Sharks Aren’t That Great, It Seems

Testing, one two


On one of my bigger posts, Furrious Raiders: The Ferocious, I was told that Wild Hunt is better than Shark Attack for all those non-beastmastery users out there(Rilgon and Pike are the ones that told me).

Well, I thought otherwise, so I did some tests.  I performed these tests under the following conditions:

-Link was talented properly and all tests were done with the same talent spec(with the exception of the 1 point difference from Shark Attack and Wild Hunt).

-All abilities were turned off, allowing only melee damage to enter the equation.  The only time this rule changed was for Furious Howl, and only to test scaling to a small degree.

-All tests were approximately 5 minutes long.

-All tests were pet only, and did not feature any Hunter interference with the exception of Aspect of the Dragonhawk being on.

-Link was the only pet used.

-I was talented for Survival PvE, and did not take any beastmaster talents capable of affecting Link.

-All tests were conducted on a level 70 dummy in order to avoid Random Number Generator interference(i.e, misses, glancing hits, etc.).

I base any and all conclusions on the average damage dealt by hits and by critical hits rather than the DPS or Overall Damage Done(ODD).  For a 5 minute test, Link had a preference of which talent spec he liked better in terms of critical hits.  As a result, by taking the DPS or ODD, I am skewing the results.  By taking how much his hits did on average, we can easily find a reliable average in 5 minutes, no matter how many critical hits he did.

In addition, it’s important to keep in mind I have 3 557 attack power while conducting these tests.

Now on to the results!

Shark Attack, no Furious Howl

Shark Attack, no Furious Howl

Shark Attack, with Furious Howl

Shark Attack, with Furious Howl

Wild Hunt, without Furious Howl

Wild Hunt, no Furious Howl

Wild Hunt, with Furious Howl

Wild Hunt, with Furious Howl

I have done these tests under very controlled, constant conditions with a constant, non-Random Number Generated environment that didn’t rely on resources that were finite.  This is pretty much the textbook definition of a perfect test environment.

The average damage dealt per hit while talented with Shark Attack was 294 damage, or 304 damage with Furious Howl.  Wild Hunt did 274 damage without Furious howl, and 290 with.  This looks like it shows that Shark Attack wins, but let’s take a closer look.

When Furious Howl was not active, there was a 20 point difference in damage.  When Furious Howl was used, the difference was only 14 points of damage.  Why is this important? Well, this brings us to scaling.

Scaling, as you may or may not know, is loosely defined as how much effect you and your pets get from buffs.  When there were no buffs present, it was obvious that Shark Attack was the winner.  By 20 points, no less.  But when we added 1 teenee tiny buff, that gap of 20 points shortened a great deal.  Link, with Shark Attack, was only getting a 10 point bonus out of it, while Wild Hunt gave a whopping 16 points instead! What this shows is that, with more buffs…

Wild Hunt would quickly outpace and outrace Shark Attack.  Furious Howl gives 320 attack power half the time, meaning that it really gives 160 attack power at all times(320/2=160).  If we were to assume that 160 attack power constitutes an increase in damage by about 10 points for Shark attack and 16 points for Wild Hunt, you would need a bit less than 640 extra attack power to have Wild Hunt beat Shark Attack if Furious Howl was applied all the time.  For other ferocity pets, this comes out to needing roughly 800 extra attack power to beat Shark Attack, at least for anyone with exactly 3 557 attack power.  Remember, if the hunter has less attack power, the pet has to get more attack power to make Wild Hunt more effective due to the lack of help on the hunter’s part.

So, in conclusions, I was wrong.  Wild Hunt is, for the majority of situations, better than Shark Attack for damage.  In addition, it gives the pet more stamina, which helps the pet stay alive more.  It seems that, out of this duel of talents, Wild Hunt wins with a comeback from last place.

But remember this: Wild Hunt will only beat Shark Attack if there are other buffs around.  If the Hunter does not have a large amount of attack power, Shark Attack will actually be better.  For PvP, this means that 2v2 Arenas and Ganking pets would rather have Shark Attack than Wild Hunt for damage purposes.  New level 80 Hunters might not have the attack power necessary to cause WIld Hunt to beat Shark Attack either.


If anyone believes that this test was conducted badly, or the results are off in some way, please tell me as this is the first time I tested something like this before.

Yes Pike, and yes Rilgon, you may both dance now.


If this method of testing pets becomes popular though, I’m patenting it.  I want it to be called the Klin method, and I want royalties.  5 gold per use!




  1. Haha, no, I can understand why you’d think that. The problem is, however, that MM and SV pets don’t hit hard enough to make the 3% boost worth it, but we have AP (especially MM Hunters) coming out our ears. Just with raid food and elixirs, I’m sitting at 5100 RAP, and with all my buffs and procs, I’ve danced just shy of 9000 RAP. AP scaling is Atridormu’s lifeblood with me. 😛

Comments are closed.