Do those people happen to have playable classes by any chance?
Don’t get me wrong we do have some good things this season: for example the pvp vendor. But we never has such a badly balanced pvp. First class alone has more representation than the last 6 classes.
This is partly because of the meta change, which favored classes which have responses to burst damage, plus on top of that the covenent abilities and legendaries. Which are a poorly balanced mess because blizzard introduced them without testing anything in pvp.
On top of that we have buffs and nerfs based on raiding performance, which for some reason are not separated from PVP. Remember when the unholy DK was nerfed? It was like 9th place in pvp representation, now it’s 11th.
I’m not saying some people shouldn’t enjoy the current season, but the class you play might make someone’s opinion very biased.
Tbf even (BFA) corruption wasn’t this broken.
Toxic.
‘luduslabs[dot]org/sotl/second-month-of-shadowlands’
Sry couldn’t post the Link! Just Insert the .
Have a look at this site. It illustrates clearly which specs are over and which specs are underperforming at this point in the season.
It compares the representation of specs on the ladder and the leader boards. So it is fairly obvious which specs are over represented at the top regardless of their overall popularity (often overlooked when you only take the leader boards into account).
So yeah there are some big outliers.
It’s also good to know how big a percentage of players is within a given mmr bracket. E.g. In EU 90% of players are below 1800 MMR.
This explains why there is such a huge gear gap even in lower ratings. It’s basically pure luck if you run into someone equally geared.
Wait, I didn’t tell that I want remove convoke from PvP, I just wanna tune it.
wrong.
Rank 1 viable specs without crazy effort or being in a huge disadvantage:
Healer: hpala, rshaman, disc (rdruid is a bit hard, mw is terrible)
melee: ww, ret, sub, arms, enh, frostdk, protpala(lol), feral are all easily rank 1 viable
caster: sp, boomy, ele, mage, affli, mm
besides dh and mw all “common” pvp specs are pretty strong.
balance is pretty okay. Not perfect but we had way way worse balancing even in bfa.
which class isnt playable? DH is hard to push rating in 3s but other than that every class is viable.
You are the type of person who says it’s fine that you need to be top 1000 with a class to reach gladiator, but you need to be top 100 on another class to reach the same rank.
How about you go play another class maybe something which is not top 3?
im playing druid and shaman and i think they are equally strong as priest but according to your data analysis druid need buffs lol
Apologies for having more trust in statistics than the opinion of a random player who plays the second strongest class and says everything else is fine.
Your claim is disproved by the statistics.
https://luduslabs.org/sotl
For healers Holy Pal and Disc Priest outperform the other healers by a significant margin. (There might by a case for Holy Priests to be made, but player numbers are so low that the data isn’t conclusive.)
Resto Sham albeit being very popular perform significantly worse than the top specs.
So much so that you are 2.6 times as likely to reach the leader boards when playing Disc/hPal compared to rSham.
For Melee DPS the balancing seems fine-ish so far. With the biggest amount of specs being viable within a reasonable margin.
For Ranged DPS: Ele Sham, Fire Mage, Shadow Priest are a solid tier above the others, with margins similar to the healing specs mentioned above.
Frost DK, Assassination Rogue, Fury Warr, Havoc Dh, Unholy DK, Outlaw Rogue are 2-6(!) times as unlikely to reach the leader boards when compared to the top spec (Enh Sham).
And that is within the currently most balanced group of specs, melee DPS.
Just generally speaking: Unholy DK, Outlaw Rogue, MW Monk, BM Hunter are severely underperforming by such a big margin that only 1/5 to 1/10 of expected player numbers are represented within the leader boards.
These Specs can and should be considered unplayable, due to the massive disadvantage they face compared to the top specs.
That all being said, it is still true that even the bottom tier specs can reach the leader boards, most likely when paired with top spec team mates and perfect play.
Doesn’t change the fact though that with one of the top specs instead the climb would be a lot faster, smoother and more reliable.
i read these too and i think they give a good insight but his method isnt 100% accurate and cant be taken to say spec xyz is better than xzy.
According to the data Enhancer is the best melee spec in the game in 3vs3 while in reality ret, war and ww are all 3 stronger which can be seen by looking at the highrating ladder or watching tournaments where not a single enhancement shaman was played.
Also the data shows that feral is better than windwalker which is absurd.
I will give you an example why this data analysis has flaws.
For example enhancer. The spec itself is good and viable but not overpowered so there are not many people rerolling to enhancer because everyone is rerolling ret,war or ww. Also enhancer isnt really popular in general. So who plays enhancer? Right. Players who play enhancer regardless of their strength. Enhancer mains which are more likely to play at higher ratings because they are good at the spec.
This is were the data shows that there is a disproportionately amount of enhancers on higher ratings compared to how many play the spec in pvp.
For casters. Im playing sp ele and boomy myself and i can tell you that boomy is 100% not a tier under ele or sp and Ele is 100% not in its own tier like luduslabs tries to show.
The data analyis even says that arcane mage is better than boomy because there are like 10 arcane mages overall and 5 are at high ratings lol.
