Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst
1
2
3
LastLast
  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by spiattalo View Post
    Is this the reason why I sometimes read that "MM always performs way under sims results"?
    Basicly, yes. A computer simulation can "foresee" what will happen, and can thus make sure it picks the best choise (so as to not let ISS drop, etc), but a real human has to rely on luck.

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by Dracodraco View Post
    Basicly, yes. A computer simulation can "foresee" what will happen, and can thus make sure it picks the best choise (so as to not let ISS drop, etc), but a real human has to rely on luck.
    So we can be confident that sim results will be as reliable as they are for SV and BM. Thanks for the clarification and sorry for the OT.

  3. #23
    Quote Originally Posted by spiattalo View Post
    So we can be confident that sim results will be as reliable as they are for SV and BM. Thanks for the clarification and sorry for the OT.
    Don't forget female dwarf averages everything. For MM this is a pretty big deal because of the CA phase and 100% crit aimed shots and steady shots. So if anything mm will be right where it is on the sims because of player error and game mechanics.

  4. #24
    Seems like the hotfix train has stopped. The current values (i'm guessing) on the latest PTR should be the same for 5.2 live. Certain sims are again putting MM high, but not higher than BM still. And even with the beast cleave buff, there's no reason for anyone to be BM in an aoe/cleave fight [I really do wanna go back to HoF after 5.2 just to do H windlord as BM lulz.. the padding...]. But yea looks like our spec slots will remain BM/SV.

  5. #25
    I wish they'd buff it a bit more, and nerf SUrvival. There's no reason for survival to be that good at AOE. Granted, my main is a demo lock and we're not too shabby either, but a our aoe rotation is more punishing on the resources than survival's is.

    Anywaaaaaay back to the buff: I wish it were more. I still wish they'd make the AOE pets able to do other stuff while AOEing (or make their AOe's (worm burrow and froststorm breath) instant or something).

  6. #26
    Survival aoe is good but can be surpassed by other classes such as frost DKs so I don't get why you'd call for nerfs on a specs aoe which is good but not top. Rather BM aoe could probably do with more than this but hey we gotta be thankful for any buffs.

  7. #27
    Quote Originally Posted by Windthorn View Post
    Survival aoe is good but can be surpassed by other classes such as frost DKs so I don't get why you'd call for nerfs on a specs aoe which is good but not top.
    Because the tippity top of the class might not be the only one that needs nerfs? It's not like I said that survival was the only spec that needed it. Any suggestion to the contrary is because I was talking about it from a hunter perspective and survival is far too strong, even if you want it to be a "niche spec", at AOE compared to the other specs.

  8. #28
    I don't understand your point. So every class at or above SV's aoe needs a nerf ? SV, DK, Shaman, Locks, Monks, Spriests lol ? Or did you actually just mean SV ?

    And what does an aoe rotation being punishing on resources have anything to do with the numbers. The rotations are just different.

    It IS a niche spec, it IS meant for aoe and cleave. BM and MM ARE significantly lower than SV. That doesn't mean SV needs a nerf. It means BM and MM need buffs. Which I believe is where blizz is headed. SV will continue to be the highest aoe spec among the three HUNTER specs, cuz that was the intention. They just want to make the gap a little closer so it is not as punishing to play the other specs on aoe fights for the general wow population. But as far as min/maxing goes, SV should always be the top spec for aoe. So again I don't understand your point.

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by Saoron View Post
    I don't understand your point. So every class at or above SV's aoe needs a nerf ? SV, DK, Shaman, Locks, Monks, Spriests lol ? Or did you actually just mean SV ?
    That is NOT my point. I was speaking very specifically. I'm not going to be baited into a general discussion about AOE because I'm not interested in that. I'm talking about hunter specs here.

    And what does an aoe rotation being punishing on resources have anything to do with the numbers. The rotations are just different.
    For high damage AOE for demo, you spend about 40-50 seconds recovering your demonic fury. For a survival hunter, even without thrill of the hunt, you spend like 10 seconds tops.

    It IS a niche spec, it IS meant for aoe and cleave. ... So again I don't understand your point.
    My point is that the gap is too large. That's fine if you disagree, but I'm not exactly lecturing on rocket science here. I think you either do understand my point but are pretending not to as a form of disagreement, or you're so eager to try to twist it into something absurd that you're missing the simplicity of it.

