EnhSim, DPS simulator - Page 99

Sylvand · 09/02/09, 11:47 AM

1.8.3.3 is out. This updates only the EnhSim.exe and config.txt files; the GUI has not been updated with this release.

EnhSim - Release: v1.8.3.3

Adding Flare of the Heavens (flare_of_the_heavens, 45518), 10% chance to proc on direct spell damage (shock LB, LO, CL, LvB)
Changing Totem of Quaking Earth to 400 AP proc with 9s ICD
Changing Totem of Electrifying Winds to 70% proc chance.

Vespasian · 09/02/09, 12:06 PM

Preliminary sim using BiS setup says that Quaking Earth sims 13 DPS lower than Electrifying Wind, and this DPS gets worse as LL is moved up the priority list.

DPS with electifying wind went up by about 10 DPS with the latest version of the sim btw.

Mogadee · 09/02/09, 12:14 PM

I don't think that simming with ToQE will be all that effective as Enhsim does not take into account that we would open with LL>SS>ES then go into the normal priotity list.

If an opening attack sequence could be added or a LL_QE (LL if QE buff is off) to the priority list, then I think we would see its true, if any, gain.

Aximous · 09/02/09, 12:46 PM

I doubt on the long term it would be much of a gain since you would get to LL after at worst 4 casts in the opening and after that it's near 100% uptime so you'd loose only very little dps in the beginning.

Sylvand · 09/02/09, 1:00 PM

I'm seeing the same thing with the BiS setup. The ToEW increase is of course due to adjusting the proc chance (70% from 66%).

It looks like haste being weird in action again; for my current gear ToQE is simming about 100 dps increase.

Rouncer · 09/02/09, 1:08 PM

Originally Posted by Vespasian

Preliminary sim using BiS setup says that Quaking Earth sims 13 DPS lower than Electrifying Wind, and this DPS gets worse as LL is moved up the priority list.

DPS with electifying wind went up by about 10 DPS with the latest version of the sim btw.

Did you remember to add MW3-CL back into the rotation and to drop MW3-LB when using ToQE? Once ToQE is fixed it is the best option and should be on the BiS set no matter what the sim says. Why? Because not every encounter is a single target stand still fight and ToEW is an awful choice for those encounters since it precludes using chain lightning. If you want your BiS list to have relevancy to the conditions people are facing in the game and to be an aid to people interested in maximizing their performance then you have to take that into account.

Sylvand, would changing the combat time setting to a variable range help to fix some of that haste weirdness? So that each combat session would have a random amount of time in combat based on a range set in the config? It would function similar to latency in the config/GUI and would add another element of realism into the sim's functionality.

Couple of other things I've been thinking about on the realism front would be percentage of time in melee range and a multiple target option. Not sure how to determine a percentage of time in melee range without someone coding a mod that would track the percentage of time in melee range per combat period but the multiple target option shouldn't be too hard to incorporate.

Sylvand · 09/02/09, 8:34 PM

Originally Posted by Rouncer

Did you remember to add MW3-CL back into the rotation and to drop MW3-LB when using ToQE? Once ToQE is fixed it is the best option and should be on the BiS set no matter what the sim says. Why? Because not every encounter is a single target stand still fight and ToEW is an awful choice for those encounters since it precludes using chain lightning. If you want your BiS list to have relevancy to the conditions people are facing in the game and to be an aid to people interested in maximizing their performance then you have to take that into account.

Sylvand, would changing the combat time setting to a variable range help to fix some of that haste weirdness? So that each combat session would have a random amount of time in combat based on a range set in the config? It would function similar to latency in the config/GUI and would add another element of realism into the sim's functionality.

Couple of other things I've been thinking about on the realism front would be percentage of time in melee range and a multiple target option. Not sure how to determine a percentage of time in melee range without someone coding a mod that would track the percentage of time in melee range per combat period but the multiple target option shouldn't be too hard to incorporate.

