Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x
Moderators: Fridmarr, Worldie, Aergis, theckhd
Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x
theckhd wrote:Time for some collaborative fun with the AoE module (which, by the way, isn't updated in the repository yet, I'm still fooling with priority queues).
Has anybody tried using these AOE rotations?
I found most of them to be rather hard to sustain. JotW is a major source of mana regen. When its priority is so low, you risk running OOM rather quickly, especially if you have a "lucky" streak of GC procs and you decide to use them.
I was running HotR>Cons>HW>AS>ShoR>J and it definitely suffers from this. I assume other rotations have the same problem. Sanctuary helps, naturally, but I had issues with 2 or 3 mobs every once in a while (tanking 4+ melee mobs makes things easier). Needless to say, practicing these rotations on a training dummy is out of question, and Hallowed Ground is mandatory.
@Theck: Do you think you could add mana regen/consumption tracking to your models? This will give us an idea how many mobs you need to tank without running OOM.
Edit: by the way, why is the DPS difference so small between rotations with and without Inquisition? Almost all of our AOE damage is Holy. Shouldn't this mean a 30% DPS increase against non-primary targets?
- M.C.
- Posts: 23
- Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:47 pm
Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x
M.C. wrote:Do you think you could add mana regen/consumption tracking to your models?
by the way, why is the DPS difference so small between rotations with and without Inquisition?
I. Doable, but we need some things sorted out beforehand. This feature should be available till Cataclysm goes live.
II. There's a blunt answer (i.e. usage/priority of SotR), and there's a more subtle one (right now Vengeance is naively modeled, so there is a fairly significant overshoot for any ability that scales massively with AP).
-

tlitp - Posts: 552
- Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 3:25 pm
Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x
It also could be a bug in the Inq implementation. I'll take a closer look tomorrow.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of Grehn|Skipjack.
MATLAB 5.x, Call to Arms 5.x, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 5.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
MATLAB 5.x, Call to Arms 5.x, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 5.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
-

theckhd - Moderator
- Posts: 7452
- Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
- Location: Harrisburg, PA
Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x
Remember the scaling on sotr is nerfed in beta. Also, while aoeing, like mentioned before, single target dps might matter less then aoe threat. It's a choice.
Yeah I have noticed going oom when not judging too often. Specially when not speced into consecrate. For simplicity's sake I just keep judging and using holy power every cycle, except the pull.
Yeah I have noticed going oom when not judging too often. Specially when not speced into consecrate. For simplicity's sake I just keep judging and using holy power every cycle, except the pull.
-

Awyndel - Posts: 672
- Joined: Sat Feb 14, 2009 8:49 am
- Location: The Netherlands
Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x
theckhd wrote:Guaranteed:
- Code: Select all
# Mobs
Q# Queue 1 2 3 4 5 Empty E%
1 ShoR>HotR>J>AS>Cons>HW 1838 1829 1662 1173 1171 0 0.0
2 ShoR>HotR>AS>J>Cons>HW 1949 1938 1745 1181 1178 19 0.2
3 ShoR>HotR>AS>Cons>J>HW 2003 1986 1790 1224 1220 15 0.1
4 ShoR>HotR>AS>Cons>HW>J 2045 2019 1818 1244 1239 101 1.0
5 ShoR>HotR>Cons>AS>HW>J 2018 1992 1800 1253 1248 118 1.2
6 ShoR>HotR>Cons>HW>AS>J 1945 1916 1744 1259 1253 110 1.1
7 ShoR>HotR>HW>Cons>AS>J 1954 1926 1751 1259 1253 96 1.0
8 ShoR>AS>HotR>Cons>HW>J 2043 2016 1801 1185 1180 378 3.0
9 AS>ShoR>HotR>Cons>HW>J 2061 2035 1809 1165 1159 387 2.9
10 AS>HotR>ShoR>Cons>HW>J 2188 2162 1928 1254 1249 121 1.2
