Elitist Jerks
Register
Blogs
Urban Rivals
Forums
New Posts


Go Back   Elitist Jerks > The Dung Heap > The Banhammer
Elitist Jerks Login

gamerDNA Login

Welcome to Elitist Jerks
We're testing some new features on the site regarding OpenID registration and coordination with gamerDNA. If you experience any issues with registering an account, please take the time to fill out a report and send it to this e-mail address. We would appreciate any assistance you could provide in making sure everything is functioning as intended. Thanks!

If this is your first visit, please be sure to check out the FAQ and the forum rules. Users must register to post and new registrations are subject to a one day "mute" period to get acquainted with the community.

 
 
LinkBack Thread Tools
Old 05/13/09, 7:30 AM   #1
 Chicken
Co-starring: The Egg
 
Chicken's Avatar
 
Blood Elf Paladin
 
Azjol-Nerub (EU)
Warning for pfg: 2. All opinions should be stated as succinctly as possible.

Post: [Elemental] Lava Burst Testing
User: pfg
Infraction: 2. All opinions should be stated as succinctly as possible.
Points: 0

Administrative Note:

Message to User:
If you're quoting a large post, edit out the superfluous parts of the post you're quoting. People can always click the arrow on top of the quote to see the full original post.
Original Post:
Originally Posted by Mmootimus View Post
OK, I have done my bit, and did some tests.

Summary: Having tested basic LvB function, and the 4-pc T7 bonus, both are working entirely normally. Based on basic testing Dual-specc also showed no problems.

All tests were done with:
- CSD meta-gem
- 5/5 Concussion, 3/3 Call of Flame, 3/3 Lava flows, 5/5 Shamanism
- Both trinkets removed
- Using the L80 Grandmaster's training dummy
- No Glyph of Lava in either specc
- No FT buff or any totems dropped

I will show the predicted hits based on the current understanding of LvB and my actual numbers for each test. I can see no discrepancy whatsoever. I did do slightly less than the 50 casts suggested originally, but you can check out the WWS for details.


Test 1

2064 spellpower

Min. normal hit:
Theoretical - 3090, Actual - 3095
Max. normal hit
Theoretical - 3452, Actual - 3446

Min. crit
Theoretical - 6864, Actual - 6871
Max crit
Theoretical - 7668, Actual - 7662

Wow Web Stats


Test 2

- 2050 spellpower
- Added 4-pc T7 bonus. Also switched to my secondary specc. This is an Ele PVP specc, so still has all the talents shown above, and lacks nothing that should change LvB damage. (I realise its slightly bad science to change two variables at once, and if I had found any weird results I would have tested further in isolation).

Min. normal hit:
Theoretical - 3079, Actual - 3082
Max. normal hit
Theoretical - 3440, Actual - 3427

Min. crit
Theoretical - 7001, Actual - 7063
Max crit
Theoretical - 7823, Actual - 7820

Wow Web Stats


I can't see a thing wrong myself, although I didn't particularly expect to either. My result with the highest variance from its theoretical limit is the "min crit" on test 2, but even then its actually too high rather than too low, and in no way inconsistent with the understood mechanics of the spell. At first glance the average damage done also looks fine.

I am beginning to get a funny feeling we won't get to the bottom of this, but time will tell. Hopefully when a few more items on Bink's original list are tested then maybe more scrutiny can be given to the raid environment.
So your saying the 4pc T7 bonus (of 10% crit damage) is worth 7823-7668=155 theoretical or 7820-7662=158 actual damage per max hit. And that's working as intended, ok. 10% of even the difference between a non-crit and a crit should be ~300 and that's according to your data.
 
User is offline.
 

Go Back   Elitist Jerks > The Dung Heap > The Banhammer

Thread Tools

Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
Warning for Pugageddon: 2. All opinions should be stated as succinctly as possible. Vykromond The Banhammer 0 04/14/09 9:03 PM
Warning for 4LV: 2. All opinions should be stated as succinctly as possible. Vykromond The Banhammer 0 04/14/09 7:46 PM
Warning for Psy: 2. All opinions should be stated as succinctly as possible. Tehax The Banhammer 0 02/20/09 2:54 PM
Warning for Mendit: 2. All opinions should be stated as succinctly as possible. Chicken The Banhammer 0 02/13/09 7:15 AM
Warning for pqueiro: 2. All opinions should be stated as succinctly as possible. Aldriana The Banhammer 0 01/29/09 7:04 PM