Page 3 of 5 FirstFirst
1
2
3
4
5
LastLast
  1. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by sultangurde View Post
    I dont really understand what you are trying to say. Explain if you wish.
    Here is another source based on wol parses.
    http://www.raidbots.com/dpsbot/Spec_...14/60/default/
    This is the failing of statistics, you can get numbers to show whatever you want as long as you manipulate them appropriately.

    If you look at a fight that is mostly single target, you'll see hunters hanging out right in the middle of the pack DPS wise. It's known that Hunter's absolutely suck at anything multi-target, those fights bring down our spec score and make us look awful when all you choose to look at is overall numbers. We need some mechanics that allow us to compete in these types of fights without throwing our single target damage completely out of control.

    That and Afflication/Fire need to be tuned. I feel that specs that have the ability to completely destroy meters on multi-target fights shouldn't be topping them on single target fights as well.

  2. #42
    Quote Originally Posted by Aertea View Post
    This is the failing of statistics, you can get numbers to show whatever you want as long as you manipulate them appropriately.

    If you look at a fight that is mostly single target, you'll see hunters hanging out right in the middle of the pack DPS wise. It's known that Hunter's absolutely suck at anything multi-target, those fights bring down our spec score and make us look awful when all you choose to look at is overall numbers. We need some mechanics that allow us to compete in these types of fights without throwing our single target damage completely out of control.

    That and Afflication/Fire need to be tuned. I feel that specs that have the ability to completely destroy meters on multi-target fights shouldn't be topping them on single target fights as well.
    It's for the top 100 of each spec meaning that it is the best players of said specs. So I'd say it's a pretty good representation of the dps in the raids.

  3. #43
    This is the failing of statistics, you can get numbers to show whatever you want as long as you manipulate them appropriately.
    Really?

    If you look at a fight that is mostly single target, you'll see hunters hanging out right in the middle of the pack DPS wise.
    Really really? You seem to use a lot of opinion in your statments of fact... I spent the last few days compiling the numbers below... as you can see they are set with every standard you can use and hunters are NOT "hanging out right in the middle of the pack DPS wise."

    Please do research before you rehash the same old tripe that every other class tries to spit out so that we dont get the buffs we need... it will help you not look like a total tool.


    I did this back in Firelands and DS so I thought I would do the same now that we have some solid numbers to look into to.
    Using 25 man heroic WOL parses as reported by raidbots.com and using the highest dps spec from each class for a total of 11. (what that means is if one class has 2 or more specs in the top 11 it is not counted, basically I use the top spec for each class so a total of 11 possible slots)

    Spec score/ Top 100/ Max/ 2months

    Mage: 1
    Lock: 2
    Rogue: 3
    War: 4
    Druid: 5
    DK: 6
    Monk: 7
    Pally: 8
    SPriest: 9
    Sham: 10
    Hunter: 11

    Spec score/ All Parses/ Max/ 2 months
    Hunter: 11

    Spec score/ All Parses/ Average/ 2 months
    Hunter: 11

    Spec score/ All Parses/ Default/ 2 months
    Hunter: 11

    We can clearly see no matter how you put the settings in spec score hunters are dead last so lets look at Dps:

    Dps/ Top 100/ Max/ 2 months
    Hunter: 11

    Dps/ All Parses/ Max/ 2 months
    Hunter: 11

    Dps/ All Parses/ Average/ 2 months
    Hunter: 11

    Dps/ All Parses/ Default/ 2 months
    Hunter: 11

    So I think that sums it up pretty well, last year I had some people say this information wasnt enough and I should look at the individual fights, so here we go... forgive me for the length but posting this now saves time later:

    Dps/ Top 100/ Max/ 2 months

    Stone Dogs: 11th
    Feng:10th
    Garajal:11th
    Kings:10th
    Elegon: 11th
    Emp: 11th
    Vizier: 9th
    Bladelord: 6th
    Garalon: 11th (only used 1 month due to the pet bug on legs being fixed a few weeks ago to get a more acurate number)
    Windlord: 11th (this is the aoe fight that SV is supposed to excell at...)

