Havroc, i am not at all in line with your comments.
to conclude about the best between intel and mastery , you have to consider all the gameplay.
and i just say again than intel is better than any others HpS stats even if you consider only PWS / SS which are the spell where mastery reaches its top score compare to others spells.
There are 2 ways to prove it (or to try to prove you).
And if i am wrong , i will be pleased to have learn about this discussion.
First is to build an argumentation wich is done on spell mechanism feeling.(no datas but only feeling = qualitative method))
second one , more long and more complicated for everybody who is not familiar with maths is to analyse the formula of each spells to define how each HpS stat can increased its value. (quantitative method)
First, i will use the qualitative method/
(and i take new aegis at 50%)
If we take all spells available and sort them depending on their dependance to a HpS stats, for disc spec, there are 5 differents category of spell which will have different behavior on HpS stats
1/ All direct heals like Penance/GH/FH/BH/Renew/PoM/Heal/ the 3 talent spells @90.
These spells have a very poor scaling on mastery because it is necessary to crit to have aegis which is re-enforce by the mastery.
The stat priority for these spells are INT >> Crit > Haste >>> Mast
2/ Atonnement :
this spell could be considered as the first category but INT stat is more empowered.
That is why ,it is a category 2 of spell.
In fact, if you know its canonic formula scoreSP ~ 27 and 10 for smite and holy fire while scoreSP ~ 103 for the spell of category1.
That means that the SP scaling of spells which create the attonement (except for penance) is better than the SP scaling of spells belonging to the category 1
The stat priority for this spell is unchanged but INT is better : INT >>> Crit > Haste >>> Mast
Even if there is a systematic aegis on each PoH, the scaling of the mastery was not very good before the up to 50%.
With this modification, mastery is scaling a litle bit under the Crit stat but there contribution to HpS are still poor compare to INT stat (i see a ratio around 3 times lower)
The stat priority for PoH is INT >> Haste >> Crit ~ Mast
4/ PWS : the mastery has a good scaling with PWS but is still under INT
we are not still @cata level stat where it was needed to have 179,28 points for 2,5%absorb.
Now, we need 600 whereas SP needs same value of point as Cata to have the same scaling. (ScoreSP of PWS is quite unchanged)
when i take my armory and stat value in buff raid (23900 SP and 15% crit and 53% mastery absorb)
+100 int = + 0,389% where +100 mast = +0,273%
The stat priority for PoH is Intel > Mastery > Haste >>> Crit (edit : maybe , i see somewhere that PWS absorb can now crit.
I did not checked it but even if there are some critical absorbs, CRIT stat will be still behind the others)
5/ Spirit Shell :
I will consider only PoH done under SS which is less favorable for Crit (+INT) stat than GH done under SS.
Scaling for this spell is the same as PWS for mastery and quite the same as PoH for the others stats.
The stat priority for PoH under SS is same as PWS : Intel > Mastery > Haste > Crit
If summarize the 5 categories :
Direct heals : INT >> Crit > Haste >>> Mast
Attonement : INT >>> Crit > Haste >>> Mast
PoH : INT >> Haste >> Crit > Mast
PWS : INT > Mast > Haste >>> Crit
SS : INT > Mast > Haste > Crit
Here , we are to the conclusion of this topic and my comment about that i do not agree with your conclusion.
1/ In any condition of gameplay INT is above Mastery for the same amount of point.
2/ For gems only , we can discuss.... but my conclusion is the same except if
- we take into account the Overheal which reduce the INT stat compare to Mastery stat (and only if absorb made by SS and PWS do not depop)
- Gamplay is full oriented PWS because margin of INT stat is not suffisant to compensate the double value on mastery gem
in fact, as the secondaries stat can have double points compare to primary stats (80 int, 160 mast or crit or haste), we must analize more accuratly what is the best choice depending on the gameplay.
I say that on standard disc gameplay, even if there are a lot of absorb in the total heal, INT stat is still better than secondaries stats (including Mastery) on gems even if we do not have the double bonus of value on INT gems.
of course , i considerer a standard disc gameplay which will result in 60 to 70% heal done by Aegis/SS/PoH/PWS.
Also if the gameplay is based only on PWS used for rapture and PoH with and without SS with no others spells, INT is still the best because of the low stat weight of mastery on PoH.
The only one combinaison i see for Mastery on gems which is better than INT is still a gameplay full PWS oriented.
(Sorry for my langage error if i did a lot but my post was very long!)
Originally Posted by Havoc12
Normal PoH is now base*(1.5+0.5*mastery))*(1+crit), whereas spirit shell is base*(1+mastery)*(1+crit)*1.3
Yes i agree on theses formula and you will easely check that dats i have provided are true.
Improvement by adding mastery on PoH = (POH with mastery2 - PoH with mastery1) / PoH with mastery1
((1.5 + 0.5*mastery2)-(1.5+0.5*mastery1))/(1.5+0.5*mastery1)
50%* (2,5%*Mastery points added/600) / (150% + 50%*%Mastery)
For example, a player with 4920 mastery point , +100 mastery points added = +.118%
same operation with Critical will provide you +0,15199% for +100 Crit point
same operation with INT will provide you +0,429243 % for +100 INT point
For PoH : Crit > Mast
INT >> Haste >> Crit > Mast is true.
if we have to integrate overheal, result can be different and depend on how is done the PoH spam (with raid full life or not)
Also, i am not convinced by SS : INT > Mast > Haste > Crit for Haste behavior since Haste breakpoint cannot be reached easely to have an additional PoH under SS proc.
and also, since this breakpoint is reached each 2 times with Power infusion proc.
I would prefer to considerer for SS : INT > Mast > Crit >> Haste
Last edited by Polopretress : 11/12/12 at 4:07 AM.
Your calculations are wrong because SS formulas that I discovered before:
For Direct Heals:
are wrong after some changes from Blizz
For PoH it should be
Change of that last coefficient doesnt relevant, but anyway.
And for direct heal SS it seems like totally wrong and I have no idea what it should be.
Just dont use it =)
But after some calculations I can absolutely assure you that for Direct Heals SS it has to be like that: SS_Absorb=AvgHeal*(1+Mastery)*Fun(Crit)
SS_Absorb for direct heals has linear scaling from Mastery and AvgHeal(read: spellpower) and some crazy Function from Crit, which I dont know.
SS healing from direct heals is just Heal * (1+mastery), so to include criticals it is AvgHeal * (1+crit) * (1+mastery). DA doesn't proc off of "crit" spirit shell casts because it's not a critical heal.
My understanding is that:
600 mastery rating is always (at level 90) a 2.5% increase in dmg absorb for PWS.
600 Int is an increase of 600*1.871 = 1122.6 dmg absorb, which is ~1.02% at current levels and will be lower as int increases with gear.
I have difficulty to follow you, maybe due to my native langage, and i cannot understand what you wrote and from where you have taken these values.
Could you explain ?
i supposed you speak about PWS.
600 mastery bring you 2,5% of additional absorb damage but this 2,5% is right compare to the value that you have with no mastery.
To have the real improvement of 600 mastery, it is necessary to calculate it with your present gear.
I have just tested it to be sure and i confirm that GH under SS has still the same formula
Average GH * ( 1 +%mastery)*(1+%crit)*(1+ 30%*%crit)
As far as i have tested several time, this result is stable and not RNG with crit.
Of course, Grace stacks up and give additional 10% per stack done under SS if the target was not already at 3 stacks of grace.
I have noticed during test some difference but it was due to my proc given by the Enchant Weapon - Windsong which give additional 1500 mastery or Critical when proc.
Maybe the RNG behavior that you have seen was due to some proc like this.
PW:S has an 87.1% spellpower coefficient, which is where that comes from (pedantically: 87.09 per simulationcraft source code).
// direct_power_mod = 0.87; // hardcoded into tooltip
direct_power_mod = 1.8709; // matches in-game actual value
Anyway as the op has deleted his post, i cannot go deaper in what he wrote.
PWS = (19428 + 187.09% * SP)*(1 + %mastery)
For SP buff = 25000 and mastery = 5000 + 3000 buff = 53.3% (with 20% additionel base)
INT >> Mastery on PWS also because INT is 38.6% more powerful than Mastery.
On gems, for PWS only it is stronger to use Mastery instead of INT because of the double value of Mastery.
Same conclusion can be found for SS.
A player which use ONLY PWS and SS will have better behavior by gemming MAST instead of INT but as the scaling of the others spells are low on mastery even for PoH, INT will be always better unless a special gameplay is applied.
I think it was the initial question of all these posts.
Poloptress your values don't agree with mine. I removed a certain amount of mastery checked my charsheet to see how much my mastery% got reduced and divided the two. I found that 1 point of mastery rating increased my % mastery by 0.0072%. That means 347 mastery rating is required for 2.5%. I will check it again when I get home, please do also check it yourself (do so in game please - so we can both post our screenies as evidence that neither of us is screwing up somewhere).
Please don't use the old notation of base + %spellpower. It is frought with errors. Spellpower has been normalised for all spells so it always adds the same % of the base value across the board.
Thus both spellpower and mastery suffer diminishing returns in pretty much the same way.
Basically x amount of SP increases the base heal of the spell by x*k, where k is a universal constant for all your spells. In other words the increase in healing from an amount of intellect equal to Int can be calcualted as follows:
[edit latex not coming up] %increase_SP = 100*(Int*B*k)/(1+spellpower*k) [/edit]
spellpower = total fully buffed spellpower
k = universal constant (can be easily calculated)
B = buffs that affect int to spellpower conversion (e.g. 1.05 unbuffed, or 1.05*1.05*1.1 fully buffed with inner will)
In constrast by my values mastery rating increases absorbs by
[edit: latex not coming up] %increase_mast = 100*(mastRat_added)/(16656+mastRat_total) [/edit]
The value of mastery in healing can be calculated directly from your combat logs:
Value of mastery = (%absorbs)*%increase_mast
Value of int = (%absorbs)*%increase_int + [100-(%absorbs)]*%increase_int*(1-OHR), where
%absorbs = % of your healing accounted for by absorbs
OHR = Overheal rate, i.e. (% of spells that overheal). I sample 30 spells at random from my logs and find the proportion of spells that overheal by any amount.
I am not adding a factor for "overheal" on absorbs, since partial absorbs are not as common as overheals. Usually either your absorb will expire unused or it will not be used at all.
Thus the relative value of int and mastery on absorbs, your overheal rate and the % of your healing that comes from absorbs completely determine which stat is better.
looking at various fights I found that my average overheal rate (i.e. the % of heals that overheal) is in excess of 50%. More than half my spells overheal to a greater or lesser extend on average. In some fights like ambershaper, blade lord, elegon and wind lord my overheal rate is closer to 70%.
In contrast my average %absorbs is 64% after the recent buffs.
When I did the calculations I did not account for the fact that mastery has diminishing returns, which you are quite right skews the calculations strongly, but I still can't see how intellect is going to end up being twice as good as mastery with things as they are now for disc, unless we start hitting 60% mastery or something.
Update: I checked again in game and it turns out you were correct its 600 mastery for 2.5% absorbs so the value of mastery per point of absorb is 0.0042% per point not 0.0072%. That means the values are closer than I thought and its not a total landslide for mastery.
[edit: latex not coming up] %increase_mast = 100*(mastRat_added)/(28800+mastRat_total) [/edit]
k =0.000096564716 ~ 0.0001
Adding in the numbers at 7000 mastery rating, 25000 spellpower and adding 100 mastery:
%increase_mast = 100/(28800+7000)*100 = 0.2793296089 increase in absorbs
at 25000 spellpower 100 intellect adds
%increase_int = 100*B*0.0001/(1+2.5)*100 = 0.2857142857*B% increase in absorbs and heals
Thus taking 2 points of mastery per 1 point of intellect we can compare a 0.56% increase in absorbs with a 0.29%*B increase in absorbs and heals.
To verify my calculations here are the values from in game on PWS (the results are exactly the same for flash heal, renew and every other spell I have tried).
19546sp 45.32% mastery PWS = 81377 (this is the value from the tooltip in game)
21870sp 45.32% mastery PWS = 87696
according to my formula I expect
2324*0.0001/(1+19546*0.0001)*100 = 7.87% increase
87696/81377 = 1.07765093331 --> 7.77% increase
So the model is absolutely spot on, when accounting for the approximation of k. Using 0.00096 for k gives 7.76%
7000 mastery is ~30% mastery, so 50% total. 100 mastery is ~0.42% mastery. So 0.42/1.5 = 0.28%, which again spot on given the small approximations.
If you consider a standard gameplay with 70% absorbs then there is no way you are going to get intellect being better at 2:1. It requires very heavy overheal on PoH to reach that.
For PoH crit adds 0.001664564943% crit per stat point. At 13% base crit this is 0.001473066321 increase ignoring overheal per stat point. We have shown that mastery increases absorbs by 0.0028% per stat point at 50% mastery.
Absorbs are now 50% of PoH so 1/3rd of the PoH amount meaning mastery increases PoH healing by approximately 9% when all overheal is ignored. This might seem great, but overheal completely obliterates the value of crit for the actual PoH heal. And it no longer adds extra aegis. Crit overheal amount is well over 70% for me (again sampling 30 PoH crits from the logs). Crit is actually a pretty poor stat for PoH, due to the fact that we tend to spam PoH on the raid constantly even for low deficits.