Remove Advertisements

Theck's MATLAB thread - MoP/5.x

Warning: Theorycraft inside.

Moderators: Fridmarr, Worldie, Aergis, theckhd

Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - MoP/5.x

Postby Klaudandus » Fri Oct 26, 2012 11:09 am

well, haste is not that good for warriors once they reach the 7.5% haste mark. we at least continue to scale past that. on the other hand, like i said, at least parry is good for them if only for procs.
The Element of Forum Hyperbole
Image
---
Flüttershy - Draenei Protection Paladin, Aerie Peak
Klaudandus - BE Protection Paladin, Feathermoon (Semi-retired)
User avatar
Klaudandus
 
Posts: 11101
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:08 am
Location: Texas' Armpit

Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - MoP/5.x

Postby KysenMurrin » Fri Oct 26, 2012 11:48 am

These days I'm starting to think that Blizz should just scrap avoidance ratings on gear entirely. 3/5 tanks right now don't need it, and I'm not sure about the state of the other two (DK&War). They've shown they can make dps stats work for tanks in a pretty straightforward fashion - they could extend that idea further, for example by tying Critical Block to Critical Strike chance (though that's a big change that'd require reworking Warrior Mastery). Scrap the ratings on gear, and bake them in from other sources (like the existing Str->Parry).
I don't play WoW any more.
Donnan - Nangun - Kysen - Kysen - Mardun - Timkins

Mostly-Book Blog.
KysenMurrin
 
Posts: 6831
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 6:37 am
Location: UK

Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - MoP/5.x

Postby Klaudandus » Fri Oct 26, 2012 11:51 am

KysenMurrin wrote:These days I'm starting to think that Blizz should just scrap avoidance ratings on gear entirely. 3/5 tanks right now don't need it, and I'm not sure about the state of the other two (DK&War). They've shown they can make dps stats work for tanks in a pretty straightforward fashion - they could extend that idea further, for example by tying Critical Block to Critical Strike chance (though that's a big change that'd require reworking Warrior Mastery). Scrap the ratings on gear, and bake them in from other sources (like the existing Str->Parry).


THIS.

I was just thinking the same just a few minutes ago.

EDIT: Although I just up with a completely different idea -- why not just give a certain amount of passive hit and exp against NPCs as part of our spec -- it would make it much easier to reach the hit and exp cap, allowing us to favor mastery/haste much faster -- at least it soften the blows of getting a piece that has dodge/parry as its secondary stats
The Element of Forum Hyperbole
Image
---
Flüttershy - Draenei Protection Paladin, Aerie Peak
Klaudandus - BE Protection Paladin, Feathermoon (Semi-retired)
User avatar
Klaudandus
 
Posts: 11101
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:08 am
Location: Texas' Armpit

Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - MoP/5.x

Postby benebarba » Fri Oct 26, 2012 12:21 pm

Klaudandus wrote:
KysenMurrin wrote:These days I'm starting to think that Blizz should just scrap avoidance ratings on gear entirely. 3/5 tanks right now don't need it, and I'm not sure about the state of the other two (DK&War). They've shown they can make dps stats work for tanks in a pretty straightforward fashion - they could extend that idea further, for example by tying Critical Block to Critical Strike chance (though that's a big change that'd require reworking Warrior Mastery). Scrap the ratings on gear, and bake them in from other sources (like the existing Str->Parry).


THIS.

I was just thinking the same just a few minutes ago.

EDIT: Although I just up with a completely different idea -- why not just give a certain amount of passive hit and exp against NPCs as part of our spec -- it would make it much easier to reach the hit and exp cap, allowing us to favor mastery/haste much faster -- at least it soften the blows of getting a piece that has dodge/parry as its secondary stats



ya'll are going about this all wrong.

What we need is a buff. What it will do is calculate the chance a boss will have to have a weaker attack, or completely miss us. It will scale with your equipped ilvl, rated to include how awesome your x-mog set is. Unless you're a belf then it will use your hair-awesomness index.

We can call it 'Radicalness'. What could possibly go wrong?

/removes dev-hat.

Seriously though - those ideas are pretty interesting ones (Klaud and Kysen's). Certainly could lead to some interesting opportunities design-wise. Imagine a world where your tank gear could be viable DPS gear minus maybe a weapon or shield with a spec change. Well, and you weren't a bear :P
benebarba
 
Posts: 2469
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 7:30 am

Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - MoP/5.x

Postby Klaudandus » Fri Oct 26, 2012 12:34 pm

The thing is, we're already favoring dps gear for our set ups. A hit/exp piece of gear is many times better than a dodge/parry. Even if you're about to hit the hit/exp caps, you can reforge into haste/mastery -- whereas even if you reforge out of dodge or parry, you still have another stat sucking balls in your dodge/parry piece of gear.

