Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x
Moderators: Fridmarr, Worldie, Aergis, theckhd
Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x
EG will be added to the talent sim for 4.1, and should manifest itself in the "W39" columns.
The effect of GbtL is probably close to what you estimated, but I can probably add self-healing to the talent sim when I update it for 4.1. That would let us compare GbtL to RoL.
The effect of GbtL is probably close to what you estimated, but I can probably add self-healing to the talent sim when I update it for 4.1. That would let us compare GbtL to RoL.
"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: 7456
- Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
- Location: Harrisburg, PA
Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x
To Theck,
I sort of calculated from my head* that EG is slightly less effective than SotP in regards of damage/threat. I used Argaloth and Magmaw as a source and even though Vengeance falls off at Arg and Magmaw should have more bursty shield slams, they both showed inferior. This is taking into account you use it every 20 seconds exactly, which I wont be doing. Of course SotP will be less bursty, but if you pop a WoG hoping to get an EG proc so you can get aggro of a new add, you're doing it wrong.
About Eye for an eye, if you can send me a message I can give you access to my WoL temporarily. As of the next raid (sunday BWD+possibly throne) to Cho'gall heroic I will be using 2 talent points into it. From the damage value, it seems to be quite valuable for Valiona, doing 4.2% of my damage. For conclave it works decently as I play defensive, eliminating SotP and RoL**. I'm excited to help the paladin cause, but unfortunately I'm quite locked on time as well. possibly we can make a list where the talent is a must for damage and where it is horrible.
I'll make sure I stand in tail swipes to see if it procs
Cass
*I'm a decent mathematist, horrible programmer, but a terrific calculator
** On wind boss I'm not really using CS due to excess damage
I sort of calculated from my head* that EG is slightly less effective than SotP in regards of damage/threat. I used Argaloth and Magmaw as a source and even though Vengeance falls off at Arg and Magmaw should have more bursty shield slams, they both showed inferior. This is taking into account you use it every 20 seconds exactly, which I wont be doing. Of course SotP will be less bursty, but if you pop a WoG hoping to get an EG proc so you can get aggro of a new add, you're doing it wrong.
About Eye for an eye, if you can send me a message I can give you access to my WoL temporarily. As of the next raid (sunday BWD+possibly throne) to Cho'gall heroic I will be using 2 talent points into it. From the damage value, it seems to be quite valuable for Valiona, doing 4.2% of my damage. For conclave it works decently as I play defensive, eliminating SotP and RoL**. I'm excited to help the paladin cause, but unfortunately I'm quite locked on time as well. possibly we can make a list where the talent is a must for damage and where it is horrible.
I'll make sure I stand in tail swipes to see if it procs
Cass
*I'm a decent mathematist, horrible programmer, but a terrific calculator
** On wind boss I'm not really using CS due to excess damage
- Cassyboy
- Posts: 23
- Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 7:55 am
Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x
I've been doing some theorycrafting and it seems that the backend of the sim could be replaced with an analytical model, removing the error margins inherent in a simulated run as well as improving performance.
An analytical result can be found by building a directed graph(/Finite State Machine) whose vertices(/states) represent the HP+cooldowns+buffs available at that moment and edges E(i, j) represent ability usage transitions from state i to j. Some abilities (CS/HOTR, J, AS, SOTR) have transition to multiple states depending on whether the ability missed, hit, or hit & proced something (SD/GC). Each state has a probability P(i) which is the likelihood of being in that state with the GCD complete. Each transition has a probability P(E(i,j)) associated with it which is determined by hit, expertise and proc rate of the ability used when in state i A(i).
Let:
i be a node in the graph
E(i, j) be a edge from i, j
A(i) be the choice of ability to use next when in state i (ie: your rotation)
T(E(i, j)) be the time taken to transition from i to j (usually 1.5s but can be greater if an ability in on CD and A(i) says to use it next, (eg delay 0.5s to judge on CD))
P(i) be the probability of being in state i
P(i, j) be the probability of transitioning to j from i when using A(i)
D(E(i,j)) be the damage done by using A(i) and transitioning to j.
then:
dps(A) = SUM{i,j->[0,n]}( P(i) * P(E(i, j) * D(E(i,j)) ) / SUM{i,j->[0,n]}( P(i) * T(E(i, j)) )
Eg: A SotR>CS rotation (ignoring GrCr) will give:
With the 0.285 in the transitions coming from 8% miss + 6.5% dodge + 14% parry.
P(x) is diffcult to calcuate but is completed determined by P(E(i, j)) which are known. The graph can be turned into a sparse matrix of linear equations and solved with LU factorisation (or any other appropriate technique).
We know the state probabilities sum to 1:
P(1) + P(2) + ... P(N) = 1
And the probability of being in a state is determined by the probabilities of the states than can transition there, and the probability of those transitions:
P(i) = SUM( P(j) * P(E(j, i)))
The matrix is sparse (max 3 transitions out of a state [for CS/J as they can miss, hit, or hit a proc SD/GC], most have 1 (eg HW/Cons/AS hit/miss have the same state 1 GCD later) so the factorisation would be fast as simple in matlab but as I do not have it, I have used an interative approximation with a starting point of P(i) = 1/N.
All this relies on the number of states being a reasonable number. 've done the graph generation in my language of choice (C# at this point) so (assuming my code is correct), I can state that the number of states is not excessive.
I have modelled each state as composed of current holy power and all relevant CDs:
{HP, CS, J, AS, Cons, HW, WOG, GC, GCICD, SD}
Total state space size using 0.5s step = 4 * 6 * 16 * 30 * 60 * 30 * 40 * 30 * 7 * 30 = 24,883,200,000 which is indeed excessive
Fortunately, the vast majority of that state space is unreachable as we can only use 1 ability per GCD:
Total reachable state space with 1.5s step: 1161487
Total reachable state space with 0.5s step: 7307349 without including WoG CD
Realistic rotations where we actually do something almost every GCD are much smaller still:
SotR>CS>J>AS>Cons>HW: 11611 states, 24920 transitions
SotR>CS>J>AS>HW>Cons: 11510 states, 24669 transitions
SotR>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW: 12176 states, 25103 transitions
SotR>CS>AS>J>HW>Cons: 12144 states, 25025 transitions
Each rotation will produce a graph whose shape is independant of stats, talent and glyphs (except cons glyph). The P(E(i, j)) varies with stats/talents/glyphs but the shape only changes when mechanics change (eg no HP on CS miss, WoG CD added).
