Unholy Dps | 3.3.5, King of Anything - Page 47

malscent · 10/05/09, 11:15 AM

Originally Posted by zagor

I think there will definitely be more WP ticks. Yes the disease uptime is 100%, but with short rotation there's clipping. We both agree there's aprox 1 tick lost every 10sec. GoD rotations will have more disease ticks, and so will WP have more chances to proc.
Another thing is WP will have bigger ticks.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe WP has a 1 second ICD, and the way GOD refreshes diseases causes them to tick at exactly the same time.

If this is correct, then GOD actually decreases WP ticks.

Athansor · 10/05/09, 11:18 AM

Wondering if I can get some feedback on Dual wield in 3.3.

I am currently retrofitting myself from a dw frost setup, as we needed the raid buff from unholy, so as of right now I'm not impressed with my own damage except for AE Situations. (Then again I have 322 ArP and other nearly wasted stats, and my gear is generally weak which i'm working on now).

Dual wield is better for me as there's little to no competition on 1handers and a lot for 2handers. As I understand it this shouldn't be a problem for Unholy.

My questions are.

When Dual-Wielding, is death and decay a priority on single targets because of its excellent scaling?

If so, what will be better for us, Death and Decay Glyph or the new Icy Touch Glyph.

With less runic power. (From A. No Icy Touch Glyph, and B. Death and Decay being in the rotation) how much is DC Damage going to drop as a % of our overall, is it going to be enough for us to want to swap out Dark Death glyph for Improved Icy Touch / Death and Decay combo? Clearly the winner on AE but how much of a hit is this on single target?

I don't see a ton of dual-wield discussion in this thread but the dual wield thread is inundated with dw frost conversations.

Consider · 10/05/09, 12:33 PM

Originally Posted by Bensch78

It would be very nice, if you could post the stats you used, when doing your sims. Otherwise it is quite inaccurate for me, to do the sims on my own.

If anything, I would rather it be done at different gear levels. More proof for (or against it).

Anyways, I did tests for Epidemic (pre and post patch, and for GoD) using three sets:
1) BiS. Imageshack - alliancebis from earier in the thread (although remember to add base str and such).
2) My own gear, except with a 245 weapon, as I haven't updated my character's file with the new weapon, and as without it, I figure that's a decent enough approximation of an ilvl 245 set.
3) An approximated ilvl 232 set.

Correct me if I'm wrong, but I believe WP has a 1 second ICD, and the way GOD refreshes diseases causes them to tick at exactly the same time.

If this is correct, then GOD actually decreases WP ticks.

Correct. On both.

I'm not saying that GoD is the best unholy style of play, I'm trying to explore all posiblities, and since there was no talk of GoD I put those simulation results to try and get a discussion

.
=p. It's either the best, or it's not a possibility. There's really no middle ground, unless one doesn't have an issue with using a suboptimal spec.

zagor · 10/05/09, 12:53 PM

To me it looks everybody is dismissing GoD without giving any good reasoning behind it. We all agree that simming GoD doesn't work good, and I have shown with my rudimentary calculations that on any fight longer than 4-5 rune cooldowns using GoD to roll diseases is a small dps loss (~50dps) if one free gcd every 10sec isn't used for DC (through soaking, etc.), and is definately a dps gain otherwise. GoD build with epidemic is also a boost in aoe damage. After all, trading a bit of single target dps for more aoe dps has always been the unholy trademark.

Now for those two things I haven't seen any arguments here to throw it on it's back. So please fill the mistakes I made, or if there aren't any major ones then GoD has to be taken as a serious option and explored more.

KnThrak · 10/05/09, 12:54 PM

It's either the best, or it's not a possibility. There's really no middle ground, unless one doesn't have an issue with using a suboptimal spec.

!Given context!
I feel this is ignored far too often. Either damage parses or simulations are done on target dummies, but then obviously no fight actually works like a target dummy, or they're done averaged over X actual parses from say WorldOfLogs, but not further split up into types of fights and types of DPS-deterrent abilities.

But yes, given context there is 1 best spec. It may change depending on context, ofc.

malscent · 10/05/09, 1:37 PM

Originally Posted by zagor

To me it looks everybody is dismissing GoD without giving any good reasoning behind it. We all agree that simming GoD doesn't work good, and I have shown with my rudimentary calculations that on any fight longer than 4-5 rune cooldowns using GoD to roll diseases is a small dps loss (~50dps) if one free gcd every 10sec isn't used for DC (through soaking, etc.), and is definately a dps gain otherwise. GoD build with epidemic is also a boost in aoe damage. After all, trading a bit of single target dps for more aoe dps has always been the unholy trademark.

