For Seal of Vengeance, i believe the correct coefficient from the data you were given is actually 68%. The 17% you have listed for this spell is actually the damage coefficient per tick as opposed for over the whole DoT as you have listed elsewhere.

However, when i get a chance to check it, will do so, as i cant understand why for this DoT the coefficient is 68% when for a 12 second DoT is should be 12/15 = 80%

Druid:

Starfire: 100% (3.5/3.5)
Wrath: 57.14% (2/3.5)
Moonfire: Initial: 15.2% Dot: 51.63% (Initial: 1.5/3.5 * Initial/(initial+dot) Dot: 4/5 * dot/(initial+dot))
Roots: 90% (9/5 * 50%)
Hurricane: 90.48% (1/3 * 10/3.5 * .95 AoE*casttime*5% penalty for the slow)
Insect Swarm: TBA I would expect: 114% (6 Tics/5 * .95 effect penalty) would appreciate if anyone that's specced for this could post.

The 50% on roots is immobilize penalty I guess. The standard 95% for slows wasn't enough, and including the 1.5 cast time into any of the formulae went far too low.

For mages, Playing with Fire and Arcane Instability are NOT included in the default tooltips, but Fire Power and Piercing Ice are. (All the mana cost reducing talents are included.)

Also, you need to take into account that I was level 67, not 66, so Ice Lance tooltip damage would be slightly higher than its tooltip at level 66. And Piercing Ice does affect the damage range on tooltip.

However, you pointed out a key mistake in my theorycrafting. I forgot to take out the bonus damage from Arcane Instability, anyhow.

And yes, you understood perfectly what my first assumption was: 1.5/3.5 scaling (as the baseline model we know and have trusted forever) assuming that the target was frozen in the first place, so 42.8/3 assuming the target is not frozen, or 14.26%. I'll go back and re-do my tests, and because I don't trust my knowledge 100% on how and where certain +%modifiers are applied, and hell, it's the beta and respecs cost 1c, I'll just try it out without any talents.

Druid:

Rejuvenation, 12 second HoT: 12/15 = 80% divided among 4 ticks, 20% per tick.

Regrowth, Direct Heal + 21 second HoT. Average direct heal is 1061, HoT component is 1064. 49.9% DH, 50.1% HoT.
Direct heal = 2/3.5 * .499 = +28.5% of +healing (at max rank.) HoT component = 21/15 * .501 = 70.14% of +healing divided among 7 ticks, 10.02% per tick.

I have empirically verified that the behavior of both spells matches the predictions of the formulae.

As pointed out, my math on IceLance was incorrect because I forgot to remove the additional damage from +% talents. So this morning I specced 0/0/0 and repeated my test.

Test Setup:

* +527 Frost Damage
* No talents
* 100 Casts

Tooltip Damage Range @ Level 68: 167-194
Tooltip Average Damage @ Level 68: 180.5

Average damage on 100 casts @ 527 Frost: 255.57
Delta: 255.57 - 180.5 = 75.07

75.07 / 527 = 0.1424 (14.24%)


If you consider the fact that Ice Lance deals triple damage vs frozen targets, according to my math, it receives 42.72% of my +Frost damage.

Therefore it seems like my first assessment was correct, Ice Lance *indeed* receives 42.8% (1.5/3.5) bonus from gear, however, assuming the target is currently frozen in place.

Apologies for rushed out, poor math, on my first reply on Ice Lance.

Drain mana does not benefit from +spell damage. I don't think mana burn does either.

However, mana burn does cause shadow damage, and the "damage" portion of mana burn is affected by CoS/Weaving/Imp SB and a priest will get the rewards of VT/VE from mana burn damage.

The way blizzard described how int->crit worked in a blue post basically made it function as a linear formula in the form Y=AX+B. Y being your spell crit, A being class and level specific int coefficient, X being your int, and B being your base spell crit (Naked). If you post your int/crit% both naked/with some gear on it should just be a interpolation.

Yes, I need to find A. Unfortunately I'm not on beta, so I was hoping someone who was could post some numbers :P.

I dont have a level 70 mage, infact my highest level mage is 23, but I asked a random mage on beta and he gave me these values

Naked Human 70 Mage
Int 151
Crit 2.8%

Human 70 Mage wearing an item with 25 int
Int 176
Crit 3.12%

Interpolating the linear equation with this data gives a=0.0128crit/int (78.125 int per 1% crit) and b=0.8672 (base crit a 70 mage "should" have if you remove your "naked int"). This seems very different from the 60 values (a naked 60 human mage has 125 int and 2.69% crit)

Which is not really relevant to a thread about damage coefficients.

I did some testing on the Mage Fire AoE's.
Character setup was +660 Fire damage, 3/3 Playing with Fire, 5/5 Firepower.

Blast Wave Rank 5
Base damage at 60 (no talents): 462 - 544 (503 average)

Observed damage over 56 hits: 620 - 712 (664.9 avg)
(BaseDmg+DmgCoef*FireDmg)*Talents=FinalDmg
(503 + x*660)*1.03*1.1=664.9
x = .127

Dragon's Breath Rank 2
Base damage at 60 (no talents): 460 - 533 (496.5 aveg)

Observed damage over 112 hits: 619-699 (656.8 avg)
(496.5 + x*660)*1.03*1.1=656.8
x = .126

My theory is both Blast Wave and Dragon's Breath use a (1.5/3.5)*(1/3)*0.9 = 12.85% scaling modifier.
That gives an expected damage range on Blast Wave of 619.6 - 712.5, and on Dragon's Breath of 617.3 - 700.0 Both of which conform reasonably to my test data.

I also tested Flamestrike. The DD portion matched the 15.7% listed in the OP.
The DoT portion however is only 8% (8/15*1/3*340/757).

Base damage on the DoT is 85/tick, observed damage was 111/tick.

0.9? That's weird, but I trust you. ;)

Great, thanks. With *1/3 the coefficient indeed makes more sense.

Updated a few other things as well; and apparently the formula for "deviations from base damage" is coming soon. :)

The new PTR screwed up at least CoAs and Corruptions coefficients... for more info, check out this thread:
http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/th...sid=1&pageNo=2

I thought it was strange also. I tripled checked my math before posting because I was worried I had done something wrong. :P

I was going to check Molten Armor, but the beta servers were down so I decided to double-check Cone of Cold, and it looks like it is also 12.86% - (1.5/3.5)*(1/3)*.9

Cone of Cold base damage: 338-368 (353 avg)
observed damage with +640 frost, 3/3 playing with fire: 433-464 (448 avg)
(353 + x*640)*1.03 = 448
x = .128

Also, one minor correction, you fixed the formulas (Blast Wave, Dragon's Breath & Frost Nova) but didn't change the listed %s. ;)

Yes, it's been known that there is a penalty for extra effects (like snare) and testing has shown it's a .95 multiplier for frostbolt.
I suppose it was just assumed that it was .95 for all snares, or perhaps Blizzard changed the modifiers for these AoE spells in the 2.0 patch.

In other news, Beta servers came back up and I did a (very) quick test on Molten Armor. It gets no benefit at all from +spell damage gear.
75 dmg a hit, and 112-113 for a crit, everytime.

I tested those two on ptr today and got different results.

Insect Swarm: 76% (12/15 * .95)
Hurricane: ~107% (?)

Can't fit a formula for hurricane, but i expect it to be x * 1/3 * .95, though x of 10/3,5 doesn't seem to match my numbers.

Here they are:
Insect Swarm:
base: 594 (99/tick)
expected%: 76% (.95*12/15)

+dmg from gear: 500
expected bonus: 380
total damage: 972-978 (162-163/tick)
bonus: 378-384 (~76%)


+dmg from gear: 675
expected bonus: 513
total damage: 1104-1110 (184-185/tick)
bonus: 510-516 (~76%)


Hurricane:
base: 1340(134/tick)

+dmg from gear: 500
total damage: 1870-1880 (187-188/tick)
bonus: 530-540 (106-108%)

+dmg from gear: 675
total damage: 2060-2070 (206-207/tick)
bonus: 720-730 (106.7-108.2%)

As of the 2.0.3 patch, the coefficient on Avenger's Shield is now ~15%, and the coefficient on Consecration is now 96%(!).

And 'lock DoT coefficients got nerfed, please update the first post.

Sort of a side question, but wouldn't it be considerably easier to compare values if the coefficients are maintained as +damage/time? Maybe +damage/10.5s since it's a pretty round value compared to what blizzard uses (3.5 * 3 = 10.5, 15 *0.7 = 10.5). Seems like everything could be reduced to base DPS + coefficient DPS, and talents simply providing multipliers to one or both values. In that form, the values could be directly compared for effectiveness (since all comparisons require dropping down anyway).

That would be useful, yes. Recording it per 3.5 seconds would make most sense, as most spells are normalised to give 100% over that period, untalented. So fireball comes out as 100% / 3.5s, but talented fireball comes out at 116.66% / 3.5s. Frostbolt comes out at 95%, talented comes out at 114% / 3.5s.

However for DoTs, what would be more useful is a way of measuring the fact that DoTs are *supplementary* damage. That is, they are damage that ticks away at the same time as you chain cast some other nuke.

Cast time for a DoT is 1.5 seconds - which you could have spent casting some other spell. Thus, the expected +damage coefficient for that 1.5 seconds is 43%. DoTs get more than that (but obviously take time to deal that damage). My suggestion is to deduct the "expected" 43% from the DoT's coefficient, normalise the rest to 3.5 seconds and flag it as supplementary.

Example - an 18 second DoT with a 93% +damage coefficient.

Subtract 43% (because you could have used the 1.5s cast time to cast something else), giving 50%. This gives a net "bonus" coefficient of 50%, delivered over 18 seconds.

50% * (3.5 /18) = 9.72% / 3.5s, supplementary.

The truest measure of a DoT's effectiveness in a raid situation is that it will give you an extra 9.72% / 3.5s, in addition to whatever coefficient you get from the other spells you're casting. So if you're casting shadow bolts at 100% / 3.5s coefficient (and renewing DoTs whenever possible), you'll have an effective coefficient of 109.72% / 3.5s.

This isn't a perfect calculation - if your main nuke has better than 100% coefficient, then you'll need to subtract slightly more than 43% from the DoT coefficient to reflect this - however playing around with the numbers suggests this shouldn't ever bring the supplementary damage of the DoT below about 8% / 3.5s of your total +damage.