The Moonkin Repository

Discussions, information and links to all things Moonkin
It is currently Wed Apr 23, 2014 7:38 pm



Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 29 posts ]  Go to page 1 . 2  Next
Author Message
 Post subject: The math behind recent Balance concerns
PostPosted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 5:10 pm  
Boomkin
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2008 12:10 pm
Posts: 140
Offline

There have been a lot of whining lately over the changes that Balance Druids have seen, in this thread, I am going to present the math related to all of those concerns. I am doing this in a separate thread in order to keep the main post less cluttered and shorter. If you have questions concerning the validity of the math, please post them here and I will do my best to address them. If you have questions or comments about the general conclusion of the topic, then please post them in the other thread. I will do my best to monitor both.

2T9/T8 compared to 4T9.

It was requested that I do these comparisons based on actual gearing numbers and not based upon theoretical values that these gearing sets might have. I agree that this is an important factor, and so I went and built item sets for each one. Each set will use no item with a higher ilevel than 245 though some of which might be from ToGC 10. I did my best to find as optimal a gear set up for each one as a possibly could, but I won't say that they are exactly perfect. For instance, I know that both are slightly over the hit cap. I did try and switch one of the Hit items and gem for Hit instead, but I found that the overall loss of stats seen by doing this simply wasn't worth it. In general, the set would gain far less Haste than it would lose in Crit to do this while Spell Power would remain approximately unchanged. The professions I used were Enchanting and Inscription. They are arguably not the best, but all professions are approximately the same in value, and these are easy to configure. For gemming, I ignored socket bonuses if I felt they weren't an on-par gain, I only used 2 Purple gems for the Meta and choose the best socket bonus for doing so. I also chose to gem yellow sockets for SP/Crit, you could argue for SP/Haste, but that's a different topic really, and since both are pretty much the same in terms of yellow gems, it doesn't really matter.

Again, please note, I am not saying that these are BiS lists for these gear sets, you can argue different gearing set ups for lots of things, but these are really good ones.

Also note, WoWhead automatically calculates the gains from talents such as Improved Moonkin Form, so the only difference in stats from those talents is due to raid buffs which alter stats. I will also be using ToW values even those Demonic Pact is actually better, this is because it is a set value and not a theoretical one that could be different. Oh, and since Intellect does increase Crit values, I added in 1% Crit to adjust the values for raid buffs which increase Intellect, the actual value is just slightly over that, since the 0.XX% additional Crit won't effect scaling too much, I don't care to figure out the exact value.

Glyphs will be the standard Starfire, Moonfire, Insect Swarm.

2T9/T8 Gearing
http://www.wowhead.com/?profile=18655158

Stats once raid buffed:
Intellect: 1386
Spirit: 648
Spell Power: 3428
Crit: 44.68 (47.68 for Starfire, 54.68 for Moonfire)
Haste: 14.52% (Raid buffs effecting Haste are embedded into the calculations. Celestial Focus removed from base value displayed as it is not additive(Stupid WoWhead))

Insect Swarm:
(215 + (3428 * 0.2)) * (1.03) * (1.04) * (1.13) * (1.03) * (1.3) = 1459.69301 per tick

(1.5 / 1.11400) / (1 + (14.52 / 100)) = 1.1757

Moonfire: Direct Damage ignored due to insignificance
(200 + (3428 * .13)) * (1.85) * (1.03) * (1.04) * (1.13) * (1.03) * (1 + ((.5468 * 1.09) * 1)) = 2376.75569 per tick

(1.5 / 1.11400) / (1 + (14.52 / 100)) = 1.1757

Wrath (nonEclipse):
(592 + (3428 * .671)) * 1.1 * 1.03 * 1.04 * (1 + ((.4468 * 1.09) * 1)) * 1.13 * 1.03 * 1.03 = 6075.15181

((1.5 / 1.114) / ((1 + (14.52 / 100))) = 1.1757

(1 -(1-.4468)^3)) = 0.830704071

(1 * 0.8307) + (1.1757 * 0.1693) = 1.0297

Wrath (Eclipse):
(592 + (3428 * .671)) * 1.55 * 1.03 * 1.04 * (1 + ((.4468 * 1.09) * 1)) * 1.13 * 1.03 * 1.03 = 8560.44119

