I think it is important to look at synergies escpecially if there is a really strong connection. For example if all the majority of those druids in 2x2 are in warrior/druid combos, then nerfing druids will even the numbers, but by doing so make other druid combinations a lot weaker as well. That means that druids will be pigeonholed into playing a resto druid with a warrior partner because it will be the only combination that is viable. If it is the synergy that makes the class over represented then it is the synergy that needs to change not the class.
I realize that druids and other classes need some changes but I just hope that this is taken into consideration when making those changes.
While class popularity is likely to mean less the smaller the sample size, we still feel like it's worth looking at (and yes we look at un-normalized stats too).
We definitely feel it's still somewhat relevant at the 2200 mark, there are plenty of anecdotal cases we know of on the dev team where the arena team in question would love to use certain group compositions but isn't able to due to not finding a player of that class with enough skill and gear to make it happen.
Actually its the imbalanced caused by certain specs being bad that limit group compositions.
Both resto shamans and healing paladins fair very poorly in smaller brackets leaving only 2 out of the 4 healing classes capable of filling in the healer slot. Then tact on the fact that half the druid population doesn't want to play resto and the other specs are mediocre if not outright terrible in arena (similar story for priests). And viola limited pool of healers and large pool of disgruntled players.
The PTR doesn't get every build that gets made, there are generally several internal builds in between each PTR build that we're able to test on.
Ahh I see, from the tester's perspective though this seemed pretty odd as we never had a working version to try out on any PTR build.
Well here's to hoping for something else for shaman. I'd love that toughness change if you guys would only allow roots to have their duration reduced as well, the tooltip is quite misleading(and hortus agrees).
Kalgan since you're still posting in here, you stated you noticed an upward trend ~1 month ago, do you happen to have the figures correlating to that in regards to how it was deemed an upward trend?
Also in regards to that is there any changes to fix the warrior over representation in some brackets, or was that why MS and utility/changes were being made to other potential melee classes to give some teams a viable option other than warriors?
I'd list my 70's but I don't have enough room for them all :(
The PTR doesn't get every build that gets made, there are generally several internal builds in between each PTR build that we're able to test on.
nice! some hope is on the horizon!
about teh new MS removed....
after reducing all forms of mana burn, drain and stings, then adding increased spirit regen, how was adding more MS abilities not the direction expected or wanted?
The PTR doesn't get every build that gets made, there are generally several internal builds in between each PTR build that we're able to test on.
So are shamans getting any other changes that might be labled "buffs" this patch or should I take my instant dispellable ghostwolf and jump off a cliff and then reroll like I should have done when I hit 70?
While class popularity is likely to mean less the smaller the sample size, we still feel like it's worth looking at (and yes we look at un-normalized stats too).
We definitely feel it's still somewhat relevant at the 2200 mark, there are plenty of anecdotal cases we know of on the dev team where the arena team in question would love to use certain group compositions but isn't able to due to not finding a player of that class with enough skill and gear to make it happen.
Thanks for the communication at least. I think everyone would be interested in seeing your un-normalized data if you could possibly share a graph for that as well. Also I think we'd love to hear if you have any comments on melee scaling in PVP. Melee has always scaled better with gear than casters, but I'm curious if the dev team sees this as a problem or if we'll just have to live with it.
Also, buff shamans and mages. I personally thought MS on flametongue was a bit much, but shamans definitely still need some buffs to compete in arena.
P.S Any word on pet scaling would be nice too. It's just very frustrating when a warrior can kill my pet in 2 autoattacks and a MS + WW. And a warlock without a pet is dead very shortly thereafter.
"Some changes are going to be made to lifetap in an upcoming PTR build. Until that time I think we've got enough feedback to ignore." -Hortus
I think you missed his point. The normalised representation in the 2200+ bracket is significantly different to the representation in the 1850+ bracket. The latter would give a better overall picture of pvp balance since:
a) It's a much larger sample size
b) It includes non cookie-cutter team comps
