This is most likely from a latency issue. I know that the original FBN had a latency adjuster but I am not sure if FBN lite still has it in its stripped form.

Strange since I'm running with 50 latency, maybe another addon is causing problems.

Yeah, about 2 weeks ago I tried how would it feel if the addon suggested the move even if you didn't have the energy for it. Don't know why I thought that it could be better than the old style

I've already reverted it back in the latest version. FBNLite has similar latency adjuster as the old FBN did, just with few minor tweaks that could help here and there.

I switched to FBN Lite and I like it so far, the only modification i could suggest is whenever you are refreshing SR before it expires to keep it out of sync with rip, you could have it wait on energy to fill back up some more to maximize it's time.

exemple: 5sec left on both SR and Rip, you have ~30energy and 5cp points, instead of using SR right there, you could wait the extra 5sec before recasting SR to refill on energy.

Or if anyone knows how i could modify the code to reflect this, I would appreciate it.

That's not a good idea. If you refresh the Savage Roar with 5 seconds left on both SR and Rip, you can get a new Rip up as soon as the old one is finished (with enough energy or Omen of Clarity procs). But if you wait 5 seconds to recast Savage Roar, you will certainly loose Rip uptime since it takes at least 3 seconds to build up 5 combo points for a new Rip.

As you said, with enough energy you can. But like i said, you need to wait on that energy anyway, might as well wait for it while using the older SR time rather than refreshing. I'm not saying to use SR to the last second with 100energy waiting, but if you don't have near full energy (85+) and no OOC proc, then it's pointless to refresh right away.

Let'd do this scenario
5sec left on SR
5sec left on Rip
25energy

Your way,
Refresh SR, down to 0 energy
To get back up to 5CP in minimum amount of energy, you need 1 crit rake and a crit shred with another shred for a total of 35 + 42 + 42 = 119 energy
Add 20 energy for rip, new total of 139 energy
Which is equal to 13.9seconds worth of energy (energy regeneration being 1 per 1/10second)
Assuming you will get 1 OOC proc used on a shred for combo points, you are now down to 9.7sec of wait time before reapplying rip

My way,
You do the exact same thing really with the exception that you do not use SR right away but instead wait for the remaining time before refreshing which means in my way of doing it, you get better energy invested in savage roar because you make the most out of it. If you worry about OOC procs in the last 5sec of SR, then just refresh SR right away if you happen to get one and then use the OOC proc on something for combo points.

Trying to keep a maximum uptime on rip is the best way to go, I am not saying otherwise. However, you need to also be able to maximize uptime on other abilities as well, SR being one of them.

Edit: Adding picture to help visualizing it. Hope you understand it.


Both Scenarios have the identical damage output, the only difference is the second (waiting a few seconds before refreshing SR) has extra time on SR after the 10th second which leads to better SR management

My thoughts on this particular one is that while what you say is correct, there is no difference except for more SR uptime, the problem can (and should) be completely avoided in the first place. At around 10 seconds left you should get as few combo points as possible. (Refreshing rake only preferably) Pool energy to 80+ and refresh SR. Continue with building 5 combo points & you will have a much lower downtime on rip.

Oh I agree, all of that was to prove my point that pooling energy before refreshing SR when possible is beneficial and adding that behavior to FBNLite would be a nice thing. I gave a scenario that would be easy to understand.

@dgkiller,

Haven't looked at this thread in a while, but i believe Gurr's point is that energy regeneration is not as predictable as your model assumes, due to OOC/Revitalize. If we get 2 OOC procs instead of 1, for example, then we have the energy to refresh Rip earlier and lose fewer ticks, but not the GCD's if we've waited for SR to tick down.

Now, to somewhat get this thread (somewhat) back on track:

I hadn't seen any new Ovale development in a while, so I took the initiative to redesign the Furion/Leaf Ovale script. To keep this thread uncluttered, I've decided to post it in my forums: you can get it here. Please post any comments; I'm interested in finding appropriate values for whether to FB or refresh SR, as I suspect the answer is dependent on gear level (especially ArP).

In this case, it is better to wait for the energy to pool without a doubt.

Notice that we were both talking about two extremes - you about having 0 energy after SR, me about having enough energy for 5CPs+Rip. 4T10, revitalize, and lucky OoC procs bring you closer to my extreme.

With the RNG in mind, you can't really predict energy income and energy pooling in this case might lead to few unnecessary seconds of Rip downtime. On the other hand, you gains 5s more on SR.

Cat's priority of (de)buff refreshing is really complex and just by looking at these two extreme cases and things that influence them, I really do not know what is better. 5s of SR or up to 4s (the more energy you have, the more possible those are) of Rip downtime? What about if you have more than 25 energy? What about cases where SR and Rip are few seconds apart in either direction? What to do in an average case? What are the breakpoints where to switch to energy pooling?

It would be cool if you could fiddle a bit with this idea in SimCraft to come up with a profile that produces better results that the actual "best profile" and answers some of those questions. I am afraid that I do not have time for that. Yes, I'd really like to have it confirmed by a SimCraft simulation Mr.Robot's simulation would do fine too.

Other than that, I am probably a bit more sceptical than I should be because adding too specialized rules in a more or less general set of rules is a bad practice from a developer's point of view. It hurts maintainability, often adds unnecessary complexity and hard-to-predict side effects. All of those are rarely justified by the added value. Also, we are still considering it as an isolated case. We do not know, how many times it occurs and how it influences the rest of the rotation.

Hi! I didn't play for about an year, due to RL problems but I'm back. I'll not raid (at least not guilds/progress raid) due to time/family issue but I'll play again. I've released a new version of FBN (3.3) update for the latest tier/trinket, etc.. I've made some small tweak (now it automatically take care of set bonuses, enchants, metagems, glyphs, etc..). Now I'm working on the code in order to make it more modular and light without removing functionalities but I don't know if it will be done before the "Cata" version. I'd like to recive the feedback of tier10 raiders in order to see if the cycle works fine.

EDIT:
I've just fast-read this topic. FBN computing every time will be removed in the next version to make it less demanding (hey, was my first addon!), as for the rotation, apart from tier bonuses/ glyphs / idols, it is not a real rotation but an "on-the fly" compute, so unless the mechanics (coefficient, new set bonuses, etc) nothing change in the code, it self-adjust.

Welcome back Nightcrowler! Thanks for a great addon! Quick question for users of FBN. What is a preferred setting for the Set wanted RIP uptime part of the interface? I am currently running it a min setting which is the default.

@Kactuz:
the default value for RIP is at the saddle point at wich using FB or RIP has the same value. So if you RIP more you'll lose FB dps, if you RIP less you lose RIP dps/uptime. The most important thing is that the RIPvsFB function is not symmetric. The slope is far higher on the FB side. So basically if you increase RIP uptime on average you'll see a DPS decrease but it will be minimal (if you shift from minimum to the average value you'll see a 50? 100? DPS decrease) while to the other side the dps decrease will be bigger. That's why the default value is at the minimum. That value is not a minimum but the "right/average" value, simply I don't want to make people able to go on the left side of the curve while they can go to the RIP side without making "mistake".

By the way to answer your question, it depends mainly on your play style, and on the fight. Fights with a lot of movement I'll RIP more.

My question is am I really expected to adjust RIP uptime FBN setting manually every time I face a boss in order to get best predictions? Like, for example, bosses 1, 3 and 7 in raid X should be better run with maximum increased RIP uptime, while others should be better run with defaulted value?

It seems to me like there is no way to go from default value of "Set wanted RIP uptime" to see even minimal dps increase. If it is already defaulted to the most optimal value, why not just remove this whole option? I see it only complicates things.

Because to play with the optimal rip uptime is difficult. Many users are willing to lose, let's say 1-2% DPS but be more "error proof" with a greater RIP uptime. By the way the difference was greater before the Aroen nerf, now expecially in high end gear it should suggest RIP pretty often.

----

By the way, as someone remind me via PM: FBN the addon is update for 3.3.5 and I'll mantain it, as for the simulation is not updated and will be updated only for cataclysm when the new abilities will be fixed.
The addon can be downloaded via curse: Feral by Night - Addons - Curse

You can not rely on FBN to do everything for you. FBN is just a move suggester. It helps one get the feel for cat dps. I know there are times it will suggest a FB when I have 8 seconds left on RIP and SR but I know not to FB. I FB normally around 12-15 seconds left on the timers. If you FB every time FBN tells you to, of course it is going to be a dps loss. FBN still relies on the player to have some skill.

As far as Alarron's script i have not tired it yet so I can not comment on the dps increase.

@ Exolaris and Kactuz. With 8 seconds on SR and RIP if you FB I expect something like 4-6 seconds of RIP downtime, 1 FB does more damage than 2-3 ticks of RIP. It could also be possible that there is something messed up in algoritm that choce between RIP and FB, actually I'm not exceptionally geared (but getting better gear could only make RIP uptime greater) I've something like 90-95% of RIP uptime with RIP uptime set at the minimum level. Have they changed multiplier or boss armor or anything like that from 3.2 to 3.3.5?

No nightcrowler they did not change anything since you last played. Look at this though: If you FB with 8 seconds left on SR and RIP you have going to have more RIP downtime than 4-6 seconds. You will have to refresh SR (I always refresh with a min of 2 combo points) so that could take one or two shreds to do that. Next you have to wait to generate 5 CPs for RIP. Thus that would lead to way more RIP downtime than 4-6 seconds. Closer to 10-12 seconds I believe and that is a dps loss. If you pop TF somewhere in between that mix than you would get a DPS increase for that but it would be too situational. Oh and dont forget about keeping Rake up too

Well it depends on many things, like your haste (more ooc procs), your crit (faster cp generation). It seems pretty strange that FBN let you FB wist SR+RIP<8 sec. The only case I can see (I'll try to fix it in the next push) is when you FB during the end of berserk. FBN by default make you use SR with 1 cp, but you can set an higher value via options. With a "normal" crit rate you need 4 CP-generating ability to use RIP (3 shred = 5 CP) and SR (1 shred), rake or mangle are not problems because they make you save energy (they cost less than shred). King of the jungle is taken into account but it track the CD in order to put 60 extra energy into the pool or not.

By the way with 3.31 I've added (checked by default) the "conservative play" option. Basically it makes the algorithm consider only 10 energy / sec as regeneration without accounting for ooc procs. This will lead to a more stable dps and dots uptime. Actually you will see a dps increase. As usuall the problem about math is that mathematical optimum is different than real optimum. Considering ooc procs for energy regen leads to more FB, less RIP uptime, etc.. from simulation it also lead to more dps. What you see in-game is that checking the option will increase your dps, so why there is that difference? The problem is that using more FB increase the mean value but decrease the median value and after all I think that the usual player is more interested in maximizing the median value.

Nightcrowler, main changes you should add (if you haven't already) are the change for mongoose from 2% physical haste to 30 haste rating, and the discovery that black magic procs off cat-mangle and shred.

FYI on the original script - this is from Ovale Spell Priority - Addons - Curse: