And much better dpm (by 2+). And will partially resist less.

And will be less affected by latency!

Also, factoring hit is irrelevant: Every druid is going to be max hit (16) simply because of getting 4 from talents and 3 from totem -- the other 9 is REALLY easy to come by on spellfire. So multiplying crit chance by .99 or multiplying non crit chance by .99 does not make any real differance.

This is generally false. The majority of raid mobs have resist scores of 0 against various schools of magic. Partial resists seen as a caster are normally a level-based mechanic, not a resist score-based one. Curse of Shadows does nothing to influence the number of level-based partial resists you experience, and as such doesn't matter until you meet a mob that actually has some Arcane Resist (which is very rare at best.)

Could you explain this part to me? I'm still working on statistics, but shouldn't it just be:
(d/3*q)+(2d/2.5*p)+(0*.01)
with q = (.99-p)
Since a miss doesn't reduce crit damage, it's easier to just reduce the chance to not crit by 1% and count the 1% miss as 0 DPS 1% of the time. And why not just reduce the cast time reduction and 2x damage together, since they both work off the same variable of crit%

Can you show me that math please?

I think I switched the meanings of p & q in between defining them and using them, which probably wasn't helping matters! Don't worry, in the actual spreadsheet they're right. That I've checked 100 times.

Even without statistics, you can puzzle out the equation step by step. You have 4 possible scenarios (p = non-crit %, q = crit%)
1) The spell you are casting is not under effect of NG (the spell before didn't crit) and does not crit ((d/3)*pp)
2) The spell you are casting is not under effect of NG & does crit ((2d/3)*pq)
3) The spell you are casting IS under effect of NG & does NOT crit ((d/2.5)*qp)
4) The spell you are casting IS under effect of NG & DOES crit ((2d/2.5)*qq)

You have to model all 4 possibilities to get the accurate DPS make-up. If you apply the cast time reduction only when considering crits, you compound the value of crit. Say you're flipping a coin & every time you get 2 heads in a row, you get $5. You couldn't just take the chance of flipping heads & multiply it times $5. The same applies with crits--you can't just take the DPS done by a crit & assume NG is active. I made that same mistake the first time I tried to model NG procs and was horribly overvaluing crit.

(Also, my model never accounts for the "first cast" or any cast after a pause of more than 15 seconds. These should be insignificant variables over the course of 100+ casts though, and can be resolved by casting rank 1 moonfire on engage & after pauses of > 15 sec in real fights, if one is willing to assume that the GCD & ~25 mana used by rank 1 moonfire are taken care of by the regen of 15 sec of not casting and some sort of say, movement time to get back into position or to get into initial position).

Where does the constant of .7386 come from?

Also, your calculation method is really confusing me: I find it way easier to compute BASE spell damage modified by spellpowe and then added talents.

Ie: ( avg + spell x 1.2 ) *1.1 * misery x shadows

What I am getting for wrath constant is:

2/3.5 x 1.1 (35 pt talent ) * 1.1 (moonfury)

Also, multiply starfire dpm by 1.1 because cos is starfire exclusive.

Anyway, doing your wrath constant and multiplying by misery/critrate (1.27 )
I get
8.630316952 vs
6.832137873

Basically 2 dpm apart, as 1000 spelldamage is unreasonable and 1300 is more expected (bringing dpm to greater then 2 dpm apart)

Efejel, while YES, without all the modifiers the spell dpm is not 2 dpm off, it is 15% off, and adjusted for CoS and scaling it to critrate produces a 2dpm change!

I believe he's using (2/3.5 + .1) * 1.1 as the wrath +dmg coef, and simply including that moonfury modifies the base damage in his 422-475 base damage, which I understand doing since he pointed out that moonfury modifies our base damage by something other than 10% (10.8% for wrath, 11.9% with strange rounding for starfire)

I would like some confirmation that the WoC modifier is added to the base spell coef and not multiplied, this is contrary to the observed behavior of our other Empowered talents (Rejuv and HT)

So the coef for wrath, and post moonfury base damages are different from what's expected. Before I keep going on my spreadsheet, could you confirm the following:

IS: .76 Coef
Moonfire: 369-432 (400 avg) initial, 726 DoT, 1126 total average. Initial .1524 coef. DoT .5158 coef

If the values for MF are different, I'll have to sneak in 2/2 Imp MF next time I respec for arena and see if it's Imp MF and/or Moonfury that are providing different results.

I suppose I'm going to have to separate talented from untalented (hey, some of us care what our DPS with a 27/0/34 spec is) And then there's the issue of Dreamstate HT specs only having 3 or 4 points in Moonfury.... /emo

Spell pane for Moonfire(12): 366-429, 720 over 12 sec

Don't know coeff. for IS, but it's not modified by any talents. Believe it's (12/15) * 0.95 = 0.76... though this doesn't seem right. Time to go log in!

EDIT: 801 +dmg, 233/234 ticks, 6 ticks. 6 x 233 = 1398 - 792 (spell pane) = 606 / 0.76 =~ 797
EDIT 2: It's probably most appropriate to use the untalented values for determining the ratios of the coefficients?
( 305 + 357 ) / 2 = 331
331 / ( 331 + 600 ) = 0.3555 * ( 1.5 / 3.5 ) = .1524 (hey, that's where you got that from--the ratio determined with the talented number is diff)
600 / 931 = 0.6445 * ( 12 / 15 ) = .5158
As for testing Moonfire coefficients... :-/
I can give it a try. It's annoying as hell b/c the initial damage range is so large, and the mana consumption of spamming it.

So IS is within rounding error of accurate, I'm happy with that.

I'm very much not happy with the WoW programming being seemingly incapable of rather simple math. That being said, I'll take a free 11 damage on starfire if they're going to give it to me.

Next time I respec (or whoever gets around to it), keep track of the spell pane point by point for Improved Moonfire, and Moonfury. I should probably also check Moonglow, I remember seeing discrepancies between base*.9*.91 and spell pane with a Moonglow/TS/GoN/Imp Rejuv.

No, it isn't. Some very fortunate Rogues/Warriors have enough good +hit gear to cap out, most do not, or aren't aware they should be trying to do so.

In the gear/buffs I had on our Gruul kill this week, iFF would have been 31 DPS for me. The other Rogue present also would have got 25+ DPS from it, the two tanks certainly weren't hit-capped, and we had a Fury Warrior chugging along too who certainly would have benefitted.

iFF also ups the aggro ceiling, noteworthy for a class with poor aggro reduction and no dumps. :P