Huntard Masquerading as a Hunter
How about we not.
How about we write a huge post on our personal blog instead.
How about you provide some basis for your math.
How about you not hide behind, “Elitist Jerks blah blah blah I’m too lazy to do my own research,” cr@p.
How about we’ve been saying 8.6% for a long time, only to be “corrected” with the people from Elitist Jerks coming to this blog to state, and prove with statistical analysis, that the Hit Cap is really 9%.
That’s weak sh!t you brought to the table, #16. We’re not saying you’re wrong, just WEAK.
Where did we get our research?
WoW Forums, Blue Stickied, Hit Rating Theorycrafting
WoWWiki Calculating Miss Rate for Physical Damage Attacks
Could our research be bad? Could there be a mistake? Sure could. But we stand behind our work because, dude, we work at it. Disprove it or shut the h3ll up about us “getting our math right.”
You want to comment and say you don’t like our writing style? That’s cool. You want to say our research is flawed? Fine. You want to show our math errors? Bring it; the math being right is more important than our ego.
You want to pretend to know what you’re talking about and tell us what to do?
Not.
Comments
28 Responses to “Huntard Masquerading as a Hunter”
Leave a Reply
-
Got Something To Say?
Email icon provided by Nexodyne. -
-
-
BRK's Site Meter
-
BRK License Agreement
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-Noncommercial-No Derivative Works 3.0 Unported License.
-
BRK's RSS Feeds
dude i just came here to comment on this very post. He tells you to get your math right, provides no math of his own and no direct commentary of your math or formula. Then generally refers to some other website and basically says don’t argue with him. What a loser.
The most amusing part is that the 9% figure comes from testing done on the EJ boards.
He reads EJ, but doesn’t read it enough.
Though to be fair to him, EJ is a much better source than the stuff you are citing. If there was a conflict between accepted theories at EJ vs. WowWiki or the official WoW forums, I would go with the EJ version. They back things up with actual proof.
is it just me or did BRK pop BW when he wrote that post?
BW and rapid fire have been popped by BRK. I hope his new IAotH also procs!!
I really don’t know why people get so worked up over this. It’s not a math error but a misconception of game mechanics.
A math error is saying that a 30% increased attack speed is reduces your cooldown by 30%. (it’s approx 23% reduction in your cooldown)
8.6% was the old projected hit cap. Back then, it didn’t matter if it were 8.6% or 9% as all +chance to hit came in 1% increments. But we figured it was 8.6% because we missed about .6% or shots when we had +3% to hit… But we didn’t care because raiding hunters could NEVER MISS EVER, so we all had 9% to hit.
Blizzard changed the mechanics (like always) and only a handful have bothered to do extensive testing on the new mechanics, and if they have they’ve given up trying to say the truth because they’re getting yelled at by schmucks like #16 who probably never did any tests himself and is spouting old second-hand information.
Only recently have I looked closely at my trackers and started to see exactly how things work out. But my guild just folded… which means I’ll not be doing any tests on boss-level mobs anymore…
Right on BRK it is “WEAK” in fact it is piss-weak.
Just saying someone is wrong is not enough. It should be demonstrated.
BRK has a history of allowing robust debate on his blog (I am thinking of a lot of posts from Guy in that regard) and isnt shy about saying he is wrong when that has been demonstrated.
The important thing is the discussion and debate about things important to Hunters. #16 offered squat in that regard.
BTW my hat goes off to anyone who can stomach reading the EJ forums. They are aptly named as the Elitest Jerkism oozes from each word posted. BRK on the otehr hand is a joy to read and if that means I pick up some erroneous info temporarily then I will gladly accept that.
I read a lot of WoW blogs and this is head and shoulders above the rest (and a Hunter is not even my main!).
Wow i was going to post one wow insider about that guy being an @ss, but there is no need now
All i can say is Troll +5 to bows, and Sure Footed = sfa hit required
werid that just with hunter epics i’m sitting over 100 and I’m not going fo hit gear…..
Atleast Blizz gives hit to use in great quantities so we dont have to bother getting non hunter gear.
Tabuti
Thaurissan
Survival
The math is 100% correct. If he has a dispute with the formula then he should cite his exact source of information so we can all be enlightened or debate that.
We’re not discussing relational physics here. Which i bet BRK is good at too. Hello, works at NASA?
So the formula or source is either newer or older or based on theory or rumor, which would be worthy of healthy discussion.
“get your math right” is not intelligent commentary and deserves to be corrected, in volume ignored. That’s why ppl get worked up.
I mean frankly, I’M PISSED OFF. Now i have to forgo tonight’s adventures and hop in the jacuzzi with a litre of margarita, my lady, and a calculator just to triple check BRK’s math. Now just how happy do you think my lady’s gonna be with that calculator there??
LOL @ platehealer
Love the kids today, everything is an arguement, if not the start running at the mouth, hell when I was a kid we respected elders and strangers for a reason, if they didn’t beat us across the mouths for stepping outta line our parents would, hell sometimes you got it twice.
Oh and nice comment someone (at WOWi) I don’t think the troll will take the bait though.
BRK it amazes me that you have the patience to post articles there, I hope the bam-bam for Mrs.BRK is worth that headache.
Hey BRK, why don’t you go a step further than just citing sources?
If you believe your stats are correct, look up EJ’s math and see if you can find where their data and analysis deviates from yours. That way, you can find out which set is ‘better’.
Since you already popped BW and your trinkets on this topic, might as well put them to good use you know? Flame away! muahahaha
We can’t do that now. We’re much to busy… making movies.
RAWR! Go BRK
I’d just like to say that I’m way to busy and not nearly smart enough to do all that math. BRK works for NASA and play with numbers all day long. I’ll trust his research and stuff any day.
My favorite argument, “Your rong cuz im rite!” Very convincing.
At some point the fractions of percentages don’t matter enough to get all in a hizzy. More boss fights are turned around by raid members turning off the suck than by .4% to hit. Just my opinion.
Yeah - how about this for an argument - BRK is right, mainly because he takes the time to think things through and then TEST them in actual gameplay and log the results…
Whereas Mr.#16 is wrong because……..er….. he’s a dick ?
BRK, ur site’s rather amusing. All ur articles are WAY OFF, and ur assumptions seem to always go the wrong way. This article, i don’t know about, I guess ur right here. But talking ’bout argumenting and verifying stuff… Reading ur posts I see that u do alot of “testing” and “calculations” only to arrive at some false conclusion. It’s funny.. testing DPS/speccs with AutoShot ONLY! Doing the “math” on whats best: Auto/Steady ONLY or Auto/Arcane ONLY, and YET GET THE WRONG ANSWER OMG!! PLZ, just doing the “sience” doesn’t automaticaly win every argument.
Platehealer…when I read that bit on the calculator, the jacuzzi and the woman, I had to laugh as the following popped into mind.
Lady: “Hey there, why don’t you come join me in the jacuzzi…and is that a calculator or are you just happy to see me.”
Platehealer: “Oh its a calculator alright!!!”
Wow. Anonymous makes a very convincing argument….for ignoring him.
Just a little hint, buddy, if you want to be taken seriously, learn to spell out you and your. It does wonders for people like me who find it hard to see past the u and urs to actually consider your argument.
@ The ranting Anonymous
Let’s see you prove that BRK was actually incorrect. Also, hiding behind the anonymous title just says that you want attention instead of healthy debate (only goes for him). If you’re going to say that someone who plays with numbers all day is wrong, you need to: A:Use actual English to show that your rant is of any value, and B: Prove all his assumptions are way off. Simple as that.
@ The anonymous below him, that was hilarious.
LOL @ 16.
You just got owned. Hilarious stuff.
/thank brk for this blog and not having to come into direct contact with complete tools like this on the wow forums…
after almost 3 years in this game and gaming since pong(yes the original) …. i just don’t bother trying to help children (like 16 or Anonymous above)to grow up anymore … it’s not my job … and it’s the internet …rem, these are the guys who sit or sleep in school and have no idea their future is sweeping warehouses ….
I pray to Gott that the above anonymous rant was posted for comedic effect. I’m pretty sure it is, given his use of misspelled Science in quotes. Otherwise, /ignore.
Well, since Weapon Skill is now being replaced by Expertise - all that extra research everyone has done is now gone down the toilet.
YAY! Even more stuff for people to argue about math over!
Expertise will not effect ranged.
Except in the case of dwarven and troll racials..
their weapon skill bonus is turning into a crit chance bonus.
Man.. If I knew effing 3 years ago what the racials were going to turn into, I wouldn’t have chosen a NE..
My hit is about 146. I’m not trying to get it that high, it just comes on the gear I want.
In a whole night of raiding, be it SSC or TK or whatever I usually only miss 3 or 4 times.
I didn’t need theory to figure that out. I just equip the gear, play the game, and look at Recap at the end of the night.
Mrs. BRK says…
“PLZ, just doing the “sience” [sic] doesn’t automaticaly win every argument.”
Um, yeah, I’ll tell the crew of the next STS mission that you said that- I am sure that they will be comforted to know that *science* won’t be ensuring their safety.
Challenging BRK’s numbers? No, he isn’t infallible, but pretty damn close.
And that’s a wicked turn on.