I'll play around with variable fight intervals. In theory I could add an optional parameter for the range/etc. and whoever is maintaining the GUI could add it in somewhere. It's not obvious to me right now that this is going to fix any variance issues, but I'll see.

As far as melee range etc., multi-target (for magma totem and chain lightning) is probably feasible, anything else is probably beyond the scope of what I can really commit. As you mention it's a very open ended problem; potentially it would be something to do for jEnhSim.

Vespasian · 09/02/09, 9:33 PM

Originally Posted by Rouncer

Did you remember to add MW3-CL back into the rotation and to drop MW3-LB when using ToQE? Once ToQE is fixed it is the best option and should be on the BiS set no matter what the sim says. Why? Because not every encounter is a single target stand still fight and ToEW is an awful choice for those encounters since it precludes using chain lightning. If you want your BiS list to have relevancy to the conditions people are facing in the game and to be an aid to people interested in maximizing their performance then you have to take that into account.

Rouncer, I did in fact remember to do this and MW3/4_CL simmed lower than MW3_LB whilst using the ToQE by about 20 DPS.

As for your argument relating to the instant BiS status of ToQE because it allows you to use CL, it sounds suspiciously like your argument that Cat's Swiftness is the instant BiS boots enchant because some encounters require you to run between targets; the similarity being that they are both based on innacurate assumptions (the TTT still needs to be updated on that btw). Let's break this down further:

We first need to ask whether or not CL is part of an optimal DPS rotation. At face value, this does not seem to be the case as MW3/4_CL sims lower than MW3_LB with both the enh and the ele totems. If the sim is accurate on this front and there are no unexplored talent/roation setups available, we can then say that CL holds no value for us on single target DPS encounters.

We then need to ask 'how many encounters does CL provide superior DPS for?' Since this is a BiS list for T9 content, it makes sense to limit ourselves to ToC for the purposes of answering this question; this is where a majority of people's raiding time will be spent for the moment. Having completed ToC last night, I can say with a fair degree of certainty that the only encounter that I would use CL on would be Anub'arak, where it is in fact extremely useful. To break it down further:

Beasts- Single target DPS the whole time
Jarraxus- Single target DPS the whole time (ranged kill adds)
Faction Champs- Single target DPS most of the time (there is little point in 'splash damaging' the non-DPS targets)
Twins- Single target DPS the whole time
Anub- Mass aoe.

Therefore, I think it would be fair to say that since the Ele totem provides superior DPS on 4/5 encounters, it is likely to be BiS.

The last step in this would be to calculate the total DPS gained by using the Ele totem throughout a full ToC run vs the DPS lost during Anub due to the fact that you are not deriving any benefit from your totem (you are still going to be casting CL, you just wont be getting any buffs from your totem whilst doing so). I honestly am not inclined to bother with this since all we need do is take into account the very obvious fact that I can of course own both of these totems, and can switch them out as needed. When we are up to Anub, or any other encounter where I am casting a lot of CL, I will simply switch totems.

So no, I do not agree that Quaking Earth is the BiS totem by any stretch as the sim results, the single target nature of most ToC encounters and the fact that I am able to switch totems as I please means that the Ele totem is, in my view, a better overall totem.

I welcome any evidence that demonstrates different findings. If you want your advice to have relevancy to the conditions people are facing in game and to be an aid to people interested in maximizing their performance then you have to able provide accurate evidence to support what you are saying.

Rouncer · 09/03/09, 2:01 AM

So you don't use chain lightning to hit snobalds if they are on people in melee range? Just one example but do what you will it is your thread after all. I just hate that people who are just getting involved in the TC side of the game will take what you post in that thread as gospel and end up hurting their play for it.

How is that Icewalker enchant working out for you on Heroic Ice Howl? I know that encounter is making me think about going back to Cat's Speed and I have Rocket Boots. As for the TTT when you get to be an editor then you can change the section about boot enchants to reflect your poor assumptions. You haven't proven your case to my satisfaction so it doesn't get into the TTT.

By the way, you have an error in your BiS config. You can't have both Mana Spring and Blessing of Wisdom since they won't stack and you might want to think about adding a charge to when the sim will refresh LS (it adds about 10dps even with the loss from the increased oom time).

Vespasian · 09/03/09, 2:45 AM

My purpose in discussing both Cat's AND this was to reject your assertion that both Cat's and the Enh totem are BiS because of the benefit they provide under certain conditions. I think I manged to prove (in both circumstances) that alternatives (Icewalker and Ele totem) are just as viable, if not more viable, than the alternatives. I was not saying that one is better than the other all the time; only that one is better than the other under certain conditions. In the case of Cat's, I make clear reference to this in my OP to give people the choice; I think it would be useful if the TTT did the same (not to mention that the TTT math is actually incorrect, particularly in it's summary statement).

And thank you for pointing out those errors in the BiS config. I'll fix them up in the next little while.

Edit: Decided to include a note on the OP of the BiS thread that highlights the value of the Enh totem when using CL. Will update soon.

SentinelBorg · 09/03/09, 7:35 AM

It's not just CL. Magma Totem doesn't gain anything from Haste, but it scales great with AP (-> SP), so that's another advantage of ToQE in situations with more then one mob. Also especially in some hardmode fights, you want to use your MW stack to heal sometimes.

The sim is an important tool, but we may not forget, that it only shows one simple situation. The fight against a single boss without interrupts, adds, movement, the need to heal and so on. The moment the fight diverges from this situation, our EP values and so BiS equip may change in reality. That is also the reason why I prefer to gem for crit, instead of haste. Because crit has additional benefits outside the "single boss"-environment, while the difference in the sim's result is rather small.

Falcon213 · 09/03/09, 8:44 AM

I have been doing some testing to properly quantify the value of haste (as the sim historically has not been very reliable for this stat), and so far my largest discovery is that haste seems to be our best-scaling stat. At what threshold it becomes better than AP I do not know, but we may be experiencing it right now.

This may explain why ToEW sims better than ToQE for the BiS set, despite its much lower uptime.

Ryethe · 09/03/09, 11:06 AM

Originally Posted by Falcon213

I have been doing some testing to properly quantify the value of haste (as the sim historically has not been very reliable for this stat), and so far my largest discovery is that haste seems to be our best-scaling stat. At what threshold it becomes better than AP I do not know, but we may be experiencing it right now.

This may explain why ToEW sims better than ToQE for the BiS set, despite its much lower uptime.

This is definitely the reason. With the best in slot gear setup in the other thread long term projections for haste were showing an EP of 2.85ish.

kaoticz · 09/03/09, 11:33 AM

It's like I posted somewhere earlier in this giant thread, it seemed like after reaching like 21-22% unbuffed haste, haste started to become the best stat to stack (in T8.5 equivalent gear, for purposes of other stat weights being regarded in this general percentile).

Perhaps though this only due to the way T8 4 piece is modeled. I'd do some more testing when I have the time.

Vespasian · 09/03/09, 11:39 AM

Originally Posted by Ryethe

This is definitely the reason. With the best in slot gear setup in the other thread long term projections for haste were showing an EP of 2.85ish.

I suppose this aligns very closely with my anecdotal experience. Since achieving near BiS towards the end of Ulduar, I began to notice the relative value of BL I was achieving vs other classes. Essentially my DPS would increase significantly more than other classes when I was lusted, which had always made me suspect that haste scaled extremely well for us towards very high levels (40%+).

I would be interested to see the results of further analysis on this.

Rouncer · 09/03/09, 12:04 PM

Originally Posted by Ryethe

This is definitely the reason. With the best in slot gear setup in the other thread long term projections for haste were showing an EP of 2.85ish.

I have no idea what you are talking about. I just loaded the BiS config and the only thing I changed is the EP values to better represent our actual current gemming situation.

Attack Power - 80
Crit Rating - 40
Hit Rating - 40
Expertise - 4*
Haste Rating - 40
Spell Power - 46

(* - increased value with new gems doesn't matter for these runs since Exp is worth 0 once over the cap)

Then I ran EP values for 20k hours with these results.

EnhSim version 1.8.3.3

Spell hit + EP range goes past cap by 6.57486% (172.472 hit rating).
Mh expertise + EP range goes past cap by 3.83441 expertise (31.4325 expertise ra
ting).
Oh expertise + EP range goes past cap by 3.83441 expertise (31.4325 expertise ra
ting).

EP                        value     DPS       total DPS      difference

baseline                                      9400.99
ap                        1.00      0.73      9459.73        58.74
crit rating               1.94      1.42      9457.82        56.83
hit rating                1.82      1.33      9454.35        53.36
expertise rating          0.13      0.10      9404.22        3.23
haste rating              1.83      1.34      9454.63        53.64
armor penetration rating  1.91      1.40      9456.97        55.98
spellpower                1.09      0.80      9437.94        36.95
mh dps                    5.30      3.89      9430.16        29.17
oh dps                    2.56      1.88      9415.11        14.12
strength                  1.10
agility                   1.76
intelligence              1.62
spirit                    0.00      0.00      9401.17        0.18
mana                      0.01      0.01      9403.18        2.19
mp5                       0.15      0.11      9403.26        2.27

( Pawn: v1: "EnhSim": Ap=1.00, CritRating=1.94, HitRating=1.82, HasteRating=1.83
, ExpertiseRating=0.13, ArmorPenetration=1.91, SpellDamage=1.09, MainHandDps=5.3
0, OffHandDps=2.56, Strength=1.10, Agility=1.76, Intellect=1.62, Spirit=0.00, Ma
na=0.01, Mp5=0.15 )
http://www.lootrank.com/wow/wr.asp?Cla=64&Str=1.10&mh=1.83&dps=5.30&mp5=0.15&mcr
=1.94&odps=2.56&spd=1.09&Agi=1.76&mhit=1.82&Int=1.62&Spi=0.00&map=1.00&arp=1.91&
Exp=0.13

elapsed simulation time: 280000.00h
elapsed real time: 709.46s
simulation speed: 1420802x

Where is the massive inflation to haste's EP values at high gear levels? The only stat that appears to have had it's value massively inflated by the gear upgrades is Armor Penetration and it is still of less value then straight AP.

EP calculations can easy be skewed by the values utilized so let's try looking at it another way. My current gear shows as generating 7624.43 dps. So what happens if I prioritize haste? Swapping all the yellow slots to 20 haste gems should noticeably increase my dps if haste has more value then the AP and Crit gems I currently use, results 7624.04
dps. Effectively no change whatsoever since there is a variation of at least a couple of dps inherent to the sim.

Originally Posted by Vespasian

I suppose this aligns very closely with my anecdotal experience. Since achieving near BiS towards the end of Ulduar, I began to notice the relative value of BL I was achieving vs other classes. Essentially my DPS would increase significantly more than other classes when I was lusted, which had always made me suspect that haste scaled extremely well for us towards very high levels (40%+).

I would be interested to see the results of further analysis on this.

Your anecdotal evidence is flawed since you are neglecting to take into account that when Bloodlusting you are also summoning and lusting your wolves too which is a very large increase in dps by itself.

Vespasian · 09/03/09, 12:50 PM

There you go with your assumptions again Rouncer. I do not always have my dogs up when I lust/am lusted by another shaman. I am sure my fellow shaman will know the frustration of this all-to-common occurance. Even when my dogs are not out, I still notice that I seem to be deriving significantly more benefit from the haste than other classes.

Of course, I would be the first to admit that my anecdotal experience is not evidence of anything at all. Using a faster-ping service whilst playing with Australians could give me a competitive advantage that is enhanced by the lust, or there could be a million other causes or I could just be imagining things. That is what makes the word 'anecdotal' so great...

Farosarg · 09/03/09, 2:39 PM

Originally Posted by Vespasian

There you go with your assumptions again Rouncer. I do not always have my dogs up when I lust/am lusted by another shaman. I am sure my fellow shaman will know the frustration of this all-to-common occurance. Even when my dogs are not out, I still notice that I seem to be deriving significantly more benefit from the haste than other classes.

Of course, I would be the first to admit that my anecdotal experience is not evidence of anything at all. Using a faster-ping service whilst playing with Australians could give me a competitive advantage that is enhanced by the lust, or there could be a million other causes or I could just be imagining things. That is what makes the word 'anecdotal' so great...

I'm probably way below your "top end gear" level but for quite a long time I've been observing the exact opposite. I'm benefitting a lot less from bloodlust compared to warriors, ferals and rogues. We talked about it on EU forums some time ago and others had noticed similar behavior and its puzzling to me that you state the exact opposite.

I'm using Worldoflogs parses and I'm familiar with haste behavior on Enhsim. Other explanation would be that I need a good dose of "L2P" and can't benefit the haste like you can.

Silverstorm · 09/03/09, 3:02 PM

Originally Posted by Vespasian

There you go with your assumptions again Rouncer. I do not always have my dogs up when I lust/am lusted by another shaman. I am sure my fellow shaman will know the frustration of this all-to-common occurance. Even when my dogs are not out, I still notice that I seem to be deriving significantly more benefit from the haste than other classes.

1) Yes, this lack of dogs when heroism is popped happens to me all too frequently. In that case, I generally call the dogs, and pop my own heroism for them. Since the debuff is far longer than the cooldown, and it is cleared if you die, this seems like a reasonable thing to do. I have not simmed this nor done any math at all, but 30% more dog attacks seems worth one GCD from me.

2) In thinking through the benefits of haste, I'm surprised you see this behavior. In my experience during heroism, I'm often waiting on cooldowns to come back up. I know white damage is a significant part of our damage, but it's reasonably similar to ferals (which I also play), and I tend to get (even more) energy limited on my feral. The benefits I see are reduced GCD so we can get through all cooldowns easily, faster white swings lead to more MW procs, and increased attack speed from dogs. Am I missing something significant? Might this be RNG playing nice for you, and you just don't recall the "normal" times?

Rouncer · 09/03/09, 3:52 PM

Originally Posted by Vespasian

There you go with your assumptions again Rouncer. I do not always have my dogs up when I lust/am lusted by another shaman. I am sure my fellow shaman will know the frustration of this all-to-common occurance. Even when my dogs are not out, I still notice that I seem to be deriving significantly more benefit from the haste than other classes.

Of course, I would be the first to admit that my anecdotal experience is not evidence of anything at all. Using a faster-ping service whilst playing with Australians could give me a competitive advantage that is enhanced by the lust, or there could be a million other causes or I could just be imagining things. That is what makes the word 'anecdotal' so great...

Like the person right above me stated, during our time in Ulduar they fixed Bloodlust/Sated so that now it functions just like Heroism/Exhausted has all along. This means we can now use our lust even when we are sated so there is no reason not to be able to lust your puppies on all of their summons. If you coordinate with the other shaman in the raid this is a nice way to get a dps boost on longer encounters, especially if it is another Enhancement shaman since then you can trade lusts on the doggies so that they are lusted on both summons. If it is a Resto or an Elemental Shaman ask them to either wait for you to call the lust on vent or to give a 3 count when the raid leader calls for it to give you a chance to get them summoned, then you can lust a second summon with yours.

Sansa · 09/08/09, 6:11 AM

I'm having issues with the precision/accuracy or what-have-you of the sim. I know this came up a few pages back, but I'm finding that whenever I sim the same setup, I see a difference of like 400 dps, which seems unreasonably large. I am simming 10000h but it doesn't seem to help. For instance, sometimes I sim the same setup and get 7600 dps, and other times i get 7200, give or take. The difference is big enough that it's really cutting into the usefulness of the sim for me, as I can't trust EP calculations and comparing talent changes and glyph changes becomes very unreliable, or at the very least tedious (the lower end, 7200 dps, seems to be incorrect, but in order to find when a gear change or talent change benefits me, I have to run the sim multiple times until it is simming the high end instead of the -400 end.. and even then I don't think I can trust to differences of like 10-20 dps increase). I did not have this problem when I used the sim until 3.2 or so (and I am using 1.8.3.3). Any advice?

Rouncer · 09/08/09, 10:13 AM

Make sure the GUI is pointing to the correct exe file*. Beyond that I have no idea why you would be seeing such variation when running the same configurations.

Just ran 2x10k hour sim runs showing 7640.12 and then 7640.63 so I think it is something at your end and not an problem intrinsic to the sim.

*the path in the GUI will stay on the previous version even when opened from the new folder so make sure to update the path when you upgrade the sim. You can also check the top line of your output to make sure it is using the correct version.

Zensai · 09/08/09, 10:30 AM

Originally Posted by Rouncer

So you don't use chain lightning to hit snobalds if they are on people in melee range? Just one example but do what you will it is your thread after all. I just hate that people who are just getting involved in the TC side of the game will take what you post in that thread as gospel and end up hurting their play for it.

How is that Icewalker enchant working out for you on Heroic Ice Howl? I know that encounter is making me think about going back to Cat's Speed and I have Rocket Boots. As for the TTT when you get to be an editor then you can change the section about boot enchants to reflect your poor assumptions. You haven't proven your case to my satisfaction so it doesn't get into the TTT.

By the way, you have an error in your BiS config. You can't have both Mana Spring and Blessing of Wisdom since they won't stack and you might want to think about adding a charge to when the sim will refresh LS (it adds about 10dps even with the loss from the increased oom time).

Everytime I've used CL they never jump far enough to hit the snobalds. You don't need a speed boot enchant for H: Icehowl, but it does help. I've ended up switching to it because my server seems to be getting laggier.

Rouncer · 09/08/09, 11:12 AM

Originally Posted by Zensai

Everytime I've used CL they never jump far enough to hit the snobalds. You don't need a speed boot enchant for H: Icehowl, but it does help. I've ended up switching to it because my server seems to be getting laggier.

They don't seem to jump from him to the snobolds but they will jump from the snobolds to each other and back to him.

As for runspeed, I switched to my runspeed pair last night over my rocket boots to help with the charge but also for another reason. Both the worms and Icehowl have knockbacks. Icehowl's can be ranged by being right on the edge of melee range but the worms can't and there is probably 5-6 seconds of movement for each knockback. Based on the math we have if you can output 7500 dps in a perfect situation (ie the sim) then if there is 10 seconds of movement in a 5 minute encounter runspeed is a better option then Icewalker or any other enchant. With Icehowl getting stunned and increasing that dps number significantly, along with all the knockbacks, it makes it so that runspeed is more valuable then anything else even if you can get out of range of his charges without it.

Sansa · 09/08/09, 11:57 AM

Originally Posted by Rouncer

Make sure the GUI is pointing to the correct exe file*. Beyond that I have no idea why you would be seeing such variation when running the same configurations.

Just ran 2x10k hour sim runs showing 7640.12 and then 7640.63 so I think it is something at your end and not an problem intrinsic to the sim.

*the path in the GUI will stay on the previous version even when opened from the new folder so make sure to update the path when you upgrade the sim. You can also check the top line of your output to make sure it is using the correct version.

Definitely pointing to the correct *exe. I have noticed that the path will stay on the previous version even when the previous folder has been deleted. I'm not sure what's going on either, then.. it's very frustrating, because literally I'm running "simulate" with the exact same setup, not changing a thing, and getting numbers like 7213 and then the next one 7545.