The crit and haste rating values for Fire are too close together for there to ever be one hard and fast rule, you shouldn't really bother trying to use relative stat values to compare them, just use Optimize or change the gear in Rawr and see what piece gives you the highest dps. That is more accurate.

Whichever is worth more will vary based on your current stats, for example for me @ 2883 SP, 1014crit, 439 haste, 16.91% hit, haste is worth slightly more (1.52 > 1.51).

This might seem insignificant but I've come across something odd.
I use watchful eye as neck with a 9sp/8haste gem in it, was checking if a 19sp gem in it would be better and to my surprise rawr listed 9sp/8crit 10dps higher than the 9sp/haste gem. It's the only item where it lists a potent topaz over a reckless topaz though. Anyone getting similar behaviour with rawr 2.2.10 ?

You'll have to post the character xml where this happens otherwise it's hard to tell what is going on.

Are you sure you’re not losing your meta gem by swapping gems? It's perplexed me a few times.

I have a similar surprising result from rawr: in upgrading to Petrified Ivy Sprig from Gemmed Wand of the Nerubians, I'm encouraged to gem a spellpower/haste over a pure spellpower. If I could find how to attach, I would.

In fact, the relative stat-values are showing haste ahead of spellpower - this matches the findings on the optimal TTW/Fire mage gear thread.

Physicist, what's wrong with that? Sp/haste gives you the 4spr socket bonus, which is quite reasonable to see being a DPS upgrade.

Actually - there is something very strange going on. Examining Pendant of Fiery Havoc, the suggested gem does not match the relative stat values. It's suggested sp/crit over sp/haste, despite relative stat values claiming haste is better.

Rawr Gear import Question

Hey all,

Ive downloaded the latest Rawr, but ive noticed that it doesnt have all the loot from Uld in it. Is there a way to import the loot thats missing somehow?

Ive tried going thru this topic as well as the help menu and have had no luck.

Thanks greatly for any help.

I don't know if this is the only way, but here's one way of doing it.
First, browse the armory or wowhead (I recommend wowhead.com) for the item you would like to add in Rawr. For this example I'll use [Starshard Edge]. As you will notice, at the end of the url adress for the item you have a five digit number. Copy this number and start up Rawr.
Now, right click your existing main hand weapon and choose edit. In the bottom left corner you have the option "Add", click this and paste the number into this field. Then click okay.

You will now have Starshard's Edge available to you in Rawr.
Good luck.

Correct, you can add any items you find missing. Mostly, at this point, it's just Algalon items which weren't found when I last updated the default itemcache.

Also, Physicist, take note of the fact that while 1 haste rating may beat 1 spellpower, you get more spellpower per itemization point than haste rating, so it's still likely that gemming spellpower is ideal, for a while longer. You see Rawr using sp/haste gems because of the socket bonuses they give you, not because haste > sp.

As for why it may use sp/crit instead of sp/haste in some case, Kavan can better explain it, but I believe there are tiny breakpoints in haste value, so fluctuates up and down slightly, over the course of small increments, such as hybrid gems.

Anyone having odd returns with the optimizer and gems? Its probably just a fluke, or a weird configuration issue, but the last several builds continually return slight dps increases (slight as in <1 dps) just for moving gems around.

Not moving them in anyway that would activate a bonus, simply swapping slots. IE moving a jc gem from a blue belt socket to a blue boot socket. Essentially just swapping the JC and blue gems already in those sockets.

I'm trying to run the optimizer, but I've noticed that even if I check "Override Reenchant", it still enchants my rings with 19 SP. Is there a way to make it not do this?

See the help docs on gear optimization. You're misunderstanding that checkbox.

Does Rawr start AP at 3 stacks of AB debuff? For example, starting AP with ABar,

ABX3 AP ABar ....

Some of the previous questions regarding haste relative value has made me curious if Rawr takes into consideration 'haste brackets' for mages in the same way ele shamans shoot for specific haste amounts to fit extra lightning bolts into their rotations. Meaning, if 10 more haste will allow an extra fireball before reapplying living bomb, assuming no hot streak procs to mess it up, then rawr is valuing the next 10 haste you get much higher then normal. Once you get that 10 haste, it puts it back down to normal. I was never sure if rawr took these things into consideration, as modeling the average rotation when you factor in random procs seems a bit complex, but I've been surprised before at how smart the mage module is for rawr. Generally speaking, if a number seems wrong to me, it's because I've made a mistake or overlooked something, not a bug in rawr. I operate under that assumption until I find my mistake, and so far I have not found a scenario where it was 'wrong' (based on the parameters it was going off of, anyway).

Unfortunately, it appears the modules for other classes isn't as robust as ours, as I've recommended the program to friends that play other classes, and even played around with it myself trying to help some people out, and some of them seem pretty.. lacking. Makes me appreciate how much effort the people who work on the mage module have put into it, so thank you.

Rawr does not model casting at the granularity of individual casts so it won't be able to answer questions like where exactly in the cycle to activate cooldowns. You could say that it activates it at the point where all spells in the cycle benefit from it equally.

Ah, nice to get a concrete answer on that. That's also very interesting that you've modeled the average amount of 'lost' LB time to that degree. I wondered if that was part of the disparity between rawr's dps theoretical max dps for me, and my realized dps. But, now that I know it's taking that into consideration, I have a higher goal to strive for.

When giving me a spell cycle for any given fight, there are things like mana gems and Evocations listed at the beginning. I presume "Evocation 2.00x" means that I'll be using Evocation twice during the fight. However, when am I actually supposed to use things like Evocations and mana gems (in the context of the presented spell cycle)? Does it matter?

Evocation 2.00x means that you use it twice yes. As long as you use it at a point where you gain full mana from it and you don't have any cooldowns running it's ok. If you want to know exactly when to use it you can use sequence reconstruction, but unless you're fire spec I'd advise against using it unless you understand how the advanced solver works.

From the Arcane Thread:

Any chance you could have a look into this? I imagine this is why Rawr is suggesting to use Brain Freeze when Simulationcraft suggests that there isn't a DPS gain from it. I think the current latency model overvalues instant casts and channeling spells by a very slight amount (I guess about 5% or something). This change could possibly increase the accuracy of other models as well, like Shadow Priests which use a lot of channeling spells.

For reference the SimulationCraft model:

You'll find a discussion on instant cast vs. cast time spell timing among the recent posts under the Raiding With Frost topic.

Spamming instant casts seems to have a relatively high time penalty.
Spamming cast time spells has a very low penalty.
Casting an instant cast between two cast time spells can take less than one hasted GCD period.

I haven't explored channeled spells.

The only case where time is relatively higher than average is spamming of instants from the tests I've seen so far which is relatively rare and might just as well be countered by cast-instant combination. Until I see a more comprehensive study or a good proof that Rawr predictions are off base I probably won't be making any changes as they are not trivial.