1. #1

    Hunter Representation in SoO

    Post on Main Page

    I'm quite suprised by how well the Hunters are represented overall. Second only to warlocks as pure DPS (especially on Garrosh).


    I understand the issues with hunters would not necessarily show up on a graph like this (as it's both 10 and 25 and only 3 boss pool). But at least it doesn't point anything obvious.

    What do you guys think about this?

  2. #2
    Meaningless. Hunters are always well represented because at least 1 exists in almost all 10man groups and their mobility appeals to 25man raids to handle mechanics that require lots of movement.

  3. #3
    Quote Originally Posted by Glurp View Post
    Meaningless. Hunters are always well represented because at least 1 exists in almost all 10man groups and their mobility appeals to 25man raids to handle mechanics that require lots of movement.
    Except that you and others have been talking about how our lack of raid utility and mediocre dps hurts our ability to be given raid slots and at least at the overall level of heroics, it hasn't.

    Obviously it would be nice to see this broken out into 10s and 25s.... but this kind of breaks the "ZOMG no heroic guild wants hunters, we're DOOOOMMMMED" line of argument. Even if we ignore the Garrosh bar due to a relatively small sample and leave out Immerseus since a guild killing the first heroic boss isn't necessarily a serious heroic guild, that leaves us withe Dark Shaman, a boss mid-way in with a fair sample size. And... we're the second highest of the 4 pure DPS just barely below warlocks.
    Last edited by clevin; 2014-01-21 at 11:43 PM.

  4. #4
    Quote Originally Posted by clevin View Post
    Except that you and others have been talking about how our lack of raid utility and mediocre dps hurts our ability to be given raid slots and at least at the overall level of heroics, it hasn't.

    Obviously it would be nice to see this broken out into 10s and 25s.... but this kind of breaks the "ZOMG no heroic guild wants hunters, we're DOOOOMMMMED" line of argument. Even if we ignore the Garrosh bar due to a relatively small sample and leave out Immerseus since a guild killing the first heroic boss isn't necessarily a serious heroic guild, that leaves us withe Dark Shaman, a boss mid-way in with a fair sample size. And... we're the second highest of the 4 pure DPS just barely below warlocks.

    Exactly. I'm not talking about their performance but whether or not they get invited into groups. The counter argument could say that Hunters is the most played class in the game, so not having it on top means it's less preferred than other classes like Warlocks. But I was expecting more drastic results.

  5. #5
    It goes both ways. Hunters are well represented because they are good at doing the "bitch jobs" in raids however when compared to classes that are simply better throughput wise they lose a bit of representation. For example, how often do you see a 25man guild with 2 Hunters and 4 Warlocks compared to a 25man guild with 4 Hunters and 2 Warlocks?

    Quote Originally Posted by clevin View Post
    Except that you and others have been talking about how our lack of raid utility and mediocre dps hurts our ability to be given raid slots and at least at the overall level of heroics, it hasn't.
    I said what?

  6. #6
    Quote Originally Posted by Glurp View Post
    It goes both ways. Hunters are well represented because they are good at doing the "bitch jobs" in raids however when compared to classes that are simply better throughput wise they lose a bit of representation. For example, how often do you see a 25man guild with 2 Hunters and 4 Warlocks compared to a 25man guild with 4 Hunters and 2 Warlocks?
    Very hard thing to verify, you can either look at the guilds you personally know (which isn't a very high representation) or look at the top guilds (including yours, still a very thin sample). This is why this argument is very hard to prove, because we can only speak for our own experience and a few small samples.


    Quote Originally Posted by Glurp View Post
    I said what?
    I think he was using you as a front of what a good chunk of the hunter's community have been saying on these forums for a year or 2 now.

  7. #7
    Moderator
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Brawl Pub
    Posts
    3,062
    There's always one hunter in a raid at least because all that agi mail and ranged weapons....gear soaks keep us competitive in progression.

  8. #8
    Mechagnome Ironjaws-Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    A forest in Sweden
    Posts
    705
    Honestly, I wouldn't trust that to much. Wouldn't trust it either if it said Hunters was less or most represented. Always hard to get something like that correct.

    Quote Originally Posted by clevin View Post
    Except that you and others have been talking about how our lack of raid utility and mediocre dps hurts our ability to be given raid slots and at least at the overall level of heroics, it hasn't.

    Obviously it would be nice to see this broken out into 10s and 25s.... but this kind of breaks the "ZOMG no heroic guild wants hunters, we're DOOOOMMMMED" line of argument. Even if we ignore the Garrosh bar due to a relatively small sample and leave out Immerseus since a guild killing the first heroic boss isn't necessarily a serious heroic guild, that leaves us withe Dark Shaman, a boss mid-way in with a fair sample size. And... we're the second highest of the 4 pure DPS just barely below warlocks.
    Well, we HAVE a lack of raid utility? But got a little buff to dps. That's true though and been many Hunters concern. And I don't think many said "ZOMG no heroic guild wants hunters, we're DOOOOMMMMED", however that they been sit out for an other DPS, like Warlock (while there is always a Hunter to mail-soak stuff at least) because they bring both the 'deeps' and utility. That is what I got out of it all, and honestly, I wouldn't throw my money into these graph to much really.

    Aaaaand I guess it try to show ALL kills? If it was under the first month progress etc, it would probably look vastly different compared to now etc, when people now have better gear. Maybe, maybe not.

    Still doesn't change the fact there is issues and needs to be fixed around the Hunter class imo. *shrugs*
    Mix red and blue, what do we get?

    Horde + Alliance = Epic

  9. #9
    Quote Originally Posted by clevin View Post
    Obviously it would be nice to see this broken out into 10s and 25s.... but this kind of breaks the "ZOMG no heroic guild wants hunters, we're DOOOOMMMMED" line of argument. Even if we ignore the Garrosh bar due to a relatively small sample and leave out Immerseus since a guild killing the first heroic boss isn't necessarily a serious heroic guild, that leaves us withe Dark Shaman, a boss mid-way in with a fair sample size. And... we're the second highest of the 4 pure DPS just barely below warlocks.
    You also have to consider the fact that this doesn't differentiate alts from mains, and a LARGE portion of people have an alt hunter. Granted it counts even a single kill, but still, it does mean that less of them are actual mains and count for less.
    Quote Originally Posted by Grimord View Post
    Mr.EvilGreedyPresident goes "MWAHAHAH YOU PUNY PROGRAMMER, I'M BUYING A NEW FERRARI AND THERE'S O MONEY LEFT FOR YOUR PUNY CONTENT, WITHER AND DIE AND SCREW THE PLAYERS MWAHAHAHAHAHHAHAHA *thunder echoes in the distance*"
    Main

  10. #10
    Grunt The Grid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2012
    Location
    The Netherlands
    Posts
    13
    Quote Originally Posted by Ironjaws-Mike View Post
    Well, we HAVE a lack of raid utility? But got a little buff to dps. That's true though and been many Hunters concern. And I don't think many said "ZOMG no heroic guild wants hunters, we're DOOOOMMMMED", however that they been sit out for an other DPS, like Warlock (while there is always a Hunter to mail-soak stuff at least) because they bring both the 'deeps' and utility. That is what I got out of it all, and honestly, I wouldn't throw my money into these graph to much really.
    I don't know if this might change per guild (which I do presume) but from the fellow hunters this is something I get to hear a lot. That when you have 2-3 hunters in the guild that they rather get benched out for something like a lock because of the reason you mentioned above.

    Quote Originally Posted by Ironjaws-Mike View Post
    Still doesn't change the fact there is issues and needs to be fixed around the Hunter class imo. *shrugs*
    Somehow I do think they are okay in a way, but I do agree on this. For example it still bugs me that Pet movement isn't yet on the place where it should be. I think that could be something aswell.

    I wonder how the class representation would be if you split them apart in 10 and 25...

  11. #11
    Quote Originally Posted by Arcanimus View Post
    You also have to consider the fact that this doesn't differentiate alts from mains, and a LARGE portion of people have an alt hunter. Granted it counts even a single kill, but still, it does mean that less of them are actual mains and count for less.

    That works the same way for other classes too though. With the recent ap buff this number is going to climb more and more too.
    Beware of the man who works hard to learn something, learns it, and finds himself no wiser than before... He is full of murderous resentment of people who are ignorant without having come by their ignorance the hard way. -Kurt Vonnegut, "Cat's Cradle"
    "Not everything on the internet is true." -- Abraham Lincoln
    Good is the enemy of great.
    Quote Originally Posted by obdigore View Post
    Also, its Birmingham. The place has more guns than teeth. What do you expect?

  12. #12
    Quote Originally Posted by Ironjaws-Mike View Post
    Still doesn't change the fact there is issues and needs to be fixed around the Hunter class imo. *shrugs*
    Hunters being "average" for an expansion doesn't mean there is a problem with the Hunter class. The numbers just weren't right, there is no magical problem that can be solved by changing/adding/removing a few spells.

  13. #13
    Keyboard Turner Fraggster's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2011
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    4
    10man groups needs one Hunter because they are buff bitches! :-D

  14. #14
    Mechagnome Ironjaws-Mike's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    A forest in Sweden
    Posts
    705
    Quote Originally Posted by Glurp View Post
    Hunters being "average" for an expansion doesn't mean there is a problem with the Hunter class. The numbers just weren't right, there is no magical problem that can be solved by changing/adding/removing a few spells.
    No, ofc not. However, some extra utility in form of raid-wide CD or similar would make Hunters more valuable for sure. At least I feel like that when I can't use any sort of raid cd to support my group. Then again, I'm just a 9/14 normal raider, so my opinion isn't to value to much I guess.
    Mix red and blue, what do we get?

    Horde + Alliance = Epic

  15. #15
    Wouldn't hunters being one of the (if not the most) popular classes skew that a bit?

  16. #16
    To be clear, I'm not arguing above that I think we're fine but I think the numbers being like this hurt our chances of getting some of the fixes we want. If we were below rogues the case is much more clearcut but when we're 2nd behind 'locks it's harder to make the case that if we don't get raid utility or a DPS buff that we'll not be taken to raids.

    That said, i'd hope Blizz has more detailed slices of this data so that they can look at things like alt vs main, 10 vs 25s, representation vs overall population, etc. After all, if there are 2x as many hunters as locks, then the picture is much worse than it might look from a quick glance.

Posting Permissions

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