@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.