Wednesday, October 8, 2014

Current 6.0 Sim Numbers = Huge Issues

The current numbers are out for what damage dealing specs can expect when the patch is released next week (as we are all working on the idea that it will be next week or the week after) and they are not looking good.  As a hunter I am very concerned, for obvious reasons, but I am not just writing this post from the standpoint of a hunter that just got bent over and screwed but from the viewpoint of every single damage dealing class.

Whether your class is at the top of the list or at the bottom of the list, a list like this should be a major cause of concern.  I see people on the forums that play the top specs saying things like "fury seems fine to me" because they are happy to see their class at the top but they do not understand the far ranging issues with a DPS chart that is this skewed can lead to later on if they do not speak up.  If we let blizzard get away with having huge number differences like this the next pass it could be your class at the bottom.  And if you were the top class doing double of the bottom one and were fine with it then hate to tell you, but when you are the bottom class and everyone is double what you are doing, you have absolutely no right to complain.  If you are fine with a gap like this, you are fine with it no matter where your class stands.  I personally am not fine with a gap like this and not just because I am a hunter but because it is wrong.

I know balance is about as hard as it gets in a game with this many abilities and this many interactions and possibilities but when it comes to numbers there should be a much smaller gap than the one we are presented with.  Lets take a look at the chart so you can see what I am talking about.

Level 90 6.0 Release Numbers

Please excuse me for a moment while I cry over the state of hunters before I get on with this post. This is not just bad for hunters, this is a freaking nightmare.  I already see it when 6.0 drops and trade, open raid, and the in game group finder are all listing groups with "LFM Garrosh Loom Run.  No Hunters."  Blizzard could have at least thrown us a bone.  For a pure DPS class that has no other way or option to work their way into a group outside of doing damage at least one of the specs should, at the absolute worst, be middle of the pack but no, hunters might as well be tanking with their numbers.  Heck, a warrior tank is better than a survival hunter.  How said is that?  Now that I am done crying about the death of my beloved class, lets get back to balancing the numbers.

Ignoring tank damage, and they have issues of their own just a huge as the damage dealer ones, we will look at the numbers for the classes who have the job of killing the mob being tanked.  At the absolute bottom is a survival hunter with 10.9K and at the top of the list is a fire mage with 21.8K.  There is no need to bust out a calculator to figure out these numbers percentage wise.  It could not be easier.  Looking from survival upward they see the top spec is doing 100% more damage.  That means double the damage they are capable of doing.  If you are of the desire to look from the top down than the fire mage looking down would see survival doing 50% of their damage.  This means it is doing double damage.

Do not let numbers fool you, and they easily can sometimes.  Looking at it from one direction is 100% and the other is 50% but in the end the top spec is still doing double the bottom spec, and that is the issue here.

When it comes to balance, as I mentioned, it is really hard to get right, but when it comes to numbers it should be easier.  Numbers can be tuned to get them closer.  Balance in PvP is hard, balance in numbers is just work.  Blizzard can fix this, they are just ignoring it hoping if they just play blind and pretend like there is no problem it will go away.

I say even if you are on top of that list you have every reason to be mad with what you see, just as much reason as a survival hunter would because the next time that could be you are the bottom and blizzard playing blind again.  Everyone, from the top of the list to the bottom, needs to start getting on blizzards back every second that they can.  This sort of difference is not acceptable.

From top to bottom the biggest margin of difference we should ever see is 10% off the top number.  If the top number is 20,000 than the bottom number should be 18,000.  That is what I call acceptable balance.  Some will say the standard line, but hunters can attack while moving.  Well, no shit sherlock, that is why they should be the 18,000 number, that is why there should be a gap in numbers, but not one that would see them at 10,000 when the top is 20,000 which is the percentages they are currently working on.

Lets take a look at the current top damage, that fire mage sitting at 21,790, lets round that to 22K even for numbers sake.  If they are sitting at 22K than the bottom damage dealer should be 10% less than them, meaning 2,200 less, which would put 19,800 at the lowest number we should see on this list.  That would be a reasonable spread from top DPS to bottom DPS in terms of capability.

Now lets refer to that chart again and take a look at which classes are under that 19,800 number.  After taking a short look at that list I have come to a conclusion, I do not want to write all the classes that are under that number.  It would be a hell of a lot easier to list the ones that are doing acceptable DPS.  So with the fire mage as our lead class the only other classes that are doing what could be considered even remotely reasonable damage are arcane mage, two handed fury warrior and one handed fury warrior.

This means, if you are not a mage or a warrior and play the two of three specs of mage or the one of three specs of warrior that are doing well, you are basically a piece of garbage and blizzard does not care about your numbers.

Some might argue, and would be telling the truth, that this is just the 6.0 and the everything is balanced around 100 so of course some things will be off at level 90.  Absolutely correct.  But that does not mean blizzard can not adjust numbers so certain abilities for certain classes hit for more at level 90.  They have done it before and they can do it again.  But that is beside the point.

Remember when I said be careful if you are near the top and do not complain now because you like it?  Well lets take a look at a heroic gear level 100 list and see what you think now.

Level 100 Heroic Gear Numbers

I wonder if that elemental shaman that was really happy be the closest one to the fire mage, arcane mage and fury warrior out of all the other class and spec combos is really happy at level 100 when they are actually closer to the hunters than they are to the top like they used to be?

At least at level 100 there is not a case of top specs doing double the bottom ones, but they are still nowhere near close enough.  If we use the top number of 42.8 rounded to 43K and minus 10% that would mean the bottom number should be 38.7K.  This means even at level 100 we are still left with an unacceptable gap as only two handed warriors, one handed warriors, demonology warlocks, arms warriors and arcane mages are doing what could be considered acceptable damage.

There might be no time left for us the convince blizzard to fix damage for 6.0 but there might still be time to convince them to fix damage for level 100 because as it stands now DPS at level 100 leaves little to no option.  I can see why the fury warriors are saying it looks fine to them.  Because they are on top right now but I wonder what those fury warriors would say if they were a shadow priest, a retribution paladin, a beast mastery hunter or a survival hunter who happen to be at the bottom of both lists.

Even if you are the top class right now you have to look at this list and say it is completely unacceptable.  Because the next time blizzard makes a pass, that class you love could very well end up being on the bottom and I am sure you would not be to happy about it.

Speak up, let blizzard know this is not acceptable.  We might not be able to save 6.0 and get it balanced in the next week, but there is still time to save level 100.  I don't know about you, but I do not want to wait around until 6.1, whenever the hell that might come out, to see my class fixed.  No class should ever be this broken to begin with.


  1. but I am not just writing this post from the standpoint of a hunter that just got bend over and screwed

    Did you at least have on the lipstick and blond wig?

    You are funny, GE. I really don't see how it is so hard to figure out damage. we are all rocks, paper and scissors. and with 3 specs it should not be hard at all. But what is hard to understand is how come Blizzard doesn't listen. You have some top game designers out in the world who play WOW and I am sure they have made suggestions. But instead we get "Jay Wilson", yes the Jay Wilson who brings his own garbage with him.

    But that's not the reason for my comment - can one wear two of the same heirloom trinkets, such as the +64 haste (Swift Hand of Justice) that gives back 2% of max health when you kill a target that gives honor or exp?



    1. No lipstick or wig and not even the common courtesy of a reach around. Its a nightmare I tell you. :P

      Yes, those trinkets are not unique equip which means you can have 2 of them on. The only time you can ever have one on is if it says "unique" or "unique-equip".

    2. not even the common courtesy, damn.

      ok, thanks for the answer on the heirloom trinkets..

      And looking at the charts you put up, lets hope that MM are not tied to one pet - Spore bats, LOL. And hyenas and Serpents don't become BM only.

      I wonder how the heirloom weapons that have +hit on them are going to fare? Will it be replaced with +haste, I wonder? I depend on a lot on heirlooms to 85 as probably a lot of people.

    3. For MM the best DPS would be using the lone wolf talent which would mean no pet. So no sporebat. :(

      Hit will be replaced with some other stat.

  2. Normally one would look at the level 90 numbers and shrug them off since everything in 6.0 is balanced around level 100 and not level 90.

    BUT - even the level 100 number for Hunters are a great cause for concern. The only silver lining is that we may see an early patch of Hunter buffs once raiding starts; maybe.

    1. That is why I bring it up more so than any other reason. Sure I would like to be better in 6.0 but it is to show that we are not scaling well because we are still just as pitiful at 100.

      This does not bode well as we keep moving up gear ranks and keep falling further behind. It is an issue that should be addressed, and as such even those level 90 6.0 numbers do matter this time around. Because if we do not comment on them now, we can not expect them to fix something later. It clearly shows a pattern and not just an "its level 90" issue.

  3. In my opinion overall the numbers at level 100 look pretty good. It looks like every class has at least one dps spec that's viable with the worst off being Ret paladins (nothing new there).

    There is still room for some minor tweaking, sure.. which blizz has been doing over the last several weeks with their beta patches (Demonology 2 piece bonus just got a slight nerf in yesterday's build for example).

    If I had the single out the biggest imbalance on the level 100 listing I would say its the ones between tank DPS. Monks tanks are much, much lower then their warrior and paladin brethren.

    Also yeah, as others have commented the level 90 dps numbers are irrelevant. Funny? Yeah. But still irrelevant.

