They do listen to feedback, they just don’t agree with most of it.
It’s not begging the question at all, it’s literally caused by the way that rankings work.
If you took 100 people and had them each flip a coin 100 times, and then made a chart of those ordered by number of heads, then if you looked at the people at the top of that chart, of course you’d see unreasonably high rates of heads occurring.
That doesn’t mean the odds are broken, it means you’re succumbing to selection bias!
That’s precisely what you are doing. You’re specifically selecting those that get the best RNG odds and then arguing that those are representative samples. I’ll take Statistical Fallacies for 100, Alex (Rest In Peace )
Saying things in Latin doesn’t make you smart, or correct.
I wasn’t using that to disprove any assertion you made, I was pointing it out to head off an anticipated rebuttle based on a mistaken impression of those overhealing numbers.
My point is that your argument is that Spirit Mend pets would provide more healing. If that was the case, they would be at the top of HPS charts. Having some of the healing not accounted for wouldn’t change that fact since the HPS treats it as 0 regardless. That’s why it’s a circular argument.
There is a logical breakdown in your argument, but you’re not seeing it.
Or maybe I’m not seeing it. I’m open to that possibility, but you need to explain why Spirit Beast Hunters wouldn’t they be at the top of the HPS charts then. If they provided more healing in raids, that should show up at the top of the healing charts.
If you were trying to determine the best healer Class in the game, you wouldn’t sort by DPS. Why would you sort by DPS to determine the best healer pet in the game?
Do you know what this means?
The only selection criteria I’m using is “people who are logged.”
Selection Criteria - All BM Hunters who are logged.
Search Criteria: Actual HPS (not counting overheals or non-heals)
Results: Which pets are being used (This turned out to be Ferocity)
Because I am trying to find the best actual heals based on pet choice.
I duplicated this process on multiple fights and different levels of difficulty.
It’s fine to sort by DPS too, but you’re not including the how much healing is being done. That is the primary search parameter. You can select any group you want to, but if you don’t compare how much healing is actually being done, you’re missing the HPS part of HPS/Spec.
If you keep it up, I’m going to start accusing you of being a dev.
I’d like to see a qualitative analysis of damage prevented by SotF + healing from Spirit Mend over a 6 minute fight, compared with Leech healing and the massive buffs to Exhilaration over the same fight.
SotF and Spirit Mend being on demand means you will likely benefit from them when you need it most, where as the Leech would largely keep you topped up and be a fair amount of overhealing, but the Exhilaration difference might be enough to make the difference.
Ultimately I’d prefer they come out about the same and it be 100% down to player choice.
No. Stop misrepresenting my position (that’s a fallacy too, you know). I’ll spell it out nice and clear for you:
In the majority of raid encounters, Spirit Beasts (between Spirit Mend, SotF, and Survival Training) will provide more effective survivability than Ferocity pets.
Ferocity peaks higher, yes, if RNG is in your favor and you spend most of your time sub-100%. That’s why the tops of the healing charts, which represent the people that got all of the RNG and fight situations in their favor, are dominated by Ferocity. But in most raid fights, around half of that leech, if not more, is simply wasted.
Get it?
If not, let me explain it this way. Let’s say every ability you cast had a 1% chance of dealing 10% of the target’s remaining HP to it. Sometimes that happens at 100%. Sometimes that happens at 1%.
If you look at the DPS ranking, the people at the top would be the ones that got a bunch of procs when it made the most difference, near 100%. Maybe they get like 5 in a row and deal, ~41% of the target’s health to them nearly instantly.
On average, however, you’ll get about half that benefit. So if you look at the DPS rankings to evaluate that effect, ya, it’s going to look amazeballs compared to the average effect. If that were being compared against an ability that gave you, say, a 20% chance to deal 1% of the target’s HP in damage, the former would win by a mile on the DPS rankings, but the latter has, mathematically, double the average value.
That’s why looking at the HPS meters is faulty here. You’re looking at the cases where nearly 0% of that leech goes to waste and it occurs in all the right situations, and then saying that’s representative, when the data clearly shows that the more common effect is for half or more of that to simply be entirely wasted.
No, you are using an ordered list, and only looking at the top. The sorting criteria of that list is your selection bias. It’s honestly not that hard. You are extracting a sample from an unrepresentative set and trying to insist that it is representative.
This is exactly like the group of 100 people flipping a coin 100 times each. You’re selecting the top 10, ordered by number of heads, and insisting that a ~90% heads rate is normal and representative.
If all you care about is what pet has the absolute maximum potential healing, then yes, Ferocity is almost certainly it.
But that’s not actually what matters in most cases. What matters in most cases is which pet has the higher average benefit. You’re arguing for something that has a higher peak but a lower average, and claiming it is universally better. That’s like arguing that buying powerball tickets is the best source of income, because maybe you’ll get lucky and get a 2 billion jackpot on your first buy. Or maybe you’ll spent yourself into bankruptcy without ever winning anything relevant, which is the average result.
Tough to do, though, because of how fight tuning functions, and how few apples-to-apples comparisons can really be made. I did a bit of an analysis about 10-15 posts up, though.
I dug into some of the logs linked above. Anecdotal, but for the first Ferocity example I looked at, Leech did 101.5k effective healing, against 110.7k raw healing. Next one was 116.5k effective healing against 127.1k raw healing. Unless I’m fundamentally misunderstanding what the “healing” vs “raw healing” metric means.
