My problem with melee dps being so dominant.

Anecdotes =/= truth.

As for rangers in luclin...VT raid

/GU Combined: Kaas Thox Xi Aten Ha Ra in 15728s, 61417k @3904 | Ranger 2814k@178 (179 in 15723s) {X} | Ranger 2395k@152 (152 in 15727s) | Ranger 1918k@121 (140 in 13625s) | Mage + pets 1789k@113 (123 in 14513s) | Monk 1736k@110 (110 in 15714s) | Ranger1665k@105 (115 in 14475s) {X} | Rogue1650k@104 (104 in 15722s) | Monk 1569k@99 (100 in 15686s) | Triconix (Warrior) 1501k@95 (95 in 15725s) {X$X} | Monk 1468k@93 (93 in 15701s) {X} | Warrior1364k@86 (92 in 14765s) {XXXX} | Necro 1357k@86 (86 in 15681s ...

Yeah, definitely are just pure trash and don't compete as a hybrid in Luclin. And look at that trash warrior competing at the top. We must really be trash when well played. Also this raid wasn't full. Only 65ish in raid.

Last night's raids

/GU Combined: Shei Vinitras in 5003s, 15478k @3093 | Ranger 720k@143 (145 in 4938s) | Ranger 534k@106 (107 in 4954s) | Ranger 494k@98 (100 in 4935s) | Ranger 462k@92 (95 in 4859s) | Rogue 439k@87 (90 in 4857s) | Mage + pets 394k@78 (79 in 4939s) | Monk 382k@76 (78 in 4876s) | Monk 381k@76 (78 in 4860s) | Wiz 376k@75 (78 in 4817s) {X} | Ranger 373k@74 (85 in 4343s) | Ranger 371k@74 (76 in 4843s) | Monk 367k@73 (75 in 4858s) | Monk 352k@70 (72 in 4864s) {X} | Triconix (War) 344k@68 (6 ...

But muhhhh uTiLiTy!!!!

That is your personal interpretation.

I said warriors are handicapped, not incapable. There is a clear distinction between the meanings of the two terms.

Maybe you need to brush up on your English comprehension skills & stop using outdated & inapplicable word associations that perhaps signify deeper disturbing & problematic prejudices you hold.

Nice ad hominem, regardless, he's right about using anecdotal arguments to support your ideas about class balance.

I am noticing a trend. Good players excel regardless of the class they are on. Bad players make excuses for why they suck (its the balance of the game).

I go into every fight as a necro with the mindset I will top the parse and more often than not I do. When the circumstances are out of my control like resists I still do well and I am satisfied I did the best job I could.

When I went through the 70s era on live, the rule was we don't talk about necro dps. Parses were not shared publicly and all the necros who played during that era on live know why, its not a secret any more the 2.5 was bugged.

I am actually looking forward to the 70s era on Rizlona because I believe I can still do well on the parse if the fight allows it. I didn't get to test that theory on lockjaw because I didn't have raid gear, all my spells or all of my aa to make an apples to apples comparison.

As for objectively measuring who the better players are without looking into damage I like to look at spells cast per minute, number of deaths (for non tanks), I like to look at the damage graph to see what my uptime on dots is compared to other necros. There are probably other metrics to consider, but these are just off the top of my head.

Other people have covered the utility argument to death. I will just say this. The best utility is making mobs die fast. That is what I specialize in and if you're a dps not doing that then you're a wasted slot on a raid as far as I am concerned.

Your lack of reading comprehension is actually sad.

What's worse is you are trying to mask it with snide remarks.

If you don't know when someone is not trying to be an arbiter of truth & just say what they have witnessed, if you cannot spot a glaring and obvious thing like this you are beyond help & clearly not worth anyone's time debating with because you are not arguing with me, you are arguing against an invented narrative you are creating on-the-fly inside your own head.

As Atabishi said earlier in this thread.

You can't seriously argue these two points back to back. They are directly conradictory. By the first standard, clerics should have a clear advantage because they give their tank a "virtual hp pool" advantage. By the second standard, warriors have a clear advantage because their dps is superior compared to knights.

Personally I agree with the DPS is King approach. Warrior tank, shaman healer, bard, and load the group with melee dps. There's very little if anything in any expansion this group can't handle, and we'll handle it more quickly than just about any other group makeup.

All anyone has are anecdotal arguments, none of us have objective empirical evidence on every player of every class with parse to back up their argument about that.

As regards the "Ad hominem"...

Just google why you should not associate Handicapped with Incapable & educate yourself.

Yes I can & no they are not.

To Paladins on non-undead sure.
To Shadowknights? Get real.

This is the way. Take your utility. I'll just torch content with pure power. At the end of the day, DPS will always reign supreme. It can, will, and does cover any perceived deficiency in utility.

Now you're speaking about social norms and acceptances. I wasn't even thinking of handicapped in that definition. You did. Maybe you have prejudice? I was speaking of the basic definition of handicapped.

A bird without a wing is handicapped. It's incapable of flight. A bird with two wings is not. It can fly. Do you see now how I can use semantics to alter definitions? (And please don't speak of the obvious biological adaptions and evolutions of penguins or ostriches)

This thread has lost it's point. I'm going to lock it since the conversation seems to have ended but leave it so people can read the previous pages.