Conversely, they could create a single stat called avoidance to be put on gear, for plate wearers, and it would split half and half into dodge and parry on the defense tables. That way you at least avoid the now dreaded dodge/parry combination

Don't like it as much as the idea of getting passive hit/exp from our spec, but c'est la vie~
The Element of Forum Hyperbole
Image
---
Flüttershy - Draenei Protection Paladin, Aerie Peak
Klaudandus - BE Protection Paladin, Feathermoon (Semi-retired)
User avatar
Klaudandus
 
Posts: 11101
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:08 am
Location: Texas' Armpit

Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - MoP/5.x

Postby KysenMurrin » Fri Oct 26, 2012 1:02 pm

Klaudandus wrote:Conversely, they could create a single stat called avoidance to be put on gear, for plate wearers, and it would split half and half into dodge and parry on the defense tables. That way you at least avoid the now dreaded dodge/parry combination

Or make Dodge the only avoidance rating, with Parry being a side-effect of Strength for plate-wearers.
I don't play WoW any more.
Donnan - Nangun - Kysen - Kysen - Mardun - Timkins

Mostly-Book Blog.
KysenMurrin
 
Posts: 6831
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 6:37 am
Location: UK

Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - MoP/5.x

Postby Klaudandus » Fri Oct 26, 2012 1:08 pm

I'm ok with that -- though like I said, I'd prefer passive hit/exp against NPCs to compensate for how valuable hit/exp are...
The Element of Forum Hyperbole
Image
---
Flüttershy - Draenei Protection Paladin, Aerie Peak
Klaudandus - BE Protection Paladin, Feathermoon (Semi-retired)
User avatar
Klaudandus
 
Posts: 11101
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:08 am
Location: Texas' Armpit

Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - MoP/5.x

Postby benebarba » Fri Oct 26, 2012 1:30 pm

Klaudandus wrote:I'm ok with that -- though like I said, I'd prefer passive hit/exp against NPCs to compensate for how valuable hit/exp are...


I actually think that if this AM thing survives the grand experiment, this approach will be good, preferably in combination with making vengence less dumb, something like a passive for tank specs only that gives X% hit, Y% expertise and Z% of your stamina (or whatever) as attack power against NPCs.
benebarba
 
Posts: 2469
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 7:30 am

Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - MoP/5.x

Postby smetson » Fri Oct 26, 2012 3:24 pm

Sagara wrote:According to the stat values Theck roughly estimated, the HH sword is ABOVE LFR Elegon's axe, but behind the other two LFR weapons and all three normal weapons.


How good are these values exactly? When I try to apply them to other pieces of gear it often gives me intelect items and I assume we shouldn't be using those.
smetson
 
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Sep 19, 2011 3:49 pm

Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - MoP/5.x

Postby Ergil » Fri Oct 26, 2012 5:03 pm

I hope this is the right thread for my question and if not I am sorry :)
It's about our L75-Talents, here you wrote basically Sanctified Wrath and Holy Avenger are roguhly on a same level dps- and HoPo-wise, but I was wondering if these two talents can be compared simply by looking at their dps and HoPo gain, as they lead to completly different rotations and different generation of HoPo. HA gives us a great CD for bosses like Will, where we can use it in a titan gas phase and in tank change fights (like Gar'jal) its defensive aspect should be roguhly double as good as in fights like the Ghostkings, but SW should have a far better smoothing effect as we have steady increase of our generated HoPo. A J-CS-J-X rotation would give us over 50% uptime of SotR without spikes of 18+ sec and larger gaps outside our HA-phase.
Easier said:
SW should give us a SotR every 6 sec (ignoring AS proccs)
HA gives less SotR outside the CD-phase but a long buff when used.

This would let me personally think that SA might be far better in some encounters if we try to smooth our DTPS.

Another point which I came up with, while overthinking this, is SW should have large impact on our SS uptime as we only have one filler every 6 sec.
I don't know if you have already tested this, but i would be very delighted if you could help me with this :)
Ergil
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 5:49 am

Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - MoP/5.x

Postby Egtheridon » Fri Oct 26, 2012 8:04 pm

Every encounter is different and it being so easy to change glyphs/talents just take the one better for the fight and your playstyle. I personally almost always use DP because it is random but it still has the highest uptime for the sotr buff. But like you even said on the start of the post for Will HA is great, its what i use actually, and for the other fights it just depends on what works better, there are advantages to SW/HA but the fight and your playstyle may favor one or the other and just use that. I actually completely change my talents and glyphs for Will of the Emperor every other fight i use a DP build. There will never be a "best" glyph choice an example for myself I rarely take sacred shield other than will, because I take selfless healer and raid heal even though sacred shield is really nice, I just find it didn't change my survivability i lived and healers had the same mana issues whether i took it or not, but now when someone dips in the raid i can insta flash of light them for 200k+.
Paladin/70/Rivendare
Egtheridon
 
Posts: 39
Joined: Wed Apr 02, 2008 2:37 pm

Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - MoP/5.x

Postby theckhd » Fri Oct 26, 2012 8:56 pm

Klaudandus wrote:well, haste is not that good for warriors once they reach the 7.5% haste mark. we at least continue to scale past that. on the other hand, like i said, at least parry is good for them if only for procs.

Huh? Haste gives warriors no survivability benefit.

smetson wrote:
Sagara wrote:According to the stat values Theck roughly estimated, the HH sword is ABOVE LFR Elegon's axe, but behind the other two LFR weapons and all three normal weapons.


How good are these values exactly? When I try to apply them to other pieces of gear it often gives me intelect items and I assume we shouldn't be using those.

If you don't want intellect items, add another filter with "Intellect=0" in it.

Ergil wrote:you wrote basically Sanctified Wrath and Holy Avenger are roguhly on a same level dps- and HoPo-wise, but I was wondering if these two talents can be compared simply by looking at their dps and HoPo gain, as they lead to completly different rotations and different generation of HoPo. HA gives us a great CD for bosses like Will, where we can use it in a titan gas phase and in tank change fights (like Gar'jal) its defensive aspect should be roguhly double as good as in fights like the Ghostkings, but SW should have a far better smoothing effect as we have steady increase of our generated HoPo. A J-CS-J-X rotation would give us over 50% uptime of SotR without spikes of 18+ sec and larger gaps outside our HA-phase.
Easier said:
SW should give us a SotR every 6 sec (ignoring AS proccs)
HA gives less SotR outside the CD-phase but a long buff when used.

This would let me personally think that SA might be far better in some encounters if we try to smooth our DTPS.

I'm not sure how you're concluding that SW gives us more smoothing. HA gives you 100% uptime on SotR for 20 seconds every 2 minutes. SW gives you 50% uptime on SotR for 30 seconds every 3 minutes. So you'll get the same amount of uptime of each buff in any fight that's a multiple of 6 minutes, and in general you'll get more HA uptime than SW uptime the rest of the time.

Furthermore, your damage intake will be much smoother with 100% uptime on SotR than with 50%. So during the effects, HA is obviously the smoothness winner. Since you don't get any extra uptime out of SW, I'm not sure how you're concluding that SW is giving you more smoothness. Are you confusing SW with DP?

Ergil wrote:Another point which I came up with, while overthinking this, is SW should have large impact on our SS uptime as we only have one filler every 6 sec.
I don't know if I'd call it a large impact. You won't have a free GCD during SW with which to refresh Sacred Shield unless you give up your filler slot, but if you're concerned with survivability you can always do that (i.e. J-CS-J-SS). Further, if you refresh SS right before you go into SW, and refresh it again after SW, you're only looking at ~10 seconds of downtime.
"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: 7796
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
Location: Harrisburg, PA

Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - MoP/5.x

Postby theckhd » Fri Oct 26, 2012 9:03 pm

Egtheridon wrote:Every encounter is different and it being so easy to change glyphs/talents just take the one better for the fight and your playstyle. I personally almost always use DP because it is random but it still has the highest uptime for the sotr buff. But like you even said on the start of the post for Will HA is great, its what i use actually, and for the other fights it just depends on what works better, there are advantages to SW/HA but the fight and your playstyle may favor one or the other and just use that. I actually completely change my talents and glyphs for Will of the Emperor every other fight i use a DP build. There will never be a "best" glyph choice an example for myself I rarely take sacred shield other than will, because I take selfless healer and raid heal even though sacred shield is really nice, I just find it didn't change my survivability i lived and healers had the same mana issues whether i took it or not, but now when someone dips in the raid i can insta flash of light them for 200k+.

I'm not sure I'd recommend DP for any of the fights in Mogu'shan vaults. And I'd definitely not recommend Selfless Healer. Yeah, you can FoL your friends for 200k every so often. But your healers could've done it if they didn't have to heal through the extra 400k+ damage you took by not keeping Sacred Shield up.
"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: 7796
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
Location: Harrisburg, PA

Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - MoP/5.x

Postby Ergil » Sat Oct 27, 2012 3:02 am

Ok, I can not read :D Somehow I thougt the 50% shorter J CD would be permanent... This solved my problem thank you :)
Ergil
 
Posts: 12
Joined: Thu Oct 18, 2012 5:49 am

Re: Theck's MATLAB thread - MoP/5.x

Postby Treck » Sat Oct 27, 2012 8:25 am

I know the original post puts HoW first in the prio sub 20% for damage, but coupled with HA it also generates Holy power, so nomatter what it should be no1 ability during HA uptime?
Image
User avatar
Treck
 
Posts: 2128
Joined: Thu Aug 21, 2008 8:10 am

PreviousNext

Return to Advanced Theorycraft and Calculations

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Feuerbart and 1 guest


Remove Advertisements

Who is online

In total there are 2 users online :: 1 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: Feuerbart and 1 guest
?php } else { ?