Nerf Thread on General

If there is a nerff, I believe this would be the best way. This would make Barb’s builds a little more balanced but would keep WW speeds as they are.

My point wasn’t to do a pairwise comparison of ranks.

I agree with class popularity being a factor that will skew the data. That is why looking at GR efficiency can be helpful.

No. I would critique data analysis that does not make sense. In my example, I was able to calculate the likelihood of the event occurring to be 1 in 10^43. The age of the universe is thought to be 14 billion years or 4x 10^17 seconds in comparison.

“I don’t have access to all the data, yet I am still trying to analyse the data, and tell the people who do have access to all the data why they are wrong and I am right!!!”

I originally thought you were trolling us.

But apparently it’s your own ego trolling your own common sense.

1 Like

I’ve pointed out how that is not the best way, because it would be a much larger nerf than 4-5 tiers. But there’s no nerf incoming, so there’s nothing really to discuss.

@ Everyone else: Please don’t engage with trolls and Fun Police. They’ve been shut down via official channels, and the more you interact, the more present they are. Ignore what they post wherever they post it, and eventually they will fade.


Well man, why are you beating your head against Blizzard’s wall of secrecy? You know as well as I do if they don’t give you all the numbers you will end up “blowen farts in the wind” no matter what you do.

You should use your talent to help get the 3 lower classes Buffed up. Help get the proper Buffs that they need, I am sure you could be very helpful to them with your “dog and a bone” passion, to get them in the right direction and still keep things to the balance that Blizzard is striving for. Think about it anyway. :slightly_smiling_face:
Keep on a Spinning!

1 Like

I know that I am beating my head against a wall of secrecy but some information has been provided. If everything is self-evident, what is the fun in that?

I am trying to think about the various ways on how someone would analyze the data within the context of the information provided and how to fit the results provided.

LoL I am sure you will come up with something. :shushing_face:

I can’t find the ignore option on these new forums. Am I blind or did blizz just forget it?

It no longer exists, but by ignore I simply mean DO NOT RESPOND TO THEM, AT ALL, IN ANY FORUM, PERIOD.

Don’t give them the time of day or the attention or validation they so desperately seek.


If there will be no nerff, ok.
But IF there is, nerff lamentation or WW would affect not only push, but speeds (which represents the majority). That is why, if hard cast is removed, WW would be 141, but our speeds would be fine.

For the 2 people that have cleared 146?

I can see why they would go to all that trouble.

1 Like

It is not my statement. I just quoted what was said by DP. Whether or not HardCast represents 5lvl, I don’t know…
What I don’t want is for rend to be ruined for speeds

Yeah, I get that.

But A) there is already no change coming, and B) I can see why they are not going to bother going to that trouble to nerf two people.

If people were clearing 146 in massive numbers, and everyone was speed farming 140, then I could understand the discussion. But that just isn’t happening.

1 Like

You did notice that their table showed that the GR potential of crusaders @ 5K paragon in seasons was 136 and in non-season 138.

Previously, you claimed that the seasonal buff was completely overpowered. Their “official” data claims that seasonal buff REDUCED crusader GR clears by 2 GRs. How does this data fit your idea and what seemingly contradicts common sense?


As I stated on the other thread, their scaling model probably has some limitations and doesn’t work as well when looking at mostly lower paragon scaling to 5k to represent GR efficiency. In non season they have a wide range of paragon to scale as well as many 5k paragon players so the limitations of the scaling are made up for by having the larger range: 2k (low end), 5k (mid, and the desired scale), and 10k (upper end) data points. In season, that early on, their data points are only between 100-2000 paragon. You could see how that data is not going to be as accurate as the non seasonal data. Clearly.

I am not trying to bash anyone. I just wish that better logic could be applied.

How so? I gave Blizzard’s numbers. You and I agree that this difference relates to the limitations of scaling. A simple prediction of a scaling model is how well does it actually fit 5K players. For seasons, the data for 5K paragon players is more limited than non-seasons.

Confirmation bias is seeing what you want to see and ignoring evidence to the contrary. I am still working through the data to make a more thorough assessment but already you and I already recognize that the scaling is problematic to some extent due to limitations in the seasonal dataset and its extrapolations.

My post was about crusaders and to highlight that there are issues with the scaling method used at least between season and non-seasosns.

Thank you linesman, thank you ball boys!

Game over!


My apologies. I misread your intent. I thought you were arguing the opposite. Maybe could have been a little clearer on your point, but after re-examining, I see where I missed it.

All good.

It would be more accurate to say that a different dataset was used rather than a math error.

A math error is 1+1=3

A difference in dataset is saying 1+1=2; but another group choosing to analyze 2+1

For the dataset that I used and clearly defined, the calculations were mathematically correct.