Your lack of common sense is actually very concerning. Of course it means something, but this notion you have that ‘x isn’t played in AWC therefore it is not good’ is completely wrong. For example, Demon Hunter damage is too high and probably warrants nerfs, but if we go by your ‘logic’ that it’s not seen in AWC, that means it’s fine?
Btw, after these statements you have made, please make sure that you do not complain about ANY class or spec that hasn’t had success in the AWC as you seem to think that is the measurement of how good or bad a spec is, because if you do EVER complain about something that isn’t winning the AWC, then you’re being a hypocrite.
Anyway like I said in my original post, Hunters (Grytax) were going to come along attempting to derail my thread by spewing their biased, uninformed nonsense. Please stop engaging with this troll/bot. Thanks!
You are the one saying AWC should be discarded as any measurement-pole. Im not at all saying that it represents every aspect of the game, but if you think that AWC-representation and performance means nothing then you are completely out of touch with reality.
Im not sure if your question was right. Do you mean if i think they are fine if/since they DIDNT get to the finals? That would at least be conceptually connected to the discussion, even if the answer would be an obvious “its not that easy and never in the thread has anyone argued that if a team wins or places second, that those classes are broken.”
No, just no. I said it means something, not that it means NOTHING. The same way people like you use representation as a measurement of viability when it does not work like that. AWC obviously shows us what is the best, but it does not show us EVERYTHING about the game, therefore it does not represent the entire game.
It’s very clear you spend more time on forums and living vicariously through statistics rather than actually playing the game.
Honestly, stop trying to talk about something you have absolutely no clue about.
Thats probably accurate yes, but what does that have to do with anything? If 9/10 teams had hunters in them in various compositions i would say that hunter is obviously broken in 3s (like holy priest / mage), but since thats not the case I wouldnt say anything special about it.
I know the feeling. Its probably how everyone felt reading during s1/s2 when you all the time claimed that “warr is fine, its a l2p issue”. The difference is im not even defending hunters here, so gtfo and stop reading if that pleases you.
If Blizzard dont make changes to the Echoing Resolve trinket(which is beyond broken) than we will be in for FMage/Dlock/X(with Hpriest even more disgusting) season which none will like…there will be like 2-3 comps way above everyone else(RMX,Jungle and the one i just mentioned)
Blizzard rly got to do something about this trinket or remove it from the game(yes i do think it doesnt belong in the game)
PS: Hpriest nerf is not even close enough to get them in line with other healers
While I don’t agree with grytax on this issue you were NOT objective when it came to warriors back in S1 / S2. You defended a spec rising from 3% to 13% coming with claims such as:
Warriors outdmging specs while in a defensive stance, Qidpunchers take:
I wont start the discussion again but you had some very “interesting” points back then.
And was 100% correct. The D stance change has taken Warrior from one of the best melees in the game to extremely mediocre. They don’t do any damage in D-stance, and when they’re not in it they’re very squishy and easy to punish.
If only they would make a change to Rogues that take them from S++++ tier to B tier.
Btw, you’re another one that relies on statistics on representation far too much. Fury and Arms are the most represented melees with 11% for each spec, whereas sub rogue is the 6th most represented melee and assa rogue is the 3rd LEAST represented melee. Both Sub AND Assa are better than Fury and Arms.
The only representation facts where it accurately reflects the strength of a spec is for Fire Mage and Holy Priest.
People asked for defensive stance to be a defensive form - or in other words if warriors sit in defensive stance they shouldn’t do any damage and if they want to do damage they should go out of defensive stance and take damage just like any other class? Isn’t that why they have abilities such as ignore pain? I didn’t want them to gut warriors, I wanted them to fix the spec. Warriors could be offensive in defensive stance - which is what many disliked.
Okay? What is your point with this?
Far too much? When a spec is 3 percentunits above any other spec for an entire season and rose from 4% to around 12% over a season is relying on representation too much?
So the only time it matters is when you think it matters? Aha I understand now
It’s not like you can see how some specs rise and fall depending on their buffs / nerfs You can literally SEE the spikes of people realising dh was stronger, or in S2 / S3 when people see how strong holy is.
In what scenario? How are they better? Are we talking about skillcap, skillceiling, skillfloor? Which comps they can play, dps, more utility?
Well yes and no. AWC is far away from the ladder state. Why? Because in the ladder the most successful comp is the one that has a good matchup against most of the comps while in AWC they rather look for counters. They don’t want to have good matchups but responces to the enemy comps. Good example. In NA teams played Turbo into RMP but Turbo wasn’t S tier comp last season.
Sub rogue has gone down in representation rankings compared to last season, when it is comfortably the best melee in the game. The only time where we can use representation as an OBJECTIVE metric is when we have what we have right now with Holy Priest. 47% representation, 18% 2nd place representation. (If you actually played the game, you would know that despite the closer representation of ranged dps, Fire Mage is comfortably the best).
No, because unlike you I actually played the game so I know what specs are exceptionally strong. You have 16 arena games played on 1 rogue and 50 games played in 2v2 on a 1400 rogue. Quite frankly, you have no idea and don’t have anything important to contribute to this discussion when you have next to zero experience with the current meta.
If we used this incredibly flawed argument of representation, we would be saying Fury Warrior and Arms warriors are the strongest melees in the game. Anybody who actually plays this game at a respectable level would know that this is a joke of a statement.
They are stronger than Warriors in this meta full stop. If you spent as much time playing the game as you do being a pedantic little boy on forums, you might actually have something important to contribute to discussions concerning improving the quality of the game.
You can literally SEE the spikes of people realising dh was stronger, or in S2 / S3 when people see how strong holy is.