Statistics and data has to be used carefully.
Shamans have 3 viable equally played specs, while warrior and ww have only 1, of course there are less people playing ench when they also have access to 2 other specs. You keep saying that we should analyse things by specs and as soon as someone gives you that data you also says it’s wrong?
so windwalker and boomkins should be buffed right?
yes because its way more complex than any data especially data ranked by class representation like yours can show.
There are way too many factors.
In my opinion 3vs3 ranking sorted by specs above 2400+ is the best method to find out what is overperforming or underperforming. If there are outliners than you know there is something wrong.
No, monks and druids are at the middle of the pack and they should remain there. They should receive spec tunings, as they are mostly played with only 1 spec. But this is not a problem inherit to them. In a perfect work we would have equal classes, and everyone would have multiple viable specs. You expect blizzard to fix viable specs inside a class when they can’t even balance the classes?
DH, DK, Hunter and Warlock should be brought up to that level, while Mages, Paladins, Warriors and Priest should be brought down to that level.
Of buff everyone until they all reach Paladin level or nerf everyone until they reach DH level. Seriously it doesn’t matter balance is relative, you can fix it multiple ways but it just needs to be fixed.
In my opinion 3vs3 ranking sorted by specs above 2400+ is the best method to find out what is overperforming or underperforming. If there are outliners than you know there is something wrong.
And what do you do when you have a class which takes multiple places in your spec ranking?
Paladin is 1st and 7th place, while rogue is 6th. Should we nerf rogue because it’s above retri?
you cant balance classes because specs inside the classes are completely different. You have to treat every spec as if it was an own class. Thats also what they are doing. You are the only person i ever met that wants balancing changes according to class representation which makes zero sense.
Just nerf hpala?
So priest is more represented than mage for example but firemage is way above shadowpriest. Would you nerf shadowpriest? see. it doesnt make any sense how can you not see that lol
Yes I would nerf both shadow and disci. It doesn’t make sense because you are not using your brain.
Tell me what you think weights more? An apple or a slice of an apple sliced into 2 parts?
If a class with 2 viable specs the people will be split between those 2 specs. If I a class has 1 viable spec people will only play that spec.
So if a mage has 10% representation as fire and 0% as others, and priest has 10% representation with 6% disci and 4% shadow, the classes are balanced. Then if you want to fix spec representation you can nerf fire while buffing frost and arcane, while keeping class representation at 10%.
Is basic math to hard for you or do I need to explain basic concepts like dividing?
people are not playing classes they are playing roles in pvp.
if disc is bad people switch to hpala/rshaman whatever is good for example.
thats the most stupid thing i read in my whole life. You need ONE healer for every 3n3 team so its absolutely normal that a class which can heal and dps has more representation than a pure dps class like mage. And i know monk and shaman has less representation but thats because MW is terrible, rdruid is terrible and rshaman isnt as good and popular as disc on ladder.
This does not change the fact that firemage sp isnt better than fire, boomy or ele.
And this doesnt change the fact that ret isnt better than warri or windwalker.
Are you even playing the game?
How can someone be so wrong lol
Suukie all your post consist of trolling other people opinions on some matter. Yes its true all expansions have had complaints about pvp inbalance, but this is the first xpac where characters HP goes to zero in a few seconds. I play since Vanilla and i never seen this inbalance. Pvp devs are doing something wrong, maybe its because they have to work at home due to Covid, and have access all day without restraints to drugs and alcohol.
Suukie next time you come trolling someone on forums do us all a favor and go play tetris or something.
You have to control for class popularity when looking at the leader boards. Even if the game were perfectly balanced, with all classes having the same chance of reaching the leader boards, you would still see more mages at the top than say warlocks.
This is fine and not a problem, if 5% of players play mages you would expect to see 5% mages on the leader boards, if 2% play warlock you would expect to see 2% warlocks on the leader boards. This would be fine and expected and would not mean that mages are stronger than warlocks. Just that they are more popular.
The thing you have to look out for is a difference in the popularity of a spec(how many % over all play it) and their representation in the leader boards. The Question has to be, do we see more or less of a given spec on the leader boards, than we would expect due to class popularity?
This is why the site I linked is so valuable. It provides easy to understand statistics an which classes are more or less likely to reach the leader boards, while controlling for class popularity.
This is the single most reliable statistic we have when trying to compare spec balance.
That way of thinking is flawed. Just as a quick counter example take MW Monks. They are very unpopular, so only the best most experienced players must remain playing them.
Still they fail to perform in any way acceptable.
Unless your claim is that “all the good players play enhanc, all the bad players play mw” which there is zero evidence for, your thinking is flawed and your argument has no value.
Your anecdotal “evidence” does not disprove the hard facts. Statistics do not take personal feelings into account, the site doesn’t try to show any given spec as being stronger than others based on the authors preferences. It simply reflects the reality of class distribution in a way that let’s one conclude which specs have it the easiest climbing to the leader boards.
That they perform equally in your hands it is not a proof of equal balance, if anything it shows that you can get equal results with them be that because you are over performing as balnce or under performing as shadow / ele.