Moonkin WotLK Talent Preview / Discussion - Page 60

Alerian · 10/31/08, 3:54 PM

In 3.0, my only threat issues are with Warlock tanks on KJ for the first bit, and then they pull ahead by the start of P2. I stopped playing beta when I hit 80, so I couldn't say how raid threat in Naxx and later will be with any degree of accuracy.

Mana has been tough on KJ if we have a few dps die early in the fight. Otherwise not as bad. We just nuke M'uru with one Void in P1 tanked to the side, so I couldn't answer about mana for that fight (I was Resto pre-3.0).

erragal · 10/31/08, 4:10 PM

Originally Posted by Erdluf

I'm looking at r819 source. Both the personal E&M, and MSS boosts are included in player_multiplier.

.

My apologies for missing that. I looked through a few times and just didn't spot it, thanks for pointing where to look. Suppose it was defined there because it affects all spells as opposed to a subset.

And range is important. Reduced threat is important if there's ever a fight with aggro sensitivity. These aren't always tangible/mathematical benefits, but they're worth the two points.

• Adoriele · 10/31/08, 4:14 PM

Originally Posted by erragal

My apologies for missing that. I looked through a few times and just didn't spot it, thanks for pointing where to look. Suppose it was defined there because it affects all spells as opposed to a subset.

And range is important. Reduced threat is important if there's ever a fight with aggro sensitivity. These aren't always tangible/mathematical benefits, but they're worth the two points.

Plus, Blizzard has said that, while threat is a non-issue now and in Naxx, it will not be so past that. They very much want to make threat an integral part of encounter design, or they wouldn't have exposed the threat tables. Nature's Reach will definitely be a useful talent when that happens.

dedmonwakeen · 10/31/08, 4:40 PM

Originally Posted by Adoriele

Issues I'm noticing:
-You're making a lot of rounding errors or just plain lazy calcs. The benefit from E&M isn't talents*.13/3. It's {0,.04,.09,.13}. Granted, any Moonkin worth his beans will be fully talented or not talented at all, but it's still not the best way to model it.
- There is no OoC cooldown, proc is PPM-based, likely 3.5/60*untalented cast time.
- Eclipse is 15s buff, 30s cooldown
- Insect Swarm's coefficient is ticktime/15 * .95, to account for affecting miss chance. Also, you're multiplying Genesis and the IS glyph. They stack additiviely.
- Your coefficients for Moonfire are close, but not exact. It's enough to cause deviations with the amount of spellpower an average 80 will have. You've got iMF and Moonfury stacking additively here, but you're multiplying in the effects of the glyph which, again, is additive.
- As Err said, Wrath's base coefficient is 2.0/3.5, not 1.5/3.5, which is likely causing Wrath's low damage.

Err, Master Shapeshifter and E&M's personal benefit are included in player_buff()

Thanks for the extra pair of eyes.... I was tearing my hair out.

The coefficient was the real kicker. It has been changed to read "( base_execute_time / 3.5 )" like it is supposed to.....

Regarding rounding errors..... I actually assumed Blizzard was lazy, too.

1 * ( 13.0 / 3 ) = 4.3
2 * ( 13.0 / 3 ) = 8.6
3 * ( 13.0 / 3 ) = 13.0

I assumed that the real benefit was fractional and they just rounded the numbers on the tool tip to make it look nice.

Regarding OOC: I was working on a very old blue post about the probably implementation. Do we know the normalized PPM value?

Regarding Ecclipse: I thought I they had planned to change it to 10sec proc with 40sec cooldown..... Did they back off on that?

Regarding additive-vs-multiplicative: Thanks! I went through all the classes to switch most passive multipliers to "additive", but I missed those.

Regarding Moonfire: I'll switch to 15% DD and 13% DoT

EDIT: With the exception of OoC, code updates have been committed. I was planning on a new release this weekend anyway: Multi-threading, scale-factor generation, etc... Thanks to all for being generous with your time to review my code!

• Adoriele · 10/31/08, 4:53 PM

Originally Posted by dedmonwakeen

Thanks for the extra pair of eyes.... I was tearing my hair out.

The coefficient was the real kicker. It has been changed to read "( base_execute_time / 3.5 )" like it is supposed to.....

Regarding rounding errors..... I actually assumed Blizzard was lazy, too.

