Rawr (v2.3.23 released on 9/12) - Page 58

cbags · 07/11/08, 2:17 PM

Originally Posted by Astrylian

cbags asked me a question via PM, but has incoming PMs disabled so I can't respond... Hope he looks here, or anyone elses finds it helpful:

Try updating to the latest version of the .NET Framework, that's fixed it for several people.

OOPS, my bad, I will go fix my PM's, then update .net.

verrückt · 07/14/08, 9:35 AM

the meta gem calculations are wrong in mage model. i made a gear set up with csd meta gem but the requirements were not met. but the system still calculates the extra dps that comes from meta gem.

it should be easy to fix. but i dunno if coders read here or not and i didnt wanna register and write this on their discussion page. if someone has already an account maybe he/she can write it down there. (i searched it is not there)

Erdluf · 07/14/08, 9:50 AM

Originally Posted by verrückt

the meta gem calculations are wrong in mage model. i made a gear set up with csd meta gem but the requirements were not met. but the system still calculates the extra dps that comes from meta gem.

it should be easy to fix. but i dunno if coders read here or not and i didnt wanna register and write this on their discussion page. if someone has already an account maybe he/she can write it down there. (i searched it is not there)

Version 14b, mage model, options tab: There is an "Enforce Meta Gems" checkbox. I haven't specifically checked that it works correctly for CSD, but you should give it a try.

verrückt · 07/19/08, 4:54 PM

Originally Posted by Erdluf

Version 14b, mage model, options tab: There is an "Enforce Meta Gems" checkbox. I haven't specifically checked that it works correctly for CSD, but you should give it a try.

Apparently, I should care about the grammar that i use. Sorry about previous post. When you enforce the Meta Gem requirements, then the optimizer certainly meets the requirements. It does not compare using the meta gem and meeting its requirements with not using meta gem and not meeting requirements. If you don't use the enforcer, then the model adds the additional dps from meta gem although the requires are not met. So I hope this time i could express myself better.

Astrylian · 07/19/08, 6:28 PM

I'm really unsure what you're trying to say, but guessing what you want, you should use the Optimizer.

verrückt · 07/20/08, 5:49 AM

Originally Posted by Astrylian

I'm really unsure what you're trying to say, but guessing what you want, you should use the Optimizer.

I just updated my post.

Astrylian · 07/20/08, 6:08 AM

Ah, I see, you're trying to compare whether it may be better to just use ideal gems and not use a meta? Then yes, the Optimizer *does* compare that.

verrückt · 07/20/08, 9:09 AM

If it compares, it does it wrong. Because it still adds the dps from meta-gem to its result, although meta-gem requirements are not met.

I run it for my mage and it chooses all +12 damage gems for all sockets and it gives around 2000k dps. After that, i ran the same optimization without choosing any meta-gem. It still chooses same +12 damage gems for all sockets but this time dps is lower. That means, 1st run includes the meta gem dps and 2nd doesn't.

Astrylian · 07/20/08, 3:32 PM

You must have Enforce Metagem Requirements turned off. If that's not the case, send me the character file.

Gruntle · 07/20/08, 5:44 PM

Just a question about the upcoming DPS warrior Rawr tool, I'm sorry if the answer to my question can be found in the thread or at the Rawr site, but I haven't been able to find it.

Is the Rawr dps calculations going to do full-scale swing simulations with some kind of prioritizing rules for how incoming rage is used or are they merely doing what the spreadsheets are doing (a set ability cycle with time averaging models for procs and cooldowns). The reason I'm wondering is that the full scale simulations will probably be the only way of doing accurate modeling when the WoTLK build goes live. Instant slams after BT crits will be almost impossible to incorporate into the current 3BT/2WW cycle and WW might in fact be the nr 1 damaging move.

Astrylian · 07/20/08, 5:57 PM

99% sure it's not doing any simulation, just doing the same thing as spreadsheets.

Phrequency · 07/23/08, 4:12 PM

First I would like to thank the devs for doing such a great job on Rawr. I use it for my warlock and it is much easier and in fact more accurate than the spreadsheet.
However, I'm wondering if any warlock set bonuses are calculated at this time. This would be a great addition to an already great program.
Thanks in advance for your attention and thanks again for a great tool!

Edit: Whoa- I just browsed through the options for other classes and I must say that Rawr.Warlock is a little lackluster in comparison. No set bonus options/talent specification like in Rawr.Mage, no cast sequence/spell rotation either. Is there an update to this section of Rawr or work being done on it currently?

Arnath · 07/23/08, 5:13 PM

Wait till b15, the warlock module is being updated to basically work like the spreadsheet.

Astrylian · 07/23/08, 5:35 PM

Also note that the Mage model is a good example of what's possible with the Rawr platform, but not what's standard. The amount of time that Kavan has put into the Mage model just about equals the rest of Rawr combined, by this point, I think. Sound about right, Kavan?

tolembot · 07/23/08, 6:05 PM

I am a mage and I'm curious as to why Rawr is telling me to increase my DPS by putting in spell damage + hit gems instead of spell haste / dmg or plain dmg gems.

It is also suggesting I take up a couple items that have more spell hit on them than their damage counterparts.

My character is at 153 spell hit which is what I thought was just over the hit cap for a draenei mage?