Now for those two things I haven't seen any arguments here to throw it on it's back. So please fill the mistakes I made, or if there aren't any major ones then GoD has to be taken as a serious option and explored more.

1) GOD is ~ 40-50% loss of DPS on WP
2) GODd and GOTG are much larger DPS losses switching to GOD then any of Blood/Frost's sacrificial glyphs
3) The range of damage between an IT + PS is only slightly less then that of SS, whereas there is a large difference between OB/DS and IT + PS.

There are Three decent reasons why GOD isn't used or Considered. Since your math shows that GOD is a DPS loss, why would we consider it? Soaking to make a spec/glyph combination work just isn't viable in my opinion.

Edit: (Correct % of DPS loss, I stated the actual percentage of total damage lost, not damage on WP)

Edit#2:

Just to clarify.. Considering the following parse of mine:

World of Logs - Real Time Raid Analysis

Knowing that this specific fight i'm looking at is very short (Wipe P1) We see that WP did 3.2% of my total DPS of 6462.
6462 * 0.032 = 206.78 DPS.

Halving that to 103.39 DPS.

Since this was a short fight, and the fact that i don't have 4pc t9. This means that WP will scale quite well over the course of a longer fight.

Burden of Proof is on the questioner in my opinion. Napkin math shows that GOD is a DPS loss. The ball is in your court to use it, and provide us with some actual data that proves us wrong.

Schpankme · 10/05/09, 1:50 PM

Originally Posted by zagor

I talk from my personal experience.
I play as blood with GoD
I have experienced a noticable boost to overal dps by using it.
In my current gear (2T9)
I have 5 procs to watch for: Fallen crusader, Banner of victory, Greatness, sigil, 2T9.

I'm confused; you came to an Unholy discussion and pitched your Blood Build; are you claiming your build in 2T9 does more damage then those listed in the OP (first page) ?

RukiaFT · 10/05/09, 3:37 PM

How do you arrive at the concept of GoD being a dps loss for WP?

GoD eliminates disease clipping so you have more ticks to proc WP.

If you're doing it right, you're rolling high AP DoTs so your WP will hit harder.

Athansor · 10/05/09, 3:40 PM

As stated above, GoD puts both diseases on the same timer.
Wandering plague has a 1 second internal cooldown.
As such if you use GoD only 1 of your diseases is able to proc wandering plague instead of both.

malscent · 10/05/09, 3:41 PM

Above poster beat me to the explanation, please delete.

RukiaFT · 10/05/09, 4:04 PM

That's not actually the case. It's the same reason why you gain more DoT ticks. GoD doesn't clip disease ticks at all. It maintains the tick timing regardless of when and if the durations are refreshed. Now, on any additional targets you pestilence the diseases to, that will be the case, since both of those diseases will then start ticking at the same time and stay that way. But the original target never loses it's staggered ticks.

malscent · 10/05/09, 4:08 PM

Originally Posted by RukiaFT

That's not actually the case. It's the same reason why you gain more DoT ticks. GoD doesn't clip disease ticks at all. It maintains the tick timing regardless of when and if the durations are refreshed. Now, on any additional targets you pestilence the diseases to, that will be the case, since both of those diseases will then start ticking at the same time and stay that way. But the original target never loses it's staggered ticks.

Really,

When did this change take effect, It has been working that way since GOD was released.

Edit:

Wait what? You're wrong.

You owe me 12g that it took to test that.

(I know.. it's hard to see trimmed down like that.. but it shows FF ticking at 16:17:08 and BP ticking at 16:17:10 (Or 2 Hundredths of a second later)

wingwraith · 10/05/09, 4:26 PM

Originally Posted by malscent

it shows FF ticking at 16:17:08 and BP ticking at 16:17:10 (Or 2 Hundredths of a second later)

Isn't the time formatted as HH:MM:SS?
Which would make BP ticking 2 seconds after FF...

RukiaFT · 10/05/09, 4:31 PM

Originally Posted by malscent

Really,

When did this change take effect, It has been working that way since GOD was released.

Edit:

Wait what? You're wrong.

You owe me 12g that it took to test that.

(I know.. it's hard to see trimmed down like that.. but it shows FF ticking at 16:17:08 and BP ticking at 16:17:10 (Or 2 Hundredths of a second later)

Really?

malscent · 10/05/09, 4:36 PM

That's what I get for testing for two seconds... I've confirmed what you're saying, but I was 100% certain that when GOD came out it didn't maintain the difference in tick timers.

Is this change recent?