Shortcoming:
Does not explicitly model autoattacks. Fortunately, just adding rotation damage with autoattack damage will give a good approximation. Only abilities that reset the swing timer (just HW at this point?) will effect autoattack damage and that can be modelled by assuming no relationship between swing timer and ability usage (effective ability damage = ability damage - 0.5 * average autoattack damage). Seal damage from autoattack can should be included in autoattack calculations and seal damage from abilities should be included in D(E(i,j)).
Is there anything obvious I'm missing here or does the above sound feasible? I can provide source code if you're interested.
Edit: turned some words into equations; added text to address seals not being explicitly modeled.
An analytical result can be found by building a directed graph(/Finite State Machine) whose vertices(/states) represent the HP+cooldowns+buffs available at that moment and edges E(i, j) represent ability usage transitions from state i to j. Some abilities (CS/HOTR, J, AS, SOTR) have transition to multiple states depending on whether the ability missed, hit, or hit & proced something (SD/GC). Each state has a probability P(i) which is the likelihood of being in that state with the GCD complete. Each transition has a probability P(E(i,j)) associated with it which is determined by hit, expertise and proc rate of the ability used when in state i A(i).
Let:
i be a node in the graph
E(i, j) be a edge from i, j
A(i) be the choice of ability to use next when in state i (ie: your rotation)
T(E(i, j)) be the time taken to transition from i to j (usually 1.5s but can be greater if an ability in on CD and A(i) says to use it next, (eg delay 0.5s to judge on CD))
P(i) be the probability of being in state i
P(i, j) be the probability of transitioning to j from i when using A(i)
D(E(i,j)) be the damage done by using A(i) and transitioning to j.
then:
dps(A) = SUM{i,j->[0,n]}( P(i) * P(E(i, j) * D(E(i,j)) ) / SUM{i,j->[0,n]}( P(i) * T(E(i, j)) )
Eg: A SotR>CS rotation (ignoring GrCr) will give:
- Code: Select all
i HP CS P(i) A(i)->E(i, j)(P(E(i,j))
S0 HP0, 0, 0.159108989657869 (CS->S2(0.715), CS(miss)->S1(0.285), )
S1 HP0, 1.5, 0.0453460620525202 (Nothing->S0(1))
S2 HP1, 1.5, 0.159108989657969 (Nothing->S3(1))
S3 HP1, 0, 0.159108989657859 (CS->S4(0.715), CS(miss)->S2(0.285))
S4 HP2, 1.5, 0.15910898965798 (Nothing->S5(1))
S5 HP2, 0, 0.159108989657846 (CS->S6(0.715), CS(miss)->S4(0.285))
S6 HP3, 1.5, 0.113762927605463 (SOTR(3HP)->S0(0.715), SOTR(miss)(3HP)->S7(0.285))
S7 HP3, 0, 0.0453460620524935 (SOTR(3HP)->S0(0.715), SOTR(miss)(3HP)->S7(0.285))
With the 0.285 in the transitions coming from 8% miss + 6.5% dodge + 14% parry.
P(x) is diffcult to calcuate but is completed determined by P(E(i, j)) which are known. The graph can be turned into a sparse matrix of linear equations and solved with LU factorisation (or any other appropriate technique).
We know the state probabilities sum to 1:
P(1) + P(2) + ... P(N) = 1
And the probability of being in a state is determined by the probabilities of the states than can transition there, and the probability of those transitions:
P(i) = SUM( P(j) * P(E(j, i)))
The matrix is sparse (max 3 transitions out of a state [for CS/J as they can miss, hit, or hit a proc SD/GC], most have 1 (eg HW/Cons/AS hit/miss have the same state 1 GCD later) so the factorisation would be fast as simple in matlab but as I do not have it, I have used an interative approximation with a starting point of P(i) = 1/N.
All this relies on the number of states being a reasonable number. 've done the graph generation in my language of choice (C# at this point) so (assuming my code is correct), I can state that the number of states is not excessive.
I have modelled each state as composed of current holy power and all relevant CDs:
{HP, CS, J, AS, Cons, HW, WOG, GC, GCICD, SD}
Total state space size using 0.5s step = 4 * 6 * 16 * 30 * 60 * 30 * 40 * 30 * 7 * 30 = 24,883,200,000 which is indeed excessive
Fortunately, the vast majority of that state space is unreachable as we can only use 1 ability per GCD:
Total reachable state space with 1.5s step: 1161487
Total reachable state space with 0.5s step: 7307349 without including WoG CD
Realistic rotations where we actually do something almost every GCD are much smaller still:
SotR>CS>J>AS>Cons>HW: 11611 states, 24920 transitions
SotR>CS>J>AS>HW>Cons: 11510 states, 24669 transitions
SotR>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW: 12176 states, 25103 transitions
SotR>CS>AS>J>HW>Cons: 12144 states, 25025 transitions
Each rotation will produce a graph whose shape is independant of stats, talent and glyphs (except cons glyph). The P(E(i, j)) varies with stats/talents/glyphs but the shape only changes when mechanics change (eg no HP on CS miss, WoG CD added).
Shortcoming:
Does not explicitly model autoattacks. Fortunately, just adding rotation damage with autoattack damage will give a good approximation. Only abilities that reset the swing timer (just HW at this point?) will effect autoattack damage and that can be modelled by assuming no relationship between swing timer and ability usage (effective ability damage = ability damage - 0.5 * average autoattack damage). Seal damage from autoattack can should be included in autoattack calculations and seal damage from abilities should be included in D(E(i,j)).
Is there anything obvious I'm missing here or does the above sound feasible? I can provide source code if you're interested.
Edit: turned some words into equations; added text to address seals not being explicitly modeled.
Last edited by Iminmmnni on Fri Mar 25, 2011 12:27 am, edited 3 times in total.
- Iminmmnni
- Posts: 46
- Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 4:41 pm
- Location: Melbourne
Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x
While seal damage is small, it does proc from a lot of abilities, think of CS,Judgement or AS. So ignoring seal damage, is in a way a key factor if AS+ > Judgement or otherwise, as judgement procs it twice.
On a side note, when it gets to half programming and some solid maths, I always lose it, I'm afraid
.
