I can understand why.
If MM was top 5, then we’d see them in the top 5 once we move up to the 95 and 99 percentiles. As well if there was some elite strategy that no one but a select few knew about we’d also see a massive variance in parses.
I understand that in your raid or dungeons group MM might do well and contribute to it’s success, but in more competitive raid groups the data doesn’t lie, MM is weaker than Surv and MM is one of the worst PVE specs currently.
1 Like
I can’t count on others, but I can always count on Kripparrian to help me 
.
Solid point.
If it was a skill issue you’d see a low floor, but a high ceiling. What you actually see is a floor thats higher than several other specs like arcane mage, but a much lower ceiling… So those specs actually perform worse in the hands of low-skilled players, but much better in the hands of high-skilled ones, but hunters are more consistent(ly bad) regardless of skill level indicating skill is less of a factor
1 Like
You seem like a chiller, but this doesn’t qualify as a “sample size.”
Seems like you’re taking a single hunter you know that plays MM, and then (without actually completing the current content) deciding she does alright, and therefore, MM ain’t too bad. There’s nothing really valuable about that insight. I could probably take my 5600 GS Rogue to your raid, play Sub PvE and likely top your meters, but that doesn’t change the fact that Sub is one of the worst specs in the game.
This thread is discussing actual damage across the game (warcraftlogs) and trying to figure out how a class that was S-Tier this phase on private servers is currently like D-Tier on Classic servers. While private servers were never perfect, this is a huge deviation from what was expected, and likely has something to do with coding. In fact, for most of Wotlk Classic it seems there’s been some sort of + to spell coding and - to physical coding.
1 Like
People have to look at warcraftlogs for the bigger picture, you can’t rely on details/recount and your guild for comparison, you have to compare with the rest of the playerbase.
Also all specs are viable and can clear the content but that doesn’t mean we shouldn’t fix/buff/nerf them. Private servers always had bugs and issues that never get discovered and fixed. To see how MM was going back in original Wotlk we need actual data from there, not private servers.
1 Like
Are any of the private server log sites that still exist? A lot of them closed up shop when Classic released, but it’d be neat to compare pserver logs to WotLK Classic logs and see where the discrepancy is.
EDIT: I found a website called “uwu-logs” that has pserver logs, and it looks like their steady shot does WAY more damage than ours. My average steady shot on a fight without damage bonuses is 2172 noncrit, 5386 crit. Theirs are 4201 noncrit, 10799 crit.
Of course they’re in ICC gear, but I don’t think Steady Shot damage is going to outright double in ICC.
1 Like
That is because of the armor pen nerf of 3.3
1 Like
I don’t disagree but then even I wonder just how useful logs are when they are cutting certain things out of them to come to their numbers. Certain specs are going to be better at certain things, but if you are cutting out something that the spec may excel at is it actually a true barometer of how it is doing?
I mean yeah they may be excluding those components because it can be used to artificially inflate numbers, but isn’t that also artificially lowering them as well?
So for example an Arcane mage is always going to be strong on single target fights, where for instance an Elemental Shaman is going to do better when you have multiple targets on a fight, but if you are removing those secondary damage sources it means the Elemental Shaman isn’t shining on the fights it should while the Arcane mage isn’t being pushed down in the fights it should.
I’ll be the first to admit that I’m fairly new to the whole logs thing as I never really cared tbh. Only real reason we even started messing with them in TBC was just as a tool to kind of see what was going on within the group, not really something to be used as an overall comparison.
I definitely don’t see why anyone should be basing anything off of private server numbers though. We know that despite their best efforts there was always some wonky stuff going on there and we found out even with Vanilla Classic that certain things didn’t turn out to be the way people remembered. I would be interested to see a log from the original WotLK though as a comparative to see how things existed then vs now.
I’d also be interested in how much the gearing changes from Ulduar, and just overall thoughts on gearing back then has affected some of these rankings.
1 Like
Logs are extremely useful when determining the viability of specs. Traditionally we want to rely on Logs more often than any other metric as logs take much more into account and are actual player data as apposed to Sims which don’t take boss mechanics or movement into account.
