Go fire or stay frost?

[Artorius]

Okay Frost, you aren't averaging out the rng located in the data, let me give you a nearly accurate simplified mathematically evaluated picture of what I am trying to say.







As you see given average luck on RNG frost is still relatively high. Fire and frost are really flexible in their total numbers given the amount good/bad luck rng it can get. Arcane is really good if you want steady numbers that won't change much based on rng but since the OP doesn't want arcane and only wants frost/fire data, he can take a look at this.

TY for making me laugh =)

[Deleted]

every mage out there who does HC raiding are playing either Arcane or Fire.

http://eu.battle.net/wow/en/characte...C3%AC/advanced

http://tw.battle.net/wow/zh/characte...BD%B1/advanced

[Deleted]

This thread is hilarious. If you want to act like a cutting edge progression raider you are half a year late. Play what you want and stop making my eyes hurt with those incorrect statistics.

[durrtygoodz]

http://eu.battle.net/wow/en/characte...C3%AC/advanced

http://tw.battle.net/wow/zh/characte...BD%B1/advanced

I get that you like frost etc and that's cool, so do I, but trying to make out that it's the top dog spec is silly. And your posts keep getting, hmm what's a word I can use without being infracted, dumber? Just quit while you're ahead.

[Narsha]

Seconded, please close the thread ^^

[Deleted]

I get that you like frost etc and that's cool, so do I, but trying to make out that it's the top dog spec is silly.

Actually, personally, I don't even like frost. I think it is a terribly boring spec but it is where the numbers are pointing to.

[Deleted]

Okay Frost, you aren't averaging out the rng located in the data, let me give you a nearly accurate simplified mathematically evaluated picture of what I am trying to say.







As you see given average luck on RNG frost is still relatively high. Fire and frost are really flexible in their total numbers given the amount good/bad luck rng it can get. Arcane is really good if you want steady numbers that won't change much based on rng but since the OP doesn't want arcane and only wants frost/fire data, he can take a look at this.

Clearly we should all go Full Spirit Frost.

[Axelond]

Arcane is great and probably the highest dps spec...Until you need to move

[Deleted]

You do know that your wpn gem is with expertise right?!?!?!?!?

[durrtygoodz]

I've made some pretty interesting discoveries recently by testing each spec, be aware though that your results may vary:



As you can see, fire is currently the highest sex per hr spec. Whilst playing fire I had a threesome with two twins and then later, with their mother.

[Deleted]

I've made some pretty interesting discoveries recently by testing each spec, be aware though that your results may vary:



As you can see, fire is currently the highest sex per hr spec. Whilst playing fire I had a threesome with two twins and then later, with their mother.

Hey hey. Only certified mathemagicians allowed.

[durrtygoodz]

Hey hey. Only certified mathemagicians allowed.

I'll have you know I've got a degree from gandalf himself. Here's a picture of us together.

[Neoxx]

Thanks for the laugh durrtygoodz and Draghonfourt ... this was exactly what i thought after seeing those diagrams

[Frost1129]

Okay Frost, you aren't averaging out the rng located in the data, let me give you a nearly accurate simplified mathematically evaluated picture of what I am trying to say.







As you see given average luck on RNG frost is still relatively high. Fire and frost are really flexible in their total numbers given the amount good/bad luck rng it can get. Arcane is really good if you want steady numbers that won't change much based on rng but since the OP doesn't want arcane and only wants frost/fire data, he can take a look at this.

I like how you ask for a mathematical evaluation, and then provide none of it.

Where are your error bars, what do they represent? What statistical test are you applying to the data? Where did you get your data from, did your normalize it? What did you normalize it to?

Where did you get your data from? I want to see it.

You just posted some bars. Those are useless and it's laughable that you think a bar graph is "mathematical data"

BTW: Using a large data set removes that RNG. That's why you use large data sets. The RNG outliers effect the true value less when they are a small portion of the population. Basic stat tests take this into account.

[durrtygoodz]

I like how you ask for a mathematical evaluation, and then provide none of it.

Where are your error bars, what do they represent? What statistical test are you applying to the data? Where did you get your data from, did your normalize it? What did you normalize it to?

Where did you get your data from? I want to see it.

You just posted some bars. Those are useless and it's laughable that you think a bar graph is "mathematical data"

BTW: Using a large data set removes that RNG. That's why you use large data sets. The RNG outliers effect the true value less when they are a small portion of the population. Basic stat tests take this into account.

I almost feel bad that you wrote such a serious reply to such an obvious troll

[Deleted]

I almost feel bad that you wrote such a serious reply to such an obvious troll

And here I thought we were quite obvious in pointing out the obviously obvious.

[Frost1129]

And here I thought we were quite obvious in pointing out the obviously obvious.

I hadn't read any of the relies that followed his post >.>. My fault I guess for just assuming he was hopelessly stupid and not a troll.

[mrgreenthump]

Closing this thread. It just went straight to hell and weren't here to catch it then.. Better late than never I suppose