1. Quick question regarding 3.2: I see that we haven't made any major changes regarding spell rotation for 3.2 (yet?), despite the changes to Eclipse. Is that likely to change our style of play at all? I'm trying to wrap my head around a dual lunar/solar rotation (wrath>eclipse>starfire>lunar eclipse cooldown>more starfire>solar eclipse>wrath>solar eclipse cooldown>rinse and repeat?). My understanding is that eclipse cooldowns are now independent of each other, but you can't have both eclipses proc simultaneously.
2. I, too, am suffering from lack of DPS versus perfect models (despite having the recommended spec, being hit capped, etc.). I've experimented with keeping IS/MF up continually regardless of proc, continually minus the actual eclipse duration, or just as described in the "you have the starfire glyph" section of the OP. Some of my gear is dual-purpose with resto. Could just be that I'm fat-fingering things - I'll have to run WWS to dig around in more detail - but is it possible to have too LITTLE crit to stack spellpower?
I'm in all epics, but there are times when it seems like I'm wrathing forever before eclipse procs - long enough for both IS and MF to need refreshing despite being reapplied just before eclipse cooldown expired, for example. Totally unbuffed (including no moonkin aura), I armory at just 12.64% crit, which is trending out to about 22% 10-man raid buffed. The World of Warcraft Armory
3. Will the eclipse changes in 3.2 change the optimal times to reapply DoTs?
1. Quick question regarding 3.2: I see that we haven't made any major changes regarding spell rotation for 3.2 (yet?), despite the changes to Eclipse. Is that likely to change our style of play at all? I'm trying to wrap my head around a dual lunar/solar rotation (wrath>eclipse>starfire>lunar eclipse cooldown>more starfire>solar eclipse>wrath>solar eclipse cooldown>rinse and repeat?). My understanding is that eclipse cooldowns are now independent of each other, but you can't have both eclipses proc independently.
2. I, too, am suffering from lack of DPS versus perfect models (despite having the recommended spec, being hit capped, etc.). I've experimented with keeping IS/MF up continually regardless of proc, continually minus the actual eclipse duration, or just as described in the "you have the starfire glyph" section of the OP. Some of my gear is dual-purpose with resto. Could just be that I'm fat-fingering things - I'll have to run WWS to dig around in more detail - but is it possible to have too LITTLE crit to stack spellpower?
I'm in all epics, but there are times when it seems like I'm wrathing forever before eclipse procs - long enough for both IS and MF to need refreshing despite being reapplied just before eclipse cooldown expired, for example. Totally unbuffed (including no moonkin aura), I armory at just 12.64% crit, which is trending out to about 22% 10-man raid buffed. The World of Warcraft Armory
3. Will the eclipse changes in 3.2 change the optimal times to reapply DoTs?
Thanks for any insights.
1) Yeah, haven't updated that section yet. We'll definitely be using a Lunar/Solar alternation in 3.2, as you describe.
2) I've tried to theorycraft differences between slightly different DoT refreshing schemes and found very little effect on overall DPS (even between the ones I described in the OP). It would be hard to observe the difference experimentally.
"too little crit to stack spellpower"--not really. In both 3.1 and 3.2, both spellpower and pre-softcap haste are significantly stronger than crit, even if your crit is on the low side.
3) See prior response, first. The two options seem to be 1) refresh both DoT's after each Eclipse ends, and 2) maintain 100% uptime regardless of eclipse. WC currently models (1), I need to incorporate (2) as well (it's a bit tricky to model as it changes the mean length of your Eclipse cycle). My guess (based on how things looked in 3.1 and extrapolating the changes) is that (2) will come out higher on paper by a very small amount.
Hi there!
My apologies for this very noob question but I'm tring to figure how the next patch will changes my little moonkin (I've Lunar equip so i'm afraid I will have to change drammatically it for I think a Solar equip, if i've understood correctly, cause my crit rating sucks) and I'ven't get one thing:
Do you mean which I've to softcap Haste and after I've to continue with Spellpower>Crit>Haste, like a Solar equip, or I've to forget ever the softcapping of Haste, like Hit>Spellpower>Crit>Haste?
I ask this question cause the build-for-noob recommended seems to me - and surely it's a my mistake - missing some strong mana-talent to compensate a Solar rotation that's more mana-expensive of a Lunar's one (ok with a good crit rating, Moonkin Form mana regen is more powerfull but is it enough for a Solar rotation?).
Thanks for answers and, another time, sorry for the dumb question ^_^"
It was stated in previous post, Haste to softcap is the 2nd priority after being hit capped. Then just stack spell power as much as possible, favor crit gear over haste gear after softcap.
I still don't see how haste to softcap is outdoing spell power on 3.2 models.
I still don't see how haste to softcap is outdoing spell power on 3.2 models.
Check the WC version I've currently attached to the OP. "Outdoing" might be a bit misleading I guess, since they're nearly equal but spellpower is slightly cheaper.
There's nothing counterintuitive about it though. The only relevant thing changing in 3.2 is that we'll be casting Wrath more often. But pre-cap, haste affects Wrath just as much as it affects everything else, so you wouldn't expect the pre-cap value of haste to change at all. The post-cap value of haste does decrease, since NG'd Wraths no longer get any benefit and you're casting them more than you do in 3.1.
Check the WC version I've currently attached to the OP. "Outdoing" might be a bit misleading I guess, since they're nearly equal but spellpower is slightly cheaper.
There's nothing counterintuitive about it though. The only relevant thing changing in 3.2 is that we'll be casting Wrath more often. But pre-cap, haste affects Wrath just as much as it affects everything else, so you wouldn't expect the pre-cap value of haste to change at all. The post-cap value of haste does decrease, since NG'd Wraths no longer get any benefit and you're casting them more than you do in 3.1.
I assume we will have about 45% buffed crit against a target. This gives ~37% of wraths (without dots being refreshed factored in, that will increase the %, as well as wrath chains starting with no crit buff) that ARE NOT under the NG buff. For them haste has full value.
Would be quite easy to assume in the 3.2 rotation less then 25% of the rotation (including dots) will be affected by clipped GCD (assuming that starfire eclipses will make up 55-60% of the total eclipses do to RNG of not proccing a solar before end of lunar CD, starting out with lunar, and movement/phase transistions allowing both eclipse CDs to be up at the same time sometimes, with maybe a bit of help on RNG)
I assume we will have about 45% buffed crit against a target. This gives ~37% of wraths (without dots being refreshed factored in, that will increase the %, as well as wrath chains starting with no crit buff) that ARE NOT under the NG buff. For them haste has full value.
Would be quite easy to assume in the 3.2 rotation less then 25% of the rotation (including dots) will be affected by clipped GCD ...
For chain casting Wrath, you are under NG if any of the previous three Wraths crit. At 45% crit there is only a (100%-(100%-45%)^3) = 16.6% chance that none of the previous three casts were a crit. That also assumes that 2t9 does not proc Nature's Grace.
Note that in that neighborhood, 1% crit provides about as much speedup (to Wrath spam) as 1% haste does (assuming you are just at the soft cap).
1% haste is a 1% speedup to 16.6% of your casts (roughly a 0.17% overall speedup).
1% crit changes that 16.6% to 15.7%. That means it s a 20% speedup to 0.9% of your casts (roughly a 0.18% overall speedup).
I think that "25%" assumption requires encounters that don't support much wrath-spam at all. That is certainly plausible. You may have encounters where movement or Hurricane limit your wrath-spam. However, most of the existing theorycraft looks at PW fights, and in a 3.2 PW fight, that 25% estimate is too low.
For chain casting Wrath, you are under NG if any of the previous three Wraths crit. At 45% crit there is only a (100%-(100%-45%)^3) = 16.6% chance that none of the previous three casts were a crit. That also assumes that 2t9 does not proc Nature's Grace.
Note that in that neighborhood, 1% crit provides about as much speedup (to Wrath spam) as 1% haste does (assuming you are just at the soft cap).
1% haste is a 1% speedup to 16.6% of your casts (roughly a 0.17% overall speedup).
1% crit changes that 16.6% to 15.7%. That means it s a 20% speedup to 0.9% of your casts (roughly a 0.18% overall speedup).
I think that "25%" assumption requires encounters that don't support much wrath-spam at all. That is certainly plausible. You may have encounters where movement or Hurricane limit your wrath-spam. However, most of the existing theorycraft looks at PW fights, and in a 3.2 PW fight, that 25% estimate is too low.
Your forgetting one thing: what happens if the 4th, 5th, and 6th wraths dont crit ect? The Sum of that total string is ~37%. If you did cast 1000 wraths in a row, roughly 37~ would not be under NG with 45% crit rate. Dots/movement would modify such values, as well as any starfires do to reaction times that dont count after the one that procs eclipse. Though yes, the crit value would effect the total sum quite significantly. I am just wondering how each will scale below and above any theoretical crit value.
I wont argue that yes, crit is better for solar, but haste>crit for the lunar part.
How I got roughly 25% is basically assuming refreshing IS early during the solar eclipse will happen occaisonally and will cut into NG uptime, lengthening that 37% basemark. if ~55% of the nuke casting is starfire, vs 45% wrath, that would be a value of 50-63% NG*45% of nuke casting. Movement, a starfire after the one that procced also i figure will happen somewhat, further pushing that value up. 50% was just a "guess", that is easy to work with, it could be 40 or 45% with a 45% raid buffed crit rate (3% crit debuff, 5% crit debuff, 5% boomkin, 7% talents, 25% base from crit rating/int).
note: I am just asking a few questions so that I might better understand this. These "figures" are merely shallow insights that I am pondering over. I dont understand all of the figures stated in previous pages, this was just a contemplation with "a touch" of math. I spent less then 5 mins on those numbers.
Your forgetting one thing: what happens if the 4th, 5th, and 6th wraths dont crit ect?
What the fuck? You're asking what happens if SPELLS YOU HAVEN'T CAST YET don't crit? What does that have to do with anything? Here's the only issue at stake:
You are casting a spell.
You either have NG or you don't.
If you have NG, then one of the 3 Wraths you cast before the spell you are casting now must have crit.
If you don't have NG, then none of the 3 Wraths you cast before the spell you are casting can have crit.
The chance of this is (1-Crit)^3. If your Crit is 45%, this is roughly 16.6%.
Therefore, for any given spell you are casting, if you were chaining Wraths before it, you have a 16.6% chance to NOT have NG up.
If you cast Wrath 1000 times, NG will be up for approximately all but 166 of them.
You are casting a spell.
You either have NG or you don't.
If you have NG, then one of the 3 Wraths you cast before the spell you are casting now must have crit.
If you don't have NG, then none of the 3 Wraths you cast before the spell you are casting can have crit.
The chance of this is (1-Crit)^3. If your Crit is 45%, this is roughly 16.6%.
Therefore, for any given spell you are casting, if you were chaining Wraths before it, you have a 16.6% chance to NOT have NG up.
If you cast Wrath 1000 times, NG will be up for approximately all but 166 of them.
Unfortunately my statistics skills are a bit rusty, and I can't really put together the formula as applied to our case of Wrath sequences. So I just post the two links for the information of others, who can.
Unfortunately my statistics skills are a bit rusty, and I can't really put together the formula as applied to our case of Wrath sequences. So I just post the two links for the information of others, who can.
I'm not sure which side you're trying to imply is correct, but Adoriele's math is fine.
The article you're linking to is a good argument that the *expected time until the first* non-ng cast doesn't necessarily obey the same rules, but that's because the *distribution curve* isn't smooth, not because the probabilities themselves are different.
I'm not sure which side you're trying to imply is correct, but Adoriele's math is fine (though the logic is a little wrong because of the travel time - it's not the three wraths before this cast, but the 2nd, 3rd, and 4th before this cast that matter, as the most recent wrath hasn't hit the target yet).
The article you're linking to is a good argument that the *expected time until the first* non-ng cast doesn't necessarily obey the same rules, but that's because the *distribution curve* isn't smooth, not because the probabilities themselves are different.
Actually I'm pretty sure NG procs as soon as it is determined that the spell crit, which is done right when the cast ends.
Actually I'm pretty sure NG procs as soon as it is determined that the spell crit, which is done right when the cast ends.
Correct. In fact, one of the things to examine more in the 3.2 TC is the potential gain from switching to SF immediately when you see that a Wrath has procced NG as it leaves your hands (thereby telling you that you have a 60% chance of starting an Eclipse when it lands).
Unfortunately my statistics skills are a bit rusty, and I can't really put together the formula as applied to our case of Wrath sequences. So I just post the two links for the information of others, who can.
Both very interesting articles. Probably more suited to the question of "How many spells can I cast in a given Eclipse", but still very much worth a listen for anyone who's interested in the subject. On a similar note, there's a spreadsheet I left in Efejel's old thread that did the sort of calculations in the second article, with the goal of determining how many casts you could fit into the duration of one Moonfire back in TBC when IS and Wrath weren't worth casting. Thing are orders of magnitude more complex now, hence why WC no longer even tries to determine that sort of info and goes for simple averages instead of probabilistic ones, but a good deal of work went into it for anyone who'd like to dissect its innards. I'll see if I can get a link to it here.
Both very interesting articles. Probably more suited to the question of "How many spells can I cast in a given Eclipse", but still very much worth a listen for anyone who's interested in the subject. On a similar note, there's a spreadsheet I left in Efejel's old thread that did the sort of calculations in the second article, with the goal of determining how many casts you could fit into the duration of one Moonfire back in TBC when IS and Wrath weren't worth casting. Thing are orders of magnitude more complex now, hence why WC no longer even tries to determine that sort of info and goes for simple averages instead of probabilistic ones, but a good deal of work went into it for anyone who'd like to dissect its innards. I'll see if I can get a link to it here.
To be clear, I thought about this while modeling and have been working under the assumption that the high degree of randomness in our cast times (most classes have lag, but we also have NG) smooths out the probability distribution sufficiently, even in a 15 second window, to the point where the difference between continuous and discrete models is well underneath the real-world precision of the model.
To be clear, I thought about this while modeling and have been working under the assumption that the high degree of randomness in our cast times (most classes have lag, but we also have NG) smooths out the probability distribution sufficiently, even in a 15 second window, to the point where the difference between continuous and discrete models is well underneath the real-world precision of the model.
Agreed. Unfortunately, I think the only way to get accurate results is with SimCraft, which isn't portable to Rawr for gear prediction. The way I see the niches of the three main models is that WC is great for mucking with the internals to figure out the best way to model things, Rawr then takes that model and makes it useful for generating gear lists/choices, and SimCraft is a great way to compare things between classes in a closer-to-real-world way, and is also good for double-checking Rawr's outputs.
This reminds me of something else I've been pondering while working on WC/TTT stuff. We've always been modeling NG uptime as a steady-state average for each type of spell, but of course in reality there are significant edge effects since we change spells so often.
Now, there's a good reason to imagine that the edge terms largely cancel. Wrath has high NG uptime for example. So when you switch to Wrath, the model slightly overestimates your haste for the first two Wraths, until you're into the steady state, but it will correspondingly underestimate your haste for the next two spells you cast after switching away from Wrath. And in the current WC I posted, I extended this rationale to instants--I give Moonfire the same NG uptime as Wrath, and IS I simply treat as having no NG effect since it can't crit. Even though this fudges the time spent casting an individual spell, it should provide a workable estimate of the eventual NG contribution from the spell.
Curious if anyone has ideas for improving on this.
Given the fact that the Eclipse CDs will be unlinked, it may very well now be possible to model an optimal Moonkin cast sequence as a markhov chain ala Rawr.Mage. I'm not saying that this reduction in complexity makes it easy..... but it may now be in the realm of possibility.
This reminds me of something else I've been pondering while working on WC/TTT stuff. We've always been modeling NG uptime as a steady-state average for each type of spell, but of course in reality there are significant edge effects since we change spells so often.
Now, there's a good reason to imagine that the edge terms largely cancel. Wrath has high NG uptime for example. So when you switch to Wrath, the model slightly overestimates your haste for the first two Wraths, until you're into the steady state, but it will correspondingly underestimate your haste for the next two spells you cast after switching away from Wrath. And in the current WC I posted, I extended this rationale to instants--I give Moonfire the same NG uptime as Wrath, and IS I simply treat as having no NG effect since it can't crit. Even though this fudges the time spent casting an individual spell, it should provide a workable estimate of the eventual NG contribution from the spell.
Curious if anyone has ideas for improving on this.
You spurred me to work on some math that got wildly out of hand, so I put it on my Blog to keep the thread at more of a beginner's state. Link's in my sig for anyone who's interested in the math we've been talking about recently, and I attached the copy of my old spreadsheet that I mentioned earlier on. If you really want to break your brain, imagine that, in order to get truly accurate results, you'd need to generate the tree for each cast that's generated in the sheet (though you'd need a much smaller tree since, at that point, it was a lot easier to figure out which casts came before the cast in question).
Correct. In fact, one of the things to examine more in the 3.2 TC is the potential gain from switching to SF immediately when you see that a Wrath has procced NG as it leaves your hands (thereby telling you that you have a 60% chance of starting an Eclipse when it lands).
Is this practical, or am I misunderstanding you? If you're trying to chain-cast, you'll have already selected your spell before you know whether or not NG proc'd. Therefore, if you have to decide which spell to cast, you introduce a reaction time delay (maybe 0.2 s). That's a pretty significant loss in dps, considering that this strategy affects all wrath casts before eclipse, not just one.
What about spell-weaving W's and SF's? It might have a slight edge at the start of a fight when both eclipse CD's are off.
Is this practical, or am I misunderstanding you? If you're trying to chain-cast, you'll have already selected your spell before you know whether or not NG proc'd. Therefore, if you have to decide which spell to cast, you introduce a reaction time delay (maybe 0.2 s). That's a pretty significant loss in dps, considering that this strategy affects all wrath casts before eclipse, not just one.
What about spell-weaving W's and SF's? It might have a slight edge at the start of a fight when both eclipse CD's are off.
Well, evidence seems to suggest that queuing only works if the following two conditions are both false: a.) you cannot queue during the first second of the GCD, and b.) you cannot queue until some short period of time before your current cast finishes, empirically seen as .3s, but it could have something to do with your latency. With those in mind, if you have over 400 haste and NG has procced, you should be able to see NG refresh before it's possible to select the next spell in your sequence. Granted, the chance of actually doing this is slim-to-none, but it does exist.
Realistically, the spell you cast after Eclipse procs is going to be a lost cause. Due to Wrath's travel time and short cast, though, it is possible that you could be already queuing the second spell after the one that procs Eclipse by the time Eclipse appears on your buff bar. NG would have procced a non-trivial period of time before that, and it's that eventuality that watching for NG procs/refreshes hopes to prevent.
Is this practical, or am I misunderstanding you? If you're trying to chain-cast, you'll have already selected your spell before you know whether or not NG proc'd. Therefore, if you have to decide which spell to cast, you introduce a reaction time delay (maybe 0.2 s). That's a pretty significant loss in dps, considering that this strategy affects all wrath casts before eclipse, not just one.
What about spell-weaving W's and SF's? It might have a slight edge at the start of a fight when both eclipse CD's are off.
No, I really meant, one Wrath after the one that procs NG. That's still 1-2 Wraths earlier than if you wait until after the travel time to react.
1) General heuristic question. In the 3.2 rotation, would you rather cast an instant during Eclipse or during pre-Eclipse?
Eclipse DPS: 6500/7000. Pre-Eclipse DPS: 4600/5000. Cycle length: 44s. Cycle damage: 276000. Cycle damage w/o DoTs: 233000. GCD: 1.2.
Casting an instant during Lunar costs 1.2*7000/276000=3.04% DPS from that cycle.
Solar: 1.2*6500/276000=2.82%
Casting during pre-Eclipse: 1.2/45.2*233/276=2.24%. (it extends the cycle, but this only effects non-DoT DPS)
So, to first order, casting outside Eclipse is better in 3.2. Significantly enough that it's not going to reverse with small changes in gear, but small enough that it's unlikely to be worth sacrificing DoT uptime in favor of one or the other.
Conclusion: Without the post-Eclipse phase, the opportunity cost of an instant cast is similar both inside and outside Eclipse. This preponderates in favor of constant DoT refreshing. I'm going to try to work this into the spreadsheet, as noted in the OP.
2) Lunar clairvoyance--is it worth casting Starfire when you see Wrath proc NG in PL phase?
3 possibilities:
A) That Wrath does in fact proc Eclipse. You've cast one more Wrath since since then and then started a Starfire. 60%.
B) That Wrath does not proc Eclipse, but the next one also crits and procs. This is actually the ideal situation. 40%*proc chance = 10%.
C) Neither Wrath procs. 30%.
C: you waste the duration of one NG'd SF cast during PL. Damage/cast of one non-Eclipsed Starfire: 10700/2.02s. Cycle DPS w/o DoTs: 6000. Damage lost. 2*6000 - 10700 = 1300. Really very little loss from spending 2s casting uneclipsed Starfire.
A: you gain some time casting Eclipsed Starfire instead of uneclipsed Wrath. Note that this can increase your effective L phase duration above 15s, if you start casting a Starfire before Eclipse procs. The tricky part is determining how much time you gain--it depends on how quickly you ordinarily manage to react to the proc. And that in turn depends on how far into a Wrath cast the proc occurs, which varies by travel time.
Let's assume you typically lose 2 Wraths to travel + delay. This is conservative. The DPS gain of the early swap is (Wrath cast)*(SFEclipseDPS-WDPS)=1.2*(7100-4600) = 3000.
B: The very lucky case. Twice the DPS gain of the prior case.
This seems pretty clearly in favor of casting the SF and I'll try to work it into the model in more detail.
07/27/09, 1:15 PM
Similar Threads
