[Balance] WrathCalcs - Page 5

♦ Tecton · 01/26/11, 7:52 PM

Thanks, figured out what the problem is (and why it's causing errors in the first place). I'll try to get it fixed tomorrow.

• Hamlet · 01/26/11, 8:08 PM

With 1813 haste in form, MF tick rate is 1.669s. Unextended MF is 11 ticks. A base 27s DoT would get 16 ticks. Extending a MF with no NG involved gets me 17 ticks. This seems to support what I was saying above.

When the MF procs NG and I extend immediately, I can get up to 20 ticks, but there seems to be some variation.

edit: I actually just got 18 with no haste changes involved.

aceofsween · 01/27/11, 1:20 AM

I'll be honest Hamlet, I have no idea what's going on. I'm really at a loss to explain the method behind the madness that is the extensions, but there is definitely a method to it. My best guess is that it takes the remaining duration, adds 3 seconds to it, then recomputes the tick rate based on your current value of haste. For example, my tick rate (without NG) is 1.66 and let's say there are 13.66 seconds remaining on the duration of the spell when Starfire lands to extend it. 13.66 seconds + 3 would be 16.66 and with a tick rate of 1.66 seconds, it comes to 10 ticks when there were 9 ticks remaining on the spell. I believe there is some amount of rounding involved though. So say we were to extend the spell when there are 14.774 seconds of duration left, which is normally 9 ticks left. 14.774 + 3 seconds would be a duration of 17.774 and with a tick rate of 1.66 you would get 10.7 ticks, rounded to the nearest number of ticks, which would make it 11. That is a gain of 2 ticks, with no change in Haste. It is simply a change in the timing of the extension.

It definitely does not always add a constant amount, as I have observed getting additional ticks that were not multiples of 3 (I remember one specific example being +5 ticks for example). This is the only way I can explain the effects right now. I do believe it comes out to an average though, otherwise I wouldn't have such a clean split between Moonfire and Sunfire. I simply don't know how to express that average at the moment.

Edit:
It just dawned on me that if what I suggested above is true, you might be able to express the average number of ticks based on the cycle length of our rotation since we will always end up clipping the DoT just before Eclipse ends. For example, if it takes you 21 seconds to go from Pre-Lunar to Pre-Solar, and you're tick rate is 1.66 seconds, you will end up getting on average about 12.65 ticks, correct? This assumes that the tick rate is constant throughout the entire rotation and that there is never any downtime of Moonfire or Sunfire, which there isn't if we are always clipping. There is an issue of course with Haste procs throwing that off, but I can't see how this would be any different from how things in WrathCalcs are now.

• Hamlet · 01/27/11, 3:10 AM

Tweaking GoSF a little, although it didn't really change all that much. If you select GoSF and Moonfire on each Eclipse, then it assumes all Moonfire damage is affected by Eclipse and NG, and 100% uptime with 2 casts per cycle.

• Hamlet · 01/28/11, 8:34 PM

Update for the day. Findings about Euphoria in the other thread included (doesn't really change much). I also took the chance to cut some unnecessary rotation stuff, like DoT/Starsurge options that are no longer relevant. Might help make more of the rotation page comprehensible to people besides me :/ . Tried to add in the 4T11 effect on DoT's as well. It's really optimistic right now though. Things look really nice if you assume MF/SF is up 100% of the time, always with Eclipse and NG, and benefits from 100% crit for a few seconds each cycle. I'm just not sure how meaningful it is in practice.

Erdluf · 01/31/11, 8:37 AM

Originally Posted by Hamlet

edit: I actually just got 18 with no haste changes involved.

If you saved a log, you may find that one of your SF landed very shortly before an MF tick, and server bugs gave you an extra tick

1) SF lands with 5 MF ticks remaining. Server checks to see if that should be extended to 7.
2) MF ticks
3) Server figures out that yes, MF ticks remaining should be extended to 7.

Magi discuss a similar behavior for ignite munching:

The time between the actual crit and the ignite applying is the server verifying that, yes, your character has the talent necessary before actually applying the debuff. Proc-based talents from all classes suffer this ~0.5s delay. This delay isn't a huge problem for other class-based procs, but strange things with ignite happen with certain sequences of events:

[00:13.872] Spell Crit on Target
[00:14.381] Ignite Tick
[00:14.461] Ignite refreshed on Target

In this situation, the Ignite Tick is a 'free' tick - since it falls between a valid crit refreshing the ignite ... and the actual refresh event

I haven't noticed a log that shows this for GoSF (which I'm not using). In 3.x I'd commonly see something similar for Lifebloom (too many total ticks from a slow-stack).

♦ Tecton · 02/01/11, 4:06 AM

Apologies for the lack of updates this week guys, drowning in work at the moment. I'll try to get the OpenOffice bugs sorted out for the last update shortly.

[EDIT]

Quick fix for the profiles as the rotation section changed:

• Hamlet · 02/02/11, 1:31 PM

I don't I think I had anything else that I was going to do at the moment, you can update things whenever. Assuming the patch is coming on Tuesday, that's probably when I'm going to put a new main version on the guide thread on this forum.

♦ Tecton · 02/02/11, 7:08 PM

Right, I'll do my best to get everything squared away before the patch, then.

How is the profile feature working for those of you who can use it?

Erdluf · 02/02/11, 11:37 PM

Profiles seem to work fine for me. Copying my profile from an old sheet to a new one is slightly non-obvious. I think I had to

0) Quick look to make sure the profile format hasn't changed (it is bound to happen sooner or later).
1) Make a new profile on the new sheet.
2) Copy/paste the profile from the old sheet, over the new profile.

An export/import for profiles could probably take care of all of that. I'm not VBA-savvy enough to want to try that.

• Hamlet · 02/03/11, 12:13 AM

Yeah, people ask about that a lot. If there's a simple way to add a user-friendly import/export that would be cool. Otherwise can at least post instructions for people.

♦ Tecton · 02/03/11, 3:22 AM

Sounds sensible, I'll figure something out.

Erdluf · 02/07/11, 12:10 AM

FoN against a Raider's Dummy in SW

Naked, MotW, Moonkin form, 133 FoN swings (2.5 casts, I reset Recount once while FoN was up)
Hit 34%
Glance 26%
Parry 17%
Miss 10%
Dodge 8%
Hit (Blocked) 5%
Crit 1%

Dressed with 14.02% spell hit (all from Spirit), 0.0% Melee Hit, 0.0% Expertise. 110 FoN swings
Hit 56%
Glance 26%
Dodge 3%
Parry 7%
Hit (Blocked) 6%
Crit 3%

I did another cast at 14.02% spell hit (50 more swings), and finally got 1 miss.

It seems likely that spell hit helps treants avoid misses, and parries. It might help reduce dodges (needs more testing). Probably doesn't help Glance or Block. That second set had 9% crit rating. Inconclusive on how much it helped the treants.

• Hamlet · 02/07/11, 12:47 AM

I've been wondering that myself. The weird thing is that even at spell hit cap, there's still the occasional miss. Dopefish never posted his actual data, I wonder if he saw the rare miss at 17% and assumed that spell hit was doing nothing.

At any rate, I'd been pretty convinced on spell hit anyway, but this still makes it unclear what numbers to put into the sheet for scaling. I'll could just change it to use spell hit for now (but this would make miss/dodge rate 0%).

aceofsween · 02/07/11, 7:02 AM

Were you sure to place Treants at the same spot every time and/or they moved to the same location when they started attacking? If memory serves, bosses shouldn't be able to block or parry from behind (but they can still dodge).