---

Q u o t e:
http://www.wowmeteronline.com/rank/classrank/8

Here's an interesting list to look at.

Northrend Beasts: Oh hey, the max range is about 1k DPS and look, Warlocks as the only pure without cooldowns to blow during the Icehowl wall-crash bonus damage portion, has the lowest DPS of all the pures. Better just buff the crap out of them by 500 DPS to make things even.

Jaraxxus: Oh hey now! Mages are completely dominating! Nerf the- oh wait, they can spellsteal that buff for a damage bonus. Well I guess that's okay. Oh man, look at those DKs and Warriors destroying the met- oh wait, its a fight with adds that they can AOE on. That's overpowered. Let's nerf it.

Faction Champs: Oh my good lord, nerf the crap out of those DK- oh yeah, they can spread diseases around the place (at the cost of CCing with things like Polymorph, so god knows why guilds actually choose to do this) and don't suffer from the 75% AOE reduction that everyone else does. That one was pretty easy to explain, and just as easy to nerf. Next fight!

Twin Valks: Ut oh! Mages destroying everybody again! Oh yeah, Arcane Mages get Incanter's Absorption and get a constant 1000 extra spellpower this fight due to another silly mechanic. Better just nerf the crap out of them to be safe. But wait, everyone else's numbers are inflated over a normal tank and spank fight, too! Nerf EVERYBODY!

Anub'arak: This fight doesn't let Warlocks Life Tap easily, Hunters have to sit in Viper a lot in order to constantly Volley and Shamans and Priests have weak AOE, so they're explainable, but we'd better just nerf everyone else, just to be safe.



So, who thinks that's how class balance should be done?

---

If every fight has a gimmick, and those gimmicks are inflating numbers for a small sub set, then you can either nerf that sub set in general, nerf their ability to use those gimmicks, nerf the gimmicks, or provide gimmicks for other classes to exploit.

Or you can just pretend that there is no knowable truth, ignore balance altogether, and wind up with guilds and players making class decisions based on data you've chosen to ignore, but which they can't afford to.

---

Q u o t e:


But it's not the only source and thus is incomplete no mater how factual it is.

And again, this ONE INSTANCE out of the whole end game. Trying to make any argument around it is pointless...

---

It may be one instance, but its the current instance, which is all that matters, which is why it matters.

If Elemental shamans get buffed to kingdom come and dominate every fight in Icecrown, these forums would be flooded with calls for nerfs and rebalancing, but that would be only one instance no?

Your argument is flawed.

---

Q u o t e:


Obvioiusly not, but what they could do is provide the classes lacking those cooldowns to blow in burn situations or lacking in aoe potential, cooldowns to blow in burn situations and better aoe mechanics.

Pointing out the reasons why the classes struggling on encounters with certain gimmicks to them are struggling is fine, but it brings up the question why when most fights in today's raids have 1 or more of these type of designs in them, why its ok for these classes lacking the ability to excell in them is still ok? And just shrugged off as gimmick fights are gimmicky?

These types of encounter designs aren't going away, thus classes struggling with them should be given the tools to deal with them just like the classes that excell in them already have the tools to excell in them, how can that be argued against?

---

But that isn't what this thread is doing. It's just vomiting a bunch of undigested numbers without context or nuance and inviting the reader to draw the broadest conclusions.

Warlocks probably do need more cooldowns (and may be getting them in due course with this shard system in the works.) I think a good case could be made for this and warlocks ought to make it. This thread doesn't. It's just throwing sh*t against the wall.

---

Q u o t e:


If every fight has a gimmick, and those gimmicks are inflating numbers for a small sub set, then you can either nerf that sub set in general, nerf their ability to use those gimmicks, nerf the gimmicks, or provide gimmicks for other classes to exploit.

---

This

Pointing out why certain classes excell in gimmick fights while others don't succeeds only at pointing out the problem in the classes struggling not having the ability to excell in them as well. There's no reason for some to have and for some to have not when there is zero indication gimmick fights are going away in the near future, certainly won't be in Icecrown, and there's no logical evidence to provide that points differently.

---

Q u o t e:
you can't just say that its fine because its this encounter or that encounter when the same classes are doing well and the same ones poorly over almost all of the current content.

---

But these are not the statistics we're being given... he's giving us the statistics from ONE SINGLE encounter to form the basis that 'DK's are OP across the board' and or 'class X is UP across the board'.

---

Q u o t e:
Should all classes be equal on all content? No. Should one class be 1st or 2nd or 9th or 10th for all content? Again no

---

They aren't now... so what is it you're trying to prove again exactly by data mining and drlling down on one single encounter in the whole game.

