I wonder what the average (say 10-90% throwing out top and bottom outliers) of each class would be?
Maybe sort it by key level , but that would be pretty impressive data. Would see truly which specs are “better”. Prolly only blizzard has this data
Yeah looking at the data without the outliers would be much better.
Okay, so perhaps take a second to address the part of my post where I say ‘even discounting that, it’s still an issue’ instead of ignoring the part you can’t dismiss 
But ya know, my history with you has given me the impression that you don’t give a crap about people. At all. You will basically argue against ANY change being made that doesn’t personally benefit you. Often saying they’d be too costly, or unnecessary, etc. You use the same arguments in almost any thread… but the real core is that if a change doesn’t personally benefit you, you’re against it. And that’s a pretty unfortunate outlook to have.
And you are 217 and can’t even time keys above 10 so what? 15s are stupid easy
Piss poor balancing by Blizz… Almost double between top and bottom. It shouldn’t be more that 5%.
1 Like
I’m sorry that you feel that way, but I’m going to have to disagree with that portrayal lol. I don’t have any issue with throwing more gear out there for casual players. I don’t have any problem with buffing survival, but unless you make it better than marks, nothing will change. And then you’ll be complaining that marks hunters don’t do the dps that survival does and we’ll be right back to square one.
I don’t have any control over the community perception, but time and time again I’ve told you guys that it doesn’t matter in 99% of keys being run. If you think you need these meta classes below like a 23, you’re part of the problem.
1 Like
Now take top 1,000 and average that out. You can’t be sane and act like 1 person…ONE…defines the entire class/meta. That’s not how it works. Let alone you literally picked top 0.0001% of the playerbase.
I’ve seen feral’s with higher overall damage, let alone single target boss fights.
Your post is crap.
2 Likes
It’s not about making it more powerful. It’s about closing the gap. Almost every metric I’ve seen paints the bottom ~3-5 specs as being more than 15-20% lower than the median spec. That’s too high a bar. Buff them to be within about ~5-10% of the median, and nerf anything that’s outperforming the median by more than 15% to within 10% and we’ll have a healthy game.
The point is not that everyone has to be meta, the point is that nobody should feel awful about their spec because they’re just straight not competitive.
1 Like
And that might be true if you’re trying out for an MDI spot, but it doesn’t matter outside of that. Should I be asking for fire mage buffs because a rogue is doing more dps on a highly situational Halls 15 run? Survival is fine in keys. The AOE is actually very good.
There’s too many variables and end game content to “balance” the game within 10% of each other spec. Some perform better for M+ and worse for pvp and raids. Some do better in pvp but not in pve. Warlocks are a good example of great in raids, but struggle to keep up in M+.
Obviously one data point is not sufficient and is circumstantial. But you’re basically arguing that nobody should ever ask for balance as long as they can complete dungeons and that is blatantly stupid.
As long as meters exist, people will be judged by their performance on those meters. And as long as people are judged on that, then it is logical that it will matter to people how they are perceived.
Small correction here: within 10% of the median is within 20% of each other. I don’t think a 20% damage gap from top to bottom is unreasonable.
How far would you SAY is unreasonable, if not 20%? 50%? 200%?
And those people are putting too much stock in the overall damage numbers at the end of the dungeon. You shouldn’t be really far behind the other dps, but overall isn’t the most important thing. Timing the key is what matters and sometimes you need to sacrifice your dps in order to do so.
I’m not going to argue that people SHOULDN’T use a game to define their self-worth. But until other people stop making a big deal out of it, expecting players to stop caring about their own numbers is unreasonable. People are not naturally immune to the opinions of others… we are, instinctively, social creatures. So it is logical we’ll care about others opinions of us… so you, Dapler, first need to convince OTHER PEOPLE to stop judging people based off of dps meter scores if you want people to stop caring about them themselves.
Like I said, you cant balance 20 specs to play evenly across M+, Raids, and PvP. Affliction locks have been S tier dps for raids since launch, but probably D or C tier for M+.
I think it’s fine for certain specs to do better in different areas and worse in others.
I’m okay with buffing specs that don’t do well in any content. It’s just difficult and impossible to balance them to be 20% of each other for all forms of content
I don’t think its unreasonable or impossible. I think it just takes intelligent targeted buffs and nerfs.
And it’s fine if affliction is S tier in Raid but D in M+… as long as D means ‘10% below median’, not ‘60% below median’. See where I’m coming from? OBviously it’s great to have different classes be IDEAL for different content… but having them be so ridiculously behind that they just feel unwelcome… is another story.
1 Like
Sure, but you can take some solace in the fact that those people are wrong. If you’ve ever had to use a dps cd on a pride or two, you’re hurting your overall dps numbers. Now you could have said screw it and wiped and your overall number would be higher, but you probably wouldn’t time the key.
It is unreasonable at this point. There’s too many specs. Also M+ is drastically different from raids even though they are both PvE.
Balancing that would be impossible. Since it takes time for affliction to ramp up. You would have to remove dots from the game.
Another prime example is how rogues are pretty useless in raids, but are S tier in high keys.
It’s perfectly fine for certain specs and classes to have an area they excell at and not in others. Buff the specs that have no where they excell, but having a margin of over 20% is fine if they are bad in one content and good in another.
I’d like to note that the reason you don’t see people complain about spriest in mythic+ is because they don’t have the best utility.
This week they are good because of bursting. Aside from that they don’t have a root or slow, they don’t have lust or Brez, they don’t have any crowd control for mobs because fear isn’t good in mythic+. Their interrupt and stun are both single target and on a relatively high cooldown. Vampiric embrace isn’t nearly as good as AG from shamans and sometimes can be unnoticeable.
Given all of this, shadow priests should be one of the specs at the top of the damage meters because that is what they bring to the table.
Moonkins on the other hand should definitely be lower than what they are because that spec has god tier utility in mythic+.
How different they are actually should make it easier. Since it means that you can make those buffs and nerfs with less impact on the other content mode, due to the differences.
What do you say to people who like that spec because of its playstyle, but still want to engage in the content that you’re decreeing it be ‘okay they be worthless in’? “Screw you?”
I think it is great for classes to have content they are ideal in and content they are less ideal in, but not for classes to be either completely dominant OR completely irrelevant in any form of content.
And, to be clear, it’s not about ‘whether they are capable of completing it’, it is whether public perception of their role in that content is so poor that they are CONSIDERED to be incapable of it.
You’re forgetting one of the best buffs/utility in the game. Power Infusion and it is crazy good in M+.