Moonkin DPS Spreadsheet - Page 78

Bellawynn · 04/11/08, 2:23 PM

My impression of the combination of Haste + NG is that haste still works off of the base 3 second spell cast rather than the modified 2.5 second cast, which would make that second half incorrect.

Benita · 04/11/08, 3:04 PM

Your impression is wrong. Check your spellbook next time.

• Adoriele · 04/11/08, 3:11 PM

Originally Posted by Benita

Your impression is wrong. Check your spellbook next time.

What Benita said, plus those equations actually have nothing to do with spell haste, as I explicitly say I'm ignoring it. They're only concerned with which is the proper way to model Nature's grace procs.

Soultrigger · 04/11/08, 6:14 PM

Adoriele,

Firstly, let me thank you for all the work in the math department, seems to help in many ways, mainly for spreadsheets and simulators (rawr). We appreciate it.

But as far as NG goes, knowing I am not good at math, what if we calculated it just for the crit part of the equation??The question is, if your equation factors crit, and if there is a way to decrease -0.5 cast time in that little part, that should solve your issue?? (like if your formula takes like 30% crit as a value from several casts in a rotation, so lets say from 100 casts you got 30 crits, so you could simply multiply 30 x -0.5 = -15 secs from cast time in the equation, and make it reflect a dps increase overall?? maybe I am sounding stupid, but then also, those 15 secs should become more casts in the same interval or could we just factor that as added dps in 100 casts??)

I hope I helped and don´t get a moderator pm again. O.o"

• Adoriele · 04/11/08, 6:30 PM

Originally Posted by Soultrigger

Adoriele,

Firstly, let me thank you for all the work in the math department, seems to help in many ways, mainly for spreadsheets and simulators (rawr). We appreciate it.

But as far as NG goes, knowing I am not good at math, what if we calculated it just for the crit part of the equation??The question is, if your equation factors crit, and if there is a way to decrease -0.5 cast time in that little part, that should solve your issue?? (like if your formula takes like 30% crit as a value from several casts in a rotation, so lets say from 100 casts you got 30 crits, so you could simply multiply 30 x -0.5 = -15 secs from cast time in the equation, and make it reflect a dps increase overall?? maybe I am sounding stupid, but then also, those 15 secs should become more casts in the same interval or could we just factor that as added dps in 100 casts??)

I hope I helped and don´t get a moderator pm again. O.o"

Yes, that's what I'm attempting to do. The question is whether to apply the benefit to the cast time, or to apply it to 1/(cast time), if that makes sense. Mathematically, they both make sense, though one way is easier to solve.

nakedduck · 04/11/08, 10:14 PM

Originally Posted by Saraya

Or 6.09375 seconds uptime on average. This gives a +damage equivalence of 67.71 damage. The trinket is hard to calculate and isn't as good as it seems, but I think you may be downplaying its effectiveness a little.

However, feel free to shoot down my math, I'm incredibly rusty.

One thing about this trinket is that it scales well with gear.

The way I calculated it's worth is the same way ambiorix did. What's the chance, that in the last 8 seconds a SF procs?
With a little less than 200 haste (guaranteed to cast 3 SF within 8 seconds) we get:

Chain SF with 197 spell haste, 0 crit:
150* 1- (.75)^3 = 86.71875 spell damage

Chain SF with 197 spell haste, 0 crit, heroism:
150* 1- (.75)^4 = 102.5390625 spell damage

Chain SF with 0 haste, 0 crit:
150* 1- (.75)^2 = 65.625 spell damage

I'll post later what happens when we throw MF into the rotation, but for people with a decent amount of haste, this trinket can become fairly solid

thedopefishlives · 04/12/08, 9:38 AM

One final note about Rawr and trinkets: The list I posted earlier must've been some kind of fluke. I re-tested on a fresh machine with a fresh item cache, and everything appears "as expected" - the Skull is far and away the #1 trinket, Icon appears above Battlemaster's, etc. The only trinket that's not in the list is the Darkmoon card, and I can work on that next.

tehdarkknight · 04/13/08, 12:05 AM

Originally Posted by Benita

Take. Alot.
10s out of 15s is not equivalent to 100 damage rating. I posted this like 3-4 times already over the last half year, but here we go again: If you don't have the buff up and your SF procs it, that SF doesn't receive the bonus damage of it aka worst possible timing of the procs. Unless they stealth changed this mechanic, it means it's alot less powerful than you guys want it to be.

I think you missed the part where I was talking about using the trinket with a lot of spell haste. With 240 spell haste, you would get three starfires during the proc, therefore none of the proc would be wasted.

Benita · 04/13/08, 5:40 AM

And i think you missed the part where i said "If you don't have the buff up and your SF procs it, that SF doesn't receive the bonus damage", which on a side note is almost 50% of my post.

The first SF which procs the trinket is NOT receiving the extra damage. Therefor in most cases it is wasted on the first SF of your 4 SF rotation. If you can fit 4 SF casts in 8 sec then yeah it will be up most of the time on the one it procs off, but still this wouldnt mean 100% uptime and effect of the proc or even 95% but rather 85% due to random variation of a 25% proc and the fact that having more spelldamage during a cast time gives you nothing, but only on the moment it actually hits. (numbers are wild estimation)

Melador · 04/13/08, 4:21 PM

Originally Posted by Benita

Your impression is wrong. Check your spellbook next time.

