DPS Rankings after Day 1 of 7.1 Changes

[justflayin]

I love all the whining about Shadow being "op". All of you guys Surrender to Sadness.

[Deleted]

These threads are so pointless and misleading.

[Woobels]

There is at least one mage, or more in the top 10 WoL ranking for every boss on mythic. Just because you don't have good legendaries while other people in your guild do, does not equate to your spec being middle of the pack. Even on Neth, the only pure single target boss in mythic a fire mage is #2.

Fire is more than competitive, theres not much it doesn't have going for it. The spec has like 4 main buttons to press not including cds, so its simple. Its ranged, with excellent survivability cds. And it has good cleave.

Explain to me what Fire's excellent survivability cds are? Both Frost and Arcane have way better ones. Cauterize really isn't that great.

Your entire post comes over really dumb tbh, you should be forced to post armory with these kind of shitposts so we know what your own skillevel is.

If you don't have correct legendaries, which is the great majority of players, you are middle of the pack or lower as Fire.

[ralphie]

Oh Blizzard's love child, good to see you back 2/3 of your specs on top again.

[coprax]

Here are the DPS rankings for Mythic EN after 7.1 balance changes:



Note: Sample sizes are Frost Mage (71), Arcane Mage (158), Frost DK (313), Fury Warrior (652), & Elemental Shaman (710) at time of post

How do you read that graph?
What's be base if no class is at 100%?

[Pheros]

It's an arbitrary score. NOT a percentage.

[Deleted]

How do you read that graph?
What's be base if no class is at 100%?

The base (100) is the person who has the highest rank overall, out of all classes and specs.

- - - Updated - - -

Things look far different today at https://www.warcraftlogs.com/statistics/10/#sample=1

On easier modes, both Mages are even completely dead in the water.... https://www.warcraftlogs.com/statist...1&difficulty=4

Also, https://www.warcraftlogs.com/statist...=1&dataset=100 proves that Shadow Priests and Fire Mages are in dire need of a heavy nerf.

[Deleted]

Also, https://www.warcraftlogs.com/statist...=1&dataset=100 proves that Shadow Priests and Fire Mages are in dire need of a heavy nerf.

Not really sure where you see that in what you linked. If you actually bothered to click through all of the bosses, you would see that Shadows are actually only propped up by Cenarius/Xavius because of fight mechanics and - let's face it - meter padding. And you don't really see a lot of Fire Mages in top positions period

I'm a lock, so I don't have any stakes in Shadow Priests or Mages, but I am a big fan of objective reporting, instead of polemic propaganda.

[Deleted]

Not really sure where you see that in what you linked. If you actually bothered to click through all of the bosses, you would see that Shadows are actually only propped up by Cenarius/Xavius because of fight mechanics and - let's face it - meter padding. And you don't really see a lot of Fire Mages in top positions period

I'm a lock, so I don't have any stakes in Shadow Priests or Mages, but I am a big fan of objective reporting, instead of polemic propaganda.

Cenarius and Xavius aren't nearly as much meter padding as Ilgynoth and Four Dragons are, those 2 skew the results too much towards other specs.

[Deleted]

75% aka Upper Percentile is the best metric to measure dps if you take into account ilvl
https://www.warcraftlogs.com/statist...display=scaled

[Schizoide]

Also, https://www.warcraftlogs.com/statist...=1&dataset=100 proves that Shadow Priests and Fire Mages are in dire need of a heavy nerf.

Max, really? C'mon now.

Fire is strong but not a major outlier. It will be fine, once the specs at the bottom are buffed up.

Shadow needs a heavy nerf to S2M (and likely buffs, once S2M is taken out of the equation).

[BadguyNotBadGuy]

LOL no. Shadow isn't supposed to be among the top, you want to be hybrid, you gotta suffer for it, as is fair.

Silly logic employed by someone who has not experienced the ball wrenching, sweats inducing stress of using S2M and going above 50 stacks, where every mistake is literally the difference between you being garbage or justifying the reason you were brought along to the raid.

The Hybrid/Non Hybrid argument is straight retarded.

It should be based on skill. I fucking hate S2M, but the other two lvl 100 talents for SPs are worthless in raids, so i have no choice but to use S2M. And if you try to argue that SPs should go through that shit and not be close to the top simply on the basis that were a "hybrid" class, you might wanna rethink your philosophy towards this game.

