A good idea, but there's not enough horizontal space to do this. In Excel 97 there's a limit to up to IV columns. I'm currently at column IP with this build. I'd have to replace total SEP with delta DPS or delta SEP if you wanted to do that. I just always thought it was easy to tell differences in numbers in an ordered list to see if it was a big upgrade or not.

Would you rather have Total SEP removed for a plus or minus value like this?

Blast Excel 97 and their lazy limits!

You're right, it's easy to tell if it's a big upgrade, but I'm an organizational freak when it comes to my gear planning. I have a spreadsheet with the top 3 upgrades for each slot, combined with how much of an upgrade they are, sorted by the size of the upgrade, so I know where to focus my efforts. We're not DKP, but with competition for plate I'll pass more freely if I have this sheet in front of me and know that it'll give me a better shot at suchandsuch item from the next boss.

I'd say that total SEP is more appropriate. I can just add them to each release, or write a macro I can run to update the sheet for each release or something.

Ooh, just a thought...could you maybe make it a dropdown box selection in the options? So you can switch between total SEP and delta SEP at a click? If that's not too tedious, that would be awesome. If it's a pain though, unless other people speak up on this subject I'd say it's not worth it for just me

First id like to say thanks for the sheet, been using the various versions of yours for a long time and it helped me loads.

Im not sure i feel qualified to make suggestions on the layout, but im going to give it a shot.

Back in your old models, designed for the "Pre 3.0" era, you had things spread out over many pages, which in my eyes made everything easy to keep track of. Now im not necessarily saying it should be exactly like that, not at all, however i did like that i had a seperate page where i could set buffs and another for the gear, where things looked more simplified and easy on the eye. Looking at a page full of numbers and boxes just seems quite daunting at first glance and im sure some people find themselves continuously scanning over the data to find what they are looking for amongst the mass of information. Keeping the simple and important information on 1 page (SEP/DPS values, gear choices and stats) with the more detailed information about buffs, proc rates and miss/hit/crit/dodge chances, along with all the rest of the "detailed" information on another would greatly increase the user friendlyness of the sheet in my opinion.

In a way, i think a sort of "declutter" by use of extra pages is what i'm suggesting. Now i may have restated what other people have said and for that i'm sorry. Otherwise it would be nice to have the gems in the way others have suggested to reduce time clicking through them (perhaps some kind of priority list that would show the last few gem choices as the first in sight when you click the pulldown menu, as im sure most people would only use a handful of gem types in their gear). That said, great work so far, and thanks alot.

I have enjoyed using the Delta DPS charts with the Hunter Spreadsheet. Its very easy to understand and, I think, much better overall. I would support this type of adjustment.

Just so you know in the 3.0.8 patch, [Belabored Legplates] are being adjusted. They were WAY overbudget for a 213 item. They are losing the 78 ArPen come patch day.

In addition to the lack of expertise food buff, I have discovered another expertise-related bug.

The racial expertise section is off: it adds 3*L24 expertise, but that doesn't apply to every race. Orcs at least get +5 instead.

Consider making it a dropdown box for 0, 3 or 5, and taking out the multiplier.

The value in the proc column refers to the corresponding average stat gain in the 'Procs' area in the Item Selection page. I suppose you could manually calculate the SEP based on that value.

Weapons have different SEP based on which hand they are in because weapon speed and damage produce different results accordingly. For example, the bigger deep wounds ticks provided by a slow weapon would be more beneficial if the weapon is in the main hand, whereas the benefit is lesser if it's in the off hand. You can see this effect in the spreadsheet SEP where the REALLY slow weapons have a much higher SEP value when in the main hand.

Fast weapons in the offhand provide consistent rage that is not affected by heroic strike usage, which probably accounts for them having a higher SEP when in the offhand, though I am not sure if this is modeled in the sheet.

Polearms are there in case I start working on Arms models. Please save all your questions until the next version, which will be done within the week. Remember it's still in BETA form so it's not entirely a finished product yet.

Thanks for a great spreadsheet! For the next update i wonder if it would be possible to implement two rows with stats, unbuffed and fully buffed? Bit like there was in dr_Allcom's spreadsheet so it was easy to see the benefit of the different buffs one got. Right now what can be seen is unbuffed stats but not the result after buffs (and talents)?

I really like this spreadsheet. It looks very useful. I've tried to read through this forum and figure out how to use the spreadsheet on my own and I have a few things I can't seem to figure out. For one, what is the expertise cap assumed to be? I thought it was 6.25% but according to the spreadsheet im still undercapped at that level. Also if that is the case, is there a way for me to manually change the cap in the spreadsheet? Because I never get dodged in raids (or at least I thought I wasnt). ALso, for each item that I enter in, do I have to manually switch all bonuses and sockets? And I don't understand what SEP is. Just so you know i'm not a tard I actually know a bit of excel programming myself but I just need a few pointers.

I know the way this spreadsheet calculates racial expertise has been brought up before but I still haven't been able to figure it out. If the boxes under Racial Expertise is supposed to be binary (values 0 or 1 only) and the values under Spec Activator-Axe-Sword-Mace is supposed to be the amount your racial expertise gives, then it's not working for me. Entering any values under Spec Activator result in no change. The only way I can get the numbers to change is to enter values 1-5 under Racial Expertise. Below is an example:

I'm an orc. I get +5 to axes. If the expertise cap is 209.856 (6.4% base dodge * 32.78998947) untalented, 144.276 (2 * 32.78998947) with weapon mastery, and 103.2885 (5 * 8.1974973675) with the axe racial, then I should see exactly zero dps increase if I set my gear to have >= 104 expertise rating with both Racial Expertise boxes set to 1 and Activator boxes set to 5 while wielding axes. This is not the case. I have tried it with all sorts of weapons, buffs, gem settings, with no effect. The closest approximation to getting it to work was when I set Racial Expertise boxes to 2 with still came out to be lower than what I would get if I had 5 expertise (but 3 resulted in too large of an expertise bonus).

In summary: Spec activator boxes don't work for me, and Racial Expertise boxes are off target. Please help/fix.

I've got a question about how you do enchant uptime... maybe I'm just missing something here. You currently have: 1.2/(1/T143)/100 which simplifies to 1.2*T143/100 for the chance to proc berserking for example. 1.2 being the enchant's PPM, and T143 being the base attack speed of the weapon, this is for MH.

With a 3.5 speed weapon, this is a 4.2% chance on hit to proc and gives around a 45% predicted uptime for zerking. I thought though that the chance on hit for a wep enchant to proc was: PPM/AttacksPerMin which is 1.2/(60/T143) which simplifies to 1.2*T143/60 = 7% chance to proc on hit. This gives an uptime of 60-65%.

Attacks per min * chance to proc = PPM. (60/3.5) * .07 = 1.2. It all checks out.

I understand now the estimated dodge rate is assumed to be 6.4%. However I am curious as to how the SEP works and what exactly does it mean. For some reason it is showing me Runeblade of Demonstratable power will give me more dps than my Titansteel destroyer. Is this right? I lose hit rating and will be undercapped if I switch, so is it calculating if I gem for hit after I switch? And if I see an item above my current item in SEP in the lookup table is it a gaurnteed upgrade (assuming i gem correctly)?

Check the front page for the massive update. Finally done with it!

@Mightbeast: Actually the Titansteel Destroyer is a pretty crappy weapon for it's level, while Runeblades are most excellent. It may not be worth the small DPS gain to switch and regem the hit back in and lose the stamina. You have to take everything with consideration. Also, for the 1000th time on these forums, the dodge cap is above 6.25 and below 6.5% percent. Just because you don't ever realize yourself get dodged doesn't mean it doesn't happen to you or other people.

@Rallik: The uptime is derived from its 1.2 PPM yes, but it has to take into account special attacks, as well as the proc refreshing itself. The formula is of the form:



Where D is the duration of the buff and v is the amount of attacks per second that can proc the buff.

Nice interface changes. There's a bug with ring sockets though, when I switch a ring to Greatring of Collision it says "16" where it should say the socket color.

Also, the SEP macro seems broken on the .xls version. When I press the button I get the error "Run-time error '1004': This operation requires the merged cells to be identically sized." Clicking debug says the error occurs on the line:

Selection.PasteSpecial Paste:=xlPasteValues, Operation:=xlNone, SkipBlanks _
:=False, Transpose:=False

in the SEP() function. In addition, the error occurs when cells AM-AN on row 29 are highlighted.

Sigh.. Are you kidding me.. Anyone with '97 able to get a crack on the solution? There's no way I can check it since I don't have the older excel. Is it only because AM:AN are merged for formatting reasons?

Quick fix for the Ring Socket bug: in AA14 and AA16 the code should say:
AA14: =IF(VLOOKUP(T14,Lookup!FN2:GA222,12,FALSE)=0,"",VLOOKUP(T14,Lookup!FN2:GA222,12,FALSE ))
AA16: =IF(VLOOKUP(T16,Lookup!FN2:GA222,12,FALSE)=0,"",VLOOKUP(T16,Lookup!FN2:GA222,12,FALSE ))

I accidentally put 14 instead of 12 in the first Vlookup Argument.

I understand how it all works, but the only part I'm concerned with is the center of that formula which should be the percent chance on every attack for the enchant to activate. What I'm asking is, why are you dividing by 100 and not 60? (PPM*WepSpd)/100 is a meaningless number. (PPM*WepSpd)/60 is by definition the percent chance a proc would need to activate per hit to come out to an expected value equal to the PPM.

With real numbers, 1.2 PPM and a 3.5 speed weapon. 1.2*3.5/100 = 4.2%. 60/3.5 ~= 17.14 attacks per minute. Attacks per minute * chance on hit to activate = expected PPM. 17.14 * 4.2% = .72, when it should be 1.2.

Or to put it another way, if you had an enchant with 60 PPM and had a 1 speed weapon, it should be obvious as hell that your chance on hit to activate would be 100%. Using: PPM*wepspd/100 will give 60% instead.

The [Spiked Titansteel Helm] has a blue socket and +8 Crit bonus listed in the spreadsheet when it only has a meta socket and +6 Agi bonus.

edit: Ignore this, I just realized those are the new stats next patch.

It's correct. The spreadsheet is designed for WoW 3.0.8, where this helm will be changed.

Okay, I found the error with the Player bug out. Thanks for all the other reports. Keep them coming.

@PPM guy. Dude, just go look at the Proc Mechanics in Thinktank. Your answer is there.

Uhhh, I think you need to re-read that article. It confirms exactly what I'm saying. You're calculating the "p" in the formula incorrectly.

There's no way that's right though, that formula would yield >60% uptime on the main hand which is way off in practice. Come to think of it, I don't remember where I got that but the dividing by 100 is what gives the conversion to percent. But I may be wrong. The results are similar so I'm sure you will forgive. I'll do it this way then:

1proc/72s * 3.5s/attack = .04861111 procs/attack = % chance. = p.

That's how you are supposed to do it. We were both wrong I guess, but thanks for bringing it to the light.