11 AS>HotR>Cons>ShoR>HW>J 2208 2182 1946 1268 1263 122 1.2
12 HotR>AS>Cons>ShoR>HW>J 2201 2175 1941 1269 1264 106 1.1
13 HotR>Cons>AS>ShoR>HW>J 2179 2153 1925 1275 1270 109 1.1
14 HotR>Cons>HW>AS>ShoR>J 2152 2119 1902 1292 1285 267 2.7
15 Cons>HotR>AS>ShoR>HW>J 2192 2166 1935 1275 1270 115 1.1
16 Cons>AS>HotR>ShoR>HW>J 2144 2117 1888 1234 1229 226 2.0
17 Cons>HW>AS>HotR>ShoR>J 2073 2039 1811 1166 1159 559 5.2
18 HotR>Cons>HW>AS>Inq>J 2322 2283 2035 1337 1330 513 5.1
19 HotR>AS>Cons>HW>Inq>J 2416 2381 2103 1312 1305 514 5.1
20 Inq>HotR>AS>Cons>HW>J>Inq 2480 2443 2158 1349 1342 177 1.8
21 Inq>HotR>Cons>AS>HW>J 2455 2419 2143 1359 1351 413 4.1
22 Inq>HotR>AS>Cons>HW>J 2471 2437 2153 1343 1336 398 4.0
23 Inq>AS>HotR>Cons>HW>J 2412 2375 2086 1262 1255 734 5.7
24 AS>Inq>HotR>Cons>HW>J 2376 2340 2061 1267 1260 739 6.1
why is the guaranteed damage so different if you look at the number of mobs? i mean, it SHOULD be exactly the same, the only numbers that should matter is 3 (because of AS) and 11+ (because of ae-dmg cap). i mean, all of these enemies are hit by the same attacks, HW, cons and hotr (+AS if 3 mobs or less). for example, rotation #20, 2 mobs get around 2.4k dps, 3 mobs get 2.1k dps. at first i thought this only happened from 2 to 3 mobs, but there is also a slightly difference between 4 to 5 mobs. i thought at first that was only random bad luck, but as ALL rotations do more guaranteed damage to 4 mobs, and less guaranteed damage to 5 mobs (only slightly though) im not so sure anymore.
- kirsty
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 1:11 am
Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x
Holy Wrath splits its damage evenly amongst targets, so the net damage per target will inevitably go down as you add targets.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of Grehn|Skipjack.
MATLAB 5.x, Call to Arms 5.x, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 5.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
MATLAB 5.x, Call to Arms 5.x, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 5.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
-

theckhd - Moderator
- Posts: 7452
- Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
- Location: Harrisburg, PA
Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x
M.C. wrote:@Theck: Do you think you could add mana regen/consumption tracking to your models? This will give us an idea how many mobs you need to tank without running OOM.
Edit: by the way, why is the DPS difference so small between rotations with and without Inquisition? Almost all of our AOE damage is Holy. Shouldn't this mean a 30% DPS increase against non-primary targets?
1) I can, but I doubt it's necessary. In my experience (at 80 anyhow), even with 0/2 HG mana's never been a serious issue regardless of number of mobs. With less than 3, I stick to something like ShoR>HotR>AS>J>Cons>HW, so Cons is pretty low in the queue. For more than 3, the incoming attack rate tends to be self-sustaining even with Cons high in the queue.
2) I found the source of this discrepancy: HammerNova wasn't getting the Inq modifier properly applied to it. Also, keep in mind that some of the queues don't have 100% Inq uptime.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of Grehn|Skipjack.
MATLAB 5.x, Call to Arms 5.x, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 5.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
MATLAB 5.x, Call to Arms 5.x, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 5.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
-

theckhd - Moderator
- Posts: 7452
- Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
- Location: Harrisburg, PA
Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x
ok, i missed that change...thanks a lot.
but, even though holy wrath damage decreases with the number of mobs (per mob at least) there shouldnt be that steep decrease in damage from 2 mobs to 3 mobs. i mean, thats several hundret dps, and looking on your previous calculation where you didnt factor in avangers shield even for 1-3 mobs i cant see this decrease in damage.
also i wonder how you calculated wotl. currently, cs and hotr deal about equal damage, with cs pulling slightly ahead single target (at least fully buffed and everything). i assume that if you wont specc into wotl, and thus wont get 60% damage bonus on cs, this means hammer of the righteous suddenly deals even single target way more damage than cs. wotl thus provides only the difference between hotr and cs plus increased holy wrath, hammer of wrath and judgement damage. did you factor in that you could use a hotr rotation (even single target) without wotl?
personally i guess that if you didnt factor that in, wotl would still be a must-have talent, but "guess" is not as good as "know".
also, it would be nice to know how good which talent would be for ae-tanking, this is of course only possible if we know the ideal rotation, but still. hallowed ground for example really stinks single target, but it definitly outperforms other talents in ae situations.
but, even though holy wrath damage decreases with the number of mobs (per mob at least) there shouldnt be that steep decrease in damage from 2 mobs to 3 mobs. i mean, thats several hundret dps, and looking on your previous calculation where you didnt factor in avangers shield even for 1-3 mobs i cant see this decrease in damage.
also i wonder how you calculated wotl. currently, cs and hotr deal about equal damage, with cs pulling slightly ahead single target (at least fully buffed and everything). i assume that if you wont specc into wotl, and thus wont get 60% damage bonus on cs, this means hammer of the righteous suddenly deals even single target way more damage than cs. wotl thus provides only the difference between hotr and cs plus increased holy wrath, hammer of wrath and judgement damage. did you factor in that you could use a hotr rotation (even single target) without wotl?
personally i guess that if you didnt factor that in, wotl would still be a must-have talent, but "guess" is not as good as "know".
also, it would be nice to know how good which talent would be for ae-tanking, this is of course only possible if we know the ideal rotation, but still. hallowed ground for example really stinks single target, but it definitly outperforms other talents in ae situations.
- kirsty
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 1:11 am
Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x
kirsty wrote:but, even though holy wrath damage decreases with the number of mobs (per mob at least) there shouldnt be that steep decrease in damage from 2 mobs to 3 mobs. i mean, thats several hundret dps, and looking on your previous calculation where you didnt factor in avangers shield even for 1-3 mobs i cant see this decrease in damage.
You're right, there was another bug with the way I was calculating AS damage. Those columns are actually supposed to be for 2-6 mobs, not 1-5 mobs (i.e. the headers I put in by hand are wrong). It's actually the third column that's wrong, since it's getting additional AS damage that it shouldn't.
kirsty wrote:did you factor in that you could use a hotr rotation (even single target) without wotl?
No. I don't think anyone would be daft enough to run a spec without WotL. Even if trying to optimize for AoE, WotL boosts Holy Wrath, so there would be better places to drop points in order to pick up Hallowed Ground (which will probably still be a weak talent for AoE DPS, by the way). Once we're done with the AoE simulations, I can go back and use the coefficients from the simulation to re-evaluate the talents and see how they stack up for AoE.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of Grehn|Skipjack.
MATLAB 5.x, Call to Arms 5.x, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 5.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
MATLAB 5.x, Call to Arms 5.x, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 5.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
-

theckhd - Moderator
- Posts: 7452
- Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
- Location: Harrisburg, PA
Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x
theckhd wrote:I don't think anyone would be daft enough to run a spec without WotL.
that was not my point. my point was, that the calculation is not really correct. most of the dps you get from WotL is because of the 60% dmg buff for crusader strike. as i said, i really dont believe that its a good thing to go without WotL, but it would still be nice to know how much tps WotL EXACTLY gets you.
i tried to calculate this on my own, but got some fishy results. i took the damage values from your ability damage chart and divided them by the time i would use the ability, and then subtracted the amount the talent is responsible for.
this way, judgement with 7178 net dmg unglyphed divided through 1.6 for the talent got me 4486 for untalented dmg. the difference is 2691, divided through 9 for dps, because you use jot every 9 secs, and also divided through 2 for 2 talent points resulted in 149.5 dps per point.
the same for cs would result in 271.75 dps, which is together with jot bonus already WAY higher than your numbers for each talent point. (which are around 300 dps)
for holy wrath i took the raw dmg of hw and multiplied by 0,075 (0,3 crit chance, only 50% bonus dmg) and divided through 15 it should result in 18,645 dps. how is a bit complicated, i just assumed the time below 20% would be 15% of the bosstime which seemed lower than the actual bosstime would be. this way, how got me 20.3 dps. until now we are already at 460 dps per point, which is 50% higher than your value. if i add the difference between cs dps and hotr dps instead of the dps bonus i get from cs, i would get 48 dps bonus instead of 271, which would add up to 236.5 dps for 1 point of wotl.
you see, either way i get completly wrong results, somehow not even near your value. maybe you can show me where i made a mistake? or perhaps something weird is going on in the code...i simply cant explain the high discrepancy between your values and mine.
- kirsty
- Posts: 14
- Joined: Fri Jul 23, 2010 1:11 am
Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x
Hm... apparently the talent spec sim was only applying self-buffs, which explains why the values don't match up. Fixing that gives me about 450 DPS per point for WotL. I'll upload updated data and plots shortly.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of Grehn|Skipjack.
MATLAB 5.x, Call to Arms 5.x, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 5.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
MATLAB 5.x, Call to Arms 5.x, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 5.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
-

theckhd - Moderator
- Posts: 7452
- Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
- Location: Harrisburg, PA
Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x
AoE Rotation Simulations
Setup:
Race: Human (hardly matters)
Talents: 0/31/5 with all prot damage talents + Crusade
Glyphs: SoT/ShoR/HotR for Prime, AS for Major
Seal: SoT
Gear: T10 sample set
Rotation: N/A
Buffs: Full Raid, Full Vengeance
Code: calc_prio_aoe.m
Revision: r169
Date: 6 November 2010
These are very similar to the single-target rotation simulations. The primary difference is the damage metrics we calculate.
For AoE, we care about two things: the damage to our primary target (in case we're burning things down one by one) and the "guaranteed" damage to all secondary targets. Guaranteed damage thus only includes HammerNova, Holy Wrath, Consecration, and for 3 or fewer targets, unglyphed Avenger's Shield.
I've included Inquisition in the queues below, even though it's irrelevant at 80. It shows up three different ways (Inq, Inq*, and Inq**) that indicate different conditionals:
Inq: 3 Holy Power and duration of Inq < 1.5s
Inq*: 3 Holy Power
Inq**: 1+ Holy Power
Observations:
TLDR Summary:
Setup:
Race: Human (hardly matters)
Talents: 0/31/5 with all prot damage talents + Crusade
Glyphs: SoT/ShoR/HotR for Prime, AS for Major
Seal: SoT
Gear: T10 sample set
Rotation: N/A
Buffs: Full Raid, Full Vengeance
Code: calc_prio_aoe.m
Revision: r169
Date: 6 November 2010
These are very similar to the single-target rotation simulations. The primary difference is the damage metrics we calculate.
For AoE, we care about two things: the damage to our primary target (in case we're burning things down one by one) and the "guaranteed" damage to all secondary targets. Guaranteed damage thus only includes HammerNova, Holy Wrath, Consecration, and for 3 or fewer targets, unglyphed Avenger's Shield.
I've included Inquisition in the queues below, even though it's irrelevant at 80. It shows up three different ways (Inq, Inq*, and Inq**) that indicate different conditionals:
Inq: 3 Holy Power and duration of Inq < 1.5s
Inq*: 3 Holy Power
Inq**: 1+ Holy Power
- Code: Select all
Primary DPS/mob for # Mobs
Q# DPS 2 3 4 5 6 Inq Empty E%
1 ShoR>HotR>J>AS>Cons>HW 8294 1833 1824 1175 1173 1171 0% 0 0.0
2 ShoR>HotR>AS>J>Cons>HW 8274 1955 1944 1178 1175 1173 0% 34 0.1
3 ShoR>HotR>AS>Cons>J>HW 8201 2010 1993 1232 1226 1223 0% 37 0.1
4 ShoR>HotR>AS>Cons>HW>J 8042 2040 2015 1252 1245 1240 0% 349 1.2
5 ShoR>HotR>Cons>AS>HW>J 8029 2034 2008 1260 1252 1247 0% 361 1.2
6 ShoR>HotR>Cons>HW>AS>J 7987 1949 1921 1267 1259 1253 0% 357 1.2
7 ShoR>HotR>HW>Cons>AS>J 8001 1961 1933 1269 1261 1255 0% 333 1.1
8 ShoR>AS>HotR>Cons>HW>J 7971 2064 2038 1189 1181 1176 0% 1042 2.7
9 AS>ShoR>HotR>Cons>HW>J 7968 2064 2038 1172 1165 1159 0% 1122 2.8
10 AS>HotR>ShoR>Cons>HW>J 7872 2179 2153 1261 1253 1248 0% 351 1.2
11 AS>HotR>Cons>ShoR>HW>J 7802 2203 2176 1275 1268 1262 0% 360 1.2
12 HotR>AS>Cons>ShoR>HW>J 7806 2194 2168 1277 1269 1264 0% 343 1.1
13 HotR>Cons>AS>ShoR>HW>J 7816 2190 2163 1283 1275 1270 0% 297 1.0
14 HotR>Cons>HW>AS>ShoR>J 7442 2169 2135 1302 1292 1285 0% 820 2.7
15 Cons>HotR>AS>ShoR>HW>J 7818 2192 2166 1283 1275 1270 0% 324 1.1
16 Cons>AS>HotR>ShoR>HW>J 7825 2145 2118 1242 1234 1228 0% 653 1.9
17 Cons>HW>AS>HotR>ShoR>J 7541 2077 2043 1182 1172 1165 0% 1565 4.9
18 Inq*>HotR>J>AS>Cons>HW 7598 2418 2406 1551 1547 1545 100% 0 0.0
19 Inq>HotR>J>AS>Cons>HW 7477 2600 2572 1626 1618 1612 100% 950 3.2
20 Inq>HotR>AS>Cons>HW>J 7357 2756 2721 1658 1648 1641 100% 1187 4.0
21 Inq>HotR>Cons>AS>HW>J 7324 2742 2706 1672 1662 1654 100% 1244 4.1
22 Inq>HotR>Cons>HW>AS>J 7248 2656 2619 1675 1664 1656 100% 1477 4.9
23 Inq>HotR>HW>Cons>AS>J 7278 2678 2636 1679 1666 1658 100% 1099 3.7
24 Inq>HotR>Cons>HW>AS>J>Inq* 7338 2712 2672 1681 1669 1661 100% 795 2.6
25 Inq>HotR>Cons>HW>AS>J>Inq** 7392 2735 2692 1687 1674 1666 100% 0 0.0
26 HotR>Inq>Cons>HW>AS>J 7254 2661 2624 1675 1664 1656 100% 1453 4.8
27 HotR>Inq>Cons>HW>AS>J>Inq* 7346 2713 2673 1681 1669 1661 100% 773 2.6
28 HotR>Inq>Cons>HW>AS>J>Inq** 7392 2741 2698 1687 1675 1666 100% 0 0.0
29 HotR>Inq>AS>Cons>HW>J>Inq* 7440 2788 2751 1662 1651 1643 100% 551 1.8
30 HotR>Inq>AS>Cons>HW>J>Inq** 7471 2813 2775 1665 1653 1646 100% 0 0.0
31 HotR>Cons>HW>AS>Inq>J 7018 2564 2525 1575 1563 1555 75% 1490 5.0
32 HotR>Cons>HW>AS>Inq>J>Inq** 7298 2704 2662 1640 1627 1619 89% 0 0.0
33 HotR>AS>Cons>HW>Inq>J 7071 2631 2596 1545 1535 1528 72% 1489 5.0
34 Inq>AS>HotR>Cons>HW>J 7354 2687 2650 1547 1536 1529 100% 2230 5.7
35 AS>Inq>HotR>Cons>HW>J 7317 2683 2648 1560 1549 1542 97% 2101 5.7
Observations:
- There's a pretty clear trade-off between Primary and Secondary DPS. If we just replace CS with HotR in the standard 939, we get our maximum DPS on the primary target, but a near-minimum on secondary targets. By shifting the queue around to favor AoE abilities, we lose Primary DPS but gain Secondary DPS.
- The differences we're talking about here aren't very large. Just using a 9H9 clone of the single target rotation nets you 90% of the secondary DPS that the optimum rotation (#14) does.
- HotR is the bread-and-butter of our AoE dps. The queues with high HotR priority tend to outperform anything else in secondary damage.
- High AS priority is a boost to secondary DPS on 2-3 adds, as expected.
- For general purpose AoE, HotR>Cons>HW>AS>(everything else) seems to be the optimal queue.
- There's a lot of interesting insight to be had from the Inq rotations, even if it's irrelevant at 80.
- Even though it creates empty GCDs, it's better to wait until Inq is about to run out to refresh it.
- It's actually a bit better to prioritize HotR over Inq
- Refreshing Inq early, even with less than 3 Holy Power, is a DPS increase over an empty GCD.
- Dropping Inq in the queue sacrifices uptime, which is a flat-out dps loss
- Again, AS priorities tend to do well on 2-3 mobs, though it's still a DPS loss to prioritize it above HotR or Inq.
TLDR Summary:
- At 80, your best pure AoE queue is generally HotR>Cons>HW>AS>(ShoR or WoG)>J. Bump J up if you have mana troubles.
- For cleave tanking, move ShoR back up to the top of the queue for extra single-target threat.
- Mixing the rotation up doesn't make a huge difference in threat. As long as you're casting something every GCD, you're going to be pretty close to optimal.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of Grehn|Skipjack.
MATLAB 5.x, Call to Arms 5.x, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 5.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
MATLAB 5.x, Call to Arms 5.x, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 5.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
-

theckhd - Moderator
- Posts: 7452
- Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
- Location: Harrisburg, PA
Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x
theckhd wrote:1) I can, but I doubt it's necessary. In my experience (at 80 anyhow), even with 0/2 HG mana's never been a serious issue regardless of number of mobs. With less than 3, I stick to something like ShoR>HotR>AS>J>Cons>HW, so Cons is pretty low in the queue. For more than 3, the incoming attack rate tends to be self-sustaining even with Cons high in the queue.
I am not sure where the differences are coming from, but it has been an issue for me (which is why I posted it in the first place). In any case, it would be nice if cleave rotations that aren't sustainable mana-wise are excluded from the simulation.
- M.C.
- Posts: 23
- Joined: Sun Oct 04, 2009 3:47 pm
Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x
M.C. wrote:I am not sure where the differences are coming from, but it has been an issue for me (which is why I posted it in the first place). In any case, it would be nice if cleave rotations that aren't sustainable mana-wise are excluded from the simulation.
It's not easy to draw a line between sustainable and non-sustainable though. That will depend on a lot of environmental factors:
- How many mobs are you fighting?
- What sort of attack speed do they have?
- Are they caster mobs or melee mobs?
- What sort of block % do you have? (i.e. Have you reforged heavily for mastery or not?)
- Are you utilizing GC procs or not? (if you're even specced for it)
- Do you have Consecration glyphed?
AoE is going to be a lot more subjective from now on, I'm afraid. Even if one rotation is a few DPS higher than another, there will be situations where you'll be better off breaking that rotation to front-load threat or hold a spell back to utilize it more efficiently (HW as a stun or Cons placement on multiple targets, for example). A good paladin's just going to have to be practiced and recognize those situations and react accordingly, which includes watching his resources and slipping Judgement in when necessary.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of Grehn|Skipjack.
MATLAB 5.x, Call to Arms 5.x, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 5.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
MATLAB 5.x, Call to Arms 5.x, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 5.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
-

theckhd - Moderator
- Posts: 7452
- Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
- Location: Harrisburg, PA
Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x
Also, I posted the Enchant/Food analysis on the first page of the thread.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of Grehn|Skipjack.
MATLAB 5.x, Call to Arms 5.x, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 5.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
MATLAB 5.x, Call to Arms 5.x, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 5.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
-

theckhd - Moderator
- Posts: 7452
- Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
- Location: Harrisburg, PA
Return to Advanced Theorycraft and Calculations
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 2 guests