  10. #30
    Quote Originally Posted by Magpai View Post
    That is NOT my point. I was speaking very specifically. I'm not going to be baited into a general discussion about AOE because I'm not interested in that. I'm talking about hunter specs here.



    For high damage AOE for demo, you spend about 40-50 seconds recovering your demonic fury. For a survival hunter, even without thrill of the hunt, you spend like 10 seconds tops.



    My point is that the gap is too large. That's fine if you disagree, but I'm not exactly lecturing on rocket science here. I think you either do understand my point but are pretending not to as a form of disagreement, or you're so eager to try to twist it into something absurd that you're missing the simplicity of it.
    So you want to nerf our aoe and not give us anything to compensate? Why? Buffing beast cleave a bit more won't make it competitive at all.

    Signature by Geekissexy Check out her Deviantart

  11. #31
    Quote Originally Posted by Tehstool View Post
    So you want to nerf our aoe and not give us anything to compensate? Why? Buffing beast cleave a bit more won't make it competitive at all.
    Whose AOE are you talking about? BM's, Survival's or something else?

  12. #32
    Quote Originally Posted by Magpai View Post
    Whose AOE are you talking about? BM's, Survival's or something else?
    You said you wanted to nerf SV's aoe and buff beast cleave a bit. Nerfing SV's aoe isn't going to fix anything.

    Signature by Geekissexy Check out her Deviantart

  13. #33
    Quote Originally Posted by Tehstool View Post
    You said you wanted to nerf SV's aoe and buff beast cleave a bit. Nerfing SV's aoe isn't going to fix anything.
    It would fix the fact that survival's AOE is too high. If you disagree that it's too high, fine, but don't pretend that nerfing SV's AOE would not fix SV's AOE being too high. Feigning that kind of disingenuous ignorance is just a waste of time.

  14. #34
    Quote Originally Posted by Magpai View Post
    It would fix the fact that survival's AOE is too high. If you disagree that it's too high, fine, but don't pretend that nerfing SV's AOE would not fix SV's AOE being too high. Feigning that kind of disingenuous ignorance is just a waste of time.
    It is most definitely not too high. If you are aoeing 50 adds, then yeah it's high, but in a realistic boss setting is is far from overpowered. Nerfing it wont fix BM's aoe.

    Signature by Geekissexy Check out her Deviantart

  15. #35
    Quote Originally Posted by Tehstool View Post
    It is most definitely not too high. If you are aoeing 50 adds, then yeah it's high, but in a realistic boss setting is is far from overpowered. Nerfing it wont fix BM's aoe.
    I didn't say nerfing it would fix BM's aoe, so I'm happy to clear up that very bad mistake you have made in your analysis of what I said.

  16. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by Magpai View Post
    It would fix the fact that survival's AOE is too high. If you disagree that it's too high, fine, but don't pretend that nerfing SV's AOE would not fix SV's AOE being too high. Feigning that kind of disingenuous ignorance is just a waste of time.
    except SVs AoE is not close to too high... in terms of sustained AoE is barely middle of the pack unless you talk trash and no-one gives a fuck about trash DPS.

    So suggesting nerfing a middle of the pack AoEs AoE damage just makes you look stupid, BM needs its AoE increased. You do not take a middle of the pack AoE and nerf it just to make a sub par AoE look better.

    Like i said before, blizzard needs to make serpent spread base line. This will still make SVs AoE superior to BMs AoE but not so far ahead its mandatory to swap to SV for all multi target fights.


    One thing blizzard has proven time and time again is they cannot see the forest though the trees. They cannot see the simple solutions to their problems.

  17. #37
    Quote Originally Posted by Magpai View Post
    I didn't say nerfing it would fix BM's aoe, so I'm happy to clear up that very bad mistake you have made in your analysis of what I said.
    Quote Originally Posted by Magpai View Post
    I wish they'd buff it a bit more, and nerf SUrvival.
    So nerfing SV and buffing BM's aoe doesn't constitute as trying to fix BM's aoe? Ok fine. SV's aoe is fine still though. It could be buffed and we'd still be fine.