1 * ( 13.0 / 3 ) = 4.3
2 * ( 13.0 / 3 ) = 8.6
3 * ( 13.0 / 3 ) = 13.0

I assumed that the real benefit was fractional and they just rounded the numbers on the tool tip to make it look nice.

Regarding OOC: I was working on a very old blue post about the probably implementation. Do we know the normalized PPM value?

Regarding Ecclipse: I thought I they had planned to change it to 10sec proc with 40sec cooldown..... Did they back off on that?

Regarding additive-vs-multiplicative: Thanks! I went through all the classes to switch most passive multipliers to "additive", but I missed those.

Regarding Moonfire: I'll switch to 15% DD and 13% DoT

Blizzard doesn't round talent numbers. If the talent says 4%, that's what it is. It creates discrepancies on how useful each point is, but it's easier for someone to understand. OoC should be 3.5 PPM, it's been stated as such by Blue regarding the Feral procs, and are probably using the same number for us. Eclipse used to be 10/40, and my sheet still models it that way (well, it's been changed locally), but on live and beta it's up to 15/30.

As for Moonfire, .13/.15 is close, but if you're after the real values it's $\frac{1}{numticksbase}*\frac{(\frac{basedur}{15})^2}{\frac{basedur}{15}+\frac{1.5}{3. 5}}$ for the DoT, and $\frac{(\frac{1.5}{3.5})^2}{\frac{basedur}{15}+\frac{1.5}{3.5}}$ for the DD.

Korben · 10/31/08, 4:54 PM

Here's the blue post on OOC:

MMO-Champion BlueTracker - OOC Procing

dedmonwakeen · 10/31/08, 4:56 PM

Originally Posted by Adoriele

Blizzard doesn't round talent numbers. If the talent says 4%, that's what it is. It creates discrepancies on how useful each point is, but it's easier for someone to understand. OoC should be 3.5 PPM, it's been stated as such by Blue regarding the Feral procs, and are probably using the same number for us. Eclipse used to be 10/40, and my sheet still models it that way (well, it's been changed locally), but on live and beta it's up to 15/30.

As for Moonfire, .13/.15 is close, but if you're after the real values

Thanks again for the details. I'll make sure I implement your recommendations before my next release.

EDIT: If Eclipse is up to 15/30, does that also mean the buffs are down to 10% dmg for Wrath and 15% crit for Starfire?

• Adoriele · 10/31/08, 4:58 PM

Originally Posted by Korben

Here's the blue post on OOC:

MMO-Champion BlueTracker - OOC Procing

Wow. Yeah, GC's a little off there. If OoC had a base proc rate of 1/(3.5 sec), Starfire would have a 100% chance to proc it. My guess is that he's confusing 1/(3.5 sec) with 3.5/(1 min).

[edit]

EDIT: If Eclipse is up to 15/30, does that also mean the buffs are down to 10% dmg for Wrath and 15% crit for Starfire?

I'll double-check tonight, but I think Beta has 20/30%. Live for sure is still 10/15%

dedmonwakeen · 10/31/08, 5:09 PM

Okay... for a 3.5 PPM, then I'll use the following logic assuming that (like PPM-enchants) haste will not increase proc rate.

static void trigger_omen_of_clarity( action_t* a )
{
  druid_t* p = a -> player -> cast_druid();

  if( p -> talents.omen_of_clarity == 0 ) return;

  double execute_time = a -> time_to_execute;

  if( execute_time == 0 ) execute_time = a -> gcd();

  double PPM = 3.5;
  double time_to_proc = 60.0 / PPM;
  double proc_chance = execute_time / time_to_proc;

  if( rand_t::roll( proc_chance ) )
  {
    p -> buffs_omen_of_clarity = 1;
    p -> procs_omen_of_clarity -> occur();
  }
}

skeldi · 10/31/08, 5:32 PM

Originally Posted by dedmonwakeen

Regarding rounding errors..... I actually assumed Blizzard was lazy, too.

1 * ( 13.0 / 3 ) = 4.3
2 * ( 13.0 / 3 ) = 8.6
3 * ( 13.0 / 3 ) = 13.0

Blizzard actually doesn't round anything. All things are extremely accurate, but rounded on the UI for general sanity's purpose.

Celdhyrean · 10/31/08, 5:49 PM

I find my agro to be non-negligible in most fights where i can just nuke the boss, and that's with 30% from NR and Vigilance (ie 37% threat reduction for me and +10% to tank i think). I'm not reaching them, but i'm at 80-90% and wouldn't spec out of it without being very carefull, as it would make my agro ceiling very dependant on Vigilance.
(regarding gear, we were at Hyjal cleaned and BT 5/9 before patch, but most of the tanks got 1-2 post-patch items (ie chest and post RoS items or from 2/6 Sunwell) where i didn't)

Sqz · 10/31/08, 8:05 PM

Hmm, I haven't seen anything about this so far but I've been noticing considerably more partial resists, at least in our latest BT clears and a friend of mine who plays a destro lock noticed it as well and after him applying CoE again, it seemed to help a great deal.

anything about this?

tried some duels, with and without motw and even there I noticed a quite large difference in partial resists

Relin · 11/01/08, 9:14 AM

Is a druid going to get more out of 3 points in Intensity or 3 points in Dreamstate? I would assume dreamstate but I don't know.

sadistic · 11/01/08, 9:24 AM

Originally Posted by Relin

Is a druid going to get more out of 3 points in Intensity or 3 points in Dreamstate? I would assume dreamstate but I don't know.

Guesstimation Warning:

Now, I'd say Dreamstate would be prevalent due to low spirit on the moongear (should be very easy to calculate though)
At 80 its very possible that intensity is better due to high spirit, though its hard to say without knowing raidbuffed stats for a 80 kin in naxx gear.

lissanna · 11/01/08, 12:20 PM

From Murmur's raid theoretical DPS calculations on the live server WoW forums, the estimated raid buffed PvE stats at some point should be about:

Intellect: 1217
Spirit: 652
Spell Haste: 24.562%
Spell Crit: 39.34% (Starfire) 36.34% (Wrath)
Spell Hit: 9.34
Spell Power: 2244

Gear used:
Helm - Cowl of Vanity
Neck - Outsted Bead Necklace
Shoulder - Mantle of the Fatigued Sage
Cloak - Shroud of Luminosity
Chest - Heigan's Putrid Vest
Wrists - Bindings of the Expansive Mind
Hands - Gloves of Token Respect
Belt - Belt of False Dignity
Pants - Leggings of Atrophy
Feet - Boots of Impetuous Deeds
Ring 1 - Signet of Manifested Pain
Ring 2 - Lost Jewel
Weapon - Wraith Spike
Off Hand - Surplus Limb

However, it's going to come down to whether or not individuals pick up a lot of spirit on their gear, since there should be a pretty wide variety of gear available for raiders at different tiers of instancing. In general, PvE gear tends to have more spirit than PvP gear, so in PvE we may almost always gain more benefit from intensity, but it's going to vary widely between people in different gear sets.

Here's more updated stats from Murmur's theorycrafting.
Edit: here's more up to date numbers (higher hit & spirit)
Intellect: 1104
Spirit: 463
Spell Haste: 23.822%
Spell Crit: 42% (Wrath) 45% (Starfire)
Spell Hit: 10.29%
Spell Power: 2503

Sqz · 11/01/08, 4:16 PM

to Lissanna: no way I'd be walking around without capped hit

• Adoriele · 11/01/08, 4:19 PM

Originally Posted by Sqz

to Lissanna: no way I'd be walking around without capped hit

Pretty sure that, since she's a Night Elf, she'd be capped in that set. At most you'd need to change two gems.

lissanna · 11/01/08, 8:24 PM

Originally Posted by Sqz

to Lissanna: no way I'd be walking around without capped hit

Those are the numbers Murmurs had on the theorycrafting set. It's not what I'm walking around in. ;o)

it's the closest thing I've got to real raid numbers for WotLK gear. That, and someone asked about dreamstate versus intensity. So, the int and spirit numbers should be about right.

Lord BEEF · 11/01/08, 9:43 PM

Intensity is better than dreamstate. The only time where this might not be true is in full pvp gear with zero spirit.

