---

Q u o t e:
Do I look like a warrior?

---

Never said ya did, no need to be snippy. I'm fighting for rogues just as much as you guys are - I don't think rogues should be as low as the player data (wish bliz would let us see theirs...) is showing.

I was asking merely because the diminishing returns on hit seem a bit crazy. I was asking if that small amount of hit I see on rogues complaining (150 or less) about their dps could be a factor because of a change that might not be thought of.

---

Q u o t e:
I don't work in research BUT I do TONS of math classes for my major. Given that a sample size is inherently random, why would the Rogues be full of bad players and not the other classes.

---

They wouldn't necessarily be, but then again, that isn't even what GC said. He just said that averaging rogue dps from parses doesn't explain why rogue dps is what it is in those parses, and thus that in itself doesn't suggest a solution. It could be because of mechanics, gear, bugs or something else entirely, each of which suggests different solutions. As an aside, when GC says something is related to gear or skill, that isn't necessarily a shorthand for "terrible player." Skill can mean familiarity and proficiency with class mechanics -- which have changed more for rogues than some other classes, like hunters. Hunters are using the same shots they used last expansion, with only minor changes for some specs, while rogues are dusting off daggers and other things they haven't used for months, and are trying to contend with figuring out whether they should do things they rarely did before, like use expose armor. Expose armor is a particularly poignant example because it adds a lot of dps to physical dps, but it doesn't show up at all as part of the rogue's dps contribution. This was less of an issue when there was always a warrior as the MT -- no one ever looked at a WWS parse to judge the MT's dps. Rogues, by contrast are judged by dps, and there isn't a column in WWS that says, "raid dps directly attributable to the rogue because of a debuff".

In other words he didn't say you can't consider dps from parses. He said you can't just average them up and say, "aha! Boost rogue dps in the next hotfix!" I understand why the one sentence you picked would give you cause for concern, but the five sentences following it should have helped give you a context for what he really was getting at, and more importantly, why the response has been to move a bit more slowly than perhaps some rogues would like.

It seems like you've taken that one sentence and used it to conclude that GC said they definitely isn't a problem and they aren't going to ever do anything about it. He said they aren't sure it's a problem, and that even if it is, they have to consider the impact of possibly breaking something later on if they boost damage and then rogues scale more quickly than anticipated with future upgrades (for example).

---

Q u o t e:

There was a post yesterday showing a druid doing 11,000 dps or something on Patch and a rogue posted that as an illustration that rogues need a buff. Um....

---

Wasn't that shown to be a druid/ret aura bug going on?

---

Q u o t e:


Wasn't that shown to be a druid/ret aura bug going on?

---

I think that was his point - data from a bug was being shown as a benchmark for dps.

---

Q u o t e:
Wasn't that shown to be a druid/ret aura bug going on?

---

It was definitely shown to be a bug, but again the point is that *somebody* used that as evidence that rogue dps was worse than tank dps, and thus needed buffing. That's why GC said they don't use the numbers as an ending point. They light up issues to monitor, which incidentally, is what they are doing with rogue dps -- monitoring it.

---

Q u o t e:
There's some evidence that hit was changed in some manner
http://elitistjerks.com/f78/t38095-retesting_hit_table_assumptions/



No one is disputing that but it also happens too be the only data we have access too and it's corroborating our own in game play experience, so discounting it purely based on that fact is also just as fail.

That is to say I wouldn't stand by the data, but I do agree with the general implications of it.

---

Sounds more like an opinion than an analytical assesment. ^_^

---

Q u o t e:
My point was more that we care about stats an awful lot -- they are one of our most powerful tools in making balance adjustments.

But...

You can't make them into more than they are. They are a tool in your box, not the only thing that matters. You can't let the incoming numbers alone dictate changes. Anything from current bugs to errors in reporting tools to players selectively removing data in order to make a point can get in the way of the numbers reflecting reality.

There was a post yesterday showing a druid doing 11,000 dps or something on Patch and a rogue posted that as an illustration that rogues need a buff. Um....

---

I get where you are coming from, but on the other hand WWS reports cannot be selectively altered. You go to the site and select the boss and boom, it shows you the who's who of DPS.

If every report shows no rogues on top, or even close to the other three (mages warriors and hunters) then what more can be done? No one says there isn't a bug at play. (example, rogues may be bugged in someway dropping their dps) But even then we have a right to complain until the bug is fixed, otherwise we cannot do the only role we are brought for.

---

Q u o t e:
My point was more that we care about stats an awful lot -- they are one of our most powerful tools in making balance adjustments.

But...

You can't make them into more than they are. They are a tool in your box, not the only thing that matters. You can't let the incoming numbers alone dictate changes. Anything from current bugs to errors in reporting tools to players selectively removing data in order to make a point can get in the way of the numbers reflecting reality.

There was a post yesterday showing a druid doing 11,000 dps or something on Patch and a rogue posted that as an illustration that rogues need a buff. Um....

---

Do you have any useful information you might be able to share with us? A great many people know that the feral WWS was due to a bug.

---

Q u o t e:


I think that was his point - data from a bug was being shown as a benchmark for dps by an idiot..

---

You left a few words out.

---

Q u o t e:
While you're here, HAT bug, fixed soon, or not?

---

What's HAT?

---

Q u o t e:


Sounds more like an opinion than an analytical assesment. ^_^

---

I didn't say it was an analytical assessment, infact my comments about not standing by the numbers would fly directly in the face of any such assessment. I'm not quite sure what you're getting at to be honest.

---

Q u o t e:
My point was more that we care about stats an awful lot -- they are one of our most powerful tools in making balance adjustments.

But...

