I'd be hesitant to draw any conclusions from 611 attacks. Assuming it's 1 PPM, your data is 3 standard deviations from the mean - unlikely, certainly, but not so unlikely as to rule out a statistical fluke.

In the early days of the expansion, I recall testing the proc rate using my Webbed Death, which, at the time, had Mongoose on it. And I recall concluding that the PPM was probably around 1. Regrettably, I have mislaid the original parameters of the test, so I can't swear as to the details, but that's my recollection. And, in point of fact, my best guess at the parameters of the test puts the proc rate even lower than 1 PPM - I'm getting .8 or so, though I make no claims that I haven't misremembered the details of the test. So I'd suggest that we perform slightly more systematic and lengthy testing - 5 or 10 thousand attacks at least - before jumping to any conclusions.

Saving with Open Office (in original format not ODF) breaks the the Envenom DPS Cell B48 on DPS-Sheet (the one that is never hidden if there are more than one) for Microsoft Excel 2007. Other DPS numbers seem to work and in Open Office the Sheet works as normal.

The formula in the cell itself looks the same and Copy pasting it over from the original sheet does not fix it. My guess is some underlying variables formula is formatted by Open Office and Excel does not get it.

Problem is the same in new and old version of sheet.

Edit: Yes the Mutilate damagebonus seems to be enabled by default. In other words the sheet assumes the target to be poisoned at all times.

@Vulajin: Did you change anything with the cycles? I tried realy hard to enter the exact same information in the two sheets and somehow the new one comes up with a thighter cycle 18.35s down from 18.80s and thus more DPS.
Stats in the DPS sheet are almost identical (I somehow have 2 AP more) but all in all the difference seems to come from the shorter cycle and nothing else.

I did edit the old sheet to account for all the 3.0.9 changes in what I presume is the correct way.

PS: The True/False trigger next to Bloodlust has no effect and thus should be removed to not confuse people.

In my case (Combat) my 5s/5r/5e cycle build went from 28.17s to 28.24s (lower DPS) and of course a bit lower DPS (same settings, same gear, same buffs). I investigated it to find that the only cell responsible is Cycles!B1 (Energy per second) - inserting exact value from 0.4.4 resulted in reverting back to 28.17 and almost same old DPS. Further investigation shown that previous value of this cell referred to cycleslice2 cell which had value of 100% while now it refers to cycleslice1 cell with value of 96%. I've lost myself there and have no idea which calculations are correct and which are not, so until somebody else will explain it better, let's assume that new version is simply more accurate.

Edit: I can bring more details on my specific gear and settings if needed

I performed further testings and found some interesting tid bits.

After 3660 HITS, it procced 258 times. This means the proc rate should be between 1.57 and 2.00 -- 19 times out of 20. However, this is not the reason I am posting this. Could it be that the proc mechanic concerns itself with the level of the mob you are fighting or that glancings are unable to proc?

I was initially performing my tests on a level 60 dummy in order to avoid misses since I was just interested in the hits. When I turned to the boss dummy for the heck of it, I found out my proc rate to be drastically reduced in the range of 1 PPM. The sample for that test was very low (11 procs out of 300), but I was curious to know if anyone was aware of such an effect before wasting another 3-4 hours. Thank you.

to add thoughts for smarter people to play with, are these the cells that were referenced in change stating that SND uptime assume 100% before cycles applied in the version change notes?

or perhaps a slight difference in energy regen procs calculated now that the sheets are streamlined instead of feeding back and forth (or whatever they did before).

Hopefully my inane comments will cause others better suited to expound helpfully =)

This is from the notes he posted in the thread when he updated the version. It states "always assumes targets are poisoned".

I hope that clears it up for people that keep asking.

Well, the reason I'm asking is because I once questioned myself what poisons I should run with while doing dailies (or in some 10-man when there is no one who can apply a posion to the target) with WD/WD and eviscerate mutilate build. I managed to find the answer by removing the assumption of the target being always poisoned in the previous version of the spreadsheet (just putting back the originial string but chaning 0.5 to 0.2). So I wondered how this could be achieved in the new version too.

Version 0.4.6 is available via the download link in the first post. Changes in this version:

- Expertise is no longer truncated (i.e. each point of expertise rating provides equal effect).
- Bloodlust modeling streamlined slightly.
- Slightly changed the calculation path for Slice and Dice uptime, preventing the drop-off that previously occurred on DPS Calc 2.
- Hyperspeed Accelerators cooldown reduced to 60 seconds, duration increased to 10 seconds.
- Added some logic to automatically activate the Master Poisoner or Savage Combat debuffs if those talents are taken.
- Added an option to assume that the target is always being poisoned by someone (for Mutilate).
- Skinning now properly provides 32 crit rating.
- The damage breakdown header on data entry sheets no longer displays values adding up to less than 100% of your DPS.
- Cooldown-based haste effects now properly affect Instant Poison and Wound Poison DPS.
- Fixed a naming issue that was causing problems for OpenOffice users.

Sorry for the second update in two days. I just happened to have some extra free time today and thought it'd be a good opportunity to try to get all the small stuff I've been putting on the back burner into the sheet. This way, 0.5.0 will be focused primarily on my planned overhaul of the cycle models, rather than having a lot of extraneous other stuff to worry about.

If there are any further issues that I've overlooked, even if they're small, they're most likely going to wait until 0.5.0.

Getting an "Err:508" iwith open office 3.0.1 (german), in the lk0.4.6 sheet. The lk.0.4.5 sheet was not giving me errors.

Getting the same 508 error, English version.

Unhide the various "DPS Calc" and "Cycles" sheets and screenshot where else those errors are occurring, if you can.

(edit) Also does the error occur right off the bat before you make any changes to the sheet at all, or did you change something to yield the error?

Root cause seems to be that it's choking on the formulas in Cycles1 starting with cell AL45. Making any change whatsoever to the formula - even adding 0 - fixes it, and you can even delete the change afterward and have it still work; but for some reason, until you force OO to reparse the statement somehow, it doesn't like it. Note that error 508 generally refers to mismatched parentheses and the like, so I'm guessing it's somehow getting confused by the nested "IF"s.

Random question, does anyone know if OpenOffice supports INDIRECT()?

It happens immediately upon load. Without doing anything at all to anything. I doubt you will need screenshots with what Aldriana has said now will you?

(Edit) According to the OpenOffice help, it does support "INDIRECT()"

You would be correct, as I just updated the download link in the first post to version 0.4.7. Changes:

- Really fixed the naming errors for OpenOffice users.

And hoo boy do I hope I'm right this time.

Well, I used INDIRECT() to reference named cell ranges. Hopefully that doesn't share the same pitfalls as indirect references to specific cells. I sort of wanted to switch to something like this already, because the code to determine which cycle table to reference on the Cycles sheets was getting more and more unwieldy, adding any more cycle types would have resulted in badness.

Yeah, the way you're using it there seems to work. Just don't try using it to point to specific cells instead of named ranges, or you'll regret it.

I just downloaded the 0.4.7 sheet and found it full of error:502

Which version of OpenOffice are you using? I got the same errors in 2.3, but not in 3.0.

I'm still using 2.0, I'll give 3.0 a whirl though.

Edit: Updating OOo worked, thanks for the heads up.

For those of you using Excel and wanting some gear search automation, i threw together a 4.7 version with buttons for finding gear and gem upgrades. There's also a couple other minor cosmetic changes for info displaying.

Roguecraft LK 0.4.7_macro.xls