That’s less than 10% overheal, which doesn’t seem possible unless there is a lot more low threat raid wide damage on H and M Shriekwing than I thought.
I also found an example with both Spirit Mend and Leech (presumably Leech from gear), but I couldn’t find it when I went back to look again and post numbers. WCL is a great tool but it does weird things with sorting sometimes.
Personally, I’ve run a spirit beast since I first tamed Loque back in Wrath. He was my first and I worked hard to get him. I like them, the utility has always been preferable even when I sacrificed DPS to use one in Legion. The fact most you have to work through a taming challenge to get just added to their appeal for me. So I disagree and certainly don’t think SBs are an “Abomination”.
I also disagree that they’re the only pet that’s viable for a hunter even though I know they’re the 'Meta" (And I seriously resent Blizzard for forcing that onto players in all classes, ALL specs should be equally viable in PVE progression through the story of an expansion and should be able to be competitive enough with each other to not have groups refuse a player because they aren’t the “Meta” spec flavor of the expansion Blizz chose to favor. But I digress)
Pick the pets you like, handle the variations in what they deliver for you by adjusting your playstyle. I know hunters who are running fine with a wind serpent, others doing great with a courser, if you’re BM? We’re screwed this expansion because Blizzard didn’t give us or Surv hunters two minutes worth of effort, something normal for BM and Surv usually was blessed in PVP but for some reason Blizz has decided only one spec per class should be useful or competitive across the board.
Play what you like, what you enjoy, make it work to the best of your ability and understand? This is nothing new for the class. Blizz has favored MM since BC with Legion being the only expansion so far that another spec in the class got competitive. If you want to play a hunter? You take the lumps for sticking with your preferred spec. I protest the lack of equal viability with my pocketbook. I unsub when my hunter gets kicked all the way to the curb because I prefer BM and always have. Didn’t play two minutes of BFA, didn’t pay for that expansion either, wouldn’t have played SL if they had demanded I buy BFA first, that’s how much I loathed what they did with that. I wasn’t alone it seems. You want to join the hunter players at the fire? You’re gonna get burned by Blizz, that goes with the class.
BC MM was hot garbage, everyone who was competitive ran BM, except the one token SV for Expose Weakness. MM was a PvP spec.
Wrath favored BM and SV in Naxx, specs were fairly balanced in Ulduar and ToC, and MM didn’t really take off until high armor pen builds became viable in ICC gear.
Cata and MoP had great balance across all Hunter specs.
WoD had great balance in Highmaul and BRF, and it wasn’t until the SV nerf in 6.2 and encounter design heavily favoring MM that MM became the meta.
Legion was better for BM than MM for about half the expansion because MM design was hot garbage, both specs were pretty balanced in Tomb of Sargeras and Antorus with SV a distant third.
BfA had SV as top dps in Uldir, BM over MM and SV mid expansion, and BM utterly destroying everything in 8.3 with Corruptions.
Shadowlands has MM on top right now, but based on past history I don’t expect it to stay that way past 9.1.5 or 9.2.
As I said before, leech events don’t even occur unless you’re below max health. So that overhealing only counts leech events that occurred, but then healed past 100%. A ton of leech’s “overhealing” is hidden by the fact that it simply fails to occur if you’re already at max HP and thus never gets logged.
Personally I wish S Beasts were still the meta pet in SL instead of clefthoof…its just too big…always standing on top of stuff I have to click in torghast, or deciding to move its fat butt right on top of a pile of corpses I’m trying to skin. Plus at least theres some variety with S Beasts…Clefthoof is just different colors of the same giant blob of a pet
I like spirit beasts. They come in a lot of varieties (wolf, cat, critter, owl, etc), so it’s not like I’m stuck with using all wolves or something. I do think they can improve this by getting more creative with spirit beast models and expanding the list of tameables.
And, animal companion/dire beast (with glyph) are nice so I get to show off my other pets. I can see why you’d feel that way, but personally, I don’t feel an issue with them.
Know what comes in even more varieties? Pets as a whole.
This is why having one pet family be “the best” is a problem. Spec-locking needs to go. Pet abilities should be freely selectable regardless of pet type.
Raid references. I’m personally not speaking just about raids. I’m talking about the over all utility of the spec and being able to do a variety of things with the class you choose. Survive solo play, not be honor fodder in BGs, decent enough DPS in a dungeon not to get eyed by the ever present elitists who expect raid level DPS in a regular heroic dungeon.
I’ll grant you the raid relevance of alternate specs but for all around max level use? There has been an imbalance more often than not where one spec becomes what you just have to play in order to be competitive. It shouldn’t be that way. All three specs should bring enough to the table they can compete on equal footing.
As for pet choices? I will always stand by people being able to play what they love and enjoy, and that choice, giving players options instead of “Meta” cookie cutter builds forced on them, should be a priority when working out how the specs in a class function expansion by expansion. Let’s be real here, “Meta” specs and builds in a class don’t prove anything except that corners were cut during design, it’s not a play issue, it’s a design flaw. We’ve all played expansions where a class had all three specs hold their own. My Druid has had that in several expansions (And the Druid has four), so has my Paladin and so has my Mage and Mages can really get messy. Only my Hunter has had this steady imbalance.
Blizz can do better. Voicing that is something players should do, or they’ll think it’s all good and not work on it.
AMEN. More customization not just in appearance but in the build of the character and their pets would really be just ideal. I never have understood why they removed those trees either. They were GREAT
)