Mavanas

There are 3 factors related to offhand speed for mutilate. If your offhand is slower, holding dps constant:
- mutilate on average hits harder
- application rate of instant poison from mutilate is higher
- your offhand crits are less frequent, which means you gain less energy through Focused Attacks


My analysis shows that the last effect dominates, so it's still better to use fast offhand when you are using eviscerate, double IP spec.

EDIT: changed order of factors

 

Grishmaluk

I have a question regarding rotations. It's possible to make a 5s/5r rotation and according to the spreadsheet it boosts your rupture damage with almost double the damage comparing to 5s/5r/5e. At least for me. That makes me wonder if the spreadsheet is modeling rupture to be able to overlap and thus do double damage for a short period of time, or something like that, cause I really have a hard time beliveing those numbers.

 

Murolith

In my gear (primarily Ulduar 25), double IP does NOT come out ahead of IP/DP on the sheet. I actually never could get it ahead by any amount unless I went to Tier 9 equivalent gear, getting rid of the T8 set bonus, and then replaced the Glyph of Rupture with Glyph of Eviscerate. Even then it was only by about 2 DPS.

 

Maweric

yes, I did re-check the results and true, ip dp goes ahed actually quite alot but only if you use 0/3 MP 4/3/4 rotation, im just having hard time to believe that DP could stack fast enough without MP

 

Vef

Indeed there was an error with MP not being included when using Xe/Yr/Ze (CttC)

Roguecraft 3.2
sp00n's Roguesheet AEP Values

 

dardz

Hey Vef.

I don't think the spreadsheet is calculating 40 crit rating for Master of Anatomy(Skinning). I have a 40 crit rating difference from char sheet and it's the only thing I can think that is missing.

 

Ghumganuk

Ok, I must be having a complete brain fart but when adding weapons I cannot figure out what the damage column means. At first, I thought it was max damage on the range... when looking at the current listed weapons, I cannot trace which value they are...for example, Malice has a number 448, nowhere on [Malice] do I see that.

Thanks in advance, sorry for noobishness.

 

saedo

It's the average. (313+582) / 2 = 447.5

 

Vef

I added a 3.2.2 version with Master Poisoner changes and Envenom scaling with 9% with AP.

Roguecraft 3.2
sp00n's Roguesheet AEP Values

 

Perforate-CC

For the XsXe only cycle (which will only be good once the 4 set of t8 is broken and armor pen stacks to nice levels...

Can you edit the sheet to give "Improved SnD" value? Running a "Rupture only" cycle "Improved SnD" isnt needed as "Rupture" is a DoT lasting roughly as long as a standard 5pt SnD.

For an "Eviscerate only" cycle though, "Improved SnD" is big for obvious reasons... but putting 2/2 in it doesnt change your DPS at all, and it should.

 

Iteken

Hi Vef.

Does your Mutilate sheet accurately Model the Tier9 Bonuses?

The reason for asking is; I've been fiddling around with the sheet for the last couple of days trying to find a way to justify 2 sets of gear. The first utilizes my existing 5pc of T8 in various combinations, along with Non-HC Colosseum Loot. This gives an approximately 10% dps boost from my existing set. The second replacing all T8 with T9.245. This is a 1% dps Loss from Tier8 gemmed for agility, and 0.8% gemmed for Pure AP.

The offset pieces I've selected are as follows:
[Hood of Lethal Intent]
[Collar of Ceaseless Torment]
[Soul-Devouring Cinch]
[Acidmaw Treads]
[Armbands of Dark Determination]
[Dexterous Brightstone Ring]
[Planestalker Band]
[Death's Choice]
[Dark Matter]
[Cloak of the Untamed Predator]

The only way it's possible, for Mutilate using this level of gear, to surpass Tier8 is to Only use Heroic/HC loot, which whilst an admirable goal, it somewhat unlikely in the short-to medium term, even then only providing under a percent of DPS gain.

To cut a long story short, is Tier9 really that bad for Mutilate, or am I doing something horrifically wrong with the sheet? I hope it's the former though, as our guild's SKG system really fails to enmesh with, in any way, with Colosseum method of giving out tokens.

Thanks for your time.

 

turbare

It's pretty bad for combat as well. Badge version of T9 is too low to break the T8 4pc for it, the normal version (token+badges) is barely pulling ahead if using 4pc, and the only version of T9 which is actually a big increase is the heroic version, which isn't even out yet. Pretty sad, T8 4pc is so good that you don't want to break it

 

Vef

I`ll add a Xs/Ye/Ze cycle for combat in the next days

Roguecraft 3.2
sp00n's Roguesheet AEP Values

 

Perforate-CC

What does that cycle stand for? Eviscerate and EA?

If so, all I am saying is that the current cycle of XsXe (which is an Eviscerate only cycle, right?) doesnt give any value to Improved SnD (which it should)

 

Teromus

I'm pretty sure the second 'e' is referring to a second eviscerate, for obvious reasons.

 

Vef

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.

Roguecraft 3.2
sp00n's Roguesheet AEP Values

 

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?

 

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

 

todemax

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.

 

Genre

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.

 

Mavanas

While they differ from simulations in more than one way, cycle-based spreadsheets still estimate expected values of stochastic processes. There is a correct way to do it, and there is an incorrect way to do it, and I was trying to find out, how it is done with respect to the glyph of sinister strike. Because I am asking about this specific spreadsheet, the question is for Vef, but if someone else has an insight into this issue, please share too.

The goal of the spreadsheet is to determine DPS, which is a non-linear transformation of several random processes. A random process is a stochastic event that can have several outcomes probabilities of which are known a priori. For instance, the effect of a glyph of sinister strike is a random variable that takes on a value of 2 if sinister strike crits and grants 2 combo points, and a value of 1 if it does not crit, which translates into 1 combo point. The probability of each outcome is your crit rate with special abilities, let's assume it is 50%. Knowing the probabilities of each event allows us to determine average value of the random variable. In this case we can determine that on average a sinister strike that does not get dodged and does not miss will grant 1.5 combo points.

While the distribution of the glyph process is uniform between 1 and 2 with average value of 1.5, the non-linear transformation of this process into DPS makes it incorrect to plug in an average value of 1.5 into the spreadsheet and come up with an average DPS value. To illustrate the non-linearity, consider extreme outcomes: a) all sinister strikes crit, so it takes only 18 seconds to build 13 combo points, which is enough for the cycle, as a result you clip snd for 4.5 seconds, b) all sinister strikes do not crit, so it takes 27 seconds to build 13 combo points for the cycle, and you go for 5.5 seconds without SND. Relative to the average case of critting 50% of the time, the deviation of case b) from the average is clearly much bigger than that of case a), even though both cases are equally likely. SO the transformation is assymetrical and therefore non-linear. In this example, plugging in the average value of 1.5 combo points in the spreadsheet will most likely OVERESTIMATE the average dps value.

 

noesis7

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.

 

Mavanas

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.

 

Bastaras

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?

 

Joigahdenn

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).