Edit: Confusion resolved

Eviscerate+T5 bonus > Rupture?

Was addressed yesterday here: http://elitistjerks.com/608065-post1070.html

First, thank you for this spreadsheet and the work you put into it. It has made many of the comparisons and decision making efforts loads easier. Here are a few things I've noticed:

1. Merciless Gladiator's Pummeler and Bonecracker do not have the Res field filled in (a few Merciless weapons do not have this filled in).

2. Vindicator's Dragonhide Bracers is not in the ArmoryImportLookUp sheet, but are available in the pull downs. It is added and works properly when the Create Lookup is used ni the ArmorImport sheet.

3. Is it possible to include the 4p Gladiator's set which adds +10 energy just like the Vigor talent?

1) Ok, I'll fix that.
2) Oops, I forgot to run that Macro after adding the new item. An FYI, for those adding their own items. You will need to click the Create Lookup Macro on the hidden ArmoryImport sheet after the addition in order for the Armory Import to successfully identify the item in the future. You correctly identified the issue.
3) Since, the additional +10 Maximum Energy actually doesn't enter into any of the calculations, it really isn't very useful. I could add it just to have a box light up to show you have 4-pieces of that set equipped.

Sqrpshr---
Ah, ok, I get it now, you have left both specs on (both Sword and Mace) and what you are saying is that with both talents, the sword swings are also gaining the benefit of the Mace-spec crit damage when it shouldn't. I will have to look more closely into how the sheet is handling dual-specs. That may be a serious issue. I'm guessing that the spreadsheet is greatly overestimating the damage of any dual-spec by letting both bonuses apply to all attacks regardless of what weapon is actually in whatever hand. This may not be that simple to resolve, as it may become necessary to have a separate attack table for each hand as well as separate crit bonuses etc.

Batory---
Uptime isn't an issue as the assumption is that all charges are consumed. Accuracy is frankly uncertain. I have seen no good theorycrafting regarding a number of issues related to the debuff. I'd say that the estimated crit % used in this sheet is lower than average, especially considering that some attacks have multipliers that will raise the damage further. On the other hand, the sheet uses ones own Armor mitigation as the basis for damage reduction and this is probably greater than realistic. All in all, I think it about cancels out, but I do want to one day improve that calculation. Unfortunately, the nature of the debuff itself, makes it's damage dependent upon on a number of factors which cannot accurately be modeled by the spreadsheet, namely the rest of the raid composition; their individual crit %
; how often they use attacks that have a greater than 100% base attack multiplier; their individual armor penetration; etc. All that said, I believe the estimate is in the correct ballpark.

It should be noted that much of that damage is realized by the rest of the raid and not by you personally. I'm not certain how the Gear spreadsheet is handling the debuff. It might just be stating one's estimated "personal" damage and ignoring the contribution to the rest of one's raid. If you are just interested in personal damage, click the Debuff Estimate off and make sure Hemorrhage is on under debuffs. By the sound of that difference, this is probably what is being reflected in the Gear sheet.

Okay, so I got home and had a chance to look at that spreadsheet. Now, it should be noted that the great power of sword specialization is that it procs MH hits from your offhand attacks. Your offhand attacks probably account for about half of the sword spec benefit. If you properly equip an offhand sword, the S3 Sword is still vastly superior to the S3 Mace. Now, with your gear itemization stacking decent crit you did manage to create a slight advantage with the S3 Mace over the S3 Sword without an offhand Sword. Some of that seems to be an apparent bug with the spreadsheet (i.e. equipping a main-hand Mace increases the crit multiplier of everything - even the non-mace offhand). I'll have to look at dual-wield issues more carefully to make sure that gets fixed.

Thank you so much for keeping this spreadsheet updated. It is beyond helpful to me.

I have 2 questions, I tried to find the answers in these forums before posting here, but was unsuccessful.

1. I am combat-swords. The spreadsheet says my dps will be higher with 4 points in Improved Poisons rather than Vile Poisons. However, the sample talent template in the Rogue 101 thread suggests Vile Poisons. I have also checked out the armory of rogues in BT guilds (I am in a SSC/TK guild) and they all seem to choose Vile Poisons. It seems to me that increasing my chance of applying deadly from 30% to 40% and instant from 20% to 30% would be a greater dps increase than increasing all poison damage by 20%. In other words, it seems to me that the spreadsheet is right. So why do all these knowledgeable rogues (including the Rogue 101 author) choose Vile Poisons?

2. The spreadsheet says that my dps will be higher with double mongoose than with exe/mon. I just skimmed over the long thread on these forums regarding these enchants, and it seems that the jury is still out on this subject. So I was just wondering if we can be pretty confident about the spreadsheet's modeling of executioner, or are we still waiting for more testing results of executioner before we can be sure of the spreadsheet's executioner results?

I apologize if these questions have already been answered, or are "nooby."

Thanks.

Both questions have been answered but anyway.

1. Almost every rogue will have only one weapon to put poison on, since windfury is the best choice for main hand. On your offhand DPS-wise Deadly Poison is better than instant. Now why is Vile Poisons better than Improved? It's simple, once you get the 5 stacks on your target improved poison is useless while vile gives you bonus damage. On some boss fights Improved is probably better due to target switching but I don't think it's worth it.

2. I don't believe the modeling is 100% correct. Hell we aren't sure even for mongoose yet. You can't go wrong with any of those two enchant combos.

1. We had this discussion a couple days ago
http://elitistjerks.com/600475-post927.html
Basically for sustained dps fights, vile provides more dps.

2. Well the value of armor penetration scales very well. Executioner doesn't seem to push ahead until a T6 level (This has also been observed with Warp Spring Coil, Choker of Serrated Blades). You seem to be at the level where mongoose provides more dps than executioner.

Thanks so much for the quick replies. I apologize again for not finding the answers myself in the big thread.

1. Ahhh, of course! Once you get (and can keep refreshing) 5 stacks of deadly it does you no good to have an increased chance of applying poisons. Improved poisons might help me get the 5 stacks up faster initially, but once they are up, they are going to stay up regardless. So Vile Poison is definitely better. This makes perfect sense. I guess the spreadsheet just isn't taking that into account or something.

2. I saw a post or two in that exe/mon thread that seemed to agree with what tymoney is saying. As you get into T6 gear, exe/mon edges out over mon/mon. I guess I am not quite at the tipping point. I am mostly in the T5 ballpark, but I do have the Warp-Spring Coil and a little bit (130) of passive armor pen. In my case its probably close enough that I could go exe/mon if I really love the graphic of the exe enchant, but mon/mon will most likely give me slightly better dps.

Thanks again. You completely addressed my confusion on issue 1 and gave me the direction I need on issue 2.

Improved modeling for Executioner and Mongoose is coming as well as other PPM procs. I've thought through and come up with a way to properly implement ppm procs. Namely, they can be initially modeled as estimated uptimes (so that the cycles have something to go by for the added damage potential). Then, post that calculation, a true ppm calculation can be determined (based on the cycles suggested that would be optimized with the estimate of their damage included). Add or subtract the difference from the estimate, and it should give actual DPS. To make things even more exact, I plan to link the final proc uptimes to the Calculate AEP button (which would change the dps estimates to match the final calculated values) thus avoiding circular references within the sheet and essentially solving the circular references through Macro. That should leave the uncertainty to the theorycraft of the actual PPM of the proc itself.

thanks.

I did some tests over the last raid (basicly frapsed part of azgalor encounter to see more less approximate uptime of hemo debuff). It appears that its around 2 seconds before all stacks get eaten in 25-man environment (and last night that was MT, critcat, another rogue, hunter and tankadin for consideration of physical attacks). Then another 2 seconds of downtime before I was able to apply a new stacks. I hope its helpfull information

The two seconds for the stack to be eaten is important to know, and very close to estimates I've seen around. Though I think DMM will want a few thousand WWS stats from different raid setups to make as good an estimate as possible. When In my own guild we generally have a tank, 3 rogues and 1 hunter, and depending on who's tanking and what boss also 1 warrior/druid. Uptime is pretty similar when all physical is on the same target, but it takes a bit longer to get all hemocharges used when this is not the case (for example during phase 1 on Al'ar, when it's only 3 rogues and a tankadin on the adds)


The theoretically perfect applicationrate (which is used by the sheet) for Hemo is 3.5 seconds, since in 14 seconds you gain 280 energy, which is enough for 280 energy / (35energy/hemo) = 8 hemo's ->

Hmm...2 seconds seems pretty long, but maybe that's because we often have 3 Rogues, 3 Hunters, melee Shaman, DPS Warrior not to mention tank and offtank and pets.

Regardless, I imagine most people use the Debuff estimate, and given that is modeled by charges used (should generally be 100%), the actual debuff time doesn't matter for it. It does matter for personal DPS as a debuff. I'd like to see a better estimate of its uptime and with a more normal group makeup. So, if anyone ever does do an actual statistical breakdown from a combat log, let me know.

A couple other things about the next few versions...

Next update is now slated as another minor bug fix plus Mac compatibility patch.
I have been told that the test version seems to work on a Mac to load the saved talent builds. That means I can apply very similar workarounds and get all the other buttons working for full Mac compatibility (at least for those versions of Excel prior to the just released one). The only Macro that still should not work is the Wow Armory import. Given that I see the new saved builds feature as a major stepping stone to upcoming UI improvements (for example, a gear comparison sheet where you can pull 2 of your saved gear sets to the page and look at a detailed comparison), getting this option to work on Macs is a high priority and thus worth it's own update.

New Adrenaline Rush modeling (need your input)
Based on some discussion I read in the Roguecraft 101 forum, I've figured out a way to better model AR, I think. This is where your input comes in. Vulajin suggested that really the best way to use AR was to tack on a 5-pt Eviscerate to your existing cycle as the energy cost is similar to the energy gained.

It wouldn't be very hard to pull the added Adrenaline Rush energy out of the energy cycle. Add a 5-pt Eviscerate / 5 minutes (with instants) to the final damage output and just charge the small energy difference to the energy cycle. The assumption would be that your normal cycle could make up for the slight energy lost to get to a full 5-pt Evis. As a bonus, this is probably quite a bit more accurate than the existing way AR is handled (namely it's just added to the energy cycle)

So, my questions to the users of this sheet:
1) Do you have any problems with the reasoning?
2) Are there any other better ways to use the AR energy that people employ?
3) Any other suggestions/advice on Adrenaline Rush specifically?

I'm very tempted to add this new modeling as part of the next update assuming it looks like there is a general consensus that this is an improvement.

Some feedback:

1) No, I think the way you explained it comes quite close the real use of AR.
2) I can't really come up with something better, you could try an EA if there's no warrior available for sunders.
3) This is probably a rather impossible suggestion, but an option to combine cd's might be nice.
AR combined with an AP trinket and BF for example provides higher returns then each cd used separate.
This depends on the playstyle of the person in question, but it might make a difference.

There seems to be an error in MH and OH socket bonuses. Basically Cells P3 and P7 on the Sockfit tab need to have the 25s changed to 17s. You corrected a similar error in the ranged row (P43). If you fix these two as well, all will be well. Great resource, thanks!

I've been trying to figure out what is going on behind the scenes to figure out the 3/3 Imp SnD = -14 dps for me issue and all I've learned is how complex a feat it was to put this spreadsheet together. You're doing the Lord's work. Thanks a billion!

Hemo - Swords outdpsing Combat Swords? Oo How accurate is that?

Just a quick reply, but don't forget combat daggers folks.
AR provides less combo to that spec, and those are never used on eviscerate.

Unless I am missing something, you would really need to add 5 SS's and a 5 point evis.

He's got it covered .

Also, its 4 SS's (AR = 150 extra energy) and hope you get a Ruthlessness proc. Generally if you buffer some energy and run 4s/5r you'll be fine. Most rogues are in the 3.Xs/5r cycle range, so doing 4s/5r should give you a bit of slack energy.

Actually, if you are speaking of raid contribution as opposed to personal damage (and thus adding in the bonus damage that the Hemo debuff provides to the physical damage portion of the rest of your raid), it is actually true until you get toward the higher end of Tier 5 in terms of gear level. Adding 10 charges of 42 additional damage per successful Hemo that is multiplied by crits and some other damage multipliers makes Hemo raid viable under these circumstances.

Of course, generally speaking, when one makes comments such as yours (especially a first post on these forums), one should be doing a little research first and providing a relatively informed opinion. There are many rogue threads that have been discussing this phenomenon over the past few months. Usually if one wishes to dispute a point, one adds an informed explanation of why one feels a certain fact might be wrong. Additionally, non-words such as "Oo" are generally frowned upon in favor of actual words and proper sentence structure.

Adrenaline Rush re-modeling thus far

Expose Armor
Seems to me that when that becomes necessary, the Expose Armor is part of the normal cycle. Although, if the spreadsheet were to model EA as a cycle, the preferred AR add-on cycle would probably be 5r as opposed to 5e. Until the spreadsheet models EA as a cycle, I think I'm good here. Adding EA cycles someday might be an idea.

Combat Swords
It appears there is general agreement that Eviscerate is probably the best way to go here. The only issue, were some people suggesting that one cuts short to a 4e if one does not receive the free combo point from the preceding finisher? Or, do you think 5e is still the way to go here?

Combat Daggers
Yes, the energy difference is more extreme. Does someone want to suggest a preferred modeling? Would the correct modeling be something like a 1s/5r as a substitute (rather than an addition) to the normal dagger cycle? Suggestions?