Shadow Priest DPS Spreadsheet

Pungent · 03/02/07, 2:15 PM

NEW RELEASE: 3/14/07

The promised update is complete and can be downloaded: HERE

Changes / Updates:
* +hit is now factored into the sample. Level based scaling included.
* The use of Shadowfiend and Manapots are now available. These are averaged into MP/5.
* An additional % damage modifier is included for specialty fights.
* Improved VE talent added.

In Progress:
* Inner Focus inclusion in sample.

Please keep me posted on any discrepancies or requests for future releases. Thanks, and enjoy.

Trepidati0n · 03/02/07, 3:09 PM

You are not including spell level vs + damage. Right now you are giving a rank 1 spell full + dam. I see you sorta have this started, just not finished. Otherwise, having a hard time initally blowing holes in it.

Pungent · 03/02/07, 6:59 PM

Originally Posted by Trepidati0n

You are not including spell level vs + damage. Right now you are giving a rank 1 spell full + dam. I see you sorta have this started, just not finished. Otherwise, having a hard time initally blowing holes in it.

Thanks for the response. Downranking is something I've considered a few times but never really decided how should be implemented. For the sake of my own sanity I've avoided it in the spell simulation and assumed max-rank spell casting.

In the next update I'll probably include downranking as an option for individual spell data but we'll see what other recommendations / corrections get brought up before uploading a revised copy. The feedback received here and within my guild will largely determine what features get added or changed but I hope others will at least find the data useful.

nataku · 03/02/07, 7:10 PM

I believe Trepidation was trying to say you are giving a low level spell it's level 70 benefit from spell damage gear when in practice, there is a penalty for using spell ranks that were trained below level 50 when your character is level 70.

Pungent · 03/02/07, 8:20 PM

Originally Posted by nataku

I believe Trepidation was trying to say you are giving a low level spell it's level 70 benefit from spell damage gear when in practice, there is a penalty for using spell ranks that were trained below level 50 when your character is level 70.

Perhaps I wasn't clear. I understand the issue being discussed but haven't put in a system to calculate coefficient changes based on character level. This change is a simple matter and would correct the readout for downranking but I haven't decided how I want to do it.

The initial idea was to put in current gear levels and see how an individual spell would scale with that gear as I leveled - without the need to change additional variables. As you can see, that initial idea has grown a bit. So at the initial conception, downranking was a distant thought. This will be corrected in the next release.

Pungent · 03/07/07, 3:45 PM

I'm having a great deal of trouble modeling the coefficient for SW:P downranking. Does anyone know the actual formula used? The one below doesn't work.

untalented: coefficient * ((level learned for next highest spell rank - 1 + 6)/70)
talented: (coefficient + (0.185 * rank of imp. SW:P)) * ((level learned for next highest spell rank - 1 + 6)/70)

LucidityAxel · 03/07/07, 8:48 PM

Your formula looks exactly like the one that Blizzard published when they announced the downranking penalties. What are you seeing that makes you believe it is inaccurate?

On a different note, does your spreadsheet model hit penalty? I didn't see any values for it anywhere.

If you don't want to go to the trouble of modeling player vs target level, then you could simply assume the player is at the hit cap and factor in a static 1% miss rate.

Trepidati0n · 03/08/07, 4:17 PM

Do me a favor. Take the default spreadsheet and turn VT on and off in terms of the queue. The delta is ~100DPS. However, the spreadsheet says 200DPS as an individual spell. How is there such a huge difference?

The reason is that because we have so many choices of what to cast that we actually lose DPS because we can't use all our spells effectively at the same time. I always knew this to be true....just never realized how big the effect was (all 50% or 100% depending upon which way you look at it).

The fact that mages can chain their spells with no lost time due to DoT casting, they can much better approximate their DPS change from 1 point of +damage while locks/priests have to actually model a cycle in order to figure out what is going on.

Northerner · 03/08/07, 5:37 PM

Originally Posted by Trepidati0n

Do me a favor. Take the default spreadsheet and turn VT on and off in terms of the queue. The delta is ~100DPS. However, the spreadsheet says 200DPS as an individual spell. How is there such a huge difference?

The reason is that because we have so many choices of what to cast that we actually lose DPS because we can't use all our spells effectively at the same time. I always knew this to be true....just never realized how big the effect was (all 50% or 100% depending upon which way you look at it).

The fact that mages can chain their spells with no lost time due to DoT casting, they can much better approximate their DPS change from 1 point of +damage while locks/priests have to actually model a cycle in order to figure out what is going on.

This I find to be fascinating actually. (I also quite agree by the way.)

Mages seem to be increasingly encouraged to move towards an AB(x)/main-nuke(y) rotation at the very least and quite possibly will end up running some sort of AB/AM/fireball/scorch weave by the end of the expansion. I don't think this is at all accidental though and imagine a good part of that is obfuscation of the casting model on Blizzard's part.

I don't mean this in a cloak-and-dagger or tinfoil-hat sort of way at all. I just mean that Blizzard wants casting to be more involved obviously and more 'skill-based' than gear-based. I don't know if that end will be met but I do find it terribly amusing that actual simulations are needed to find optimal casting cycles. What I don't find quite as interesting is how many casters will be far behind simply because they don't have access to the math that they need to make good decisions.

Pungent · 03/08/07, 6:07 PM

NEW RELEASE:

The promised update is complete and can be downloaded: HERE

Changes / Updates:
* Threat and VE calculations have been updated to correspond with the latest patch.
* SW:P coefficient has been updated to correctly reflect talent scaling.
* Spell cycle updated to accommodate level changes. Unavailable spells will be dropped from rotation.
* Downranking has been modeled across all spells (exception is Devouring Plague which scales ... oddly)

Interesting Discoveries: (based on in-game testing)
* SW:P suffers no degradation from downranking until Rank 3 or lower.
* The SW:P coefficient nerf was not a flat 9%. The improved talent scales this to a 12%.
* Devouring Plague scales strangely when downranked. Normal scaling is 80% but drops to around 65% at the next lowest rank. It then scales back upwards to 80% at Rank 1.

Please keep me posted on any discrepancies or requests for future releases. Thanks, and enjoy.

EDIT: In response to the question about including +hit in the calculations. It's something I've put a lot of thought into but neglected for now. I wanted to get this build pushed out ASAP in order to get feedback on the underlying spell formulas before adding more variables. It's something I'm looking into, but don't know how doable it will be with Excel. I'm already hitting the upper bounds on logic formulas in a lot of instances.

Asmo · 03/10/07, 12:25 PM

Thanks for this. Great work!

One interesting point is assuming that optimal cast sequence and 100ms lag or less only points 1 and 4 in imp MB does anything. Having 3 instead of 1 point apparently never results in a situation where you gain any extra mindblasts in the spell rotation. Which does seem to confirm my own calculations I tried to make based on the spell rotations I believe Shalas posted earlier in the other shadowpriest thread.

So at least theoretically with my gear the answer to the question of where to put the 3 points I have left for imp MB or shadow power is optimally spent 1 in imp MB and 2 in shadow power.

Brekk · 03/10/07, 4:46 PM

that is for optimum cycle, ive found 4 in Imp MB is nice just because it puts it on the same cooldown as SW

, it just makes it easier to deal with those two being on the same cooldown.

heel · 03/10/07, 5:37 PM

This is an excellent spreadsheet. A few issues, though:

-According to the spreadsheet, DPS is maximized with one point in improved SW:P (1/2 produces higher DPS than 2/2). This doesn't make sense.

-Shadow Weaving is not modeled properly. Each point in your spreadsheet results in a linear increase in DPS, which is not correct. 4/5 Shadow Weaving is *very* close to 5/5 in a raid environment. I did the math a while ago, and the chance that Weaving ever falls off in a 5-minute fight is less than 3%.

Pungent · 03/10/07, 6:05 PM

Originally Posted by heel

This is an excellent spreadsheet. A few issues, though:

-According to the spreadsheet, DPS is maximized with one point in improved SW:P (1/2 produces higher DPS than 2/2). This doesn't make sense.

-Shadow Weaving is not modeled properly. Each point in your spreadsheet results in a linear increase in DPS, which is not correct. 4/5 Shadow Weaving is *very* close to 5/5 in a raid environment. I did the math a while ago, and the chance that Weaving ever falls off in a 5-minute fight is less than 3%.

On SW:P - What you're noticing here is exactly the same thing commented on above by Asmo and Brekk. It's not that the DPS of the spell actually increases; it's that given the pieces to the puzzle, having only 1 point causes everything to fall into place more frequently. This is a subjective increase based on lag and spell rotation.

On Shadow Weaving - I'm not 100% sure what you're implying. Yes, it's true that in a raid situation 4/5 shadow weaving will rarely drop off the mob. What I'm doing in the spreadsheet however isn't calculating frequency of drops, only the total damage done under situations where the rank of shadow weaving in the spreadsheet corresponds to the number of stacks on the mob. The number of points you have in the talent is ultimately irrelevant, as this is simply for DPS analysis. As long as the stacks get on the mob, that's what counts.

Brekk · 03/10/07, 6:14 PM

Originally Posted by Pungent

On SW:P - What you're noticing here is exactly the same thing commented on above by Asmo and Brekk. It's not that the DPS of the spell actually increases; it's that given the pieces to the puzzle, having only 1 point causes everything to fall into place more frequently. This is a subjective increase based on lag and spell rotation.

however, the shorter duration requires more recasts, and with the cost of SW:P for long duration fights 2 pts in it is better.