A couple pretty minor things. When I unhid the trinkets and looked em over, it shows DST as rank 10 and wsc as 1 even though the AP value of dst shows ~10 over wsc.
Second, we've been using Scroll of Agility V for Brutallus, I'm not sure how many others are, but it IS 20 agility.
Regardless, extremely nice revamp on the buffs list, I like it.
The gear that you currently have equipped are always ranked last, so they don't show up on the recommendation lists; knowing that what you're using is a 0 point upgrade relative to itself is not the most productive piece of information, so I adjusted things to give useful information instead. That change was actually made a couple of months ago, as I recall.
ah ok, I knew they didn't show up in the ap list next to your equipped gear, never saw the correlation to trinket ranks on the trinket page though, my bad!
For the new sheet, is there no longer a place to set up Expose Weakness (Surv Hunter) uptime? Is it just an assumed 90% uptime now? I used to tweak it a bit based on my hunter's crit rate.
It's assumed to be ~98% uptime. Unfortunately it's hard to make that parameter tunable in a useful way if one is going to allow Hunters with less than 3 ranks in Expose Weakness to be entered; thus, we removed the "uptime" parameter and computed a reasonable default. The exact formula used is 1-(1-.15*ranks)^7; this works out to be about 67% uptime with one rank, 90% uptime with 2 ranks, and 98% uptime with 3 ranks.
It's assumed to be ~98% uptime. Unfortunately it's hard to make that parameter tunable in a useful way if one is going to allow Hunters with less than 3 ranks in Expose Weakness to be entered; thus, we removed the "uptime" parameter and computed a reasonable default. The exact formula used is 1-(1-.15*ranks)^7; this works out to be about 67% uptime with one rank, 90% uptime with 2 ranks, and 98% uptime with 3 ranks.
The formula I was using earlier is similar, found a while ago among the hunters, but more like (1 - ((1 - (CritRate * 0.33 * ranks)) ^ (7 * AttacksPerSec))). Yours seems like a simplified version that is assuming about a 45% crit rate with a 1 attack per second rate. Not sure if that's true for all hunters. What I did previously went by some of my Teron parses and just worked out what my surv hunter's avg attack rate was with his crit, 3/3 EW, and got a 90.76% uptime with the formula so 98% might be too high for some.
Something that looks like a bug to me: the values being assigned to gems.
Looking at a Glinting Noble Topaz, the Talents_Equipment sheet is showing the ones I have socketed at a 15.80 value, and showing the Delicate Crimson Spinels that it says are optimal at 20.33. Now, taking the values off the DamageCalcs page for agility (1.894910901) and Hit (1.917302623), I get values of 15.25 for GNT, and 18.95 for DCS {and 19.06 for Glinting Pyrestone (instead of the 19.75 it's showing on the sheet), which it seems it *should* be suggesting instead of DCS...}.
Is there something I'm missing in how it calculates the value of the gems? I see the same value for all of these gems regardless of whether it thinks the socket bonus is worth using, or even what the socket bonus is, as I thought might have originally been the case.
Also, is there a way to turn off the suggesting of BT quality gems? I'm rather new to using this sheet, I had been using the DPS sheet until recently, when I started seeing this one being more highly praised. I know BT Quality gems will be available from the badge vendor soon, but I have much more important upgrades than gems for the next 200-300 badges I get.
Edit:
I forgot to mention I am using the newest version of the sheet 0_10 Beta.
Advanced Settings tab has the option to turn off BT or Heroic gems.
Also, I think you're taking the offensive damage value of agility and comparing it to the gem's weighted value. The weighted value will be somewhat higher since agility has some defensive value as well.
I would like to know what you are planning, gemwise, in end-game Sunwell gear.
By looking at spreadsheets I can either:
1. Go all out orange gems and pretty much land on the hit cap with food
OR
2. Go all out red gems and be 40ish behind the hitcap.
I know spreadsheets show a slight dps advantage going for the cap, but nevertheless.. I still feel like going all out 10agi gems where I can for extra fun factor and because I'm not convinced that it can't be just as good, if not better than 5agi5hit gems.
What's your thoughts concerning this?
Last edited by OnTheHissay : 04/09/08 at 11:45 PM.
The default talents have both 5/5 Sword Spec and 5/5 Fist Spec enabled, which will show Vanir's Right Fist of Brutality as a MH upgrade for most rogues. Be sure to note that it is *not* an upgrade if you disable the 5/5 Fist Specialization.
The default talents have both 5/5 Sword Spec and 5/5 Fist Spec enabled, which will show Vanir's Right Fist of Brutality as a MH upgrade for most rogues. Be sure to note that it is *not* an upgrade if you disable the 5/5 Fist Specialization.
The correct way to evaluate this however, is to disable the points in vile poisons, which for most rogues, WILL show it to be an upgrade, but of significantly lower value.
The point is that it is an upgrade IF one has fist specialization, which should be pretty obvious to most users. Still, it is possible that some would think it to be an upgrade without realizing that their character's talents are not what is entered into the spreadsheet by default.
I had version 9_4 and just upgraded to version 9_4(2) and im getting different results. Before it was saying the optimal gems for most of my slots were agi/hits and now it's saying the optimal is +hits. Also, before the upgrade it was telling my my broach was more dps than WSC and TT, but now the opposite. Ryker is my chars name on skullcrusher if you need to armory me.
