Idk why people are complaining about Ele now. If the Ele is in ascend you press a defensive. It’s
literally that simple.
Without a huge mistake or big skill gap. Ele is not going to kill you before second ascend.
This isn’t a proper response to the argument though, although you are correct in that players will play the strongest specs, the results however do not show the breakdown between specs nor the gaps between strengths.
By clumping them together you are in fact inflating the apparent participation of the strongest specs by adding the , albeit lower, weaker ones further bolstering them.
Besides how would you do tuning passes for what actually matters then?
Takes warlocks for example, which spec is the strongest right now? Is it still aff? Is it demo? What about destro? Which do you buff /nerf?
I’ll say it again, the data is flawed and cannot be used to make factual claims.
2 Likes
Aug isn’t ever going to be good in PvP. Blizzard doesn’t want it to be because it’s toxic.
data isnt flawed for classes like demon hunter that are objectively bad
Depending on the intention.
My intention is what the title of my post says: What classes need buffs? Those that don’t have a single viable DPS (Healer) spec for high rated arena!
It doesn’t exactly show which specs are doing too good. I mean, sure, it shows that Ele, Enha and Feral are currently overtuned or that shadow is too dominant in shuffle, but it doesn’t show us that BM is broken. BUT remember, that wasn’t the intention of this post.
All I was talking about were buffs for DK, DH, Monk, maybe Ret, Rdruid and Rshaman.
None right now, as we simply should buff classes first, that are obviously underpowered! After that, we can start tuning specs like Destro, MM and Fire if needed. Remember that they can easily play another spec with the same core mechanics. They don’t have to level and gear another class and learn it from 0!
It can, based on my intention!
??? can you not read?? this is why monk is not fine. it’s bottom 2 in every bracket.
or are you just trolling or something
negative self healing, negative damage, negative cc, negative utility.
the onyl thing we have going for us is that we’re tanky and can be annoying with knockup every 25 seconds.
top damage every game is touch of karma rofl
Details looks very different depending on how you have pet sources grouped. If you group all pet melee together, it’s almost always going to be the highest source of damage. If you have it by pet then you’re dividing it all between db, fenryr, hati, dark hounds, etc. which will make them all look like smaller individual sources of damage. You can change it in details settings to show it by spell instead of by pet which looks a lot better imo.
you’re not ever going to get an objective case of anything with data as the point of data is to try to represent reality(meaning data is not 100% equal to reality)
now, in terms of it being as close to objective reality as possible, that’s up to the data restrictions the OP used as well as your opinion of whether it is valid. I believe the OP’s goal was to point out the weaker classes on the shuffle and 3v3 ladder, and his data(and the restrictions on that data) pointed out:
Dk,
DH
Monk
Druid Healer
Shaman Healer
to be the weakest classes in the meta right now, which I think is true and I think most of the playerbase agrees that these specs are weak right now - so the OP’s data achieved its intended purpose.
2 Likes
It is easy to manipulate statistics to paint whatever biased picture you want. Let’s use Demon Hunters and Frost Mages on the US Shuffle ladder for example. We will use shuffle since it prevents specific comps from propping up a spec and it has higher participation. We will use 1900 to filter out everyone that is playing for the 1600 token, the 1800 mog, and players who are objectively pretty bad at PvP. We will be left with a more concentrated group of players that are more likely to be pushing for 2400 and who also have a more decent grasp on how to PvP since we are excluding things like 1200 cr players.
DH:
https://check-pvp.fr/solo?region=us&realm=all&faction=all&classes=all&specs=577&sort=rating&order=desc&page=1&minRating=1900&bracket=shuffle
Characters 1900 or Above: 166
Characters 2400 or Above: 4
Percentage of character 1900 or above that reach 2400: 2.4%
Frost:
https://check-pvp.fr/solo?region=us&realm=all&faction=all&classes=all&specs=64&sort=rating&order=desc&page=1&minRating=1900&bracket=shuffle
Characters 1900 or Above: 557
Characters 2400 or Above: 15
Percentage of character 1900 or above that reach 2400: 2.6%
As you can see it’s practically dead even. Does Frost Mage need buffed? Should we take into account the performance of players that can’t even reach 1900 in shuffle when balancing classes?
The point is Flitzi and I both took a set of characters and pulled a percentage out of them that can reach 2400 and came to completely different conclusions. It’s up to the reader to decide which one makes more sense to them, but I hope it’s clear how easy it is to use statistics to present a biased or just incorrect conclusion.
3 Likes
Nerf BM
that’s all u need to do
Then everything else becomes viable
Everyone’s defensives suck compared to hunters, everyone’s damage sucks compared to hunters, and honestly everyone’s cc sucks compared to hunters at this point
Untouchable by melee, and just hide behind pillars and sick ur pets on people vs casters
It quite literally has no counter
Just BM. Marks is garbage. SV is good but i don’t think it’s anything to complain about. Most hunter mains would be completely fine with whatever happening to BM so long as marks gets fixed so that there’s a ranged hunter spec to play.
Only when you pick questionable data. For example is 1900 already like top 10%? So the representation there is already filtered by a lot! Its like saying, the other 90% of the player base don’t matter for balancing!
Sure, but the other hunter specs aren’t bad and you’ll still see backpeddling mm’s at a way higher mmr than anyone would like to see
They’re just being overshadowed by the goliath that is bm
No, marks might actually be the worst spec in the game right now. Check out current rep on drustvar fotm tab. Look how fast it drops off after the patch. It’s at like .5% right now where it was ~7% directly before. The only time it is ever semi-threatening is if it gets extremely lucky with procs in the first three casts of trueshot. They need to make withering fire a non-factor for it via a choice node and pvp nerfs to it, then bring back the aimed/rf modifiers from the old dark ranger tree and then it will be fine, and also not be capable of random oneshots when it gets procs in trueshot with bigger rapidfire/aimed shots.
If they nerf BM every other hunter spec gains representation
Stop using bad math
If they nerf bm to unplayability do you think every bm hunter is just going to keep playing bm hunter?
Survival rep over the same time period is extremely consistent. Marks will still be awful once BM is nerfed.
Because MM has been better for 2 xpacs
That’s like saying outlaw is bad because people played sin rogue
Win rates at high mmr reflect spec power, not representation. People can play a spec just because they think it’s cool, it has nothing to do with how good it is.
Bad cc, no team utility.
I’m not going to take the bailey and try to equate hunter and rogue with you. People play marks when it works because BM is boring and repetitive, and SV is melee. Marks sucks. You’d rather play against hunters using marks instead of BM as the primary ranged hunter spec because you can stop and disarm it.
Then explain why you’re similar CR on both MM and BM