I do love "right by proxy" arguments though... the numbers are factual thus any argument built around them must also be factual. It's the opposite of people that use things like spelling errors to invalidate valid arguments. "oh he can't spell, how can he possibly be right about X or Y?"

It's logic for people with little brains who don't know how to actually form useful arguments.

---

Q u o t e:


It may be one instance, but its the current instance, which is all that matters, which is why it matters.

If Elemental shamans get buffed to kingdom come and dominate every fight in Icecrown, these forums would be flooded with calls for nerfs and rebalancing, but that would be only one instance no?

Your argument is flawed.

---

The argument that's flawed is one that supposes that QQ begets class balance....

---

Q u o t e:


The argument that's flawed is one that supposes that QQ begets class balance....

---

You're fooling yourself if buffs/nerfs in whatever amount aren't effected by what is complained about on the forums. You can take every change in every patch and relate it to a subject brought up on the forums as a reason or an aiding influence to why the change was made.

Whether the changes are warranted is debatable, but stating statistics or balance between classes doesn't matter from one tier to another because its only one tier is the flawed part because class balance is always based around the current progression tier, as it should be.

---

Q u o t e:


You're fooling yourself if buffs/nerfs in whatever amount isn't effected by what is complained about on the forums. You can take every change in every patch and relate it to a subject brought up on the forums as a reason or an aiding influence to why the change was made.

---

I never said that what gets discussed on the forum couldn't lead to changes in balance - I simply said that QQ does not.

And when you're cherry picking a single encounter to make a point on, such as this thread, thats nothing but QQ - and QQ by itself isn't what they balance around, even if the QQ happens to be on point in certain situations.

Like I said, OP is making an argument by proxy.. the numbers are factual - thus anything he says must also be factual - but he's not using ALL the numbers, only those he cherry picked to highlight his point.

---

Q u o t e:


I never said that what gets discussed on the forum couldn't lead to changes in balance - I simply said that QQ does not.

And when you're cherry picking a single encounter to make a point on, such as this thread, thats nothing but QQ - and QQ by itself isn't what they balance around, even if the QQ happens to be on point in certain situations.

Like I said, OP is making an argument by proxy.. the numbers are factual - thus anything he says must also be factual - but he's not using ALL the numbers, only those he cherry picked to highlight his point.

---

I'd agree that leaving out information to enhance one's argument is helping nothing in discussions like this, but in this instance using Unholy's ability to take advantage of their aoe mechanics to inflate numbers, it brings up the question why then in fights with these "gimmicks" (encounters with adds is not a gimmick, FC is considering pestilence spreading diseases is the only "aoe" that doesn't have an "aoe cap") certain classes have the ability to excel and some can only struggle, that's why these numbers can be useful, even if displayed with bias.

---

Q u o t e:
Hunter Beast 4830
Mage Frost 3295

---

Bad players are bad?

---

Q u o t e:


I'd agree that leaving out information to enhance one's argument is helping nothing in discussions like this, but in this instance using Unholy's ability to take advantage of their aoe mechanics to inflate numbers, it brings up the question why then in fights with these "gimmicks" (encounters with adds is not a gimmick, FC is considering pestilence spreading diseases is the only "aoe" that doesn't have an "aoe cap") certain classes have the ability to excel and some can only struggle, that's why these numbers can be useful, even if displayed with bias.

---

No, all they prove is that the gimmick of this one encounter favors one certain class, you might as well start complaining about the gimmick fight were Frost excels in Ulduar as basis for how Frost is balanced across the board.

If OP really wants to make such an argument, then he should be posting parse on ALL the AoE fights in the game and show us that UH-DK's are dominating ALL AOE fights (which they dont) - that might show that there is a problem. But does he do that? Nope, because the only parse he could find that supports his thinly veiled QQ was ToC.


And just for interest... this is from the arena representation thread sticky at the top.

---

Q u o t e:
We have asked you to support your assertions with data, which several players are doing by linking Arena representation statistics generated by fine sites such as SK, Realmhistory and others. There is nothing wrong with this.

However we are starting to see many new threads each day that consist of nothing other than a link to another website with perhaps a "Blizzard fix it" added for good measure.

We find such threads to be of really limited utility to the community. Anyone interested in Arena reprentation is certainly capable of finding that information on their own. We ask that you first look for an existing thread on the topic. If you feel the need to start your own, then at least try and offer some analysis as to why you think things are the way they are or how they should be.

Please don't start threads that are little more than a link to Arena representation.

---

And thats all this thread is, little more than some DPS parse from one single fight in one single encounter across the entire end game with "Blizzard fix it" thrown in for good measure.

