Theck's MATLAB thread - Cataclysm/4.x

Warning: Theorycraft inside.

Moderators: Fridmarr, Worldie, Aergis, theckhd

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

Postby Kihra » Thu Oct 13, 2011 1:10 pm

Jackinthegreen wrote:The two Ret pieces we'd use are the legs and helm


Why not use legs and chest? They both have Mastery on them. The helm is nothing but threat stats.
Kihra
 
Posts: 340
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 12:01 pm

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

Postby theckhd » Fri Oct 14, 2011 6:47 am

Jackinthegreen wrote:The thing is though, once we get 2pT13 the Judgement glyph will give us a bit of mitigation. Sure it'll be weak, but every other prime glyph is just DPS/TPS, not survivability. Adding in the Ret 2p would make it more attractive and give us some extra HoPo, which definitely raises the possibility of weaving in Inq. With Inq up Judgement will hit harder and thus grant a larger shield.

Admittedly though, perhaps using the Ret 2p might set us back more. The two Ret pieces we'd use are the legs and helm, which would exempt using the Prot pieces that are dodge/mastery and dodge/parry respectively. The sheer CTC on those most would most likely outweigh the little gain we get from the 2p bonus.

If the quick napkin math I did on EJ is any indication, Prot's 2p probably won't do much. The Judgement glyph was worth less than 50 mastery rating in terms of mitigation, which means it's only worth a similar amount of avoidance too. Avoiding a 50k hit for example means we just negated 166 boss DPS during a 5 minute fight. If we assume Judgement does 20k average (which is probably high) and used every 8 seconds (definitely not happening) then the 2p is a 5k shield every 8 seconds, or 625 DPS.

Gah, heck of a time for my handheld calculator to die. Suffice to say, now that I look at it I'm pretty sure the sheer CTC of the prot pieces outweigh any gains we might get from using 2p Ret.


Some assorted comments on this:
1) The Judgement glyph will be a mitigation increase, but a very weak one. You're increasing the shield's value by 10%, but that's still a fairly small amount of extra absorbed damage. It's certainly something, but we get back into the same argument we've had before about SoI - it's another few hundred absorb that we can't control all that well, and will mostly just be negated by creating more overheal on the part of our healers.

If the absorb bubble were considerably larger, we might care about it the same way DKs care about timing their heals/absorbs. But 5k is such a small amount that I don't think we'll go to that extreme - the interruption of our rotation and the impact on HPG and WoG availability are probably enough to make it undesirable. Similarly, I don't think we'll be optimizing for Judgement bubbles. At best, we might switch to using Inq as a finisher, sacrificing DPS to get slightly more mitigation. But even that's questionable at this point.

That said... The only other survival options are WoG and SoI. I'd make an argument for WoG/SoT glyphs being the "default" load-out, because I think that the expertise from SoT impacts your survivability more noticeably than SoI healing. But J would certainly be an option for that third slot. It's just not a very compelling one, since the mitigation bonus is so weak.

2) I don't think that most people will seriously be considering Ret 2pc as a viable progression option. It'd certainly be a large DPS increase, but if the bosses aren't massively undertuned I think the survivability loss (a few hundred avoidance rating, roughly) wouldn't be worth it. You would be able to get off more SotRs and Inqs between WoGs, but in the end that's all it buys you.

For parse-hunting and DPS maximization, it will certainly be an attractive bonus. But that's what you do on farm content, not progression bosses. The vast majority of players won't care about that. Of course, we'll do the simulations anyway, because we have nutjobs like Khira, Meloree, and myself around who do care about that, or at least find it interesting. That shouldn't be taken as an indication that it's relevant for actually killing bosses, though.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of Grehn|Skipjack.
Simcraft 6.x, Call to Arms 6.0, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 6.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
User avatar
theckhd
Moderator
 
Posts: 6211
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
Location: Harrisburg, PA

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

Postby Kihra » Fri Oct 14, 2011 9:38 am

theckhd wrote:2) I don't think that most people will seriously be considering Ret 2pc as a viable progression option. It'd certainly be a large DPS increase, but if the bosses aren't massively undertuned I think the survivability loss (a few hundred avoidance rating, roughly) wouldn't be worth it.


There are still enough unknowns that I'm not sure about 2pc Ret for progression, but I am actually considering it. For me, it depends on the following:

(1) Whether the 4pc Prot bonus is needed. Our raid is currently so full of CDs already that I'm unconvinced that the 4pc will really be much of a benefit for my raid. Mostly it depends on if there are any fights in Dragon Soul where the 100yd range would be amazing.

(2) On how much of a DPS boost 2pc Ret actually is. I'll be curious to see. Plus I just like the idea of playing with a different rotation for a tier. :)

As far as giving up a few hundred avoidance, I'm not sure that's much of a survivability loss. The gear in the next tier is strange in that they have done away with Stamina socket bonuses. This closes the EH gap between Ret gear and Prot gear and actually leads to a model where I could see socket bonuses being ignored again.

For example if you use the Ret legs and Ret chest, you give up about 400 points in pure avoidance. However the tier prot legs have no mastery on them anyway, so in terms of CTC, I don't think you end up losing much relative to the prot gear.
Kihra
 
Posts: 340
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 12:01 pm

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

Postby theckhd » Fri Oct 14, 2011 11:29 am

That will really depend on the off-set options as well; good mastery/avoid off-set legs would potentially end up winning that battle.

To be honest though, I haven't had time to look at the PTR gear lists that closely yet.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of Grehn|Skipjack.
Simcraft 6.x, Call to Arms 6.0, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 6.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
User avatar
theckhd
Moderator
 
Posts: 6211
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
Location: Harrisburg, PA

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

Postby lythac » Fri Oct 14, 2011 12:22 pm

Kihra wrote:(1) Whether the 4pc Prot bonus is needed. Our raid is currently so full of CDs already that I'm unconvinced that the 4pc will really be much of a benefit for my raid. Mostly it depends on if there are any fights in Dragon Soul where the 100yd range would be amazing.


Also the tier bonuses aren't final. Warriors were updated not too long ago and is massively overpowered. Enough situationally (DW pt 2 sub 20%) for Fury warriors (IMO) to pick up.
Ryshad / Lythac of <Heretic> Ravencrest-EU
User avatar
lythac
Moderator
 
Posts: 2077
Joined: Wed Sep 24, 2008 8:10 am

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

Postby Sur-Pseudo » Mon Oct 17, 2011 12:25 am

wouldn't a judgement increase of 10% be a straight 10% of Tier bonus increase? e.g. a 20% shield would be a 22% shield, etc.
Sur-Pseudo
 
Posts: 101
Joined: Sat Apr 05, 2008 9:44 pm

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

Postby RedAces » Mon Oct 17, 2011 1:28 am

Yes, No.
It will always be 20% of your J but yes it will be 10% higher than without the glyph.
Image
User avatar
RedAces
 
Posts: 374
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 9:39 am
Location: Germany

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

Postby Kihra » Mon Oct 17, 2011 11:46 am

Kihra wrote:(2) On how much of a DPS boost 2pc Ret actually is. I'll be curious to see. Plus I just like the idea of playing with a different rotation for a tier. :)


I spent a couple of hours screwing around with SimulationCraft, fixed a few bugs with Prot, hacked the Vengeance calculation to just be constant, and then tested out the T13 Ret 2pc bonus. Take this with a grain of salt, since I don't know what other bugs might be lurking in the Prot module for SimulationCraft, but preliminary results show that Ret 2pc is a 1200 DPS gain for T12H level of gear at max Vengeance for low Hit/Expertise values. I coded it assuming the Judgement had to hit in order to gain Holy Power.

