Forum Settings
       
Reply To Thread

class "usability scores"Follow

#1 Dec 06 2006 at 1:33 PM Rating: Decent
I'm gonna try and compile a small guide on what classes are good at what and so on. Mostly a graphical chart.

So I would really appreciate if you guys could just rate some different stuff for the different classes, Just rate them on a scale from 1 to 10. And please don't rate XX class high at PvP just because they can kill you easily, think about it from an overall perspective.

I know that these things will vary a lot with different talents, so if you feel that different talent setup will alter the outcome a lot just put out 2 or 3 values and put the appropriate talent tree behind it.

Solo: being the ability to solo bosses, how fast you can lvl and etc.

Group: being how much the class is being sought after in groups, how much it can contribute and etc.

Damage: being how much damage the class can dish out.

Survivability: being how well the class can survive simply, it may not be so good at killing something but it wont die hehe =).

PvE: PvE capabilities.

PvP: PvP capabilities.

Warrior:
Solo:
Group:
Damage:
Survivability:
PvE:
PvP:

Mage:
Solo:
Group:
Damage:
Survivability:
PvE:
PvP:

Druid:
Solo:
Group:
Damage:
Survivability:
PvE:
PvP:

Hunter:
Solo:
Group:
Damage:
Survivability:
PvE:
PvP:

Warlock:
Solo:
Group:
Damage:
Survivability:
PvE:
PvP:

Priest:
Solo:
Group:
Damage:
Survivability:
PvE:
PvP:

Paladin:
Solo:
Group:
Damage:
Survivability:
PvE:
PvP:

Rogue:
Solo:
Group:
Damage:
Survivability:
PvE:
PvP:

Shaman:
Solo:
Group:
Damage:
Survivability:
PvE:
PvP:

Thanks a lot for your time!
#2 Dec 06 2006 at 1:39 PM Rating: Decent
There is a simple answer to this. They all have the same ability to do the same stuff. Its the skill of the player not the class. Gear helps a bit to.


There is no Uber PVE class or UBER PVP class. There is no UBER FARMING BOSS class. Some have it easier than others, but that is by no means a huge factor.


This appears nothing more than help me find the uber class of all classes.
#3 Dec 06 2006 at 1:44 PM Rating: Decent
**
461 posts
Assuming 1 is poor, 10 good and based on my experience, build etc.

Warrior (predominantly prot spec):
Solo: 3
Group: 10
Damage: 4
Survivability: 8 (+priest = 11)
PvE: 6
PvP: 5

Mage (ice):
Solo: 6
Group: 3 (water carrrier/CC = 10)
Damage: 7
Survivability: 6
PvE: 7
PvP: 6

Druid (feral/resto hybrid):
Solo: 10
Group: 7
Damage: 2
Survivability: 9
PvE: 7
PvP: 3 (except WSG BG = 10)



Edited, Dec 6th 2006 4:50pm by dashwoe
#4 Dec 06 2006 at 1:51 PM Rating: Good
****
8,832 posts
To many Variables.


#5 Dec 06 2006 at 1:58 PM Rating: Decent
CaptainOmelette wrote:
To many Variables.




Well I just need an avarage. I know some classes do better in different instances and etc. This is ment to be for newbs so that they can get an idea of what the different classes are like, so Just an avarage number.
#6 Dec 06 2006 at 2:06 PM Rating: Decent
*
147 posts
I think Blizzard went into great lengths to avoid rating guides like these.

Sure, there are some general trends that exist, in terms of grouping and survivability. For instance, I noticed that my Rogue can get out of nasty situations much easier than my Mage, so the survivability in those situations is higher. I call some buttons on my toolbar the "Oh Sh@#" buttons, and as a Rogue I have a few at my disposal. Also, that my Druid has a much easier time finding parties than my Rogue.

With that said, the talent specs really blur the lines that are being suggested by this survey, along with gear and playing style/skills.
#7 Dec 06 2006 at 2:19 PM Rating: Decent
DoctorPepper wrote:
I think Blizzard went into great lengths to avoid rating guides like these.

