Multiple times you made it abundantly apparent that you didnt understand what a parallel line was, which spawned the discussion about it.
ToC is a raid where most fights have immense amount of cleave. Ret is already outperforming warrior of a couple of them. Even in phase 1, warrior was decent in OS because of all the cleave. I’ve acknowledge several times already that in 3-4 target fights, or a fight with frequent cleave situations, that warrior is not useless. Ive noted that because ToC is mostly cleave, with Anub have important adds to cleave, that warrior is not useless.
In single target situations, warrior is still bad. Their advantage in cleave is niche and not high enough to make it super valuable, as DK, Ret (lol), Feral, and a few other more useful classes all beat or compete with warrior in the warrior’s niche. There is still a big reason that world first quality guilds will take 4-5 paladins including a ret but take 1 prot warrior and 0 dps warrior, or even 0 warriors all together.
Its also been noted that we dont have perfect parallel scaling. But again, the “warriors scale hard” is a myth. They scale okay, Slightly better than average. There is no zero to hero story arc. Its from zero to not useless anymore. Ive been looking at ICC ptr logs and often see warrior at the bottom, sometimes middle. After the first week of ICC with all the logs we’ll have a better picture but in a world where ret sims better single target, the future for warrior is not bright.
No, you dont, I had to explain it several times and show you algebra equations with a graph and you still didnt understand it. You thought that if two classes gained the same dps, but one started lower, that the lower one “got more dps out of it and scaled harder.” Never did you stop to consider that simply lowering the base dps made the 2k dps gain a higher percent of the original number, proving your position unequivocally incorrect.
its been changed more than once and we could see what it was prior to the change, but they have retroactively changed it on old logs too
And from the data we have, will continue to stay above it for the rest of the phase.
Everyone considered that Rets were as bad as warriors in phase 2 because they were balanced around their t10 (which is insane) and TAJ. Aggrend still game himself a 10% buff anyway. But we also knew from sims warriors didnt have a hero arc and that they didnt scale substantially better than anyone else, so their dps rank wouldnt wildly change. Now we have a Private Server version of WotLK we all pay for where the #1 class is feral and the top 2 melee are feral and ret.
You are far more likely to get shadowmourne than anything off of heroic lich king.
Shadowmourne isnt rare, it’s a guaranteed weapon, it just takes time. The phase will almost certainly be long enough to get 2 or more.
I’m full 252 gear fury was pretty solid. There were bosses in ulduar it competed just fine on. The single target stand still fights like Ignis and XT were great fights for Fury.
They didn’t do this for ret. Ret has not ever been better than fury warrior for an extended period of time. At best we essentially tie them. Fury had a large edge on Ret in Ulduar, even after the buffs once they started getting gear.
Warriors are going to need the gear from ICC before they start looking better. You don’t just zone in and have the scaling. Ret was buffed to Fury’s level in early Ulduar, but fury left ret behind as it geared.
Same thing would have happened in icecrown if TaJ wasn’t basically an extra ret only legendary.
In full BiS gear in ICC which is a raid that isn’t out yet. You’re whining this much about something that hasn’t even come to pass. UH DK absolutely dominating for all of WoTLK so far but you don’t care cause “muh authenticity!” Raids actually stacking UH DK but no let’s complain about the 10% Ret buff that might want raids taking TWO in full ICC BiS gear.
I just can’t fathom the amount of whining about this.
Everyone knows what parallel lines are. = <— those are parallel lines. What does that have to do with scaling?
DPS increases are the result of scaling. For instance some stats scale much better with certain classes either through how much rating increases the stat by 1% or just how the spec is designed. A spec with all physical damage is going to scale better with armor pen than a spec that is 50% physical and 50% magical due to half of their spec not gaining any benefit from it. Some specs dont scale well with secondaries but others do.
This is a little more complicated than “middle school math”.
Its hard to imagine how people can claim warriors didn’t scale when they started off 17th in naxx and are projected to be 4th in icc, they were nearly 2.5k dps behind warlocks in p1 and somehow came out ahead of a very high tier pure caster dps, i guess the warlocks should have made some forum posts
Overpower weaving is something that on paper can add some dps but in practice, the actual windows to use it are rare or never exist or come with real serious drawbacks.
Overpower spec is only ~75-125 dps. Not enough to change the situation Fury is in. Your insistence on combining this with removing the troll racial, claiming 450 DPS inflation, is disingenuous at best. Claiming that using the best DPS racial is inflating the numbers is so silly, for a spreadsheet that shows maximum possible DPS. All the class sims on the spreadsheet use their best racial, so why should Fury be the only class without a DPS racial on the sheet? Race changes are a thing, and Orc is only 100 dps worse than Troll, so you definitely used a race without a DPS racial in order to try and prove your point. Yeah most warriors don’t do the overpower spec, but once again, it is a spreadsheet of maximum possible DPS.
Links for proof: https://tinyurl.com/FuryOverpowerSpec 16510 dps https://tinyurl.com/FuryRegularSpec 16416 dps (-94) (added 20 start rage to regular spec from imp zerker rage) https://tinyurl.com/ICCsimulationDPS
In most scenarios, Warrior w/o Overpower, occupies the same DPS ranking as Overpower.
Fury may also increase in the coming weeks if the reported anger management bug is fixed.
I play a Disc priest and now Destruction warlock in Wrath. If I were to bring up another character it would be this Arms warrior. Have you considered that you are just a simpleton experiencing a fit of histrionics?
People without bias see warrior whinging as cringy and embarrassing. People without bias think Ret is fine. You have to be biased towards the princess class that is warriors to think otherwise.
Its been kind of the opposite, and ret scales harder in ICC so enjoy being the #2 being feral I guess. If anyone wants to play Cata just see what Aggrend plays lmao.
Yes, if class rankings are janky because its Classic, so be it. The current team is not qualified to make balance adjustments as we have seen ret skyrocket and also feral, the class with battle rez and innervate, skyrocket to #1 overall. The team has either 1) no tools to internally find any math out [as we saw with the misinformation about warriors being 252 kings - theyre actually at the bottom and just above arms, BM, frost and sub, etc] or 2) malice and partiality to developer played classes. Or possibly a combination of both.
If DK and Assassination and Affi were outliers all game because of 3.4 numbers, then so bet it. But slingshotting feral to #1 and ret to #2 melee cuz of arbitrary reasons? Wut?
At least when Kris Zierhut said they’d consider buffs only to an underrepresented class, I could sort of see it. But then when the least parsed and most qualified class all of phase 1 and 2 did not get any feral/ret level buffs that logic obviously just went out the window.
Ret scales far worse than warriors, we literally need a completely broken trinket (that gets fixed in Cataclysm), Shadowmourne AND the buff to remotely keep up with warriors.
Rets quite literally need the equivalent of 2 legendaries to keep up.
Seriously, he will say anything at this point with zero critical analysis. It’s like he’s a bot on a mission to spread misinformation and whine about Aggrend.