    1. I am afraid I can not agree, or even come remotely close to agreeing.

      The 100 numbers are no where close to being "good". Priests and paladins have no DPS options and hunters, a pure class which has no options outside of DPS to work their way into a raid with, unlike priests and paladins, has one broken spec that is "usable" and two other useless ones.

      Not to mention the difference between top and bottom is no where even remotely close to balanced. The only person that would see anything on that list that is considered "good" is someone playing the top class and not caring about balance or someone that is willfully blind, just like blizzard.

      Level 90, while irrelevant in usage, is not irreverent over all. If people are okay with playing with such a huge difference for one month it lets blizzard have the false impression that huge differences are okay.

      They will then believe that if we can live with it for one month we can live with it for 3 or 6 months between patches. We need to let them know that even for an irrelevant time like this huge differences are not acceptable.

  4. I've said it before... hunters will be an absolute nightmare to balance in this expansion.
    The 'niche' of dps while moving is incredibly powerful but extremely reliant on the encounter.
    I expect a bumpy ride for hunters all through the expansion.

    I'm guessing the sim is for a patchwerk encounter?
    It remains to be seen how much of an impact movement will make on dps for the rest of the ranged but it's hard to imagine any encouter where they lose 50% of their dps

    The only change to your maths that I would make is your starting point. Really, you should start from the median value and then impose your delta.
    Doing it this way, 6 specs are overpowered and 8 specs are underpowered. Virtually the same number of specs 'unbalanced' as your calculations but balancing becomes much easier.
    In theory, it is easier to make 2x 4k than 1x 8k dps adjustment. Whether Blizzard can pull it off in practice is another matter altogether.

    1. Hunters are not "that" hard to balance. Blizzard just refuses to do it. Use my example of the 20K being max DPS. Have hunters sitting around 18K. On a straight up patchwork fight hunters would be last, on a mild movement fight everyone would lose a little and would be even with hunters and on a heavy movement fight hunter would be tops while everyone else would be a little lower like around 16K. There balanced. It is not hard, it is just that blizzard does not know how to think rationally.

      Any half way decent player will lose, at most, 20% on most movement fights, but probably less for the really good ones. So the 50% is way the F out of the ball park.

      I find it is easier to use the top point as the point to be balanced around because that is what people look at and want to be compared too.

      It is easier to convey the thought and show how skewed things are. If I were to say 38K and then go up or down a little it would not push the fact that people to do think like that.

      People do not look at numbers and say "oh cool I am doing more than someone in the middle of the pack", they look at numbers and say "I am so far behind the top". So you can not say lets use 38K for our number. It is just not how people work. People want to be balanced around the top, not the middle. While I understand what you mean, it really does not work that way to the player. Only works that way to people that actually dig into the numbers.

      The only real difference is that what you said would bring everyone to the middle, which I would think is best, and the way I said it would bring everyone to the top, which the players would prefer. Remember, bringing to the middle means everyone that takes the hit cries nerf. So much easier to round up.

    2. I'll rephrase... hunters will be an absolute nightmare *for Blizzard* to balance... :-)

      Unfortunately, it's not easier to round up.
      Power creep is virtually inevitable which then causes a multitude of other issues.

      Player perception and the balancing process are two very different things. It's fine for a player to compare themselves to the top but they will be balanced around the median.

      Once all balancing has been done, players will still compare themselves to the top which is fine as the delta should be the same no matter where the balancing point began.

      The fact is, it is just easier to balance around the middle, rather than one extreme.

      Blizzard have always claimed that they aim for a 5% delta across all dps specs.
      I don't think they have ever come close to it, how close do you think they will get this time?

    3. I was talking from the perspective of the player. You or I might look at the numbers and think lets take the median and move up and down 5%, which would be the same thing, but for others to understand saying 10% of top is easier.

      I am not talking actual numbers here. I am talking numbers in theory. Saying that numbers should be 10% from top to bottom. For what I am trying to convey it makes no difference if top is 43K or top is 36K or 24K. Just that the bottom should be no more than 10% off top. As such, it is much easier to explain that idea to people that are not very good with math by saying here is the top, and the bottom should be no less than this.

      Trust me, if I tried to explain it the way you did most people would not understand. Have you ever had to deal with someone telling you they never opened the farm because it was too hard? Yeah, I have had to explain how to open it up because someone could not figure out how to do it because it was "too hard". Trust me, just saying 10% off the top is way the hell easier than trying to explain it the right way.

      They actually have come pretty darn close a few times this expansion. With the exception of a few outliners here and there each pass I think they have been closer together this expansion than any before. I can not back that up as I do not have access to older numbers right now, but it sure felt better this expansion than any before.

