Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ...
2
3
4
5
LastLast
  1. #61
    Those who progress at an 'average pace' as how you put it, are not stupid and are not unaware of the limitations of the Hunter class. Yes, they're obviously going to be less hardcore and elite but it doesn't mean they don't know where their class stands and is supposed to perform when competing against other DPS of similar gear and skill. Sure, their expectations would probably be not as extreme as some of the top raiding hunters, and perhaps they don't want to go down the rerolling route either but I've definitely noticed the same concerns in regards to the class from some of my friends.

    I know plenty of old school Hunters on my big realm that I've met since vanilla that still play, and whilst not all of them are 13/13hc, it doesn't mean I'm going to automatically look down on them - why should I? Every now and then, I like to have random talks with them, and the topic of Hunter DPS is usually discussed. It's something they're not too happy with either, not surprisingly. Most of them feel that the class could use some help too.

    Just because you're a casual raider, or someone who is only 10/13hc doesn't mean they can't feel somewhat lacking in X and Y departments etc by the class. It still shows and things like the lack of utility can also annoy these players.
    Last edited by Drakoes; 2013-08-23 at 11:24 PM.

  2. #62
    Quote Originally Posted by Klatar View Post
    Fair?

    That's how it looks in LFR TOT. They just can't ignore those raidsizes as there are far more LFR Raiders than Highend Raiders.


    I agree that changes would be good, but they would have to come at the costs of more difficult gameplay. As long as "bad" hunters perform sooooo good, buffs aren't fair to everyone else.

    - - - Updated - - -



    That's now, after getting cloaks and being totally overgeared.

    And it's now like hunters suck in heroic raiding. They just aren't too strong either.
    You posted parses of the bottom 10% of lfr. If you really want it balanced around the "average hunter" you should balance it around the average lfr hunter, where survival is 8th, behind specs from 6 different classes, barely beating a seventh. All while bringing no raid wide defensive or dps cds, no off heals, and no nifty tools like lock rocks or portals.

    (I would post the link to the average, but unfortunately I do not have enough posts on this site to posts links or pictures)

  3. #63
    High Overlord
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    California
    Posts
    123
    Quote Originally Posted by Dracodraco View Post
    http://femaledwarf.com/ use that instead of the inaccurate garbage that is the simulationcraft tool for hunters. For me in current gear, it shows:
    BM: 245K-> 232K (AKA 5.3%.).
    This is AFTER the fact that we were supposed to be buffed - instead, we are facing a 11K nerf while we were already horrible DPS-wise. Everyone else also got nerfed through RPPM changes, but they in turn got buffed otherwise (For example, DKs, shadow priests, warriors, rogues etc) or were already incredible overpowered to start with and did not NEED further compensation (For example, Mage, Warlock).
    Note that the 4.7% loss is also with current gear, not calculating the new tier set, which was only worth a damn because of the fact that rapid fire was "real" haste, and thus increased our RPPM chance. It is now garbage compared to pretty much anything else, as it has been nerfed over and over again (started on 12 sec per arcane shot) because of it.

    As for Surv, I am logged off in that spec because I have only done Meg this week and I cba with pet pathing fuck ups. But hey, shits n giggles, simulating Surv with FD:
    232K DPS on live, 226K on PTR (or a 2.5% nerf). As you can see, Surv is affected a whole lot less than BM by the RPPM nerf - because surv does not have focus fire to enhance the proc chances of RPPM items. But its not the laughable 400 DPS you are getting as a result.
    Either way, Surv doesnt even matter. Post-patch BM is the same strength as current-level Surv, so we will be sticking to BM to maximize what little damage we do, either way.

    Meanwhile, guildy is telling me that his rogue is simulating at almost 270K in current gear with PTR changes.
    I am at a 548 ilvl myself and I get something like 5.5 or 6% loss (~14k-15k DPS). Looking into the results a bit more in depth I noticed that adding up the % damage lost between hunter and pet identically matched the damage gained by stampede, yet there is still a huge chunk of missing DPS left uncompensated which I would assume is the RPPM nerf. I actually made a spreadsheet comparison to side by side compare the values pre/post PTR changes and then had it calc out the difference in DPS both absolule value and percentage but I don't have it with me at work to refer to, and after getting a couple upgrades this week (boosting my FD results) the DPS loss is actually like 1k less than it was before.

    So unless my results are completely wrong or I have totally misinterpreted that data I think it's pretty safe to say the devs actually literally did not do a single thing for us for 5.4:
    1. They removed readiness as a result of their inability to adequately balance PvP and are "marketing" it as a QoL change because it was just oh so damn comlplicated.
    2. They partially reverted the stampede nerf and marketed it as a buff, not a fix, before [publicly] stating that removing readiness altogether was currently on the table as a potential option.
    3. When it was made known that gutting readiness was an option being considered and when it began to become apparent that was the direction we were headed, Lore was sent out to the frontlines 3? 4? 5? times to sell the illusion that should readiness be removed, adequate compensation would be provided.
    4. Weeks pass with new patch notes every few days without anything, when finally the tweaks to our primary nukes get factored shifting some damage from arcane to signatures.

    Yet assuming RPPM isn't factored in or doesn't even exist for the sake of argument, there is literally no net change in damage, when if anything -- at bare minimum reverting of the Stampede nerf should have put us what... like 3%? ahead of live...

    I believe that this has been the intent since this shit initially hit the fan 2 months ago and there was never any intention to actually buff. As hunters rode the PTR roller coaster they finally said something along the lines of "look, we think readiness is the major source of the issue and as such we're removing it and will be adjusting the damage on x,y,z abilties to compensate for the damage. We also agree that Stampede should be a worthwhile cooldown and are reverting the damage modifiers back to pre-nerf values" when in actuality the alleged "buff" to stampede is really inclusive of that compensation for a net change of zero. RPPM nerf is just an additional swift kick to the nuts for good measure.

  4. #64
    There's also this problem that a lot of guilds follow the setup of high end raiding. If they bench Hunters, the other guilds will bench hunters too. Same with PuGs, because they can just take a Warlock or other DPS instead. Only guilds that have to take Hunters will take them. :F

  5. #65
    Quote Originally Posted by bewsh View Post
    I am at a 548 ilvl myself and I get something like 5.5 or 6% loss (~14k-15k DPS). Looking into the results a bit more in depth I noticed that adding up the % damage lost between hunter and pet identically matched the damage gained by stampede, yet there is still a huge chunk of missing DPS left uncompensated which I would assume is the RPPM nerf.
    Correct. The removal of readiness, the significant increase to AS' focus cost for less than +15%~ damage and even the RRPM nerfs has had a huge impact in our DPS, and the proposed buffs to our signature abilities, along with the new stampede doesn't look like it will allow us to come out with a gain as it is NOT enough. We need some more tweaks, and I have continously forwarded some math that Arcane Shot should do more than simply 125% weapon damage for 50% more focus (alternatively, buff our signatures further as that also works if they don't want to do that).

    This is something GC assured us in his watercooler post, and that was to say that they will *make sure* our DPS in 5.4 is higher than that of 5.3. Lets hope there's some more buffs to follow, as it's safe to say that the majority of us right now can't expect to happily walk into 5.4 knowing that our DPS is a lot higher than ever with a straight face.

  6. #66
    Blizzard does not even balance hunters around the top 100% of players #totallyunrelated #rant

  7. #67
    Quote Originally Posted by Erzengel View Post
    Blizzard does not even balance hunters around the top 100% of players #totallyunrelated #rant
    Who cares about 100% ? about 5% ?
    It is top 1% what matters.. maybe even less.. rest are casuals who are not loosing spots - they don't compete for spots - just raiding for fun 3-4 times a week..
    How would some mechanical changes affect casuals in negative way at all ? even casuals are behind on multidot fights, not just hc raiders.
    How would 5% single target damage increase(which we are missing) affect casuals so much, that blizzard can not make changes? They would do 2-3k more damage - and what is wrong with this?

    For top 1% it matters the most! where everyone min/max.. everyone gets 100% out of their classes.

    NOT 99% who gets 60-90% out of their potential.

