08/30/09, 3:39 PM #1816 Vef Von Kaiser   Vef Gnome Rogue   Dun Morogh (EU) The Xs/Ye cycle only uses 1 evis before snd renewal, so if you use a 5 CP SnD for a slice time of 31 sec and a 5 CP evis you have a a CP builder time of ~17 sec and this time is set to the actual cycle time. So 14 seconds of snd uptime are wasted. So using imp. SnD makes no difference for the Xs/Ye cycle as the cycle time is still 17 sec. Last edited by Vef : 08/30/09 at 3:45 PM.
 08/30/09, 6:31 PM #1817 Mavanas Great Tiger   Mavanas Night Elf Rogue   Lightning's Blade I was always wondering about how cycle-based spreadsheets accounted for RNG. Let's take for example the sinister strike glyph. If average time to build 10 combo points is 17 seconds, it takes 1.7s for one. So let's say you model a cycle of 3/5/5, which with improved SND should last 22.5 seconds, enough time to build on average 13 combo points. However due to RNG of the glyph, it could take between 18 and 27 seconds to build enough combo points for an entire cycle. Let's say you were not very lucky, and building 13 combo points took you 27 seconds, thus making you go without SND for 5.5 seconds. Does the spreadsheet calculate the loss of SND uptime due to RNG factors like that or does it simply assume an average cycle of 22.5 seconds and 100% snd uptime?
 09/01/09, 5:19 AM #1818 Radmsc Von Kaiser   Radmsc Dwarf Rogue   Quel'Thalas (EU) Can someone explain me why I have a sudden increase of Expertise with my gear? I have entered exactly the same options and gear into the new sheet, but I see a difference of 1,25%, which is 5 expertise. I read back a few pages, but I can't find an explanation. I find it hard to explain so I just uploaded the two sheets so someone can have a look at it: Old Sheet New Sheet Last edited by Radmsc : 09/01/09 at 5:20 AM. Reason: Faulty links
09/01/09, 5:32 AM   #1819
todemax
Piston Honda

Troll Rogue

Zenedar (EU)
 Originally Posted by Radmsc Can someone explain me why I have a sudden increase of Expertise with my gear? I have entered exactly the same options and gear into the new sheet, but I see a difference of 1,25%, which is 5 expertise. I read back a few pages, but I can't find an explanation. I find it hard to explain so I just uploaded the two sheets so someone can have a look at it: Old Sheet New Sheet
It appears that the expertise from Dwarf Racial wasn't added to the G9 cell (On Gear and Talents sheet) in roguecraft1.xls. The calculations are the same though, so apparently just a tooltip fix.

09/01/09, 12:53 PM   #1820
Genre
Von Kaiser

Blood Elf Rogue

Undermine
It is my thought that cycle-based spreadsheets use averages. So in your example would mean that you get 22.5 combos out of a complete cycle. This leads you to change your cycle in order to have a rotation that on average will not get SnD to drop. Cycle-based spreadsheets are deterministic in nature, there is no luck involved in the DPS calculations and you cannot say the odds of falling within a certain range of DPS values is X%. The DPS distribution is unknown.

On the other hand, stochastic modeling (simulations) do give you a better insight of your DPS distribution which permits you to calculate various values such as average, standard deviations and condition-tail-expectations which could prove useful in pointing out the setups that would not only provide the highest average but also a smaller standard deviations for consistent DPS.

 Originally Posted by Mavanas I was always wondering about how cycle-based spreadsheets accounted for RNG. Let's take for example the sinister strike glyph. If average time to build 10 combo points is 17 seconds, it takes 1.7s for one. So let's say you model a cycle of 3/5/5, which with improved SND should last 22.5 seconds, enough time to build on average 13 combo points. However due to RNG of the glyph, it could take between 18 and 27 seconds to build enough combo points for an entire cycle. Let's say you were not very lucky, and building 13 combo points took you 27 seconds, thus making you go without SND for 5.5 seconds. Does the spreadsheet calculate the loss of SND uptime due to RNG factors like that or does it simply assume an average cycle of 22.5 seconds and 100% snd uptime?

09/01/09, 3:00 PM   #1822
noesis7
Glass Joe

Night Elf Rogue

Anetheron

The logic you have is somewhat sound but I think the error is in the way you are analyzing the variables. Instead of viewing it as an average of the total number of CPs generated per SS cast it needs to be dealt with individually and every SS compared to the % of crit likelihood at each occurrence. The goal of course would be to continue until the total 5 CPs is generated (assuming in this case at least that SND uptime is not a priority). Therefore the cycle time is estimated by the outcome of each cast individually instead of a variable based on the average outcome of the each SS in the entire cycle itself. Now if SND uptime is brought into the scenario then instead of a CP count of 5 being the trigger for the next event the the termination of the cycle would be tied to the time of the prior SND termination which of course would be tied to the results of the prior CP build up. By doing it this way the randomness of the simulation is built in from the very beginning instead of being tied to the end of the cycle.