      I would love to see 5% but I would gladly settle for 10%. I do not believe it would be that hard to do. What ruins it is PvP. They always end up having to tweak things because when they balance it out for PvE something becomes too strong in PvP. I say just change how the ability hits a player instead of changing it over all and the problem is solved. Maybe one day blizzard will realize it really is that simple.

    4. got you beat - I don't understand, even with how you explained it GE. I just go by what you say and know that hunters unless, just maybe a MM (but I will never play MM again), in any kind of raid or dungeon are fucked.

      May as well bring back vanilla spore bat.


    5. Well, I tried to keep it as simple as possible. For the most part working from the top down or the bottom up is usually the easiest way to explain something.

      Hey, at least you figured out how to open the farm. The person I was talking about said to me he couldn't do it because it was too hard. I said, a quest is too hard?

  5. Wow. Just wow. I saw those sim charts yesterday, freaked, and then thought, well no one else is getting too alarmed over them so I must just be over reacting.

    Two comments. First, you are absolutely right about the overall ideal dps spread -- should be very close to allow what Blizz has always touted, that is, bring the player, not the class. Additionally, imo it does matter about level 90 spread, since we have only one month to get our Garrosh loom, and many of us will be forced to seek out pugs to do so -- hunter dps is so suspect that not even the prospect of the conveyor belts will convince some raid leaders to accept more than maybe 1 or 2 hunters at best.

    Second, even though MM apparently does not stink at level 100, it achieves that lofty category by giving up most of what makes hunters fun to play. Basically, MM gives up the pet and takes talents that require standing still to shoot. This play style may appeal to some, but it seems to me it turns the hunter into just a physical caster, and even at that it does not come close to top of the charts. Much better off playing a mage in that case.

    My only hope is that Blizz will see the problem and fix it, but even if they do, we are likely screwed for the next month.

    1. I believe there is reason to be alarmed. If we let them think this is okay for one month, they will go on and say it will be okay for three months until we can patch stuff in 6.1. So we need to voice our concern now before they start thinking we are okay with these types of differences and our one month at 90 in hell becomes 3 months at 100 in hell while we wait for patch 6.1 after progression is over and we were left out of it.

      You mentioned loom runs which is a huge way that the DPS will hurt us. Pugs, as usually, want to get things done as quick and easy as possible. This means why bring a class that can only do half what another class can do, even if the players is awesome. It hurts. Even more so being they are removing the heirlooms because it is not like you can go back. This is the moment many hunters that have not got one have been waiting for. Like me. Lucky for me at least that all my hunters have either a warforged or heroic weapon, so it is not a hgue deal, but I really would have liked a loom so if I ever bring some of those 80 and 85 hunters up it would be there for them. Now, as a raid leader, I would not even want to bring myself. I would be better bringing my prot warrior as a third tank than bringing my hunter. Sad.

      MM, for what it is, a stand still petless class, is still way to low. Compared to SV and BM it might look good at 100 but as you said, with what you give up to play it and its boring, slow and clunky play style, it does not do enough to compensate. Not even close.

      I too hope blizzard will do something but I really doubt they will. This is why I am urging everyone to say something to them. Even the people on the top of the list should be upset with this breakdown at 90 and at 100. Just looking at it from a loom standpoint, as you mentioned, 90 DPS DOES matter.

    2. Balance at 90 matters more in this coming patch than for any pre-expansion patch before.
      A time-constrained BoA award and the length of the patch means more people will be running the raids than at any equivalent pre-expansion time.

      Sad that there has been so little effort put into it.

    3. Thank you Wes, I think you said exactly what I was trying to get at with the 90 numbers. It matters more this time than ever before because of the limited time items available.

      Look at someone like me, I have killed garrosh roughly 40 times and still not seen an heirloom. I was so waiting on this patch to get one because for a limited time it is guaranteed to anyone that never got one. What if I did not have a guild? I would never get it playing a hunter now. Balance at 90 matters. More than ever before.

    4. I'm not quite at 40 kills but getting there, no heirloom here either.
      Thankfully, I play Ele shaman so won't have a problem getting into the pugs... until I get to lvl100 anyway.

      Out of interest, for pure dps classes, do you think Blizzard are content when 1 of the 3 specs does appropriate damage?
      For instance, MM hunters are ok at 100 so there's no rush for us to sort out BM and SV.

      Not saying that they should think that way, just wondering if they do.

    5. It is messed up how "random" it is. There is someone on my server that has a total of 14 kills on normal, 13 heirlooms, and 31 kills on flex, 17 heirlooms. How the hell does one person get 30 heirlooms in 44 kills and I can't get 1 in that amount? Makes me a sad elf. The random is random saying just does not cut it here.

      I am thinking as long as one of the specs is okay they will not rush to fix the others. Do I think that is right? Hell no, of course. However, if only one of the three is going to do good, it should be doing a hell of a lot better than MM is at lower middle of the pack. If they are going to let only one spec be viable for a pure it better be top 3.

    6. Thats completely false hunters are fine and get groups all day you just dont see 5-10 of them per raid any more. There are a couple hunters in every pug ive been in, same with the rest of the classes.

    7. You know you are answering something over a month after it was posted and after 2 buffs to hunters right? So it was dated information.

  6. Say what you will about Ghostcrawler but he was very dedicated to bringing the class's in line. I'm not worried yet if you remember two years ago there were some pretty quick hotfix's once the numbers on live started rolling in. Fire will receive that nerf for sure they always do

    1. One of GCs biggest problems was he was too reliant on numbers and could not think outside of them. However, in a case like this, were it was just about numbers, he was the perfect man for the job, because that is what he did. He thought in numbers.

      There may have been a million and one things I could complain about in the era of GC but getting the numbers closer than they have ever been before is not one of them. He did that one thing well if nothing else.

      Whoever it was that looked at the 10.9K and 21.8K and said, cool, that looks close enough, needs new glasses. And needs to take a math class. Even someone with absolutely no math skills would know they are not close enough.

      I do not believe that they will do any huge changes before patch. But a few buffs for hunters, priest, paladins and nerfs to warriors and mages should not be out of the question right about now.

      Maybe they might nerf survival again, because apparently it is doing too much as the nerfs they have received in 3 of the last 5 patches seems to show blizzard thinks that.

    2. I think they will wait for the live #'s once raids are launched to make the hotfixes remember sims are only sims they have been pretty quick with the nerf bat in Mop Ask fire mages they got nerfed so hard that Frost was the go to spec for most of the expansion.

    3. Warriors will be top since they haven't been there in a long time.

    4. @Tiggi

      Now frost is dead last. Even worse than hunters. It is like pre MoP.

      The only time I have ever seen blizzard take any "quick" action to a class is when it involves PvP. If it is just a PvE issue they will let it sit and rot until the next patch most of the time unless it is a HUGE issue.


      For as long as I can remember warriors have always been on and off. One good patch, one bad patch, one good patch, one bad patch. Guess this is just an on mode. But for PvP I think they have been gods since, technical alpha, give or take. ;)

    5. Out of curiosity, where is the best place to comment on this to Blizz? There are so many PTR, class, xpac, etc. forums that I feel like any comment will go unnoticed in the crowd.

    6. Seems lately like twitter is. Sadly I never even used my twitter account expect like twice since I set it up.

      There are countless posts about such, I would guess picking whichever has the most posts and views would be best. I would caution against starting any new threads as they are likely to be shut down.

      Personally the forums are a horrible place to post. 99% of what needs to be read by blues never is, or if it is it is never commented on so you never know they saw it, and whatever you say, no matter how solid your opinion is or how many facts you can back it up with, unless you are the #1 ranked PvPer and #1 ranked PvEer, you will be a no nothing noob to everyone that posts there. I hate the forums with a passion. Can't you tell.

      I actually submit in game tickets and tell them, because I know the forums are horrible and I wanted to get my opinion to someone, and then go on with what I have to say.

      It works on the beta. lol Not so sure about live however. It does make me feel as if I am being heard however, more so than a forum post would.

  7. Now as a hunter I have the "Jaws" theme stuck in my head... and this time I'm not the shark!

    1. We most definitely need a bigger boat.

    2. 50kt Thermo Nuclear Device. Not no stinkin' boat.

  8. I really hope that lvl 90 table is a bad joke and not a representation of real numbers - but considering Blizz track record I think a lot of DPS will be very unhappy until they hit 100 and get some decent gear.

    The Lvl 100 table does not look that bad to me, except Ret DPS is much too low, and a few ranged need a 20% nerf. Warrior are probably over the top too, but otherwise we are looking at 30kDPS plus/minus 10%. Not bad for a problem with so many variables.

    I should point out one thing in my claculation: IMHO Melee DPS need an overall 20% advantage in simulation to be on par with ranged in a real fight - with the exception of Patchwork style encounters, that was my impression from raiding over the years. Raid design is on average more punishing to melee to begin with, so you have to compensate or announce "sorry, please bring only ranged to fights".

    Rauxis, chosen of CAT

    1. At level 100 it is better, but still not good. If they bring the top down some and the bottom up some and try to get us bunched up in that middle more it could be okay. But it still needs a lot of work.

      The 90 chart however is a complete joke. I know it is just "filler" and "get to know the changes" time but that can not let it go live like that. It is just horrible.

      Personally I have always been of the camp of bring ranged only. Ranged are just better in my opinion, more options on where to stand. But throughout the history of the game melee have always been better, and at some points much better, when they have a chance to stand still. Following a target is part of the skill of playing melee, just like timing your spells around movement is for a ranged. I skilled melee loses almost nothing to moving, trust me, I have seen it (a druid in my guild that is tops WoLs on all fights) and an unskilled melee gets hurt by movement (like me on my rogue, near 300K standstill, under 150K when I need to move).

    2. Oh you are point with "more options on where to stand". Worse - if you have encounters like Lich King and his beloved "defile" (especially on heroic .. *shudder*).

      But if you are in the camp of "bring ranged only" you'd have to agree that for fairness Melee should have an advantage :P

      In Vanilla and also in BC especially Rogues and Warrs had a distinct DPS advantage over ranged. I also remember when ranged only used wands for the first part of the fight.
      That went away in LK (legendaries aside...).

      You are correct on the importance of movement. But how should melee keep up their DPS, when half of the fight they are not allowed to be near the boss due to "flames", or are trying to chase adds ...

      Wouldn't it be just more honest if Blizz announced "bring the player, as long as they are using ranged for DPS"?

      Rauxis, chosen of CAT

    3. Melee do have an advantage, always have had an advantage. Whenever a mob stands still for any reasonable amount of time and they do not have to move they will slaughter, not just beat, slaughter ranged on the meters. It has always been that way.

      The "half the fight not being near the boss" thing is the only real problem with melee would have but over all melee usually can ignore most of the mechanics of fights. Most effects target ranged. It is designed that way so melee do not need to move. Ranged are the ones that have to deal with doing all the "work" in the fight while the melee just stand there and tunnel most of the time. That is part of the balance.

      I would love bring the player not the class, but no matter how many times blizzard has spewed that out of their mouth they have never even come close to making any moves in that direction. Not even close.

      There should be absolutely zero issue with doing progression with all hunters as DPS if hunters were your best players, but you can't because blizzard talks the talk but does not walk the walk.

      Not saying I would do that (or would I?) but just using it as an example.

  9. I main a prot paladin. I'm seriously considering taking a break between 6.0 and the expansion because there's no way in hell I'll be able to hold threat from my mages and warriors.

    1. In the tank camp prot paladins are looking like the hunters of tanking. Heck, even the DPS spec for paladins is playing around at the bottom. If it were not for their good healing paladins would be in a completely crap place too. But 2 out of 3 specs being crap still means they are in a crap place. I feel for you.

      Don't know if you have a warrior but I have always tanked on mine and am looking forward to gladiator stance. Perhaps if you like to tank that might be something worth looking into until they can fix paladin tank damage.

  10. I say we organize a naked gnome march to protest bad hunter dps. That will show them!

    1. I am SSSSOOO there...

      ... and my clothing isn't. ;)

  11. shouldn't we take those numbers with a grain of salt? is simcraft really the best way to compare classes with one another? for specs within a class, or talents or gear, it's fine. but i'm not sure if we should take the numbers we see here seriousely. it would be better to look at logs, but i fear there aren't any (or enough of them) from the ptr.

    that said i tried BM and MM on the ptr and got the feeling that i am missing something important for my dps, especially with MM. too few buttons to push. too little control over damage.

    1. I understand what you are saying and agree, but at the moment simcraft is all we have to work with and their data is usually not too far from the truth.

      With that said, I might not take them as absolute, but I would take them to be in the ballpark. As that is the only thing we have to work with because blizzard is really tight lipped about it, I say we can forgo the salt, at least until blizzard comments on it, which they won't.

      I too am on the beta and have tried all three specs. I have read theory crafting, played with the rotation, even tried some new things, and I too think either we, as in all hunters in the entire hunter community, are missing something, or hunter numbers are way below where they should be.

      The sim numbers might not be perfect, but they do show there is a problem there that needs addressing. Either in terms of gameplay, number tuning, or how things work.

    2. care to share the theory craft sites you were visiting? i'm finding it really hard to find good resources with hard stats and numbers at the moment. there's much less useful theorycraft and info out there than before any addon, it seems (maybe frostheim left a huge gap) or i simply suck at googling. and as i stand i can't really generate useful numbers myself. it's kinda frustrating, really.

      anyway, if our l90 prepatch numbers remain so bad, then let's hope that the content will be nerfed so much that it won't matter. i'd really like to get the heroic bow before wod release (caring about min/max even during levelling). i won't bother about wod numbers until we're there, since lots and lots might change agai, and it's just bad for my blood pressure... :)

      in the end, the whole "hunter overhaul but not in warlock-esque dimension" seems to leave the hunter class (maybe not BM) in a weird, unfinished limbo state. and therefore in a bigger need of a warlock-esque overhaul than during mop (bm and sv were in a pretty good shape imho).

    3. Hunter blogs, like some I have linked here. Posts on sites like EJ and MMO. There is no secret sources out there or at least none that I have noticed.

      Del over at the thrill of the wild has had some awesome theory crafting posts of recent that are well worth taking the time to read. He convinced me I was wrong on versatility and how it will actually be a decent stat and how at some stat levels it would even be a hunters best stat. But for the record I still dislike it.

      WHU is coming back and the afore mentioned del will be contributing, so keep an eye on that.

      I am hoping like you that the content will be nerfed as well so my 10K as BM will be equal to what 400K is now, but somehow I doubt that. Even if it was however people would still choose hunters last because the idea of a loom run would be to make it as easy as possible so that means taking the highest DPS even if 10K is more than capable of doing it.

      MM and SV are very much unfinished. BM seems like it is fine even if the numbers are low in mechanics but both other specs are really lacking. MM in mobility because of the stupid mastery that makes a class designed around movement have to stand still with no instants and no reactionary abilities and SV with no burst, no finisher and feeling like it is half a rotation. They are in a sad state right now mechanic wise. Maybe a warlockese redesigned would have been better than the half specs we were left with.

  12. alright, thanks for the infos. i just recently (after months of progress-free apathy) discovered thrill of the wild and you're right, they post great stuff on there. elitist jerks on the other hand seems pretty dead to me. MMOC is a pain, i'ts hard to find valuable posts among the whiners and complainers (either about hunters being UP or OP). i'm glad that the WHU is back but is imho kind of lacking on the theorycrafting side, but still entertraining regardless.

    despite all the issues and uncertanities about the class i'm still pretty much excited about wod. at least BM they seem to have gotten right. no worrying about SrS anymore, which is huge, and adaptation (l100) looks pretty neat from a BM's pov too.

    1. EJ has rare but decent posts when they are there. Too make elitists there, but with that name what can you expect. MMO you need to weed through the BS. There are a lot of gems to be found if you are willing to spend the time looking for it but I can understand why you wouldn't. I get a little frustrated with all the crap myself too.

      Have you looked into the new BM only tame in WoD? It is a long quest line that never actually gives you a quest. You need to find it and figure it out all yourself (or read a guide). It is kind of cool that they added a quest line like that without it actually being a quest. Now that is some interesting stuff. Hunters might not be lucky in terms of balance right now, but we are lucky to still have some great things in the game just for us and tames like that are awesome.

      I personally am glad to be able to play MM again being I used to love the spec, but I am also upset at the same time because this is not my MM. This is not the MM I fell in love with. It feels more like playing a warlock or a mage with arrows now. MM is about physical damage, it should not have a caster feel to it and it does right now.

    2. i haven't looked much past the first few quests, garrisons, some lfr raid encounters, and new hunter mechanics (rotations etc) on beta. i prefer discovering it all on live, and the char wipes were pretty annoying which prevented me from testing much.

      that BM quest looks fantstic, i hadn't heard about it! thanks for the heads up. it sounds almost like the old rhok quest, where we had to find the felwood trees and all by ourselves (when avoiding guides).

      well, MM doesn't look too bad imho. it makes a nice contrast to BM, which is rather fast paced, while MM is pretty laid back and kinda slow, just sitting at max range and casting away. ok it kinda feels too slow now... as i said before it feels like something is missing but maybe i just got that impression because i only tested it with low haste levels, or it will get better with set bonuses (which would be a pretty bad way to fix specs). MM definetely looks more like an sniper-archer than ever before, which is fine by me, because that's always how i imagined it. but of course, it's nothing like the previous MM spec. and it probably won't be of any use in pvp, or 5 manning/CM or soloing, or almost anything outside of raids. i get why you are frustrated. maybe SV becomes more like "old MM"? they weren't much different in playstyle before imho, and it is definetely supposed to be mobile in WoD.

    3. I prefer fast paced. It is part of why I like the hunter class and could never get into melee because most melee classes have so many things they have to wait on. Same goes for casters. I am a button smasher. I can hit 3 100 times in the time it takes to cast the 3. I love the fast pace of hunters and that is why I hate MM the way it is now, because it takes forever to cast things and I start button mashing and it gets frustrated by it. I guess that is also why I like tanking and healing. Always feels like there is something to do instead of waiting on energy or long cast times. The difference between a 1.5 second cobra and a 1.6 second cobra feels like night and day. I am sure you know exactly what I mean. So an aimed shot feel like I can get up and go get a coffee before it finishes. lol

      I love how the BM quest line does not involve sitting and waiting for the thing to spawn. That is awesome. I really hate the "luck" pets. I would rather a quest line like this any day.

  13. Where can I pitch my bitch? Please post a place that blizzard is sure to see. Thanks in advance
    Salty Peanuts Hunter

    1. Looks like they got the message somewhat because survival got a last minute 12% buff to black arrow, explosive shot and serpent sting while the top specs took a small nerf. Might help a little.

      I submitted tickets from the beta to mention numbers I saw and what felt low in comparison to others. Some post on the forums or do blog posts like this. Others go to live chats like the one convert to raid had this weekend to question developers. It all comes to do being heard. Sometimes it doesn't feel like we are ever heard, but if we do not voice our opinion than we most definitely will not be heard.

      So where ever you choose to reach out. Be polite, state facts and be direct, that is the best way to get them to hear you. As much as I want to curse them, I always am as sweet as sugar when I talk to them.

  14. Well that is a plus and I would always be polite ;) I know about the more bees law. Thank you for responding and I will find an appropriate place to comment. Ill stay Sur then :) Peace

    1. It seems they listened some. Can't wait to see how that translates to live now. From another poster they said that things seem a lot closer than they had been, so that is helpful. SV might still be last, but they will not be doing half the damage any longer, which is a plus.

  15. Grumpy,

    While I am aware that you have some serious concern issues while looking at the #'s presented, my advice would be to simply relax. WoD is not out yet and I would not be worried about hard #'s that you are seeing at the present. They will be fixed.

    Furthermore, if they are not, you can be sure whatever classes are near the bottom are going to be the ones that get dmg bumped later in the expac. As a Ret Paladin player, that was my story all through MoP. At this point I may as well toss in that Hunters were exceptional throughout all of MoP, being one of the most sought after classes, whereas it was my class (melee dps) who was being denied raid entry early on. Do keep in mind that this is all from my perspective, as your opinions are from yours. However, at the end of MoP for SoO I was close or near to chart topping for almost every fight. I like to think I am a decent player, and player skill does play some part in the #'s, but more realistically I believe that Ret was at a mediocre place compared to many classes, so we were boosted.

    My ultimate point is that the designers aren't stupid. They will fix anything that is far too out of whack. Everyone is nervous with the new #'s dropping and seeing how their classes hold up, but to tell the truth, if anyone should be complaining at this point, I reckon it should be the healers who I think we can all agree got screwed the hardest.

    1. I just want it to me when I request to join a group I don't get, no thanks, we do not want hunters.

      I know it is about waiting until next expansion and all, but I still want to play the month leading up to it and being told you suck and we do not want you, not because of skill but because of the class you play, is not good design, even if it is only for 1 month.

      Hunters were always "okay". We were not very good or wanted for most of ToT and heroic SoO progression would have never seen a hunter get invited outside of to soak gear. Hunters did not get a buff for SoO until after all the top guild were finished with progression and all the hunters in those guilds missed out on it.

      Was hunter better than ret this expansion over all? Hell yes. Were hunters good all expansion? Not even close.

      Ret has been, in my opinion, in a bad place for the better part of 4 years. Most people I knew that mained one either quit, changed mains, or went tank or heals. They are worse off than hunters, that I will freely admit.

      As you said, developers are not stupid, look back to what I just said about ret and then think about that for a second. Yes, they are. They develop, nothing more. If we do not tell them what we see is wrong they will not know what needs to be changed.

      That is why I believe it is important to keep an open dialogue, to let people know when you are not happy, because if you don't they will just leave well enough alone.

      The hunters got across the board buffs this week because we made a big deal about it. Because people in trade that do not even play hunters were saying hunters suck and they feel bad for them. Because the group finder had comments in it like "no hunters".

      Speaking out gets things fixed. Wait on developers and thinking they are smart enough to figure it out on their own means things do not get fixed.

      Healers are in for a shock. They have infinite mana now and it will not be that way come warlords. Now healers have nothing to complain about, it is like god mode now. Later, that is when you will and should hear them complain.

  16. What's the state of SV hunters since last Fridays hotfix? (Too miserable to play since patch)
    It seems '100% Garrosh heirloom drop' is for everyone...except YOU SV hunters. Nothing for you.

    1. I did a heroic garrosh kill pug as SV on one of my hunters. Top 2 DPS were 12K, second 2 where me and someone else at 11K, the rest of the raid was around 6K-9K.

      Not sure if that is a product of the group I was in and the skill of the players, but we one shot it.

      In that run I would say survival did solid, I was not number one with a bullet like I am used to, no, but they did not do bad. Take that with a grain of salt as I do not know any of those people or there respective skill levels, so it is hard to really compare, but it seemed okay even if it did not seem like much more than I was doing beforehand.