01/17/2011 12:51 AMIf you had taken a basic statistics/data managment course, you would have realized your data failed to address one very important thing:
Posted by Syronas
Assuming all these classes were equally represented, then yes your data would make sense. However, this is not a perfect world, and class balance equally will never happen.
This is one of the few good points that gets brought up to counter these numbers and I respect the people that take the time to consider it. However I would make a counter-point as to why these numbers do have relevance in any discussion of spec balance, or at least this one.
13. Surv. Hunter - 5
14. Demo lock - 4
15. Destro lock - 3
15. Disc. Priest - 3
15. Boomkin - 3
18. Fire Mage - 2
18. Frost DK - 2
20. Elemental Shaman - 1
20. Holy Priest - 1
20. Arcane Mage - 1
These are the specs immediately below Feral on the list of representation in 3s. A similar argument could be made for these specs that due to their previous lack of viability in arena there are likely many less serious PVPers using them in arena.
But there's two important things to look at here. First of all, some of the specs including Disc and Ele were
very strong in previous seasons. By your reasoning there should be many more people playing these specs - than for example Holy priests - and should have a moderately low. The players that did make the top 20 proved it's possible after all and it's logical to assume that due to previous prominence in arena there would be more highly skilled players using and pushing these specs to their limits to reach these ratings.
Secondly there's all the other specs that, like feral, have not been strong in previous seasons. As you say it's reasonable to assume that there may be many less players using things like moonkin as they would have little reason to play and practice their skills in previous seasons. Specs that have nearly never been viable like moonkin and holy priests would have the lowest player base of all going into this season using this logic. So we should be able to extrapolate from that, that these specs are actually in a decent place in 3s to have any representation at all. Or at least they would simply be below average, right?
Well this is where that logic falls apart. I haven't seen any posts by any class on these forums that suggests that Survival Hunters, non-Affliction Locks, Moonkin, Ele, Holy, Disc, etc. are not in desperate need of PVP buffs to be considered remotely viable.
01/17/2011 12:51 AMAlso you only mentioned 3v3. What about 2v2, I'd argue that an OP class has more of an effect there, than 3v3 where it's more about team-play and not solo-OPness..
Posted by Syronas
I don't recall the post but players have compiled the numbers across all 3 brackets as well and they're very similar. While Feral is very well suited if not overpowered in 2s they are even weaker in 5s than they are in 3s due to the lack of defensive abilities.
Additionally both Blizzard and a large number of players have made it clear that it is neither desired nor realistic to balance PVP around 1v1 or 2v2 combat.
Thank you though for making a reasonable, rational, and not inflammatory post. It is good to see well thought out arguments on both sides of this debate.
EDIT: just woke up, edited out some stupids I posted