Cass
On a side note, when it gets to half programming and some solid maths, I always lose it, I'm afraid
Cass
- Cassyboy
- Posts: 23
- Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 7:55 am
Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x
While seal damage is small, it does proc from a lot of abilities, think of CS,Judgement or AS. So ignoring seal damage, is in a way a key factor if AS+ > Judgement or otherwise, as judgement procs it twice.
I'm not sure if you're referring to me, or an earlier post. I'm going to assume it's an earlier post as seal damage can be calculated and incorporated as part of the ability damage.
I've coded up an iterative solution to the state probability part of the algorithm and convergence is good enough (LU would still be faster but as I'm processing a rotation in < 5s, it's good enough).
I've got the following numbers for the usual 939 SotR rotations:
- Code: Select all
SOTR>CS
Total Verticies: 27, Edges: 54
State probability iteration stopped after 393 iterations with error 9.58275080061505E-13
0.363564041368229 Nothing
0.341288782816326 CS
0.136038186157557 CS(miss)
0.113762927605386 SOTR(3HP)
0.0453460620524964 SOTR(miss)(3HP)
1499.99999999999ms average transition time
SOTR>CS>J
Total Verticies: 171, Edges: 381
State probability iteration stopped after 389 iterations with error 9.98697506299349E-13
0.341288782816317 CS
0.215574921725008 Nothing
0.136149990071774 J
0.136038186157553 CS(miss)
0.0713479214621628 SOTR(3HP)
0.0424150061432255 SOTR(3HP)(SD)
0.0284393812821208 SOTR(miss)(3HP)
0.0169066807703766 SOTR(miss)(3HP)(SD)
0.0118391295714586 J(miss)
1500ms average transition time
SOTR>CS>J (allowing sub GCD delay)
Total Verticies: 179, Edges: 407
State probability iteration stopped after 393 iterations with error 9.80723790266492E-13
0.341288782816293 CS
0.214169214565253 Nothing
0.136038186157543 CS(miss)
0.132367324049788 J
0.0711476856238427 SOTR(3HP)
0.0426152419815512 SOTR(3HP)(SD)
0.0283595669969164 SOTR(miss)(3HP)
0.0169864950555834 SOTR(miss)(3HP)(SD)
0.0115102020912859 J(miss)
0.00507591660898373 J(500ms delay)
0.000441384052955107 J(miss)(500ms delay)
1502.75865033096ms average transition time
SOTR>CS>J>AS>CONS>HW
Total Verticies: 14758, Edges: 36267
State probability iteration stopped after 1059 iterations with error 9.64027599466249E-13
0.330577341790352 CS
0.134829809949125 J
0.131768590783567 CS(miss)
0.0901086008667421 AS
0.0811325921648711 SOTR(3HP)
0.0481607737317609 HW
0.0433362819725671 SOTR(3HP)(SD)
0.0362720949378112 CONS
0.0323395647090745 SOTR(miss)(3HP)
0.0272985960996393 Nothing
0.0172739026044498 SOTR(miss)(3HP)(SD)
0.0117243312999239 J(miss)
0.00783553051015149 AS(miss)
0.00418789336797921 HW(miss)
0.00315409521198359 CONS(miss)
1500ms average transition time
SOTR>CS>J>AS>HW>CONS
Total Verticies: 14622, Edges: 35902
State probability iteration stopped after 521 iterations with error 9.84401001333725E-13
0.330577341790353 CS
0.134829809949125 J
0.131768590783567 CS(miss)
0.0901086008667421 AS
0.0811325921648712 SOTR(3HP)
0.0606421677632382 HW
0.0433362819725671 SOTR(3HP)(SD)
0.0323395647090745 SOTR(miss)(3HP)
0.027814284613963 CONS
0.0229251355478686 Nothing
0.0172739026044498 SOTR(miss)(3HP)(SD)
0.0117243312999239 J(miss)
0.00783553051015149 AS(miss)
0.00527323197941202 HW(miss)
0.00241863344469244 CONS(miss)
1500ms average transition time
SOTR>CS>AS>J>CONS>HW
Total Verticies: 16483, Edges: 39638
State probability iteration stopped after 1056 iterations with error 9.84314530186058E-13
0.332373523449293 CS
0.132484551304963 CS(miss)
0.108333206018138 J
0.107001015075022 AS
0.0946411464580944 SOTR(3HP)
0.047852226354343 HW
0.0377240933434362 SOTR(miss)(3HP)
0.0366459092814797 CONS
0.0358151713723161 SOTR(3HP)(SD)
0.0267808010967622 Nothing
0.014275977400154 SOTR(miss)(3HP)(SD)
0.00942027878418595 J(miss)
0.00930443609348019 AS(miss)
0.00416106316124722 HW(miss)
0.00318660080708519 CONS(miss)
1500ms average transition time
SOTR>CS>AS>J>HW>CONS
Total Verticies: 16409, Edges: 39443
State probability iteration stopped after 457 iterations with error 8.56180179756929E-13
0.332373523449292 CS
0.132484551304963 CS(miss)
0.108333206018139 J
0.107001015075022 AS
0.0946411464580944 SOTR(3HP)
0.0633337182940086 HW
0.0377240933434363 SOTR(miss)(3HP)
0.0358151713723161 SOTR(3HP)(SD)
0.0268674842018618 CONS
0.0205818153793192 Nothing
0.014275977400154 SOTR(miss)(3HP)(SD)
0.00942027878418596 J(miss)
0.00930443609348019 AS(miss)
0.00550727985165292 HW(miss)
0.00233630297407494 CONS(miss)
1500ms average transition time
For the above results, I'm using the highest priority not on CD (or waiting a full GCD), and assuming 8% miss (for everything), 6.5% dodge, 14% parry (CS/SotR). The third result will cast judgement as soon as it is off CD (if SoTR+CS are on CD) instead of waiting a full GCD.
DPS of rotation = dps from white damage + SUM(pr(action) * damage(action)) / average transition time
Do these results look sane?
Edit: added misses into output (GrCr+AS miss=consume buff for 0 HP, correct?). Fixed DPS statement to include time.
Last edited by Iminmmnni on Thu Mar 24, 2011 11:35 pm, edited 2 times in total.
- Iminmmnni
- Posts: 46
- Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 4:41 pm
- Location: Melbourne
Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x
My results for Nefarian are in.
I'm horrible at WOL Log browsing, but it appears..