  8. #68
    High Overlord
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    California
    Posts
    123
    Quote Originally Posted by Drakoes View Post
    Correct. The removal of readiness, the significant increase to AS' focus cost for less than +15%~ damage and even the RRPM nerfs has had a huge impact in our DPS, and the proposed buffs to our signature abilities, along with the new stampede doesn't look like it will allow us to come out with a gain as it is NOT enough. We need some more tweaks, and I have continously forwarded some math that Arcane Shot should do more than simply 125% weapon damage for 50% more focus (alternatively, buff our signatures further as that also works if they don't want to do that).

    This is something GC assured us in his watercooler post, and that was to say that they will *make sure* our DPS in 5.4 is higher than that of 5.3. Lets hope there's some more buffs to follow, as it's safe to say that the majority of us right now can't expect to happily walk into 5.4 knowing that our DPS is a lot higher than ever with a straight face.
    The "I assume" sentence was largely rhetorical. But yes.

    My point was that there is no gain, anywhere. The damage was gently and quietly shifted from one place to another and that was labeled a "buff" when in fact there is no buff, anywhere. There is the reverting of a poorly thought out nerf, more general nerfs, and some numbers shifting from one ability to another.

    That is literally all that was done. You mention signature shots getting buffed but maybe don't realize according to blizzard they already were. Only when they meant "buffed" what they really meant was "normalized". RPPM mechanics aside, we walk into the next tier in the same place as we leave the current tier, with one less button to press every 5 minutes. Taking RPPM into account, we walk into it in a worse spot.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Paladzins View Post
    Who cares about 100% ? about 5% ?
    It is top 1% what matters.. maybe even less.. rest are casuals who are not loosing spots - they don't compete for spots - just raiding for fun 3-4 times a week..
    How would some mechanical changes affect casuals in negative way at all ? even casuals are behind on multidot fights, not just hc raiders.
    How would 5% single target damage increase(which we are missing) affect casuals so much, that blizzard can not make changes? They would do 2-3k more damage - and what is wrong with this?

    For top 1% it matters the most! where everyone min/max.. everyone gets 100% out of their classes.

    NOT 99% who gets 60-90% out of their potential.

    Apparently you are either 15, homeschooled, and lacking friends or any semblance of a social life, along with common sense - or I'm not sure what to say without resorting to personal insults.

    That said, I agree the balancing should be done using the highest level of skill and the difficulty then scaled down from there... but trying to put a blanket label on people who do not spend 40 hours a week raiding in a poor attempt to discredit their efforts is foolish and makes you look sad. There are plenty of 9-12/hr, 4/day a week raids who have managed to progress [and clear] in a fraction of the actual time of most guilds... So I guess that makes the people who raid 20-25+ hours, 5+ days a week during the first month of a release both terrible AND stupid by your logic?

    If you do not raid for fun -- as in -- you do not get enjoyment out of the teamwork, the challenge, the competition, the VOIP lulz, whatever... what the fuck do you raid for? Bragging rights? Even the uppermost echelon of raiders enjoys it -- else they'd unsub. I'm but a lowly 11/13H casual who works 12 hour days, sleeps 4 hours a night, and raids no more than 9 hours per week, but hey... I'd much rather be labeled a dirty casual than as the fat, greasy, pimple-faced, neckbearded basement dwelling virgin.

  9. #69
    Really? Now people are expected to link logs just to prove something as minor as stating that they think one class is easier to play than another?
    It is not unreasonable for you to prove how easy it is to play a hunter at a high level when you claim that they are easy. In fact, if you can not prove you can play at a high level it invalidates your entire premiss.
    Seeing you pretend to be outraged by someone asking for proof of your claims is down right hilarious and says all that we here that can play hunters need to know... your full of shit and so is your argument.

    I mean.... what the hell would it prove? I guess I can link a log showing my hunter beating the warlock in my raid group when I know that Warlock can play as well as me when he is on his hunter..... But then you would expect me to dig up a link to a log proving that we do similar dps when we are both on our hunters.
    The fact that you do not even know how to break down a simple log OR what kind of information you can get from it just by spending 10 mins on one is mind blowing. I can take your log and parse it out and can tell immediately by the number of KC's you do in a fight and dividing it by the cd and the time of the fight to see if you are clipping KC or playing optimally. That is only 1 ability and it takes about 11 seconds to figure out...

    And, YES.... I do think both BM and Surv are easier to play than any of the Warlock specs. You don't have to believe that, but I think most people would agree with me.
    No one said being a moron was illegal, but please try and keep it to yourself? Its just embarrassing for you and not really worth the time it takes to respond to this type of idiocy.

  10. #70
    Quote Originally Posted by Buttercheese View Post
    You posted parses of the bottom 10% of lfr. If you really want it balanced around the "average hunter" you should balance it around the average lfr hunter, where survival is 8th, behind specs from 6 different classes, barely beating a seventh. All while bringing no raid wide defensive or dps cds, no off heals, and no nifty tools like lock rocks or portals.

    (I would post the link to the average, but unfortunately I do not have enough posts on this site to posts links or pictures)
    Of course i did. I just wanted to show that there are raid points where hunters tend to overperform.

    In the end, the only way to justify hunter dps buffs would be to remove the mobility aspect of hunters so that they can't "cast" while running. This way they could increase "potential dps" so that skilled hunters perform closer to the top and bad hunters get more punishment for bad playstyle. That's what happens for many casters who just outperform hunters and most melees when they can optimize their movement and casting. E.g. the arcane mage treatment: extremely high dps, but very big problems on movement.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Paladzins View Post

    NOT 99% who gets 60-90% out of their potential.
    Yeah so fire mages should get a nerf to where 99% of mages suck and hunters should be buffed to a point where 99% of hunters are overpowered and the top 1% is balanced.

    They can't balance a game for 1% of all raiders so that 99% perform over the top. They're always trying to balance around different gearsets and different skill levels.

    Hunters underperforming in high end raiding is because hunters are too easy. Low hunters performing a lot worse would leave room to buff highend raiding.

  11. #71
    So we first get autoshot on moving, then any shot (apart from aimed shot) on moving, and now we're too easy ...

    So making Hunter one of the (if not the) most mobile class in the game, in addition to being really easy to level, great for solo pve/farming and (as of mop) really good in pvp has lead blizzard to the conclusion that we must have drawbacks regarding damage output in utility in raids to be 'balanced overall'?

    I do realize that the Hunter Class is a nice 'all in one'-package, but apart from being mobile on range I don't see us taking the top spot anywhere (I'd love to kill those warbringers as easily with my Hunter main as I do with my badly geared dk alt).

    The class being popular is, in my opinion, nowhere being connected with being that awesome at raiding. I recall Blizzard even recommending Hunters as easy to level, so they're a nice choice for a first char (apart, again from DK ... lets not talk about those :P). Overall class population shouldn't be connected with Raid viability really. Knowing you won't be competitive around the Warlocks, Mages, etc. in your raid is a bit frustrating and diminishes my overall enjoyment of raiding.
    Last edited by sokrana; 2013-08-24 at 10:17 AM.

  12. #72
    And, YES.... I do think both BM and Surv are easier to play than any of the Warlock specs. You don't have to believe that, but I think most people would agree with me
    Idk about aff or demo since I rarely use those. But I have a destruction warlock alt I PvE with and he's insanely easy to play.

  13. #73
    Quote Originally Posted by Orcindauh View Post
    Idk about aff or demo since I rarely use those. But I have a destruction warlock alt I PvE with and he's insanely easy to play.
    I think people are misinterpreting me when I say that hunters are easier to play than other classes...

    I'm not saying they are stupid EZ Mode.... but even if they are 10% easier to play (smoother rotation, no movement penalty, fewer DoTs/cooldowns) a noticeable difference in damage done will show up.

  14. #74
    Quote Originally Posted by Klatar View Post

    Yeah so fire mages should get a nerf to where 99% of mages suck and hunters should be buffed to a point where 99% of hunters are overpowered and the top 1% is balanced.

    They can't balance a game for 1% of all raiders so that 99% perform over the top. They're always trying to balance around different gearsets and different skill levels.

    Hunters underperforming in high end raiding is because hunters are too easy. Low hunters performing a lot worse would leave room to buff highend raiding.
    The difference is spec vs class.

    If fire mages get a nerf to where 99% of fire mages suck, then the other two specs are still going to be outperforming hunters by quite a bit, and in lfr/lfg/questing situations, fire isn't that popular anyways because they other two classes are easier to play with their 4 button rotations. If hunters got buffed so that one or 2 of their specs was keeping up with those mages, and then scaled successfully with those mages, there would be nothing wrong with that. Or if hunters weren't buffed, but given something to make them helpful to the raid, that would be fine too.

    As for low end hunters performing worse, I'm certain some of them are trying. I ran an lfr on my fresh 90 boomy the other day, got in on Gara'jal, and the bottom two dps on that fight were hunters (that I beat by about 15k dps on my 457 that I will admit I am bad at) the BM hunter used kill command once, and the survival hunter used explosive trap about 15 times. If those are the kinds of people that blizz wants to balance a game around, then it's no surprise that they suck at it. I don't care if arcane shot spam pulls better dps than frostbolt spam, or a rogue auto attack, or lightning bolt spam, because those people wouldn't notice an attempt to balance anyways, and wouldn't care enough to bitch if they did.

  15. #75
    Quote Originally Posted by Buttercheese View Post
    BM hunter used kill command once, and the survival hunter used explosive trap about 15 times. If those are the kinds of people that blizz wants to balance a game around, then it's no surprise that they suck at it..
    That is not what Blizzard balances around. I really don't think LFR plays much of a role in class balance. Blizzard was balancing classes long before LFR was around, so while it might have some small role now, I think class performance in normals and heroics (all heroics, not just the months worth of progression) play the biggest role.

  16. #76
    Quote Originally Posted by Rackfu View Post
    That is not what Blizzard balances around. I really don't think LFR plays much of a role in class balance. Blizzard was balancing classes long before LFR was around, so while it might have some small role now, I think class performance in normals and heroics (all heroics, not just the months worth of progression) play the biggest role.
    I didn't think that's what blizz was balancing around, but the person I was responding too ported parses of the bottom 10% of lfr to explain why hunters shouldn't be buffed. I was saying if those are the people blizz balances around they are doing it wrong.

  17. #77
    Went on the PTR last night, the arcane shot focus cost change really has messed up our rotation, many a time I was focus starved so either this remains and I'll just have to get use to it and spam more cobras almost like the older mm rotation in cata - in pairs or they revert these changes. Our Dps currently is confirmed as poo, especially more on multi dot encounters. The only shining light is the 4 set for survival is decent, that's about it. I'll be sitting on a bench somewhere on silvermoon EU, care to join me Kibu?

  18. #78
    Stood in the Fire Conjor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    Toronto
    Posts
    397
    Quote Originally Posted by Windthorn View Post
    Went on the PTR last night, the arcane shot focus cost change really has messed up our rotation, many a time I was focus starved so either this remains and I'll just have to get use to it and spam more cobras almost like the older mm rotation in cata - in pairs or they revert these changes. Our Dps currently is confirmed as poo, especially more on multi dot encounters. The only shining light is the 4 set for survival is decent, that's about it. I'll be sitting on a bench somewhere on silvermoon EU, care to join me Kibu?
    The 4 set for survival is ridiculous and I hope they change it. Sitting there hitting ExS 10 times is not fun nor engaging nor challenging gameplay.

  19. #79
    Quote Originally Posted by Conjor View Post
    The 4 set for survival is ridiculous and I hope they change it. Sitting there hitting ExS 10 times is not fun nor engaging nor challenging gameplay.
    While not challenging, I have a feeling that it could be kind of fun.

  20. #80
    Quote Originally Posted by Paladzins View Post
    Who cares about 100% ? about 5% ?
    It is top 1% what matters.. maybe even less.. rest are casuals who are not loosing spots - they don't compete for spots - just raiding for fun 3-4 times a week..
    How would some mechanical changes affect casuals in negative way at all ? even casuals are behind on multidot fights, not just hc raiders.
    How would 5% single target damage increase(which we are missing) affect casuals so much, that blizzard can not make changes? They would do 2-3k more damage - and what is wrong with this?

    For top 1% it matters the most! where everyone min/max.. everyone gets 100% out of their classes.

    NOT 99% who gets 60-90% out of their potential.
    ROFL, i was just randomly trolling along and answered a hunter thread because it was highlighted. The title made me think of pvp only even. Only after posting I even saw the word 'damage' in the title, but i couldnt be bothered to delete my answer.
    But this right here is fucking comedy gold, wow you're dumb oO

Posting Permissions

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