Another look at class balance - some data I put into a spreadsheet, per boss+global

[GT4]

@GT4 there's a lot of specs with extremely strong specific legendaries, and neither balance or arms gain as much as the highest mage/rogue legendaries afaik.

First off, saying "there's a lot of specs with extremely strong specific legendaries" doesn't really add anything here. There are 26 (?) DPS specs and most of them don't have a legendary that adds >6% total damage, let alone two that add >8% each.

Secondly, you're comparing classes to specs here and even then you're not necessarily correct. If you take single legendaries, sub boots are generally the strongest (~15% DPS) but the second strongest sub legendary (you know you can wear two, don't you?) is pretty average at ~6% and sub isn't terribly popular to begin with.

Anyway, for simplicity's sake I'll make a comparison for balance here (since that's the spec that was mentioned in the post quoted by me) so I'll only take into account other range DPS. Arcane (pants) and Fire (bracers) each have one legendary comparable to balance helmet and ring - which one is better depends on fight conditions and whether the druid exploits the EoA trinket when using the helmet - and the second best legendary each is significantly worse. Frost has no comparable legendary. Demonology has two that are slightly worse each (bracers, shoulders). Destruction and affliction have no comparable legendaries. Shadow has no comparable legendary. MM and BM have no comparable legendaries. Elemental has no comparable legendaries.

That means out of the 10 other range DPS specs, none has two legendaries as strong as the strongest balance ones, two each have one legendary as strong as the strongest balance ones and one has two legendaries each slightly weaker than the strongest balance ones. I'd say that certainly skews results in favour of balance given how the top 25% will have a disproportionate amount of players with the correct legendaries.

Basically each class has the problem that the top 25% will be made up with majorly logs of players with the correct legendaries. At that point it simply becomes a question of "Who has the strongest one/two legendaries?" to determine which classes' statistics are most affected by this.

[Raiju]

You vastly underestimate fire legendaries and I assume others, from glancing over your rant.

[GT4]

You vastly underestimate fire legendaries and I assume others, from glancing over your rant.

More like you have no idea what you're talking about and just assume things based on your limited knowledge.

Here's some (generally regarded as credible) third party sources so you cannot blame me for any bias here:
(taken from altered-time.com)
I cannot directly link the image here so I'll just refer you to https://docs.google.com/document/d/1...yZW4A/preview# page 10.

Fire's #1 legendary is at ~11% and comes at the loss of mobility (might end up slightly worse in practice)
Fire's #2-4 legendaries are at ~2-3% and come with situational benefits (additional burst phase, mobility, AoE) that might end up slightly stronger in practice

Balance's #1 legendary is at ~10% excluding trinket snapshotting (so better in practice if using trinket snapshotting because it allows you to snapshot both empowerments)
Balance's #2-#3 legendaries are between ~7% and ~9% each and come with situational benefits (free cleave, additional burst phases and more AoE) that might end up slightly stronger in practice

Now feel free to explain to me how my assessment that each of the specs has one very strong legendary but balance's second strongest legendary is significantly stronger is off.

Ultimately, fire's legendaries will at best come even if the fight significantly favours them and otherwise fall short.

Having said that, I already mentioned fire in my post as one of the three casters that comes somewhat close when it comes to legendary reliance so even if you were to claim an equivalence here (which isn't supported by warcraftlogs by the way), that wouldn't change anything about the fact that the average spec benefits significantly less from legendaries than balance does.

[Raiju]

More like you have no idea what you're talking about and just assume things based on your limited knowledge.

Here's some (generally regarded as credible) third party sources so you cannot blame me for any bias here:
(taken from altered-time.com)
I cannot directly link the image here so I'll just refer you to https://docs.google.com/document/d/1...yZW4A/preview# page 10.

Fire's #1 legendary is at ~11% and comes at the loss of mobility (might end up slightly worse in practice)
Fire's #2-4 legendaries are at ~2-3% and come with situational benefits (additional burst phase, mobility, AoE) that might end up slightly stronger in practice

Balance's #1 legendary is at ~10% excluding trinket snapshotting (so better in practice if using trinket snapshotting because it allows you to snapshot both empowerments)
Balance's #2-#3 legendaries are between ~7% and ~9% each and come with situational benefits (free cleave, additional burst phases and more AoE) that might end up slightly stronger in practice

Now feel free to explain to me how my assessment that each of the specs has one very strong legendary but balance's second strongest legendary is significantly stronger is off.

Ultimately, fire's legendaries will at best come even if the fight significantly favours them and otherwise fall short.

Having said that, I already mentioned fire in my post as one of the three casters that comes somewhat close when it comes to legendary reliance so even if you were to claim an equivalence here (which isn't supported by warcraftlogs by the way), that wouldn't change anything about the fact that the average spec benefits significantly less from legendaries than balance does.

It's clear as day you try to attribute any negative you can to nonbalance while only consider positives for balance. The fact you can't see this yourself is baffling and why I'm not wasting my time arguing with you properly. Like you really think the sun king bindings are difficult to use due to movement? Have you ever even seen a mage this expansion?

[GT4]

It's clear as day you try to attribute any negative you can to nonbalance while only consider positives for balance. The fact you can't see this yourself is baffling and why I'm not wasting my time arguing with you properly.

Yeah, I'm totally biased towards specs I don't play. You got me there. Or maybe you're just reading into my posts whatever the fuck you want to? I'm fairly sure I referenced multiple credible sources for my claims (the respective most popular non-IV guides as well as warcraftlogs' statistics) while you haven't provided any evidence whatsoever.

Like you really think the sun king bindings are difficult to use due to movement? Have you ever even seen a mage this expansion?

Thanks for proving that you're just reading into my posts whatever you want. I never even remotely mentioned that sun king bindings "are difficult to use due to movement" - that's an ad hominem if I've seen one. I mentioned that they "come at the loss of mobility". That they "might end up slightly worse in practice" clearly implies that I do not regard it as a big issue (otherwise I wouldn't have used the bolded words).

[Raiju]

As mentioned, I have no reason to actually take you seriously until you prove you're someone who may bring more than class parroting to a discussion. With this I'm done since I seem to just be making you madder by existing.

[TheRabidDeer]

As mentioned, I have no reason to actually take you seriously until you prove you're someone who may bring more than class parroting to a discussion. With this I'm done since I seem to just be making you madder by existing.

Why does he have to prove a quality when you are arguing number based information? He made a statement, then brought in numbers to back up his statement. You, rather than rebutting his actual argument, imply that he has a bias.

[zenga]

So the best spec in the game for Ilgynoth is Affliction?

I think your analysis is pretty much useless. You need way more data to determin the avg outcome.
There are 6 parses for Ilgynoth were 1 of them just aoe'd all of the adds. Nice =D

The chart doesn't try to find the best spec for a boss, it just ranks the available data vs the median. And of course that comes with flaws (such as affliction having very few logs for certain bosses). That doesn't mean that the trend the chart shows is invalid, because most specs have more than enough parses available. Especially the first 'naked numbers' chart kinda shows what one would expect, even for affliction.

Determining which is the best spec requires a whole different approach (that I'm not interested in).

[Raiju]

Why does he have to prove a quality when you are arguing number based information? He made a statement, then brought in numbers to back up his statement. You, rather than rebutting his actual argument, imply that he has a bias.

He brings in numbers that show fire mages gain more damage than boomkin

he uses incorrect personal statements to disqualify fire mages and rogues.

he then claims he used numbers to prove this

[Deleted]

Outlaw is fine though.

No it really isn't. The spec was ruined by Blizzard's inability to see past the 1% RtB logs.

[Beace]

So the best spec in the game for Ilgynoth is Affliction?

I think your analysis is pretty much useless. You need way more data to determin the avg outcome.
There are 6 parses for Ilgynoth were 1 of them just aoe'd all of the adds. Nice =D

You're completely misreading the data. The way he's done it, high points mean the spec is probably fairly balanced. Low points mean the spec is probably underpowered OR overpowered.

It's not intended for what you're trying to do.

[Gilor]

It's an interesting read but I don't know how it genuinely reflects what's really going on. The first example I noticed is Sin Rogue on Dragons - in heroic I can top my raid on that fight, but in Mythic (as I imagine most rogues) I'm in the portal team where the dps is not being read by the combat logs produced outside. So the idea that Mythic Dragons logs indicate anything about balance is suspect.

[adynn]

It's an interesting read but I don't know how it genuinely reflects what's really going on. The first example I noticed is Sin Rogue on Dragons - in heroic I can top my raid on that fight, but in Mythic (as I imagine most rogues) I'm in the portal team where the dps is not being read by the combat logs produced outside. So the idea that Mythic Dragons logs indicate anything about balance is suspect.

That's a fair point, although I would imagine a lot of the top logs for these specs would be uploaded by people going in the portal.

It's kind moot though as Warlocks and Spriests would be able to beat melee with their eyes closed on H dragons.

[Mhyroth]

As mentioned, I have no reason to actually take you seriously until you prove you're someone who may bring more than class parroting to a discussion. With this I'm done since I seem to just be making you madder by existing.

I found the salty Mage player.
He backed up with logs, links and a reasonable explanation. You gave nothing to back up your end.

[Deleted]

Meele will always look shit on dragons because they are portal-bitches (lots of movement).

[Raiju]

I found the salty Mage player.
He backed up with logs, links and a reasonable explanation. You gave nothing to back up your end.

I don't play mage and I think they're OTT, and I explained why his explanation is BS. If you check his logs, they show the main mage legendary is more powerful and his excuse against that was his luck of understanding of the mage spec (and how outside of super chaotic fights they do not need to break casts to move)