#### Archived

This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.

# Cataclysm Mechanics Testing

## 323 posts in this topic

28. Are existing DoTs (DP, Rupture, etc.) boosted by the KSp damage buff?

It looks like existing DoTs are not boosted by the 20% KSp damage buff. In this test I ruptured and swapped to a weapon with no DP on it just before a KSp.

##### Share on other sites

I'd like to take a few minutes to discuss a testing technique that's helpful for getting detailed results. It involves the behavior of fixed damage attacks - i.e., things like Gouge, Rupture ticks, Venomous Wounds procs, etc. which always obey the same damage formulas. When you're actually testing such an attack, it will exhibit a damage range exactly one point wide - for instance, it will do 123-124 damage in practice. This is because, when the game calculated the damage for that move, it will find that it does (say) 123.4 damage. At this point, the game rounds randomly up or down based on the fractional part; in this example, it will round down 60% of the time and round up 40% of the time, so the actual average over the long term will be 123.4, but each individual attack will do either 123 or 124.

Hence, if you test once or twice and find that it does 123 damage, that's somewhat useful as it tells us that the internal damage number is between 122 and 124; but if you test until you get both values (123 and 124 in this case), it tells you that the answer is between 123 and 124, which basically halves the uncertainty.

Note that this is true for both crits and hits; for instance, if you look at the second Venomous Wounds test, we know both that the base damage is between 1002 and 1003, and that 1.545 times the base damage is between 1548 and 1549, which lets us state with absolute confidence that the actual damage number is between 1002 and 1002.59, which is better still. Hence, when testing this sort of thing, the most descriptive answer you can possible give is to get both damage number for both crits and noncrits; this gives us the most possible confidence in the answer.

However, sometimes the value comes out very very close to an actual damage number; for instance, in the first Venomous Wounds test above, the expected damage is 1.2 * 1.2 * 1.08 * (302.5+.1125*4347) = 1230.99912 damage. Hence, 99.9% of the time, it's going to do 1231 damage, meaning you can beat on the dummy all day and not see a 1230 - you'll note that he did 53 trials and all did the same amount. And while 53 tests with venomous wounds isn't that hard to do, once you start testing with Gouge... you won't *always* be able to get both numbers for a given attack. However, if you can at least make a reasonable effort to get them - 6 or 8 trials of a given attack - that does help reduce the uncertainty involved. More is of course better, but we'll take what we can get.

I bring this up because while ieatpaperbag's testing in post 23 is indicative that target armor is about 11950, I think it would be good to narrow it down further; in particular, some testing with a fixed-damage attack (gouge for rogues - other classes have other options) would be very helpful towards pinpointing the actual value.

Regarding Potent Poisons and Vile Poisons stacking, testing with instant poison suggests that they stack additive.

Average of around 250 instant poison hits with:

With no talent spec: 797

20% from Vile Poisons: 952

20% from Vile Poisons and 20% from Mastery: 1104.

1104/952=1.16.

It is also worth noting that Envenom doesn't benefit from Mastery directly.

Interesting - particularly since Venomous Wounds implies the opposite. I wonder if the damage range on IP is dirtying the results? Regardless, we'll need more testing - we should probably look at WP and DP in addition to Venomous Wounds and IP to try to get the full picture. As a note to people testing this: beware of Master Poisoner.

It looks like existing DoTs are not boosted by the 20% KSp damage buff. In this test I ruptured and swapped to a weapon with no DP on it just before a KSp.

Interesting. Could you also confirm with Rupture, and perhaps try refreshing DP during KSp? That is, if you have a rolling DP stack and refresh it during KSp, does the following tick do 20% more damage? This will, of course, require getting lucky on poison procs during a KSp, and quickly unequipping your DP weapon once it ends, but I'd be interested to know the answer.

I suppose while we're at it it might be worth verifying the behavior of poison and Venomous wound procs during KSp; I recommend Wound Poison rather than IP for testing this to avoid the IP damage range problems. And I suppose if we're being picky I'm not sure we've ever verified that autoattack damage gets boosted during KSp - we've always sort of assumed it does, but it might be good to check.

##### Share on other sites

18. Does HAT affect Spell Crit?

Hat does affect spell crit as well as melee crit.

No Hat.

With Hat.

I'm not quite sure why it says there was 32 sp, i had no buffs on me, so I assume it is just a bug.

And if anyone is interested this is the spec i used; shouldn't make a difference, but I'm including it for the sake of completeness.

##### Share on other sites

I can verify that autoattack damage gets boosted during KsP. Totally naked except for a white 1h level 1 sword (with flowers in the OH to prevent attacks).

##### Share on other sites
I think it would be good to narrow it down further; in particular, some testing with a fixed-damage attack (gouge for rogues - other classes have other options) would be very helpful towards pinpointing the actual value.

I did 100 gouges with 6595 AP (after vitality, I only had 3 points in precision, forgot about them)

15 of the normal hits were 1030, the rest were 1029 (average of 1029.15)

I did another 50 gouges with no talent points (5735 AP)

22 of the normal hits were 905, the rest were 906 (average of 905.56)

Initially I used (AP * 0.21) + 1 to predict my damage before armor and got two numbers that did not agree with each other or the initial guess from earlier tests. I looked at the cata tooltip in wowhead and guessed at (AP * 0.21) + 117. The first test estimates damage reduction from armor to be 31.4791% and the second suggests 31.4671%. They don't seem to agree to the degree I would have liked for something like armor. What do you suggest for a better number rogue-wise, a larger sample? what are some of the other classes' abilities that could provide better data?

##### Share on other sites

Your data is internally consistent for the moment, so I wouldn't worry about it too much. As a note on further testing: doing repeated trials once you've identified both possible damage values isn't really that useful - there's just too much noise in the probability distributions for the average to say much. But lets look at we can figure out based purely on the fact that crits do 2058-2059 damage with 6595 AP and 1810 to 1811 damage with 5735 AP.

Wowhead asserts that the damage of gouge at level 85 is 117; this is consistent with your proposed formula of 117 + .21*AP, so lets assume for the moment that that is correct.

Per the combat ratings thread, the armor mitigation parameter, P, is 26070 at level 85. Hence, an attack with raw damage D and mitigated damage D' against a target with armor A satisfies D'/D = P/(A+P), or, rearranging, A = P*(D-D')/D'.

At 6595 AP, D = 3003.9 for a crit, so plugging in at our two endpoints for D, we find that 11963.8 <= A <= 11982.3.

At 5735 AP, D = 2642.7 for a crit, so plugging in at our two endpoints for D, we find that 11972.6 <= A <= 11993.6

Hence, combining these data ranges, we can assert with absolute certainty that, assuming our other formulas are correct, the target's armor is between 11972.7 and 11982.3. Eyeballing it based on the positions of the averages within each range, we can guess that the answer is probably "about" 11975, but with a few more endpoint tests with Gouge (or any other fixed-damage ability), it should be reasonably straightforward to narrow down the answer more precisely.

##### Share on other sites
14. How does Coup de Grace stack with Revealing Strike? What about Executioner (the Subtlety Mastery)? What about Aggression?

I did all of the following with no gear and 2 white-quality weapons on a lvl 60 dummy that gave approximately 12.56% DR from Armor. I did not take the RvS glyph, Savage Combat or Bandit's Guile in any spec.

No evis talents, I did take Imp SS for convenience and so that I would have the same AP of 783 from Vitality for all except for the executioner test which had 785 AP via Sinister Calling.

Coup de Grace only with combat as the main tree for vitality.

Coup de Grace with Aggression, they appear to be additive

`2978 * (1+ 0.20 + 0.15) = 4020.3 ~ 4005`
Coup de Grace with Executioner again with 785 AP and base 20% mastery, these appear to be additive as well
`2978 * (1+ 0.20 + 0.20) = 4169.2 ~ 4167`
The rest involve RvS which does something to eviscerate that I either misunderstood somewhere, or I did something wrong, or has an effect I just plain can not figure out. No evis talents, just RvS Coup de Grace and RvS
`3096 * (1+ 0.20) = 3715.2 ~ 3719`
Coup de Grace with Aggression and RvS
`3096 * (1+ 0.20 + 0.15) = 4179.6 ~ 4199 (getting far but this sample only has 25 eviscerates)`
Interesting. Could you also confirm with Rupture, and perhaps try refreshing DP during KSp? That is, if you have a rolling DP stack and refresh it during KSp, does the following tick do 20% more damage? This will, of course, require getting lucky on poison procs during a KSp, and quickly unequipping your DP weapon once it ends, but I'd be interested to know the answer.
An old rupture also does not increase in tick damage during or after a KSp. If DP is refreshed during KSp, it increases to 120% until refreshed again after. In this one, I did not refresh DP after KSp. In this one, DP was refreshed after one tick after KSp ended.
[*]Verify the IP/WP proc rates. I have no particular reason to believe it's changed, but it's worth verifying. Similarly, verify that the proc rate on ranged attacks (i.e. FoK) is what you'd expect.
Adding to the expected ranged proc rates in post #21, here are some tests with WP/IP on a single MH weapon, the proc rates appear to be the same as live. IP on a 2.6 speed Mace
`187 / 500 = 0.374 (expected 0.3714)`
IP on a 1.3 speed Dagger
`93 / 500 = 0.186 (expected 0.1857)`
WP on a 2.6 speed Mace
`460 / 501 = 0.918 (expected 0.9286)`
WP on a 1.3 speed Dagger
`230 / 500 = 0.460 (expected 0.4643)`

