Hi there! Anyone who tried kyrian MM, NF MM or both can say if Kyrian covenant is performing well for m+? I love Night Fae abilities in terms of movility and simplicity but I don’t like their theme, tmog etc. Considering that I am going to spend half a game in the covenant zone Im thinking to choose another covenant that it’s not “BiS”.
I plan to do pve content and i wonder what is the difference between kyrian and night fae in terms of dps (More than 4-5% would make me worth choosing Night Fae). Also I plan to change race and push higer keys “I know Im not that 1% harcore player but I like to be competitive and do things the best I can”
They’re both within ~1% of each other so pick the one you prefer of the two.
Kyrian has the bonus of being good for PVP with NF being better for M+ iirc.
Moofzy, the guide writer for WoWhead and a competitive PvE hunter, suggests that Kyrian is slightly preferably particularly for M+ for a couple of reasons. As Kyrian vs NF is so close performance wise for Hunters, we need to look at factors outside of throughput.
Immediately, we can see that Phial of Serenity is extremely useful for M+ while Soulshape is practically useless, particularly on a class already so mobile. I’d personally extend the argument that Phial is the best signature ability for M+ for every class. This is an easy +1 for Kyrian.
Kyrian requires mobs to remain in it’s field for 10 seconds with a 4 second “grace” period, so effectively 6 seconds. Wild Spirits requires 15 seconds, or 18 seconds with the suggested BiS conduit, which is obviously a little more cumbersome and often not as practical. Another point for Kyrian.
NF concentrates more damage into it’s window than Kyrian does which allows it to be more impactful in situations where this higher burst is needed (dangerous pulls, for example), during limited-buff periods such as the Prideful buff, or when you have the Sanguine Depths Venthyr buff, or during burst phases on bosses (Oryphrion, Mueh’zala and Stitchflesh are 3 that spring to mind).
The damage profiling is a little more awkward. We can use the 2 accepted Fire Mage builds in BFA to compare how 2 minute vs 1 minute profiles compare - 2 minute profiles required a lot more “playing around” than a 1 minute build, which is active on every pull more-or-less. This makes 1-minute builds far more friendly with fleeting groups, be those pugs or otherwise, and 2-minute builds being very strong when “big pulls” are solicited … which the global AoE cap directly interferes with. This is more a “personal” preference, but if you’re playing with different groups all the time I’d be inclined to say Kyrian is better here, with 2-minute NF having a strong opportunity to synergise well with your group dependant on composition and the competence of your tank to manage group cooldowns.
The final point is only really applicable if you’re in a dedicated group - what does your group need? Do you have a NF player but no Kyrian? Then you should gravitate towards Kyrian. Is it the opposite? Then you should go NF. This was pretty much the whole driving factor behind my choice - I’m the only Kyrian, but my static has 2 NF players.
Wasn’t the 4 sec grace period only for the “wallhack” part of the ability? i’m pretty sure once the target leaves the zone the damage and the crit chance boost is immediately canceled… which doesn’t invalidate your point, but still, worth mentioning.
NF buffs Mastery makeing all ur ablity deal more damage +1 point to NF
NF aplays hunters mark to all targets +1 point to NF
NF sims better then Kyrian +1 point to NF
Kyrian is just good for Arenas allowing u shoot tru the pillars +1 to Kyrian
Moofzy says Night Fea is best. look for urself .
Best Covenants for Marksmanship Hunters
Night Fae is currently our best Covenant choice. It is currently the best option for both single target and AoE. Gives us insane burst every 2 minutes. Niya is our best soulbind and offers traits such as Grove Invigoration that complement our toolkit. She also gives us some solid defensive bonuses to aid our survival.
So is mine, but that isn’t really helpful when the question lies in which is better and you link… frankly obscure videos and someone else links a wowhead guide (Which for a change is actually decent).
I’ll just echo my original reply to OP, choose whichever of the two, they’re close and have their own benefits depending on what you want.
I think that’s needlessly dismissive and reductionist. The guide is only as valuable as its author, WoWhead simply commissions that person to write them.
It’s up to us as users to judge the “worth” and credibility of that author - we can see that the MM and BM guides have some credibility due to the reputation of their authors (Moofzy and Impakt respectively), while the SV one can pretty much be immediately dismissed and not given any attention as it is written by someone who isn’t even actively playing a Hunter, let alone as Survival.
Wowhead guides have a flaky reputation as sometimes it’s one person writing for all 3 specs of a class without playing them and other times they have some people who actually play all specs or different writers.
Icy-veins have always had writers who raid at the top, perform well, theorycraft in class respective discords and play their specs to the utmost so you don’t have john doe who plays a retri pally write the holy guide whilst never touching the spec.
Sometimes the wowhead guides are good, other times they’re noxxic level material, which is to say better ignored and left forgotten.
As I said above, I agree with this sentiment as touched upon above.
That’s just people who want to be carried or try-hard, welcome to pugs they will pick whatever is “Meta” at any given time.
I very much agree, but I’d extend that to IV aswell who often have had … questionable authors themselves. If I recall, their 8.3 Fire Mage guide completely dismissed the “minute mage” playstyle, as an example. I often suggest my less-invested friends cross-check between both IV and WoWhead.
While we’re having a discussion, specifically on OP’s question involving M+, I’m inclined to say WoWhead’s guide is superior as Moofzy has discussion, reasoning and expansion on his judgment, while the IV author is just “haha NF big number go brrr” with no substance to it.
If you click the covenants link in the IV guide he goes more into detail of the strengths/weaknesses of each covenant, hence the… nonchalant “NF is best but Kyrian is sometimes better” quote.
I too suggest people look up both guides depending on class, however the WH hunter guides have almost always been misinforming in regards to the class.
At least it seems we’re both in agreement or share a similar opinion on things.
Thanks to all 
