Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x

Warning: Theorycraft inside.

Moderators: Fridmarr, Worldie, Aergis, theckhd

Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x

Postby knaughty » Tue Apr 26, 2011 2:14 pm

45 reads as the winning to me when you consider ease of execution.

45 Explanation
  1. Hit CS every 2nd GCD.
  2. Hit ShoR (or WoG if you're being "defensive" and it's off CD) if you're at 3 HoPo
  3. Hit AS between CS if it lit up. Don't push back ShoR or CS to hit it.
  4. Judge for Mana & SD procs. HoW if you're in execute phase.
  5. Whatever's off CD. Skip consecrate unless you have mana coming out your ears.

Versus this, for a percent or so more threat:
  1. If Inquisition is up, hit HotR every 2nd GCD
  2. If Inq is down, hit CS every 2nd GCD.
  3. If at 3 HoPo and Inquisition is up, hit ShoR.
  4. If at 3 HoPo and SD is up, hit ShoR
  5. If at 3 HoPo and you haven't got a SD Proc to use and Inq is down, hit Inquisition
  6. Hit AS between CS/HotR if it lit up. Don't push back Inq, ShoR, HotR or CS to hit it.
  7. HoW if you're in execute phase.
  8. Judge for Mana & SD procs.
  9. Whatever's off CD. Skip Consecrate unless you have mana coming out your ears.

Anyone who thinks that they can execute 56 with less than 1-2% extra decision time and zero mistakes when compared to 45 is delusional. Even you, Meloree.

56 isn't even "Alternate ShoR/Inq, except always hit ShoR if you've had a SD proc recently" because both Inq and SD can both fade before the next time that you get to 3 HoPo. So you do actually have to make decisions only a GCD or so in advance depending on how many CS/HotR misses you've had and at what point in the cycle you got your SD proc (which only lasts 6 GCDs + 1 second lag allowance).

I'd bet that for 99% of tankadins 45 > 56 even on a training dummy, let alone versus an actual boss where you have something to do other than track CDs.
This isn't the "Offtankadin" forum. My MoP FAQ: http://tinyurl.com/FAQ-5-0
- Knaughty.
User avatar
knaughty
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 10:06 pm
Location: Sydney, plotting my next diatribe against the forces of ignorance!

Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x

Postby theckhd » Tue Apr 26, 2011 2:32 pm

To be fair, the more relevant comparison is probably #11 to #25 (45 and 56 are HoW queues - and by the way, neither uses HotR).

Code: Select all
11  SotR>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW                        14673    9515  44021   28546     0       0    1.6   0.0
25  SDSotR>ISotR>Inq>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW            14834    9621  44504   28865     0       0    1.7  47.5


The only difference is to use Inq if SD or Inq isn't already active. Those are simple enough conditionals to process with a single PowerAura or clcinfo. I already have a PowerAura setup on my screen that shows the CS icon when it's available, but overlays a SotR when I'm at 3 Holy Power (and a small Sacred Duty icon beneath it to let me know whether it's active or not). It wouldn't be all that hard to modify it to show SotR only if SD or Inq is already active, and overlay Inq otherwise. And of course, it's even easier to do in clcinfo, since it's designed for that sort of thing.

HoW doesn't change much except to bump J down further on the filler list, again something that's easily done with an addon.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of Grehn|Skipjack.
MATLAB 5.x, Simcraft 6.x, Call to Arms 6.0, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 5.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
User avatar
theckhd
Moderator
 
Posts: 7950
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
Location: Harrisburg, PA

Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x

Postby inthedrops » Tue Apr 26, 2011 3:20 pm

Theck, I just noticed that Sacred Duty isn't eaten up when your ShoR misses or parries anymore (haven't seen dodge yet). Just playing on a target dummy and it's consistent.
inthedrops
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 1281
Joined: Mon Oct 29, 2007 9:19 am

Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x

Postby 99sitr » Tue Apr 26, 2011 5:04 pm

inthedrops wrote:Theck, I just noticed that Sacred Duty isn't eaten up when your ShoR misses or parries anymore (haven't seen dodge yet). Just playing on a target dummy and it's consistent.


Oh please let it be so, it was unfortunate when it was pulled due to a miss, I hope this is intended behavior now.
99sitr
 
Posts: 57
Joined: Thu Feb 11, 2010 11:55 am

Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x

Postby Shathus » Tue Apr 26, 2011 6:56 pm

99sitr wrote:
inthedrops wrote:Theck, I just noticed that Sacred Duty isn't eaten up when your ShoR misses or parries anymore (haven't seen dodge yet). Just playing on a target dummy and it's consistent.


Oh please let it be so, it was unfortunate when it was pulled due to a miss, I hope this is intended behavior now.


