Any spreadsheet or simulation is by very nature going to overvalue haste, this is because haste only affects steady and auto, both of which are disproportionately reduced in value by movement in fights compared to other shots. Given most fights have at least some movement and given steady is the lowest priority shot and generally the first one to be dropped in any complex situation, the estimated values for haste will never be accurate to real game conditions. You just have to apply a certain amount of common sense when looking at dps value estimates and adjust accordingly when haste items are being taken into account.

I've seen absolutely no reliable data that supports gemming haste- I suspect hunters you see who gem it are not up on theorycraft and are probably working off some old belief that reaching the softcap is a worthwhile endeavor or under the usually mistaken belief that they "have enough crit".

I don't see how Zod's proc and AshenBand proc benefit from haste at all. Haste can make your zod's proc more, but each proc will do less damage than if you didn't have haste, since the damage of each proc is based on your autoattack damage - if your autoshot scales better with crit/arp/agi/ap better than haste, then so will the Quick Shot proc from Zod's. And The Ashen Band proc has a long ICD (60 seconds), so additional haste should have a very minimal effect on its uptime.

2pc T10 on the other hand scales with haste and only haste, since it's based purely on the frequency of your autoshots, and not their damage, and has no cooldown.

Alienangel:

I might be misunderstanding what you are saying but both [Zod's Repeating Longbow] and [Ashen Band of Endless Vengeance] are chance on hit (respectively on ranged attack). Haste doesn't lower the base damage of the weapon, thus both these procs benefit from haste.

More haste equals more autoshots (and for SV and MM more steadies unless at softcap). More autoshots means more hits, and more hits means more chances for the proc to go off.
Now, granted, the ring won't benefit much if at all, as it has an ICD (according to wowhead), but Zod's has no ICD and thus will benefit proportionally to the increased amount of ranged hits (and therefore haste).

Haste does lower the base damage of the weapon, in the sense that you are losing some other stat to gain haste, and all those other stats you could get (AP/ARP/AGI/CRIT) increase your average base damage, while haste does not. Hence whenever you increase your haste via gear/gems, you are making Zod's proc more, but each proc will do correspondingly less damage than if you had geared/gemmed ap/arp/agi/crit instead. If Zod's proc were like bryntroll's and independent of weapon damage, then you could say unequivocally that haste increases the overall proc-damage - but it's not, and if it were the procchance would be changed to be a PPM like Bryntroll instead of the fixed chance on hit Zod's has, and/or an ICD added.

In a very few cases where you're choosing between 2 things neither of which affect average damage, haste can come out ahead because of Zods - for example choosing between the rocket tinker to gloves and the haste tinker to gloves, or choosing between Imp Stings as SV and Imp Hawk.

This is the same reason you can't say "haste increases your Wild Quiver DPS" - it doesn't, it just gives you more wild quiver procs, each of which does less damage.

What Alienangel is getting at is Haste does indeed = more autoshots/steadies but that if you were to say trade 30 haste for 30 arp you would see more out of the proc as it scales better with stats other than haste.

Lets take Festergut, everyone likes him. Hes so damn cute. Using some napkin math, last weeks Festergut was like 231 seconds. Using my effective haste as per FD. I, on paper would have gotten 110(wol has me at 120 in reality) shots off. If I were to add 100 haste from the magic stat fairy I would have gotten 114ish auto shots off. From just auto shots 100 haste would have taken me from 5.5 procs on autoshot to 5.7. But im really tired so poke holes in the math and someone else can talk about how good everything else is.

Oh, I don't disagree in the slightest that other stats are most likely better, so I'll chalk it up to misunderstanding your last post, as all I saw mentioned was that "Zods and the ring don't benefit from haste at all", and that "each proc will do less damage than if you didn't have haste".

I have to go a pretty ways back (I can't see it right now) where the discussion started - as a haste vs other stats - because I only saw haste mentioned.

So to sum up; No disagreement that other stats will benefit both procs and other damage more than haste, and no disagreement that the magic stat fairy granted haste would be a benefit for the procs and damage as well.

If it's listing a t9 piece as an upgrade, chances are the profile has a single piece of t9 already equipped and the spreadsheet is taking the 2-set bonus into account. This is a pretty significant boost to dps (femaledwarf puts it at ~170 dps for me), so it's not too surprising that it comes up under these circumstances. The general consensus is that until you have 3 pieces of 264 t10, you're better off going with t9x2 and t10 x2.

93g shows t10 leggings for me, although they end up fairly low on the gear optimizer since equipping them would break the t9 set bonus--264 shows as 6th best, 251 8th, when I sort without including hardmode. Do you have a screenshot that shows the list and the checked boxes on the top of the spreadsheet?

edit: I see t10 there now... I swear they werent there before

Another item to be aware of besides the impact of tier set bonuses is that for some, especially MMs, the T10 legs are very bad. They have no ArP but have unneeded haste, while the T9 legs have ArP and no haste. Furthermore, the T10 legs have considerably less intellect, which affects your mana pool and DPS uptime. Hence, even without any tier set bonuses being in play (i.e, wearing no tier gear), the T9.245 legs >> T10.251 and almost = to T10.264. Likewise, the T9.258 >> T10.264 and almost = to T10.277. Hence, for MMs, the legs are the T10 piece you want to leave out to get the 4-set bonus.

im curious about the ArP weighting too... has 1.451 for ArP, 1.402 for crit and 1.649 for agility.

Hitting regem changes everything to crit/agi gems or pure agi. ArP is nowhere in the mix. Also... the trend in the planner seems to be agi > crit > arp. I realize im nowhere near soft nor hard cap on ArP but shouldnt the planner still calculate upgrades based on reaching these marks? From what Im seeing its suggests moving away from ArP, contrary to what the apparent norm is for top end hunter.

Ill be honest my hunter is my alt (which used to be my main till Ulduar) so I havent used the spreadsheet since Cheeky went away, but Im highly confused at the moment on whether ArP stacking is best vs agi/crit stacking.

In a nut-shell...the higher your ArP is, the more effect additional ArP will have. Eventually you will reach a point to where the switch from Agi/Crit to ArP is beneficial. For me, it didn't happen until I got Deathbringer's Will. I imagine that is the case for most hunters.

Just a small update, I have been too busy with non-spreadsheet projects/work to do much lately beyond playing the game itself. I hope to have the remaining ICC loot added this weekend (also apologies to those that PM'ed me, but this project was sidelined for a bit) and address any possible bugs/issues.

As always, there's the great femaledwarf website which Rivkah maintains in good order.

I've been thinking about it and I'm curious about the 'Normal' method the spreadsheet uses to simulate ArP procs.

Following the spreadsheet calculations, it seems to take the expected value of the ArP proc based on uptime. Since ArP is exponentially scaling (in that it scales with itself), this would seem to produce an inaccurate prediction of the DPS value of ArP proc trinkets.

However, once the lost mitigation due to ArP is calculated, the expected value of this lost mitigation should be accurate (since it is no longer averaging a value then deriving a exponential property based on that average).

Using the sheet, (these values are for example - the gear is taken from a guild hunter I'm examining but the method should work for any gear):

DPS with NES using normal ArP mode: 10,348
DPS with custom trinket equivalent to NES averaged by proc rate: 10,348 (+108.3444 ArP)

DPS with custom trinket equivalent to NES during proc: 11,580
DPS with custom trinket equivalent to NES without proc: 10,159
NES uptime % from spreadsheet: 15.98%

Expected DPS: 10,386

The difference isn't substantial but it will rapidly grow around the soft cap, as the value of the proc increases and past it, as the value decreases (rather than increasing as the averaged ArP suggests).

Since ArP won't affect the pet/non physical shots either way, we can do that expected value calculation with just the mitigation remaining post ArP and get the same answer to save on calculations.

In other words, would this pseudocode produce better ArP proc modelling? :

ArP value with Proc= Base ArP +ArP Proc
ArP value without Proc = Base ArP

Remaining Mitigation with Proc = f(ArP value with Proc)
Remaining Mitigation without Proc =f(ArP value without Proc)

Expected Mitigation = Uptime*(Remaining Mitigation with Proc) + (1-Uptime)*(Remaining Mitigation without Proc)

Criven this is basically the implementation I have on the femaledwarf site. It doesn't really support more than one ArPen trinket but I put an error message to warn people if they have more than one (since that's usually a bad idea anyhow). It may be more difficult to implement in the spreadsheet itself however given the different structure, Shandara would know better than I.

I will mention that when I put this implementation in, it didn't have a very large effect on the dps results.

The reason I think it may be worthwhile is that it models the transitions around proc ArP capped and non proc ArP capped better.

I've a specific query about the webtool, but I'll PM you that along with some related information.

Update:

Just for the record, I think there's an additional change between version H and version G that isn't listed above, which is that version G didn't seem to include the averaged out Culling of the Herd and 2pc T10 bonuses when calculating Serpent Sting and as a result Chimera-Serpent damage. This is distinct from the new option to roll % modifiers, since it affects DPS even when that option is disabled - in version H, serpent sting and chimera-serpent both show higher DPS than in version G since they're getting a slightly higher % damage modifier even with the new option disabled.

I'm a little baffled here... I must have set something wrong somewhere.

Greatness shows as my best trinket by far in my Imp Stings Surv spec. Just above 50 DPS better than Death's Choice (H). That just isn't right. The delta is 556.14 compared to my regular Death's Choice of 443.02. Interestingly HWT is ranked second at a loss of only 2.11 DPS. I know that Greatness is awesome for Survival, which is why I have kept it for so long. But I am beginning to consider other options than just DC and DBW, but it is a little hard when the calculations are wonky for some reason.

On a related note, in my MM spec the regem options in the gearplanner are quite odd. I don't know what to make of them. The Frost Emblem cloak shows as being almost 50 DPS better with some regemming... But how? I use a 20 Agi gem and the socket is blue. A similar tale happens elsewhere. Other options show losses (20 DPS here 15 DPS there), and it is overall quite hard to make sense of. Now I have not used the regemmer much, mainly because before it showed I could gain something like 2 DPS by changing 5 gems or something like that. But if I change the gems listed now there is nothing fitting the results in the planner. Meanwhile my Surv spec does not see any regemming difference at all.

On a non-related note, I enabled PvP gear and to my dismay saw that the 264 weapons are better than normal Zod. At least they aren't better for Survival.

Is it just me or is the link to get the Excel sheet still giving 93g instead of 93h?

It's giving the proper version for me.

Small re-upload fixing an issue where the change to the gear planner lead to massive slowdowns and some unpredicted random behavior.

I'm still looking into the haste issue, but it seems the gear planner change didn't fix it properly.

Tried it again today worked this time