So, holy priest has close to 50% representantion of healers in 2s and 32% in 3s.
Soooo, no tuning in sight? Doesn’t it set their alarms on seeing a spec with such a great representation??
7 Likes
tuning? delete this spec already, whoever designed holy priest in its current state deserves something im not allowed to say on this forum
8 Likes
I believe they need to tune / fix specs way more often than they do now. FOTM rerollers can switch to a new spec and stick to it for long. If they would fix these issues within weeks that would not be possible. Sadly I don’t think many if any developers play the game.
Or as the pros of the forums say:
3 Likes
seems fine to me
I don’t understand after all these years how can they not be able to balance pvp and pve separately. They buff spec underperforming in PvE immensely but instead on putting modifier on PvP stats where it was fine already, they let it become godlike so now if not 2 out of 3, then every second game in arenas is against holy priest…
According to forum, representation has nothing to do with if a spec is good or not.
4 Likes
nah, holy is fine.
Yes, holy priest has never been so fine as it is now
Just wait until rogues get their set bonuses 
Just wait til survival does
It wont matter because because rogues will obliterate survival hunters who give up that huge amount of versatility.
I see
1 Like
Ya, maybe ur right, this season so far is dogshiet anyway so …
No, representation doesn’t ALWAYS mean X spec is best. Sub being the 5th most represented melee when it is the BEST shows that. Survival is less represented than DK’s, Havoc and Enhancement when it’s better than all of them.
Shadow is more represented than Fire despite Fire being the best ranged in the game. More Affliction than Demonology.
The ‘this spec is played the most therefore it is the best’ argument is currently only applicable to Holy Priest.
Forum dwellers would understand this if they actually played the game instead of forming opinions through statistics on a website.
1 Like
I think what Grytax or anyhone who look at class numbers mean is that when you see a rise in a class / spec such as dhs going from 1,8% to 3,7% or warriors going 2% to 9,4% (BFA4 → SL1) . This would indicate that it is strong enough for people to reroll it.
I agree and this is important. Representation is not always accurate - but I would not discard it as nothing.
1 Like
It’s definitely not ‘nothing’ but when you look at Sub rogue in particular that has a low representation, then compare it to how strong it actually is, using representation statistics to make a judgement on the spec would be seriously flawed.
I think it’s important to stop using representation as an indication of anything and instead actually play the game to understand how and why X spec is overperforming or underperforming.
2 Likes
Absolutely - and when it comes to sub rogues being a low representation I would say other factors would be more likely to show how strong the spec is. And I know there are specs with low representation which are also very strong.
That is also true - but idk if the forums reflect what it is actually like ingame but there seem to be many people disagreeing on what is overperforming or underperforming even at R1 levels.
And with the warrior scenario - what I meant is that it is super boring to just face the same class over and over again and I think that there being so many warriors must be due to the same reason the amount of RM rose - easy to get wins with.
I think generally people should be more open to what is wrong with their spec and have an honest discussion about it, but as soon as you say you disagree on the forums people start calling you names like there is no tomorrow.
2 Likes
According to forum, simply saying “according to forum” will instantly make your point more believable 
6 Likes
10 arenas 9 holy priest, hard spec
Its great that you as an individual know that, but you are not the majority of the forum.