In terms of queues, I tried AS+ > J > AS, AS > J and J > AS, and the differences between them were all negligible. AS+ > J > AS was the winner over J > AS by 10 DPS, and AS > J was about 50 DPS behind.
Kihra
 
Posts: 340
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 12:01 pm

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

Postby theckhd » Mon Oct 17, 2011 12:01 pm

Those numbers all sound reasonable. The MATLAB code should be updated to handle 2pc ret now, so I'll try and find some time tonight to fool around with numbers. I've been fairly busy lately this week, what with BlizzCon coming up and trying to finish up some data for a professional conference.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of Grehn|Skipjack.
Simcraft 6.x, Call to Arms 6.0, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 6.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
User avatar
theckhd
Moderator
 
Posts: 6211
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
Location: Harrisburg, PA

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

Postby theckhd » Mon Oct 17, 2011 1:06 pm

My 939 numbers are a little different. Here's what I get if I just use the T12 heroic gear set and arbitrarily toggle on the different set bonuses:

Code: Select all

939/SoT, 2% hit, 10 exp, Mandible of Beth'tilac (Heroic) 391
           v=    1           v=    0.3         
           T11   T12   T13   T11   T12   T13   
prot 2pc   219   838     0   143   522     0   
ret 2pc      0   756   526     0   494   310   

939/SoT, 8% hit, 56 exp, Mandible of Beth'tilac (Heroic) 391
           v=    1            v=    0.3         
           T11   T12    T13   T11   T12   T13   
prot 2pc   291   1111     0   190   692     0   
ret 2pc      0   1004   396     0   656   232   

I39/SoT, 2% hit, 10 exp, Mandible of Beth'tilac (Heroic) 391
           v=    1            v=    0.3         
           T11   T12    T13   T11   T12   T13   
prot 2pc   291    988     0   190   615     0   
ret 2pc      0   1004   446     0   656   266


So I'm getting closer to 500 DPS for the T13 ret 2-piece bonus (assuming on-cast rather than on-hit). That's with a standard 939, I'm in the process of putting together T13 gear sets and updating the comprehensive rotation simulator now.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of Grehn|Skipjack.
Simcraft 6.x, Call to Arms 6.0, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 6.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
User avatar
theckhd
Moderator
 
Posts: 6211
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
Location: Harrisburg, PA

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

Postby Kihra » Mon Oct 17, 2011 1:27 pm

theckhd wrote:My 939 numbers are a little different. Here's what I get if I just use the T12 heroic gear set and arbitrarily toggle on the different set bonuses:

Code: Select all

939/SoT, 2% hit, 10 exp, Mandible of Beth'tilac (Heroic) 391
           v=    1           v=    0.3         
           T11   T12   T13   T11   T12   T13   
prot 2pc   219   838     0   143   522     0   
ret 2pc      0   756   526     0   494   310   

939/SoT, 8% hit, 56 exp, Mandible of Beth'tilac (Heroic) 391
           v=    1            v=    0.3         
           T11   T12    T13   T11   T12   T13   
prot 2pc   291   1111     0   190   692     0   
ret 2pc      0   1004   396     0   656   232   

I39/SoT, 2% hit, 10 exp, Mandible of Beth'tilac (Heroic) 391
           v=    1            v=    0.3         
           T11   T12    T13   T11   T12   T13   
prot 2pc   291    988     0   190   615     0   
ret 2pc      0   1004   446     0   656   266


So I'm getting closer to 500 DPS for the T13 ret 2-piece bonus (assuming on-cast rather than on-hit). That's with a standard 939, I'm in the process of putting together T13 gear sets and updating the comprehensive rotation simulator now.


Yeah, take my numbers with a grain of salt, since I have no idea how much SimulationCraft gets wrong. I know I coded the HP gain correctly, but maybe it does something stupid like allowing overflow.

Do you understand why your numbers show the T13 Ret 2pc to be less of a DPS boost at high Hit/Exp than at low Hit/Exp? That seems counter-intuitive to me.
Kihra
 
Posts: 340
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 12:01 pm

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

Postby theckhd » Mon Oct 17, 2011 1:51 pm

Putting together gear sets will take longer than I thought, so I quickly just manually toggled the flag on and off in the rotation simulation. Here are the results:

939, SoT, 2% hit / 10 exp, T12 gear set:
Code: Select all
                                            DPS            SHPS            E    I    mps
  Q#  Priority                              V=100%  V=30%  V=100%  V=30%   %    %       
   1  SotR>CS>AS>J                          20053   12673     0       0   0.0   0.0   115
   2  SotR>HotR>AS>J                        18307   11392     0       0   0.0   0.0   115
   3  SotR>CS>J>AS                          20029   12643     0       0   0.0   0.0   245
   4  SotR>AS>CS>J                          19897   12568     0       0   0.0   0.0   191
   5  AS>SotR>CS>J                          19649   12415     0       0   0.0   0.0   183
   6  SotR>CS>AS+>J>AS                      20071   12679     0       0   0.0   0.0   158
   7  SotR>AS+>CS>AS>J                      20079   12685     0       0   0.0   0.0   167
   8  SotR>AS[buffGC<2][buffGC>0]>CS>AS>J   20057   12676     0       0   0.0   0.0   117


Toggling on the T13 ret flag gives
Code: Select all
                                            DPS            SHPS            E    I    mps
  Q#  Priority                              V=100%  V=30%  V=100%  V=30%   %    %       
   1  SotR>CS>AS>J                          21001   13250     0       0   0.0   0.0   197
   2  SotR>HotR>AS>J                        19373   12056     0       0   0.0   0.0   197
   3  SotR>CS>J>AS                          21175   13347     0       0   0.0   0.0   294
   4  SotR>AS>CS>J                          20899   13178     0       0   0.0   0.0   268
   5  AS>SotR>CS>J                          20815   13131     0       0   0.0   0.0   241
   6  SotR>CS>AS+>J>AS                      21095   13304     0       0   0.0   0.0   229
   7  SotR>AS+>CS>AS>J                      21029   13261     0       0   0.0   0.0   252
   8  SotR>AS[buffGC<2][buffGC>0]>CS>AS>J   21004   13253     0       0   0.0   0.0   198
 


So the holy power on Judgement pushes J>AS above AS>J by about 200 DPS, and above AS+>J>AS by about 80 DPS.

I was a bit surprised by the bonus giving a smaller benefit at high hit/exp, but I can think of several reasons that make sense. First, the J gain is coded on-cast, which means that it isn't seeing a potential reduction by low hit/exp. We need some PTR testing to determine if that model is correct, or whether it should grant on-hit like CS does.

More importantly, at low hit the Judgement HoPo will be a significantly larger portion of your overall HP gain because of CS misses. As you decrease the probability of CS missing, the rotation tightens up and may negate some of the Judgement HoPo's benefit.

For example, in an ideal case, you might have:
CS-J-CS-SotR
CS-AS*-CS-SotR
CS-J-CS-SotR
But that pushes back J by 3 seconds, reducing the rate of HPG from J. You can also imagine other situations, like CS-AS-CS-J-SotR, which push back CS by a GCD, and thus aren't as big a DPS gain. These might be more common in the high-hit/exp regime than the low one.

Those are just guesses at this point though, it'll take some more digging to figure out if that's really what's going on.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of Grehn|Skipjack.
Simcraft 6.x, Call to Arms 6.0, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 6.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
User avatar
theckhd
Moderator
 
Posts: 6211
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
Location: Harrisburg, PA

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

Postby Kihra » Mon Oct 17, 2011 2:19 pm

So it looks like our numbers are pretty close after all. In that final table you linked, it looks like 100% Vengeance is a 1000 DPS boost with 2pc Ret for most queues? And 1100 DPS for SotR>CS>J>AS?

If so, that meshes pretty closely with what I got. I used Kihra's actual gear and current talent builds rather than a stock gear set (and of course SimulationCraft will also cast Heroism and assume you use buffs like Avenging Wrath), so that may just account for the remaining difference.

So it seems we are on the same page after all.
Kihra
 
Posts: 340
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 12:01 pm

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

Postby theckhd » Mon Oct 17, 2011 3:27 pm

Yeah, that simulation seems to agree with your results. I think I've figured out why the tier bonus sim disagreed; it was using SotR>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW, which sees a smaller DPS increase (fewer empties to start with, hence the SotR speed-up isn't as critical). Switching it to SotR>CS>J>AS brings it up to a 919 DPS boost at low hit/exp.

There's also a detail I need to sort out regarding the FSM calculation. We get different results depending on whether we use 1 step per GCD or 3 steps per GCD in calculating the state probabilities. I'm looking into it; presumably what's happening is that it's casting J after a half-second gap rather than waiting a full GCD for CS to come off of cooldown. In other words, in this situation (assume all CS's are successful):

CS-J-CS-AS*-SotR-CS-???

7.5 seconds have elapsed since casting J. If we sim with 1 step per GCD, the ??? becomes an empty, and we end with:
empty-CS-J-CS-SotR

If we sim with 3 steps per GCD, we instead wait 1 step (0.5 seconds) and then cast J, which has come off of cooldown. This gives us:
.-J-CS-X-CS-SotR
where "." is the half-second wait period. What this does is push the CS cycle back by half a second. When J doesn't grant Holy Power, the difference between the two sequences is small (~30 DPS). However, once J grants holy power, it becomes a much more important factor, leading to a ~1k DPS discrepancy between the two methods. In addition, it reverses the order of the queues, favoring AS+>J>AS.

To show you what I mean, here are the data dumps for the 4 different scenarios:

1 step, with T13 ret:
Code: Select all
                                            DPS            SHPS            E    I    mps
  Q#  Priority                              V=100%  V=30%  V=100%  V=30%   %    %       
   1  SotR>CS>AS>J                          20036   12665     0       0   0.0   0.0   128
   2  SotR>HotR>AS>J                        18281   11377     0       0   0.0   0.0   128
   3  SotR>CS>J>AS                          20009   12632     0       0   0.0   0.0   258
   4  SotR>AS>CS>J                          19825   12526     0       0   0.0   0.0   199
   5  AS>SotR>CS>J                          19618   12398     0       0   0.0   0.0   197
   6  SotR>CS>AS+>J>AS                      20053   12669     0       0   0.0   0.0   172
   7  SotR>AS+>CS>AS>J                      20017   12648     0       0   0.0   0.0   172
   8  SotR>AS[buffGC<2][buffGC>0]>CS>AS>J   20036   12665     0       0   0.0   0.0   128
   9  SotR>CS>AS>J>HW                       20281   12910     0       0   0.0   0.0   -84
  10  SotR>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW                  20523   13039     0       0   0.0   0.0  -322
  11  SotR>CS>AS+>J>AS>Cons>HW              20538   13040     0       0   0.0   0.0  -276
  12  SotR>AS+>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW              20518   13035     0       0   0.0   0.0  -291
  13  sdAS>sdJ>SotR>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW         20016   12713     0       0   0.0   0.0  -140


3 steps, with T13 ret:
Code: Select all
                                            DPS            SHPS            E    I    mps
  Q#  Priority                              V=100%  V=30%  V=100%  V=30%   %    %       
   1  SotR>CS>AS>J                          21001   13250     0       0   0.0   0.0   197
   2  SotR>HotR>AS>J                        19373   12056     0       0   0.0   0.0   197
   3  SotR>CS>J>AS                          21175   13347     0       0   0.0   0.0   294
   4  SotR>AS>CS>J                          20899   13178     0       0   0.0   0.0   268
   5  AS>SotR>CS>J                          20815   13131     0       0   0.0   0.0   241
   6  SotR>CS>AS+>J>AS                      21095   13304     0       0   0.0   0.0   229
   7  SotR>AS+>CS>AS>J                      21029   13261     0       0   0.0   0.0   252
   8  SotR>AS[buffGC<2][buffGC>0]>CS>AS>J   21004   13253     0       0   0.0   0.0   198
   9  SotR>CS>AS>J>HW                       21097   13398     0       0   0.0   0.0   -14
  10  SotR>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW                  21213   13452     0       0   0.0   0.0  -262
  11  SotR>CS>AS+>J>AS>Cons>HW              21318   13506     0       0   0.0   0.0  -208
  12  SotR>AS+>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW              21206   13448     0       0   0.0   0.0  -242
  13  sdAS>sdJ>SotR>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW         21080   13364     0       0   0.0   0.0  -134


1 step, no T13 ret:
Code: Select all
                                            DPS            SHPS            E    I    mps
  Q#  Priority                              V=100%  V=30%  V=100%  V=30%   %    %       
   1  SotR>CS>AS>J                          20036   12665     0       0   0.0   0.0   128
   2  SotR>HotR>AS>J                        18281   11377     0       0   0.0   0.0   128
   3  SotR>CS>J>AS                          20009   12632     0       0   0.0   0.0   258
   4  SotR>AS>CS>J                          19825   12526     0       0   0.0   0.0   199
   5  AS>SotR>CS>J                          19618   12398     0       0   0.0   0.0   197
   6  SotR>CS>AS+>J>AS                      20053   12669     0       0   0.0   0.0   172
   7  SotR>AS+>CS>AS>J                      20017   12648     0       0   0.0   0.0   172
   8  SotR>AS[buffGC<2][buffGC>0]>CS>AS>J   20036   12665     0       0   0.0   0.0   128
   9  SotR>CS>AS>J>HW                       20281   12910     0       0   0.0   0.0   -84
  10  SotR>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW                  20523   13039     0       0   0.0   0.0  -322
  11  SotR>CS>AS+>J>AS>Cons>HW              20538   13040     0       0   0.0   0.0  -276
  12  SotR>AS+>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW              20518   13035     0       0   0.0   0.0  -291
  13  sdAS>sdJ>SotR>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW         20016   12713     0       0   0.0   0.0  -140


3 steps, no T13 ret:
Code: Select all
                                            DPS            SHPS            E    I    mps
  Q#  Priority                              V=100%  V=30%  V=100%  V=30%   %    %       
   1  SotR>CS>AS>J                          20053   12673     0       0   0.0   0.0   115
   2  SotR>HotR>AS>J                        18307   11392     0       0   0.0   0.0   115
   3  SotR>CS>J>AS                          20029   12643     0       0   0.0   0.0   245
   4  SotR>AS>CS>J                          19897   12568     0       0   0.0   0.0   191
   5  AS>SotR>CS>J                          19649   12415     0       0   0.0   0.0   183
   6  SotR>CS>AS+>J>AS                      20071   12679     0       0   0.0   0.0   158
   7  SotR>AS+>CS>AS>J                      20079   12685     0       0   0.0   0.0   167
   8  SotR>AS[buffGC<2][buffGC>0]>CS>AS>J   20057   12676     0       0   0.0   0.0   117
   9  SotR>CS>AS>J>HW                       20282   12911     0       0   0.0   0.0  -104
  10  SotR>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW                  20524   13040     0       0   0.0   0.0  -342
  11  SotR>CS>AS+>J>AS>Cons>HW              20540   13042     0       0   0.0   0.0  -295
  12  SotR>AS+>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW              20524   13039     0       0   0.0   0.0  -311
  13  sdAS>sdJ>SotR>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW         20106   12770     0       0   0.0   0.0  -193


I'm still thinking about what to do with this. I think that the 1-step simulation is closer to how most of us play. But this doesn't include the CS latency penalty, which could soak up that 0.5s in the majority of cases and make the 3-step simulation more accurate. And there might be other effects going on that I haven't thought of yet.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of Grehn|Skipjack.
Simcraft 6.x, Call to Arms 6.0, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 6.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
User avatar
theckhd
Moderator
 
Posts: 6211
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
Location: Harrisburg, PA

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

Postby Kihra » Mon Oct 17, 2011 6:09 pm

theckhd wrote:There's also a detail I need to sort out regarding the FSM calculation. We get different results depending on whether we use 1 step per GCD or 3 steps per GCD in calculating the state probabilities. I'm looking into it; presumably what's happening is that it's casting J after a half-second gap rather than waiting a full GCD for CS to come off of cooldown. In other words, in this situation (assume all CS's are successful):


I see the same 1k difference in SimulationCraft (which I can basically simulate by refusing to Judge unless CS has > ~1.5 seconds remaining). If I'm interpreting your results (and my results) correctly, it means there's a very real DPS gain to be had by casting Judgement even if CS has < 1.5 seconds remaining on its cooldown. This is actually what was happening by default in SimulationCraft with my changes, and I lost the gigantic DPS gain once I switched to behave like your 1 step model.

This does not surprise me, since the most common scenario is that using Judgement will actually enable Shield of the Righteous to cast faster as well, and because it doesn't require Expertise, Judgement is actually a more reliable HoPo generator than CS. For example, any time you have 2 HoPo, casting Judgement is clearly superior to waiting for CS, because it will accelerate the cast of Shield of the Righteous, and Crusader Strike will still be ready after you've finished the Shield.

Basically it looks like any time you are at the 7.5 second mark from Judgement and you've just gotten out from under the GCD, then casting Judgement again is actually preferred (assuming CS is on cooldown)... my guess is that it's because you will most commonly have 2 HoPo and the # of Shield of the Righteous hits will go up as a result.

In fact, you can even gain ~150-200 more DPS by deferring Holy Wrath and Consecration as fillers if Judgement is coming off CD in 0.5 seconds.

That's really interesting.
Kihra
 
Posts: 340
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 12:01 pm

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

Postby theckhd » Tue Oct 18, 2011 6:25 am

Yup. Unfortunately it's only interesting with the ret 2-piece. But with LFR, that might not be that hard to acquire early on compared to the valor point grind.

I want to take a look at a wider variety of queues as well; I've mostly limited it to AS>J style queues, but with the buff to Judgement damage those are no longer strictly superior.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of Grehn|Skipjack.
Simcraft 6.x, Call to Arms 6.0, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 6.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
User avatar
theckhd
Moderator
 
Posts: 6211
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
Location: Harrisburg, PA

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

Postby Kihra » Tue Oct 18, 2011 9:32 am

theckhd wrote:I want to take a look at a wider variety of queues as well; I've mostly limited it to AS>J style queues, but with the buff to Judgement damage those are no longer strictly superior.


Yeah, I'm curious about that as well, e.g., if AS+ > J > AS becomes the right thing to do even without Ret 2pc.

For Ret 2pc the highest DPS queue I simmed (this includes the buff to Judgement damage) was:

SDSotR > InqSotR > Inq > CS > AS+ > J > HoW > AS[J > 0.5] > Cons[J > 0.5] > HW[J > 0.5]

Where [J > 0.5] denotes that you only do it if the time remaining on the Judgement CD is > 0.5.
Kihra
 
Posts: 340
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 12:01 pm

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

Postby Kihra » Wed Oct 19, 2011 2:53 pm

I know you don't normally test for this, Theck, but maybe you could hack it in and let me know what results you get. I'm seeing that once you hit cap and hard exp cap, that the Ret 2pc bonus is almost worthless. In other words, the DPS benefit seems to largely go away once you are reliably generating Holy Power from Crusader Strike.
Kihra
 
Posts: 340
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 12:01 pm

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

Postby theckhd » Wed Oct 19, 2011 4:33 pm

I should have several hours worth of sitting around in the airport to kill tomorrow, so I'll probably be cranking away at a little MATLAB while I wait. I'll see if I can confirm that for you, as well as try out a wider breadth of queues.

Airport internet being what it is though, you might have to wait until later tomorrow night or Friday for me to post it.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of Grehn|Skipjack.
Simcraft 6.x, Call to Arms 6.0, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 6.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
User avatar
theckhd
Moderator
 
Posts: 6211
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
Location: Harrisburg, PA

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

Postby Jeremoot » Wed Oct 19, 2011 5:56 pm

If those priorities remain true after the PTR I'll be a happy Paladin, would love some more complexity in our rotation. Especially complexity that's actually rewarding.
User avatar
Jeremoot
 
Posts: 423
Joined: Tue Feb 08, 2011 5:36 pm

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

Postby Iminmmnni » Thu Oct 20, 2011 5:02 am

Kihra wrote:I know you don't normally test for this, Theck, but maybe you could hack it in and let me know what results you get. I'm seeing that once you hit cap and hard exp cap, that the Ret 2pc bonus is almost worthless. In other words, the DPS benefit seems to largely go away once you are reliably generating Holy Power from Crusader Strike.


The ret bonus was coded to give HP on cast, not on landing. If this assumption is incorrect (anyone on PTR able to confirm this assumption is true/false?) then the matlabadin Ret T13 P2 numbers will be slightly inflated for low hit.
Iminmmnni
 
Posts: 45
Joined: Thu Mar 24, 2011 4:41 pm
Location: Melbourne

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

Postby theckhd » Tue Oct 25, 2011 10:07 am

Kihra wrote:I know you don't normally test for this, Theck, but maybe you could hack it in and let me know what results you get. I'm seeing that once you hit cap and hard exp cap, that the Ret 2pc bonus is almost worthless. In other words, the DPS benefit seems to largely go away once you are reliably generating Holy Power from Crusader Strike.


I didn't observe this at all in the MATLAB model. It was giving me ~1.1k DPS at low hit/exp, but still giving me ~400 DPS at high hit/exp. Which does make sense - even at hit/exp cap, you'll turn some CS-J-CS-X-CS-SotR sequences into CS-J-CS-SotR, which should still be a noticeable boost over any regular filler.

I'll post exact numbers here so you can scrutinize; note that this is from a yet-to-be-uploaded version that adds a bunch of new queues, but the FSM back-end is the same as the current version on the repo.


2% hit, 10 exp, no ret 2-pc
Code: Select all
                                               DPS            SHPS            E    I    mps
  Q#  Priority                                 V=100%  V=30%  V=100%  V=30%   %    %       
   1  SotR>CS>AS>J                             20053   12673     0       0   0.0   0.0   115
   2  SotR>HotR>AS>J                           18307   11392     0       0   0.0   0.0   115
   3  SotR>CS>J>AS                             20029   12643     0       0   0.0   0.0   245
   4  SotR>CS>J[cdCS>0.5]>AS                   20029   12643     0       0   0.0   0.0   245
   5  SotR>AS>CS>J                             19897   12568     0       0   0.0   0.0   191
   6  SotR>J>CS>AS                             19707   12434     0       0   0.0   0.0   327
   7  SotR>CS>AS+>J>AS                         20071   12679     0       0   0.0   0.0   158
   8  SotR>CS>AS+>J[cdCS>0.5]>AS               20069   12678     0       0   0.0   0.0   157
   9  SotR>AS+>CS>AS>J                         20079   12685     0       0   0.0   0.0   167
  10  SotR>AS[buffGC<2][buffGC>0]>CS>AS+>J>AS  20076   12682     0       0   0.0   0.0   159
  11  SotR>CS>AS>J>HW                          20282   12911     0       0   0.0   0.0  -104
  12  SotR>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW                     20524   13040     0       0   0.0   0.0  -342
  13  SotR>CS>AS+>J>AS>Cons>HW                 20540   13042     0       0   0.0   0.0  -295
  14  SotR>AS+>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW                 20524   13039     0       0   0.0   0.0  -311
  15  sdAS>sdJ>SotR>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW            20106   12770     0       0   0.0   0.0  -193
  16  Inq>CS>AS>J                              17270   10933     0       0   0.0  94.1    94
  17  Inq>HotR>AS>J                            16209   10053     0       0   0.0  94.1    94
  18  Inq>AS+>CS>AS>J                          17380   10996     0       0   0.0  93.9   148
  19  Inq[buffInq<2]>SotR>CS>AS>J              19224   12150     0       0   0.0  75.8   103
  20  ISotR>Inq>CS>AS>J                        19401   12261     0       0   0.0  72.3   103
  21  SDSotR>Inq>CS>AS>J                       20064   12676     0       0   0.0  46.0   107
  22  SDSotR>ISotR>Inq>CS>AS>J                 20237   12784     0       0   0.0  40.1   109
  23  SDSotR>ISotR>Inq>CS>J>AS                 20206   12749     0       0   0.0  36.1   238
  24  SDSotR>ISotR>Inq>CS>AS+>J>AS             20255   12790     0       0   0.0  40.0   151
  25  ISDSotR>Inq>CS>AS>J                      19238   12159     0       0   0.0  78.1   101
  26  Inq>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW                      17878   11409     0       0   0.0  94.2  -377
  27  Inq>HotR>AS>J>Cons>HW                    16815   10528     0       0   0.0  94.2  -377
  28  ISotR>Inq>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW                19944   12685     0       0   0.0  72.6  -362
  29  SDSotR>Inq>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW               20582   13082     0       0   0.0  46.5  -356
  30  SDSotR>ISotR>Inq>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW         20745   13181     0       0   0.0  40.5  -353
  31  SDSotR>ISotR>Inq>CS>J>AS>Cons>HW         20696   13134     0       0   0.0  36.5  -225
  32  SDSotR>ISotR>Inq>CS>AS+>J>AS>Cons>HW     20759   13182     0       0   0.0  40.3  -307
  33  ISDSotR>Inq>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW              19792   12594     0       0   0.0  78.4  -366
  34  WoG>CS>AS>J                              15810   10041  1971    1357   0.0   0.0   127
  35  WoG>SotR>CS>AS>J                         18199   11521  1636    1126   0.0   0.0   107
  36  WoG>SotR[cdWoG>10]>CS>AS>J               16877   10703  1955    1346   0.0   0.0   107
  37  WoG>Inq>CS>AS>J                          16598   10517  1637    1127   0.0  65.2    94
  38  WoG>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW                      16378   10487  1971    1357   0.0   0.0  -395
  39  WoG>SotR>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW                 18683   11896  1630    1122   0.0   0.0  -356
  40  WoG>SotR2>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW                18095   11496     0       0   0.0   0.0  -266
  41  WoG>Inq>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW                  17161   10957  1631    1123   0.0  65.6  -377
  42  WoG>Inq>AS+>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW              17212   10990  1610    1109   0.0  64.6  -345
  43  WoG>ISotR>Inq>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW            18085   11529  1631    1123   0.0  50.6  -370
  44  WoG>SDSotR>ISotR>Inq>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW     18707   11914  1629    1122   0.0  27.0  -363
  45  SotR>CS>AS>J>HoW                         21448   13606     0       0   0.0   0.0   -53
  46  SotR>CS>J>AS>HoW                         21541   13654     0       0   0.0   0.0    66
  47  SotR>CS>AS>HoW>J                         21642   13779     0       0   0.0   0.0  -327
  48  SotR>CS>J>HoW>AS                         21254   13495     0       0   0.0   0.0    -1
  49  SotR>CS>AS+>HoW>AS>J                     21589   13756     0       0   0.0   0.0  -380
  50  SotR>CS>AS+>HoW>J>AS                     21577   13732     0       0   0.0   0.0  -258
  51  SotR>CS>HoW>AS>J                         21421   13668     0       0   0.0   0.0  -445
  52  SotR>CS>HoW>AS+>J>AS                     21403   13634     0       0   0.0   0.0  -264
  53  SotR>HoW>CS>AS>J                         21265   13578     0       0   0.0   0.0  -418
  54  HoW>SotR>CS>AS>J                         21094   13477     0       0   0.0   0.0  -400
  55  SotR>CS>AS>HoW>J>Cons>HW                 21678   13802     0       0   0.0   0.0  -362
  56  ISotR>SDSotR>Inq>CS>AS>HoW>J>Cons>HW     22044   14041     0       0   0.0  43.0  -375
  57  ISotR>SDSotR>Inq>CS>AS>J>HoW>Cons>HW     21969   13945     0       0   0.0  40.5  -232
  58  ISotR>SDSotR>Inq>CS>J>AS>HoW>Cons>HW     22010   13955     0       0   0.0  36.6   -78
  59  WoG>SotR>CS>AS>HoW>J>Cons>HW             19920   12710  1629    1122   0.0   0.0  -376


2% hit, 10 expertise, ret 2-pc active
Code: Select all
                                               DPS            SHPS            E    I    mps
  Q#  Priority                                 V=100%  V=30%  V=100%  V=30%   %    %       
   1  SotR>CS>AS>J                             21001   13250     0       0   0.0   0.0   197
   2  SotR>HotR>AS>J                           19373   12056     0       0   0.0   0.0   197
   3  SotR>CS>J>AS                             21175   13347     0       0   0.0   0.0   294
   4  SotR>CS>J[cdCS>0.5]>AS                   21172   13346     0       0   0.0   0.0   293
   5  SotR>AS>CS>J                             20899   13178     0       0   0.0   0.0   268
   6  SotR>J>CS>AS                             20970   13209     0       0   0.0   0.0   371
   7  SotR>CS>AS+>J>AS                         21095   13304     0       0   0.0   0.0   229
   8  SotR>CS>AS+>J[cdCS>0.5]>AS               21092   13303     0       0   0.0   0.0   228
   9  SotR>AS+>CS>AS>J                         21029   13261     0       0   0.0   0.0   252
  10  SotR>AS[buffGC<2][buffGC>0]>CS>AS+>J>AS  21095   13304     0       0   0.0   0.0   230
  11  SotR>CS>AS>J>HW                          21097   13398     0       0   0.0   0.0   -14
  12  SotR>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW                     21213   13452     0       0   0.0   0.0  -262
  13  SotR>CS>AS+>J>AS>Cons>HW                 21318   13506     0       0   0.0   0.0  -208
  14  SotR>AS+>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW                 21206   13448     0       0   0.0   0.0  -242
  15  sdAS>sdJ>SotR>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW            21080   13364     0       0   0.0   0.0  -134
  16  Inq>CS>AS>J                              17254   10908     0       0   0.0  98.7   170
  17  Inq>HotR>AS>J                            16294   10104     0       0   0.0  98.7   170
  18  Inq>AS+>CS>AS>J                          17297   10926     0       0   0.0  98.6   229
  19  Inq[buffInq<2]>SotR>CS>AS>J              20511   12937     0       0   0.0  80.0   183
  20  ISotR>Inq>CS>AS>J                        20634   13014     0       0   0.0  77.5   183
  21  SDSotR>Inq>CS>AS>J                       21047   13274     0       0   0.0  55.1   185
  22  SDSotR>ISotR>Inq>CS>AS>J                 21335   13454     0       0   0.0  46.8   188
  23  SDSotR>ISotR>Inq>CS>J>AS                 21532   13564     0       0   0.0  46.5   285
  24  SDSotR>ISotR>Inq>CS>AS+>J>AS             21442   13516     0       0   0.0  47.7   221
  25  ISDSotR>Inq>CS>AS>J                      20436   12891     0       0   0.0  82.7   180
  26  Inq>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW                      17715   11292     0       0   0.0  98.8  -312
  27  Inq>HotR>AS>J>Cons>HW                    16743   10478     0       0   0.0  98.8  -312
  28  ISotR>Inq>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW                20919   13278     0       0   0.0  77.1  -288
  29  SDSotR>Inq>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW               21314   13522     0       0   0.0  56.6  -283
  30  SDSotR>ISotR>Inq>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW         21596   13695     0       0   0.0  47.8  -277
  31  SDSotR>ISotR>Inq>CS>J>AS>Cons>HW         21776   13785     0       0   0.0  47.5  -144
  32  SDSotR>ISotR>Inq>CS>AS+>J>AS>Cons>HW     21708   13754     0       0   0.0  48.8  -226
  33  ISDSotR>Inq>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW              20734   13165     0       0   0.0  82.8  -294
  34  WoG>CS>AS>J                              15811   10041  1972    1358   0.0   0.0   127
  35  WoG>SotR>CS>AS>J                         19122   12082  1718    1183   0.0   0.0   188
  36  WoG>SotR[cdWoG>10]>CS>AS>J               17484   11075  1984    1366   0.0   0.0   132
  37  WoG>Inq>CS>AS>J                          16782   10616  1715    1181   0.0  81.0   170
  38  WoG>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW                      16378   10488  1972    1358   0.0   0.0  -395
  39  WoG>SotR>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW                 19369   12307  1701    1171   0.0   0.0  -279
  40  WoG>SotR2>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW                18003   11431     0       0   0.0   0.0  -227
  41  WoG>Inq>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW                  17213   10977  1700    1170   0.0  80.6  -312
  42  WoG>Inq>AS+>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW              17236   10994  1699    1170   0.0  80.2  -291
  43  WoG>ISotR>Inq>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW            18925   12037  1699    1170   0.0  56.9  -298
  44  WoG>SDSotR>ISotR>Inq>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW     19469   12373  1701    1171   0.0  34.0  -290
  45  SotR>CS>AS>J>HoW                         22174   14045     0       0   0.0   0.0    15
  46  SotR>CS>J>AS>HoW                         22235   14065     0       0   0.0   0.0   135
  47  SotR>CS>AS>HoW>J                         22021   14003     0       0   0.0   0.0  -256
  48  SotR>CS>J>HoW>AS                         21950   13913     0       0   0.0   0.0    58
  49  SotR>CS>AS+>HoW>AS>J                     21928   13956     0       0   0.0   0.0  -319
  50  SotR>CS>AS+>HoW>J>AS                     21978   13975     0       0   0.0   0.0  -232
  51  SotR>CS>HoW>AS>J                         21811   13899     0       0   0.0   0.0  -374
  52  SotR>CS>HoW>AS+>J>AS                     21898   13935     0       0   0.0   0.0  -243
  53  SotR>HoW>CS>AS>J                         21647   13806     0       0   0.0   0.0  -367
  54  HoW>SotR>CS>AS>J                         21547   13752     0       0   0.0   0.0  -369
  55  SotR>CS>AS>HoW>J>Cons>HW                 21926   13948     0       0   0.0   0.0  -359
  56  ISotR>SDSotR>Inq>CS>AS>HoW>J>Cons>HW     22419   14269     0       0   0.0  46.9  -376
  57  ISotR>SDSotR>Inq>CS>AS>J>HoW>Cons>HW     22563   14302     0       0   0.0  48.8  -186
  58  ISotR>SDSotR>Inq>CS>J>AS>HoW>Cons>HW     22648   14329     0       0   0.0  48.3   -17
  59  WoG>SotR>CS>AS>HoW>J>Cons>HW             20165   12855  1662    1145   0.0   0.0  -380


8% hit, 56 expertise, no ret 2-pc
Code: Select all
                                               DPS            SHPS            E    I     mps
  Q#  Priority                                 V=100%  V=30%  V=100%  V=30%   %    %         
   1  SotR>CS>AS>J                             24935   15802     0       0   0.0    0.0    67
   2  SotR>HotR>AS>J                           22845   14238     0       0   0.0    0.0    67
   3  SotR>CS>J>AS                             24870   15735     0       0   0.0    0.0   268
   4  SotR>CS>J[cdCS>0.5]>AS                   24870   15735     0       0   0.0    0.0   268
   5  SotR>AS>CS>J                             24653   15610     0       0   0.0    0.0   179
   6  SotR>J>CS>AS                             24703   15627     0       0   0.0    0.0   280
   7  SotR>CS>AS+>J>AS                         24955   15808     0       0   0.0    0.0    93
   8  SotR>CS>AS+>J[cdCS>0.5]>AS               24955   15808     0       0   0.0    0.0    93
   9  SotR>AS+>CS>AS>J                         24948   15798     0       0   0.0    0.0   160
  10  SotR>AS[buffGC<2][buffGC>0]>CS>AS+>J>AS  24955   15808     0       0   0.0    0.0    93
  11  SotR>CS>AS>J>HW                          25123   16022     0       0   0.0    0.0  -164
  12  SotR>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW                     25322   16106     0       0   0.0    0.0  -353
  13  SotR>CS>AS+>J>AS>Cons>HW                 25337   16106     0       0   0.0    0.0  -313
  14  SotR>AS+>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW                 25250   16056     0       0   0.0    0.0  -299
  15  sdAS>sdJ>SotR>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW            24441   15544     0       0   0.0    0.0  -195
  16  Inq>CS>AS>J                              20436   12987     0       0   0.0  100.0    67
  17  Inq>HotR>AS>J                            19442   12082     0       0   0.0  100.0    67
  18  Inq>AS+>CS>AS>J                          20611   13083     0       0   0.0  100.0   160
  19  Inq[buffInq<2]>SotR>CS>AS>J              24390   15451     0       0   0.0   76.8    67
  20  ISotR>Inq>CS>AS>J                        24390   15451     0       0   0.0   76.8    67
  21  SDSotR>Inq>CS>AS>J                       24886   15764     0       0   0.0   55.6    67
  22  SDSotR>ISotR>Inq>CS>AS>J                 25214   15970     0       0   0.0   46.3    67
  23  SDSotR>ISotR>Inq>CS>J>AS                 25182   15923     0       0   0.0   38.0   268
  24  SDSotR>ISotR>Inq>CS>AS+>J>AS             25235   15977     0       0   0.0   45.8    93
  25  ISDSotR>Inq>CS>AS>J                      24204   15336     0       0   0.0   82.3    67
  26  Inq>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW                      20941   13383     0       0   0.0  100.0  -353
  27  Inq>HotR>AS>J>Cons>HW                    19943   12474     0       0   0.0  100.0  -353
  28  ISotR>Inq>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW                24837   15803     0       0   0.0   77.1  -353
  29  SDSotR>Inq>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW               25284   16082     0       0   0.0   56.7  -353
  30  SDSotR>ISotR>Inq>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW         25615   16288     0       0   0.0   47.1  -353
  31  SDSotR>ISotR>Inq>CS>J>AS>Cons>HW         25554   16221     0       0   0.0   41.4  -180
  32  SDSotR>ISotR>Inq>CS>AS+>J>AS>Cons>HW     25624   16283     0       0   0.0   46.8  -313
  33  ISDSotR>Inq>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW              24640   15682     0       0   0.0   82.7  -353
  34  WoG>CS>AS>J                              18847   12013  1972    1358   0.0    0.0   110
  35  WoG>SotR>CS>AS>J                         22781   14458  1722    1186   0.0    0.0    67
  36  WoG>SotR[cdWoG>10]>CS>AS>J               20938   13313  1984    1366   0.0    0.0    67
  37  WoG>Inq>CS>AS>J                          19979   12701  1722    1186   0.0   84.4    67
  38  WoG>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW                      19443   12481  1972    1358   0.0    0.0  -403
  39  WoG>SotR>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW                 23178   14769  1728    1190   0.0    0.0  -353
  40  WoG>SotR2>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW                21813   13886     0       0   0.0    0.0  -302
  41  WoG>Inq>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW                  20447   13068  1728    1190   0.0   84.6  -353
  42  WoG>Inq>AS+>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW              20520   13113  1702    1172   0.0   83.3  -299
  43  WoG>ISotR>Inq>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW            22690   14464  1728    1190   0.0   54.0  -353
  44  WoG>SDSotR>ISotR>Inq>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW     23202   14783  1728    1190   0.0   33.8  -353
  45  SotR>CS>AS>J>HoW                         26214   16661     0       0   0.0    0.0   -94
  46  SotR>CS>J>AS>HoW                         26144   16594     0       0   0.0    0.0    75
  47  SotR>CS>AS>HoW>J                         26006   16572     0       0   0.0    0.0  -338
  48  SotR>CS>J>HoW>AS                         25371   16135     0       0   0.0    0.0     8
  49  SotR>CS>AS+>HoW>AS>J                     25968   16550     0       0   0.0    0.0  -345
  50  SotR>CS>AS+>HoW>J>AS                     25931   16504     0       0   0.0    0.0  -195
  51  SotR>CS>HoW>AS>J                         25754   16440     0       0   0.0    0.0  -404
  52  SotR>CS>HoW>AS+>J>AS                     25702   16376     0       0   0.0    0.0  -196
  53  SotR>HoW>CS>AS>J                         25614   16374     0       0   0.0    0.0  -442
  54  HoW>SotR>CS>AS>J                         25354   16207     0       0   0.0    0.0  -366
  55  SotR>CS>AS>HoW>J>Cons>HW                 26006   16572     0       0   0.0    0.0  -338
  56  ISotR>SDSotR>Inq>CS>AS>HoW>J>Cons>HW     26390   16820     0       0   0.0   50.8  -338
  57  ISotR>SDSotR>Inq>CS>AS>J>HoW>Cons>HW     26591   16896     0       0   0.0   47.1   -94
  58  ISotR>SDSotR>Inq>CS>J>AS>HoW>Cons>HW     26499   16815     0       0   0.0   41.6    75
  59  WoG>SotR>CS>AS>HoW>J>Cons>HW             23951   15290  1729    1190   0.0    0.0  -338


8% hit, 56 expertise, ret 2-pc active
Code: Select all
                                               DPS            SHPS            E    I     mps
  Q#  Priority                                 V=100%  V=30%  V=100%  V=30%   %    %         
   1  SotR>CS>AS>J                             25467   16138     0       0   0.0    0.0     4
   2  SotR>HotR>AS>J                           23380   14577     0       0   0.0    0.0     4
   3  SotR>CS>J>AS                             25402   16055     0       0   0.0    0.0   282
   4  SotR>CS>J[cdCS>0.5]>AS                   25402   16055     0       0   0.0    0.0   282
   5  SotR>AS>CS>J                             25055   15848     0       0   0.0    0.0   199
   6  SotR>J>CS>AS                             25250   15947     0       0   0.0    0.0   351
   7  SotR>CS>AS+>J>AS                         25368   16045     0       0   0.0    0.0   192
   8  SotR>CS>AS+>J[cdCS>0.5]>AS               25368   16045     0       0   0.0    0.0   192
   9  SotR>AS+>CS>AS>J                         25221   15953     0       0   0.0    0.0   193
  10  SotR>AS[buffGC<2][buffGC>0]>CS>AS+>J>AS  25368   16045     0       0   0.0    0.0   192
  11  SotR>CS>AS>J>HW                          25680   16350     0       0   0.0    0.0  -176
  12  SotR>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW                     25853   16422     0       0   0.0    0.0  -344
  13  SotR>CS>AS+>J>AS>Cons>HW                 25804   16383     0       0   0.0    0.0  -262
  14  SotR>AS+>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW                 25509   16212     0       0   0.0    0.0  -313
  15  sdAS>sdJ>SotR>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW            25183   15995     0       0   0.0    0.0  -117
  16  Inq>CS>AS>J                              20041   12746     0       0   0.0  100.0     4
  17  Inq>HotR>AS>J                            19049   11843     0       0   0.0  100.0     4
  18  Inq>AS+>CS>AS>J                          20010   12693     0       0   0.0  100.0   193
  19  Inq[buffInq<2]>SotR>CS>AS>J              25223   15976     0       0   0.0   89.5     4
  20  ISotR>Inq>CS>AS>J                        25223   15976     0       0   0.0   89.5     4
  21  SDSotR>Inq>CS>AS>J                       25071   15884     0       0   0.0   68.8     4
  22  SDSotR>ISotR>Inq>CS>AS>J                 25709   16282     0       0   0.0   59.1     4
  23  SDSotR>ISotR>Inq>CS>J>AS                 25768   16276     0       0   0.0   53.9   282
  24  SDSotR>ISotR>Inq>CS>AS+>J>AS             25717   16256     0       0   0.0   55.5   192
  25  ISDSotR>Inq>CS>AS>J                      24759   15686     0       0   0.0   92.3     4
  26  Inq>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW                      20531   13108     0       0   0.0  100.0  -344
  27  Inq>HotR>AS>J>Cons>HW                    19531   12196     0       0   0.0  100.0  -344
  28  ISotR>Inq>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW                25701   16329     0       0   0.0   89.7  -344
  29  SDSotR>Inq>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW               25521   16216     0       0   0.0   69.4  -344
  30  SDSotR>ISotR>Inq>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW         26162   16616     0       0   0.0   59.5  -344
  31  SDSotR>ISotR>Inq>CS>J>AS>Cons>HW         26143   16580     0       0   0.0   57.3  -142
  32  SDSotR>ISotR>Inq>CS>AS+>J>AS>Cons>HW     26185   16622     0       0   0.0   58.5  -262
  33  ISDSotR>Inq>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW              25221   16030     0       0   0.0   92.6  -344
  34  WoG>CS>AS>J                              18847   12013  1972    1358   0.0    0.0   110
  35  WoG>SotR>CS>AS>J                         23493   14907  1790    1233   0.0    0.0     4
  36  WoG>SotR[cdWoG>10]>CS>AS>J               20913   13296  1983    1366   0.0    0.0    73
  37  WoG>Inq>CS>AS>J                          19787   12587  1790    1233   0.0   92.9     4
  38  WoG>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW                      19443   12481  1972    1358   0.0    0.0  -403
  39  WoG>SotR>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW                 23879   15191  1789    1232   0.0    0.0  -344
  40  WoG>SotR2>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW                21652   13788     0       0   0.0    0.0  -303
  41  WoG>Inq>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW                  20280   12950  1789    1232   0.0   93.0  -344
  42  WoG>Inq>AS+>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW              20197   12910  1774    1222   0.0   90.9  -313
  43  WoG>ISotR>Inq>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW            23044   14672  1789    1232   0.0   75.7  -344
  44  WoG>SDSotR>ISotR>Inq>CS>AS>J>Cons>HW     23878   15191  1789    1232   0.0   41.3  -344
  45  SotR>CS>AS>J>HoW                         26497   16828     0       0   0.0    0.0  -126
  46  SotR>CS>J>AS>HoW                         26551   16832     0       0   0.0    0.0   104
  47  SotR>CS>AS>HoW>J                         26235   16716     0       0   0.0    0.0  -311
  48  SotR>CS>J>HoW>AS                         26202   16648     0       0   0.0    0.0    -3
  49  SotR>CS>AS+>HoW>AS>J                     26235   16716     0       0   0.0    0.0  -311
  50  SotR>CS>AS+>HoW>J>AS                     26235   16716     0       0   0.0    0.0  -311
  51  SotR>CS>HoW>AS>J                         26069   16633     0       0   0.0    0.0  -357
  52  SotR>CS>HoW>AS+>J>AS                     26084   16639     0       0   0.0    0.0  -334
  53  SotR>HoW>CS>AS>J                         25928   16557     0       0   0.0    0.0  -384
  54  HoW>SotR>CS>AS>J                         25840   16508     0       0   0.0    0.0  -383
  55  SotR>CS>AS>HoW>J>Cons>HW                 26235   16716     0       0   0.0    0.0  -311
  56  ISotR>SDSotR>Inq>CS>AS>HoW>J>Cons>HW     26760   17058     0       0   0.0   53.9  -311
  57  ISotR>SDSotR>Inq>CS>AS>J>HoW>Cons>HW     26913   17090     0       0   0.0   59.8  -134
  58  ISotR>SDSotR>Inq>CS>J>AS>HoW>Cons>HW     26792   16982     0       0   0.0   59.0    -5
  59  WoG>SotR>CS>AS>HoW>J>Cons>HW             24202   15448  1762    1213   0.0    0.0  -311
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of Grehn|Skipjack.
Simcraft 6.x, Call to Arms 6.0, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 6.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
User avatar
theckhd
Moderator
 
Posts: 6211
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
Location: Harrisburg, PA

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

Postby Kihra » Tue Oct 25, 2011 2:51 pm

theckhd wrote:
Kihra wrote:I know you don't normally test for this, Theck, but maybe you could hack it in and let me know what results you get. I'm seeing that once you hit cap and hard exp cap, that the Ret 2pc bonus is almost worthless. In other words, the DPS benefit seems to largely go away once you are reliably generating Holy Power from Crusader Strike.


I didn't observe this at all in the MATLAB model. It was giving me ~1.1k DPS at low hit/exp, but still giving me ~400 DPS at high hit/exp. Which does make sense - even at hit/exp cap, you'll turn some CS-J-CS-X-CS-SotR sequences into CS-J-CS-SotR, which should still be a noticeable boost over any regular filler.


I only get a 100 DPS boost instead of 400 DPS, but it may just be because I'm using my current threat set to model this and tacking the T13 bonus on top of that. My threat set does include both the Ret T12 2pc and the PvP gloves. Therefore the damage from Crusader Strike is boosted substantially. In addition, SimulationCraft doesn't include the T12 Prot 2pc bonus, so it is missing Righteous Flames damage.

Just turning off all the T12 bonuses and the PvP gloves bonus, I get about a 200 DPS difference. I suspect you have the T12 Prot 2pc coded in your simulation but don't have the PvP gloves or T12 Ret 2pc. That may explain the rest of the difference.

Since you basically end up casting more Inquisitions and SotRs, a simulation will be skewed a bit if any T12 bonuses (or PvP bonuses) are included, especially if one of the bonuses is left out.
Kihra
 
Posts: 340
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 12:01 pm

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

Postby daiceman » Thu Nov 17, 2011 11:13 pm

I may have missed it, but has there been a reevaluation of threat talents after the buffs to judgement/seal damage? (especially AotL with our new 2pc)
daiceman
 
Posts: 43
Joined: Tue Apr 22, 2008 1:53 pm

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

Postby theckhd » Fri Nov 18, 2011 8:01 am

daiceman wrote:I may have missed it, but has there been a reevaluation of threat talents after the buffs to judgement/seal damage? (especially AotL with our new 2pc)

Not yet, but there will be. The code's done, it just has to be run and posted. But it's only going to be a ~25% increase to AotL's DPS output, which isn't likely to change much given how far behind it was. Similarly, it's only going to be a ~12% increase in the mitigation afforded by our 2-piece bonus, so it's on par with the Judgement glyph in effectiveness (which means, "not very").
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of Grehn|Skipjack.
Simcraft 6.x, Call to Arms 6.0, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 6.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
User avatar
theckhd
Moderator
 
Posts: 6211
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
Location: Harrisburg, PA

PreviousNext

Return to Advanced Theorycraft and Calculations

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron

Who is online

In total there is 1 user online :: 0 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: No registered users and 1 guest