How Blizz could develop such weak BM Tree?

Ответить

Вернуться на главную страницу форума

Сообщение от 298296

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Сообщение от 670547

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Сообщение от 757306

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Сообщение от 170457

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Сообщение от 757306

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Сообщение от asakawa

define horrible?
a 40% drop i think moves a spec well out of the range at which you might deem it "viable" and "horrible" certainly becomes a fair description.

Сообщение от 170457

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Сообщение от 757306

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Сообщение от asakawa

Look at some parses and come back to admit you're wrong.

It's one of the worst DPS specs in the game, if not the worst.Ha, wow your overreacting. Its true what people say. Whenever a new patch or expansion comes all the kiddies really do cry "OMG BLIZZ JOO NURFED OUR CLASSEZZZ".

You must be a CRAP BM to do 40% less damage. Im always top of the charts or close to it anyway. I dont need to give numbers because i know theres more to a spec than that. But whatever, have fun in your little bubble where BM is "one of the worst specs in wow". HA! I still chuckle at that.

you can try to make a point by calling those who disagree "kiddies" and put nonsense in quotation marks even though it bears no relation to anything that's been said but it only serves to makes a fool of you.

BM does ~40% less damage than survival when you take the average of the top parses for each spec for damage done on Argaloth. the numbers are pretty solid.

further to this, the very worst argument you can ever make on a forum like this (and one that is seen woefully often) is "Im always top of the charts". all this tells your readers is that you likely group with imbeciles. it certainly doesn't strengthen your argument.

you may enjoy BM and i'm very happy for you but it is too weak for anyone serious about group based PvE to consider and it is serious group based PvE that this thread is covering.

Сообщение от 452949

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Сообщение от 170457

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Сообщение от 757306

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Сообщение от matheus314

Wow, man, tell ME about issues...

Сообщение от 355869

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Сообщение от 355869

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Сообщение от Xiamaru

At Nykkida, oh I think I see what you mean. Black Arrow does this much instant damage and this much damage over time for example?

But it's a top tier talent. It must be the strongest.

And where it gains in damage for SV, BM has Beast Mastery and MM has Chimera Shot, a lot more useful than just plain DPS.

Wrong. Top tier talents aren't supposed to be the strongest. Go look at Protection Paladins 31-point, and tell me if you find that "the strongest talent in the Protection tree". If you agree, you must be one horrible tank. According to an In-game ticket (Since we got no answer at all on the official forum), the answer I recieved was along the lines of "The top-tier talent is wrongly seen as "THE" talent for any given spec. It isn't supposed to be the best, nor the defining talent for any spec. It's supposed to make you better at your given role, which it does." <- and he is right. Compare this to Hunters: Beast Mastery makes you better at dishing out damage as a Beast Master = True - Chimera Shot makes you better at dishing out damage as a Marksman = True, and finally, Black Arrow makes you better at dishing out damage as Survival = True. Don't take up this discussion however, have already tried wasting pages discussing it, to no avail.

On said note, having a Paladin main, who alternate between main healing and off-tanking, I have yet to see any BM or MM top the charts. In fact, when I tank, I would be suprised to see either go above my damage. This is, of course, in Heroics, but since the counter arguments to why Beast Masters are bad, similarly refered to Heroics. These players could just suck a lot, but I wouldn't be surprised if it was simply a matter of the spec itself being weak.

As for me, I'll stick to Survival for now. They give me the best dps right now, and I quite enjoy the LnL mechanics of Survival. I find the other specs a bit boring to be honest, but that's my subjective point.

Regardless, a spec that does poorly in dps because of the spec, regardless of the "fun" factor, shouldn't raid. I see your frustrations Facefoul, since I felt the same about Subtelty rogues at one point. It's sad to see your favorite spec being pushed down so far, that people would outright refuse to let you join their raid. An equal discussion took place on the Paladin Forum not so long ago about Shockadins. They may be fun, and you may like them all you want to, but when the numbers behind their attacks are bad, the spec wont be able to hold their ground. Shockadins were the closest thing to viable during Wrath, because of the main bulk of mobs being undeads (garantueed crit with their main spell), but in Cata, they can't hold their weight. Neither can Beast Mastery nor Marksman. You could argue from now till they fix it, but it doesn't make the fact that Beast Mastery and Marksman are bad specs right now.

