Rawr (v2.3.23 released on 9/12) - Page 136

Deathwing · 04/18/09, 1:45 AM

I'm a bit skeptical of the new trinket model. Maybe skeptical is too harsh of a word...sanity check? I know for feral cats, grim toll and agi card were the best trinkets through naxx and even projected through ulduar(with the little we knew about the loot). With the new rawr trinket modeling, it puts grim toll in the same place as expected, but the agi card gets bumped WAY far down. A whole slew of new and old trinkets are better than it.

I'm not saying it's wrong, just a huge change.

Massacre better than mongoose and berserking?

Kris · 04/18/09, 3:19 AM

Originally Posted by Kavan

What exactly are you referring to? Was armory/wowhead operational when you were trying this?

I'm sorry, guess I should've explained more. I'm referring to trying to update [Bracers of Unrelenting Attack]. The item has a socket bonus of +4 hit. The one in item cache has +6 crit which is wrong. Updating from armory/wowhead doesn't fix that - armory totally clears the bonus, while wowhead brings the +6 crit back. Both armory and wowhead were operational at the time of testing this.

Kavan · 04/18/09, 7:00 AM

Thanks for the report, I was able to locate the bug. For Armory that is an error on Armory part. They just stopped listing socket bonuses at some point, you can check The World of Warcraft Armory. For wowhead we had a bug in socket bonus id to stats mapping, this will be fixed in next release.

Arthaal · 04/18/09, 2:33 PM

Reposting this, as it may in fact have had more to do with the main module then with the ret module:

In some damage dealing modules, Rawr breaks down DPS per ability under it's main view. Would it be terribly difficult to add the corresponding percentage value of total DPS that each ability contributes next to that number - possibly between parentheses or something? It's simply a convenience factor for me when looking at where my damage is coming from (physical/holy/affected by hit/expertise/or not etc.) I can't imagine it would be to troublesome to add and might provide some starting point for figuring out where any differences from optimal DPS may lie and what could be done to address them.

Astrylian · 04/18/09, 2:56 PM

Originally Posted by Jheusse

edit: To clarify, are the values I mentioned above usable as an apples to apples comparison of tank strength across several classes, notwithstanding different skillsets and abilities?

No, they are not Apples to Apples.

Originally Posted by untrainedmonkey

I just recently started using rawr extensively with the 3.1 patch approaching and since I started, I recommend it to everyone. The issue I've encountered has to do with resizing the window. Since I find more time to do character modeling when I'm away from my desktop, during travel, downtime, etc, I have loaded rawr on my netbook which runs on odd resolution of 1024x576. When rawr loads, it moves the weapon slots up for the shrunken window size but cuts off the lower slots on the right and left so i can't access my trinkets or wrist slot. Resizing only seems to allow me to make the window bigger, not smaller. Is there any chance of making the objects in the window scale with the window size and allow resizing the window to fit my screen? Maybe there is a way that I've missed in my searches, if so, please point me in the right direction.

Rawr's interface currently requires 1024x768 or higher resolution. There's currently no way around that that I know of.

genjuro · 04/18/09, 4:19 PM

I'd like to request the prot warrior module developers implement shield block usage and uptime. I don't see this ability currently being accounted for yet it'is a huge part of our mitigation. I poked around in the source code and found UI code for specifying usage and uptime, but they were disabled. Ignoring this ability is going to give severely incorrect results for item upgrades, as full 25% shield block uptime almost triples the value of block value as opposed to not using it.

Deathwing · 04/18/09, 8:35 PM

Astrylian, there seems to be a bug with the "Highest stat" field for procs(noble cards). No matter what number is put in there, the proc modeling ignores it. I manually altered the field to 300 AGI and the noble card returned to more "sane" ranking.

Also, is there a way to edit enchants?

Astrylian · 04/18/09, 8:52 PM

Fixed the Bear/Cat handling of HighestStat in procs for the next version.

There's no UI to edit enchants, but you can edit the EnchantCache.xml file (while Rawr isn't running).

Deathwing · 04/18/09, 9:34 PM

I'm just trying to figure out why Massacre is ranking higher than Berserking. Berserking is 400AP for 15, 1PPM. That is a baseline of at least an average 100 AP per minute. Special attacks should push that well above the 110 AP of Massacre.

Astrylian · 04/18/09, 10:54 PM

I believe the current version doesn't have the correct calculations for procs for Cat/Bear; try again in the next version.

charriu · 04/19/09, 2:58 PM

Originally Posted by Deathwing

I'm just trying to figure out why Massacre is ranking higher than Berserking. Berserking is 400AP for 15, 1PPM. That is a baseline of at least an average 100 AP per minute. Special attacks should push that well above the 110 AP of Massacre.

Berserking however doesn't benefit from pred. strikes, while massacre does. Depends on the uptime, I guess.

Astrylian · 04/19/09, 3:32 PM

There were some more bugs with procs not getting % based multipliers in Cat. I'm working on ensuring that procs are working correctly in Cat.

Boevis · 04/19/09, 4:06 PM

What's our Attacks/sec? I'm at around 12% Haste + 16% (no frost DK or Enh shaman) so I do 1.26 white attacks per second, 1/10 Rakes (90% uptime), 1/11 Mangles, 1/26 Rip, probably 1/60 FB or less, and lets just say 3/26 Shred = 1.62 hits per second. Following the TTT 1-(1-1/60)^(15*1.62) ~33.5% uptime * 400 = 134 AP.
Massacre = 110*1.2 = 132

Mongoose = 1.5 ppm (??) 46% uptime = 55.14 agi + 23.67 haste = 142.77 + 45.64 = 188.41 AP equivalent.

All of that depends on Haste not affecting the base PPM percentages, ie. it calculates ppm chance as PPM/60*Base Attack Speed instead of PPM/60*Hasted Attack Speed

Astrylian · 04/19/09, 5:06 PM

I'm retesting the PPMs right now, to make sure I've got them right, and to make sure they do scale with haste. Interestingly, with my current values, Mongoose is winning.

nightcrowler · 04/20/09, 1:03 AM

@Boevis:
mongoose is 1.0 ppm at level 80, berserk is 1.2 ppm.
@Astrylian:
can you publish your test for haste ppm scaling when you have finished them, badly I have low haste on gear and it's pretty difficult to test it that way.