Sqz · 11/02/08, 1:07 PM

true

interesting to see those stats though. and it's still tricky to get that spec right, but if you can dualspec it might make it easier, so I'd have a more dps orientated spec and one with some more regen capabitilies.. though my original plan was to have a pvp orientated spec and a pve one. but I guess time will tell

on another note; anyone have any info about those partial resists and the worth of CoE on top of Earth and Moon? I'd find it strange if I where the only one to notice that

edit: spelling

dedmonwakeen · 11/02/08, 8:06 PM

I'm trying to understand the distinction of the "guardian" subset of pets.

As far as I can tell Guardians do not seem to suffer from lag nor do they benefit from auras.

Are the Treants considered "guardians"? If so, do they follow this same distinction? (ie: lag=o, auras=0)

Erdluf · 11/02/08, 9:05 PM

I'm not sure why they would have lag. I've seen them hit at the same instant as summoned in 2.4.

Here there is a 0.3s delay for the first hit:

20:48'59.266 Erdluf Force of Nature summons Treant #24.
20:48'59.266 Erdluf Force of Nature summons Treant #23.
20:48'59.266 Erdluf Force of Nature summons Treant #22.
20:48'59.562 Treant #23 melee swing hits Coilfang Collaborator #11 for 418 Physical.
20:48'59.562 Treant #24 melee swing hits Coilfang Collaborator #11 for 431 Physical.
20:48'59.562 Treant #22 melee swing hits Coilfang Collaborator #11 for 475 Physical.

Combat log shows them gaining moonkin aura and drums of battle:

20:36'23.172 Erdluf Force of Nature summons Treant #21.
20:36'23.172 Erdluf Force of Nature summons Treant #20.
20:36'23.172 Erdluf Force of Nature summons Treant #19.
20:36'23.672 Treant #20 melee swing hits Mennu the Betrayer for 462 Physical.
20:36'23.750 Treant #19 melee swing hits Mennu the Betrayer for 408 Physical.
20:36'23.750 Treant #21 melee swing hits Mennu the Betrayer for 481 Physical.
20:36'24.844 Treant #21 gains Moonkin Aura.
20:36'24.844 Treant #20 gains Moonkin Aura.
20:36'24.844 Treant #19 gains Moonkin Aura.
20:36'25.312 Treant #19 melee swing hits Mennu the Betrayer for 479 Physical.
20:36'25.562 Treant #20 melee swing hits Mennu the Betrayer for 412 Physical.
20:36'25.562 Treant #21 melee swing hits Mennu the Betrayer for 463 Physical.
20:36'26.203 Treant #21 gains Drums of Battle.
20:36'26.203 Treant #20 gains Drums of Battle.
20:36'26.203 Treant #19 gains Drums of Battle.
20:36'26.844 Treant #19 melee swing hits Mennu the Betrayer for 472 Physical.
20:36'27.141 Treant #20 melee swing hits Mennu the Betrayer for 392 Physical.
20:36'27.406 Treant #21 melee swing hits Mennu the Betrayer for 397 Physical.
20:36'28.609 Treant #19 melee swing hits Mennu the Betrayer for 373 Physical.

Edit: In the same run, Netherwing Ally was summoned six times, and never gained any buffs. There may not have been a Drums chance, but there certainly was Moonkin Aura.

Edit 2: This was in 3.02, earlier today.

Druidark · 11/03/08, 9:17 AM

So last raids I'm giving wrath a chance, with imp IS up and using wrath idol my wrath is doing 52-55% damage compared to my starfires. But I am really suffering from halve or fully red filled quartz bar. I don't have this problem with starfire. Every few casts I hit wrath to early, 'spell not ready', so I have to react and cast it again fast. But I'm pretty sure that every other wrath cast I am hitting it too late. I don't think I'll ever like it in its current form

.

edit: grammar

Nilaus · 11/03/08, 9:52 AM

To Druidark: As I understand it, the reason for those "Spell not ready" messages is because it is not possible to queue spells under the GCD. With SF you can precast by 0.5 sec, but if you do the same for wrath then it is still under the GCD and therefore cannot be precast. I usuallt just spam my wrath hotkey whenever I cast it (eclipse only for me)

bunnie · 11/03/08, 12:53 PM

Originally Posted by Sqz

on another note; anyone have any info about those partial resists and the worth of CoE on top of Earth and Moon? I'd find it strange if I where the only one to notice that

I've found the same thing so far for myself, although I haven't asked other casters in the guild about it yet nor have I asked for CoE to be up as well. I'm curious as well about the reasons for the increased partial resists.