Possibly because some specs bring utility rather than pure DPS to the runs? That would explain that discrepancy if true.
2 Likes
I donāt think itās a matter of the key being too low to mean anything, itās a matter of the meta for 15s being different than the meta for 20s, which is different than the meta for 24s, and so on. For 15s in particular, any spec in the game can complete 15s without coordination; I wouldnāt expect this information to be as valuable for someone who doesnāt do keys higher than that, and then if they do go higher, this data isnāt entirely relevant to them (not to say that itās inaccurate).
Depends on the spec. Again, Venthyr Boomy is a spec that gains damage from the packs living longer. I do more overall dps in 18s-20s than I do in 15s. Venthyr Paladins are going to get more out of Ashen Hallow for the same reason, with that CD being a large reason why theyāre meta in higher keys, yet Kyrian is the majority in 15s.
1 Like
| Avg | Spec | DOS | HoA | MoTS | NW | PF | SD | SoA | ToP |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| 9287 | Balance @15 | 8739 | 11064 | 10465 | 9865 | 8042 | 10669 | 7852 | 7606 |
| 9545 | Balance @20 | 9439 | 11533 | 10616 | 10009 | 8312 | 10567 | 8092 | 7796 |
So 2%
Is that 2% difference due to 20ās being a more accurate representation of the spec, or is it like you said, just different tactics in high keys? That 9545 average would move balance up one spot in the 15 data as long survival didnāt also gain 1% at 20.
Iām sure the players that run high keys probably come down and run 15 from time to time for vault, so I think the data is a pretty accurate representation of the relative balance among specs. And I seriously doubt higher keys will magically bring everything into balance.
I think the difference in raids is from boss to boss there are trade offs. Some specs are better on some bosses, other specs on other bosses.
In M+ there seems to be very little variation, specs are just better across the board.
1 Like
This would skew the damage for Boomy to be even lower in that bracket. If I pop Frenzy on a pack and the pack dies after 20s, I lose damageā¦and thatās liable to happen more often in 15s than in higher keys, and would be even more liable to happen if I was running 15s with better players.
I honestly donāt understand blizz with the balancing. Like how are some specs literally always just bad and never even close to the dps or utility of other specs. But then to remain this way for an entire expansion, or multiple expansions for that matter.
Like man, imagine maining feral or enhance. When was the last time either of them were anything other than a meme spec that groups donāt want
2 Likes
Utility can definitely explain some of it. Especially on the margins where you need things like Lust and BRez.
But at the end of the day you donāt overpower instances with utility. Utility is what you use when you donāt have the DPS.
1 Like
Seems normal , the WoD data was worse
1 Like
Feral is LAST place with a 7k score ā¦ EXCEPT
The Feral I play with sims 11k, and itās a running joke when any of us play with him on those rare occasions when he canāt actually beat 11k.
In other words, it isnāt just the sim-- heās actually PLAYING 11k.
Feral is OP just, no one plays it. So itās in a negative-feedback loop for all the FOTM people who make those charts what they are. If itās not Meta, they donāt play it.
So who does play it? Scrubs who can only average 7k on a spec that can produce 11k.
I donāt know what else to make of that data when Iām PLAYING WITH A GUY RIGHT NOW who is Feral and CRUSHING everything.
2 Likes
Extraordinary claims require extraordinary evidence.
The data is from parses not sims. If the feral you know is outperforming the tens of thousands of parses that have been uploaded to warcraft logs, they need to be uploading their parses.
Feral can do some spectacular single target numbers in a 20 second boss fight, but thatās not overall DPS for a 15.
2 Likes
I agree with that quote and although Iām not going to post someone elseās parse (that feels weird to me), Iām sure something could be worked out. I can talk to him later or something.
Because raiding or M+, his numbers are WAYYYY above anything I ever see on these ācharts.ā
And as much as I agree with your assertion (extraordinary claimsā¦), will you do me the same courtesy and agree that when a class is ādeterminedā to not be Metaā¦ people drop it like a stone and simply donāt play it. It enters a negative feedback loop until, someone, like my friend, has the audacity to notice āheyā¦ this isnāt anywhere near as bad as youāre claiming.ā
edit: I meanā¦ he SIMS at 11k. I just had this discussion with someone else in another thread and he verified my claim (in a lame effort to refute me) by simming a Feral andā¦ sure enough, he simmed 11k.
You could argue that the PRACTICAL doesnāt match the sim, but to deny heās not even simming 11k is flat out falsifiable. Feral is strong.
1 Like
Yes a lot of players do.
But not all. Every spec has diehards and they can be just as good at getting the best performance out of their spec as someone that hops around playing the FOTM.
In fact there is a good argument that the least played specs might be the most accurate representation of a spec because of this. The people still playing them are much better at that spec then someone playing a spec they donāt know as well because it has much greater potential.
And Iām not disagreeing about the sim data. But sims are their own world and worthless for everything other than comparing what set ups have the best theoretical output in simulated fights.
I think thatās more of an established fact than an argument.
2 Likes
Itās only a āfactā in that the sim doesnāt account for things that very obviously affect you negatively: having to move, etc.
But the sim also doesnāt predict things that benefit you: extra procās, etc.
What Iām saying for this discussion is that when you sim 11k and play 10.3k, you shrug that off as the practical verus the theoretical.
But when you sim 11k, and āthe chartā is showing 7k ā¦ youāre being obtuse to make that same argument. Something else is going on. It further keeps my eyebrow raised in this example because Feral is a much harder spec to play than many others. So when I see an obvious skew in data, Iām going to correlate that to āpeople donāt know how to play this spec.ā
The people that do, largely tend to just move on to a FOTM spec. Per your argument, will there always be die-hards that play it? Sure. And while they are stomping the numbers, they are outweighed by the keyboard-turning-clickers who canāt figure it out.
Iām not saying anything for a fact here. EXCEPT the fact that I play with a Feral who consistently pulls within 5% of his sim, and his sim is 11k, not 7k.
Blizz is horrible at class balancing. They feed whatever specs are popular for the yes men and streamers and say screw the rest of em.
Using the 25th best parse may be inappropriate. It will favor specs with more overall runs. Perhaps you could compare the specs at the 95th percentile.
But another issue would then be the amount of good players who have rerolled to meta specs, or the likelihood of better tanks to group with meta specs and pull more, leading to more mobs at any given time and less overall time = higher dps for the meta specs. It would still show which specs are better, but this difference is overstated like it is in raid logs (Specs that are slightly better will get PI and other buffs more often, leading to larger differences than there would naturally be).
1 Like
Man, thatās about right. My feral druid has nice burst, and can kill a few normal NPCs real quick, but then runs out of energy on anything tougher or a larger group. Then itās bear time. Heās not geared yet though.
1 Like
Hereās the thing with all of this.
Itās all taken into account. You can assume for every one of the best runs it was the best circumstance for that class in that dungeon. And since that would more or less be equally true for the best parses for every spec, it all equals out. And taking the 25th best run throws out the outliers like excessive PIās which are noted in the warcraftlogs data now, 2nd to last column.
As for the 95th percentile, percentile of what? WCL arbitrary scoring system? One of the reasons I do this is because that data has no real world analog. You donāt know what it means practically.
Ok, looking at that feral is 87.69. Windwalker is 97.2. What do those numbers equate to?
Sure doesnāt look like that on average feral is pulling 4k less overall damage in instances.
My question is why do any of this at all? Subcreation already does it for you and it takes all the data into account, not just the best and not just 15s.
https://mplus.subcreation.net/all-affixes.html
Ok according to that
Windwalker is 187.43 and feral is 156.8
Again. OK thatās great, but what does it mean?
Feral in shambles. Buffs when?
2 Likes