Explosive trap is the offender that makes trap weaving a dps increase. You know, the trap for aoe damage, yet it extreamly strong for single target…
1 Like
Make it so your character dies when you use explosive trap, easy fix 
.
1 Like
Well I definitely understand that adding additional parses would raise the top DPS, it would more than likely be an insignificant change. With 32,490 parses logged in a two week time frame enough variance would be accounted for that increasing the number of parses to 300,000+ would yield only a small increase to overall dps.
Currently the dps difference between a 99 MM and a 99 Survival is around 1000 (slightly lower on average).
1 Like
I don’t know how else I can explain this. If you had the top 1000 Survival Hunters go Marks for half their raids, the top few percent of Survival parses would drop and the Marks would rise.
There’s only ONE Marks Hunter in a 25m Heroic Anub zerg kill and he’s 3,300 DPS ahead of the 2nd highest Marks Hunter. What do you think would happen to the Anub parses if the top 39 Survival Hunters who all have a zerg kill went Marks for half their kills?
The gap would close, just like it would for every other fight.
99 isn’t just a few outliers.
No it wouldn’t.
At least, not by enough to really matter.
Looking st the 99th percentile already accounts for low number of total parses to see what the spec is truely capable of. Sure it might go up a little if the best parser from SV did a MM parse, but it wouldnt be enough to move MM ranking by very much
As a quick example
https://classic.warcraftlogs.com/zone/statistics/1018#dataset=99
MM is at 79 points.
Even if it gains 5 points just from better hunters doing the 99th percentile parse that would still barely move it above blood dk dps. And thats assuming that the better hunters would do at least 7.5% better than the rest of the current 99th percentile MM parses, which would be a big increase.
Looking at the 99th percentile already factors in the “skill issue”
1 Like
No, it doesn’t. I’ve explained this numerous times and if people don’t get it… I can’t force them to understand.
I’ll try once more with the Anub example. There is only a single MM Hunter in the world with a zerg Anub kill (2:xx mins). That means every single 99 parsing MM Hunter in the world is in a submerge phase Anub kill and doing thousands less DPS because of it.
1 Like
I’m 5743 gearscore and I swapped to MM just for fun for the past two raids, I beat my best SV damage numbers on Beasts and Twin Valkyrs but I’m in a casual GDKP guild so we’re not super parsers.
Also, it’s not really easier to parse as less played specs, the volume of players at all levels on the more meta specs really helps bring up the shiny orange/pink number. On Jaraxxus as SV, I did 11.5k (rank 5000, parse of 90) on MM I did 11k even (rank 250, parse 97). If I was rank 250 on SV, that would be a 99.
Been there, done that. MM is way down, the spec needs very high armor penetration and excessive amount of attack power to compete and even then, both specs stays middle of the pack. Imagine ranking 10-15th dps but still getting a 99 parse, that’s MM today.
Such gear dependency is usually rewarded with very good high end performance like you can see with Fury and Combat except here we have a bottom of the barrel spec reaching middle of the pack as peak performance.
2 Likes
https://classic.warcraftlogs.com/character/us/pagle/silika
Uhhh, it looks like you’re outdamaging your Survival parses as MM.
He is parsing higher as MM. His actual damage per second is lower than an equal parse number of SV though.
2 Likes
That’s the disconnect you guys are having in your logic. You’re not understanding that the current ceiling for MM parses is lower. Do you think he’s just a whatever SV Hunter and a godlike MM Hunter? You think his skill between two specs varies so much?
No, it’s because a 99 on MM is far easier to obtain. The specs are closer than people realize but they don’t know how to analyze and properly interpret the data they’re seeing on WCL.
Find people who are playing both specs and look at the numbers.
personal skill is a very small component of parsing. it’s mostly about kill times, gear, cheese, and luck. mm hunter isn’t even complicated. it plays a lot like surv, but easier.
Here’s another random “top” MM Hunter I pulled up:
There’s going to be outliers but most of the MM Hunters who also play SV look like this. The difference between the specs is smaller than most people think it is.
MM is also a far easier and less rng reliant spec.
The difference between the specs is small on purely single target. The moment aoe is added in. Sv pulls ahead a lot (10%+) because its damage is capable of being strong on multiple targets at once.
In fact in bis icc gear MM will have better single target than SV. But we are not fighting target dummies. There are adds, cleave, etc. And thats what pushes SV ahead.
1 Like
My Surv parses are pretty bad this phase tbh, I mostly play MM right now but if you look at Ulduar, I was doing the same damage as Surv back then in comparison to now as MM with ~12 more average ilvl.
Yes I get that the sample is much smaller as MM but the gap between Surv and MM is definitely noticeable right now which is about 12%, it’s not a huge gap but it’s there enough to be apparent. My 99 parse as a 10-15th dps would only change to ~95-98 if sample was much bigger and my recount/details rank would still be bad.
I can see the gap in the picture you posted, those surv parses can definitely go higher in DPS while the MM parses are almost capped.
2 Likes
Hey there, I 100% understand that the gap would start to close if more players were on playing MM rather than Surv, but I think the difference would still leave Surv as the undisputed superiors spec (i.e leaving MM in the C tier were Surv would continue to be a B tier spec).
There are two elements that I think we need to take into consideration. Firstly the DPS difference between Surv and MM and secondly how much would the ceiling change if all the top Hunters were to alternate between MM and Surv.
So for DPS lets take a look at two sets of numbers one for non zerg kills and the other for zerg kills. Starting off with MM non zerg kills we have an average dps of 9397.3 (top players) and for Surv has average dps of 10,599.42 (top players) with a difference of 1,202.09 dps.
Now lets say all these players were to swap over to MM for a raid or two, next we need to take a look a the variance found in each group. For MM will take the second best parse at 10,038.5 and the 100th best parse at 8968.4 leaving us a difference of 1,070.10. On the other hand we have Surv which will start with the 42 best parse (non zerg) at 11,026.5 and the 141th best parse at 10,271.0 which is a difference of 751.90.
For Zerg kills we can see a much different picture won’t be statically accurate (due to the single MM parse). But from a top figure approach we can see that MM Maxed out at 13,321.3 dps and Surv Maxed out at 15,338.1. Right away this isn’t a fair comparison as Surv got 40 chances at Zerg kills as apposed to the single chance MM got. Instead it would most likely be better to look at the difference between the top zerg parse vs the highest non-zerg parse. For MM that difference is 3282.8 and for Survival that difference is 4311.6.
What we can see with these figures is that you are 100% correct that because Survival has a larger population it’s level of play is more consistently high and it’s top player variance is lower than MM. Unfortunately with the number the way they currently are even if Surv players swapped over their we’d only realistically expect them to find an additional 318.2 dps (the difference between the Surv and MM variance) . Now if we add that 318.2 dps onto all the MM parses they would still be around ~700 dps lower than their Survival counterparts.
5 Likes
What the data needs is a true MM hunter like Kripparrian to tip the scale on logs 
.
Yeah, my argument has never been that MM is better, simply that it’s closer than it appears at a glance on logs. If we had exactly equivalent circumstances, the seemingly large gap between the two specs would close somewhat.