WW Monk in HFC

[skulldelight]

I definitely don't think we're worthless (I compete in our raids pretty well), but as someone who gets into the 90 percentile range+ quite often, depending on the type of fight we definitely seem to have a fall off.

As long as you're being brought to raid's though and you're able to compete, I don't really think it's a big deal

[Babylonius]

The data doesn't agree with the idea that we scale better comparatively with other classes as we get better gear. If you adjust the results with increasing item level we begin to get passed by more specs. We also drop in rating as you increase the percentile range.

There is no idea that we scale better compared with other classes, we scale worse. I meant that without 4pc and class trinket you're playing behind the eight ball. If you can jump out and get class trinket and 4pc before others then you can compete, but as they get gear, WW will fall behind.

[Deleted]

What is the realistic chance of Blizzard "upping" our damage abit ?

[Deleted]

0%, we are doing fine and above average, especially on hard part of the instance (Tyrant/Xhul/Manno/Archi are all amazing for WW).

[Enpoli]

0%, we are doing fine and above average, especially on hard part of the instance (Tyrant/Xhul/Manno/Archi are all amazing for WW).

This was the biggest factor for me not freaking out when we got our 2pc nerf and then no tuning buffs to compensate. At least we'll be desirable late in the tier, not because we scale well when everyone finally gets decent gear.. but because we happen to excel at those encounters.

[klepp0906]

0%, we are doing fine and above average, especially on hard part of the instance (Tyrant/Xhul/Manno/Archi are all amazing for WW).

i love when ignorance is quelled.

so how's about that massive buff we have coming? no chance since we're doing fine n all. www.warcraftlogs.com so you dont have to pull statements from your tail.

[Deleted]

i love when ignorance is quelled.

so how's about that massive buff we have coming? no chance since we're doing fine n all. www.warcraftlogs.com so you dont have to pull statements from your tail.

Maybe, just maybe, you should give a look at data that you are linking. Let me do that for you: https://www.warcraftlogs.com/statistics/8#dataset=100.
I have no idea who you are, but if you actually have done progression in HFC/took a look at the fights, you would know that WW excels on all hard encounters in the raid.

As I said in the other thread, those buffs are totally over the board. If they go live in that state It will push and solidify WW dominance in HFC (followed by Arcane/MM). I guess class balance doesn't really matter now for Blizzard with HFC being out for 2 months already, and with Legion beta coming soon artifacts/new system will prolly switch it 180 degrees.

PS.If you are going to be disrespectful online, atleast make sure that you are assured of the info you post otherwise you look like a clown.

[Deleted]

I guess class balance doesn't really matter now for Blizzard with HFC being out for 2 months already, and with Legion beta coming soon artifacts/new system will prolly switch it 180 degrees.

How so? Looking at wowprogress, only a small fraction of the guilds have completed progression.

[Deleted]

If they want to stay true to their release plans (~6 months/tier) and taking into consideration fact that WoD was a massive failure sub-wise IMO it's safe to assume they are focusing fully on Legion atm (beta should be out before blizzcon so pretty soon).

[Deleted]

Considering they're still only in internal alpha, I'm guessing this tier will overall stay a lot longer than ~6 months.
Seems like they misunderstood what players meant when asking for shorter expansions. They cut a tier/expansion instead of reducing the time of the final one. Who knows, maybe in some years they'll sell every tier for the price of an expansion.

[Notter]

Rait, I have looked at the data, and i don't see monks doing so great as you try to show it.
Yes, in the link you've provided the "overall" statistic shows monks pretty high.. but when you look at each fight it's a different story.

Assault - bad
Iron Reaver - bad.
Komrok - bad.
Council - SUPER GOOD. which totally screws up the "overall" statistic.
Kilrogg - bad.
GoreFiend - bad.
Iskar - very good. rogues are still WAY better.
Zakkun - bad.
Xhul - Alright. rogues are still WAY better.
Soc'rethat - bad.
Valhari - SUPER GOOD. (though you can't single target the nuke phase...)
Mannaroth - very good.
Archimonde - good.

so that's 7/13!!!! fights WW monk is bad... and you're saying this class is doing fine.
yeah sorry, that's just doesn't make any sense to me.

and another facor: i don't even think it's really 7/13. since after Gorfiend, there are less than 200 WW monk parses, and obviously, those <200 players are awesome and play way better than most monks, which skews statistics even more.

[Deleted]

Rait, I have looked at the data, and i don't see monks doing so great as you try to show it.
Yes, in the link you've provided the "overall" statistic shows monks pretty high.. but when you look at each fight it's a different story.

Assault - bad
Iron Reaver - bad.
Komrok - bad.
Council - SUPER GOOD. which totally screws up the "overall" statistic.
Kilrogg - bad.
GoreFiend - bad.
Iskar - very good. rogues are still WAY better.
Zakkun - bad.
Xhul - Alright. rogues are still WAY better.
Soc'rethat - bad.
Valhari - SUPER GOOD. (though you can't single target the nuke phase...)
Mannaroth - very good.
Archimonde - good.

so that's 7/13!!!! fights WW monk is bad... and you're saying this class is doing fine.
yeah sorry, that's just doesn't make any sense to me.

and another facor: i don't even think it's really 7/13. since after Gorfiend, there are less than 200 WW monk parses, and obviously, those <200 players are awesome and play way better than most monks, which skews statistics even more.

Really curious to what ur definition of bad is,

Assault - Shitiest bosser ever, the easier it is for ur guild the more of a twat ur gonna look like as a WW which is easily flipped, the harder the boss is for ur guild, the more of a hero ur gonna look like.

Iron Reaver+Kormrok - What is that we are bad at that other melee do so much better? The fact that we can ToD bombs, DM+Zen Med to help out with Explosive Runes?

Kilrogg - 2-target cleave on Kilrogg himself + Hulking Terror + endless of CD's. Clearly BAD!

Gorefiend - Top Melee-DPS on Constructs within' the stomach cause of SEF. Can easily Help out on adds because Chi-Ex is a range spell. Got 60%multiplier through the whole Weakend Soul phase. Bad.

Zakkun - Can use Immunities for the Soul Cleave's. Incredible mobility and 0 chance of failing with Seeds.

Like, ur definition of bad is cause it's not doing the most dps on every fight?

[Notter]

It's the same definition that Rait said ww is good. he shown how high it is located in the statistics.
i replied to rait's argument.

[Deleted]

Assault: Mediocre (fight being total padfest logwise atm)
Iron Reaver: Bad (<Impact's> 2 healer no bomb phase kills skwe data towards burst specs)
Komrok: Mediocre (again top ranks are already people soloing hands with burst specs)
Council: Top
Kilrogg: Bad (but in reality WW is best melee outside)
Gorefiend: Mediocre (beign the one dotter assigneg to souls skwes top logs for dot classes)
Iskar: Very Good
Zakkun: Bad
Xhul: Very Good
Socr: Mediocre (fight is heavily range favour log-wise beacuse of the ghosts)
Velhari: Very Good
Mannoroth: Very Good
Archimonde: Very Good

The only fights we are "bad" on is Fel Lord(although we are the best class to soak there with diffuse/zenmed/tok) and Iron Reaver (doing no bomb phase tactic, progress wise WW was really good there with bomb control). Also if you look at that list we are best/top3 spec on ALL of the hard fights (which is the thing that matter the most for progress).

Also it's other way around, the fact that most top guilds have zero monks makes it skewed negatively for WW when looking at class max capabilities. Since for every single "top" monk you have 9-10 same skilled hunters/rogues/mages/druids, if you had bigger representation of world class players playing WW, the spec would look better not worse statistic wise.

so that's 7/13!!!! fights WW monk is bad... and you're saying this class is doing fine.
yeah sorry, that's just doesn't make any sense to me.

It's the same definition that Rait said ww is good. he shown how high it is located in the statistics.
i replied to rait's argument.

That's not using the same definition, that's reading things the way you want them to be.

[Drunkenskunk]

Since for every single "top" monk you have 9-10 same skilled hunters/rogues/mages/druids, if you had bigger representation of world class players playing WW, the spec would look better not worse statistic wise.

What does it matter how many people play a spec, when you are talking about averages? If anything, it skews the statistics to be better than they are, as the few ww logs are made by very skilled players, who are brought to mythic kills even though wws are not in a great spot.

[Deleted]

I don't think that's the case after 2 months of content. You are gonna have average players raid mythic and guess what, if you have a mediocre player play monk, he's not gonna do good. I'm not saying that every monk that has not killed 10/11... etc mythic bosses is bad because that's definitely not true, but on average that's what you are gonna find. An average player playing monk is gonna do worse than any other player of equal skill level in their respective class, just because its harder to do good as a monk.
What Raitank said is absolutely right, do you have an idea of how many people play windwalker in the top 20 guilds this content? 3! If you had 2-3 monks in every guild (just like hunters/mages), statistics would look different.

[Shibito]

Its funny according to the logs we are bottom at heroic hfc then jump pretty high on mythic, do mythic gear just scale better for us? Its funny how they expect most monks to get to mythic too if we arent good at heroic.

[bushes]

Its funny according to the logs we are bottom at heroic hfc then jump pretty high on mythic, do mythic gear just scale better for us? Its funny how they expect most monks to get to mythic too if we arent good at heroic.

Most adds don't instantly explode on Mythic, so we actually get a chance to effectively use SEF.

[Ustabil]

On heroic adds die faster wich makes SEF less usefull and on the fights we do well in mythic is cause we can have SEF on 2 targets almost all the time. Not that i claim to be a good monk or experienced, but i feel monks really aint scaling that well with gear. We scale well with Weapon, classtrinket and set bonuses but thats about it, and which class doesnt scale well with these. WW also the Agi class that gets the least out of the "allegedly" OP trinket "Soul Capacitor"

[Shibito]

On heroic adds die faster wich makes SEF less usefull and on the fights we do well in mythic is cause we can have SEF on 2 targets almost all the time. Not that i claim to be a good monk or experienced, but i feel monks really aint scaling that well with gear. We scale well with Weapon, classtrinket and set bonuses but thats about it, and which class doesnt scale well with these. WW also the Agi class that gets the least out of the "allegedly" OP trinket "Soul Capacitor"

Well thats cause we dont have the cooldowns like rogues do, combat doing killing spree with a sc proc will do alot