Theck's MATLAB TPS analysis  WotLK/3.x
Moderators: Fridmarr, Worldie, Aergis, theckhd
Re: Theck's MATLAB TPS analysis (A Jonesy derivative work)
Blade Warding Theory and Simulation
I mentioned in the last post that due to Judgement mechanics, uptime calculations are a bit more complicated now. Since every Judgement can result in 0, 1, 2 or even 3 procs of an enchant, it changes the numbers a bit.
For Mongoose, all we care about is uptime, so the previous analytical solution should suffice. Blade Warding is another beast though  we care not only about uptime, but also mean stack size and potentially the number of procs (for damage purposes). This is, quite frankly, a pain in the ass.
Why?
Well, first of all, the values I gave for BW uptime in the last post were "bestcase" values. They assumed that the buff was never consumed by a parry. If we're actively being attacked, the uptime should be lower because it will terminate early on occasion. So to get the proper uptime, we need to somehow incorporate a boss attack event into the math.
In addition, we want to know the mean stack size. Which means we need to incorporate conditional probabilities to handle a procs occurring during the buff period, multiple simultaneous procs from the Judgement mechanic, and boss swings resetting the stack size.
As much fun as that sounds, I took the easy way out. Rather than seek an analytical solution, I wrote a script to simulate a limited combat environment. The code is here: calc_bw.m
The basic idea is as follows: It simulates combat in timesteps of 0.1 seconds, and runs for 10^6 iterations (or 10^5 seconds, nearly 28 hours worth of combat). It simulates 4 different event types (autoattacks, Judgements, HotR's, and boss attacks) and determines if any of those events are "off cooldown" for the current time step. If so, it rolls for attack success and proc chance. During all of this, it tracks many of the important details for each time step  stack size and remaining duration, which type of events fired, and number of procs.
As a result, it can very easily spit out the uptime, mean stack size, and total number of procs. The only downside is that I haven't optimized the code very much, so it takes about a minute to run. This means that it would be tricky (at least at this point) to generate a plot of the dependence on boss swing speed or weapon speed, for example. However, it's relatively easy to run it 3 or 4 times for some representative values.
So, without further adieu, here they are:
As you can see, the uptime decreases slightly as both our weapon speed gets faster and as the boss swing speed gets faster. Keep in mind that these are basically Monte Carlo simulations, so there's some variability in the data  the total procs can vary by +/ 5075 from run to run, and similarly the uptime can vary by roughly a percent. That's why the last sims in the second block has more procs and higher uptime than the previous one. I can do some longer runs later to get more accurate values, but it would take some time.
So, within the limits of error, we find that the uptime varies by a few percent with both boss attack speed and weapon speed, but should be between 10 and 15% for Icecrown bosses depending on your weapon choice.
In the last simulation, I set the boss swing speed to a ridiculous number (like 5e5 seconds) so that no boss parries occur during the simulation. This will check against the analytical expression I gave, which didn't include boss parries. If I plug the avoidance and miss values of the simulation (9.62% avoid, 2.12% miss) into the analytical expression, I get an expected uptime of 27.8%.
You can see that we get about 23% uptime in that simulation, which is a bit lower than the analytical prediction. I'm not sure yet whether this is due to an error in the code, an error in the derivation, or something else entirely (maybe there's a subtlety I've missed here due to "stack bunching" effects?).
Since most bosses in Icecrown seem to be swinging at around 11.5s, let's estimate the uptime as 12% and the mean stack size as 0.13. We should be getting around 2600 procs in 1e5 seconds, or 0.026 procs per second (1.56 per minute). The average amount of parry rating gained is then
0.13 * 200 = 26 parry rating,
which is roughly onpar with the itemization of the 26 agility enchant.
Assuming that the proc damage is modified by Crusade, Onehanded Weapon Spec, Sanctified Retribution, and Glyph of Sense Undead, each proc will be giving us
700 * 1.03 * 1.1 * 1.03 = 816.9 damage (841.4 for a Crusade mob, 849.8 for an Undead).
At 0.026 procs per second, this works out to
816.9 * 0.026 = 21.2 DPS (21.9 for Crusade, 22.1 for Undead)
Since the damage is physical, we only get the 1.43 modifier, for 30.4 TPS (31.3 Crusade, 31.6 Undead)
It also adds some DPS through parryhaste, but that will be a relatively minor effect. In the future I may modify the code to try and incorporate this, but it's likely to be a small enough effect that we'll never see it within the noise limits of the simulation.
So anyway, if we compare Blade Warding to 26 agility, it has roughly the same threat output with 10% less avoidance (thanks to kings). For DPS, it's about the same as the Greater Potency enchant, slightly ahead of 26 agility. It lags Mongoose by a significant amount in all categories.
The only thing that changes dramatically with boss attack speed is the avoidance, which will go up to around 35.6 parry rating for a slowswinging 2.0speed boss. That brings it slightly ahead of 26 agility, but still far behind Mongoose (~52 agility average).
I mentioned in the last post that due to Judgement mechanics, uptime calculations are a bit more complicated now. Since every Judgement can result in 0, 1, 2 or even 3 procs of an enchant, it changes the numbers a bit.
For Mongoose, all we care about is uptime, so the previous analytical solution should suffice. Blade Warding is another beast though  we care not only about uptime, but also mean stack size and potentially the number of procs (for damage purposes). This is, quite frankly, a pain in the ass.
Why?
Well, first of all, the values I gave for BW uptime in the last post were "bestcase" values. They assumed that the buff was never consumed by a parry. If we're actively being attacked, the uptime should be lower because it will terminate early on occasion. So to get the proper uptime, we need to somehow incorporate a boss attack event into the math.
In addition, we want to know the mean stack size. Which means we need to incorporate conditional probabilities to handle a procs occurring during the buff period, multiple simultaneous procs from the Judgement mechanic, and boss swings resetting the stack size.
As much fun as that sounds, I took the easy way out. Rather than seek an analytical solution, I wrote a script to simulate a limited combat environment. The code is here: calc_bw.m
The basic idea is as follows: It simulates combat in timesteps of 0.1 seconds, and runs for 10^6 iterations (or 10^5 seconds, nearly 28 hours worth of combat). It simulates 4 different event types (autoattacks, Judgements, HotR's, and boss attacks) and determines if any of those events are "off cooldown" for the current time step. If so, it rolls for attack success and proc chance. During all of this, it tracks many of the important details for each time step  stack size and remaining duration, which type of events fired, and number of procs.
As a result, it can very easily spit out the uptime, mean stack size, and total number of procs. The only downside is that I haven't optimized the code very much, so it takes about a minute to run. This means that it would be tricky (at least at this point) to generate a plot of the dependence on boss swing speed or weapon speed, for example. However, it's relatively easy to run it 3 or 4 times for some representative values.
So, without further adieu, here they are:
 Code: Select all
Base
Boss Plyr Mean Total
Speed Weap Sp. Uptime Stack Procs
2.0 2.6 17.2% 0.204 2976
2.0 2.0 16.1% 0.190 2798
2.0 1.7 15.0% 0.178 2611
2.0 1.6 15.1% 0.175 2597
2.0 1.5 14.9% 0.173 2591
Base
Boss Plyr Mean Total
Speed Weap Sp. Uptime Stack Procs
2.0 1.7 15.0% 0.178 2611
1.8 1.7 14.7% 0.171 2640
1.5 1.7 13.4% 0.153 2587
1.2 1.7 10.8% 0.120 2570
1.0 1.7 11.1% 0.123 2659
Base
Boss Plyr Mean Total
Speed Weap Sp. Uptime Stack Procs
5e5 1.7 22.9% 0.295 2543
As you can see, the uptime decreases slightly as both our weapon speed gets faster and as the boss swing speed gets faster. Keep in mind that these are basically Monte Carlo simulations, so there's some variability in the data  the total procs can vary by +/ 5075 from run to run, and similarly the uptime can vary by roughly a percent. That's why the last sims in the second block has more procs and higher uptime than the previous one. I can do some longer runs later to get more accurate values, but it would take some time.
So, within the limits of error, we find that the uptime varies by a few percent with both boss attack speed and weapon speed, but should be between 10 and 15% for Icecrown bosses depending on your weapon choice.
In the last simulation, I set the boss swing speed to a ridiculous number (like 5e5 seconds) so that no boss parries occur during the simulation. This will check against the analytical expression I gave, which didn't include boss parries. If I plug the avoidance and miss values of the simulation (9.62% avoid, 2.12% miss) into the analytical expression, I get an expected uptime of 27.8%.
You can see that we get about 23% uptime in that simulation, which is a bit lower than the analytical prediction. I'm not sure yet whether this is due to an error in the code, an error in the derivation, or something else entirely (maybe there's a subtlety I've missed here due to "stack bunching" effects?).
Since most bosses in Icecrown seem to be swinging at around 11.5s, let's estimate the uptime as 12% and the mean stack size as 0.13. We should be getting around 2600 procs in 1e5 seconds, or 0.026 procs per second (1.56 per minute). The average amount of parry rating gained is then
0.13 * 200 = 26 parry rating,
which is roughly onpar with the itemization of the 26 agility enchant.
Assuming that the proc damage is modified by Crusade, Onehanded Weapon Spec, Sanctified Retribution, and Glyph of Sense Undead, each proc will be giving us
700 * 1.03 * 1.1 * 1.03 = 816.9 damage (841.4 for a Crusade mob, 849.8 for an Undead).
At 0.026 procs per second, this works out to
816.9 * 0.026 = 21.2 DPS (21.9 for Crusade, 22.1 for Undead)
Since the damage is physical, we only get the 1.43 modifier, for 30.4 TPS (31.3 Crusade, 31.6 Undead)
It also adds some DPS through parryhaste, but that will be a relatively minor effect. In the future I may modify the code to try and incorporate this, but it's likely to be a small enough effect that we'll never see it within the noise limits of the simulation.
So anyway, if we compare Blade Warding to 26 agility, it has roughly the same threat output with 10% less avoidance (thanks to kings). For DPS, it's about the same as the Greater Potency enchant, slightly ahead of 26 agility. It lags Mongoose by a significant amount in all categories.
The only thing that changes dramatically with boss attack speed is the avoidance, which will go up to around 35.6 parry rating for a slowswinging 2.0speed boss. That brings it slightly ahead of 26 agility, but still far behind Mongoose (~52 agility average).
Last edited by theckhd on Wed Jan 13, 2010 12:52 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of GrehnSkipjack.
MATLAB 5.x, Simcraft 6.x, Call to Arms 6.0, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 5.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
MATLAB 5.x, Simcraft 6.x, Call to Arms 6.0, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 5.x, Blog: Sacred Duty

theckhd  Moderator
 Posts: 7947
 Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
 Location: Harrisburg, PA
Re: Theck's MATLAB TPS analysis (A Jonesy derivative work)
Lythac wrote:When I was looking at +26agi last night I was in ret gear so not having the meta. Reading my previous post I should have written about the +2% meta elsewhere, it was only that I remembered about it then. The 58 armor gain may have been coming from rounding.
That's odd, I would have expected it to be rounded with a floor() rather than a ceil(). But I think Shathus' intuition is probably right.
So it should be a flat 264 armor from mongoose and 57.2>58 armor from 26 agility.
Thels wrote:Do we know that the talent and meta apply after each other, for a total of 12.2%, or do they stack, so the bonus is only 12%?
I don't know offhand, but again, it should be easy enough to figure out by equipping and unequipping a helm. It might be easier to equip a Ret helm and a Prot helm with the same base armor and 0 agility. Presumably nobody has the Armor meta in their ret gear, anyway.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of GrehnSkipjack.
MATLAB 5.x, Simcraft 6.x, Call to Arms 6.0, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 5.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
MATLAB 5.x, Simcraft 6.x, Call to Arms 6.0, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 5.x, Blog: Sacred Duty

theckhd  Moderator
 Posts: 7947
 Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
 Location: Harrisburg, PA
Re: Theck's MATLAB TPS analysis (A Jonesy derivative work)
theckhd wrote:That's odd, I would have expected it to be rounded with a floor() rather than a ceil().
It'll probably add all values together first, and then round down. If he happened to be at .9 without the enchant, it could just be a lucky rounding.
theckhd wrote:I don't know offhand, but again, it should be easy enough to figure out by equipping and unequipping a helm. It might be easier to equip a Ret helm and a Prot helm with the same base armor and 0 agility. Presumably nobody has the Armor meta in their ret gear, anyway.
I got 15sta/10agi in my prot helm and 10stats in my retri helm, so that should even out, but the 21 agi from my ret's meta will screw stuff up. I could buy the holy helm and sell it after, but then it would miss the 10 agi as well.
Also, what value do we compare this to? We already established that only the armor from items is affected by Toughness (and presumably the meta), so an increase in total armor by equipping the metagem is rather useless.

Thels  Posts: 1294
 Joined: Tue May 15, 2007 7:30 am
 Location: The Netherlands
Re: Theck's MATLAB TPS analysis (A Jonesy derivative work)
Get naked armor value. Have 2 helms with same armor one with meta, one without.
(Helm, Meta, Toughness  Naked) / (Helm, no Meta, no Toughness  Naked)
Hopefully this should work out to either 1.12 or 1.122
(Helm, Meta, Toughness  Naked) / (Helm, no Meta, no Toughness  Naked)
Hopefully this should work out to either 1.12 or 1.122

lythac  Moderator
 Posts: 2684
 Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 8:10 am
Re: Theck's MATLAB TPS analysis (A Jonesy derivative work)
Theckd wrote:Assuming that the proc damage is modified by Crusade, Onehanded Weapon Spec, Sanctified Retribution, and Glyph of Sense Undead, each proc will be giving us
700 * 1.03 * 1.1 * 1.03 = 816.9 damage (841.4 for a Crusade mob, 925.5 for an Undead).
At 0.026 procs per second, this works out to
898.6 * 0.026 = 21.2 DPS (21.9 for Crusade, 24.1 for Undead)
Since the damage is physical, we only get the 1.43 modifier, for 30.4 TPS (31.3 Crusade, 34.4 Undead)
Am I correct to assume you took the bonus from Glyph of Sense Undead as 10% there? It's only 1%.
I'm curious to know where you got that 898.6 value from to calculate the dps. I don't see it turn up anywhere else. (I might just be blind though)
Lythac wrote:Get naked armor value. Have 2 helms with same armor one with meta, one without.
(Helm, Meta, Toughness  Naked) / (Helm, no Meta, no Toughness  Naked)
Hopefully this should work out to either 1.12 or 1.122
You'd have to still fulfill the meta requirements though.

Gamingdevil  Posts: 1738
 Joined: Mon Jan 14, 2008 8:16 am
 Location: Belgium
Re: Theck's MATLAB TPS analysis (A Jonesy derivative work)
Ok so mongoose beats bladewarding in avoidance, threat and armor. Would have been weird if that changed, but it's nice to have some numbers of proof to point to .
Personally I really like blood draining, because it's a heal when you need it most, and hence you could consider it somewhat like more health. Theck I didnt quite understand why you said it would only proc after AD procs. Something to do with average hit sizes? Also I heard a lot of ppl saying it doesn't have time to built up stacks anymore since stuff hits so hard nowadays ( here I was thinking stuff also hit hard in ulduar, and hits less hard in icc ) . Is there any data available on average stacks, and how usefull those will be for health? I'm having trouble here deciding between the ocasional heal and an armor proc.
Personally I really like blood draining, because it's a heal when you need it most, and hence you could consider it somewhat like more health. Theck I didnt quite understand why you said it would only proc after AD procs. Something to do with average hit sizes? Also I heard a lot of ppl saying it doesn't have time to built up stacks anymore since stuff hits so hard nowadays ( here I was thinking stuff also hit hard in ulduar, and hits less hard in icc ) . Is there any data available on average stacks, and how usefull those will be for health? I'm having trouble here deciding between the ocasional heal and an armor proc.

Awyndel  Posts: 672
 Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2009 8:49 am
 Location: The Netherlands
Re: Theck's MATLAB TPS analysis (A Jonesy derivative work)
Gamingdevil wrote:You'd have to still fulfill the meta requirements though.
Great, this made it easy for me to do and stopped me faffing around. I used my old JC trinkets to turn the meta on and off.
 Code: Select all
Naked Helm Dif
Meta + Toughness 172 2426 2254
No Meta + No Toughness 172 2181 2009
2254/2009=1.12195122
An armor increase of 12.2%.

lythac  Moderator
 Posts: 2684
 Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 8:10 am
Re: Theck's MATLAB TPS analysis (A Jonesy derivative work)
Gamingdevil wrote:Am I correct to assume you took the bonus from Glyph of Sense Undead as 10% there? It's only 1%.
Argh. Yes, I did. I went back and fixed the numbers using the proper 1.01 factor.
Gamingdevil wrote:I'm curious to know where you got that 898.6 value from to calculate the dps. I don't see it turn up anywhere else. (I might just be blind though)
That number was from a previous version where I used the 1.1 factor for an Undead mob but forgot to square the Crusade factor. When I rewrote it to give the values in the "Base (Crusade, Undead)" format, I fixed the results but apparently forgot to fix that factor. I went back and fixed that too.
Thanks for catching those errors.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of GrehnSkipjack.
MATLAB 5.x, Simcraft 6.x, Call to Arms 6.0, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 5.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
MATLAB 5.x, Simcraft 6.x, Call to Arms 6.0, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 5.x, Blog: Sacred Duty

theckhd  Moderator
 Posts: 7947
 Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
 Location: Harrisburg, PA
Re: Theck's MATLAB TPS analysis (A Jonesy derivative work)
Thels wrote:theckhd wrote:That's odd, I would have expected it to be rounded with a floor() rather than a ceil().
It'll probably add all values together first, and then round down. If he happened to be at .9 without the enchant, it could just be a lucky rounding.
Good point. So I guess we can settle on 57 armor for 26 agility then?
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of GrehnSkipjack.
MATLAB 5.x, Simcraft 6.x, Call to Arms 6.0, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 5.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
MATLAB 5.x, Simcraft 6.x, Call to Arms 6.0, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 5.x, Blog: Sacred Duty

theckhd  Moderator
 Posts: 7947
 Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
 Location: Harrisburg, PA
Re: Theck's MATLAB TPS analysis (A Jonesy derivative work)
theckhd wrote:
 Code: Select all
Base
Boss Plyr Mean Total
Speed Weap Sp. Uptime Stack Procs
2.0 2.6 17.2% 0.204 2976
2.0 2.0 16.1% 0.190 2798
2.0 1.7 15.0% 0.178 2611
2.0 1.6 15.1% 0.175 2597
2.0 1.5 14.9% 0.173 2591
Base
Boss Plyr Mean Total
Speed Weap Sp. Uptime Stack Procs
2.0 1.7 15.0% 0.178 2611
1.8 1.7 14.7% 0.171 2640
1.5 1.7 13.4% 0.153 2587
1.2 1.7 10.8% 0.120 2570
1.0 1.7 11.1% 0.123 2659
Base
Boss Plyr Mean Total
Speed Weap Sp. Uptime Stack Procs
5e5 1.7 22.9% 0.295 2543
The current sim of BW is borked (read : it is contradicted by both analytical methods and experimental data). Until the BW model is fixed, take those predicted average uptimes with a grain of salt. Expect the real values to be ~ 50% higher.
Edit
Ok, here's a random example :
1. 10NFestergut (~23% observed uptime)
2. get relevant stats from the paladin's armory profile
 Code: Select all
player_base_speed=1.7
gear_hit=225
gear_expertise=166 (add in 3 racial expertise)
gear_defense=837
gear_dodge=711
gear_parry=306
3. set up the raid environment
 Code: Select all
20% on boss speed
no +20/+3% player speed
+Horn of Winter
+MotW (improved)
+BoK/BoSanct
+Draenai aura
no Scorpid Sting/Insect Swarm
4. compute the relevant combat variables
 Code: Select all
player avoidance
boss avoidance
parryhaste factors (no reckoning)
5. get the estimates (rounded)
 Code: Select all
simulation analytical
boss_base_speed=2.0 ~14% ~25%
boss_base_speed=1.0 ~10% ~24%
Festergut isn't exactly an ideal example, granted. Still, the sim's estimates seem awfully low. 22.9% combined uptime when the target never actually parries ?

tlitp  Posts: 556
 Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 3:25 pm
Re: Theck's MATLAB TPS analysis (A Jonesy derivative work)
tlitp wrote:The current sim of BW is borked (read : it is contradicted by both analytical methods and experimental data). Until the BW model is fixed, take those predicted average uptimes with a grain of salt. Expect the real values to be ~ 50% higher
Yeah, I agree. There's got to be an error in the code. I didn't have time to look up some parses earlier, so I didn't know whether they would agree with the code's result or the analytical result, which is why I left that as an open question in my post.
I'll try and go through it with a finetoothed comb today if I get some time. My guess is that there's an error in the proc rate somehow. Unfortunately, I want to get the new Expertse vs. Avoidance stuff posted this morning as well, and I already have a busy schedule the next few days. I'll probably spend the majority of tomorrow in the lab realigning optics, which leaves little time for theorycrafting.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of GrehnSkipjack.
MATLAB 5.x, Simcraft 6.x, Call to Arms 6.0, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 5.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
MATLAB 5.x, Simcraft 6.x, Call to Arms 6.0, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 5.x, Blog: Sacred Duty

theckhd  Moderator
 Posts: 7947
 Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
 Location: Harrisburg, PA
Re: Theck's MATLAB TPS analysis (A Jonesy derivative work)
So...Mongoose is #1 ?
Sorry all your theory crafting goes over my head..
Sorry all your theory crafting goes over my head..
 Araiken
 Posts: 60
 Joined: Sat Mar 21, 2009 8:54 pm
Re: Theck's MATLAB TPS analysis (A Jonesy derivative work)
We changed the way PPM procs work to make sure many of the weapons and trinkets did their expected performance in Icecrown instead of proc'ing too much for some specs or classes or forcing players into unusual behavior to try and fish for the procs. This change also affected some older mechanics in the game too such as the Berserking enchant. For the most part the intent is that these systems all proc off of attacks and they are balanced with that assumption.
At this time we're happy with the damage that characters are now doing after these changes, though we'll continue to monitor and adjust damage overall and that includes the procbased items.
Source
More work for Theck I'm afraid...

Eredor  Maintankadonor
 Posts: 48
 Joined: Thu Oct 01, 2009 4:45 am
Re: Theck's MATLAB TPS analysis (A Jonesy derivative work)
I'm 99% certain they're referring to the change to HV applications that nerfed Byrntoll, Mongoose, etc. I don't think this is another unannounced change, especially given the context. If you look at the post he was replying to:
So there have been rumors of this going around on various theory sites.
Apparently, the behavior of all PPM mechanics has been changed, so that they no longer proc off certain things which they did before. This translates to less uptime for things like berserking, the Heartpierce proc, and less Bryntroll procs.
Which certainly sounds like the changes discussed a few pages back.
Though I'm not sure if he has a valid complaint  I don't know if they did anything to rogues that would change proc uptimes, since the fix was centered on Byrntoll's high proc uptime for Retribution. tlitp would probably know, since he's actually a rogue and (probably) follows that class's theorycrafting.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of GrehnSkipjack.
MATLAB 5.x, Simcraft 6.x, Call to Arms 6.0, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 5.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
MATLAB 5.x, Simcraft 6.x, Call to Arms 6.0, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 5.x, Blog: Sacred Duty

theckhd  Moderator
 Posts: 7947
 Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
 Location: Harrisburg, PA
Re: Theck's MATLAB TPS analysis (A Jonesy derivative work)
theckhd wrote:(..) I don't know if they did anything to rogues that would change proc uptimes, since the fix was centered on Byrntoll's high proc uptime for Retribution. tlitp would probably know, since he's actually a rogue and (probably) follows that class's theorycrafting.
They Shoot Rogues, Don't They ?
Berserking/Mongoose(/Blade Ward) are still 1 ppm, not hastenormalized. It's been speculated that what Blizzard actually changed is the proc triggers, the same as in the case of the paladins. Namely, the poison applications are no longer valid triggers for such ppmbased dynamic effects.

tlitp  Posts: 556
 Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 3:25 pm
Return to Advanced Theorycraft and Calculations
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: Bing [Bot], Google [Bot] and 1 guest