Seven-day parse aggregates:

90 Blood Elf Mage
0
Crossposting from DD thread:

It's been a week since the nerf, so we can start looking at the seven day averages on parse aggregators like DPSbot.

The verdict for fire is not good.

Across all fights (rank in parentheses)
25H: http://www.raidbots.com/dpsbot/Overall_DPS/25H/all/7/60/default/ (8th)
25N: http://www.raidbots.com/dpsbot/Overall_DPS/25N/all/7/60/default/ (16th)
10H: http://www.raidbots.com/dpsbot/Overall_DPS/10H/all/7/60/default/ (5th)
10N: http://www.raidbots.com/dpsbot/Overall_DPS/10N/all/7/60/default/ (17th)

Single Target
Feng:
25H: http://www.raidbots.com/dpsbot/Feng_the_Accursed/25H/all/7/60/default/ (18th)
25N: http://www.raidbots.com/dpsbot/Feng_the_Accursed/25N/all/7/60/default/ (16th)
10H: http://www.raidbots.com/dpsbot/Feng_the_Accursed/10H/all/7/60/default/ (14th)
10N: http://www.raidbots.com/dpsbot/Feng_the_Accursed/10N/all/7/60/default/ (17th)

Elegon:
25H: http://www.raidbots.com/dpsbot/Elegon/25H/all/7/60/default/ (15th)
25N: http://www.raidbots.com/dpsbot/Elegon/25N/all/7/60/default/ (13th)
10H: http://www.raidbots.com/dpsbot/Elegon/10H/all/7/60/default/ (15th)
10N: http://www.raidbots.com/dpsbot/Elegon/10N/all/7/60/default/ (14th)

Cleave
Stone Guards:
25H: http://www.raidbots.com/dpsbot/The_Stone_Guard/25H/all/7/60/default/ (2nd)
25N: http://www.raidbots.com/dpsbot/The_Stone_Guard/25N/all/7/60/default/ (2nd)
10H: http://www.raidbots.com/dpsbot/The_Stone_Guard/10H/all/7/60/default/ (2nd)
10N: http://www.raidbots.com/dpsbot/The_Stone_Guard/10N/all/7/60/default/ (2nd)

So as you can see, Fire is fine on cleave fights. Fire is in the bottom third on almost every other fight. What surprises me here is that there isn't much improvement between N and H versions of fights. I would assume that HM raiders would have better gear than N raiders, therefore more crit and better parses. Doesn't seem that way, except for "overall dps". As that includes cleave fights, those numbers are skewed. If you can find contradictory data, I'd welcome it. As for me, I guess it's Arcane.
Reply Quote
90 Gnome Mage
6870
Thanks for the good summary Wexler, with data/links to show this.
Even on the best fight, the trend is showing it is in a nose dive.
The other concern is that the changes are also going to effect fires gear scaling, and IF that is true, bottom of the list won't be the bottom.
Edit - reedit: thank you for also posting this in the damage dealing forum. Now getting out my learn to read instructions.
Edited by Nert on 12/7/2012 11:42 AM PST
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Mage
0
Thanks for the good summary Wexler, with data/links to show this.
Even on the best fight, the trend is showing it is in a nose dive.
The other concern is that the changes are also going to effect fires gear scaling, and IF that is true, bottom of the list won't be the bottom.
Edit: you might want to post this in the damage dealing forum. The word on the forums street is that developers might have a ear there.


Read the first line of the post again :P
Reply Quote
90 Draenei Shaman
12405
I think the biggest counterargument would be this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-selection_bias
Reply Quote
I think the biggest counterargument would be this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-selection_bias


Geez, my brain boiled reading this. If you believe the factual data in OP is self-biased, care to provide another set of data that prooves it?
Reply Quote
90 Human Mage
12765
I think the biggest counterargument would be this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-selection_bias


You read it here folks! Using ALL LOGGED PARSE DATA qualifies as self selection bias!!
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Mage
12215
I think the biggest counterargument would be this:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-selection_bias


Geez, my brain boiled reading this. If you believe the factual data in OP is self-biased, care to provide another set of data that prooves it?

"Prooves" what? That the OP's data is biased or that the data proves fire's imbalance?
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Mage
17145
12/07/2012 08:26 AMPosted by Wexler
As for me, I guess it's Arcane.


I honestly loathe the way arcane plays now. I hate it. Ugh. :(
Reply Quote
90 Gnome Mage
8510
So Selection Bias likely is a factor in these numbers. Good mages are moving to other specs to find DPS. Fire's actual DPS is probably a bit higher than the numbers suggest, but the same could be said for other middle of the road specs. I wouldn't consider it a significant enough to disregard the data which does show a significant drop in Fire DPS.

That said, looking at the data I wouldn't be surprised if we have one more small drop in Fire tomorrow. The higher % parses finally fell but I expected a larger drop there. I'm not sure exactly how Raidbots' timing works and when the nerf was live on all servers. I think we might still have a little pre-nerf data in there.
Reply Quote
90 Draenei Shaman
12405
So Selection Bias likely is a factor in these numbers. Good mages are moving to other specs to find DPS. Fire's actual DPS is probably a bit higher than the numbers suggest, but the same could be said for other middle of the road specs. I wouldn't consider it a significant enough to disregard the data which does show a significant drop in Fire DPS.

That said, looking at the data I wouldn't be surprised if we have one more small drop in Fire tomorrow. The higher % parses finally fell but I expected a larger drop there. I'm not sure exactly how Raidbots' timing works and when the nerf was live on all servers. I think we might still have a little pre-nerf data in there.


Rofl. Thank you Aftershock. I didn't realize I would have to explain what self-selection bias is after posting a wiki link to a very simple explanation of it, but apparently I was wrong.

Let me make it clear what selection-bias means.
Pre-5.0, frost sucked for PvE raiding. How many accurate and consistent parses do you think there were of the BEST mages in the game doing raids as frost to give their numbers? None. Because they all -SELF-SELECTED- to be fire.

I was simply saying that as word came in that "fire got nerfed," it's possible the numbers were skewed by the BEST and BRIGHTEST mages moving on to try another spec in an attempt to min/max their numbers, thus leaving only the mediocre mage parses as data.
Edited by Houndstooth on 12/7/2012 11:18 AM PST
Reply Quote
Rofl. Thank you Aftershock. I didn't realize I would have to explain what self-selection bias is after posting a wiki link to a very simple explanation of it, but apparently I was wrong.

Let me make it clear what selection-bias means.
Pre-5.0, frost sucked for PvE raiding. How many accurate and consistent parses do you think there were of the BEST mages in the game doing raids as frost to give their numbers? None. Because they all -SELF-SELECTED- to be fire.

I was simply saying that as word came in that "fire got nerfed," it's possible the numbers were skewed by the BEST and BRIGHTEST mages moving on to try another spec in an attempt to min/max their numbers, thus leaving only the mediocre mage parses as data.


Rofl. I didn't think someone so adamant about being correct would veer off so badly.

Let me make i clear for you!
Self selection bias refers mainly to taking all the data available, from all sources, and picking the data that best fits your hypothesis.

For example, someone may claim, "Fire is still teh leet dps, look at the Stone Gaurd fight!! [inserts logs showing 2nd place]" and everybody that knows anything about fire will instantly say, "that's not right, that's a cleave fight. [links all data]" The data (SG) that he selected was had a heavy bias placed on it to prove his point.
Edited by Larcix on 12/7/2012 11:36 AM PST
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Mage
0
It could be a factor but I doubt that entire decline can be attributed to good fire mages abandoning the spec. Especially if they, like me, used this week's raid lockout to see exactly how bad the fire nerfs were. I'd expect the bias to be more apparent this week, but I don't think you can simply dismiss this data as "all the good mages are arcane now".

Also a "self-selection bias" as it would apply to this data is that there is something different from the general population about people that choose to log their data. I'd have to see how the number of fire parses changed to tell you if enough people are abandoning the spec to make a difference.

Rofl. Thank you Aftershock. I didn't realize I would have to explain what self-selection bias is after posting a wiki link to a very simple explanation of it, but apparently I was wrong.

Let me make it clear what selection-bias means.
Pre-5.0, frost sucked for PvE raiding. How many accurate and consistent parses do you think there were of the BEST mages in the game doing raids as frost to give their numbers? None. Because they all -SELF-SELECTED- to be fire.

I was simply saying that as word came in that "fire got nerfed," it's possible the numbers were skewed by the BEST and BRIGHTEST mages moving on to try another spec in an attempt to min/max their numbers, thus leaving only the mediocre mage parses as data.


Rofl. I didn't think someone so adamant about being correct would veer off so badly.

Let me make i clear for you!
Self selection bias refers mainly to taking all the data available, from all sources, and picking the data that best fits your hypothesis.

For example, someone may claim, "Fire is still teh leet dps, look at the Stone Gaurd fight!! [inserts logs showing 2nd place]" and everybody that knows anything about fire will instantly say, "that's not right, that's a cleave fight. [links all data]" The data (SG) that he selected was had a heavy bias placed on it to prove his point.

That's confirmation bias.
Edited by Wexler on 12/7/2012 11:39 AM PST
Reply Quote
90 Gnome Mage
8510
Yea, I don't think selection bias is a significant factor here. It maybe a few %, but I just got asked last night what I thought about mages by another mage who I think is probably better than me at the class (Although not geared quite as well). Fire also is still showing the highest number of mage parses by a wide margin. I don't think the mage community as a whole has written off fire just yet.

A good test for the selection bias argument would be seeing the higher percentile ranges. If good people are leaving the higher percentile parses would drop more than the average parse. So far we haven't seen that happen, but its the last metric to drop, so it probably won't be clear until tomorrow.

Would love to see a dps/ilvl graph, although I doubt we'll ever see one.
Reply Quote
90 Draenei Shaman
12405
Someone already pointed it out, but here's the wiki for you.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Confirmation_bias

And re-read my first point. I simply said I think that self-selection would be a big counterargument. I presented a different viewpoint. I didn't take a side. Mostly because I don't think there's enough reliable data out there and certainly no reliable interpretation of the data after one week.

For all we know, there could be a mass respec of 50% of fire mages to frost for two weeks and then fire goes back up (relative to gear and the rest of the raid). I think too much info is missing to make a reliable estimate about whether mages were truly nerfed or simply brought in line.

@aftershock, I believe epeen bot has something like what you're asking about...not sure though, I don't use it much.

Last thing:
To quote the OP himself from another thread:
Incidentally all of Blood Legion's mages ran arcane this week.


How can we truly compare data from before and after if presumably the top tier of mages aren't even contributing data to fire anymore?
Edited by Houndstooth on 12/7/2012 12:24 PM PST
Reply Quote
90 Human Mage
13865
If that is how self selection-bias is defined..

I guess any discussion here is non-sense as I can claim most people discussing want to troll something in some aspect, as that is self selection-bias as well.
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Mage
0
That's an awful big presumption. And your argument appears to be "there is literally no way to know what is going on because all we have is bad data." I would say that the burden is on you to provide some sort of evidence that the data is bad rather than guesses and speculation. Until then, I'm going to rely on the massive data set that points to a massive nerf to the spec.

By the way, dpsbot has now added parses from last night to the aggregate. The trend is still downward, but not as steeply. Though on overall 10N damage, we are now second to last.

When people were initially freaking out over the nerf, GC said on twitter "Let's meet back here next week and see if Fire is at the bottom". I wonder if first to second to last is enough for him to admit they went too far.
Reply Quote
90 Orc Mage
11910
It's a valid hypothesis, self selection bias, but without any strong evidence it's just that, a hypothesis. With the large sample size created by the constant inflow of parses on World of Logs I would believe that self selection bias wouldn't have much of an impact. Also, even if most of the top guilds went another specialization it's not like they own the top parses. Majority of top rankers are players who abused mechanics or got extremely lucky.

Unless you have strong evidence to suggest otherwise that validates self selection bias in this current context I wouldn't attempt to argue for it without some sort of research that holds merit.
Edited by Wyzeguyy on 12/7/2012 3:13 PM PST
Reply Quote
90 Gnome Mage
8510
Much happier with the new stats in that its more in line with what I expected to see.

10N - Fire's very low, as Wexler mentioned.
25N - Fire's not quite so bad, but still low.
10H - Mid pack
25H - Mid pack

The heroic rankings may point to Fire's scaling still being good, but hard to tell too much at this point. The 10N numbers have the most datapoints by a wide margin although they probably have the lowest average ilvl of all of the breakdowns.

Interestingly Frost is only better than fire in one set, the 10N. Its worse in all others.
Edited by Aftershock on 12/7/2012 3:17 PM PST
Reply Quote
90 Draenei Mage
11815
12/07/2012 12:20 PMPosted by Houndstooth
How can we truly compare data from before and after if presumably the top tier of mages aren't even contributing data to fire anymore?


My question would be why should "top tier" mages be forced to switch? If the DPS gap wasn't such a huge amount as it is now there would be no need. Chances are if the nerf had not been as severe those mages may not have switched. At the bare minimum they would have had a choice.
Reply Quote
90 Troll Mage
11840
my self bias

change data set to top 100, and then measure to 75th percentile and:

Overall DPS 25H - Top 100 Parses - 7 Day Moving 75th Percentile DPS - Showing Last 30 Days

http://www.raidbots.com/dpsbot/Overall_DPS/25H/100/7/30/p75/#7ff1v (1st)
Reply Quote

Please report any Code of Conduct violations, including:

Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.

Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.

Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.

Forums Code of Conduct

Report Post # written by

Reason
Explain (256 characters max)
Submit Cancel

Reported!

[Close]