro locks' rotation is more significant, both as an Instant spell, but also since it hastens your other spells in the meanwhile.

One solution would be to have the dispelling of an Immolate proc Backdraft. It might be too similar to the Ele Shaman's FS protection, but it might work. Alternately, and this one is wicked out-there, but have an Immo dispel proc a form of Nether Protection. It's kinda strange, but I kind of like the idea of a dispelled lock gaining some sort of survival benefit.

WTB a "Trollface" option beside the up/down rating here :D

@thebitterfig This. Exactly this. While the damage from immolate is a big part of destro damage the real benefit of having immolate is what it enables, without it there is no conflagrate and therefore we get a neutered incinerate with -%20 damage and a much increased cast time. When you think about all the consequences it's pretty amazing how much one dispel can ruin a destro lock