 |
01/07/13, 6:21 PM
|
#76
|
|
Don Flamenco
Gnome Rogue
Darksorrow (EU)
|
All the sims I've done so far indicate that using FoF is still an increase. However, it is true that the more haste we have, the smaller the delta between using it and not will become. With my current char as a baseline (501 equipped ilvl, 5.8k haste rating), including FoF in rotation gives a boost of slightly over 2% (or 3k dps) over not using it. If I keep adding haste to the profile (via "enchant_haste_rating=x" override), then the no-FoF profile breaks even with the FoF profile at 12k haste. I think it's pretty safe to assume that we will not be going that high any time soon.
|
|
|
|
|
01/07/13, 8:00 PM
|
#77
|
|
Don Flamenco
|
I guess I can see that in simulation FoF will do a smaller portion of your damage as you acquire more haste, but so will RSK. Those two spells have a fixed cooldown and are the heavy hitters but don't scale with haste, and ideally BOK should fill in the gaps in between. In practice I agree that fists of fury is harder to work into your rotation at higher levels of haste. Is the model trying to prevent haste capping and thereby reducing fists of fury usage to compensate?
I don't see haste capping as a problem unless you are playing a perfect rotation, which is difficult to do for a wind walker.
|
|
|
|
01/08/13, 12:56 AM
|
#78
|
|
Von Kaiser
Blood Elf Warlock
Burning Legion
|
The FoF loss was an anomalous output, I can no longer replicate it. However, it only turns out to a 200-400 dps increase, and thats with the 2pc so I'm sure if I retest the profile with off set pieces that would change.
Mastery > haste > crit is the best reforging method I've found thus far at higher gear levels, bis/bis+8ilvl. Mastery gems seem to outweigh agility.
Put simply, the highest dps I've achieved in TEB usage is with this line:
actions+=/tigereye_brew,if=!buff.tigereye_brew_use.up
Dancing steel still wins in both weapon slots.
I'll do stat weight testing without 2pc/4pc tomorrow.
Last edited by gahddo : 01/08/13 at 1:08 AM.
|
|
|
|
|
01/08/13, 1:05 AM
|
#79
|
|
The moral of the story is:
|
FoF does scale with haste though. The channel time is affected by it.
|
|
|
|
|
01/08/13, 1:52 AM
|
#80
|
|
Don Flamenco
|
Originally Posted by Baconslicer
FoF does scale with haste though. The channel time is affected by it.
|
It has a cooldown, and does the same amount of damage regardless of how much haste you have. The channel time is lower, but ultimately it's damage per cast is the same. It's weird and depends how you look at it. The channel's DPS scales with haste, but the spell itself does not due to the cooldown.
In terms of our rotation, haste does not increase it's overall damage.
|
|
|
|
01/08/13, 2:19 AM
|
#81
|
|
Rawr
|
Originally Posted by Saltycracker
In terms of our rotation, haste does not increase it's overall damage.
|
Somewhat pedantic, but it does reduce the time spent not autoattacking, which is effectively damage.
|
Rawr!
|
|
|
01/08/13, 8:05 AM
|
#82
|
|
Faceroller
|
Just because FoF or RsK becomes a smalle portion of you damage if you acquire more haste doesn't mean it's not worth using it. The only reason that happens is because those abilities do not scale with haste, and auto-attacks / Tiger Strikes will deal more damage, but RsK still hits harder than anything basically, and FoF channeling is reduced with haste.
RsK will be top priority regardless of your haste level.
|
|
|
|
|
01/08/13, 1:36 PM
|
#83
|
|
Von Kaiser
Pandaren Monk
Burning Legion
|
I think the only way it can potentially fall off is because you have so much haste, using FoF will cause capping situations, that would be best spent on BoK to move more chi.
The sim that gahhda must have run had an disgustingly high amount of combo breaker procs, causing FoF to be a loss. I really think combo breaker will inevitably curse us.
Further optimization in the profile might show FoF to be a loss or gain depending on how you stat and prioritize. We'll have to see when the time comes though. For instance, IF (huge if, because we dont know yet) SeF is selective on which abilities go through the clones, then that will shift EVERYTHING.
We can say things may be 'likely' but until everything is said, done, and optimized, we just wont know 
|
Play Brewmaster; work on Windwalker module. Makes sense.
|
|
|
01/08/13, 1:36 PM
|
#84
|
|
Don Flamenco
|
Originally Posted by Crevan
A few quick runs I did show this as well. Patchwerk fight dps seems to peak when using TEB at 4-6 stacks. Using it at lower stacks increases the uptime slightly, but not the dps.
|
Originally Posted by gahddo
- The abundance of TEB stacks means keeping a 100% (94-96% realistic) uptime is the best way to go
|
Could you guys run these tests with weapon enchants/Trinket Procs turned off? I think that you will see the same TeB damage increase regardless of how many stacks you are using in the long run. I think because you are blanketing TEB, the uptime is always coinciding with trinket/enchant procs, while pooled usage may not coincide with procs.
In practice, I think it would be best to use pooled TEB stacks when you are getting trinket and enchant procs for maximum DPS.
|
|
|
|
01/08/13, 2:30 PM
|
#85
|
|
Kind of hates everything.
|
Originally Posted by saboya
Just because FoF or RsK becomes a smalle portion of you damage if you acquire more haste doesn't mean it's not worth using it. The only reason that happens is because those abilities do not scale with haste, and auto-attacks / Tiger Strikes will deal more damage, but RsK still hits harder than anything basically, and FoF channeling is reduced with haste.
RsK will be top priority regardless of your haste level.
|
RSK will be top priority not just because of its amount of damage, but also because of the 15% additional damage from your abilities (which will scale with all things, but especially new mastery) - FoF does not give a similar debuff.
However, as others have pointed out, FoF should scale with all of our secondary stats. As Eeinx said, my assumption that it may fall off is at certain haste levels is flawed - even then, more testing required as not all energy capping situations are necessarily a loss (math and even logs have shown that using it at <85 energy is generally not a loss - perhaps even higher energy, but 85 is a nice, round number and a very safe one). Perhaps it IS because of Combo Breakers that the weird results are coming in - which just shows we need to test more in order to limit its margin of error.
I just can't see Blue deprecating something that they really seem to like as part of our rotation, and that they have engrained into the monk class (almost every monk NPC (drawing off of Shado Pan) uses it, so it seems like it is supposed to be iconic of WW in MoP). That said, even 200-400 DPS can add up over time - in a 6 minute fight, that's 72-144K damage (faulty math, I know, I'm just putting what 200-400 DPS is into perspective), which in some situations could be the difference between the top of the meter and the bottom of the meter (or, even, a server first kill  ).
Also, thanks for all the comments on the guide so far. I haven't been feeling well the last 2 days, so I haven't really updated it since posting (I haven't even finished adding all of the sections). Feedback is appreciated, and outside eyes to review and make sure I am being concise is welcome.
|
|
|
|
01/08/13, 2:38 PM
|
#86
|
|
Von Kaiser
Blood Elf Warlock
Burning Legion
|
Originally Posted by Saltycracker
Could you guys run these tests with weapon enchants/Trinket Procs turned off? I think that you will see the same TeB damage increase regardless of how many stacks you are using in the long run. I think because you are blanketing TEB, the uptime is always coinciding with trinket/enchant procs, while pooled usage may not coincide with procs.
In practice, I think it would be best to use pooled TEB stacks when you are getting trinket and enchant procs for maximum DPS.
|
I've tried every variation of saving stacks for cds and pooling, the facts come down to the difference between lining up for procs being 3-4 stacks going in (none during haste cds/EB usage)...the interval of 15.5 seconds between TEB usages allows for about 6 stacks outside of haste cds. Now, if we had an actual cd that benefited from the damage increase, I might agree with you. But EB is hardly a major cd, xuen doesn't benefit from it, and there aren't any major on use trinkets, and likely you'd only do it then if it were mastery. Feel free to try your hand at it but its been nothing but a loss in every form I've tried.
-edit- with regards to the FoF debate, I see NO purpose in using it if you will cap. The difference between entirely dropping it from the rotation is already less than 2% COUNTING TWO PIECE. Losing any amount of dps further than that just makes it entirely negligible in my book, and frankly if I played my WW as main, I probably wouldn't ever use it unless perfect situations all. All the additional trouble of timing it around boss mechanics and pits in the rotation for a less than 1% gain without 2pc is just bonkers in my book.
|
|
|
|
|
01/08/13, 3:52 PM
|
#87
|
|
Glass Joe
Pandaren Monk
Bleeding Hollow
|
For those of you simming FoF and finding low/no dps boost, did the FoF action you used prevent energy capping?
The default action list in the live version of simulationcraft doesn't prevent energy capping, although it tries to:
actions.st+=/fists_of_fury,if=!buff.energizing_brew.up&energy.time_to_max>(cast_time)&buff.tiger_p ower.remains>(cast_time)
The problem with it is that simulationcraft considers channels to have 0 cast time. To check this, you can replace energy.time_to_max>(cast_time) with (cast_time)>(0) and note that in this case FoF won't occur at all, whereas if you put in (cast_time)>(-0.1) it casts normally again.
Here is the version of the FoF action I've been using for my own simming:
actions.st+=/fists_of_fury,if=!buff.energizing_brew.up&((energy<50&!buff.combo_breaker_bok.remains )|(energy<40&buff.combo_breaker_bok.remains))
(I use ascension, without it you would probably want different energy thresholds)
(full action priority list : pastebin.com. The only other changes I remember making to the default are the time remaining to refresh tiger power and the amount of chi to cast BoK with ascension in the lowest priority item. I have not carefully checked to make sure each change I made was a dps increase and only simmed my own character, not a BiS profile. This is for live, I have not done any 5.2 simming yet. I get about a 1% increase overall v. default priority with my character)
Other things to check could be avoiding delaying RSK (make sure you don't use cast_time of course) and timing FoF to start just before the end of a tigereye brew buff.
|
|
|
|
|
01/08/13, 6:56 PM
|
#88
|
|
Von Kaiser
Blood Elf Warlock
Burning Legion
|
I don't understand your logic because it does happen and fundamentally >0 is the exact same thing as a positive value and therefore it would occur. And if you test >(cast_time) vs >2, the difference is >2 gets slightly more casts, which would indicate that, in fact, cast_time > 2, meaning =/= 0. The reason its a gain over >(cast_time), simply put, is the math shown earlier in the thread proving that FoF is a gain even if you slightly cap.
Last edited by gahddo : 01/08/13 at 7:07 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
01/08/13, 7:04 PM
|
#89
|
|
Don Flamenco
|
The problem with using FoF isn't that the ability, when used at the right time is a dps loss, that question is easy to sim. The problem is that the complicated process of determining when and whether to use FoF during a fight is also a dps loss. There's certainly a haste cap, though rather high, where the superior damage per execute time of BoK outweighs the superior damage per chi of FoF, but there is a far lower haste cap where an actual human cannot accurately keep track of:
not dying and other vaguely important things like that,
if RSK is about to come off CD,
if you will have enough chi to RSK when it does come off cd,
if Tiger Power is about to wear off
if you will have a proc or chi to Tiger Palm before it does
if you are going to energy cap during FoF
if you are going to energy cap right after FoF because your next ability will also cost chi rather than energy
if TeB is going to wear off during FoF, or before you can refresh it given all those things above
if you have a combo breaker proc and will need to jab right after FoF to have chi to RSK, thus possibly wasting a CB proc
i'm sure there's more things I've left out
Given the accuracy of self assessment when it comes to video game skill, I imagine most people would find that trying to answer those questions correctly mid-fight each time FoF is off CD is going to be a far different dps cost for them than it is for simcraft. If you're ever wrong, we need to be looking at not only the dps cost of trying to think of the answer, but also the cost of answering incorrectly some of the time.
Given that the only real way to determine what the dps cost you pay to gain 200 dps, or 1000 dps, or whatever using FoF is for your gear would be a pretty exhausting amount of data analysis for fairly little gain, it seems a better pursuit would be finding ways to minimize the mental cost of deciding whether to use FoF. Feral druids have faced much the same issue with using Ferocious Bite, where often the mental cost to decide and the damage cost of deciding incorrectly, simply wasn't worth the damage gain of using the ability at all in most situations. A variety of projects to figure out what ability to use next have been done, though most druids at even a mildly heroic level pretty much just used them to answer the question of whether the many step check list for Ferocious Bite use had been met, or if it was actually better to just throw away a few combo points, wait a bit, and refresh Rip or Roar.
So, does anyone have a great system of power/weak auras, an ovale script, or something else that makes the FoF question easy enough that sub-perfect players can actually gain damage with FoF?
On a side note, there doesn't appear to be anything in the simcraft action lists people are pasting to address a number of the clauses I outline above. For instance if you have 3 chi and RSK is going to come off CD right after your FoF channel would end, that meets all of the conditions to use FoF, but then you won't have enough chi to RSK which will delay it, which is bad.
|
|
|
|
|
01/08/13, 7:39 PM
|
#90
|
|
Glass Joe
Pandaren Monk
Bleeding Hollow
|
Originally Posted by gahddo
I don't understand your logic because it does happen and fundamentally >0 is the exact same thing as a positive value and therefore it would occur. And if you test >(cast_time) vs >2, the difference is >2 gets slightly more casts, which would indicate that, in fact, cast_time > 2, meaning =/= 0. The reason its a gain over >(cast_time), simply put, is the math shown earlier in the thread proving that FoF is a gain even if you slightly cap.
|
Seriously, put in &(cast_time)>(0) and see what happens.
edit: and i also checked and found that putting &energy.time_to_max>(2) results in slightly fewer casts (not more as you say) than &energy.time_to_max>(cast_time). This is as expected given that cast_time of a channeled spell in simulationcraft is 0.
BTW, I found this out when trying to deal with bugged FoF pre-5.1, at the time I had low enough haste to not lose any ticks to the bug with no procs, but when I put in &cast_time>3.5 i didn't get the results I expected, and further investigation and asking in the simulationcraft irc channel revealed why. I was told in the simulationcraft channel that using tick_time*4 (or something like that) might work as a workaround, but the bugged FoF was simmed incorrectly (in the sim it lost ticks, but still channeled for the full duration, making it look worse than it really was ingame). Since the default action list wasn't fixed I guess you guys don't talk to each other much. Yes I should have filed a ticket, but was too lazy.
Last edited by Taigong : 01/08/13 at 8:21 PM.
|
|
|
|
|
|