Sure, there are some general trends that exist, in terms of grouping and survivability. For instance, I noticed that my Rogue can get out of nasty situations much easier than my Mage, so the survivability in those situations is higher. I call some buttons on my toolbar the "Oh Sh@#" buttons, and as a Rogue I have a few at my disposal. Also, that my Druid has a much easier time finding parties than my Rogue.

With that said, the talent specs really blur the lines that are being suggested by this survey, along with gear and playing style/skills.


Why would you say that they went into great lengths to avoid guides like these?

Only thing I can think of is PvP. Blizzards dream would be if everyone put 5 to every class I guess. Other then that. Classes have different roles and should have different properties? why not display them? they are displayed but in a different fasion, a fasion without numbers so to say at their own site.
#8 Dec 06 2006 at 2:25 PM Rating: Decent
Ohls wrote:
DoctorPepper wrote:
I think Blizzard went into great lengths to avoid rating guides like these.

Sure, there are some general trends that exist, in terms of grouping and survivability. For instance, I noticed that my Rogue can get out of nasty situations much easier than my Mage, so the survivability in those situations is higher. I call some buttons on my toolbar the "Oh Sh@#" buttons, and as a Rogue I have a few at my disposal. Also, that my Druid has a much easier time finding parties than my Rogue.

With that said, the talent specs really blur the lines that are being suggested by this survey, along with gear and playing style/skills.


Why would you say that they went into great lengths to avoid guides like these?

Only thing I can think of is PvP. Blizzards dream would be if everyone put 5 to every class I guess. Other then that. Classes have different roles and should have different properties? why not display them? they are displayed but in a different fasion, a fasion without numbers so to say at their own site.


Because each class has a 10. Its not the class, its the player. Blizzard made every class similar as far as PVE/PVP/Solo/Survival what your pretty much asking for is Rogues can stealth into SM and ninja a boss and loot chests, while a preist can run SM as much as they want because they can heal a group. Both get a 10 based on variables.

You cant seem to understand that each class when played very well can get a "10 rating" in your lil list there.
#9 Dec 06 2006 at 2:30 PM Rating: Decent
***
2,634 posts
Also you gotta throw in the aspect that gear definately throws off some of these numbers.

If your going for an average, man thats tough.

For example mage:
Some mages perfer to be the fire cannon, others perfer to have a little more stamina, thus making them able to take a little more damage.

Its near impossible for most classes to be able to be rankled like this.

As much as i would like to see that happy medium number that your asking for, i just dont think its possible. Someone is always gonna say its wrong.

#10 Dec 06 2006 at 2:56 PM Rating: Decent
You guys aren't listening to me. Indeed some classes can solo certain instances. And gear does matter. But what I am asking for is an AVERAGE number. Each class cant solo exactly the same number of instances. Some classes does infact lvl faster then others.

Just ***** it. I'm already getting tons of numbers that are pretty accurate from other sources.
#11 Dec 06 2006 at 4:49 PM Rating: Decent
**
717 posts
Since everyone else wants to sit on the fence, I'll give mine now.

Warrior
Solo: At low levels, soloing is an absolute nightmare for a warrior. If you can endure that, then warrior becomes pretty solid. As far as killing uber elites goes, they're maybe average. I can solo something like the twilight prophet but match Faxmonkey's acomplishments, not a chance.

Group: Hard to do without from 1-59 and endgame is absolutely impossible without them. Very high demand

Damage: Warrior is only as powerful as his gear but with the right gear, they can deal great damage. Not as much as dedicated damage dealers like nukers or rogues but still good. I'd say average or above average.