Maybe I'm missing something, but what in the spellbook answers the question? The issue is whether NG is applied after haste has been calculated on the 3.0 second cast time, or before, in which case haste will be applied to the 2.5 second cast time. Given that none of the other coefficients change when Starfire becomes a 2.5 second cast with a NG proc, I would expect that haste would always apply to the 3.0 second cast time.

nakedduck · 04/13/08, 7:21 PM

Originally Posted by Melador

Maybe I'm missing something, but what in the spellbook answers the question? The issue is whether NG is applied after haste has been calculated on the 3.0 second cast time, or before, in which case haste will be applied to the 2.5 second cast time. Given that none of the other coefficients change when Starfire becomes a 2.5 second cast with a NG proc, I would expect that haste would always apply to the 3.0 second cast time.

haste is applied after the NG proc.

3.5 ->3 (after talents) -> 2.5 (nature's grace) -> then haste

tehdarkknight · 04/14/08, 12:16 AM

You mentioned that the more spell haste you have, the more spell haste Nature's Grace is worth; I found a simple correlation between Nature's Grace and Spell Haste. Assuming your starfires are talented:

With 0% Spell Haste, NG is worth 20% haste.
With 10% Spell Haste, NG is worth 22% haste. (0.2 * 1.10)
With 25% Spell Haste, NG is worth 25% haste. (0.2 * 1.25)

I hope this helps in simplifying any of your previous equations.

Benita · 04/14/08, 3:00 AM

Originally Posted by Melador

Maybe I'm missing something, but what in the spellbook answers the question?

The tooltip of the spell shows the correct cast time, at least in the spellbook, but im guessing also on your action bars. Just equip some haste and you have like 2.7 seconds. Then cast HTs till NG procs and you won't end up with 2.2 seconds.

Saraya · 04/14/08, 3:21 AM

Benita: I'm actually not sure why you keep mentioning the point that the SF bonus doesn't give you bonus damage on the starfire that casts it. This is no different from any other temporary +damage effect in the game. If I activate Icon and cast a starfire, that's still 3 seconds before I see any effect from the +damage. Yes what you're saying is true, but it's really not relevant to how good/bad the trinket is.

nakedduck: The problem with your estimation is that it doesn't account for what happens with back to back procs. Yes, if you get enough haste for 3, or 4 SFs in a 8 second period, that will make the trinket better. However, a back to back proc can lose 2/3, 3/4's of its effectiveness. Let's say you have 2 second starfires, this means every 4 starfires will on average have 1 proc, which can cover all 4 starfires.

SF    SF    SF    SF    SF    SF    SF    SF
150X  150   150   150   150X  150   150   150  8/8 Starfires get the benefit

SF    SF    SF    SF    SF    SF    SF    SF
X     150X  150   150   150   150              5/8 Starfires get the benefit

And then you have any cases in between. Best case scenario is indeed a 100% coverage, but as with any chance based thing, you will have streaks of procs and nonprocs. The problem is the streaks of procs will lose some of the proc benefit. I've forgotten everything I learned in my high school statistics class otherwise I would have already calculated this out properly.

But just as an extreme worst-average case example, over 64 starfires, you'd expect 16 procs. But if those procs all happened on the first 16 casts, instead of the ideal 63 starfire coverage(1st starfire does not gain benefit), you'd only have a 19 starfire coverage. Yes the trinket scales with haste, but it also is hit by "diminishing returns" due to haste, so the overall effect, while positive, may not be as good as you might think.

thedopefishlives: Any ETA on when we can see the updated version?

nakedduck · 04/14/08, 11:02 AM

Originally Posted by Saraya

Benita
nakedduck: The problem with your estimation is that it doesn't account for what happens with back to back procs. Yes, if you get enough haste for 3, or 4 SFs in a 8 second period, that will make the trinket better. However, a back to back proc can lose 2/3, 3/4's of its effectiveness. Let's say you have 2 second starfires, this means every 4 starfires will on average have 1 proc, which can cover all 4 starfires.

hmmm.

With the forumla I posted, it's based on the chance that it will NOT proc.

For example, if we starfire spammed 100 starfires, what's the chance the 42nd starfire would have a +150 spell damage benifit?
Given: let's just say we can perfectly fit 3 SF's in 8 seconds.

That means we need to check if the 39th 40th or 41st proced. It doesn't matter if they all proced or just 1 did.
there's a 75% chance the 39th did not proc, there's a 75% chance the 40th did not proc, there's a 75% chance the 41th did not proc. The chance of them ALL NOT procing is
75%*75%*75% = 42.1875%. This means there's a 57.8125% chance that one, two or all 3 proced. This means that all the casted starfires (minues the first 3) have a 57.8125% chance that it's affected by a proc.

If 57.8125% of them proced, the average spell bonus is going to be 86.71875 spell damage.

I'm not sure where the flaw is in my logic.