    Signature by Geekissexy Check out her Deviantart

  18. #38
    thought this was going to be a thread about one of the weakest specs in the game with the lowest glad-rating representation(combined with its other spec) in the game besides monk DPS getting a buff instead of being neutered again, then acknowledging they suck even though they're being nerfed, and refusing to buff them.

  19. #39
    Quote Originally Posted by Nemesis003 View Post
    except SVs AoE is not close to too high... in terms of sustained AoE is barely middle of the pack unless you talk trash and no-one gives a fuck about trash DPS.

    So suggesting nerfing a middle of the pack AoEs AoE damage just makes you look stupid, BM needs its AoE increased. You do not take a middle of the pack AoE and nerf it just to make a sub par AoE look better.
    It's saying that I want Survival AOE nerfed to "make BM's AOE look better" that makes a person look stupid.

    I've already explained the reasoning behind why I think SV's AOE should be nerfed. The fact that you disagree with the premises behind that reasoning is fine, but it doesn't give you license to simply disregard them and assign me new premises for my own reasoning. In other words, don't put words in my mouth just because you're not willing to agree to disagree.

    I believe that BM's AOE is too low and SV's AOE is too high. The two are mostly independent problems, and the solutions to the two that I suggested (buff BM, nerf SV) are not related; they could be implemented separately or together. Yes, there is an underlying problem - too much disparity between SV and the other specs in AOE - that would be solved by these fixes, but it's not the primary goal of what I'm suggesting.

    ---------- Post added 2013-03-04 at 03:46 AM ----------

    Quote Originally Posted by Tehstool View Post
    So nerfing SV and buffing BM's aoe doesn't constitute as trying to fix BM's aoe?
    No, it doesn't. That was a mistake you are continuing to make in your interpretation. The fact that I mentioned my wish for a SV nerf in the same sentence does not mean both solutions target the same problem, namely BM's AOE. Arguing WITH ME about WHAT I think rather than whether or not what I think is right is a waste of both our time, so this is going to be the last post I type up explaining your mistaken interpretation. As for the state of SV's AOE as a standalone issue, we'll have to agree to disagree on that.

  20. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by Magpai View Post
    It's saying that I want Survival AOE nerfed to "make BM's AOE look better" that makes a person look stupid.

    I've already explained the reasoning behind why I think SV's AOE should be nerfed. The fact that you disagree with the premises behind that reasoning is fine, but it doesn't give you license to simply disregard them and assign me new premises for my own reasoning. In other words, don't put words in my mouth just because you're not willing to agree to disagree.

    I believe that BM's AOE is too low and SV's AOE is too high. The two are mostly independent problems, and the solutions to the two that I suggested (buff BM, nerf SV) are not related; they could be implemented separately or together. Yes, there is an underlying problem - too much disparity between SV and the other specs in AOE - that would be solved by these fixes, but it's not the primary goal of what I'm suggesting.

    ---------- Post added 2013-03-04 at 03:46 AM ----------



    No, it doesn't. That was a mistake you are continuing to make in your interpretation. The fact that I mentioned my wish for a SV nerf in the same sentence does not mean both solutions target the same problem, namely BM's AOE. Arguing WITH ME about WHAT I think rather than whether or not what I think is right is a waste of both our time, so this is going to be the last post I type up explaining your mistaken interpretation. As for the state of SV's AOE as a standalone issue, we'll have to agree to disagree on that.
    No, I'm not misinterpreting what you are saying. I'm saying nerfing SV's aoe wont do anything simply because it's not overpowered. Look at any raid log and you will see there are numerous classes above SV on aoe fights. Nerfing SV's aoe and buffing BM's aoe is going to make BM's aoe more attractive by definition regardless of whether or not that was the fix for BM's aoe, but since SV's aoe is fine it's not going to fix anything, it will just create problems unless if they superbuffed beast cleave. You are arguing that SVs aoe is too high and I'm telling you it's not. Nerfing it won't fix SV's aoe being too high because it's not too high. You are the one who is misinterpreting what I'm saying.

    Signature by Geekissexy Check out her Deviantart

Posting Permissions

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