Survivability: Warriors are tanks, survivability is what they're all about. Very good

PvE: Average, read "solo" and "Group"

PvP: Potentially dangerous since they can take hits as well as dish them out. But again, it's all about how good their gear is.
#12 Dec 06 2006 at 6:22 PM Rating: Decent
SillyGnomeMage wrote:

There is no Uber PVE class or UBER PVP class. There is no UBER FARMING BOSS class. Some have it easier than others, but that is by no means a huge factor.


Duh. But the point being, there is a difference at all; amirite?

I mean, can Rogues farm undeadz as well as Paladin and Priests?

#13 Dec 06 2006 at 6:59 PM Rating: Decent
Sure a Rogue can farm Undead just as well. Check the gloves in my CTProfile sig :)
#14 Dec 06 2006 at 11:09 PM Rating: Decent
The part that you can't factor in is fun. A person who enjoys playing a certain class is going to be better at playing it than in playing an equally competent class that he doesn't take any pleasure in playing. It's one of the reasons that trying to find an uber-class in WoW will always fail. The classes are fairly well balanced, and there are really two variables that will account for uberness: playing ability and equipment. You are trying to create an artificail ranking system without taking those into account (and they are more important than what class is chosen).
#15 Dec 06 2006 at 11:49 PM Rating: Decent
Citizen's Arrest!
******
29,527 posts
Ohls wrote:
Just ***** it. I'm already getting tons of numbers that are pretty accurate from other sources.


ORLY? I'd love to see how you prove it to be accurate when you're going based on perceptions.

Also, I agree wholeheartedly with Mike.
#16 Dec 07 2006 at 7:01 AM Rating: Decent
The One and Only Poldaran wrote:
Ohls wrote:
Just ***** it. I'm already getting tons of numbers that are pretty accurate from other sources.


ORLY? I'd love to see how you prove it to be accurate when you're going based on perceptions.


Well when you get 10+ people ranking a certain quality of a certain class the same, differing +/-1 you can say that it is pretty accurate.

And I think you should rethink the terms you are using. Perception is everything, If you percept that your class is good at PvP. Then that is what you think obviously, and why would you percept that it is a lot better or worse then it is? Some people might, But those will be a lot more then +/-1 point. And thus be eliminated.

Who better to judge this then the players? A mathematical equation of stats? No, because its allow about how people perceive things.
#17 Dec 07 2006 at 7:14 AM Rating: Decent
**
265 posts
What we're getting at, Ohis, is that the "noise" of the data is just as large as the measurement. On a scale of 1-10 I can give you a rating, but it is +/- 4 or more based on the situation, equipment, etc. That's over half of your entire range.

You can try to draw conclusions based on the statistical analysis of such data, but most if it is going to be "white noise" that is going to blur out any useful trends. This wasn't the case in FFXI and some other MMORPGs where only one class could fit specific needs, because it was easy to say "white mage required". Rating classes wasn't based on perception - it was based on cold hard facts like White Mages are the only basic class that can heal (and deleveling for the thousandth time in a white mage-less group in Valkurm <shudder>).

But that isn't true in WoW. And that's what everyone is trying to point out. Like you said, it's perception. And everyone's perception is different. Which is why the data is going to add up to nothing useful or informative. Which, incidentally, is one of the reasons I like WoW.

Edited, Dec 7th 2006 4:22pm by garfunkel
#18 Dec 07 2006 at 7:21 AM Rating: Default
Pifuaa wrote:
SillyGnomeMage wrote:

There is no Uber PVE class or UBER PVP class. There is no UBER FARMING BOSS class. Some have it easier than others, but that is by no means a huge factor.


Duh. But the point being, there is a difference at all; amirite?

I mean, can Rogues farm undeadz as well as Paladin and Priests?


I seem to kill em faster than my pally does, and we have compareable gear. both t1/t2 on rogue and pally. so yes i can kill "undeadz" just as fast if not faster than my pally.
#19 Dec 07 2006 at 7:25 AM Rating: Default
Ohls wrote:
The One and Only Poldaran wrote:
Ohls wrote:
Just ***** it. I'm already getting tons of numbers that are pretty accurate from other sources.


ORLY? I'd love to see how you prove it to be accurate when you're going based on perceptions.


Well when you get 10+ people ranking a certain quality of a certain class the same, differing +/-1 you can say that it is pretty accurate.

And I think you should rethink the terms you are using. Perception is everything, If you percept that your class is good at PvP. Then that is what you think obviously, and why would you percept that it is a lot better or worse then it is? Some people might, But those will be a lot more then +/-1 point. And thus be eliminated.

Who better to judge this then the players? A mathematical equation of stats? No, because its allow about how people perceive things.


10 players do not equate to the opinion of 7million players. It appears that math wasnt your strong point. Perception is a Human trait to boost steath awareness, not a basis for your opinions. Face it, what you are asking for would be pointless. Useless, and overall giving out wrong information thats based on the perceptions of less than all the players who play wow.
#20 Dec 07 2006 at 7:33 AM Rating: Decent
**
631 posts
I think that in theory it would be interesting to see the results of this, but as a lot of people have pointed out it's just too difficult (impossible) to come up with accurate data. I'll demonstrate with druids, which is the class I know best.

Druid:

Solo:

Which spec? Restoration druids have great survivability, but kill slowly and are boring (relatively) - 4 points. Balance druids before the patch killed more quickly, had good survivability, but went oom very quickly - 6 points. Balance druids after the patch are apparently even better at killing and surviving, and don't have mana problems - 8 points. Feral druids have very little downtime, kill quickly, and have great survivability - 10 points.

That's my opinion. A mage, rogue or warlock would argue that a feral druid's dps isn't actually as hot as theirs, and might not understand how good a druid is at surviving. They'd (perhaps) give them 7 or 8.

And that's assuming they understand just how different a feral druid is from a balance druid or restoration druid.

Group:

Where do I start? We can fill any role - 10 points, surely. Then again, we don't dps as much as other classes - 7 points? My opinion is that we heal as well as priests if we have the right talents - I'll bump it back up to 9. A priest probably disagrees. 7 or 8 again?

I don't know how to judge tanking, to be honest. I have very little experience of it myself, and I've played with both good and bad feral tanks. Could be anything from 6-10.

I imagine only the very experienced and open-minded warriors would rank a druid's tanking above 5 or 6.

And then, of course, while druids can do anything, we're not the "ideal" class for any specific role. How often have you seen "LFM <instance>: Druid & Priest" or "...Druid & Warrior" or "Mage and Druid" rather than "Warrior & Priest" or "Mage and Rogue"? Does that mean we could be given a very low rating for grouping - say 2-5 - because the fact is we're never essential?

Damage:

You can't generalise or average here, spec is much too important. Feral druids - 9 or 10. Balance druids - 5-7 (pre-patch), or perhaps 7-9 (post-patch). Resto druids - 3-5. You could just say "ahh, let's average a druid at about 6", but that's completely inaccurate when you take it to the level of individual characters, which is what counts. Mages have excellent damage however they spec, even if some talent trees are better than others, but this isn't the case for druids.

Again, perception comes into it too much...people who have played druids, or are perhaps seasoned in PvP, will know what a feral or balance druid is capable of. People without that experience are more likely to assume they're hybrids, usually used as healers, can tank ok, dps isn't really there.

Survivability:

I think this is the only sub-category that you can be definite on - all druids have great survivability. Easily a 9, perhaps a 10. I doubt many people would disagree.

So...out of four categories I could give a pretty definitive answer on one. I expect all classes are similar. As people have explained, it's just impossible to come up with anything accurate...it's a nice idea, but it just won't work.
#21 Dec 07 2006 at 7:41 AM Rating: Decent
***
1,117 posts
Retadin Pally:
Solo: 8
Group: 5
Damage: 7
Survivability: 7
PvE: 8
PvP:6
Reply To Thread

Colors Smileys Quote OriginalQuote Checked Help

 

Recent Visitors: 181 All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (181)