I totally understand your point about logs taking certain things out of them, but predominantly Logs remove padding more than anything else. Padding can come in many forms but generally padding occurs when doing major AOE to smaller summons. I.e the little cats on Auriaya.
This unfortunately actual only helps the idea that MM is in a poor place, as they are the single target damage dealer compared to the more AOE focused Surv.
2 Likes
No, not really. The way this playerbase plays the game means the vast majority will be playing the “meta” specs and people playing less optimal specs will generally be in worse guilds, and many will be PvP players buying PvP gear skewing the median down.
You should try Marks out for a single raid week and see how you fare against your best Survival numbers. I don’t think you will, because people are so afraid of trying something the community deems unviable or less than optimal.
Log are quite important, I understand your concerns regarding, lower population numbers and PVP players. But when determining viability we aren’t looking at the general overview, instead we’re focusing on the 95th and 99th percentiles. Anyone in the 95th and 99th percentile is well geared, knowledgeable about their class and traditionally has a solid raid comp.
Well it is true that MM players won’t be invited to the 9 Unholy DK speed run Raid team, that only effects a small portion of the results.
Compound this with the fact that many extremely high ranked hunters change to MM (to cheese a higher parse), and we can be certain that MM’s performance is noticeably worse than Surv’s. (Because if it was comparable damage wise then they’d just stick with the easier and more forgiving MM rotation)
1 Like
This is false. Virtually all the top damaging Hunters in the best guilds have not played anything but Survival. They’re not going to swap to MM because they want to compete on the “meta” spec and every week is another chance at improving those parses with good RNG.
Marks would be significantly closer to Survival on logs if an equal number of top players were playing it.
Many Hunters have played other specs than Surv, myself included. Yet every hunter player will tell you that Survival is clearly superior to the other options for PVE content.
I’ll attach a few really great hunter player’s logs down below and you’ll be able to see many of them have tried out MM (and Parsed extremely high with the spec) yet always return to Surv.
.classic.warcraftlogs.com/character/US/Mankrik/Xøren (lots of MM 99’s in Ulduar)
.classic.warcraftlogs.com/character/US/Mankrik/Whewlad (once again has kills logged on MM but mainly sticks to Surv)
.classic.warcraftlogs.com/character/US/Mankrik/Chaotichunts (has parses in both Uld and ToGC in MM)
.classic.warcraftlogs.com/character/EU/Gehennas/Çv (Played BM on Ulduar to get all 100’s)
.classic.warcraftlogs.com/character/EU/Gehennas/Razgorr (MM Ulduar kills)
All of theses’ players are top tier and mainly play Surv but have 99’s and 100’s in other specs.
If MM was just as good then they swapped over from Surv to play MM (or BM)
I tried, but i was swiftly benched from the progression raid by the survival hunter who joined the guild less than a week prior. It didnt matter how much i did mechanically, how much time i spent running titan rune runs for gear and badges and how many months of previous raiding I had already run with the guild. A spec with “better” numbers than me arrived and i was out.
The other dude didnt even use tranq shot, but the bigger numbers still trumped me out
1 Like
What we really need is Kripparrian to play MM, dude would be beating unholy death knights 
.
I didn’t say it was just as good, I’m saying it’s closer than it appears on logs.
I just swapped my 4.7 MM to Survival. Sadly, it’s much better, though I enjoy it a lot less than MM.
I almost wish for Blizz to add in some “custom” glyph that would be something like:
Increases your auto attack damage by 25%, but reduces potency of your Immolate trap by 80%"
to get rid of trap weaving. Ruins the whole hunter fantasy vibe of being a range “assassin”. Sniffing every boss’s butt is definitely not as appealing to me as it may be others.
But my new guild needs a hunter for our alt runs. So I will suck it up and do my best regardless.
The only thing that keeps me going is the fact that during ICC I will be able to swap to MM, altho trap weaving aint going anywhere 
1 Like
I wouldn’t mind sniffing jaraxxus’s butt 
.
Im sorry but a hunter uses traps.