You can't make them into more than they are. They are a tool in your box, not the only thing that matters. You can't let the incoming numbers alone dictate changes. Anything from current bugs to errors in reporting tools to players selectively removing data in order to make a point can get in the way of the numbers reflecting reality.

There was a post yesterday showing a druid doing 11,000 dps or something on Patch and a rogue posted that as an illustration that rogues need a buff. Um....

---

I agree but when the numbers displayed show a correlation with what we've seen in game it's enough for us to take notice.
People see proof where they want too it's the dirty reality of statistics. Numbers can be used too say pretty much anything.
My office gets requests daily from various department heads and more times than anyone cares to count have been used by competing departments to show two completely different stories. It's actually amusing.

EDIT: For those of you who don't get it I'll try and break it down.

The data displayed shows numbers that are by no means perfect. In game bugs and inherent inaccuracies in the methods used to both collect and report the information cannot be used as a metric by which to affect change. It can only be used as a tool by which to display a picture of what's currently happening in the game.
Rogues may very well be under preforming but it's not easily reflected by the data we've seen, all we've seen is a snapshot of how all sorts of things, some going right and some going wrong reflect in the current gameplay.

Edited for readability though I doubt it made a difference :P

---

Q u o t e:
There was a post yesterday showing a druid doing 11,000 dps or something on Patch and a rogue posted that as an illustration that rogues need a buff. Um....

---

And he made a good point, warlocks need a buff too, everyone should be able to do 11k dps+ if a druid did. Hes not OP were all just UP (insert rant about hybrid vs normal class dps here)

---

Q u o t e:
Yeah, me.

Edit: Also, Hit is a weak-ass stat.

---

If you say "weak-ass stat" aloud, it sounds like "weak assed hat" Just thought I'd distract you all with a minor derailment.

I can't say for certain if rogues need a boost to dps. If bugs exist, they should be fixed. Rogues don't SEEM to be having problems in my raids, and topping meters isn't the only position for a rogue. Who cares if some hunter beat you by 150 dps?

Other classes, however, are in more dire "need" of buffs. By need I mean in regard to the seems to be striving for parity. Elemental shamans seem pretty far and away the worst off. Afflict Locks complain, but while they have do have numerous dots to deal with, it's not as if they all have unique cooldowns. Most are instant cast with no c/d.Managing duration seems to be balancing act for them. Shadow priests have as many spells to manage most with unique spell casts and cooldowns and durations. It just takes practice to get it down.

I think its somewhat early to start jumping to conclusions. The ret pally 3.0 chaos was due in part to a bug. The 11.4k dps feral druid was a bug. Huge disparities in dps are usually due to a)gear b)the player c)bugs/encounter. If they buff rogues then fix the bugs, bigger problems will arise. If after bugs are fixed rogues still trail the pack, then a more proportionate buff can be instated.

---

Q u o t e:
If you say "weak-ass stat" aloud, it sounds like "weak assed hat" Just thought I'd distract you all with a minor derailment.

---

Good point, there are a lot of weak ass hats. Is this something blizzard is looking into?

---

Q u o t e:
My point was more that we care about stats an awful lot -- they are one of our most powerful tools in making balance adjustments.

But...

You can't make them into more than they are. They are a tool in your box, not the only thing that matters. You can't let the incoming numbers alone dictate changes. Anything from current bugs to errors in reporting tools to players selectively removing data in order to make a point can get in the way of the numbers reflecting reality.

There was a post yesterday showing a druid doing 11,000 dps or something on Patch and a rogue posted that as an illustration that rogues need a buff. Um....

---

I'd mostly point out these statistics are taken from the top kills reported on raid dps. These are all the players who are "doing it right" and we look up to.

I do not think all these high end high power guilds have been doing it right while carrying rogues who "do it wrong".

---

Q u o t e:
There was a post yesterday showing a druid doing 11,000 dps or something on Patch and a rogue posted that as an illustration that rogues need a buff. Um....

---

Why are you intentionally contrasting a single datapoint against an average?

---

Q u o t e:


Why are you intentionally contrasting a single datapoint against an average?

---

Read my post, that's why.

specifically this part

---

Q u o t e:
The data displayed shows numbers that are by no means perfect. In game bugs and inherent inaccuracies in the methods used to both collect and report the information cannot be used as a metric by which to affect change. It can only be used as a tool by which to display a picture of what's currently happening in the game.
Rogues may very well be under preforming but it's not easily reflected by the data we've seen, all we've seen is a snapshot of how all sorts of things, some going right and some going wrong reflect in the current gameplay.

---

The example he used is just a larger more grossly inaccurate incident.

The general idea is, yes the numbers show something but not what everyone thinks they show. Maybe rogues are under preforming but then maybe hunters are over preforming or maybe the phases of the moon are interacting with a fragment of a function somewhere and causing a slight discrepancy. It's not as black and white as who's hitting harder than whom.

There are literally thousands of tiny little bits floating around that can be causing all sort of issues that we have no way of measuring. It's easy to see a singular bug that causes a druid to hit ridiculous numbers but we have no way of telling what coefficient is off by .03% that's interacting with some other function in a way that was unintended that ultimately makes a certain class hit for 1% more damage than they should be and all these sorts of things can be cascading into one another forming the picture that we see now.
It's easy to say "That guy hit 300 more DPS than me, nerf him" but that doesn't take into account the play styles, the skill of the individual and the myriad of other circumstances that caused it to happen. You can't simply make that guys attack do 30 less damage and call it fixed because that will just do more harm than good.

---

Q u o t e:


Why are you intentionally contrasting a single datapoint against an average?

---

I'm surprised I'm defending GC since I play a Priest, but he wasn't contrasting a single data point versus and average. He was showing how silly it was for people to base calls for buffs/nerfs off of one case. And that case was a very obvious bug, most likely attributed to Ferocious Inspiriation.