I'm not actually sure what you mean by 9_4(2)... there should only be one version called 9_4, so if you have two versions it's most likely the exact same sheet, whereupon different answers presumably have to do with different settings within the sheet (Offense vs Weighted Total scoring, buffs, something like that). If you're using one of the beta versions... quite a bit has changed. There have been modeling changes since 9_4, and a lot of defaults (including the buff defaults) have changed. So there's any number of perfectly reasonable reasons why you might be getting different answers.
Cell Buff_Calcs:C67 should have (B71-1) instead of (1-B71) (improved strength of earth wronlgy calculated)
Row 5sXr3s.383 should use row 382 instead of row 381,(similar to the other cycle sheets) (Deadly DPS not accoutned for)
I've been hesitating to make this post, but after 3 weeks of waiting I guess I can no longer call "RNG" on what's been happening with my cycles.
Basically I just started raiding on my rogue, but I've been familiar with the class for years... I can't however understand this particular problem. Back when there was still weapon skill, my human rogue hit capped at 300 and after expertise came out I still had like 320 hit rating unbuffed (not capped but high enough) with karazhan/crafted type of gear, and back then I never had a problem keeping the simple 1s/5r cycle going. (2 piece T4)
So now I decide to raid somewhat seriously on my rogue and to my surprise 1s/5r is NOT sustainable (don't bother suggesting other cycles, I've been using another, I'm just trying to understand why is this happening) and I can't quite discover why. So my only guess would be the lack of hit rating, since I went from 320+ to 227 (but gained pretty much all other dps stats doing so) but the spreadsheet still says 1s/5r.
After noticing the sheet would still suggest the same cycle if I had 363 hit rating or 227 hit rating, I started switching gems and items to see when would it change, and the cycle only changed from 1s/5r to 1.1s/5r when I went from ~139 hit rating to ~131. Now I think there's probably something wrong here, a rogue is gaining (correct me if I'm wrong) a lot² more energy from Combat Potency with 363 hit rating, then with ~139. So how can a rogue perform the exact same cycle with such different ammounts of energy gain through Combat Potency? Could this possibly be some sort of bug?
If it says 1.1s/5r, then that is the sheet telling you that you can't sustain 1s/5r. You always need to go to the next highest whole number for it to be in any way sustainable.
I understand that, however what I said on my post was that it only goes from 1s/5r to 1.1s/5r (and therefore tells me I can't sustain 1s/5r) when I go from ~139 hit rating, to ~131. It still says 1s/5r all the way from 363 to 139, which sounds unreasonable to me, seeing I have 227 and can't sustain 1s/5r.
The first thing to keep in mind is that 2/5 T4 gives, actually, quite a bit of cushion on one's cycle with hit rating in the normal ranges. With ~300 hit rating, you should generally have a second or two of slack SnD per cycle; the sheet would recommend a shorter SnD if it could, but you can't do anything smaller than a 1 point SnD, so that's what gets recommended. Hence, as hit rating drops, the cycle stays the same since this slack gets absorbed before the cycle needs to change.
The second thing is to keep in mind the relative scale of the abilities we're talking. Consider: Baseline rogue energy regen is about 10 per second; with Combat Potency, it's still under 13 per second. Thus, the energy regen from Combat Potency is only about 25-30% of your regen in the first place. Next, 0 hit rating does not correspond to 0 Combat Potency regen; in fact, your OH still hits 75% of the time, so you still gain ~2 energy per second on average; all 363 points of hit rating from 0 to the hit cap increase your energy regen by less than 1 energy per second. Thus, dropping 130 or so, as in your case, is maybe .3 energy per second out of your total regen of 12.5+ - that is, about a 2.5% reduction. Now, is this a loss of damage? Sure. But it's not going to change your cycle *that* fast.
Basically, I suspect the problem you're having is that the loss of hit as eroded enough of the slack in your cycle that the randomness of procs makes it hard to sustain; this is something that the sheet does not model, but does come up.
I'm not actually sure what you mean by 9_4(2)... there should only be one version called 9_4, so if you have two versions it's most likely the exact same sheet, whereupon different answers presumably have to do with different settings within the sheet (Offense vs Weighted Total scoring, buffs, something like that). If you're using one of the beta versions... quite a bit has changed. There have been modeling changes since 9_4, and a lot of defaults (including the buff defaults) have changed. So there's any number of perfectly reasonable reasons why you might be getting different answers.
The original one I didnt have the (2) in it. The download site also shows it as (2). My original version didnt have this so i figured it had been updated. If it is the same sheet, I still have all the correct gear and buffs put into the sheet. How do I adjust the offense vs weighted total scoring stuff?
The original one I didnt have the (2) in it. The download site also shows it as (2). My original version didnt have this so i figured it had been updated. If it is the same sheet, I still have all the correct gear and buffs put into the sheet. How do I adjust the offense vs weighted total scoring stuff?
The dropdown in cell Talents_Equipment!B6 selects offense vs weighted total. Could you directly me to the download link from which you're getting 9_4(2)? As the link in the first post just points to 9_4.
Originally Posted by Reynus
Great update, but still sad to not see Might of the Scourge added - just keep it in mind next time if you could
If you'll note, I specifically said that I hadn't added any gear in this revision, so not to ask. This is still on the list to be done. It will be added in due time.
04/09/08, 9:07 AM
in 
Similar Threads