Heh, when i started this i actually had no idea/bias as to how it would turn out. To be honest i was actually kind of surprised.

To give you an idea, my guild is working on Anub Hardmode and we have 1 DK in our raid and he's blood right now. It was very interesting to see how every class/spec dps balanced over the entire instance though so that you can have some sort of semblance of a benchmark in what to expect when i bring a raid with 2 feral druids/2 ret pallies/arms warrior/ 2 combat rogues and like 1 DK to the fight.

So, this really wasnt/isnt ment to be a troll, it is meant to gauge the optimal expected performance, given basically perfect conditions for each respective spec/class

And it is over a whole instance, i do agree that if i had just picked one fight or something it would be rediculous. When uludar was the end game content, it would have been interesting to do the analysis at that point as well to have a reference on how classes are evolving and changing via gear and encoutner design

---

Q u o t e:


Obvioiusly not, but what they could do is provide the classes lacking those cooldowns to blow in burn situations or lacking in aoe potential, cooldowns to blow in burn situations and better aoe mechanics.

Pointing out the reasons why the classes struggling on encounters with certain gimmicks to them are struggling is fine, but it brings up the question why when most fights in today's raids have 1 or more of these type of designs in them, why its ok for these classes lacking the ability to excell in them is still ok? And just shrugged off as gimmick fights are gimmicky?

These types of encounter designs aren't going away, thus classes struggling with them should be given the tools to deal with them just like the classes that excell in them already have the tools to excell in them, how can that be argued against?

---

And when they start providing cooldowns to everybody, and taking it a step further and giving everyone all kinds of similar abilities and thus an equal chance to shine in all situations, in all boss fights, at all times, ever, we get what everybody has been dreading/complaining about since the first ever change was made to the game: 10 classes that are basically the same.

The thing that nobody ever seems to acknowledge around here is that EVERY fight is a gimmick. EVERY...SINGLE...FIGHT in the GAME has some kind of gimmick around it, 5, 10, 25 and 40 man raids. Everywhere you look, every boss is different in one way or another and its on the players to figure out what it is, build a strategy around it and kill it to the best of their ability.

There are occasions where some classes perform exceptionally well and some perform exceptionally badly. It only then becomes a problem if good people are getting subbed out for bad people just because of the gap in exceptionality (is that a word?) that class finds themselves in, for instance Unholy DKs on Anub perform exceptionally well, while Warlocks and Hunters perform exceptionally badly. When we have to sub out a good Warlock for a trial DK, that's a problem. When we have to sub out a good DK tank, and bring in some new recruit Prot Paladin, because Block is ridiculously overpowered on Anub's adds, that's a problem.

Unholy DKs doing a lot of damage on a fight here and there? Not really a big deal if it doesn't actually matter to the fight. Would you say that unholy DKs spreading diseases on Faction Champs is a truly game-breaking issue? Its just a quirk that their diseases don't obey the 75% AOE damage reduction thing. Oh well. Its not like raids are stacking Unholy DKs for it. God help you if you feel the need to. Only the bads who don't actually understand how top-tier raiding works will spout garbage like 'higher DPS means bosses die faster, which equates to more boss kills per hour, which equates to more loot per hour, and that's all top guilds care aobut'. Who the hell raids like that? ****ing robots?

Not every class struggles in EVERY fight. There are times when Warlocks and Shamans get to shine, particularly where mana is involved. And basing the game around every class having an equal number of fights to 'excel' in is just stupid design. Get to a new boss, work with the mechanics a bit and come to the conclusion "oh, this is the Enhancement Shaman fight. All shamans respec Enhance and start rocking the joint", get to the next one "Oh, this is the Warlock fight, sub out all the Mages". That would be a really crap game to play.

---

Q u o t e:
There are occasions where some classes perform exceptionally well and some perform exceptionally badly.

---

Actually no there really aren't. There's some where classes perform abnormally high and average on another encounter, but you don't have any 1st or last scenarios. It's really more a case of certain gimmick fights benefitting classes that are already performing well.

---

Q u o t e:


Actually no there really aren't. There's some where classes perform abnormally high and average on another encounter, but you don't have any 1st or last scenarios. It's really more a case of certain gimmick fights benefitting classes that are already performing well.

---

There are a few, like Warlocks and Hunters on H25 Anub, but yeah, its more common to see a normal spread and then 1 or 2 classes (or specific individuals due to plain, old good luck like on a fight like Hodir) doing better than normal.

Too harsh.

You really can't say anything about any of the ToC fights.. most of them are gimmicks and any class with cleaves and aoe will excel here. Unholy single target is no where near the top. They are just aoe kings and will top the meters on the fights involving aoe(which is most in ToC).