Really interested to see how SotF stacks up with doubled energy gain now, should be easy to math no?

It's going to be interesting to see the comparison now, although I'll be a few days delayed on the spreadsheet since I'm traveling. I'm pretty sure SotF is going to come ahead in the spreadsheet comparison, so we're going to have another HotW/NV situation where you have to evaluate how important the controlled use of the cooldown is.

And on that note, half strength and half cooldown for NV really weakens it for DPS since it reduces the intangible value of timer synching (especially since so much of that is based on the opening timer stack). NV will be much closer to its on-paper value now.

Here's a PTR version. It's Tecton's 12/20 file with SotF/FoN/NV changed.

FoN--I threw in the numbers from the datamined tooltip: Force of Nature - Spell - World of Warcraft . The missing piece though is the number of casts each one gets. Tecton tried to test this sometime around launch and we couldn't find any coherent behavior with haste scaling. Probably worth a revisit now. For now the slightly low estimate of 6 casts is still in there.

SotF--the weird thing is, the DPS basically didn't change. Then I realized, the prior model assuming that you could, often, get through post-Solar with 1 Wrath and 1 SS anyway. This was optimistic at the time, had to be fudged a bit in the model, and probably led to slightly high SotF DPS. Now you have 2 casts no matter what so the model is cleaner and probably better reflects reality. But on paper it basically didn't change.

Overall I would expect Incarnation to be most popular still.

NV--This actually comes down a bit even on paper since the overlap with Incarnation is reduced. Also (and this isn't reflected in the sheet), the overlap with Eclipse will come down as well. When NV overlaps with your Incarn/CA stack you get basically full Eclipse/CA uptime. But when you have to use it exactly at the midpoint (so that it's back up for the next Incarn/CA), that might not even overlap as well as you'd like with Eclipse. So NV is materially weaker than before, even before taking into account the loss of utility of controlled damage stacking.
NV does gain utility since reducing the damage bonus by half does not affect the smart healing component much, so that's nearly doubled when the uptime is doubled. Hard to say how much people will care about this (since HotW has strong, controlled, utility healing).

In general I think there will be something of a shift back to HotW for DPS purposes, but they should be pretty close.

PS: I'm also going to put Tecton's 12/20 file up in the main thread OP. The one there is pretty out of date, and we'll only be working on PTR versions from now until 5.2.

If I remember correctly he did report a noticeable increase in casts with a few haste buffs, so I don't think the question is whether or not it scales with haste, but just how exactly it works. Is the model right now using Haste at all to compute DPS, or is it just a manually entered 6 casts? If 6 is what it was in pre raid gear I would imagine ~7-9 casts as you get close to BiS.

Another thing to consider is with the 1min CD you could pretty easily hold it for a few seconds to line it up with trinkets/Jade spirit procs. Dropping them with a LoC proc and EoT proc would be 4k int and 6k haste (perhaps an extra cast?).

When I fire up WrathCalcs (Open Office, Windows 7 64-bit), I get 'Err:514' in all of the fields where something is supposed to get counted.

Burning Necklace of the Golden Lotus cannot be chosen from the drop down menu for necks and it's one of the best options pre-heroics.

What version are you using, as I've got Burning Necklace of the Golden Lotus in the dropdown when I look at it? The OpenOffice errors are probably due to the new upgrade stuff I guess, I'll check it out and hopefully sort it for the next version.

The version I used was 121220.

I'm sorry, the Burning Necklace of the Golden Lotus is there indeed. I must have missed it.

I still don't fully understand what is going on with haste stat weights. Importing my gear gives the following weights:

Crit: 2.24
Mastery: 1.87
Haste: 1.54

Obviously Haste is way too low, and just to be sure I changed one of my reforges from Spirit --> Haste to Spirit --> Mastery and as expected the DPS dropped.

I realize the comment in the Haste box states the value does not take Dot ticks into consideration, but that shouldn't really have any effect on my gear anyway as I'm no where near a bp. Even without gaining an extra tick on your dots, one point of Haste should still equate to more DPS than one point of Mastery.

Edit: Although apparently it doesn't. I manually added 1point of Haste and then 1point of Mastery and the latter was higher DPS. Just plain confused now.

It's basically telling me 1 Mastery > 1 Haste, but 178 Haste > 178 Mastery (the reforge switch). I updated my stat weights before and after each switch and they did not change.

This is something I've been meaning to look at for a bit. Somehow the value of haste is not completely smooth (for some reason other than DoT breakpoints). It should be fixed generally--the model works best when all stats give their benefit totally continuously except for things like DoT breakpoints that reflect a real in-game effect. I haven't looked closely yet, although Erdluf PMed me some ideas today.

Ok yeah, Erdluf's fix was right. I edited to stop rounding tick rate to the nearest millisecond before importing to rotation tab. Before, you were getting little mini-breakpoints every time a DoT started ticking one millisecond faster. Just to confirm, I graphed DPS against haste for each 1 haste over a range of about 150 or so, attached below along with updated sheet.

Funny thing, the old way actually reflected the game better, as I'm pretty sure it does round tick rates to the nearest millisecond. But this this effect is too small for anyone to gear around, so it's more informative to smooth it out when valuing haste. The breakpoints due to temp haste buffs (Bloodlust, etc.) will still work the same as they did before.

Looks like some weirdness between saving on PC & Mac, fixed that up and replaced some conditional formatting that seemed to be gone. Give this a spin and let me know if it sorts it: