Explosive Ammo is better than everything else for MM

[Lateraldrop]

incendiary proc from auto attacks is not a burst rotation and it is not killing anyone. IF op wanted to talk about random dmg output he would have calculated AAs but he didn't. The argument made was that incend >>> bc it has the best potential burst (witch is mathematically true, not even arguable.)

I concede that a random proc outside of your burst rotation is not avoidable in any way, i wasn't arguing against that. What i am saying is a proc for random dmg outside of your burst is not meaningful and that optimizing how you can use your burst has value. IF you want to look at it from how much total dmg the enchant offers you in a bg and not how much you can burst with it (witch is what OP was showing) then it looks more like this.

IA procs for 200-400 so lets take the middle of the road. 300 dmg 2 times in 60 seconds.
600/60=10 dps.

avg non-crit auto attack dmg in 100 shots w ilvl 23 BoA is 79 dmg.
W +4 scope avg non-crit auto is 92 dmg.
So thats a 4 DPS increase just on auto attacks. once you add your dmg increase into literally every move you have it FAR outshines a measly 10 dps.

Using these numbers +4 scope is clearly the better enchant because it offers more dmg right? But it is clearly not (i dont think you could find a single person that would argue that it was) because no one cares that your auto attack did 10 more dmg because you were not bursting someone to death.

I also never said that people that don't weapon swap are bad; I also do not think that IA is bad. I just think that Xray and +4 dmg is just as viable since it DOES give you more control over your burst and the burst numbers are not even that far off. Weapon swaps are not difficult and i certainly do not feel like I have some special skill because i made a macro and hit a button.

@Frogturtle You should run the numbers on gnomish Xray if you do not want to account for the dmg prod on woodchuck Xray is 94 ap 10 sec buff.

 

[Warglave]

The more accurate thing to say would be "Explosive Ammo can do more overall burst than Flintlocke's".

Bingo.

Comparing best case scenarios ignores most of the REST of the battle... how much damage are you doing when you don't get any procs. Incendiary is completely random, and by not "holding onto" any of your burst fishing for a proc when you're "allowed" to swap and actually use it will yield more damage the rest of the time. Right? So overall... "better". If you're not using burst because you're waiting for a proc to USE your damage, then the rest of the time you're doing less. Correct?

Saying incendiary CAN be better more often. Right? You will more often do more damage. Agreed?

Holding burst in reserve waiting for a proc means less burst every time you don't get one. Yes?

I remember looking at the straight up +weapon damage scopes as well...but can't remember the conclusion.

Yeah, we did it a way back. I would say that if you're looking for reliable burst then you shouldn't be using incendiary or flintlockes. Just use +damage all the time, because then you're not fishing for anything. Consistently "better".

The only option where you can lose is flintlocke's because you can get LoS or CC or die. The rest is unavoidable.
[doublepost=1551694349,1551694042][/doublepost]

incendiary proc from auto attacks is not a burst rotation and it is not killing anyone.

Clearly false. It happens all the time, just not 100% when you "want" it to. Saying it never happens is dumb.

 

[HairyTreeMan]

I never use Incendiary as MM. I much prefer having control over my burst and calling target swaps when I have Flintlocke procs. Lining up your burst with your team is much more valuable and reliable than an Incendiary proc you have zero control over. Your scenarios are when all the stars aline perfectly. Sure Incendiary has higher potential burst but how often are your 2 Incendiary procs per minute going to waste, proccing when you didnt want/need them to?

 

[Warglave]

Lining up your burst with your team

So your entire team waits on pins and needles for you to get a proc so everyone can attack? Sounds great.

I guess no one ever wins without you there. Congrats.

I guess the real question is how to get everyone else's procs to line up with your flintlocks for burst. Pro.

 

[The Saint]

Can't we all go back to +3 scopes?

 

[HairyTreeMan]

So your entire team waits on pins and needles for you to get a proc so everyone can attack? Sounds great.

I guess no one ever wins without you there. Congrats.

Your response is so stupid I'm going to pretend I didn't read it.

 

[Warglave]

Your response is so stupid I'm going to pretend I didn't read it.

Anyone surprised? Anyone? Raise your hand.

you're clearly implying that the only damage in the whole game that matters is damage done while YOU have a proc up.

That's what's stupid. This is all stupid, but the self absorption rampant in the replies is pretty amusing. Damage you do while not on proc is far more important then... if you aren't implying only you matter. And incendiary can be useful there.

Random incendiary procs during other people's burst can be very relevant. Without having everyone wait on you...

 

[HairyTreeMan]

you're clearly implying that the only damage in the whole game that matters is damage done while YOU have a proc up.

Where are you getting this from? I never said anywhere that target swaps only occur when I have a proc. You're getting all riled up over something that was never said or implied.

As a side note, how come you reply with a small amount of text each time then come back later and add a chunk with an edit? Post your reply when it's finished. Use edits for corrections/mistakes.

 

[Warglave]

I never said anywhere that target swaps only occur when I have a proc.

Well then +damage would be "best" because it compliments your team, not just you. Right?

Saying everyone's "target swap" would be improved except yours. Better damage all the time, not just your time.
Never lost due to LoS, cc, or just plain poor play. If you do damage, you do more damage. Incendiary as well.

edit- and because I can. (and to clarify, you don't all seem too eager to understand anything but your own posts)

also worth noting (editing)… it's been a while since we were discussing it before, but I don't believe +dmg got nerfed.

Cherry-picking the best case scenarios to give weight to your preference doesn't make it best, it makes it situational. For the vast majority of players, incendiary will be "best" due to the sheer lack of maintenance, and +damage compares.

Claiming "10% of the time it works best every time" isn't exactly any better than the anchorman joke it refers to.

 

[HairyTreeMan]

As it currently stands, I think both Incendiary and Flintlocke's are strong/viable options that suit different play-styles. Regardless, these are both getting nerfs in a week. This discussion is better left for post patch. I'd also be interested to see how the BFA enchants (gale-force, deadly nav, versatile nav, etc) stack up against the nerfed Incendiary and Flintlocke's. I assume Incendiary/Flint/Frost will still be on top, but I wonder how large the gap will be between them and BFA chants. BFA enchants are interesting because they can be applied by the lvl 19, allowing for BG crate guns and quest reward weapons to be used.

 

[Stabilt]

Anyone not using incend is a nut

If u swap good for u but ure not allowed to in wargames so who cares

 

[HairyTreeMan]

Anyone not using incend is a nut

If u swap good for u but ure not allowed to in wargames so who cares

I respect that view and I'm definitely in the minority of preferring Flint. One thing that bothers me though is Incen was banned in TC. I'd rather keep playing around Flint knowing that Incen may be banned again in the future. Incen doesn't require any thinking/effort to use so if by chance it is allowed, I can simply throw it on and play with no issues. I'm likely gonna be using Incen more during EU wargames and see if I change my mind on preference.

 

[Revoman]

I don't play hunter so I don't really have any experiance using either of these 2 weapon enchants but just my 2c.

I would much rather have a proc that does ~200 less damage on the combo (based on frogturtle's numbers, not doing my own im too lazy) and lasts 10 seconds than some proc that you COULD go an entire wargame without ever really getting to utilize with your team. I'm gonna go ahead and assume the hunter is doing damage in the teamfight the entire time and not just sitting there waiting for a swap, so it procc'ing randomly off auto shots seems like something that would happen consistently. Playing around flintlocke's seems much easier and much more reliable to me than the explosive ammo. What's the proc rate on flintlocke's though? that could definitely change my opinion.

Also, i'm pretty sure the numbers are wrong because the hunter also shoots an auto shot while casting aimed shot.

 

[necroaqua]

I don't play hunter so I don't really have any experiance using either of these 2 weapon enchants but just my 2c.

I would much rather have a proc that does ~200 less damage on the combo (based on frogturtle's numbers, not doing my own im too lazy) and lasts 10 seconds than some proc that you COULD go an entire wargame without ever really getting to utilize with your team. I'm gonna go ahead and assume the hunter is doing damage in the teamfight the entire time and not just sitting there waiting for a swap, so it procc'ing randomly off auto shots seems like something that would happen consistently. Playing around flintlocke's seems much easier and much more reliable to me than the explosive ammo. What's the proc rate on flintlocke's though? that could definitely change my opinion.

Also, i'm pretty sure the numbers are wrong because the hunter also shoots an auto shot while casting aimed shot.

Flintlocke has a 10% chance to proc with a 40s ICD last I checked.

 

[Revoman]

Flintlocke has a 10% chance to proc with a 40s ICD last I checked.

Sounds like it doesn't proc too often then

 

[Warglave]

I'm gonna go ahead and assume the hunter is doing damage in the teamfight the entire time

Sounds like it doesn't proc too often then

Just giving it 10 seconds per minute uptime leaves 50 seconds (51 if you count the swap global) it does nothing.

Incendiary is at worst just as effective for those 51 seconds, and might proc several times over that minute. Might not.

+damage affects every shot every minute of the game.

Only having 9 seconds a minute where you're "allowed" to use your burst abilities doesn't seem too intuitive to me. Situational, sure. Playstyle is really going to determine which is "best" but for random joe not concerned with just trying to look pro swapping every 50 seconds... incendiary will give the most significant burst. Not necessarily always the best, perhaps. 90% functional improvement is "better" in my world than 10% functional improvement.

Or you can just go +damage and have 100% uptime, every time. Right?

"10% of the time it works best every time" isn't exactly any better than the anchorman joke it refers to.

 

[Revoman]

Only having 9 seconds a minute where you're "allowed" to use your burst abilities doesn't seem too intuitive to me.

Well I don't think that's really the case. The hunter has 2 aimed shots, can always just save 1 for if it procs, or if it's on cooldown you burn through them. Landing kills in mid in a teamfight is your #1 goal. not topping damage charts

Playstyle is really going to determine which is "best" but for random joe not concerned with just trying to look pro swapping every 50 seconds... incendiary will give the most significant burst. Not necessarily always the best, perhaps.

I'd say incendiary blows flintlocke's out of the water in a random BG environment, where healers are sometimes non existent.

But in wargames, a good team might have target swaps coming in every like 10 seconds or so (not sure if that's right it's been awhile since i've wargamed). Randomly hitting someone for 400 more damage will likely have 0 impact in a wargame setting, especially against good healers who can predict who's getting bursted next. If your team lines up burst on someone and incendiary procs, then yes 100% it's better. It just really boils down to how often that happens, and I can't really say because I would need data to back that up and I don't play hunter. You (the general you) can theorycraft all you want, but I think the only way to REALLY know which is better is by using both and recording data. But I'd wager most people don't care enough. To me, it sounds like fun

Or you can just go +damage and have 100% uptime, every time. Right?

The +damage is useless. 100% uptime doesn't mean anything if it's adding negligible amounts of damage to your burst rotation.

 

[Warglave]

Landing kills in mid in a teamfight is your #1 goal. not topping damage charts

Which incendiary does in fact do... it compliments that burst and tho not exactly reliable, is not counter-able either. You cant cc an incendiary proc, you cant LoS an incendiary proc, you cant pop a defensive on an incendiary proc. It just happens, and happens hard. Flintlocke's is very predictable and easily countered. No?

And of course this is mostly about random BG, your wargames have rules and what falls in them decides.

And +damage is hardly "useless" unless every attack you do outside a flintlocke proc is "useless" too. C'mon... think about what you're claiming. You just said landing kills matters and that passively makes ALL your burst MORE.

You're still stuck in the 10 seconds you have a proc instead of the 50 you don't…. What good is flintlockes then?

You're so set on trying to throw rocks thru a window in a glass house you're ignoring you can just throw thru the walls.

 

[Revolution]

Which incendiary does in fact do... it compliments that burst and tho not exactly reliable, is not counter-able either. You cant cc an incendiary proc, you cant LoS an incendiary proc, you cant pop a defensive on an incendiary proc. It just happens, and happens hard. Flintlocke's is very predictable and easily countered. No?

And of course this is mostly about random BG, your wargames have rules and what falls in them decides.

And +damage is hardly "useless" unless every attack you do outside a flintlocke proc is "useless" too. C'mon... think about what you're claiming. You just said landing kills matters and that passively makes ALL your burst MORE.

You're still stuck in the 10 seconds you have a proc instead of the 50 you don't…. What good is flintlockes then?

You're so set on trying to throw rocks thru a window in a glass house you're ignoring you can just throw thru the walls.

Not sure how i logged into this account lol.
I'm only talking about wargames.
Obviously incendiary is better for random BGs, when there's limited amounts of healing, communication, etc going on. At that point - yes, that random 400 damage worst-case-scenario would be worthwhile. I was mainly curious if incendiary is better than flintlocke's in a wargame environment. I think I just read that it was banned in wargames, which is interesting, because it's really not clear if it's any better than flintlocke's. I guess they'd rather not deal with the RNG of it actually lining up with the team's sync'd burst.

Flintlocke's isn't any less predictable than an incendiary proc(in a wargame). Sure, you might see they have the buff if your keeping track, but how do you know which target they are going to hit if they're using mouseover/focus macros?


And no, +damage is 100% useless in random BGs and wargames. It makes you burst more in comparison to the other 2 weapon enchants while they are on cooldown, sure. but you are completely ignoring by how much. It's not alot. If you're arguing for the use of +damage why wouldn't you just use incendiary, i'm pretty confident that would net you more kills AND more damage over the course of a random BG or wargame.

Also, I'm not sure what you're implying with your "throwing rocks" statement. I'm just trying to think about things objectively. These are, of course, my opinions and you can 100% disagree with me. I don't really care lol.

 

[Warglave]

I'm only talking about wargames.

Ok. I wont "argue" with you on those.

I'm not sure what you're implying with your "throwing rocks" statement.

Only that the only damage anyone seems to care about is their own burst window. You play a rogue? from your sig? Is all your burst damage irrelevant or "useless" because it doesn't happen during a hunter's flintlocke's proc? Of course not. But apparently from most views here, they are only doing "useful" damage in THAT 10 second window... ignoring damage they output complimenting teammate burst outside their own window ----> which incendiary AND +damage both increase.

Has anyone even tested +damage in all of this? Diamond refractor scope on a BoA was giving me 20% increased damage to both aimed and arcane on the PTR a few months ago. Looking at frogs numbers, flintlockes only gives 40%. Correct?

At his agility anyway... but shouldn't vary too much, i'd think. Is that "useless" damage? 20% static? Vs 20% more for 10 seconds? That you have to swap weapons to increase your benefit from anyway? Why not just use +damage all the time?

20% less damage than you could be doing for 50 seconds of every minute. For 9 seconds of "burst"? Instead of... 60?

(+damage scopes had not been nerfed either, at the time. Don't know if that's changed.)

Really just saying, all that's going on here is cherry-picking best case scenarios to show which best case is supposedly best... why ignore the rest of the battle? No one is guaranteed a crit during a proc, and i'm pretty sure that a non-proc crit with +damage is going to be more "burst" than any non-crit during a proc. How does only 10 secs a minute decide "best"?​