Last edited by noesis7 : 09/01/09 at 5:31 PM. Reason: Corrected some miswording

 09/01/09, 3:07 PM #1823 Mavanas Great Tiger   Mavanas Night Elf Rogue   Lightning's Blade To be certain, I am not talking about a simulation. I have created a simulation spreadsheet of rogue dps for these forums, so I know exactly how a simulation operates. My question is about average-cycle spreadsheet, such as the one currently being updated by Vef.
 09/01/09, 4:14 PM #1824 Bastaras Glass Joe   Bastaras Night Elf Rogue   Kul Tiras I am using the most recent version of Vef's Mutilate spreadsheet. It is telling me that using Instant Poison on both weapons will increase my dps by 800-900 points. It also says using Envenom for my finisher instead of Eviscerate yields an even larger increase. Which is interesting since you can't envenom without Deadly Poison. Is this an error or is double IP really that much better?
 09/01/09, 4:27 PM #1825 Joigahdenn Piston Honda     Joigahdenn Night Elf Rogue   Cenarius Using dual IP and envenom will *not* increase your dps. While I'm not familiar with Vef's sheet, this sounds very much like a bug. It sounds to me like the sheet doesn't require DP for envenoms, which as you state isn't actually possible in game, so you're seeing a DPS increase because of the higher damage IP in addition to envenoms. Edit: I'm not entirely up to snuff on dual IP/evis vs. IP/DP envenom, but think that dual IP pulls ahead of your standard envenom build provided someone else is poisoning the target (don't quote me on that though).
 09/01/09, 5:26 PM #1827 Mavanas Great Tiger   Mavanas Night Elf Rogue   Lightning's Blade Thanks Aldriana. I understand your points regarding energy pooling even though I can't judge about how realistic it is to assume energy pooling can consume all combat-spec rng. Especially going into mutilate, the variance of random processes there is even higher due to Seal Fate, so it's hard to imagine energy pooling can completely consume it. Besides energy pooling has problems of its own with mutilate. For instance, timing envenoms with DP ticks and trying to pool energy to even 60 often leads to energy capping or disruption of envenom-timing, both of which hurt one's dps. So I would not advise to pool energy while doing envenom-based mutilate and rather focus on timing envenoms to DP ticks. I am curious about your approach with attack priorities instead of cycles. The artificiality of cycles was one of the big reasons why I took on the simulation approach to estimating dps. Analytical modeling of dps based on attack priorities, if I understand it right, brings it much closer to simulation approach in terms of realism of dps modeling. Yet you don't run into problems with variance of your DPS estimates. So when you do venture into that new-thread territory, I am definitely going to take a look.
09/01/09, 5:40 PM   #1828
• Vulajin
Vula'jin the Void, blessed by the loa

Mal'Ganis
Pardon me if I misunderstand the ongoing discussion, since I've only been loosely following this thread of late. It seems that the question at hand is, how does the Roguecraft sheet handle the variance in CP generation and timing introduced by Glyph of Sinister Strike.

The answer goes back to Left's work on the Mutilate modeling in the original Rogue DPS Spreadsheet back in BC. He devised a calculation table which took, as inputs, your desired number of CP (X) and your various CP-generating procs/talents/whatever. Then, based on whether you were using Mutilate or SS/BS, it would calculate your likelihood of reaching X CP, or of overshooting it and hitting X+1 or X+2. It would also calculate the average number of combo moves performed to reach each amount. In his implementation, the averaging was done at this point to figure out how many combo moves you'd perform per cycle as well as how many CP you'd generate.

I deferred the average calculation a little longer. First I calculated the results of running a cycle consisting of each combination of possible outcomes, i.e. if you're running (X+)s/(Y+)r, then we'd want to simulate Xs/Yr, (X+1)s/Yr, (X+2)s/Yr, Xs/(Y+1)r, etc. The damage output, cycle length, and all the other quantities of these cycles are each computed separately, and then averaged together based on the likelihood of their occurrence. Unless Vef has greatly changed the sheet, you can see all this stuff at work on the Cycles calculation sheet.

 Originally Posted by Enervate Yep, still a fucking idiot.

09/01/09, 11:09 PM   #1829
Lodfish
Von Kaiser

Troll Rogue

Kilrogg
 Originally Posted by Vef I added a 3.2.2 version with Master Poisoner changes and Envenom scaling with 9% with AP.
A couple of bug notes on this spreadsheet.

-It is displaying my haste 20.16% instead of the 10.16% in game and on the 3.2 sheet. I believe this is just a display error.
-Both sheets list my Agility as 1418, but in game it is 1424. Is this a rounding error?

Also, a non-bug (i think). Those of you using "Victor's Call/Vengeance of the Forsaken (Faction Champions-10)" may notice a dps (And AP) decrease. This is because he removed the flat AP from the trinkets and added them to the cooldowns 1 sheet. It took me a few minutes to figure out where the big drop in AP was coming from.

09/02/09, 6:54 AM   #1830
trrdr
Von Kaiser

Orc Hunter

Kargath (EU)
 Originally Posted by Lodfish -It is displaying my haste 20.16% instead of the 10.16% in game and on the 3.2 sheet. I believe this is just a display error.
Did you consider Lightning Reflexes?

 Originally Posted by Lodfish -Both sheets list my Agility as 1418, but in game it is 1424. Is this a rounding error?
I don't recall if Vulajin's sheet had the option or not, but if so: did you choose the correct race?

 Originally Posted by Lodfish Also, a non-bug (i think). Those of you using "Victor's Call/Vengeance of the Forsaken (Faction Champions-10)" may notice a dps (And AP) decrease. This is because he removed the flat AP from the trinkets and added them to the cooldowns 1 sheet. It took me a few minutes to figure out where the big drop in AP was coming from.
The trinket doesn't have flat AP, you gain the (stacking) AP bonus on use and with a 2 minute cd. So without being able to download and check the spreadsheet at the moment I still think he implemented it correctly and you are somehow mistaken as to how the trinket works.