Starfire (nonEclipse):
(1130 + (3428 * 1.2)) * 1.1 * 1.03 * 1.04 * (1 + ((.4768 * 1.09) * 1)) * 1.13 * 1.03 = 10928.7317

((3 / 1.114) / ((1 + (14.52 / 100))) / (1 + (.2 * (1 -(1-.4768)^2)) = 2.0533

Starfire(Eclipse):
(1130 + (3428 * 1.2)) * 1.1 * 1.03 * 1.04 * (1 + ((.9268 * 1.09) * 1)) * 1.13 * 1.03 = 14456.073

((3 / 1.114) / ((1 + (14.52 / 100))) / (1 + (.2 * (1 -(1-.9268)^2)) = 1.9613

Each Wrath cast has a 26.808% chance to proc Eclipse. On average, it should take 5 Wrath casts to proc Eclipse. An additional Wrath cast is added for reaction time. Lunar Eclipse lasts for 13.9703 and allows for 7 Starfire casts. Insect Swarm will not be refreshed during Lunar Eclipse, Moonfire will unless there is minimal time remaining. On average, it should take 3 Starfire casts to proc Eclipse. An additional Stafire cast is added for reaction time. Solar Eclipse lasts for 13.0404 seconds and allows for 12 Wrath casts. Insect Swarm and Moonfire will be refreshed during Solar Eclipse.

IS - 14 (IS)
MF - 12.8243 (IS) 15 (MF)
Wrathx6 - 6.6461 (IS) 8.8218 (MF)
Starfire(E)x7 - Both DoTs drop (IS half way, MF during last SF cast.)
IS - 14
MF - 12.8243 (IS) 15( MF)
Starfirex3 - 6.6644 (IS) 17.8401(MF)
Wrath(E)x6 - 11.6619 (MF) 6.8622 (E)
IS - 10.4862 (MF) 5.6865(E)
Wrath(E)x5 - 8.8515 (IS) 5.3377 (MF)
Wrathx6
Starfire(E) x2

Normally I would have ended the rotation after the last Wrathx6 to proc Eclipse since this should represent when the damage gained from Eclipse has balanced back to the standard average, but adding in the last two Starfires would allow for IS to fall off while Moonfire fell off just after the last Wrath cast. In total, the rotation has 2 Insect Swarms, 2 Moonfires, 12 Wraths, 11 Wraths(E), 3 Starfires, and 9 Starfires(E) and takes 52.1975 seconds to complete.

(1459.69301 * 14) + (2376.75569 * 16) + (6075.15181 * 12) + (8560.44119 * 11) + (10928.7317 * 3) + (14456.073 * 9) = 388421.32

388421.32 / 52.1975 = 7441.37784 DPS

4T9 Gearing:
http://www.wowhead.com/?profile=18671025

Stats once raid buffed:
Intellect: 1430
Spirit: 645
Spell Power: 3505
Crit: 45.66 (48.66 for Starfire, 55.66 for Moonfire)
Haste: 14.39% (Raid buffs effecting Haste are embedded into the calculations. Celestial Focus removed from base value displayed as it is not additive(Stupid WoWhead))

Insect Swarm
(215 + (3505 * 0.2)) * (1.03) * (1.04) * (1.13) * (1.03) * (1.3) = 1484.65333 per tick

(1.5 / 1.11400) / (1 + (14.39 / 100)) = 1.1771

Moonfire
(200 + (3505 * .13)) * (1.85) * (1.03) * (1.04) * (1.13) * (1.03) * (1 + ((.5566 * 1.09) * 1)) = 2429.75899

(1.5 / 1.11400) / (1 + (14.39 / 100)) = 1.1771

Wrath (nonEclipse):
(592 + (3505 * .671)) * 1.14 * 1.03 * 1.04 * (1 + ((.4566 * 1.09) * 1)) * 1.13 * 1.03 * 1.03 = 6454.5774

((1.5 / 1.114) / ((1 + (14.39 / 100))) = 1.1771

(1 -(1-.4566)^3)) = 0.839542913

(1 * 0.8395) + (1.1771 * 0.1605) = 1.0284

Wrath (Eclipse):
(592 + (3505 * .671)) * 1.44 * 1.03 * 1.04 * (1 + ((.4566 * 1.09) * 1)) * 1.13 * 1.03 * 1.03 = 8153.1504

Starfire (nonEclipse):
(1130 + (3505 * 1.2)) * 1.14 * 1.03 * 1.04 * (1 + ((.4866 * 1.09) * 1)) * 1.13 * 1.03 = 11606.7374

((3 / 1.114) / ((1 + (14.39 / 100))) / (1 + (.2 * (1 -(1-.4866)^2)) = 2.0519

Starfire (Eclipse):
(1130 + (3505 * 1.2)) * 1.14 * 1.03 * 1.04 * (1 + ((.7866 * 1.09) * 1)) * 1.13 * 1.03 = 14086.7544

((3 / 1.114) / ((1 + (14.39 / 100))) / (1 + (.2 * (1 -(1-.7866)^2)) = 1.9768

Each Wrath cast has a 27.40% chance to proc Eclipse. On average, it should take 5 Wrath's to proc Eclipse. An additional Wrath cast is added for reaction time. Lunar Eclipse lasts for 13.9716 and allows for 7 Starfire casts. Insect Swarm will not be refreshed during Lunar Eclipse, Moonfire will unless there is minimal time remaining. On average, it should take 3 Starfire casts to proc Eclipse. An additional Stafire cast is added for reaction time. Solar Eclipse lasts for 13.0404 seconds and allows for 12 Wrath casts. Insect Swarm and Moonfire will be refreshed during Solar Eclipse.

IS - 14 (IS)
MF - 12.8243 (IS) 15 (MF)
Wrathx6 - 6.6461 (IS) 8.8218 (MF)
Starfire(E)x7 - Both DoTs drop (IS half way, MF during last SF cast.)
IS - 14
MF - 12.8243 (IS) 15( MF)
Starfirex3 - 6.6644 (IS) 17.8401(MF)
Wrath(E)x6 - 11.6619 (MF) 6.8622 (E)
IS - 10.4862 (MF) 5.6865(E)
Wrath(E)x5 - 8.8515 (IS) 5.3377 (MF)
Wrathx6
Starfire(E) x2

Although there are slight cast time differences between the two sets, none of them were significant enough to alter the rotation. In total the rotation has 2 Insect Swarms, 2 Moonfires, 12 Wraths, 11 Wraths(E), 3 Starfires, and 9 Starfires(E) and takes 52.3085 seconds to complete.

(14 * 1484.65333) + (16 * 2429.75899) + (12 * 6454.5774) + (11 * 8153.1504) + (3 * 11606.7374) + (9 * 14086.7544) = 388401.875

388401.875 / 52.3085 = 7425.21531

2T9/T8
7441.37784 DPS

4T9
7425.21531


The Change to Eclipse

Eclipse has recently been buffed to 40% increases instead of 30%. Since we will now be using 4T9 without question due to the 2T8 nerf, here is how this change would impact the DPS of the above T9 rotation

Wrath (Eclipse):
(592 + (3505 * .671)) * 1.54 * 1.03 * 1.04 * (1 + ((.4566 * 1.09) * 1)) * 1.13 * 1.03 * 1.03 = 8719.3414

Starfire (Eclipse):
(1130 + (3505 * 1.2)) * 1.14 * 1.03 * 1.04 * (1 + ((.8866 * 1.09) * 1)) * 1.13 * 1.03 = 14913.4267

((3 / 1.114) / ((1 + (14.39 / 100))) / (1 + (.2 * (1 -(1-.8866)^2)) = 1.9660

The slight reduction in Starfire's cast time would reduce the total time of the rotation by 0.0756 seconds, not really significant, but it shouldn't have been expected to be, but still a slight change. This brings the total time down to 52.2329

(14 * 1484.65333) + (16 * 2429.75899) + (12 * 6454.5774) + (11 * 8719.3414) + (3 * 11606.7374) + (9 * 14913.4267) = 402070.027

402070.027 / 52.2329 = 7697.63936

7697.63936 - 7425.21531 = 272.42405

(272.42405 / 7425.21531) * 100 = 3.6689% gain


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The math behind recent Balance concerns
PostPosted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 5:32 pm  
User avatar

Crit-chicken
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 1:58 pm
Posts: 682
pbguild: Crimson Defilers
pblevel: 85
pbrace: Tauren
pbclass: Druid
pbarmoryguildlink: http://us.battle.net/wow/en/guild/eredar/crimson%20defilers/
pbarmorycharlink: http://us.battle.net/wow/en/character/eredar/thorne/advanced
Offline

Thanks for this Murmurs... Based on this...I think we can all be pretty pleased with the buff.

I have no doubt all of us would have preferred that they buffed our core dmg as opposed to eclipse...but a buff is a buff. I shall not look a gift horse in the mouth.

_________________
Thorne, 85 Druid, Balance
http://us.battle.net/wow/en/character/eredar/thorne/advanced


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: The math behind recent Balance concerns
PostPosted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 5:40 pm  
User avatar

Orbital Owl Cannon
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 1:29 pm
Posts: 3993
Location: Baelgun - US
pbguild: Crisp
pblevel: 85
pbrace: Night Elf
pbgender: Female
pbclass: Druid
Offline

3.6% is a bit higher than what Graylo got out of his Sim. So I'll have to look over the math when I'm wide awake, but thanks for posting this!

_________________
Image
Foofys Cupcake Factory


Top
 Profile My Photo Gallery  
 
 Post subject: Re: The math behind recent Balance concerns
PostPosted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 6:20 pm  
Spamkin
Joined: Wed Sep 16, 2009 4:08 pm
Posts: 62
Offline

Thanks for this; looks like it was not a trivial amount of work!

Now, I am not sure if what I have posted on recent changes would be identified as whining, but it has generally been negative, so I feel the need to support my argument. The net of all the changes in 3.3 is a DPS buff on average, and that's great. My issue, however, is that the Eclipse buff is incomplete compensation for the loss of WiseEclipse.

WE, in addition to increasing average DPS, increased Eclipse uptime (in fact, it very-nearly halved average Eclipse downtime). Practically, this meant having Eclipse when you need it (i.e. during DPS burns) more often. The real killer to the Balance playstyle is the outlier streaks where you spend an entire Eclipse CD failing to proc a new one; it might average out over the course of a stand-still-and-nuke fight, but there significant, relevant fights where hitting your DPS valley at the wrong time could actually wipe the raid.

It's not the end of the world, and I expect I will enjoy playing Balance as much in 3.3 as I do now, but the changes do not improve my faith in the developers' direction for the spec in the long run.

_________________
http://www.wowarmory.com/character-shee ... w&n=Akkoto


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: The math behind recent Balance concerns
PostPosted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 6:24 pm  
Boomkin
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2008 12:10 pm
Posts: 140
Offline

Huh? I think you may be mistaken, or I am, because Graylo's simulations place the buff to be on the exact same playing field I have it.

Graylo said, in short:

Using 2T9/T8, losing WiseEclipse accounts for a 4.1% - 4.6% DPS loss.

Using 4T9, losing WiseEclipse accounts for a 2.6% - 3.1% DPS loss.

Using 2T9/T8, the buff to Eclipse results in only a 1% DPS loss.

Using 4T9, the buff to Eclipse results in a 1.24% DPS gain.

So, Graylo's estimations place the Eclipse buff to be worth approximately a 3.84% - 4.34% DPS gain, which is a tad higher than this calculation estimates it to be. There is some iffiness in his wording and he may be basing everything off of the 258 Tier set, but, so far as I know, he isn't comparing any of the set bonuses at all, merely the loss of WiseEclipse and the boost to Eclipse; therefore which T9 set is used shouldn't have any meaningful impact at all.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding him though, as I said, his word choice is a bit confusing.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The math behind recent Balance concerns
PostPosted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 6:33 pm  
Boomkin
Joined: Sun Jun 15, 2008 12:10 pm
Posts: 140
Offline

Oni wrote:
Thanks for this; looks like it was not a trivial amount of work!

Now, I am not sure if what I have posted on recent changes would be identified as whining, but it has generally been negative, so I feel the need to support my argument. The net of all the changes in 3.3 is a DPS buff on average, and that's great. My issue, however, is that the Eclipse buff is incomplete compensation for the loss of WiseEclipse.

WE, in addition to increasing average DPS, increased Eclipse uptime (in fact, it very-nearly halved average Eclipse downtime). Practically, this meant having Eclipse when you need it (i.e. during DPS burns) more often. The real killer to the Balance playstyle is the outlier streaks where you spend an entire Eclipse CD failing to proc a new one; it might average out over the course of a stand-still-and-nuke fight, but there significant, relevant fights where hitting your DPS valley at the wrong time could actually wipe the raid.

It's not the end of the world, and I expect I will enjoy playing Balance as much in 3.3 as I do now, but the changes do not improve my faith in the developers' direction for the spec in the long run.


WiseEclipse honestly did not have as large of an impact on total DPS out-put as you seem to think. Yes, it is true that 2T8 exacerbated the gains of WiseEclipse since the entire gear setup surrounding 2T8 centered around Eclipse uptime, but overall WiseEclipse itself was a fairly minor DPS increase, and, theoretically speaking, held the potential to not increase DPS at all.

WiseEclipse hinged upon the line of thinking that the faster you get Eclipse proc A, the faster you get Eclipse proc B. While this is true in theory, it doesn't honestly work out that way. In a simulation of averages such as what I did above, WiseEclipse would behave perfectly and result in a fairly decent DPS gain, but in the actual in-game world where a player can go well past the average length of time to proc Eclipse, then WiseEclipse losses most of it's boon.

Don't get me wrong, I loved WiseEclipse, I used it, and before that I was using a self-crafted /cancelaura macro to do the same thing, but it really wasn't as amazing as people are chalking it up to be. I've played without WiseEclipse recently, and I've been doing testing on the PTR, and, honestly, I rarely notice a significant difference in Eclipse uptime. There is a difference, yes, but most of it is muddled in the variations of fight mechanics to seem significant. Going a full 3 Starfires without getting a single crit, which is my average, is very rare. More often than not, it seems at least, I'll crit that first or second Starfire outside of Eclipse. A few times here and there it can go longer, but honestly not often enough that my DPS variance becomes a liability. Procing Lunar Eclipse still, far and away, holds a greater variance on my DPS output than procing Solar Eclipse.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The math behind recent Balance concerns
PostPosted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 6:43 pm  
User avatar

Crit-chicken
Joined: Mon Sep 15, 2008 1:58 pm
Posts: 682
pbguild: Crimson Defilers
pblevel: 85
pbrace: Tauren
pbclass: Druid
pbarmoryguildlink: http://us.battle.net/wow/en/guild/eredar/crimson%20defilers/
pbarmorycharlink: http://us.battle.net/wow/en/character/eredar/thorne/advanced
Offline

I think yours and Graylo's numbers are in line, or at least pretty close. I think Foofy misunderstood that Graylo's 1.24% gain is a NET gain you will see if you wear 4T9 and balance the loss of WiseEclipse against the buff to Eclipse. Your 3.67% represents ONLY the gain from the eclipse buff (while wearing 4T9).

Also factor in that Graylo is using a simulator, which is why he provides a range. If you assume the lower end of his range... 2.6% + 1.24% = 3.84% buff due to the eclipse change. Really you guys are only off by a fraction of a percentage point.

_________________
Thorne, 85 Druid, Balance
http://us.battle.net/wow/en/character/eredar/thorne/advanced


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: The math behind recent Balance concerns
PostPosted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 7:04 pm  
KFC
Joined: Wed Aug 06, 2008 11:12 pm
Posts: 13
Location: New Jersey
Offline

Glad to see what I expected and hoped for supported by someone with better math skills than myself. Hopefully this means we can enjoy our little buff, get ready for Icecrown, and move past all this unpleasantness.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The math behind recent Balance concerns
PostPosted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 7:33 pm  
User avatar

Spamkin
Joined: Thu Oct 08, 2009 10:04 am
Posts: 85
pbguild: Pwnögraphy
pblevel: 80
pbrace: Night Elf
pbgender: Female
pbclass: Druid
pbarmoryguildlink: http://www.wowarmory.com/guild-info.xml?r=Muradin&cn=Liafail&gn=Pwnögraphy
pbarmorycharlink: http://www.wowarmory.com/character-sheet.xml?r=Muradin&cn=Liafail
Offline

Thank you for doing the math. It would have been nicer if it had worked out to be a higher increase than 3.67%, but it's still better than 0% so I'm happy.

Cheers

_________________
Liafail
Pwnögraphy - Muradin


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The math behind recent Balance concerns
PostPosted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 7:46 pm  
User avatar

Orbital Owl Cannon
Joined: Thu Aug 07, 2008 1:29 pm
Posts: 3993
Location: Baelgun - US
pbguild: Crisp
pblevel: 85
pbrace: Night Elf
pbgender: Female
pbclass: Druid
Offline

Thorne wrote:
I think yours and Graylo's numbers are in line, or at least pretty close. I think Foofy misunderstood that Graylo's 1.24% gain is a NET gain you will see if you wear 4T9 and balance the loss of WiseEclipse against the buff to Eclipse. Your 3.67% represents ONLY the gain from the eclipse buff (while wearing 4T9).

Also factor in that Graylo is using a simulator, which is why he provides a range. If you assume the lower end of his range... 2.6% + 1.24% = 3.84% buff due to the eclipse change. Really you guys are only off by a fraction of a percentage point.

This, I had to go back and read both of yours. Lack of sleep is all I know of for the past 2 months..if only I could get aza to stop pvping at night when I try to sleep, it would all work out.

So yeah, my bad on that.

_________________
Image
Foofys Cupcake Factory


Top
 Profile My Photo Gallery  
 
 Post subject: Re: The math behind recent Balance concerns
PostPosted: Thu Dec 03, 2009 8:25 pm  
Godkin
Joined: Thu May 07, 2009 8:40 am
Posts: 1933
pblevel: 80
pbrace: Night Elf
pbclass: Druid
pbarmorycharlink: http://www.wowarmory.com/character-sheet.xml?r=Shadowsong&n=Xiera
Offline

Thanks for putting in the work Murmurs (and Graylo as well, of course). It's very much appreciated.

_________________
Xiera of Shadowsong

TMR Profile


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The math behind recent Balance concerns
PostPosted: Fri Dec 04, 2009 1:43 am  
User avatar

Godkin
Joined: Fri May 23, 2008 11:59 am
Posts: 1846
Location: Korea
pbguild: Unbreakable
pblevel: 85
pbrace: Tauren
pbclass: Druid
pbarmoryguildlink: http://us.battle.net/wow/en/guild/frostmourne/Unbreakable/?character=bearnaked
pbarmorycharlink: http://us.battle.net/wow/en/character/frostmourne/Bearnaked/simple
Offline

Thank you for the maths Murmurs.


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The math behind recent Balance concerns
PostPosted: Fri Dec 04, 2009 5:11 pm  
User avatar

Badgekin
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 3:13 pm
Posts: 262
Offline

Murmurs wrote:
Huh? I think you may be mistaken, or I am, because Graylo's simulations place the buff to be on the exact same playing field I have it.

Graylo said, in short:

Using 2T9/T8, losing WiseEclipse accounts for a 4.1% - 4.6% DPS loss.

Using 4T9, losing WiseEclipse accounts for a 2.6% - 3.1% DPS loss.

Using 2T9/T8, the buff to Eclipse results in only a 1% DPS loss.

Using 4T9, the buff to Eclipse results in a 1.24% DPS gain.

So, Graylo's estimations place the Eclipse buff to be worth approximately a 3.84% - 4.34% DPS gain, which is a tad higher than this calculation estimates it to be. There is some iffiness in his wording and he may be basing everything off of the 258 Tier set, but, so far as I know, he isn't comparing any of the set bonuses at all, merely the loss of WiseEclipse and the boost to Eclipse; therefore which T9 set is used shouldn't have any meaningful impact at all.

Maybe I'm misunderstanding him though, as I said, his word choice is a bit confusing.


Murmurs and My numbers agree, they are just saying different things.

When I said:
Quote:
Using 2T9/T8, losing WiseEclipse accounts for a 4.1% - 4.6% DPS loss.

Using 4T9, losing WiseEclipse accounts for a 2.6% - 3.1% DPS loss.


Those estimates are comparing future DPSs to our Current DPS. It takes both the 2T8 and WiseEclipse nerfs into account. Just for your information, the first number lsited in the rage is the number I got from my simulator. The second number is what I got from WrathCalcs.

When I said:
Quote:
Using 2T9/T8, the buff to Eclipse results in only a 1% DPS loss.

Using 4T9, the buff to Eclipse results in a 1.24% DPS gain.


Again, I was comparing our future DPS to our Current DPS. These numbers are only from my simulator.

When Murmurs says that the change to Eclipse is a 3.6% DPS increase he is comparing Post 3.3 4T9 DPS before the Eclipse change and after the Eclipse change. If I put my numbers into that format my simulator is saying the Eclipse change is worth 3.84% DPS increase. The two are vary close. (which makes me very happy. I always worry that I screwed something up)

The difference is probably due to different assumptions. I used better gear for my calcuations. Plus, Formulation and Simulation will always have different values.

_________________
Http://www.graymatterwow.blogspot.com - My Blog. Focuses on Moonkin and things that interest me in WoW.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
 Post subject: Re: The math behind recent Balance concerns
PostPosted: Fri Dec 04, 2009 7:34 pm  
Doomkin
Joined: Wed Feb 25, 2009 4:42 pm
Posts: 1040
Location: Chicago
pbguild: Nonpareils
pblevel: 85
pbrace: Night Elf
pbclass: Druid
pbarmoryguildlink: http://us.battle.net/wow/en/guild/senjin/nonpareils/
pbarmorycharlink: http://us.battle.net/wow/en/character/senjin/relevart/simple
Offline

Graylo, I have a question about your simulator. Are you assuming that every Moonfire receives the maximum benefit from the Glyph of Starfire? If not, how did you phrase the conditional?

_________________
Image
Image


Top
 Profile E-mail  
 
 Post subject: Re: The math behind recent Balance concerns
PostPosted: Mon Dec 07, 2009 11:23 am  
User avatar

Badgekin
Joined: Tue Jul 01, 2008 3:13 pm
Posts: 262
Offline

Relevart wrote:
Graylo, I have a question about your simulator. Are you assuming that every Moonfire receives the maximum benefit from the Glyph of Starfire? If not, how did you phrase the conditional?


No, I don't assume that MF will tick for 24 seconds.

My simulator is an overblown Excel spreadsheet with a lot of counters. When MF is cast it sets the MF counter to 15 seconds minus the GCD since MF is an Instant. It also sets a Glyph of SF counter to 3. When Starfire is cast a couple of things happen. The MF counter checks the Glyph Counter to see if there are still charges available. If there are, then it checks to see if the time left on Moonfire is greater then the time it takes to cast Starfire. If both of those conditions are met then the MF counter will add 3 seconds and subract the SF cast time.

_________________
Http://www.graymatterwow.blogspot.com - My Blog. Focuses on Moonkin and things that interest me in WoW.

Image


Top
 Profile  
 
Display posts from previous:  Sort by  
Post new topic Reply to topic  [ 29 posts ]  Go to page 1 . 2  Next


All times are UTC - 5 hours


Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot post attachments in this forum

Search for:
Jump to:  
cron


World of Warcraft phpBB template "WoWMaevahEmpire" created by MAËVAH (ex-MOONCLAW) for EMPIRE guild (v3.0.2.2) - wowcr.net : World of Warcraft styles & videos
© World of Warcraft and Blizzard Entertainment are trademarks or registered trademarks of Blizzard Entertainment, Inc. in the U.S. and/or other countries. wowcr.net is in no way associated with Blizzard Entertainment.
Powered by phpBB © 2000, 2002, 2005, 2007 phpBB Group