Ratings

Necrotoid · 03/06/07, 1:27 PM

So I noticed all the basic ratings are on a different scale. According to wowwiki:

Hit (60/70): 10 / 15.8 rating for 1%
Crit / Spell crit: 14 / 22.1
Spell hit: 8 / 12.6
Resilience: 25 / 39.4

Why do they have 4 different arbitrary rating systems? The only explanation I could think of is each rating could then be deprecated at a different rate with level. But nope, all 4 of those scale at factor of 1.58 from 60 to 70. In effect, all four are exactly the same. So why the cosmetic difference of different numbers?

Falk · 03/06/07, 1:33 PM

Itemization points.

Edit: To clarify, 1 rating of this == 1 rating of that in terms of item budget.

Kytrarewn · 03/06/07, 1:34 PM

Originally Posted by Necrotoid

So I noticed all the basic ratings are on a different scale. According to wowwiki:

Hit (60/70): 10 / 15.8 rating for 1%
Crit / Spell crit: 14 / 22.1
Spell hit: 8 / 12.6
Resilience: 25 / 39.4

Why do they have 4 different arbitrary rating systems? The only explanation I could think of is each rating could then be deprecated at a different rate with level. But nope, all 4 of those scale at factor of 1.58 from 60 to 70. In effect, all four are exactly the same. So why the cosmetic difference of different numbers?

Being able to modulate iValue a bit more effectively. Makes it easier for the itemization designers if crit and hit, for example, were weighed evenly, though a single point of crit is almost always better than a single point of hit.

Necrotoid · 03/06/07, 1:37 PM

Originally Posted by Kytrarewn

Being able to modulate iValue a bit more effectively. Makes it easier for the itemization designers if crit and hit, for example, were weighed evenly, though a single point of crit is almost always better than a single point of hit.

Why don't they just fucking balance it "behind the scenes", then? 1 pt of stam does not equal 1 pt of spirit in item budget, does it? They can change the iLvl weights of 1 rating of each different type to make all 4 scales line up evenly with very little effort. They're all off from each other by just a constant proprotionality. Why make us remember 4 different systems when they can just build it into their itemization calculator?

Kytrarewn · 03/06/07, 1:40 PM

Originally Posted by Necrotoid

Why don't they just fucking balance it "behind the scenes", then? 1 pt of stam does not equal 1 pt of spirit in item budget, does it?

1 spirit = 1 strength = 1 crit rating = 1 hit rating = 1spellcrit = 1 spellhit.

It's not perfect, but it is elegant with the exception of stam.

Malan · 03/06/07, 1:41 PM

Yah trying to remember what the ratings equate to is mind boggling. The very least they could do is put the exact conversion factor into the damn tooltip so that I don't need a website to tell me.

WoW has reached the point where Johnny QQ Casual can't play the game properly unless he trolls 5 different forums 20 hours a week and has 15 different WoW websites that he reads religously.

Ranalis · 03/06/07, 1:46 PM

Get RatingBuster (http://www.wowinterface.com/download...ing_Buster.htm) and then the exact percentages are on your tooltip. Useful until Blizzard implements the same feature in 4 patches.

duostrike · 03/06/07, 1:48 PM

Originally Posted by Malan

Yah trying to remember what the ratings equate to is mind boggling. The very least they could do is put the exact conversion factor into the damn tooltip so that I don't need a website to tell me.

WoW has reached the point where Johnny QQ Casual can't play the game properly unless he trolls 5 different forums 20 hours a week and has 15 different WoW websites that he reads religously.

All J.Q.C. needs to know is that more is better. He can see the effect of swapping gear on the character frame if he wants to get more involved. I do believe ratingbuster or something similar should be part of the default ui. It isn't really required though.

Redd · 03/06/07, 1:48 PM

A big reason for it was to allow for different allocation of item value budgets. Before, the only way to add fractions of a crit for example, would be to add staggering levels of agility(which also came with AP for rogue/hunters). With the rating system, it allows them to make items with varying %'s of crit.

Sayeh · 03/06/07, 1:52 PM

Originally Posted by Kytrarewn

Being able to modulate iValue a bit more effectively. Makes it easier for the itemization designers if crit and hit, for example, were weighed evenly, though a single point of crit is almost always better than a single point of hit.

I thought it used to be that hit was more valuable? maybe it's just because I'm an affliction lock and crits aren't my top priority =p but a spell or attack has to hit before it can crit right? so isn't it better to have more hit, until you're at the max of 99% hit or whatever it is?

Bury · 03/06/07, 1:58 PM

Originally Posted by Redd

A big reason for it was to allow for different allocation of item value budgets. Before, the only way to add fractions of a crit for example, would be to add staggering levels of agility(which also came with AP for rogue/hunters). With the rating system, it allows them to make items with varying %'s of crit.

I think the point is that you could still achieve this effect by using the same rating range for each stat. e.g. 1 rating = .1% crit or hit or etc

Abaxial · 03/06/07, 2:02 PM

Originally Posted by Sayeh

I thought it used to be that hit was more valuable? maybe it's just because I'm an affliction lock and crits aren't my top priority =p but a spell or attack has to hit before it can crit right? so isn't it better to have more hit, until you're at the max of 99% hit or whatever it is?

There is a large difference in value between casters and melee.

Quigon · 03/06/07, 2:03 PM

Wow, when I first brought this up people said I was crazy. Its a stupid system right now, at least for end user purposes.

Zagzil · 03/06/07, 2:13 PM

Originally Posted by Quigon

Wow, when I first brought this up people said I was crazy. Its a stupid system right now, at least for end user purposes.

I don't see what you're getting it. It's definitely confusing and makes items harder to judge right off the bat, but the actual item value of the ratings aren't arbitrary nor are they "dumb." It's just a way of making ratings have different values.

Bibdy · 03/06/07, 2:14 PM

Originally Posted by Sayeh

I thought it used to be that hit was more valuable? maybe it's just because I'm an affliction lock and crits aren't my top priority =p but a spell or attack has to hit before it can crit right? so isn't it better to have more hit, until you're at the max of 99% hit or whatever it is?

Its a 1-roll system, so if you had 20% crit, +2% to hit, assuming a base miss chance of 4% and you made a billion and one attacks on your opponent you should find 20% of them are crits, 2% of them are misses and the remaining 78% are regular hits.

One thing I'm curious about is, is there still a 4% chance of a miss on a target of the same level, or has that changed, too?