Beast Mastery Hunter 7.3

[Valks 2,375]

1 minute ago, kriley71 said:

Tear 3 and 5 are not talked about on the talents.

Tier 3

Posthaste

Farstrider

Dash

 

Tier 5

Binding Shot

Wyvern Sting

Intimidation

Azor does give a short description, mainly due to the fact that these talents won't directly impact the damage you put out. These are more "utility" talent rows. Please check the talents page for the choices that he suggests, as well as why. 

[Azortharion 60]

2 hours ago, Guest lavascha said:

Hey dude! Great guide for beginners.

Although some of your statements are just making me pissed off. Can you please explain why BM is considered worse than MM? Considering rotations, cd's and everything, BM felt much more smooth than MM to be honest. Most of MM talents have this small area of usefullness during a 8 min fight, yet all viable BM talents have great use in them, and dps never drops even when RNJesus decides to leave you alone, yet your cd's make you go literally wild.

Second, how is Chimera Shot better than Stomp? Even against a single target (a situtaion rarely happens) simple math tells you stomp is way better, even without mentioning the cosmetic part.

Great job again, but a bit confusing statements for lovers of this spec.

Smooth does not equal good, that is a flawed subjective conclusion, and has nothing to do with the reality of the game which is that Marksmanship is capable of equal or higher single-target damage, and significantly higher multi-target damage. On top of that, it can do full single-target damage while doing full AoE damage at the same time, which is its strongest asset.

I don't know what you mean by Marksmanship's talents only being useful for a small part of an 8 minute fight (what fight do you think lasts 8 minutes, anyway?)

I'd like to see your math on the Stomp vs Chimaera argument.

The statements are not "confusing" unless you mean that they are ambiguous in their wording or something. Your personal opinion (which is all that you've offered so far) does not outweigh the thousands of simulation iterations that's been run to achieve the results that ultimately make the foundation for a practical guide.

[Tenzi 0]

I am wondering about the Stat listing for BM you have in guide.

The stat priority for a Beast Mastery Hunter is:

1. Agility;
2. Weapon DPS;
3. Haste;
4. Versatility;
5. Mastery;
6. Critical Strike.

I would put Mastery ahead of Haste  then  Versatility with Critical Strike last.

Bm damage when you have 2 pets out almost all the time with the addition of Bestial Fury and Stampede would gain more dps  with Mastery. Does Versatility do anything for pets?

 

[Azortharion 60]

What you would personally put it as is irrelevant to me unless you can prove that it is the higher DPS option. And no, your feeling/personal experience hitting dummies/raidtesting/random world mobs does not count.

[Ouren 0]

With Mastery being tied to pet damage, Why is versatility considered a higher priority stat?

Since I'm not an ultra theory crafter guru, just an average player I would think it should be Haste (For cooldown reduction) and Mastery.

Thanks so much for putting out these guides. Your efforts are much appreciated!

[Azortharion 60]

Versatility is tied to all damage, you can't look at what a stat does and make conclusions based on that. By that logic, Versatility would always be the best stat because it just flat out increases your damage done, sounds sick, right? Err. It's about how much a stat improves your output by per point.

[Armorphis 0]

Hi Azo,

First of all i want to thank you very much for your guides, it´s allways a pleasure to read it and follow up your instructions, good Job well done.

I have a question regarding BW and your recommended opener sequence.

Does Stampede and Crows benefit from BW or not, because the tooltip from BW says "...increase all our damage..."?

Thank you very much for your reply, and sorry for my bad english, i am not native.

Kind regards

Armorphis

[Azortharion 60]

4 hours ago, Armorphis said:

Hi Azo,

First of all i want to thank you very much for your guides, it´s allways a pleasure to read it and follow up your instructions, good Job well done.

I have a question regarding BW and your recommended opener sequence.

Does Stampede and Crows benefit from BW or not, because the tooltip from BW says "...increase all our damage..."?

Thank you very much for your reply, and sorry for my bad english, i am not native.

Kind regards

Armorphis

Yes, they do benefit.

[Guest Axxia]

I came here because I really wanted help with talents and rotation for beast mastery but your recommendations don't make sense. You don't recommend taking barrage as a talent but you do have it in both rotations for one target and two target but don't include murder of crows in your rotations which is the talent you do recommend. This makes no sense at all and is frustrating. I was hoping to get real advise I could follow from someone with greater knowledge than I obviously have but please be consistent.

[Azortharion 60]

It is in the rotation for people who decide to use it against the guide's suggestion. If you are not using Barrage, simply pretend the step is not there. Based on your suggestion and others', I have decided to just remove sub-optimal talents from the rotation altogether to make it cleaner, and easier to understand for those using the advised talents (the majority). This goes for all guides.

A Murder of Crows is considered a cooldown, I've added a note about it as such.

[DirtyLilPaws 0]

Thank you Azor, as always your advice is most welcome :) 

As someone who mains BM and had to switch for guild to MM for WoD, I sure hope BM gets a little tweaking to AOE when Legion hits! /fingerscrossed

[Guest Blayke]

On 7/19/2016 at 9:00 PM, Azortharion said:

Chimaera and Stomp are extremely close single-target, with Chimaera narrowly winning out. Unless you have simulations that show the contrary that are better than my own, then your anecdotal experience and in-game testing is not worth a single thing, actually.

The same goes for everyone challenging the guide on its choice of talents. You can't just come and claim something is better, you must prove it. The best way to do that is with sims. If not with sims, then you must have a reasonable case for why simulations are not adequate.

 

With all due respect to your large body of very fine work, you are being unnecessarily petulant here.  As has been pointed by others, including the Admin of this site, simulations are not to be altogether relied upon at this point in time due to devs being more focused on level 110.  This reminds me of the time Aldrianna, the well known Elitist Jerks rogue theorycrafter who pioneered the use of spreadsheets in theorycrafting, once claimed that if there were a discrepancy between his spreadsheet and in-game experience, then the game must be wrong.

Ultimately, the game is not played on a simulator.  In game experience counts.   From what I can see, nobody is "challenging" you, they are merely reporting what they're seeing in-game and asking you for answers.  As someone who holds himself out as an expert, you have a responsibility to answer their questions, not simply dismiss their experiences and questions as not worth a single thing.

While I doubt this comment will actually be approved by the moderator, it felt good to get this off my chest.  :)

[Damien 1,514]

23 minutes ago, Guest Blayke said:

With all due respect to your large body of very fine work, you are being unnecessarily petulant here.  As has been pointed by others, including the Admin of this site, simulations are not to be altogether relied upon at this point in time due to devs being more focused on level 110.  This reminds me of the time Aldrianna, the well known Elitist Jerks rogue theorycrafter who pioneered the use of spreadsheets in theorycrafting, once claimed that if there were a discrepancy between his spreadsheet and in-game experience, then the game must be wrong.

Ultimately, the game is not played on a simulator.  In game experience counts.   From what I can see, nobody is "challenging" you, they are merely reporting what they're seeing in-game and asking you for answers.  As someone who holds himself out as an expert, you have a responsibility to answer their questions, not simply dismiss their experiences and questions as not worth a single thing.

While I doubt this comment will actually be approved by the moderator, it felt good to get this off my chest.  :)

We're never going to not approve comments like this :p

[Azortharion 60]

2 hours ago, Guest Blayke said:

With all due respect to your large body of very fine work, you are being unnecessarily petulant here.  As has been pointed by others, including the Admin of this site, simulations are not to be altogether relied upon at this point in time due to devs being more focused on level 110.  This reminds me of the time Aldrianna, the well known Elitist Jerks rogue theorycrafter who pioneered the use of spreadsheets in theorycrafting, once claimed that if there were a discrepancy between his spreadsheet and in-game experience, then the game must be wrong.

Ultimately, the game is not played on a simulator.  In game experience counts.   From what I can see, nobody is "challenging" you, they are merely reporting what they're seeing in-game and asking you for answers.  As someone who holds himself out as an expert, you have a responsibility to answer their questions, not simply dismiss their experiences and questions as not worth a single thing.

While I doubt this comment will actually be approved by the moderator, it felt good to get this off my chest.  :)

The simulations are not dev-created, there is no reason to doubt simulations that are made around current content because the developers are focused on 110. (The developers of WoW or the developers of SimCraft?); either way it's irrelevant because there's no difference, from a simulation standpoint, between 100 and 110, if you do not actually have 110-specific variables in play (like an artifact) for your level 100 prepatch simulations. Ingame experience does not count because ultimately being able to repeat something in a simulator 10000, 25000, 50000 or more times is going to be more scientifically valid than Average Joe #672 going on a dummy and finding, over a pathetic sample size of 10, that the guide is wrong, unless there's a reason to believe that the simulator is modeling in-game mechanics incorrectly which absolutely does happen from time to time, which is why a lot of ingame testing is done by myself and others to try and achieve similar results with similar variables. But to just cry foul on the simulator without backing up what you're saying does not make any sense. If it is modeled correctly, there is no better way to find out which of 2 talents is better than a simulation which eliminates RNG and even player skill from the equation. If two talents are effectively equal or within a very small margin of the other, we tend to recommend the one that's easier to use and/or maximize.

In-game experience is not worth a single thing because the methodology used by different players varies wildly, and as do the thousands of variables and their combinations, because it's not like Average Joe #672 and Average Carl #823 has talked to each other and are using the exact same methodology, and if I were to individually investigate the methodology used by each and every single one who asks why they are seeing different ingame results than the simulator implies, then that is all I would be doing with my entire life.

Your initial comment about developers focusing on 110 implies that you have a lack of understanding of what SimulationCraft actually is, who makes it, and what makes it far superior to in-game testing as far as comparing talent X and Y go, provided that those talents and the related mechanics are modeled correctly. 

If a guy were to play simulator and hit a dummy for 5 minutes with two different talents like, 10 times each, he could reach almost any conclusion between here and the moon because simple RNG will tend to vary your DPS much, much more than a talent choice will.

[Guest Blayke]

57 minutes ago, Azortharion said:

Your initial comment about developers focusing on 110 implies that you have a lack of understanding of what SimulationCraft actually is, who makes it, and what makes it far superior to in-game testing as far as comparing talent X and Y go, provided that those talents and the related mechanics are modeled correctly.

To address this comment, allow me to repeat a quote from Damien.  It was in response to someone asking why Heroic trinkets were showing up as Mythic ones.   Even though it appears on the Mage forum, it is equally relevant here:

" It's what SimC is outputting currently. People are still working on it, so there's room for improvement. One problem is that most devs are focusing on Level 110, so results for Level 100 sims are highly inaccurate. Gotta work with the tools available :P"

So by dev's, I assume he means SimC devs.   I also assume Damien has a pretty good idea of what he's talking about.

None of this is meant to discredit your work, which I and many others have benefited from.  But I do think that given the somewhat wonky nature of things in pre-patches in general you need to develop a healthy respect for the margin of error in sims. 

To just assume players based their questions on 10 swings is patronizing.  To say in game experience is "not worth a single thing" is absurd.  Yes, 50,000 iterations in a sim should be mathematically more accurate than a few hundred on a training dummy, but the results from both should at least be in the ballpark. I'm sure you're aware of the GIGO principle (garbage in garbage out).  If something is off with a sim, it doesn't matter how many iterations you run, you're still going to get false information.   If a player can't approximate in game what the sim says should be happening, then that potentially raises questions which should be addressed. 

Again, I have nothing but respect for your body of work.  But please, have a healthy appreciation for the margin of error that is inherent in any theorycrafting, and try being a little nicer to the very people who admire your work and rely on it to get better.

[Azortharion 60]

It does not matter that the SimC devs are focusing on level 110, because the mechanics governing level 100 content are not affected. I cannot speak for Damien as that is not part of my job description.

Just apply your brain to it, though. Why would SimCraft devs working more on 110 (whatever that actually means? Class mechanics remain the same) have any bearing on the accuracy of Sims done at 100 - what do you imagine the difference to be?

People do base their questions on 10 attempts a lot of the time. Sometimes, it's even less (single logs). I know this because I've done it for years, it's not like people trying to refute me with anecdotal evidence is a new thing. Not everyone does it, but it is not an unreasonable assumption.

Until the opposite is proven, SimCraft is the best thing to rely on. Is it perfect? No, but it is significantly more reproducable than any in-game testing. Ingame tests are conducted all the time to see if damage numbers, ability counts and other mechanics are modeled correctly, the same goes for crafting the action lists.

[Knocknoc 0]

Azo, one of the things you dont do which I (&probably others) would appreciate is; listing a reason for the secondary stat changes on your secondary stats page. ex. Mastery was very good for BM hunters but has been down graded because.... they nerfed pet damage or mastery benefits or maybe they just buffed the hell out of Haste & Vers. This would help us come to grips with the changes. Even if the answer is "I dont know why mastery sucks now that just what the sims tell me" at least it would be an answer.

Edited July 24, 2016 by Knocknoc

[Azortharion 60]

You can't really compare stats across patches/fundamental changes of the game. It might as well be a new spec, there isn't something you can say for individual stats that made them better or worse, other than literally just saying what the stats do (which the guide already does).

[Guest KitKat]

I think you all should be ashamed of yourselves.  This guy Azortharion has taken his time to make this guide for you.  He didn't get paid anything for doing it and his only payment is "thank you's," but does he get that?  Nope.   He just gets a bunch of slack from a bunch of people who think they know it all.  Well, if you all know it all so much, go write your own guide and if it's better, then I'm sure you will get people who will use it - but for now this is the only guide that is out there.  Everything is up in the air right now because we're transitioning from WoD to Legion and it must be very hard to make a guide that is accurate in the long term.  This guide is it for now though and it is what Azortharion's tests have shown to be the most effective, so be respectful and pay him his "thank you," or go write your own guide!

[Damien 1,514]

On 24 July 2016 at 2:38 AM, Guest Blayke said:

To address this comment, allow me to repeat a quote from Damien.  It was in response to someone asking why Heroic trinkets were showing up as Mythic ones.   Even though it appears on the Mage forum, it is equally relevant here:

" It's what SimC is outputting currently. People are still working on it, so there's room for improvement. One problem is that most devs are focusing on Level 110, so results for Level 100 sims are highly inaccurate. Gotta work with the tools available :P"

So by dev's, I assume he means SimC devs.   I also assume Damien has a pretty good idea of what he's talking about.

None of this is meant to discredit your work, which I and many others have benefited from.  But I do think that given the somewhat wonky nature of things in pre-patches in general you need to develop a healthy respect for the margin of error in sims. 

To just assume players based their questions on 10 swings is patronizing.  To say in game experience is "not worth a single thing" is absurd.  Yes, 50,000 iterations in a sim should be mathematically more accurate than a few hundred on a training dummy, but the results from both should at least be in the ballpark. I'm sure you're aware of the GIGO principle (garbage in garbage out).  If something is off with a sim, it doesn't matter how many iterations you run, you're still going to get false information.   If a player can't approximate in game what the sim says should be happening, then that potentially raises questions which should be addressed. 

Again, I have nothing but respect for your body of work.  But please, have a healthy appreciation for the margin of error that is inherent in any theorycrafting, and try being a little nicer to the very people who admire your work and rely on it to get better.

The main problem with SimC right now is with the Action Priority Lists. The engine is in a good state, but for most classes, the default APLs are not optimal or written with Level 110 in mind. Azor maintains his own APL for Hunter specs, which gives him a definite edge over what others can sim. He would add his APLs to SimC, but he doesn't know how to. I usually do it for him, but I haven't had any time with the pre-patch and now we're working on the DH guides and the D3 patch that's coming up next week :P

[Guest aaa]

On 7/21/2016 at 7:13 PM, Tenzi said:

I am wondering about the Stat listing for BM you have in guide.

The stat priority for a Beast Mastery Hunter is:

1. Agility;
2. Weapon DPS;
3. Haste;
4. Versatility;
5. Mastery;
6. Critical Strike.

I would put Mastery ahead of Haste  then  Versatility with Critical Strike last.

Bm damage when you have 2 pets out almost all the time with the addition of Bestial Fury and Stampede would gain more dps  with Mastery. Does Versatility do anything for pets?

 

It is

Agility

Mastery

Haste

Crit

Versatility

Weapon dps  now  ;)

Looks like you did know it good . And they almost bite you for it lol

 

[Azortharion 60]

The stat priorities changed due to a change in how the sim methodology worked, usually working around lower killtimes.

That has nothing to do with what that guy said, because none of what he said is true. He just happened to guess what it would be post-change, but for all of the wrong reasons.

That's part of the fun in changing things such as stat priorities. The one billion people who have been telling you that you're wrong based on "hunches" and other bs are gonna be like "oh look I was right" when it just happens to change to whatever they pulled out of their ass back then.

[Guest aaa]

5 hours ago, Azortharion said:

The stat priorities changed due to a change in how the sim methodology worked, usually working around lower killtimes.

That has nothing to do with what that guy said, because none of what he said is true. He just happened to guess what it would be post-change, but for all of the wrong reasons.

That's part of the fun in changing things such as stat priorities. The one billion people who have been telling you that you're wrong based on "hunches" and other bs are gonna be like "oh look I was right" when it just happens to change to whatever they pulled out of their ass back then.

Hey no need to be upset . I come here all the time to use this guide ( and mage , DK ect too ) and Im happy for it . On my own I would be kinda lost for sure . Just don't have enough game time to figure out everything alone.

I need to remember to re check on stats before I spend all that gold , and leather to change things and then have to change it again !

[Guest Hidden]

The part about Blink Strikes is wrong by the way. The current version of Simulationcraft assumes that Beast Cleave only cleaves auto attack damage whereas in reality it also cleaves basic attack (e.g. bite) damage that's increased by Blink Strikes' +50%. This is trivial to test in-game and going by some napkin maths on total damage distribution when AoEing, Blink Strikes should easily be the best AoE talent when properly accounted for in Simulationcraft.

[Orthios 271]

11 minutes ago, Guest Hidden said:

The part about Blink Strikes is wrong by the way. The current version of Simulationcraft assumes that Beast Cleave only cleaves auto attack damage whereas in reality it also cleaves basic attack (e.g. bite) damage that's increased by Blink Strikes' +50%. This is trivial to test in-game and going by some napkin maths on total damage distribution when AoEing, Blink Strikes should easily be the best AoE talent when properly accounted for in Simulationcraft.

Neither Blink Strikes nor Beast Cleave have mechanically changed, thus their implementations in SimC are the same as they were before the patch, meaning it does account for the basic attacks triggering beast cleave.

Unless you can prove otherwise, we will assume that this is the case.