Shadowflame Barrage & Electrocute can be reflected proc return damage
ICD appears to be as short as ~2.3/2.4 seconds, if not shorter... but thats the minimum time i saw between them
Atramedes - Modulation & Searing Flame, perhaps something else (Need a better WOL log browser to look)
Note: there were 2 pally's in the raid, for some AOE his EfaE proced, included it since it still applies
As far as I can tell, for tanks, there's no "added" benefit from this fight beyond what a ret paladin gets.
Looks like the same for Chimaeron...
We only got 2 shots on Heroic Chimaeron this week before it bugged out and wouldn't let people in the zone anymore, but our 7min heroic Chimaeron (Failure)
Eye for an Eye did 303,938 damage, 13.2% of my total DPS... Seems to be only from Massacre but not positive if slimes will also proc it (doubtful, since as tank's we're not valid targets)
And for our killshots, a quick summary:
Obviously this may be very hard to code or determine, or simulate really in any way... Overall the numbers seem too low to be worth considering unless you need a little help on heroic Chimaeron... Or unless heroic modes add more abilities that could be useful. Something to keep an eye out on? Perhaps Al'Akir will be good... The Electrocute from being out of range might deal some damage while ya dodge tornados... and maybe stormlings for OT's
Nezir is also on my list to look at..
I'm horrible at WOL Log browsing, but it appears..
Shadowflame Barrage & Electrocute can be reflected proc return damage
ICD appears to be as short as ~2.3/2.4 seconds, if not shorter... but thats the minimum time i saw between them
Atramedes - Modulation & Searing Flame, perhaps something else (Need a better WOL log browser to look)
Note: there were 2 pally's in the raid, for some AOE his EfaE proced, included it since it still applies
- Code: Select all
[17:59:51.702] Atramedes Modulation Pseudo 39844 (R: 18974)
[17:59:52.520] Maquesta Eye for an Eye Atramedes 21529
[17:59:22.359] Atramedes Searing Flame Pseudo 13188 (R: 9769)
[17:59:23.187] Atramedes Searing Flame Pseudo 26073 (R: 8805)
[17:59:23.968] Pseudo Eye for an Eye Atramedes 13051
[18:00:49.046] Atramedes Modulation Pseudo 44099 (A: 2059, R: 5698)
[18:00:49.898] Maquesta Eye for an Eye Atramedes 13899
[18:00:49.898] Pseudo Eye for an Eye Atramedes 14716
As far as I can tell, for tanks, there's no "added" benefit from this fight beyond what a ret paladin gets.
Looks like the same for Chimaeron...
We only got 2 shots on Heroic Chimaeron this week before it bugged out and wouldn't let people in the zone anymore, but our 7min heroic Chimaeron (Failure)
Eye for an Eye did 303,938 damage, 13.2% of my total DPS... Seems to be only from Massacre but not positive if slimes will also proc it (doubtful, since as tank's we're not valid targets)
And for our killshots, a quick summary:
- Code: Select all
Boss Mode/Role %DPS Breakdown
Atramedes (25N) (MT) 1.1% 3 ticks totalling ~39.9k
Maloriak (25N) (OT) 2.1% 5 ticks totalling ~39.8k
Chimaeron (25N) (OT) 6.7% 2 ticks totalling ~122k
Valiona (25N) (MT) 0.9% 4 ticks totalling ~33k
(Ony P1, Nef p3)
Nefarian (25N)(MT) 2.2% 13 ticks totalling ~105k
Obviously this may be very hard to code or determine, or simulate really in any way... Overall the numbers seem too low to be worth considering unless you need a little help on heroic Chimaeron... Or unless heroic modes add more abilities that could be useful. Something to keep an eye out on? Perhaps Al'Akir will be good... The Electrocute from being out of range might deal some damage while ya dodge tornados... and maybe stormlings for OT's
Nezir is also on my list to look at..
- Sur-Pseudo
- Posts: 117
- Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 9:44 pm
Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x
Iminmmnni: I've sent you a private message, I'm very interested to see your code. We thought about a similar approach, but decided it was impractical. It seems that we overlooked something, because you've obviously made it practical enough to code in a day or so.
"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: 7456
- Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
- Location: Harrisburg, PA
Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x
Sur-Pseudo wrote:Atramedes - Modulation & Searing Flame, perhaps something else (Need a better WOL log browser to look)
Use the Expression Editor with the following string:
- Code: Select all
(spell="Eye for an Eye") or (fullType in (101, 102, 103, 104, 105, 107) and targetName in ("Pseudo","Maquesta"))
This will show you all E4E events as well as any time you take damage from "swing," "range," "spell," "spell_periodic," "damage_split," or "environmental" sources. I suspect that swing/range/spell_periodic/environmental cannot trigger it, so you could probably shorten that list to (103) to make it easier to read. For most of these analyses, I've used this filter:
- Code: Select all
(spell="Eye for an Eye") or (fullType in (103) and targetName in ("Pseudo","Maquesta"))
Nefarian: Electrocute and Shadowflame Barrage are both "spell" (103), and Shadowflame Breath is "spell_periodic" (104). Given the number of ticks of Shadowflame Breath we've seen without any procs, it's a good bet that spell_periodic can't trigger it. This is reinforced on other bosses in this parse.
Some interesting observations:
- Code: Select all
[19:39:23.249] Chromatic Prototype Blast Nova Pseudo 33124
[19:39:23.601] Pseudo Eye for an Eye Chromatic Prototype 32982
[19:39:24.971] Nefarian Shadowflame Barrage Pseudo 16354 (R: 4543)
[19:39:25.563] Pseudo Eye for an Eye Nefarian 5299
This confirms that if there's any ICD, it's ~2 seconds or less. Also, Blast Nova triggers it, also type "spell" (103).
- Code: Select all
[19:43:51.313] Nefarian's Lightning Machine Electrocute Pseudo 61069 (R: 21205)
[19:43:52.155] Pseudo Eye for an Eye Nefarian 19787
[19:43:52.999] Shadowblaze Shadowblaze Pseudo 17640 (R: 10500)
[19:43:53.734] Shadowblaze Shadowblaze Pseudo 17640 (R: 10500)
[19:43:54.564] Pseudo Eye for an Eye Nefarian *8573*
Shadowblaze apparently triggers it, directed at Nefarian, despite him not being the source. Shadowblaze is also type "spell" (103).
Atramedes: Searing Flame, Modulation, Roaring Flame all trigger it (all type 103)
Chimaeron: Caustic Slime, Massacre both trigger it (both type 103). Amusingly:
- Code: Select all
[19:20:34.984] Chimaeron Caustic Slime Pseudo 9959 (R: 1229)
[19:20:35.115] Pseudo Eye for an Eye Chimaeron Miss
So it can miss. I think this is the first time I've seen it miss, I'm curious what your hit (melee and spell) were for this run.
Maloriak is confusing. Arcane Storm and Scorching Blast both trigger E4E and are both type 103. Acid Nova is type 104 and doesn't trigger it at all (more evidence that 104 is not a trigger). Those are both consistent.
Biting Chill is type 103, but doesn't seem to trigger it - however it also has an "Unknown" source, which could prevent it from activating. It's odd that Shadowblaze redirected it in that case, but it did have a source while this one doesn't.
The most confusing part is this (types 101, 103, 104 represented):
- Code: Select all
[18:56:37.208] Prime Subject hits Pseudo 13449 (B: 8966)
[18:56:37.535] Maloriak Acid Nova Maquesta 6000 (R: 1500)
[18:56:37.546] Maloriak Acid Nova Pseudo 6075 (R: 750)
[18:56:38.624] Maloriak Acid Nova Maquesta 6750 (R: 750)
[18:56:38.640] Maloriak Acid Nova Pseudo 6075 (R: 750)
[18:56:39.499] Unknown Rend Pseudo 1620
[18:56:39.562] Maloriak Acid Nova Maquesta 5250 (R: 2250)
[18:56:39.562] Maloriak Acid Nova Pseudo 4725 (R: 2250)
[18:56:39.577] Prime Subject hits Pseudo 14633 (B: 9756)
[18:56:40.578] Unknown Magma Jets Pseudo 27449 (R: 7625)
[18:56:40.578] Unknown Magma Jets Pseudo 29313 (R: 8143)
[18:56:40.593] Maloriak Acid Nova Maquesta 6000 (R: 1500)
[18:56:40.609] Maloriak Acid Nova Pseudo 4725 (R: 2250)
[18:56:41.062] Unknown Magma Jets Pseudo 14995 (R: 4165)
[18:56:41.078] Unknown Magma Jets Pseudo 14863 (R: 4129)
[18:56:41.327] Pseudo Eye for an Eye Prime Subject *11739*
[18:56:41.359] Unknown Magma Jets Pseudo 14739 (R: 4094)
[18:56:42.025] Prime Subject hits Pseudo 25652
That crit should have been caused by a 24k-27k damage event. Yet there are literally no events caused by the Prime Subject in the 3 second window preceding it, and the one 4 seconds earlier is a melee type (101) and is too small to cause that large a crit. Rend is "Unknown" but presumably sourced from Prime Subjects, but it's also too small. The only thing in there is Magma Jets, which while "unknown" should be sourced by Maloriak.
My current guess is that when the source of the event is "Unknown," E4E arbitrarily picks the nearest enemy target. That would explain it, as one of the 25k+ Magma Jets in the previous second could have caused the proc, and the Prime Subject just happened to be in the wrong place at the wrong time. That doesn't explain why Biting Chill doesn't cause it though, since both Biting Chill and Magma Jets are type 103.
V&T: Twilight Blast, Twilight Meteorite both proc (103 again). No procs from Blackout (also type 103), but it looks like there were only 3 events that hit either of you, so that's not conclusive.
Atramedes Trash:
- Code: Select all
[17:48:12.687] Spirit of Ironstar Whirlwind Pseudo 26246
[17:48:13.453] Pseudo Eye for an Eye Spirit of Ironstar 8758
Whirlwind is type 103, and properly triggers E4E despite being physical damage. Thunderclap and Chain Lightning are also type 103 triggers.
Conclusions:
Only events of fulltype=103 ("SPELL_DAMAGE" events) trigger E4E. This means that melee, ranged (101, 102) and periodic damage effects (104, likely 107) do not trigger it. Note that we're specifically referring to event types here, i.e. "SPELL_PERIODIC_DAMAGE" will not trigger E4E (ex: Shadowflame Breath), but a boss ability that generates a periodic sequence of "SPELL_DAMAGE" (type 103) events will (ex: Searing Flame).
There's still some confusion over what happens when the source of damage is unknown. There's evidence that in some cases E4E picks whatever target is closest (Maloriak - Magma Jets, Nefarian - Shadowblaze), and in other cases it punts (doesn't trigger at all, Maloriak - Biting Cold).
"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: 7456
- Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
- Location: Harrisburg, PA
Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x
•Sacred Duty now also procs from Avenger's Shield. Now lasts 10 sec, down from 15 sec.
This makes it very easy.... AS > Judgement if mana is above 70%, Judgement > AS if mana is below 70%. You can fill in the % yourself, perhaps 60 or 50 is better.
On an off topic note: Why doesn't get Ardent defender a visual animation for proccing or anything showing if you got it up or not? A bit lazy design in my opinion.
This makes it very easy.... AS > Judgement if mana is above 70%, Judgement > AS if mana is below 70%. You can fill in the % yourself, perhaps 60 or 50 is better.
On an off topic note: Why doesn't get Ardent defender a visual animation for proccing or anything showing if you got it up or not? A bit lazy design in my opinion.
- Cassyboy
- Posts: 23
- Joined: Wed Mar 16, 2011 7:55 am
Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x
With updated 4.1 Sacred Duty mechanics.
20k GCD sims, 939/SoT build, 2%/10
W39/SoI build, 2%/10
939/SoT build, 8%/26
There's very little difference between queues 3, 5, and 6, which is sort of interesting. This alleviates enough of the opportunity cost that prioritizing AS+>CS isn't as significant loss, though queue #7 suggests that it is still a loss. Note that #7 pulling ahead in the first sim seems to be a statistical fluctuation - in every other realization I've run today it's fallen behind #3. I've been tweaking the queues a bit as I go to test some things.
<edit> should have clarified, "sdAS" and "sdJ" are "fishing" queues, in other words "AS iff SD is not active" and "J iff SD is not active". "sd" is the complement to "SD" as a prefix - where "SD" means "only if SD is active", "sd" means "only if SD is not active."
20k GCD sims, 939/SoT build, 2%/10
- Code: Select all
DPS TPS SHPS E E SotR AS GC DT
Q# Priority V=100% V=30% V=100% V=30% V=100% V=30% # % miss cast procs SotR
1 SotR>CS>J>AS 14285 9211 42856 27632 0 0 2210 11.0 779 1999 1456 10.4327
2 SotR>HotR>J>AS 13007 8291 39020 24874 0 0 2212 11.1 782 2011 1461 10.4267
3 SotR>CS>AS>J 14366 9275 43098 27826 0 0 2228 11.1 765 2352 1407 10.0313
4 SotR>AS>CS>J 14236 9193 42708 27578 0 0 2581 12.9 775 2590 1448 10.3059
5 SotR>CS>AS+>J>AS 14359 9265 43077 27795 0 0 2160 10.8 802 2162 1457 9.9089
6 SotR>AS+>CS>AS>J 14397 9296 43192 27887 0 0 2304 11.5 773 2458 1462 9.9518
7 SotR>AS++>CS>AS>J 14282 9221 42845 27662 0 0 2332 11.7 843 2440 1425 10.0998
8 sdAS>sdJ>SotR>CS>AS>J 14246 9193 42738 27579 0 0 2791 14.0 710 2427 1374 10.2293
9 sdAS>SotR>CS>AS>J 14357 9271 43072 27813 0 0 2425 12.1 785 2491 1459 9.9822
10 sdJ>SotR>CS>AS>J 14310 9233 42931 27700 0 0 2504 12.5 781 2295 1367 10.1091
W39/SoI build, 2%/10
- Code: Select all
DPS TPS SHPS E E SotR AS GC DT
Q# Priority V=100% V=30% V=100% V=30% V=100% V=30% # % miss cast procs SotR
1 SotR>CS>J>AS 10596 6900 35601 23003 2543 753 2304 11.5 979 1968 1377 11.01
2 SotR>HotR>J>AS 9471 6086 31179 19930 1844 331 2328 11.6 920 1981 1387 11.0844
3 SotR>CS>AS>J 10776 7028 36085 23353 2505 730 2291 11.5 980 2357 1370 10.5986
4 SotR>AS>CS>J 10621 6929 35562 23020 2465 706 2657 13.3 954 2540 1335 10.9792
5 SotR>CS>AS+>J>AS 10653 6942 35744 23112 2524 741 2290 11.4 1039 2111 1317 10.6814
6 SotR>AS+>CS>AS>J 10730 6997 35928 23250 2492 722 2461 12.3 956 2400 1338 10.746
7 SotR>AS++>CS>AS>J 10755 7014 36006 23302 2493 723 2446 12.2 939 2413 1347 10.693
8 sdAS>sdJ>SotR>CS>AS>J 10669 6955 35710 23101 2468 708 2802 14.0 929 2407 1267 10.7813
9 sdAS>SotR>CS>AS>J 10740 7006 35941 23264 2480 715 2521 12.6 953 2464 1362 10.6718
10 sdJ>SotR>CS>AS>J 10733 6994 35946 23246 2497 725 2549 12.7 960 2289 1313 10.6447
939/SoT build, 8%/26
- Code: Select all
DPS TPS SHPS E E SotR AS GC DT
Q# Priority V=100% V=30% V=100% V=30% V=100% V=30% # % miss cast procs SotR
1 SotR>CS>J>AS 16692 10776 50076 32328 0 0 1810 9.1 262 2081 1768 8.903
2 SotR>HotR>J>AS 15180 9686 45541 29058 0 0 1823 9.1 246 2073 1763 8.8933
3 SotR>CS>AS>J 16854 10898 50563 32693 0 0 1792 9.0 284 2543 1805 8.4191
4 SotR>AS>CS>J 16677 10782 50030 32346 0 0 2207 11.0 246 2739 1691 8.8769
5 SotR>CS>AS+>J>AS 16698 10790 50093 32371 0 0 1805 9.0 350 2335 1780 8.4698
6 SotR>AS+>CS>AS>J 16823 10876 50469 32627 0 0 1935 9.7 294 2624 1755 8.5636
7 SotR>AS++>CS>AS>J 16783 10849 50349 32546 0 0 1973 9.9 279 2580 1706 8.6269
8 sdAS>sdJ>SotR>CS>AS>J 16596 10724 49789 32173 0 0 2470 12.4 257 2547 1620 8.6325
9 sdAS>SotR>CS>AS>J 16824 10878 50473 32634 0 0 1988 9.9 259 2623 1758 8.5833
10 sdJ>SotR>CS>AS>J 16692 10785 50076 32355 0 0 2230 11.2 272 2449 1721 8.4857
There's very little difference between queues 3, 5, and 6, which is sort of interesting. This alleviates enough of the opportunity cost that prioritizing AS+>CS isn't as significant loss, though queue #7 suggests that it is still a loss. Note that #7 pulling ahead in the first sim seems to be a statistical fluctuation - in every other realization I've run today it's fallen behind #3. I've been tweaking the queues a bit as I go to test some things.
<edit> should have clarified, "sdAS" and "sdJ" are "fishing" queues, in other words "AS iff SD is not active" and "J iff SD is not active". "sd" is the complement to "SD" as a prefix - where "SD" means "only if SD is active", "sd" means "only if SD is not active."
"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: 7456
- Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
- Location: Harrisburg, PA
Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x
Another set:
939/SoT build, 2%/10
W39/SoI build, 2%/10
939/SoT build, 8%/26
Looking at the results, I think this change makes AS++ irrelevant. The only case where it was interesting before was when we had AS++>CS>J>AS, such that we ran into a situation like CS*-J-(?), and AS++ ensured that we'd use AS instead of CS in that spot. But with AS>J as a baseline, that situation never happens, and AS+>CS covers the situations where we delay CS after SotR - in other words, CS-SotR-(CS or AS?).
It's also interesting that the "fishing" queues fared pretty well in the WoG build, and the AS+>CS queues fared pretty well in the low-hit 939 build. This definitely wasn't the case in my earlier tests, so I'm not sure whether to trust those. Everything is still within 50 DPS or so, which is around the noise threshold.
939/SoT build, 2%/10
- Code: Select all
DPS TPS SHPS E E SotR AS GC F2F
Q# Priority V=100% V=30% V=100% V=30% V=100% V=30% # % miss cast procs time
1 SotR>CS>J>AS 14240 9181 42719 27544 0 0 2238 11.2 779 1992 1446 10.5
2 SotR>HotR>J>AS 13052 8320 39156 24959 0 0 2223 11.1 692 1999 1454 10.5
3 SotR>CS>AS>J 14359 9271 43076 27814 0 0 2206 11.0 813 2390 1480 9.9
4 SotR>AS>CS>J 14226 9185 42677 27555 0 0 2587 12.9 737 2548 1409 10.3
5 SotR>CS>AS+>J>AS 14403 9294 43208 27883 0 0 2186 10.9 742 2205 1554 9.9
6 SotR>AS+>CS>AS>J 14406 9301 43217 27904 0 0 2284 11.4 753 2475 1483 10.0
7 SotR>AS++>CS>AS>J 14409 9305 43228 27914 0 0 2259 11.3 809 2519 1550 9.8
8 sdAS>sdJ>SotR>CS>AS>J 14277 9213 42831 27639 0 0 2747 13.7 745 2414 1359 10.1
9 sdAS>SotR>CS>AS>J 14268 9212 42803 27637 0 0 2459 12.3 800 2465 1406 10.2
10 sdJ>SotR>CS>AS>J 14417 9303 43251 27908 0 0 2459 12.3 694 2324 1421 10.0
W39/SoI build, 2%/10
- Code: Select all
DPS TPS SHPS E E SotR AS GC F2F
Q# Priority V=100% V=30% V=100% V=30% V=100% V=30% # % miss cast procs time
1 SotR>CS>J>AS 10672 6950 35832 23155 2543 753 2302 11.5 938 2004 1410 11.1
2 SotR>HotR>J>AS 9389 6032 30928 19765 1841 329 2356 11.8 962 1947 1328 11.2
3 SotR>CS>AS>J 10732 6999 35948 23264 2501 728 2362 11.8 972 2339 1356 10.7
4 SotR>AS>CS>J 10606 6918 35519 22989 2467 707 2762 13.8 881 2482 1257 11.2
5 SotR>CS>AS+>J>AS 10729 6992 35975 23265 2526 743 2221 11.1 1036 2162 1436 10.5
6 SotR>AS+>CS>AS>J 10689 6971 35798 23167 2487 719 2442 12.2 1017 2402 1310 10.8
7 SotR>AS++>CS>AS>J 10707 6982 35857 23203 2490 721 2387 11.9 1069 2398 1372 10.6
8 sdAS>sdJ>SotR>CS>AS>J 10757 7012 35980 23277 2474 711 2777 13.9 877 2417 1313 10.7
9 sdAS>SotR>CS>AS>J 10767 7023 36027 23319 2483 717 2538 12.7 903 2453 1377 10.7
10 sdJ>SotR>CS>AS>J 10731 6994 35940 23246 2498 726 2617 13.1 847 2308 1358 10.7
939/SoT build, 8%/26
- Code: Select all
DPS TPS SHPS E E SotR AS GC F2F
Q# Priority V=100% V=30% V=100% V=30% V=100% V=30% # % miss cast procs time
1 SotR>CS>J>AS 16602 10717 49805 32152 0 0 1811 9.1 300 2061 1761 8.9
2 SotR>HotR>J>AS 15209 9705 45627 29115 0 0 1770 8.8 258 2108 1813 8.9
3 SotR>CS>AS>J 16805 10866 50416 32597 0 0 1795 9.0 285 2526 1777 8.4
4 SotR>AS>CS>J 16649 10764 49946 32291 0 0 2195 11.0 276 2724 1688 8.8
5 SotR>CS>AS+>J>AS 16822 10872 50466 32615 0 0 1799 9.0 261 2363 1818 8.4
6 SotR>AS+>CS>AS>J 16735 10818 50205 32453 0 0 1963 9.8 302 2583 1698 8.6
7 SotR>AS++>CS>AS>J 16733 10816 50198 32449 0 0 1974 9.9 276 2589 1718 8.6
8 sdAS>sdJ>SotR>CS>AS>J 16604 10730 49812 32190 0 0 2464 12.3 233 2572 1659 8.7
9 sdAS>SotR>CS>AS>J 16749 10829 50248 32486 0 0 1993 10.0 275 2576 1682 8.6
10 sdJ>SotR>CS>AS>J 16694 10785 50081 32356 0 0 2293 11.5 230 2408 1672 8.5
Looking at the results, I think this change makes AS++ irrelevant. The only case where it was interesting before was when we had AS++>CS>J>AS, such that we ran into a situation like CS*-J-(?), and AS++ ensured that we'd use AS instead of CS in that spot. But with AS>J as a baseline, that situation never happens, and AS+>CS covers the situations where we delay CS after SotR - in other words, CS-SotR-(CS or AS?).
It's also interesting that the "fishing" queues fared pretty well in the WoG build, and the AS+>CS queues fared pretty well in the low-hit 939 build. This definitely wasn't the case in my earlier tests, so I'm not sure whether to trust those. Everything is still within 50 DPS or so, which is around the noise threshold.
"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: 7456
- Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
- Location: Harrisburg, PA
Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x
Sacred duty change will certainly help dps/tps... and encourage me to keep GrCr... Previously I dropped GrCr for the WOG-ness specs, but with AS granting +1 HoPo & an extra chance for free crit...
@Theck,
Thanks for the filter, I tried for a good 2 hours to figure out how to use the log browser and identify the sources...
Sucks the breath attacks don't work, it might end up being too situational to be a good source of damage without some periodic effects working.
Yeah, that's the two hits that I got the 2.3 seconds from on my guess.. good to know, but less useful since we know breath attacks wont trigger it.
I think you're right, it probably picks a random target.. I can't think of any other way (if it were some kind of "Pet ability" magma jet's wouldn't hit the prime subject... which is something i considered for Nefarian)
Theck, sorry I probably missed it a few pages back when I stopped lurking for a week, AS+/AS++ refer to? (The forums don't allow searching for "AS++", the plus' get dropped and the word "AS" is too short
Found it
@Theck,
Thanks for the filter, I tried for a good 2 hours to figure out how to use the log browser and identify the sources...
Sucks the breath attacks don't work, it might end up being too situational to be a good source of damage without some periodic effects working.
theckhd wrote:This confirms that if there's any ICD, it's ~2 seconds or less. Also, Blast Nova triggers it, also type "spell" (103).
Yeah, that's the two hits that I got the 2.3 seconds from on my guess.. good to know, but less useful since we know breath attacks wont trigger it.
theckhd wrote:Shadowblaze apparently triggers it, directed at Nefarian, despite him not being the source. Shadowblaze is also type "spell" (103).
I think you're right, it probably picks a random target.. I can't think of any other way (if it were some kind of "Pet ability" magma jet's wouldn't hit the prime subject... which is something i considered for Nefarian)
Theck, sorry I probably missed it a few pages back when I stopped lurking for a week, AS+/AS++ refer to? (The forums don't allow searching for "AS++", the plus' get dropped and the word "AS" is too short
Found it
- Sur-Pseudo
- Posts: 117
- Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 9:44 pm
Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x
This new HoPo + SD mechanic on AS interferes with the routine 939 or W39 rotation of on your 3rd CS/HotR you execute either ShotR or WoG based on whether you need health.
Now we have this scenario that will be similar to EG refreshing HoPo too late to notice:
CS, J, CS, AS, ShotR
If the 2nd CS procs the GC opportunity on AS HoPo, you skip the 3rd CS and go directly for ShotR/WoG.
But if they make it such that AS only grants HoPo if it hits, then it becomes a situation like when EG refreshes your 3 HoPo but you have already cast the next CS. There is likely not going to be enough time to notice that AS granted the key 3rd HoPo. If it stays automatic (on test does AS still grant HoPo on miss?), even on an AS miss, then you can trigger ShotR/WoG with no worries. But is that really likely? Surely they will make it so AS HoPo is only granted on hit.
This new AS HoPo + SD proc, along with the 20 sec CD on WOG, is really Blizzard telling us that they want Paladin tanks to be more balanced and not always just spam WoG. They want us to have a rotation with a lot more opportunity for RNG variations and they want us to contribute more to DPS.
And that is a GOOD thing in my opinion. It creates more opportunity to excel instead of just repetitively mashing the same 5 buttons in a known order for 6-9 minutes.
Now we have this scenario that will be similar to EG refreshing HoPo too late to notice:
CS, J, CS, AS, ShotR
If the 2nd CS procs the GC opportunity on AS HoPo, you skip the 3rd CS and go directly for ShotR/WoG.
But if they make it such that AS only grants HoPo if it hits, then it becomes a situation like when EG refreshes your 3 HoPo but you have already cast the next CS. There is likely not going to be enough time to notice that AS granted the key 3rd HoPo. If it stays automatic (on test does AS still grant HoPo on miss?), even on an AS miss, then you can trigger ShotR/WoG with no worries. But is that really likely? Surely they will make it so AS HoPo is only granted on hit.
This new AS HoPo + SD proc, along with the 20 sec CD on WOG, is really Blizzard telling us that they want Paladin tanks to be more balanced and not always just spam WoG. They want us to have a rotation with a lot more opportunity for RNG variations and they want us to contribute more to DPS.
And that is a GOOD thing in my opinion. It creates more opportunity to excel instead of just repetitively mashing the same 5 buttons in a known order for 6-9 minutes.
Last edited by Cascadian on Fri Mar 25, 2011 3:04 pm, edited 2 times in total.
- Cascadian
- Posts: 48
- Joined: Tue Mar 15, 2011 12:44 pm
Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x
I think you're over-thinking this. The only way I see it being a problem is if it waits for the projectile delay to finish before awarding the point. Hit/miss is determined immediately upon cast, just like CS, so you'll have the full 1.5-seconds to react as long as it's granted when the spell is cast (even if it's only on hits) and not when the spell deals damage.
"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: 7456
- Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
- Location: Harrisburg, PA
Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x
Theck - what are the error/variance of those queues?
Excluding your HotR queue, there's less than 200 DPS difference between best and worst queue, even after they added a GC proc to AS.
Those differences don't look statistically significant to me, and they're certainly smaller than human variance for a real fight length - remember that a boss fight is only 200-400 GCDs. Timing your GCDs better so that you one extra cast is a bigger difference than best queue to worst queue on your current results.
Looks to me like queue remains: SotR > CS > Judge or AS, doesn't matter, just hit whatever's off CD.
At least there's no longer a significant penalty for paying attention to the GC proc... if you take the naive view that "Proc = good, hit button!" you're no longer doing worse DPS than the person who just mashes out 939 ignoring the proc.
They've managed to making tanking stressful without making it skillful. The stress comes from "Can I hold aggro due to retarded Vengeance mechanic which is completely outside my control?
Of course, what's worse, is that the answer to that question is: Of course not, Tricks/MD are mandatory to hold aggro for first 30 seconds. After that, it's entirely down to Vengeance RNG, but 80% of the time you can faceroll your TPS and the other 20% there's nothing you can do about TPS capping your DPS. GG.
Good queue / bad queue difference needs to be more like 14k vs 10k and easily determined in-game by logic and reading tool-tips. Not 14.4k vs 14.2k and requiring a PHD in mathematical analytics....
4.1 prot rotation is now entirely skill-free. The only thing you react to is misses - keep hitting CS every 2nd GCD until you're at 3 HoPo, then hit ShoR till it conects. Repeat.
Excluding your HotR queue, there's less than 200 DPS difference between best and worst queue, even after they added a GC proc to AS.
Those differences don't look statistically significant to me, and they're certainly smaller than human variance for a real fight length - remember that a boss fight is only 200-400 GCDs. Timing your GCDs better so that you one extra cast is a bigger difference than best queue to worst queue on your current results.
Looks to me like queue remains: SotR > CS > Judge or AS, doesn't matter, just hit whatever's off CD.
At least there's no longer a significant penalty for paying attention to the GC proc... if you take the naive view that "Proc = good, hit button!" you're no longer doing worse DPS than the person who just mashes out 939 ignoring the proc.
They've managed to making tanking stressful without making it skillful. The stress comes from "Can I hold aggro due to retarded Vengeance mechanic which is completely outside my control?
Of course, what's worse, is that the answer to that question is: Of course not, Tricks/MD are mandatory to hold aggro for first 30 seconds. After that, it's entirely down to Vengeance RNG, but 80% of the time you can faceroll your TPS and the other 20% there's nothing you can do about TPS capping your DPS. GG.
Good queue / bad queue difference needs to be more like 14k vs 10k and easily determined in-game by logic and reading tool-tips. Not 14.4k vs 14.2k and requiring a PHD in mathematical analytics....
4.1 prot rotation is now entirely skill-free. The only thing you react to is misses - keep hitting CS every 2nd GCD until you're at 3 HoPo, then hit ShoR till it conects. Repeat.
-

knaughty - Maintankadonor
- Posts: 3558
- Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 10:06 pm
- Location: Sydney, plotting my next diatribe against the forces of ignorance!
Return to Advanced Theorycraft and Calculations
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest