I think Build-a-Talent might be venturing dangerously close to WoW forum territory. Also, I'm not sure why there's all this sudden talk about Eclipse, which isn't going see any big change until Cataclysm.
The problem with Eclipse is more subtle than people are always making it out to be. Lots of classes have RNG all over the place in their mechanics. I can think of two significant things that make Eclipse different:
1) It only happens a few times a fight. Most heavily RNG-based mechanics (say Missile Barrage) are "attempted" every few seconds, so the total variance over the course of a fight is small. I know of no way to make this point without invoking the
Central limit theorem - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia , but we can validly expect to have a higher variance in expected DPS output due to less frequent trials of an important RNG roll. This effect will actually be lessened in 3.3 when we're back to trying to proc it twice as often.
2) Interruptions work heavily against us. Interruptions during Eclipse downtime delay the next Eclipse, leaving mean Eclipse uptime during actual casting constant. But interruptions during Eclipse uptime result fully in lost uptime. So it's a lose/lose situation--interruptions during Eclipse count against us, but interruptions outside Eclipse fail to counteract them, because they don't reduce the total time we have to spend proccing Eclipse.*
I think (2) might be more significant. Eclipse in its current form admits little to no ability to use any of skill or judgment to ameliorate the effect of interruptions. Ordinarily a good player with some short-term buff mechanics at his disposal and a good knowledge of a boss fight that lets him predict interruptions to some degree should be able to plan his ability use to manage the situation in some fashion. But we have none, so not only are we hit unfairly by casting interruptions in the average case, but there's no way to improve the situation with attentive play.
*To make this slightly more mathematical: say we ordinarily have average Eclipse uptime E, but are only able to cast with frequency x. The normal cycle had Eclipse uptime E and eclipse downtime (1-E). But with cast time deflated to x, the Eclipse uptime is still E, with only Ex of that spent casting, and the Eclipse downtime is (1-E)/x, with only (1-E) of that spent casting. The preceding sentence contains the important point--Eclipse uptime
gross (including interruptions) is the same in both cases, but Eclipse downtime
net (excluding interruptions) is the same--heavily favoring the downtime in this interaction.
Our new average Eclipse uptime out of time spent casting will be new ratio of Eclipse time to total time (both excluding interruptions):
+Ex})
,
which is less than the E is was without interruptions. For example, where E = .75 and x = .8 (75% nominal Eclipse uptime and 80% casting frequency), Eclipse uptime will be reduced to 70.6%.