[cFortyfive]

you would see that Shadows are actually only propped up by Cenarius/Xavius because of fight mechanics
but I am a big fan of objective reporting, objective reporting, instead of polemic propaganda.

What mechanic is it on ursoc ?

[Tharkkun]

This is exactly right. All the top tier Hunters play MM because they have been convinced that it's the best. If some of them played BM, the difference between the specs would be much less. All of these kinds of "rankings " are invalid and Blizzard has said that's why they don't pay much attention to them. They shouldn't.

I play BM and in my guild raids, I can keep up with a MM Hunter easily. BM AOE is far better than ever before with the artifact traits and on a single target, I can beat our MM (he's a better overall player than me too). In Heroic and Mythic dungeons, I am the top dps about 50% of the time. This was without my Legendary ring which I just got from a Wardens Emissary chest and haven't tried out yet.

Then your MM hunter is undergeared or not playing efficiently. This argument has been hashed out many times. The best BM hunter in the website with 2 legendaries was still 20-70k behind the top MM hunters in his own raid. I play BM because MM sucks but there's no arguing which is better.

On the other hand with the bugs introduced in 7.1 not being hotfixed for 1-2 days BM looked even worse with almost a 20% nerf due to the bug.

[BiggestNoob]

Unless you pick max, outliers should not be much of an issue. I think there is a misunderstanding here of what I show on the statistics page. When you select a percentile for a boss, e.g., 75% on Nythendra, the value you are seeing is how much DPS was done by the spec at the 75% rank position when considering all of the parses for that spec over the sampled period (2 weeks is the default sample period).

In other words, outliers at the top don't cause the 75% number to rise. It sounds like people think 75th means i'm looking only at the top 25% of parses and doing some math on them. That *would* be skewed by outliers, but that's not what I'm doing.

The 75% mark is determined by the top percentiles. A 75% mark when the top 20% are filled with people who have an absurdly strong legendary is going to be closer to a higher percentile mark for classes that don't have such a massive gap.

Someone who does 50% then gets bracers suddenly does 80%, and the top 5% are completely dominated by people with good legendaries and/or absurdly high ilvl gear.

I'd like to have the raw data so I can demonstrate this, but I'm too lazy to scrape it out of WCL.

What mechanic is it on ursoc ?

I'd suspect it's mostly kill time, meaning more of the fight is spent in StM. Cenarius is the same way now, you can push after the first sister and get a sub 4 minute kill. If we had longer fights StM wouldn't seem as broken (it still is, though).

[Bugg]

Parses means how many players contributed to that report?

[Daveon]

No. Just no.

The average performance of a class is irrelevant when it comes to balance. When talking about class balance, you are supposed to look at the maximum potential of each class, aka 95% percentile in Mythic.

Except Blizzard disagrees with you. They balance for both the average performance, and for those at the top. Which is why balance isn't as simple as "make all the specs do the same dps at maximum performance". They also balance raids vs. dungeons vs. open world. You can say you only care about raid balance, but they balance for all players in all situations. Sure, they prioritize raid balance, but they can't wreck open world or dungeon performance to make all the specs equal on every raid boss fight.

And when you say balance for the top 5% of Mythic raiders, you're saying to balance everything for like what, under 10,000 people in a game with 8-10 million players? That's bad game design, and bad for business.

[coprax]

The base (100) is the person who has the highest rank overall, out of all classes and specs.

And why set into relation to an statistical outlier in the first place?
Doesn't make sense to me.
How is someone who had all the critluck and procc-luck in the world in his fight make the base?

[RoMarX]

Also, https://www.warcraftlogs.com/statist...=1&dataset=100 proves that Shadow Priests and Fire Mages are in dire need of a heavy nerf.

Sorry, but are you stupid? How can you not realize that the max logs are the extreme outliers and a spec that heavily depends on procs like fire mage might have one try out of 1000 where every fucking thing spell was a crit therefore they might have a broken max dps, when the average try is a completely different thing. Someone like you for sure shouldn't be trying to analize logs.

[Schizoide]

And why set into relation to an statistical outlier in the first place?
Doesn't make sense to me.
How is someone who had all the critluck and procc-luck in the world in his fight make the base?

You have to relate to some number, and that one makes sense. There's nothing wrong with that.

Note that comparing on the 100th percentile for balance is laughable. I'm just talking about the number scale itself.