    Dps/ All Parses/ Max/ 2 months

    Stone Dogs: 11th
    Feng: 11th
    Garajal: 11th
    Kings: 11th
    Elegon: 11th
    Emp: 11th
    Vizier: 8th
    Bladelord:7th
    Garalon: 11th
    Windlord: 11th

    Dps/ All Parses/ Average/ 2 months

    Stone Dogs:11th
    Feng:10th
    Garajal: 9th
    Kings: 7th
    Elegon: 10th
    Emp: 11th
    Vizier: 5th
    Bladelord: 10th
    Garalon: 11th
    Windlord: 11th

    Dps/ All Parses/ Default/ 2 months

    Stone Dogs: 11th
    Feng: 10th
    Garajal: 8th
    Kings: 7th
    Elegon: 11th
    Emp: 10th
    Vizier: 5th
    Bladelord: 10th
    Garalon: 11th
    Windlord: 10th

    In basically every scenerio according to the WOL parses posted, I do not see hunters "near the top" on any fight whatsoever as Ghostfailure said a few weeks ago, in point of fact I see what I saw back before we got buffed at the end of FL... hunters sucking the ass end of 95% of the fights and average to low on one fight that allows the pet 100% uptime on a boss (Vizier)

  4. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by Tehstool View Post
    It's for the top 100 of each spec meaning that it is the best players of said specs. So I'd say it's a pretty good representation of the dps in the raids.
    I didn't dispute that. What I disputed was using the overall measure to create the blanket statement that Hunter's damage is bad. However if you look at the numbers closer, you'll find that BM's single target damage isn't that bad. It's not tops, but it's not parsing anywhere near the bottom.

    The reason our "average" or "spec score" looks low is because of how god-awful we are on multi-target fights compared to other classes. Especially the ones that already beat us in single target.

  5. #45
    Quote Originally Posted by Aertea View Post
    I didn't dispute that. What I disputed was using the overall measure to create the blanket statement that Hunter's damage is bad. However if you look at the numbers closer, you'll find that BM's single target damage isn't that bad. It's not tops, but it's not parsing anywhere near the bottom.

    The reason our "average" or "spec score" looks low is because of how god-awful we are on multi-target fights compared to other classes. Especially the ones that already beat us in single target.
    So what you are saying is that our single target dps is in the middle, but we're bad in every other aspect? Doesn't that sound kind of contradictory to your statement trying to say that hunters aren't bad?

  6. #46
    Jax, before you try arguing with someone, then post numbers that support what they said, you think?

    ---------- Post added 2012-11-27 at 02:04 PM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Tehstool View Post
    So what you are saying is that our single target dps is in the middle, but we're bad in every other aspect? Doesn't that sound kind of contradictory to your statement trying to say that hunters aren't bad?
    No, most of these threads seem to be asking for accross the board buffs to Hunter's damage. However that won't "fix" us.

    People like to provide a single link as evidence that the entire class is broken, you can't do this. Looking at overall damage on raidbots doesn't show what the classes actual problems are. Jax listed the full breakdown above, which clearly illustrates the problem.

  7. #47
    Quote Originally Posted by traen View Post
    First of all NEVER EVER use simulationcraft as source of any information. Because this information has nothing to do with real raid environment. WOL is the only thing that you can rely on. And still you need to use it with caution.

    Second - guess what? There MUST be one class at the bottom of the dps chart. Hunters were at good spot in Cata. Now its your turn to be at the bottom.
    I do understand that no one likes to be at the bottom, but you can't disagree that when other classes were at the bottom before, you did not create "we need to buff %classname%" threads.
    I want you to name 1 "CLASS" which has had it worse than hunters in pvp notice I said "CLASS" and not "SPEC" some people like to confuse those 2 and they're toally different.

    So by your statement why is it the same CLASS and not SPEC has to spend so much time at the bottom?

    Also why should a class that brings dps and only dps to a raid be bad at it?

  8. #48
    Quote Originally Posted by Aertea View Post
    Jax, before you try arguing with someone, then post numbers that support what they said, you think?

    ---------- Post added 2012-11-27 at 02:04 PM ----------



    No, most of these threads seem to be asking for accross the board buffs to Hunter's damage. However that won't "fix" us.

    People like to provide a single link as evidence that the entire class is broken, you can't do this. Looking at overall damage on raidbots doesn't show what the classes actual problems are. Jax listed the full breakdown above, which clearly illustrates the problem.
    How would buffing our damage not fix us? If we are 10th and 11th place on feng, wouldn't say an arcane shot buff for example bump us up ever so slightly in the ranks?

  9. #49
    Quote Originally Posted by jax View Post
    Really?



    Really really? You seem to use a lot of opinion in your statments of fact... I spent the last few days compiling the numbers below... as you can see they are set with every standard you can use and hunters are NOT "hanging out right in the middle of the pack DPS wise."

    Please do research before you rehash the same old tripe that every other class tries to spit out so that we dont get the buffs we need... it will help you not look like a total tool.


    I did this back in Firelands and DS so I thought I would do the same now that we have some solid numbers to look into to.
    Using 25 man heroic WOL parses as reported by raidbots.com and using the highest dps spec from each class for a total of 11. (what that means is if one class has 2 or more specs in the top 11 it is not counted, basically I use the top spec for each class so a total of 11 possible slots)

    Spec score/ Top 100/ Max/ 2months

    Mage: 1
    Lock: 2
    Rogue: 3
    War: 4
    Druid: 5
    DK: 6
    Monk: 7
    Pally: 8
    SPriest: 9
    Sham: 10
    Hunter: 11

    Spec score/ All Parses/ Max/ 2 months
    Hunter: 11

    Spec score/ All Parses/ Average/ 2 months
    Hunter: 11

    Spec score/ All Parses/ Default/ 2 months
    Hunter: 11

    We can clearly see no matter how you put the settings in spec score hunters are dead last so lets look at Dps:

    Dps/ Top 100/ Max/ 2 months
    Hunter: 11

    Dps/ All Parses/ Max/ 2 months
    Hunter: 11

    Dps/ All Parses/ Average/ 2 months
    Hunter: 11

    Dps/ All Parses/ Default/ 2 months
    Hunter: 11

    So I think that sums it up pretty well, last year I had some people say this information wasnt enough and I should look at the individual fights, so here we go... forgive me for the length but posting this now saves time later:

    Dps/ Top 100/ Max/ 2 months

    Stone Dogs: 11th
    Feng:10th
    Garajal:11th
    Kings:10th
    Elegon: 11th
    Emp: 11th
    Vizier: 9th
    Bladelord: 6th
    Garalon: 11th (only used 1 month due to the pet bug on legs being fixed a few weeks ago to get a more acurate number)
    Windlord: 11th (this is the aoe fight that SV is supposed to excell at...)

    Dps/ All Parses/ Max/ 2 months

    Stone Dogs: 11th
    Feng: 11th
    Garajal: 11th
    Kings: 11th
    Elegon: 11th
    Emp: 11th
    Vizier: 8th
    Bladelord:7th
    Garalon: 11th
    Windlord: 11th

    Dps/ All Parses/ Average/ 2 months

    Stone Dogs:11th
    Feng:10th
    Garajal: 9th
    Kings: 7th
    Elegon: 10th
    Emp: 11th
    Vizier: 5th
    Bladelord: 10th
    Garalon: 11th
    Windlord: 11th

    Dps/ All Parses/ Default/ 2 months

    Stone Dogs: 11th
    Feng: 10th
    Garajal: 8th
    Kings: 7th
    Elegon: 11th
    Emp: 10th
    Vizier: 5th
    Bladelord: 10th
    Garalon: 11th
    Windlord: 10th

    In basically every scenerio according to the WOL parses posted, I do not see hunters "near the top" on any fight whatsoever as Ghostfailure said a few weeks ago, in point of fact I see what I saw back before we got buffed at the end of FL... hunters sucking the ass end of 95% of the fights and average to low on one fight that allows the pet 100% uptime on a boss (Vizier)
    I personally will be looking forward to another one of these gyms;

    Will we take steps to adjust hunters if they continue to be weak in Arenas? Yes. This is absolutely a concern of ours. To some extent my reputation is on the line here because I keep trying to assure players that we will make adjustments, and I know you’ll throw it back in my face if we don’t deliver. The game has only been out for a few days though, so it’s just premature to make sweeping changes yet. I realize some knowledgeable hunters are convinced the changes we made were not enough. At the end of the day though, it is us, not the players, who need to make decisions about game design. We will always listen to your feedback when making our decisions though.-GhostcrawlerNov 14, 2008

    It will be coming sooner or later after he removes his head from his ass and stops tweeting...

  10. #50
    Quote Originally Posted by Tehstool View Post
    How would buffing our damage not fix us? If we are 10th and 11th place on feng, wouldn't say an arcane shot buff for example bump us up ever so slightly in the ranks?
    I think what they're trying to argue is that buffing us so we perform at an average level (~6-7th) on a multidot fight would inadvertently move us up to the top of single target fights as well. This is sort of a stupid argument because it is entirely dependent on the fix they implement, and it also sort of ignores the fact that there are several classes at the moment that are top of single target and also very high on multidot fights.

  11. #51
    Hunters just aren't a useful class atm, which I think would be ok with some folks if we provided great utility. In 25m (which is what I raid) raids where most buffs/debuffs are covered by different classes a hunter doesn't bring anything useful. We don't have raid CDs and our dps is matched or surpassed by other classes that actually provide raid buffs. DPS is kind of skewed right now because as BM you can burst to 100+ (300k if it's a gimmick fight like Garalon and you and your pet are in the buff zone) in the opener and coast off of that depending on the fight. Surv AOE is great and all but besides Feng, Spiritbinder, Wind Lord, and maybe Grand Empress there are no AOE fights and Surv single target is severely lacking. We won't even mention MM because after these buffs for 5.1 the spec is STILL shit because of lack of damage and that shitty steady focus mechanic.

    Hopefully more buffs are on the way. Because so far I am disappointed with the hunter class.

  12. #52
    Today's hotfix puts Hawk and Iron Hawk at 15% from 10%.

  13. #53
    Quote Originally Posted by Gunba View Post
    I think what they're trying to argue is that buffing us so we perform at an average level (~6-7th) on a multidot fight would inadvertently move us up to the top of single target fights as well.
    Exactly

    This is sort of a stupid argument because it is entirely dependent on the fix they implement, and it also sort of ignores the fact that there are several classes at the moment that are top of single target and also very high on multidot fights.
    I also addressed that in my original post. Affliction and Fire single target is too high. They both need to come down a peg.

  14. #54
    Quote Originally Posted by Rankin View Post
    Today's hotfix puts Hawk and Iron Hawk at 15% from 10%.
    The fuck... This is a really large buff, how come they didn't signalize it? Thanks anyway

  15. #55
    Quote Originally Posted by Rankin View Post
    Today's hotfix puts Hawk and Iron Hawk at 15% from 10%.
    Interesting......now if only they would buff explosive shot, steady shot, chimera shot, and serpent sting.

  16. #56
    What ppl are to stupid understand is YES there have to be someone on the bottom of the ranks. But when you have a 30-100K dps gap between mages and hunter for 1-11 place SOMETHING IS WRONG.

    And yes hunter are in dire needs of PVP buffs, after the wave of nerfs and THEN they fixed stampeded. Hunters are just pure garbage now.

    There have been like 100 pages on the forums suggesting GOOD buffs and nerfs to the hunter class. And blizzard just 100% ignored them all.

    For ex why not buff steady/cobra shot ?!?!? Wont effect pvp basicly at all, but buff PVE damage.

    Our survivability is a complete JOKE in all aspects of the game at the moment.

    I love my hunter but im starting to get pissed of with all that needs to be fix with this class.

  17. #57
    Nice hotfix buff.

  18. #58
    Quote Originally Posted by Rankin View Post
    Today's hotfix puts Hawk and Iron Hawk at 15% from 10%.
    Fuck yeah! Best news today!!!!

  19. #59
    hunters aren't aight, were middle of the pack when 4 of the top dps classes are mage, rogue, warlock and warrior. 3 are pure and were below ret pallys as BM

  20. #60
    Quote Originally Posted by Rankin View Post
    Today's hotfix puts Hawk and Iron Hawk at 15% from 10%.
    Every little bit helps.
    Tinker + Alchemist in a single class:
    Tank spec: robotics, steampunk hammers/chainsaws, grappling hooks and heavy machinery.
    Melee dps spec: doping yourself with chems and tossing vicious acids on the enemies.
    Ranged dps: rockets, lasers, TNT critters and explosives, shrink rays and sapper mines.
    Healing spec: chemical sprays, needles, exploding flasks and other chemical type abilities to heal.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •