A Call to Arms  Cataclysm Mechanics testing
Moderators: Fridmarr, Worldie, Aergis, theckhd
Re: A call to arms  Beta/PTR parses on WoL
Klaudandus wrote:I'll try to start working on parses again, just been very out of it and sick  problem is that I dont have any SP items, but I know of 3 I can get easily. Expect me to hit Grol later today.
It might be easier to use the Argent Tournament dummies. I've heard that they count as lowHP and you can chain HoW them on cooldown. The level of the target should be completely irrelevant for this test.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of GrehnSkipjack.
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: 7658
 Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
 Location: Harrisburg, PA
Re: A call to arms  Beta/PTR parses on WoL
theckhd wrote:Ideally I'd like to have two sets with the same AP but vastly different SP to nail down the SP scaling, and a couple more at whatever AP/SP values I can get my hand on. If anyone has time for this, please parse around 50 HoW's in as many different gear configs as you have time for.
HoW:
 50 HoW's.
 Stats: 820 AP, 3177 SP, level 80 Melee Target at the Argent Tournament Grounds.
Editting this post in a few minutes with a parse with lower SP but identical AP
Edit:
 ~50 HoW's.
 Stats: 820 AP, 400 SP, level 80 Melee Target at the Argent Tournament Grounds.
Edit2:
 ~50 HoW's.
 Stats: 3822 AP, 1168 SP, level 80 Melee Target at the Argent Tournament Grounds.
 Rabs
 Posts: 15
 Joined: Wed Mar 24, 2010 8:09 am
Re: A call to arms  Beta/PTR parses on WoL
That's.... very interesting.
D1 and D2 are the average damage calculated two ways  D1 just uses the average hit value, D2 is a weighted average of hits, crits, and blocks (i.e. Nhit*Dhit+Ncrit*Dcrit/2+Nblock*Dblock/0.7)/(Nhit+Ncrit+Nblock)).
The first two traces unambiguously show that the SP scale factor is not 0.4. Using D1 and D2 I get:
(54425046)/(3177400) = 0.1426
(54644981)/(3177400) = 0.1739
Both of these are way off of 0.4, but straddle the old coefficient of 0.15. It's also trivial to show that if you take D1 or D2 and subtract off 0.4*(AP+SP), the result (which should be base damage) isn't consistent, indicating that something's wrong with the model.
If we look at the third parse, it gets more interesting. Taking the extra damage from 2>3, subtracting off the expected contribution from SP with a coefficient of 0.15, and dividing by the AP difference gives us the following AP coefficient:
((67174981)0.15*(1168400))/(3822820) = 0.5399
Repeating this for the other three of the four possibilities (D1 and D2 for traces 1 and 2) gives us 0.5183, 0.5178, 0.5251, or a mean of 0.5253.
I can't use the nonlinear fitting algorithm without a few more data sets, but a model of:
4500+x*AP+y*SP
gives me less than one percent error for a continuum of [x,y] pairs in the 0.50.55 and 0.150.19 range.
For the moment, I'm going to guess at 4500+0.53*AP+0.17*SP, since that puts me in about the middle of the range.
 Code: Select all
AP SP D1 D2
820 3177 5442 5464
820 400 5046 4981
3822 1168 6714 6717
D1 and D2 are the average damage calculated two ways  D1 just uses the average hit value, D2 is a weighted average of hits, crits, and blocks (i.e. Nhit*Dhit+Ncrit*Dcrit/2+Nblock*Dblock/0.7)/(Nhit+Ncrit+Nblock)).
The first two traces unambiguously show that the SP scale factor is not 0.4. Using D1 and D2 I get:
(54425046)/(3177400) = 0.1426
(54644981)/(3177400) = 0.1739
Both of these are way off of 0.4, but straddle the old coefficient of 0.15. It's also trivial to show that if you take D1 or D2 and subtract off 0.4*(AP+SP), the result (which should be base damage) isn't consistent, indicating that something's wrong with the model.
If we look at the third parse, it gets more interesting. Taking the extra damage from 2>3, subtracting off the expected contribution from SP with a coefficient of 0.15, and dividing by the AP difference gives us the following AP coefficient:
((67174981)0.15*(1168400))/(3822820) = 0.5399
Repeating this for the other three of the four possibilities (D1 and D2 for traces 1 and 2) gives us 0.5183, 0.5178, 0.5251, or a mean of 0.5253.
I can't use the nonlinear fitting algorithm without a few more data sets, but a model of:
4500+x*AP+y*SP
gives me less than one percent error for a continuum of [x,y] pairs in the 0.50.55 and 0.150.19 range.
For the moment, I'm going to guess at 4500+0.53*AP+0.17*SP, since that puts me in about the middle of the range.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of GrehnSkipjack.
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: 7658
 Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
 Location: Harrisburg, PA
Re: A call to arms  Beta/PTR parses on WoL
Bumping because
A) I need more data sets (and Rabs has worked hard enough already), and
B) I told Redcape I'd request some beta parses to see if the scaling is the same on beta.
A) I need more data sets (and Rabs has worked hard enough already), and
B) I told Redcape I'd request some beta parses to see if the scaling is the same on beta.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of GrehnSkipjack.
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: 7658
 Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
 Location: Harrisburg, PA
Re: A call to arms  Beta/PTR parses on WoL
Dalaran Sword on Melee dummy from Argent Tournament Grounds.
Hammer of Wrath Test
3058 AP/968 SP  http://www.worldoflogs.com/reports/060h0bb7hfkg5yp5/
3058 AP/1172 SP  http://www.worldoflogs.com/reports/a6bjia6ln0k5ve6a/
530 AP/393 SP  http://www.worldoflogs.com/reports/3kd29kjrai8np268/
530 AP/189 SP  http://www.worldoflogs.com/reports/pwr24b9eveh1w8yg/
DONE
Hammer of Wrath Test
3058 AP/968 SP  http://www.worldoflogs.com/reports/060h0bb7hfkg5yp5/
 Code: Select all
STR 1419
AGI 161
STA 3958
INT 177
SPI 123
3058 AP/1172 SP  http://www.worldoflogs.com/reports/a6bjia6ln0k5ve6a/
 Code: Select all
STR  1419
AGI  161
STA  4180
INT  331
SPI  221
530 AP/393 SP  http://www.worldoflogs.com/reports/3kd29kjrai8np268/
 Code: Select all
STR 155
AGI 96
STA 580
INT 310
SPI 201
530 AP/189 SP  http://www.worldoflogs.com/reports/pwr24b9eveh1w8yg/
 Code: Select all
STR  155
AGI  96
STA  245
INT  106
SPI  103
DONE
The Element of Forum Hyperbole

Flüttershy  Draenei Protection Paladin, Aerie Peak
Klaudandus  BE Protection Paladin, Feathermoon (Semiretired)

Flüttershy  Draenei Protection Paladin, Aerie Peak
Klaudandus  BE Protection Paladin, Feathermoon (Semiretired)

Klaudandus  Posts: 10823
 Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:08 am
 Location: Texas' Armpit
Re: A call to arms  Beta/PTR parses on WoL
Thanks, I'll take a look at those tomorrow.
Glyph of HotR testing:
Glyphed: http://www.worldoflogs.com/reports/rt5 ... details/3/
No Glyph: http://www.worldoflogs.com/reports/rtl ... details/0/
Using Last Word (277 ilvl, 1.8 speed and 315586 damage), 3810 AP, 1165 SP, on two lvl 80 dummies. (edit: these aren't including the BoL buff).
Difference of 11 damage in the Nova portion (11/1780=0.0062, or 0.62% difference, not statistically significant)
Difference of 21.8 damage in the physical portion, (21.8/273.4=0.0797, or 7.97% difference).
This means that:
1) HotR glyph is still bugged
2) It's probably additive with Crusade rather than multiplicative:
(1.3+0.1)/1.3=1.077, or a 7.7% increase.
Glyph of HotR testing:
Glyphed: http://www.worldoflogs.com/reports/rt5 ... details/3/
No Glyph: http://www.worldoflogs.com/reports/rtl ... details/0/
Using Last Word (277 ilvl, 1.8 speed and 315586 damage), 3810 AP, 1165 SP, on two lvl 80 dummies. (edit: these aren't including the BoL buff).
Difference of 11 damage in the Nova portion (11/1780=0.0062, or 0.62% difference, not statistically significant)
Difference of 21.8 damage in the physical portion, (21.8/273.4=0.0797, or 7.97% difference).
This means that:
1) HotR glyph is still bugged
2) It's probably additive with Crusade rather than multiplicative:
(1.3+0.1)/1.3=1.077, or a 7.7% increase.
Last edited by theckhd on Tue Oct 26, 2010 9:08 pm, edited 1 time in total.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of GrehnSkipjack.
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: 7658
 Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
 Location: Harrisburg, PA
Re: A call to arms  Beta/PTR parses on WoL
T10 2piece testing:
2pc: http://www.worldoflogs.com/reports/rt1 ... details/5/
no 2pc: http://www.worldoflogs.com/reports/rt4qv1yvph5o4vjcez/
Last Word, 3772 AP, 1173 SP (with BoLight buff)
Again, 10 damage difference in the Nova, (10/1713.5=0.0058 or 0.58% difference, not statistically significant)
Melee damage was poisoned thanks to annoying warrior, retook the data on a 70 dummy:
no 2pc: http://www.worldoflogs.com/reports/rtn ... details/6/
2pc: http://www.worldoflogs.com/reports/rts ... details/6/
Again, no significant difference in Nova damage.
Melee: (289.6258.7)/258.7=0.119, or 11.9%. A little lower than the expected 15.38% if it's additive with Crusade. But it's closer to that than 20%, so chances are it's additive.
2pc: http://www.worldoflogs.com/reports/rt1 ... details/5/
no 2pc: http://www.worldoflogs.com/reports/rt4qv1yvph5o4vjcez/
Last Word, 3772 AP, 1173 SP (with BoLight buff)
Again, 10 damage difference in the Nova, (10/1713.5=0.0058 or 0.58% difference, not statistically significant)
Melee damage was poisoned thanks to annoying warrior, retook the data on a 70 dummy:
no 2pc: http://www.worldoflogs.com/reports/rtn ... details/6/
2pc: http://www.worldoflogs.com/reports/rts ... details/6/
Again, no significant difference in Nova damage.
Melee: (289.6258.7)/258.7=0.119, or 11.9%. A little lower than the expected 15.38% if it's additive with Crusade. But it's closer to that than 20%, so chances are it's additive.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of GrehnSkipjack.
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: 7658
 Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
 Location: Harrisburg, PA
Re: A call to arms  Beta/PTR parses on WoL
Klaudandus wrote:Dalaran Sword on Melee dummy from Argent Tournament Grounds.
Hammer of Wrath Test
....
DONE
Was that data from live or beta Klaud? I can get it to fit reasonably well with 4585 base and 0.42*(AP+SP), though the nonlinear fitting algorithm seems to want it to be 0.466*AP+0.285*SP. Either way, it doesn't agree at all with Rabs' data  his SP scaling is much lower than yours.
If it's from Beta, it's a good chance that it's still 0.42*(AP+SP). If it's from live... then something weird is going on.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of GrehnSkipjack.
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: 7658
 Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
 Location: Harrisburg, PA
Re: A call to arms  Beta/PTR parses on WoL
That was live. If I don't have RS25 in the next 10 mins, I'll parse 'em again if you need me to do so  otherwise, I'll do everything again tomorrow.
Forgot to mention that I had kings at that time  but should be reflected on the initial stats  since I wrote down the stat breakdown per gear set for each different parse.
Forgot to mention that I had kings at that time  but should be reflected on the initial stats  since I wrote down the stat breakdown per gear set for each different parse.
The Element of Forum Hyperbole

Flüttershy  Draenei Protection Paladin, Aerie Peak
Klaudandus  BE Protection Paladin, Feathermoon (Semiretired)

Flüttershy  Draenei Protection Paladin, Aerie Peak
Klaudandus  BE Protection Paladin, Feathermoon (Semiretired)

Klaudandus  Posts: 10823
 Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:08 am
 Location: Texas' Armpit
Re: A call to arms  Beta/PTR parses on WoL
OK, that's definitely weird. I'm going to need more data points. If you (or others) could repeat those tests with different gear sets when you have some free time, I'd appreciate it. The more different AP/SP combinations the better the fit.
Also, APonly changes would be good if you can get them. Things like with/without Might, for example.
It also might help to increase the parses to 100 casts. The damage range on HoW is high enough that smaller parses can be misleading.
Also, APonly changes would be good if you can get them. Things like with/without Might, for example.
It also might help to increase the parses to 100 casts. The damage range on HoW is high enough that smaller parses can be misleading.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of GrehnSkipjack.
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: 7658
 Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
 Location: Harrisburg, PA
Re: A call to arms  Beta/PTR parses on WoL
Dunno how much help these are, my gear options are a tad limited
Each run ~50 HoW on the Argent Tournament Dummy, wielding a Dalaran Sword. No buffs other than Seal of Insight for mana recovery.
AP:516, SP:179  http://www.worldoflogs.com/reports/w43a ... amageDone/
AP:516, SP:520  http://www.worldoflogs.com/reports/m2mk ... amageDone/
AP:1210, SP:179  http://www.worldoflogs.com/reports/j2x7 ... amageDone/
AP:3410, SP: 1058  http://www.worldoflogs.com/reports/6p2x ... amageDone/
AP:1529, SP: 179  http://www.worldoflogs.com/reports/awrj ... amageDone/
AP:1903, SP: 179  http://www.worldoflogs.com/reports/yq19 ... amageDone/
Each run ~50 HoW on the Argent Tournament Dummy, wielding a Dalaran Sword. No buffs other than Seal of Insight for mana recovery.
AP:516, SP:179  http://www.worldoflogs.com/reports/w43a ... amageDone/
AP:516, SP:520  http://www.worldoflogs.com/reports/m2mk ... amageDone/
AP:1210, SP:179  http://www.worldoflogs.com/reports/j2x7 ... amageDone/
AP:3410, SP: 1058  http://www.worldoflogs.com/reports/6p2x ... amageDone/
AP:1529, SP: 179  http://www.worldoflogs.com/reports/awrj ... amageDone/
AP:1903, SP: 179  http://www.worldoflogs.com/reports/yq19 ... amageDone/

Malthrax  Posts: 726
 Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 11:23 am
Re: A call to arms  Beta/PTR parses on WoL
Been doing some fooling around with your data. There are a few clear conclusions to be had.
D1 and D2 are the same as last time  D1 is just hits, D2 is a weighted average of hits and crits. To see what the AP scaling is, we can look at sets 1, 3, 5, and 6, which all had the same SP. For SP scaling, we could only directly compare 1 & 2, which gives an abnormally low coefficient (for reasons which will be obvious in a second). However, we can infer some data by calculating the AP coefficient from 1/3/5/6 and subtract estimated damage due to AP to get residual damage. That's what I've plotted below; The green dots are sets 1/3/5/6, the blue line is a fit to that data, the black dots and red line are the residuals plotted against SP:
Fit details  AP:
Fit details  SP:
First of all, the AP fit is good, but not terribly convincing. The fit predicts a coefficient 0.52, but the 95% confidence interval includes everything from 0.399 and 0.633.
The SP data is trickier. The only two "pure" data points in this set are 1 & 2, which gives something between 15/341=0.044 and 19/341=0.0557. Both of those are ridiculously low, and probably due to the large base damage range of HoW. We're looking at a small increase in a measurement that has a large range, which makes it hard to get good fits without larger data sets.
If we subtract off 0.5159*AP from the damage data to get residuals, and plot that against AP, we get the black dots and the red line as a fit. This certainly suggests that SP scales differently from AP, though it's not a completely fair test, as we've imposed an AP scaling on the data.
If we plot D2 vs (AP+SP) and try and fit it, we get the following:
Which certainly doesn't look that bad  the fit isn't as good, but it's not terrible either. The average error is a bit higher, but would agree with Redcape's 0.42*(AP+SP) model. That said, I don't think this is correct  more likely than not, this is what you'd stumble across with a limited data set, and only after scrutinizing more data would you notice that AP and SP seem to scale very differently.
In particular, this is what happens if we include the data from Klaud and Rabs:
The data point from Rabs with very high SP really demonstrates the problem. If the scaling was equal (and thus depended only on SP+AP), then we wouldn't expect that data point to be almost 800 damage lower than the curve. In general, the fits would all be a lot better as well. So Rabs' data pretty much seals the deal  there's no question that SP is scaling at a much lower rate than AP.
If we plot the residuals again (but for all of the data this time), we get:
Again, not perfect, but pretty good, and far better than the equalscaling model.
Finally, let's do something a little more rigorous than simple linear fits to plots. We'll go back to our nonlinear regression function (nlinfit in MATLAB) and calculate the coefficients and confidence intervals using all of the data:
gives us (myfun is a simple X*B, where B is the column vector of coefficients passed to nlinfit):
The first thing to note is that 0.42 is completely outside of both confidence intervals. The second is that we're definitely narrowing down on the correct values, though there's still quite a bit of wiggle room in the SP coefficient.
Finally, here's all of the data used along with the residuals R (i.e. the error from the fit):
Note that almost all of the data points fall within about 20 damage from the expected value, and the one that's fairly far off is at low AP/SP where we expect the base damage variance to be a large source of error.
Conclusion: Hammer of Wrath's damage formula at 80 is approximately 4585+0.515*AP+0.14*SP. Some clarification on the SP coefficient would be nice if someone doesn't mind suiting up in Holy Gear/Spec and taking some data covering the range from about 200 SP to 4k SP.
 Code: Select all
AP SP D1 D2
516 179 4899 4902
516 520 4918 4917
1210 179 5204 5230
3410 1058 6488 6490
1529 179 5431 5388
1903 179 5657 5628
D1 and D2 are the same as last time  D1 is just hits, D2 is a weighted average of hits and crits. To see what the AP scaling is, we can look at sets 1, 3, 5, and 6, which all had the same SP. For SP scaling, we could only directly compare 1 & 2, which gives an abnormally low coefficient (for reasons which will be obvious in a second). However, we can infer some data by calculating the AP coefficient from 1/3/5/6 and subtract estimated damage due to AP to get residual damage. That's what I've plotted below; The green dots are sets 1/3/5/6, the blue line is a fit to that data, the black dots and red line are the residuals plotted against SP:
Fit details  AP:
 Code: Select all
Linear model Poly1:
f(x) = p1*x + p2
Coefficients (with 95% confidence bounds):
p1 = 0.5159 (0.3987, 0.6332)
p2 = 4622 (4459, 4784)
Goodness of fit:
SSE: 1542
Rsquare: 0.9945
Adjusted Rsquare: 0.9917
RMSE: 27.77
Fit details  SP:
 Code: Select all
Linear model Poly1:
f(x) = p1*x + p2
Coefficients (with 95% confidence bounds):
p1 = 0.1211 (0.05005, 0.1921)
p2 = 4598 (4563, 4634)
Goodness of fit:
SSE: 1677
Rsquare: 0.8485
Adjusted Rsquare: 0.8106
RMSE: 20.48
First of all, the AP fit is good, but not terribly convincing. The fit predicts a coefficient 0.52, but the 95% confidence interval includes everything from 0.399 and 0.633.
The SP data is trickier. The only two "pure" data points in this set are 1 & 2, which gives something between 15/341=0.044 and 19/341=0.0557. Both of those are ridiculously low, and probably due to the large base damage range of HoW. We're looking at a small increase in a measurement that has a large range, which makes it hard to get good fits without larger data sets.
If we subtract off 0.5159*AP from the damage data to get residuals, and plot that against AP, we get the black dots and the red line as a fit. This certainly suggests that SP scales differently from AP, though it's not a completely fair test, as we've imposed an AP scaling on the data.
If we plot D2 vs (AP+SP) and try and fit it, we get the following:
 Code: Select all
Linear model Poly1:
f(x) = p1*x + p2
Coefficients (with 95% confidence bounds):
p1 = 0.4326 (0.3427, 0.5225)
p2 = 4605 (4402, 4809)
Goodness of fit:
SSE: 3.827e+004
Rsquare: 0.9781
Adjusted Rsquare: 0.9726
RMSE: 97.82
Which certainly doesn't look that bad  the fit isn't as good, but it's not terrible either. The average error is a bit higher, but would agree with Redcape's 0.42*(AP+SP) model. That said, I don't think this is correct  more likely than not, this is what you'd stumble across with a limited data set, and only after scrutinizing more data would you notice that AP and SP seem to scale very differently.
In particular, this is what happens if we include the data from Klaud and Rabs:
 Code: Select all
Linear model Poly1:
f(x) = p1*x + p2
Coefficients (with 95% confidence bounds):
p1 = 0.3867 (0.2935, 0.4799)
p2 = 4613 (4344, 4883)
Goodness of fit:
SSE: 6.369e+005
Rsquare: 0.8835
Adjusted Rsquare: 0.8729
RMSE: 240.6
The data point from Rabs with very high SP really demonstrates the problem. If the scaling was equal (and thus depended only on SP+AP), then we wouldn't expect that data point to be almost 800 damage lower than the curve. In general, the fits would all be a lot better as well. So Rabs' data pretty much seals the deal  there's no question that SP is scaling at a much lower rate than AP.
If we plot the residuals again (but for all of the data this time), we get:
 Code: Select all
Linear model Poly1:
f(x) = p1*x + p2
Coefficients (with 95% confidence bounds):
p1 = 0.1416 (0.1166, 0.1665)
p2 = 4581 (4554, 4609)
Goodness of fit:
SSE: 1.173e+004
Rsquare: 0.9342
Adjusted Rsquare: 0.9282
RMSE: 32.65
Again, not perfect, but pretty good, and far better than the equalscaling model.
Finally, let's do something a little more rigorous than simple linear fits to plots. We'll go back to our nonlinear regression function (nlinfit in MATLAB) and calculate the coefficients and confidence intervals using all of the data:
 Code: Select all
X=[ones(size(a)) a s];Y=d2;
[BETA,R,J,COVB,MSE]=nlinfit(X,Y,@myfun,[4600;0.52;0.14]);CI=NLPARCI(BETA,R,'covar',COVB);
gives us (myfun is a simple X*B, where B is the column vector of coefficients passed to nlinfit):
 Code: Select all
Fit 95% Conf. Int.
Base 4584 4546 4623
AP 0.5138 0.4957 0.5320
SP 0.1423 0.1152 0.1693
The first thing to note is that 0.42 is completely outside of both confidence intervals. The second is that we're definitely narrowing down on the correct values, though there's still quite a bit of wiggle room in the SP coefficient.
Finally, here's all of the data used along with the residuals R (i.e. the error from the fit):
 Code: Select all
AP SP D2 R
516 179 4902 26.8343
516 520 4917 6.30559
1210 179 5230 1.28829
3410 1058 6490 2.7306
1529 179 5388 7.56617
1903 179 5628 40.1567
3058 968 6256 37.6434
3058 1172 6344 21.4639
530 393 4934 21.4025
530 189 4897 12.9587
820 3177 5464 6.31203
820 400 4981 81.6269
3822 1168 6717 2.57167
Note that almost all of the data points fall within about 20 damage from the expected value, and the one that's fairly far off is at low AP/SP where we expect the base damage variance to be a large source of error.
Conclusion: Hammer of Wrath's damage formula at 80 is approximately 4585+0.515*AP+0.14*SP. Some clarification on the SP coefficient would be nice if someone doesn't mind suiting up in Holy Gear/Spec and taking some data covering the range from about 200 SP to 4k SP.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of GrehnSkipjack.
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: 7658
 Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
 Location: Harrisburg, PA
Re: A call to arms  Beta/PTR parses on WoL
Would Holy gear and Ret spec be ok? If not, do you want Holy gear and no spec in addition to Holy gear and Holy spec? Do you have a particular spec in mind?
~Arathor~
Arianne  80 Paladin  Protection
Arianne  80 Paladin  Protection
 Arianne
 Posts: 502
 Joined: Wed Jul 11, 2007 1:22 pm
Re: A call to arms  Beta/PTR parses on WoL
Arianne wrote:Would Holy gear and Ret spec be ok? If not, do you want Holy gear and no spec in addition to Holy gear and Holy spec? Do you have a particular spec in mind?
I guess spec should be irrelevant if you're just using Holy gear. The main thing we want to test is the SP scaling, so we want a bunch of data sets with the same AP but different values of SP. Holy Gear should do that, since it will have Int but no STR.
The advantage of Holy spec is that you don't have the STR>SP conversion, so you can test AP and SP essentially independently by wearing prot gear and holy gear. But I think we have the AP coefficient mostly nailed down, so I'd rather focus effort on the SP scaling right now.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of GrehnSkipjack.
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: 7658
 Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
 Location: Harrisburg, PA
Re: A call to arms  Beta/PTR parses on WoL
I've got some spellpower scaling data on HoW for you  since I didn't have my combat log text parsing code handy, I just did this in Excel to be lazy (texttocolumns ftw). I had a constant 544 ap and varied sp from 179 to 3534 with around 70 HoW's per data point. Standard deviation on the HoW damage was 2.7% on average.
First, here is the world of logs report. I didn't realize WoL wouldn't separate out my different combats, but I split them up by just looking for any time interval > 20 seconds between HoW's. Next, here is an excel file of all the data with ap/sp/average/stdev calculated (For any crits, I divided the damage from WoL by 2). Plotting that data and having Excel calculate a trendline versus spellpower gives the following (Xaxis is SP, Yaxis is damage):
The 6 significant digit scaling coefficient I get for these six data points is 0.151276 with R Squared of 0.999873.
Edit: One other note  I did this test in pure holy gear and prot spec so I wouldn't screw up the numbers with the Conviction talent. Also, I just threw out the few blocked hits and blocked crits.
First, here is the world of logs report. I didn't realize WoL wouldn't separate out my different combats, but I split them up by just looking for any time interval > 20 seconds between HoW's. Next, here is an excel file of all the data with ap/sp/average/stdev calculated (For any crits, I divided the damage from WoL by 2). Plotting that data and having Excel calculate a trendline versus spellpower gives the following (Xaxis is SP, Yaxis is damage):
The 6 significant digit scaling coefficient I get for these six data points is 0.151276 with R Squared of 0.999873.
Edit: One other note  I did this test in pure holy gear and prot spec so I wouldn't screw up the numbers with the Conviction talent. Also, I just threw out the few blocked hits and blocked crits.
Kimurellia  Holy/Protection Paladin  Scions of Destiny  EredarUS

Xenix  Posts: 244
 Joined: Thu Jun 25, 2009 4:56 am
Return to Advanced Theorycraft and Calculations
Who is online
Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest