Thank you for the well-written article.
So, let me summarize that. Basically, people were asking for classic, because retail is all about metrics and DPS. Just to make classic all about metrics and DPS? Well done.
The amount of butt hurt here.Yikes.
Garbage post.... /sighThis post doesnt consider quite a lot of factors especially debuffs or pets or even phase... this post is close to garbage i am sorry to say it but its better to delete such a misleading poorly written post :/
No need to get upset. Some people are simply curious about this sort of thing. It's just metric data of mild interest, not the end of Classic.
Well lets see : warrior top damage 525*0.93 = 488. Still atop everything... Im a casual chaman trying to understand if there was any chance to raid in classic as DPS. And i don't see the point.
Remember back during Vanilla when people with low DPS would get really upset because someone posted the damage meters? That's what some of these comments remind me of.
Does anyone else feel an urge to roll a moonkin now out of sheer bloody-minded spite?
And how many of these kills were from guilds that exploited their way to the top?
Ahahaha, oh, classic druids. It never gets better for you.Suppose you'd still want to bring one in place of a real class for Wild, gotta choose your losses.
Removed
While i don't necessarily like the idea of tier lists based off dps in Classic I don't really disagree with the ordering. Some of the language used is misleading though. For example idk how 487 is 2/3s of 596. (Druid vs hunter max dps.) It's a 109 difference when a third of 596 is 199ish. They actually do at the max levels 81% of hunter dps which translates to roughly 4/5s. That's a pretty large distance away from 2/3 (66ish%).
Oh look, ferals CAN do dps!