I noticed this in our raid tonight as well.
Shathus
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 1466
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2008 5:02 pm

Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x

Postby theckhd » Tue Apr 26, 2011 8:40 pm

If that's the case, I'll have to update the C# code, the sims don't reflect that mechanic.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of Grehn|Skipjack.
MATLAB 5.x, Simcraft 6.x, Call to Arms 6.0, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 5.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
User avatar
theckhd
Moderator
 
Posts: 7950
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
Location: Harrisburg, PA

Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x

Postby knaughty » Tue Apr 26, 2011 8:47 pm

theckhd wrote:If that's the case, I'll have to update the C# code, the sims don't reflect that mechanic.


This is likely to slightly improve the TPS of rotations that pay attention to SD procs?
This isn't the "Offtankadin" forum. My MoP FAQ: http://tinyurl.com/FAQ-5-0
- Knaughty.
User avatar
knaughty
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 10:06 pm
Location: Sydney, plotting my next diatribe against the forces of ignorance!

Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x

Postby theckhd » Tue Apr 26, 2011 9:31 pm

I have to think about that. It will raise DPS across the board, for sure. I'd guess that the SD queues would see a slightly bigger benefit, in that they'd be going from SDSotR(miss)-Inq to SDSotR(miss)-SDSotR-. But again, that pushes back the entire cycle by a GCD, and in some cases they might have Inq up and would recast anyway, and it depends on how likely it was that SD or Inq was going to fall off before the next GCD anyway.

In short, there's probably too many different effects involved to say definitively without simming it out, but it shouldn't be very hard to do so in the next day or so.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of Grehn|Skipjack.
MATLAB 5.x, Simcraft 6.x, Call to Arms 6.0, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 5.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
User avatar
theckhd
Moderator
 
Posts: 7950
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
Location: Harrisburg, PA

Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x

Postby Meloree » Wed Apr 27, 2011 6:06 am

knaughty wrote:Anyone who thinks that they can execute 56 with less than 1-2% extra decision time and zero mistakes when compared to 45 is delusional. Even you, Meloree.


For 1%, you'd better believe that I'm going to hit the dummy and figure out how to make that reliable and mistake free. Delusional? Maybe, but I think it's just a matter of good information display.

Remember that in most cases the only real point of making a mistake in that rotation is hitting SotR without SD or Inq - probably because they've fallen off due to a miss or two. If you hit the nonSD/Inq'd SotR, you're doing exactly what the slightly less optimal rotation would have you do. So your point of failure is in lapsing into a very nearly optimal rotation anyway.
Meloree
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 1420
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2008 10:15 am

Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x

Postby Malthrax » Wed Apr 27, 2011 6:37 am

knaughty wrote:45 reads as the winning to me when you consider ease of execution.

Versus this, for a percent or so more threat:
  1. If Inquisition is up, hit HotR every 2nd GCD
  2. If Inq is down, hit CS every 2nd GCD.
  3. If at 3 HoPo and Inquisition is up, hit ShoR.
  4. If at 3 HoPo and SD is up, hit ShoR
  5. If at 3 HoPo and you haven't got a SD Proc to use and Inq is down, hit Inquisition
  6. Hit AS between CS/HotR if it lit up. Don't push back Inq, ShoR, HotR or CS to hit it.
  7. HoW if you're in execute phase.
  8. Judge for Mana & SD procs.
  9. Whatever's off CD. Skip Consecrate unless you have mana coming out your ears.


No way I could keep track of that mentally. I'd need to write a clcInfo module to track the decisioning.
User avatar
Malthrax
 
Posts: 729
Joined: Tue Feb 03, 2009 11:23 am

Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x

Postby knaughty » Wed Apr 27, 2011 7:00 am

Meloree wrote:So your point of failure is in lapsing into a very nearly optimal rotation anyway.


I hate it when you're (potentially) right.

However, I have to state that I still think that you're simply going to get off 1% less GCDs due to the mental bandwidth of trying to keep track of what to cast next.
Last edited by knaughty on Wed Apr 27, 2011 7:02 am, edited 1 time in total.
This isn't the "Offtankadin" forum. My MoP FAQ: http://tinyurl.com/FAQ-5-0
- Knaughty.
User avatar
knaughty
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 10:06 pm
Location: Sydney, plotting my next diatribe against the forces of ignorance!

Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x

Postby Chicken » Wed Apr 27, 2011 7:02 am

Malthrax wrote:
knaughty wrote:45 reads as the winning to me when you consider ease of execution.

Versus this, for a percent or so more threat:
  1. If Inquisition is up, hit HotR every 2nd GCD
  2. If Inq is down, hit CS every 2nd GCD.
  3. If at 3 HoPo and Inquisition is up, hit ShoR.
  4. If at 3 HoPo and SD is up, hit ShoR
  5. If at 3 HoPo and you haven't got a SD Proc to use and Inq is down, hit Inquisition
  6. Hit AS between CS/HotR if it lit up. Don't push back Inq, ShoR, HotR or CS to hit it.
  7. HoW if you're in execute phase.
  8. Judge for Mana & SD procs.
  9. Whatever's off CD. Skip Consecrate unless you have mana coming out your ears.


No way I could keep track of that mentally. I'd need to write a clcInfo module to track the decisioning.
It looks worse than it is. Steps 1-2 are superfluous as CS/HotR is in fact a single vs. multi-target choice: HotR is worse than CS on a single target even with Inq up. Beyond that the change is mostly steps 3-5; the rest you're already doing with the non-Inq queue.

Note the change is a case of having to decide "Do I cast Inq or ShoR?", you can combine steps 3 and 4 to answer that most easily: If either SD or Inq is up cast ShoR, otherwise cast Inq. That isn't too bad to keep track of, though a mod for it is obviously very helpful: Having PowerAuras display a shield when SD or Inq is up is probably the most intuitive solution. Timers sound attractive but are mostly unneeded fluff: You'll occasionally have your SD and Inq timers run out just when you get 3 HP which might cause you to do a ShoR where you should have done an Inq, but that's less bad for your DPS/TPS than accidentally using an Inq where you should have used ShoR.

Edit: Theck might want to split off this discussion into it's own topic since while it's interesting, it isn't directly related to the MATLAB model.
Image
User avatar
Chicken
 
Posts: 1597
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x

Postby theckhd » Wed Apr 27, 2011 7:49 am

Nah, I don't think it really warrants its own thread, and it'll probably die out pretty soon anyway since there's not much more to be said about it. Plus, it's at least vaguely relevant in the sense of "what other queues do we want to add that are actually feasible?"

'SotR[phase of the moon]>Inq[weekdays]>CS[high tide]>HotR>AS+[planetary alignment]>J>AS>Cons[leap year]>HW' is right out!
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of Grehn|Skipjack.
MATLAB 5.x, Simcraft 6.x, Call to Arms 6.0, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 5.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
User avatar
theckhd
Moderator
 
Posts: 7950
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
Location: Harrisburg, PA

Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x

Postby theckhd » Wed Apr 27, 2011 7:51 am

Also, in regards to SD not being consumed on miss/dodge/parry, the other effect I expect to see is a devaluation of hit/exp. SD utilization is a big part of the strength of hit/exp right now. Probably not as big as HP generation, but certainly significant enough to knock hit/exp down a peg.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of Grehn|Skipjack.
MATLAB 5.x, Simcraft 6.x, Call to Arms 6.0, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 5.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
User avatar
theckhd
Moderator
 
Posts: 7950
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
Location: Harrisburg, PA

Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x

Postby Meloree » Wed Apr 27, 2011 7:55 am

knaughty wrote:
Meloree wrote:So your point of failure is in lapsing into a very nearly optimal rotation anyway.


I hate it when you're (potentially) right.

However, I have to state that I still think that you're simply going to get off 1% less GCDs due to the mental bandwidth of trying to keep track of what to cast next.


We have the easiest and most forgiving rotation of all the tanks. Adding ONE conditional to the very simple priority queue is not asking for excessive mental bandwidth. "If SD and/or Inq up, hit SotR, otherwise Inq" replaces "SotR". That's it, that's the only change. HP generation is predictable enough to be leaning one way or the other by the time you generate your last HP, so you really only need to know if SD procced from that last filler to choose your finisher.

I'm coming at this from the perspective of having played a feral druid dps alt in WotLK. Believe me, watching exactly one timer while watching for exactly one proc, and only having to actually pay attention to those at specific moments does not strike me as demanding excessive mental bandwidth. It strikes me that it requires a fraction of available mental bandwidth so small as to be nearly indistinguishable from zero. For 1%, when we're talking about nearly zero penalties for failure and very minimal added difficulty - why wouldn't you do it? At least for the advanced thread. If we're talking about the basic training thread, then 1% is lost in the noise of not hitting enough GCDs, I wouldn't recommend fighting for the last percent there, either.

EDIT: I wrong CS when I meant filler.
Meloree
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 1420
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2008 10:15 am

PreviousNext

Return to Advanced Theorycraft and Calculations

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Caarheim, Yahoo [Bot] and 1 guest

Who is online

In total there are 3 users online :: 2 registered, 0 hidden and 1 guest (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 380 on Tue Oct 14, 2008 6:28 pm

Users browsing this forum: Caarheim, Yahoo [Bot] and 1 guest