I found this on SA (not public forum - need account to see thread), which in turn leads to the official forums (click this link if you don't have an SA account) - insert cliched catchphrase about diamonds here.
Short form: Zyph-Maelstrom (who as far as I know does not post here) rooted through the Armory looking at talents of level 70 characters (albeit with a flawed methodology - he gets his list of names to scan from Allakhazam (obligatory fuck allakhazam)) then isolating to people who have 31 or more points in one tree. Reasonable, since I can't think of any intelligent build offhand that doesn't. After figuring out those numbers, he further culls by determining who didn't take the key 31 or 41 point talents in those trees.
His findings are relatively unsurprising - people hate Slow, Circle of Healing, Endless Rage, etc. - but the standout is that the majority of heavily Holy-specced priests skipped Lightwell. Mind you, he has some really findings (and if we don't have that emoticon, we really should), such as "Dark Pact is unpopular with Affliction warlocks" - there is an allegation that he meant Contagion, but his original post clearly says "Dark Pact" - but the methodology is fairly sound.
I would like to meet this insane 1.4% of mages though that put 31+ points into Arcane but skipped Arcane Power.
(hooray is in)
Last edited by Navaash : 05/05/07 at 7:25 PM.
Reason: mission complete
There was post similar to this by level 20ish on PTR realms earlier yesterday and it focused on priests only. I think this is the same guy just posting on his main again. Even if flawed by 25% margin it still paints a picture that some of holy priest talents are undesirable.
Last night was pessimistic skydive in a foolish narcotic shell
I can't see the paid SA forums, could someone repost the numbers?
Any Affliction Lock with more than 31 points in the tree needs Dark Pact, sure I can believe 1% were too stupid to get it (just like AP), but anymore and there is something wrong with his data collection.
The first column indicates the percentage of that class that specialized in the tree -- for example, 59.9% of all druids in my study put 31 or more points into Feral Combat.
The second column indicates the percentage of specialized players, that SKIPPED the 31 point talent. For example, 0.5% of all Feral druids (31 points or more) in my study skipped Leader of the Pack.
The third column indicates the percentage of specilized players, that did not take the 41 point talent. For example, 2.7% of all Feral druids (31 points or more) in my study don't have Mangle. They may have gone 0/31/30, or perhaps they went 0/61/0 but skipped Mangle.
Lightwell stands out the most. More than 3/4ths of Holy priests SKIPPED it. They were already heavily invested in Holy, so all they had to do was move one point from a lower-tier talent into the 31-point talent.
These talents may be unpopular for a variety of reasons -- perhaps the talents themselves are bad. Or, perhaps there are other alternatives 21 points into another tree that are more attractive, which is often the case for Arms Warriors and Holy Priests. Or maybe the "filler" talents to get to the end of the tree are undesirable.
Let's look at the data in another way:
Percentage of players of (class) that took the 31 point talent in (tree)
Percentage of players of (class) that put at least 31 points in (tree), but didn't take the 31-point talent
You would think that with this information, and how glaring the differences are between specific specs and trees that Blizzard would go about rebalancing/retuning some of these talents and/or trees entirely.
Ideally to me "balanced talent trees" means that there should be an equal distribution of talents - 33.3% for every tree for every class. Obviously this won't ever be possible, but look at Mages who are comparatively balanced, with frost bringing up the rear, to Hunters or Paladins who have trees with numbers in the near single digits.
I'm flabbergasted that 38.5% of all Mages with at least 31 points in 1 tree are specced into Arcane. That really, and I can't stress this enough, boggles my mind.
Wouldn't that indicate that a little over a third of all mages are specced into one of the three available trees?
To me, at least, it seems to show that there is about an average distribution among the three trees in mages. Sure, theres a large portion that is arcane over frost, but overall it seems somewhat balanced. But if you compare the numbers to other classes, like paladin or druid, it seems pretty good in comparison.