The talent loader, gear save, and gear load macros don't seem to work for OpenOffice. Is there any way I can work around this?
Originally Posted by thetrueavatar
Macro call works for me on openoffice 2.3.
Don't forget that macro usage in openffice is disable by default for security reason.
You have to activate it int tools>options>openOffice.org>security>macro security
The issue isn't with Macro security. It won't even try to run them in order to give errors if the security is set to High or Very High. I'm currently getting the same problem and am researching it now.
Here is the error it gives in a pop-up window. Easiest way to duplicate is to go to cell A17 on the DPS tab and select a new build, then click "Load". When I do this it pops up a second window titled "OpenOffice.org Error" with the following text:
A Scripting Framework error occured while running the Basic script
vnd.sun.star.script:Standard.Load_template?language=Basic&location=document.
Message: BasicProviderImpl::getScript: no script!
There's only an "OK" button which closes the pop-up window and the page remains as is.
I tried going in to edit the macros and found one called "Module1" which has the functions in it (along with ~20 of them named Feuil1 - Feuil20). The Module1 module is completely commented out in OpenOffice. When I remove the "Rem " from the beginning of all the lines it won't run. It goes to the first Sub defined within the "Module1" Sub and says "BASIC syntax error. Sub not allowed within a procedure.".
So far as I can tell setting the data manually still produces the correct calculations, it just looks like OpenOffice completely destroys the macros and form controls. I was using version 2.3.0 of OpenOffice, moving up to 2.3.1 made no difference.
Edit: I managed to get past the Sub error by taking "Sub Module1" line out of the top and removing the last "End Sub" line off the bottom. It looks like the Module1 part is already defined when you create the module, whereas in Excel it's probably just been typed in at the Workbook level in the VB editor. However, I then had to go to every single button in the spreadsheet and redefine the control options to explicitly point to Standard.Module1.function_name rather than just Standard.function_name. Now I've gotten it that far but they all fail because it doesn't seem to like the way the VB picks the sheets/cells when it calls them for values. Anyone out there an expert on using Basic in OpenOffice?
One thing I think should be changed is the ghost value of hit when at hit in the 'full stats' column, for item comparisons.
When you take the value of the last point of hit to be the value of every point of hit, it overvalues it by a tonne when really the true opportunity cost of the last points of hit is more accurately modelled as the same value as crit/haste that you could gem for alternatively.
This should be changed someway (or perhaps be able to be changed by user) because at the moment the numbers the spreadsheet is showing for item comparisons with all stats is really off due to the inflated value of hit.
One thing I think should be changed is the ghost value of hit when at hit in the 'full stats' column, for item comparisons.
When you take the value of the last point of hit to be the value of every point of hit, it overvalues it by a tonne when really the true opportunity cost of the last points of hit is more accurately modelled as the same value as crit/haste that you could gem for alternatively.
This should be changed someway (or perhaps be able to be changed by user) because at the moment the numbers the spreadsheet is showing for item comparisons with all stats is really off due to the inflated value of hit.
That's what the ignore hit value column is for, no? Gear up with hit worth the last point then sort by ignoring-hit and trade in top values until you settle in near the cap.
EDIT: Think I found a problem on the ignore-hit column, by the way. It looks like vlookup was going to wrong column as well as double counting socket bonus. I think it should look like this:
That's what the ignore hit value column is for, no? Gear up with hit worth the last point then sort by ignoring-hit and trade in top values until you settle in near the cap.
Well the issue is that with the 2.4 gear, you cannot really make a good gearset by 'ignoring' hit, and then when you look at the hit column currently it overvalues hit so much that the numbers it puts out are relatively useless - because it is based off the last point of hit which is worth around 2 spell damage, instead of anywhere close to what the opportunity cost of being below the hit cap is, which is the cost of gemming the last few points at the cost of crit/haste.
Example of how this is a problem
With forgotten star equipped at 202 hit:
wand of the demonsoul 63.39 -0.95
wand of the forgotten star 64.34 0.00
With demon soul equipped at 191 hit
demonsoul 63.15 0.00
forgotten star 64.56 1.41
dps is higher with demonsoul by 3 with even staying a bunch below the hit cap (this will be more after swapping in hit gems)
So the spreadsheet by overvaluing hit is telling me that forgotten star is better, when even if i go 11 hit below the cap as a result of swapping wands, it is still better.
Swapping the value of next hit once at cap to either crit or haste will make the values come out a lot more accurately.
When you're valuing hit, you're always considering "the last point" of hit since gear sets will be getting you in that zone. Trade-offs should be focusing on the values near where they'll be because that will be the most accurate. Setting them arbitrarily to the value of crit/haste kinda ruins the point of the spreadsheet's calcs?
I have noticed a bug with SWF boots which put NA in gem slot if no gem was previously selected.
This is maybe a more generic problem but didn't had the time to investigate.
Other things. I didn't set up the blood pact in party buffs before. So my correction for stamina imp is wrong and you don't have to add the bloodpact to warlock stamina in the rules.
Though blood pact should still be added to imp stamina.
BTW Runic spellthread is hardcoded for the legs in the Gear/Bufs tabs.
Last edited by thetrueavatar : 03/14/08 at 10:01 AM.
When you're valuing hit, you're always considering "the last point" of hit since gear sets will be getting you in that zone. Trade-offs should be focusing on the values near where they'll be because that will be the most accurate. Setting them arbitrarily to the value of crit/haste kinda ruins the point of the spreadsheet's calcs?
Currently the numbers are way off, given what I explained above and why. So it is useless for placing accurate value on items - which is obviously one of the intended features of the spreadsheet. If the spreadsheet is currently telling me an item that is actually an upgrade is a downgrade due to the way it currently values hit, this is a problem and needs to be rectified.
Placing the value of hit at the value of other stats instead of 1.8-2.0 damage is going to give more accurate results, it isn't arbitrary because in essence every time you lose hit you can simply gem up to it. Hit is never 'worth' 2.0 because the opportunity cost of getting to the hit cap is losing equivalent numbers of crit/haste through gems as you will always be capped within 1-2 points assuming going for maximum dps.
I noticed that when sorted, [Waistwrap of Infinity] was above [Anetheron's Noose]. However when I equipped the Waistwrap my theoretical dps went down. Even though I was 6 over the hitcap while wearing the Noose (which I have +5 hit in) could that be causing it?
My guess would be that Noose is better for ISB uptime, which drops your personal dps a bit. The Item tab also depends on what you have in the Sock_bonus for the socket set in Noose, I believe. If that doesn't match your actual gemming, it will give different results.
Currently the numbers are way off, given what I explained above and why. So it is useless for placing accurate value on items - which is obviously one of the intended features of the spreadsheet. If the spreadsheet is currently telling me an item that is actually an upgrade is a downgrade due to the way it currently values hit, this is a problem and needs to be rectified.
Placing the value of hit at the value of other stats instead of 1.8-2.0 damage is going to give more accurate results, it isn't arbitrary because in essence every time you lose hit you can simply gem up to it. Hit is never 'worth' 2.0 because the opportunity cost of getting to the hit cap is losing equivalent numbers of crit/haste through gems as you will always be capped within 1-2 points assuming going for maximum dps.
I see what you're saying and while it makes the decision on that particular item a little bizarre, I think the way hit is valued makes for larger-scale gear choices easier. The way I've always geared is consider I'm under the hit cap gear up every slot, then find the best value items (ignoring hit) to trade in per hit rating lost.
The other thing to keep in mind is that the values take into consideration the increased DPS via ISB. This means that items with crit will have a higher value on that column but if you actually equip them will yield lower personal DPS. Seems like this is what you're experiencing for that wand.
Originally Posted by Eph
I noticed that when sorted, [Waistwrap of Infinity] was above [Anetheron's Noose]. However when I equipped the Waistwrap my theoretical dps went down. Even though I was 6 over the hitcap while wearing the Noose (which I have +5 hit in) could that be causing it?
I think that is part of the bug I mentioned a couple posts up.
Originally Posted by LockApologist
The Item tab also depends on what you have in the Sock_bonus for the socket set in Noose, I believe. If that doesn't match your actual gemming, it will give different results.
This is correct and can greatly change the values depending on how you actually gem.
That's what the ignore hit value column is for, no? Gear up with hit worth the last point then sort by ignoring-hit and trade in top values until you settle in near the cap.
EDIT: Think I found a problem on the ignore-hit column, by the way. It looks like vlookup was going to wrong column as well as double counting socket bonus. I think it should look like this:
There was indeed a problem in the formula. It is fixed.
It is not exactly what you wrote : since you want the value without hit, you will ignore the hit bonus, and thus use the socket_bonus_other and sock_bonus_meta_other tables.
Originally Posted by Trickykid
Originally Posted by LockApologist
The Item tab also depends on what you have in the Sock_bonus for the socket set in Noose, I believe. If that doesn't match your actual gemming, it will give different results.
This is correct and can greatly change the values depending on how you actually gem.
Yes, currently the socket bonus tab is a pain to use, but I'm working on it !
If you really want to make hit give realistic results for item value make it an adjustable conversion to spell damage that the user can change based on what gear he has available. Lower geared locks will value 1 hit as 1 spell damage as their way to swap hit back to damage is swapping 5 dmg 4 hit gems to 9 dmg gems, while higher geared locks will gain very little for swapping stuff like belt of blasting to anetheron's noose, so hit is much lower value for those. Since hit has such varying values based on the actual gear used (not nescesarily the gear level even) it would be a nightmare to actually give it a numeric value that is calculated by a spreadsheet, and the chance for the value a spreadsheet would give it to be applicable to the user are pretty low.
I don't think the issue is how Hit is valued, but rather how DPS values on the Item sheet are calculated. Right now, the DPS value only represents the DPS of an item given your current stats. It doesn't take into consideration the stat changes of un-equipping your current item nor the stat changes after you equip the item in question. Because of this, there's going to be a margin of error as the relative value of stats move up and down.
The DPS difference in the Fogotten Star and the Demonsoul is so small, it falls within this margin of error.
I don't think the issue is how Hit is valued, but rather how DPS values on the Item sheet are calculated. Right now, the DPS value only represents the DPS of an item given your current stats. It doesn't take into consideration the stat changes of un-equipping your current item nor the stat changes after you equip the item in question. Because of this, there's going to be a margin of error as the relative value of stats move up and down.
The DPS difference in the Fogotten Star and the Demonsoul is so small, it falls within this margin of error.
Thats not remotely true. I remove forgotten star and put in demonsoul with a great lionseye and get a 14dps increase.
If you weigh the slot on the Demonsoul with 10 hit, the item list is going to clearly show that it is a higher DPS item anyways, so I'm not exactly sure what your point is.
I think there is some merit in the idea that players should consider Hit at the same DPS value as Crit and/or Haste if these stats have the same item budget value. The spreadsheet, however, should reflect actual DPS value Hit.
If you weigh the slot on the Demonsoul with 10 hit, the item list is going to clearly show that it is a higher DPS item anyways, so I'm not exactly sure what your point is.
I think there is some merit in the idea that players should consider Hit at the same DPS value as Crit and/or Haste if these stats have the same item budget value. The spreadsheet, however, should reflect actual DPS value Hit.
Why can't the spreadsheet do both? Show a colum for normal hit, ignoring hit, and equivalence hit.
If you weigh the slot on the Demonsoul with 10 hit, the item list is going to clearly show that it is a higher DPS item anyways, so I'm not exactly sure what your point is.
I think there is some merit in the idea that players should consider Hit at the same DPS value as Crit and/or Haste if these stats have the same item budget value. The spreadsheet, however, should reflect actual DPS value Hit.
What are you even talking about, your point was that demonsoul and forgetten star are close enough that they are within the margin of error, which is completely wrong because they aren't close at all. I don't see why you want hit as the same dps value as crit and haste when it clearly adds more to your dps when your not capped than the other two..
Nevermind, I see the error now. I had downloaded a newer version of the spreadsheet and had neglected to update the socket bonus table, which was using rare crit/dam gems to value the Demonsoul's slot instead of the epic hit gems. That loss of DPS value for the Demonsoul was bringing the difference between the two wands down to less than 1, which is within the margin of error and the reason the Forgotten Star was appearing to be higher DPS than the Demonsoul on the Item page when in reality the Demonsoul was slightly better.
That being said, I have to retract my earlier statement and now agree Hit should be weighted against Crit/Haste/Dam and not it's true DPS value. Hit is worth more DPS than any other equivalent stat, but is hard capped on how much is effective. Since you can't stack it, the extra DPS it provides becomes irrelevant. What's important is the DPS of the stats that Hit is effectively replacing: Crit/Haste/Dam.
I'm still trying to get to grips with the damage v crit scaling, as this impacts on gem selection. I see constantly the mantra that damage will always be better than crit for destruction locks.
However, even as a non-mathematician (I'm a lawyer, I did law to avoid numbers bigger than 10 :P), I can see that, assuming you're at hit cap, the value of each point of crit is static, whereas the value of each point of damage is smaller the more spell/shadow damage you have.
For example, 10 dmg is 1% of 1,000 damage, but that same 10 damage is 0.66% of 1,500 damage. However, 1% crit is 1%. The added complication that I have no hope of working out myself is crit causing and benefitting from ISB uptime.
So take an item with 3 yellow socks with a +5 damage socket bonus. You have the choice of 3 x 12 dmg gems (36 dmg) or 3 x 6 dmg 5 crit gems which is 23 dmg and 15 crit rating. The difference is 13 damage v 15 crit rating.
At what level of spell/shadow damage is the 15 crit rating worth more than the 13 damage?
Not sure the exact turning point but its a pretty low level for when 1crit > 1dmg.., crit is worth 1.11 dmg for me in my current gear (with a slight tweak)... The real question is when does 20crit food > 23spelldmg food, and when does 10crit gems(and 6dmg/5crit gems) become > 12dmg gems. Both of those two scenarios occur a lot less from what I can tell.
Oh and crit is value of crit isn't static at all, the more you have the less it helps on isb uptime, even in final sunwell gear the magic number of 1crit = 1.2dmg isn't reached for me.
Remember to properly model your raid in the ISB tab of the spreadsheet or you'll get significantly inflated crit values (for better or for worse depending on what kind of mistaktes you make there). 1 crit getting valued as 1.1 damage probably means you didn't model proper warlock:SP ratio (say, if you put yourself as the only warlock with no shadow priests crit gives a lot more than if you play with an extra destruction warlock and an affliction warlock, and then a slightly more if you raid with 3 shadow priests). Realistic ISB model is critical for crit evaluation.
Also remember crit costs 1.2X (or close to it) of what spell damage does so unless crit is worth more than 1.2 damage it's not the best use of the item budget.
Regarding hit evaluation, while most people will neither be in the area where you're under the cap and hit is extremely powerful, nor would they be at the area where any extra hit is a complete waste, there would still be a very large variety of how much damage you could actually gain if you increase your hit. The most extreme examples that can still realistically happen is one player being able to gain "full" (1 dmg actually costs less than 1 hit rating) 1 damage per 1 hit, while the opposite extreme would be swapping something like anetheron's noose in place of belt of blasting, gaining effectively 5 spell damage at the cost of 23 hit rating...
Bottom line is the more hit-heavy your good gear is, the less you benefit from more hit, becuase the spell damage you can gain per each hit rating you drop goes down.
Regarding relative value of stats changing as your gear changes, while this is true, this is neglicible when you only make small item changes. To really see a difference in relative stat values you'll need to pretty much completely overhaul your gear and even then you're most likely to get similar relative stat values. Therefore the approximation of "with this item I will have different stats but I'll ignore the effect they will have on how I evaluate stats" is actually extremely close to what you'll get if you'll just calculate your DPS with the old item and compare to the dps with the new item. Your rounding errors are probably going to be noticeably bigger than that "inaccuracy".
I just downloaded the 2.2 version, and the very nice gear load/save makes it impossible for me to repeat a modification I made to 1.1!
I like to be able to see how things change (specifically my +hit) when I'm fiddling with gearsets, and scrolling down to the bottom of the Gear_Buffs tab to see it each time is annoying. I had used the columns E-Q of row 1 to just be duplicates of the data in row 104.
I know I can add another row and just do it that way, but I thought either there may be a way to do this without adding a row (am I missing some of the information display anywhere?) or this is a nice thing to add.
03/12/08, 8:20 PM
Similar Threads
