New role/spec based parses - feedback

1

Hello everyone, hope you’re having an amazing night/day.
Just made an account here and this will be my first post which is basically a followup to my twitter spam where I brought up the issue of logs numbers becoming worse if the “suggested spec” is not chosen for a certain boss.

Since I wrote the twitter stuff from my phone I’m sure it was quite difficult to fully understand where I’m coming from and what is the problem. With this post I want to make that right and make it cristal clear and completley understandable.

So without further ado, I’d like to get right on it.

I came home this afternoon, got myself a cup on coffee, went to mmo champ and then went on warcraftlogs to check something that interested me. I was very suprised and excited when I saw the new parses consisted of both specs and their numbers. Being extremely competetive that I am, I immediately went to compare myself with another raider from my guild ( we both play DPS warriors ). And this is the part where I noticed something didn’t add up. You see I knew before he’s ahead of me on “best dps” part of the logs, however I’d been looking at both of us for weeks and knew I’m better than him on median perf. avg. and average percentiles. However that is not what median perf. avg, showed and I realised that sth is obviously different. Then I noticed what the problem was.

My spec was an issue apparently. You see, I play a fury warrior on most of the mythic fights because as a class they provide more consistent damage instead of arms and its dps whoring last 20% of the boss fight. And it seems that my logs… my median AND average percentiles have now dropped because on Gorefiend/Xhul’horac/Fel lord Zakuun/Kilrogg/possible others, I don’t play my suggested spec.

Now let me be clear… while I “should” play my suggested spec because it does indeed do more dmg on those fights I choose not to because as I said fury as opposed to in this case arms does provide more consistant damage, it’s in my opinion more fun and I don’t see a reason why should I be punished in terms of my logs just because I perform better with another spec.

To bring you closer to my (and undoubtedly other peoples) situation atm I will give you an exaple of what I mean by providing you with some numbers.

I will make and example on mythic Gorefiend where I play fury all the time and my fellow warrior guildy plays arms all the time.

1st: these are my logs from mythic gorefiend:
https://www.warcraftlogs.com/rankings/character/12650738/latest/#boss=1783
you can see how on melee tab my median/avg numbers are much lower as opposed to fury tab (THIS IS THE MAIN ISSUE TO ME AND A PART THAT CONFUSES ME… I don’t get it why is this case?)

2nd: these are the gorefiend logs from my buddy:
https://www.warcraftlogs.com/rankings/character/7809576/latest/#boss=1783
here you can see how with his chosen arms spec he’s behind me just a little bit but THE POINT is that his MELEE nubmers are SAME AS ARMS nubers obviously because he plays “sugessted spec”

The points of these links were to show how even tho I do pretty much the same dps with fury as he does with arms which is the “sugessted spec” my melee logs are different from my fury logs and I don’t know why. it is SIMPLY not fair in my opinion and I’m absolutley sure that any1 who doesn’t pick “sugested spec” is feeling the same way because his logs just got shit and when some1 who sees that on the main “all bosses” tab sees that info will think “damn, this guy could do much better” when in reality “the guy” is doing rly good but he just didn’t pick “suggested spec”

At this point I feel like I said everything I wanted. In my honest opinion this a flaw we have in this wonderful system we just got from Kihra. Bro, God bless ya, I luv warcraft logs and as you can see I deeply care about my performance and this site cuz if I didn’t, I obv wouldn’t be writing this. I really hope this is some sort of a bug… I don’t know what else to say. I realise that I’m too obsesed with this whole thing but that’s just who I am i guess

At this point the nubers aren’t real and I hope it gets fixed.

I’m just gonna make 2 suggestions and then I’ll be on my way…

I think it would be fair to only count in the numbers from spec that people play most often on whatever boss because that obv shows their chosen spec.
2.
I think that it would also be smart to put average percentile along with median perf. average. (btw… REALLY LIKE the median perf. avg., so gg there :slight_smile: )

So in conclusion, keep “all bosses” tab, keep “median perf. avg.”, keep “best dps” thing, but DON’T punish peoples nubers just cuz they didn’t go with “suggested spec”, instead count in their ORIGINAL spec numbers (regardless of spec) AND THEN give us median perf. avg. percentiles (and this is my main idea btw from all that i said)

Thats all from me… sry for such a lenghty post but fck it, I’m passionate bout this thing and want it to be 100% fair to people.
Again, much love and support Kihra for providing us with the website, you’re a gift and I would be extremely grateful if you could get this right. More importantly, I hope I get some sort of answer.

Ty and have a good night if you’re in Europe
P.S. Ain’t this song sick… luv it: Dancin (Krono remix), couldn’t put the 3rd link since I’m new xD

2

Sorry completely disagree with your position here. Arms and Fury are close enough that you may not see the issue here, so let’s go to a different class to illustrate the problem with what you’re suggesting.

Let’s look at Hunter, specifically MM vs. Survival. Survival is currently the worst spec in the game. It is outperformed by MM on every fight by a mile. If I wanted to, I could go Survival and easily earn 95%+ ranks on every single boss while doing a fraction of the damage of top MM parses.

If the combined view simply took your best % only within the spec, I would look like a great player in the combined view even though I only played a garbage spec (SV). That’s not what the combined view should show though in my opinion. It should compare you against the best spec on a fight, and so that’s what happens right now. My SV parses would (rightfully) be compared against MM, and it would become clear that I’m absolutely playing the wrong spec.

In the case of warrior, if Arms is outperforming Fury on a particular fight, then your Fury parses are compared against the Arms ranking positions. This basically shows how you would be performing relative to the best spec on the fight. If your #s go down, then the implication is that even if you performed better as Fury, a more mediocre Arms warrior could have done just as well as you. The theory of course is that if you went Arms and knew how to play it, you’d do better than that mediocre Arms warrior and do even more DPS than as Fury.

3 Likes
3

I certainly see your point however the fact remains people who don’t play the suggested spec on a fight will now have worse logs because they didn’t go for the best possible spec.

The part that makes no sense to me at all is that fury is now compared to a spec which is obv better and can acomplish better results. FURY ranks need to be compared with other FURY ranks and not arms ranks which will obviously be better. With this system you’re kinda forcing players to switch specs otherwise it will be much harder for them to even come close to the suggested spec.

What I’m aiming at is that for instance, on one of our gorefiend kills my % was 83… THAT was my % compared to all the other FURY warriors. It’s not 68 as it now shows compared to ARMS warriors. It is simply unfair to compare the best spec to a bit less better spec because as you pointed out yourself it simply performs better.

Compare fury warriors with other fury warriors, not some arms warrior that has it easier just because that spec is at this time better. This feels like taking something I (and other people) acomplished and just shoving it down the toilet.

I don’t want the system where I need to change specs just to stay competitive to other peoples rankings… doesn’t feel right at all. Again, many people earned their ranks even if they didn’t go with the best possible spec, those are their numbers and taking that effort away seems very counterproductive because now, buch of people will think to themselves: “ah shit, looks like I just wasted time playing this spec cuz now it’s being compared to the best spec and my perfomance looks shit even tho when compared to the people of the SAME spec it’s not shit at all… too bad my frontpage logs and median perf. avg. will get fcked”

4

I would be interested to know how many of the classes this rule applies to. Does this rule apply to Priests?

5

I don’t understand what you’re getting at here. The character page has multiple selectable tabs at the top. You can look at Fury, Arms, or a combined Melee view. You can still look at the Fury tab and see Fury being compared only with Fury, or at the Arms tab and see Arms compared only with Arms.

The combined view is just another view that shows Arms/Fury together. It’s just an additional view. Is your objection then that it’s the default view shown now? I guess I’m not understanding how more data has suddenly cost you something.

If you mean All Stars points, those have been Arms/Fury combined for months. Nothing changed there other than how the points are computed.

1 Like
6

So does this rule stop you from double ranking? Say as a Priest I main Disc and I get bored, I decide to go for Holy ranks. I succeed in getting very good ranks and am now Rank 11 and 20 overall. You’re saying that this is disallowed making it so I would be some combination therein.

This explains why Jakbcastin fell from World 9th healer all classes (I should say spec) to 138.

7

Nope, it does not stop you from double ranking, although to see the individual Holy/Disc ranks, you should select their specific specs.

Regarding Holy/Disc specifically, I am still on the fence about combining these two. I combined them a few months ago, and then many people complained about them being combined. I then uncombined them and nobody complained for a long time until ztn’s post recently in the other thread.

Now I have them combined again, and I’ve already gotten multiple complaints, so I will probably just go back to keeping them uncombined.

8

Yeah, as a multiclass healer I can tell you that Disc and Holy are essentially different classes and have extremely different niches.

Aside: Basically on both of my accounts now, Egregious and Egregarian, I am getting thread information as if it were a single account. I don’t get notifications in the upper right, but when I log between them I see the blue notification in next to the thread title. Interesting.

9

This is what I’m getting at.

The default tab is not the problem, however the way that it works is. It works on the principal of providing number based on both dps specs (again in this case arms/fury), and that’s it great, no complains there. But the numbers that tab provides are not accurate unless you play the suggested spec on all of the bosses. The median perf. avg. is not real because any ranks people with “un-suggested spec” get are now fcked which results in the final median perf. avg. being in a way “fake” because we are no longer compared to players of the same spec but players of another spec that is better.

The main problem is this. People who have rly good numbers with not suggested spec are now falling back on their median perf. avg. which on the default tab serves as a grand result in a way… that is what raid leaders will look at when they quickly go check out a raiders performance. They will see numbers being “eeeh”, when in reality the performance of their chosen spec is quite good compared to other people who are playing that same spec.

To sum up, this is what would be fair at the end of this whole thing… If my median number is 83 on mythic gorefiend as fury… then that is what i want to be counted as melee (not 67 as it is now). because melee tab (and it’s medain percentile) from every boss lead to final medain perf. avg. on the default tab that people will actually see when they search up a player for his/hers performance. the melee tab itself is only needed on the default tab and not on every boss because right now it’s ruining the median percentiles for every person who doesn’t play their suggested spec on a boss.

P.S. I have no prob with all star points, the way those work are fair and they work perfectly.

10

Yeah, again the counter is MM vs. SV, where the difference between the spec performance is huge. An 85 SV is like a 25 MM, so showing 85 would be misleading. Arguably raid leaders should be able to see when someone is playing a spec that is absolutely terrible for a fight. In the case of Arms vs. Fury, if #s go down only slightly, I’d expect a raid leader to understand “Ok, this is fine, since the raider is still performing all right.”

As an example, we have a guy who plays Frost DK in our guild. Unholy parses a little better, but he’s really really good at Frost DK. Do his #s drop slightly in the combined view when compared to Frost? Sure. They don’t drop enough to be concerned though. Still, that’s important data to have.

11

so its a mater of logic or number of complains? if i ask 30ppl to come here and complain then our complains will be more then priest complains about lost of free 2x spots in ranking? why you so logically explain exactly same situation with SV vs MM hunters in 1 post higher and now cant understand that its exactly same situation with priests. why you ignore complains of fury warrior from 1st post and explain him why his vision is not right and then in same situation with priest logic becomes nothing. complains like “oh we lost 2x free spots in ranking. we lost opportunity to play in suboptimal spec. gime all back!”

12

It’s literally not the same situation. Disc and Holy are extremely different. I would imagine in Legion, when whatever that Hunter spec is that’s getting revamped, we may see a similar situation of them being split into their own ranking category.

Also, I made that argument at the cost of four positions in world ranking. I went from 11 to 15 as a result, so it’s not as if I benefited at all.

1 Like
13

Ok, so if I understood it correctly this counting system is based on MM vs SV.
While I can see the point of that I still have to say it would be obvious for hunters to know which spec to go with.

Here is the thing that is bothering me… I can say for myself that fury is what I went for this tier and I play it on most of the bosses in HFC. And I think I’m doing a pretty good job playing that spec. I play it BETTER then the other warrior in my guild who’s playing arms as his chosen spec. If you go from boss to boss, compare our median and avg percentiles yuo can literally see that im better at those numbers.

The only thing I wanted with this new melee tab we have is for THAT to show… for instance, two warriors/warlocks/mages etc. can stand to each other (while playing different specs) and see who is better at his chosen “field”

raid leaders are not going to compare every single player in their raid. they will open this default tab and quickly compare the numbers. And in my case with this other warrior, my numbers aren’t real. Because as I said, In my chosen spec I indeed beat him at his chosen spec yet the median perf. avg does not show that.

I actually went to medain calculator, counted medain percentiles from all 13 bosses both for me and him based on the spec we play more often. And the calculator showed my having a bit larger numbers then he has yet right now that is not the case… all because my logs got fcked by the fact I don’t play my suggested spec no matter how good I am with my other spec.

14

This has in fact already been done for Legion, since SV is Melee in Legion and BM/MM are ranged. Only BM/MM will be combined together in Legion.

ztn, yes, feedback from people is obviously relevant. When uncombined, I got no complaints. As soon as I combine, I get many complaints from many sources (Twitter, private email, and forums). These complaints are people independently surprised that the two specs got combined. Of course that carries weight.

Also a reminder, let’s please keep posts civil. We can have a healthy debate without posts getting rude or nasty.

15

every my post seems rude and may be is rude because of my very poor language skill. sorry for that. so i write idea without all other words that make it looks polite. you receive complains because you make mistake and separate these specs in the past. really if SV was not combined with MM for a year and then you would combine it how many complains you would receive from hunters do you think? it’s same situation with priest. you recive a lot of complains and you can see that its just flood and dont have any logic behind.

1 Like
16

If you find my posts offensive, then sure…I’ll stop with those few swearing words… that’s just me when I get into a debate, it’s not meant to offend anybody. As I said in my original post, i luv this site and what it provides but this got me out of my element today, I gotta admit. I’m basically being told that I’m mediocre with my numbers while that is rly not the case. I’m not saying im extraordinary but I want to see my logs being accurate and display real info, weather if I’m better or worse compared to some1 else. Right now i feel wronged by the counting system. btw…Just as I tend to look your points from your point of view I hope you can do the same for me

but ya, ofc, we can have a healthy debate.

17

Good morning… Solid weather over here.

Kihra… the dust has settled now :slight_smile: .You have any proper followup answer for us? Is anything going to change or the debate was pointless?