#0 - April 11, 2010, 12:03 a.m.
1. I don't think that buffs/nerfs should be based off of it.
2. This is a small sample size, but one that I test for statistical significance.
3. Of course blizzard has larger numbers
4. I am bad and need to learn to play
Let's get to the data.
In 3.3, there was a problem with DK representation: notably, that there was less than 10% representation for DKs on two tank fights. The problem got worse when you got outside of the top 100.
For Festergut25 and Sindragosa25, parses in the midrange of guilds, tank representation looked like this:
Warriors: 163 tanks (40.24%)
Paladins: 141 tanks (34.81%)
Druids: 75 tanks (18.52%)
DKs: 26 tanks (6.42%)
3.3.3 came, and brought with it some massive DK buffs. DKs are still thought of as poor tanks (we can see that in these forums sometimes, even if it's not really true outside of Nerubian burrowers), but their numbers have changed.
200 Parses from 3/23 to today on page 1,000 of WoL or later (parses number 24,976 and later)
Warriors: 140 tanks (34.82%)
Paladins: 144 tanks (35.82%)
Druids: 70 tanks (17.41%)
DKs: 48 tanks (11.94%)
I ran a Chi-square on the numbers, and the P value is .037, meaning that this change is overwhelmingly unlikely to be due to random variation. 3.3.3 has been successful in more DKs tanking at a lower level.
For hardmode data, Dks were never in quite as bad a place as they were for lower level parses. However, the differences there are not yet statistically significant. Still, the point remains--DK representation is on the rise.
Most of the gains in representation seem to be coming at the expense of warriors as well, interestingly. Which is probably (although not certainly) working as intended. It's a fairly small amount at the moment. However, the gains mostly came from a decrease in double warrior groups. There were 24 double warrior groups in the earlier samples, and 15 in the later samples. That's 40% of the difference in the warrior numbers. The rest is the slightly higher likelihood of Paladin/DK comps.