Blizzard sometimes does stupid things. I find groups for Heroics, and actually disallowed Troll Druids to tank Shadowfang Keep prior to the fix, because they would get instant-killed instead of being left at 1 % hp. When something, regardless of the reason, is broken, you can't use it till they fix it. All we can do is hope Blizzard fixes it soon. They have already shown a couple of buffs for MM and BM, but I have a fear the buffs will end up being a buff to Survival as well... KC is greatly considered by many to be used by Survival instead of Arcane Shot. Arcane is better than KC right now, if I'm not completly wrong, but only by a very small margin. But if they buff KC a lot, it would just end up being better than Arcane, and thus be used instead - which would make it a buff to Survival instead.

Blizzard have really messed up the Hunter right now... How the hell did they manage to make them vary so much? How the hell did they manage to make MM and BM have 11 and 10k dps, while Survival have 25k? Either ES and BA is simply far and beyond what the other two specs possess, otherwise, I just don't know. It doesn't seem to make much sense to me.

Сообщение от asakawa

BM does ~40% less damage than survival when you take the average of the top parses for each spec for damage done on Argaloth. the numbers are pretty solid.

The numbers may be "solid", but your interpretation is quite soft.

How much of that 40% is due to the spec, how much is due to gear, how much is due to raid comp (buffs and debuffs), and how much is due to player skill?

Why does FD.com show closer to a 15% difference, when you hold buffs, debuffs, and gear the same?

the numbers are arrived at from an average of the best performing parses.
if you want to call it 15% then i'm happy to go along with that because that is still mathematically significant and indicative of a severe disparity.

people are getting too invested in sides here and defending their favourite specs or whatever.
BM and MM are weak. they need some attention and they are receiving some on the PTR. fingers crossed some balance can be achieved.

as i've said, if someone enjoys BM or MM so much more than SV that they want to play it then more power to them but those people aren't coming to my raids and i don't think i'm taking such an extreme position by saying that. this isn't the difference between destruction and affliction or even assassination and combat the difference is significant.

Сообщение от matheus314

Wrong. Top tier talents aren't supposed to be the strongest. Go look at Protection Paladins 31-point, and tell me if you find that "the strongest talent in the Protection tree". If you agree, you must be one horrible tank. According to an In-game ticket (Since we got no answer at all on the official forum), the answer I recieved was along the lines of "The top-tier talent is wrongly seen as "THE" talent for any given spec. It isn't supposed to be the best, nor the defining talent for any spec. It's supposed to make you better at your given role, which it does." <- and he is right. Compare this to Hunters: Beast Mastery makes you better at dishing out damage as a Beast Master = True - Chimera Shot makes you better at dishing out damage as a Marksman = True, and finally, Black Arrow makes you better at dishing out damage as Survival = True. Don't take up this discussion however, have already tried wasting pages discussing it, to no avail.

OK, so you disagree with me by agreeing with me. I can understand that.

I do not play a Paladin and I don't want to do a tank role. That's why my main is a Hunter, not a hybrid.

Can we just call this discussion a moot point now, and let this thread fall off the first page? As I said before, it's a matter of base damage numbers, weapon damage modifiers, and AP coefficients. 4.0.6 will be changing the numbers for all three specs - heck, we'll be using a different meta gem. Thus, all this will be irrelevant soon enough. If someone wants to know which spec to use between now and then, they simply should play it safe and go with SV if they want max DPS potential. It's not worth arguing over.

True.

Сообщение от 355869

This post was from a user who has deleted their account.

Сообщение от matheus314

Judging players on their actual performance, rather than their conformance, seems to be the radical notion around here.

Now let's just hope that the raid leaders think the same.