I understand it just fine, it just doesn’t have any relevance.
Now in your understanding, before we go any further, what is geometry?
fury been underperforming all game with none of the utility a ret brings
https://www.reddit.com/gallery/16xzqi4
PTR stats, warriors is basically obsolete, least used class in 25 man heroic
Ret was at about the same level in Naxx, and was worse off in Ulduar before buffs.
None of the utility was good enough to overlook it’s DPS.
Oh no, fury is only as represented as… a half dozen other classes… the horror!
We already know prot is screwed.
1 Like
now you understand why warrior as a whole class is brought 0-1 to raid and why warrior as a class is the least parsed class all game.
give warriors an innervate and a battle rez and maybe we can justify a world where you bring 0-1 of them.
ret wishes it was the same level as fury, the reality was it wasn’t even close, an average of about a 10% gap extending to almost 20% on the very top end throughout naxx, pre-buff ret is more around the arms/frost mage level than near fury
Nerf feral
1 Like
if you go to warcraft logs, and look at phase 1, and go to patchwerk, ret was ahead of both fury and arms
The number 1 ret, Zafia, did 7401 dps
The number 1 fury warrior, [우에스기겐신], did 8310 dps
The number 1 arms warrior, lockcole, did 7301 dps
even on single target undead like patch, ret was barely beating arms at the very top level, you’ll find that if you go through all of the fights, arms and ret split the fights almost 50/50, while fury beats them both on every fight
2 Likes
I already linked him the facts, dude doesn’t care. He has a false narrative to push and he’s gonna keep pushing it:
1 Like
Comparing the single top Parse with the single top Parse is a horrible way to do it. Ret is less impacted by RNG so Fury will have a higher top parse but a lower average parse.
Some classes have a higher theoretical max but the stars have to align in order to hit it. Others are more reliable.
I mean using that method would show Feral and Fire to be massively OP as their outlier potential is huge.
Taking the single top parse from each spec yields some seriously wonky results. If you built tier lists from it, it wouldn’t make sense because it would be very far removed from players actual experiences.
Figures they would completely screw up the class balance with any changes they made.
You love including that 0 in there, when the value is really close to 1.
Fury is -nowhere- close to the least parsed spec.
For DPS, fury is now around the same level of representation as other classes like rogue and hunter
Prot is severely underutilized.
You keep trying to use the fact that prot is bad to argue for fury buffs.
And you keep trying to use the fact that holy/prot paladins are good to argue for ret nerfs/reverts.
2 Likes
ok, considering you don’t like max parses because of the high roll element because rets can’t highroll somehow, lets put it to the top 1%
99 percentile
all bosses
entire p1
Druid Feral 85.40
Warrior Fury 83.24
Hunter Beast Mastery 82.57
Mage Frost 81.57
Retribution 79.69
Arms 77.00
Rogue Subtlety 70.14
1 Like
do 5% or 10%
hey it’s not all fun & games being capped on threat as Feral with no abilities to reduce it
Shadowmeld restores threat after moving
Cower does nothing
I honestly don’t like the focus on 99+. I think the premise that it filters out the bad players is flawed. It overstates how many players in classic are genuinely “bad” and overstates the relevance of skill to top parsing.
There are specs that are always going to be capable of higher top end parses than other specs while other specs that will always be doing more consistent dps. It’s how the classes are designed. A string of lucky crits will do more for a Fire Mages DPS than it will for a Ret for instance.
But generally with top end parses you are competing against your own spec not other classes specs. So, we also need to be clear about why we are measuring what we are measuring - the reason behind it.
Are we saying that if you want to be a best of the best parser when the stars align Ret is worse off than Fury? Then sure that’s about right.
Are we saying that Fury generally does better than Ret? Well no, that isn’t right. Ret will more often than not have consistently higher dps than Fury in that tier - given the way unique buff timings and rng impact Fury’s dps it has a higher damage ceiling and lower floor and average.
To my mind people don’t choose specs for their raid groups on the basis of their absolute max potential output (that may be so rare as to never occur for a given player) when the stars align but rather on their general consistent output. So the model of picking a tier list from on the 99th percentile and up is super flawed.
To be clear, the average parse has been generally worse for Fury than Ret in the early phases - but I am not suggesting that is a problem. I do think they’re well enough balance as is. When you choose a spec like Fury (or Fire) you trade off consistent dps for the chance at hitting some freakishly high numbers. If you only look are top or near top parses it weights in favour of Fury over Ret, but if you only look at overall it weighs the other way as Ret is more reliable dps. The logs require more nuanced assessment to get an accurate idea of the relative quality of both specs.
My main issue here is with how the logs are being used. Ret and Fury have different strengths and weaknesses - but I think they’ve been pretty much neck and neck all the way through when you try and account for those inherent class differences. Fury having an inherently higher max potential does not mean that Rets are generally “way behind Fury”. To read it that way is an overly simplistic way to assess the numbers. It just means that Fury outliers are higher than Ret outliers. If you want a reliable performer you’d pick a Ret over Fury.
They both have pros and cons and they’re roughly as in demand as each other.
I looked at the parses, you looked at who got the rank 1 spots for each spec which is largely based on main character syndrome. the 99, 95, 90, and 80 parsing points are all infinitely more relevant than a #1 log. Warcraft logs is constantly changing their rules because some people do things like extend Algalon phases and let just one person AOE specifically to pad their parse lmao.
The #1 spot is barely more relevant than a 1 parse.
You looked at two unspecified weeks of parses. The top 15 Fury Warriors all beat the top Ret on P1 25m Patchwerk. There were 59 Frost Mages that beat the top Ret on P1 25m Patchwerk.
59 Frost Mages, how many Frost Mages even parsed on 25m Patchwerk in P1?
1 Like
Like, 60 or thereabouts?
you can sort by far more relevant metrics than what someone like ahlaundo is trying to do, warcraft logs always chasing him down
ret was ahead of fury and arms in phase 1 on patchwerk. What the top dude did is irrelevant if the next 100,000 parses show an entirely different picture.
Currently in ToGC, furies strongest tier (cleave fights) ret is neck and neck or ahead of fury, and ret scales harder and is better single target, so in ICC ret (and especially feral) are way out of line.
meta changing adjustments should have never happened in classic like this. It should have only been slight changes, QoL changes, catch-up changes, etc. Totally reworking what is top tier in phase 4 is absurd.