Skip to Content
3-18-2009 @ 3:31PM
"You'll see that Combat beats Mutilate on many fights, and even trumps HAT in certain environments. It's a top-tier spec, and arguing otherwise is arguing against the data."No, it's arguing against parses from relatively short, farm-status boss kills. In short-duration fights, Combat has the edge because it has much better burst tools than either of the other two trees. You've got Adrenaline Rush, Blade Flurry, and Killing Spree. The best you get with the other trees is a brief boost by vanishing; Mutilate gets discounted energy costs for 6 seconds and HAT gets increased damage for 6 seconds. As fights increase in duration, the value of Combat's burst tools decreases relative to the sustained damage of the others. This very thing is explained in the thread you linked, and even if my native suspicion of absolute statements like "I read every post" hadn't already made me doubt that, not acknowledging that certainly doesn't make your statement very believable. There is no question and no argument whatsoever that in sustained fights, pre-3.1 Combat lags considerably behind the other two builds.
3-18-2009 @ 4:12PM
Grubba, your argument is that:-Combat wins on short fights (btw every fight is farm mode now).-Mutilate wins on sustained fights (compared to combat)So... one wins on short fights, and one wins on long fights. This means that:"You'll see that Combat beats Mutilate on many fights, and even trumps HAT in certain environments. It's a top-tier spec, and arguing otherwise is arguing against the data."In many fights... Combat wins. Exactly what I said. In certain environments... Mutilate wins. Exactly what I said.Let's run the numbers between Mutilate and Combat:Anub - Combat (1)GWF - Combat (2)Maex - Mutilate (1)Noth - Combat (3)Heigan - Combat (4)Loatheb - Combat (5)Raz - Mutilate (2)Gothik - Combat (6)4H - Combat (7) - even trumps HATPatchwerk - Combat (8)Grobbulus - Combat (9)Gluth - Mutilate (3)Thaddius - Mutilate (4)Sapphiron - Mutilate (5)Kel'Thuzad - Mutilate (6)Sartharion - Tie (they're too damn close)Malygos - Mutilate (7)That's Combat's 9 fights to Mutilate's 7. Believe it or not, Combat outperforms Mutilate on the majority of current content. Just because Mutilate wins in some imaginary world of target dummies where sustained DPS is king does NOT mean that it wins in our very REAL world of short fight durations."In short-duration fights, Combat has the edge because it has much better burst tools than either of the other two trees."-Fights are short (in current content)-Combat wins short fights-???-Combat beats MutilateWe'll see what shakes out of tonight's new PTR build and speculate from there. :)
3-18-2009 @ 10:39PM
If combat is already trumping mut in most of the current content, wth are they so concerned with buffing it? I only started raiding because I thought mut was cool and intresting, much more so than boring old combat where u sit behind your target and mash SS until your finger is numb.Blizz fails if they can't even read the data and see that mut needs just as much help as combat. srsly, screw combat, if I have to spec combat to be competitive in 3.1 I'd rather just not pve at all.
3-19-2009 @ 5:57PM
LemonThe state of combat beating mutilate is after the current buffs are in place via 3.1 not the current variety that is on the live realms. They are concerned with the live version not the PTR version.
First time? A confirmation email will be sent to you after submitting.
Members enter your username and password.
Enter your AOL or AIM screenname and password.
Please keep your comments relevant to this blog entry. Email addresses are never displayed, but they are required to confirm your comments.
When you enter your name and email address, you'll be sent a link to confirm your comment, and a password. To leave another comment, just use that password.
To create a live link, simply type the URL (including http://) or email address and we will make it a live link for you. You can put up to 3 URLs in your comments. Line breaks and paragraphs are automatically converted — no need to use <p> or <br /> tags.