Blizz refuse to buff Fury

[Deleted]

Well I can only speak for 10man but I don't think there is that much cheese possible, especially as a fury warrior. I think if I play an encounter correctly I'm in the top 100 99% of the time and most of my high ranks don't involve enormous luck or player specific tactics (maybe with the exception of using skull banner for personal gain, i.e. not on bl if execute phase is coming up soon). I have to say with the small amount of high end raiding guilds nowadays I think if you go much more below the top 100 you start parsing suboptimal play pretty soon and it's hard to argue for overall damage buffs if the spec is not played correctly.

[Firebert]

Who's handpicking parses again?

You are, because you fail to realise that Blizzard really don't care about end-of-the-bell-curve balance outside of sims. If you want your selected parses to have merit they should contain as much parses and as much of the exposure of the raid as possible and that's 10N.

Awesome! Fury Warriors are middle of the pack with classes of guilds that can't kill Heroic Jinrokh!

And there's no problem with that, as it includes any PuG that runs ToT10N too.

[Archimtiros]

You can argue about world of logs parsing until the end of days.
Regardless of how you see it Fury is not extremely far behind any others, infact most specs are very close together. You have to remember that it is impossible to get complete balance.
I honestly don't even think Fury needs much of a buff (at most it would be a minor one), what is needed is for the very high specs (Rogues, Warlocks, Mages) to be brought down to match the rest of the dps.
Really some quality of life changes would lead to a boost in dps without a straight damage % buff across the board. Remember the way our dps is presented plays a big factor in how much we can put out.

I still think a big issue with our DPS comes from Execute. Don't get me wrong, I love execute, but only being usable at 20% is nuts. Every other class gets ~35% executes and at this point, execute phases getting shorter and shorter means you could end up losing damage. I really hope that the new Tier 4p (chance to proc a >20% execute) becomes baseline.
Our other giant dps boost ability, Bladestorm is directly tied to what other AoE classes you have in your group. Try using Bladestorm in a 25m raid with 3 warlocks, then try it without! Hell my Magaera parses have dropped significantly each week, we are killing Mag so fast now, we hardly get any adds (actually wiped us a few times due to lack of CDs for Rampage /lawl) and I have a hard time getting 2 CSmashes on each head.

Seriously, stop complaining about parses. You will never convince the other person, they are intended to be an overview and taken with a grain of salt, not the end all be all. Just do yourself a favor and don't try to feed the trolls or convince them that you are right.

Edit: While I am on the topic, I honestly think that trying to make every spec competitive in every aspect of the game is one of the worst decisions Blizzard ever made. I am perfectly fine with Arms being optimal PVP and Fury being the best at PVE. Regardless of how much they try to balance it, it will likely always be that way. Instead we have so many people whining that they want to play Arms in PVE, we see patch notes full of changes for Arms that ultimately amount to nothing and it continues to be bottom of the barrel.
Seriously, when is the last time you heard a Rogues complaining about wanting to use Sub in PVE? I never understood while this is such a big issue.

[Brakthir]

Tweeted at GC today. This is what he had to say to my tweet concerning defensive cooldowns and dps.

"@DeviousUn Fury's defensive cooldowns are fine, IMO, especially with the change to shields. My hunch is their DPS is too low in 5.4 ATM."

[Archimtiros]

You are, because you fail to realise that Blizzard really don't care about end-of-the-bell-curve balance outside of sims. If you want your selected parses to have merit they should contain as much parses and as much of the exposure of the raid as possible and that's 10N.


And there's no problem with that, as it includes any PuG that runs ToT10N too.

The problem with that is that the vast majority of the top parsing players do not touch normal mode, or even LFR. So it gives you an extremely biased view of the lower end of the skill cap. And generally the players who operate at that level are not always necessarily bad, they simply do not care about output. I think everyone here is much more concerned about the top end performance, because those are the people who see the most out of any "balancing" changes made.

To say nothing of the fact that the 25m players hardly ever go in 10m and vise versa. The best way to get a look is by taking all parsing data into account, not just one aspect.
Regardless neither side will ever convince the other they are right/wrong.

[Bloodletters]

Blizzard doesn't care about heroic raiding balance? Do you have a link to a quote by a Blizzard representative that proves this?

Player skill can make up a lot of the spec DPS variance you see in normal modes. Not to mention the DPS checks generally aren't that intense. Heroic raiding is where DPS balance matters. That is where certain classes are stacked for fights, and others are left out.

- - - Updated - - -

Tweeted at GC today. This is what he had to say to my tweet concerning defensive cooldowns and dps.

"@DeviousUn Fury's defensive cooldowns are fine, IMO, especially with the change to shields. My hunch is their DPS is too low in 5.4 ATM."

Hmm, interesting. Ghostcrawler seems to agree with me. But according to the 10 man normal parses we're just fine!

[Brakthir]

To be perfectly honest, if you're not raiding heroics, then min maxing power gaming isn't something you should be worried about. Cutting edge heroic raiders have always affected balance. Normal mode and LFR raiders, not so much.

That being said, looks like we might get buffed as I posted.

[Darkfriend]

Don't name and shame, and everyone's allowed their opinion regardless of their progress.


You don't understand: there has to be a class that sits in the middle of the stack. Blizzard aren't gods and cannot make every spec sim exactly the same DPS.

If someone is an LFR raider their opinions are naturally going to be worth less than someone who is far more knowledgeable. Progress/logs are completely reasonable expectations when someone is making claims.

[sjsctt]

https://twitter.com/Ghostcrawler/sta...58951964196865

Good news

[Darkfriend]

I wonder why you ignore top 100 and only take overall parses into account?

Top 100 includes some combination of the following 1.) Very lucky RNG 2.) Cheesing 3.) Doing the fight in such a way someone will rank 4.) Very geared players.

It's a tool, but not very accurate for comparing. The main thing is cheese. Much easier for, say, a warlock to cheese on heroic meg than a warrior.

[Archimtiros]

Top 100 includes some combination of the following 1.) Very lucky RNG 2.) Cheesing 3.) Doing the fight in such a way someone will rank 4.) Very geared players.

It's a tool, but not very accurate for comparing. The main thing is cheese. Much easier for, say, a warlock to cheese on heroic meg than a warrior.

Top 100, not so much, top 10-20 definitely. That said there are some players who are extremely good and consistently rank very high. Some of that is due to the way their guild does the fight and their comp. Some of it is also gear, but most of it is just from being extremely good players who know how to tweak everything to work for them.

This tier is very weird for ranking however, many of the boss mechanics and RPPM especially make a huge difference.
Jin'rokh for example; the entire time my guild worked on this boss up until around the time we killed Ra-den, he was going into execute range at the very end, or outside of a pool. Without that huge execute CD burst in a pool, you will never get a good rank. Go into a pool at 20% and get a feather proc however, and say hello to your orange parse.
Likewise, Iron Qon is a very good fight for Warriors but has many "screw you" mechanics. A poorly positioned frost line, or Quet'zal shields can really hurt you.

Sometimes it is just how you do the fight though. My rank 1 on 25H Ra-den is a good example. We have melee kill the add and only swap to boss when it is dead, and melee does not deal with chaining the debuff. However we have so much melee, that the add is killed too quickly, so we switch off and about half our melee get to tunnel the boss. I got the chance to have near 100% uptime on Ra-den. Combine that with some decent procs and I came out with an outstanding parse.

There are very few fights Warriors can cheese on though. Unlike many classes we have no immunities to ignore boss effects, nor do we have ridiculous mutli target abilities of Warlocks. Even Bladestorm pales in comparison to Warlock burst AOE.

[Darkfriend]

The thing you are forgetting is that we aren't comparing Fury cheese to Lock cheese. We're comparing Fury cheese to Fury non-cheese. Fury cheesing will generally beat fury non-cheesing. And that impacts ranks.

[Archimtiros]

This is true, but there still aren't that many instances in which Fury can cheese, atleast not in the way that multi-dotting classes can.

But actually we are comparing Fury to Lock, because we were looking at parsing between classes to compare who was stronger/weaker than who. As you said, if it is much easier for locks to cheese half the fights and we cannot, then surely the gap between both classes will widen. Unless I misunderstood what you were trying to say a few posts ago.

[Brakthir]

The simple truth is that most raid mechanics will almost always favor ranged over melee. That being said, we weren't in a terrible spot this tier. Not the best, but not like, the worst. Still competitive during progression. Not so much while everyone is in BIS. Hopefully we'll get some QOL and actual buffs come 5.4. Maybe adding a bit more oomph to our basic rotational abilities.

[Deleted]

Somehow I really think we would be exactly in the right spot, if they didn't nerf execute.
Not that the damage distribution would be good, just the outcome would be more on par with other classes.

Wasn't it nerfed because we would appereantly scale way to good with the meta?
Which, as we can see now, is far from true.

[Deleted]

I think the thread title isn't accurate anymore now? :P Though some number adjusting was to be expected later in the PTR, mechanically fury is one of the better (and fun to play) specs. Now let's hope we get a second good trinket and don't have to rely on feather anymore.

But actually we are comparing Fury to Lock, because we were looking at parsing between classes to compare who was stronger/weaker than who

Imo we only should compare fury to other melees (sup rogues) with the ranged/melee situation we already talked about. Let's hope they find a solution for that problem in the next expansion.

Hmm, interesting. Ghostcrawler seems to agree with me. But according to the 10 man normal parses we're just fine!

If you wanna be nitpicky you could say he talked about 5.4 while 10man normal is 5.3 :P (don't take it seriously)

Wasn't it nerfed because we would appereantly scale way to good with the meta?
Which, as we can see now, is far from true.

If I remember correctly they just wanted to redistribute damage with the execute nerf. They wanted another nerf, but they realized the meta was too good and thus nerfed meta ppm for fury.

[cFortyfive]

Wasn't it nerfed because we would appereantly scale way to good with the meta?
Which, as we can see now, is far from true.

IIrc they actually buffed some strike damage first but reverted that basically instantly and left it at that shitty haste thing and bs procs costing no rage and nerfed the meta. Could have been different patches though.

[Pua]

If someone is an LFR raider their opinions are naturally going to be worth less than someone who is far more knowledgeable. Progress/logs are completely reasonable expectations when someone is making claims.

Rubbish.

I only raid LFR at the moment, and stopped raiding in an organised group months ago because I was sick of it. Prior to that, I've played in multiple server-leading guilds, have had multiple top 100 parses without scumbagging or padding, and been a part of the warrior theorycrafting community for several years (Protection). My opinion is not worth less than someone who's played the class for a 10th of the time I have, but who happens to have the free time to commit to a heroic raiding schedule.

This is what's wrong with the community in our game right now. People who believe (on both sides of the hardcore/casual divide) that their opinions are more important than somebody elses. Ignorance of an issue has nothing to do with progress or a commitment to high-end raiding; that's just an easy fallback for people who want to pretend they're better people.

Let's start showing some discernment on these topics so that the developers get more signal, and less noise.

We all want the same thing - a game that's easy to pick up, tough to master and fun to play.

We should start acting like it.

The simple truth is that most raid mechanics will almost always favor ranged over melee.

I agree. This is why people who are comparing DPS should really compare melee classes to melee classes, because that's where the best information is going to be gleaned. And, to be honest, I'm quite worried about the future of melee; almost every ranged class now has a baseline interrupt, a strong cleave, and a way of moving around without losing a lot of DPS.

Because melee is often a mechanical pain to carry with you, taking away what used to be the role's niche looks like a bigger problem than it first appears.

We'll see, I suppose.

Personally, I think Fury has three problems:

1) Haste is rubbish, causing us to get far less out of Bloodlust than pretty much every other class. It's frustrating when encounter buffs are also haste buffs.
2) Our baseline cooldowns are really strange; we get two RNG cooldowns, Retribution is packing two pure output ones. Recklessness worsens with gear.
3) Bloodthirst is embarrassingly poor. Mechanically it's fine, but it does absolutely pitiful damage - is there another spec whose signature ability is so weak?

I'm comfortable being corrected because I'm not a long-term Fury player, but these are the issues that are the most pressing for me. If we saw them fixed (particularly two and three), I think Fury would be more competitive again in PvE.

[Deleted]

Personally, I think Fury has three problems:

1) Haste is rubbish, causing us to get far less out of Bloodlust than pretty much every other class. It's frustrating when encounter buffs are also haste buffs.
2) Our baseline cooldowns are really strange; we get two RNG cooldowns, Retribution is packing two pure output ones. Recklessness worsens with gear.
3) Bloodthirst is embarrassingly poor. Mechanically it's fine, but it does absolutely pitiful damage - is there another spec whose signature ability is so weak?

I'm comfortable being corrected because I'm not a long-term Fury player, but these are the issues that are the most pressing for me. If we saw them fixed (particularly two and three), I think Fury would be more competitive again in PvE.

I don't think #2 is an issue, without 4pT15 Reck shouldn't cap anymore and it has a strong synergy with skull banner. I think #1 is the biggest issue together with RPPM based scaling. #3 is more of a number tuning thing IMO.

[Pua]

I don't think #2 is an issue, without 4pT15 Reck shouldn't cap anymore and it has a strong synergy with skull banner. I think #1 is the biggest issue together with RPPM based scaling. #3 is more of a number tuning thing IMO.

I have less of a problem with Skull Banner than I do Recklessness; the fact is simply that the more critical strike rating you get on gear, the worse it becomes because you're more likely to get a critical strike in lieu of it. I just think it's a dud cooldown, and I've always felt that way about it.