##### Share on other sites
18. Does HAT affect Spell Crit?

Hat does affect spell crit as well as melee crit.

I'm not quite sure why it says there was 32 sp, i had no buffs on me, so I assume it is just a bug.

And if anyone is interested this is the spec i used; shouldn't make a difference, but I'm including it for the sake of completeness.

All but your first 10 intellect count towards SP/Mana pool.

All but your first 10 agilty count towards AP/crit.

All but your first 10 strength count towards AP/block (if str still increases blockvalue).

So it seems you should have exactly 42 intellect naked

Probably some very old design decision that still lurks around

Regarding HaT: There are no +5% spell and 5% melee crit buffs, every crit buff gives %5melee and spell crit, a little step further down the road so you don't only have 2-3 exact 10man raid setups which guarantee you all de/buffs

##### Share on other sites
Regarding HaT: There are no +5% spell and 5% melee crit buffs, every crit buff gives %5melee and spell crit, a little step further down the road so you don't only have 2-3 exact 10man raid setups which guarantee you all de/buffs

I'm completely aware of the design principal; on the other hand, consider the wording of the abilities:

Leader of the Pack: "increases critical strike chance..."

Elemental Oath: "...bonus to their critical strike chance."

HAT: "Increases the ranged and melee critical hit chance..."

There's a very distinct difference in wording there. And it's not like they haven't shown a willingness to give some classes inferior versions of buffs - for instance, how there are both +10% and +6% spell power buffs. So it might just be a typo. Or we might actually have a weak version of the ability. And rather than making assumptions, it seemed sensible to test it.

##### Share on other sites

26. Does the AR haste stack as expected with Windfury/SnD/Haste Rating?

AR haste stacks multiplicatively with SnD, WF, and haste rating.

```
Observed		Expected

base speed			2.6	1.6

6% haste talents		2.45	1.51	2.452830189	1.509433962

AR + talents			2.04	1.26	2.044025157	1.257861635

AR + talents +snd		1.46	0.9	1.460017969	0.898472597

AR + talents + WF		1.86	1.14	1.858204688	1.143510577

AR + talents + WF + snd		1.33	0.82	1.327289063	0.81679327

2.6	1.5

talents + gear			1.85	1.07	1.846315535	1.06518204

AR + talents + gear		1.54	0.89	1.538596279	0.8876517

AR + talents + gear + snd	1.1	0.63	1.098997342	0.634036928

AR + talents + gear + WF	1.4	0.81	1.39872389	0.806956091

AR + talents + gear + SnD +WF	1	0.58	0.999088493	0.576397208

```

By the by, can you say a little more about what you mean (or link to the original posts) about 16 and 24?

##### Share on other sites
FoK on the main target is buffed, but not on any of the secondary targets.

Edit: I can also say something more about energy regen. Without a doubt base regen is 10/second and 12.5 a second with vitality. The value of haste was up for debate in the 4.0.1 combat spreadsheet thread, so I did a somewhat longer test. I spammed fok for 120 seconds and recorded both the total casts and the energy remaining at the end of the test. With 32.57% haste I got 58 casts off with 58 energy remaining, for a net expenditure of 1988 energy or 16.566 energy/sec. If haste is multiplicative (e.g. regen = 12.5 * (1+haste%)) then I'd have expected 16.571 energy/sec, well within the margin for human error here. The only alternative hypothesis I've heard advanced was 12.5 + .11 * haste% which would predict an overall regen of 1930 energy, a reasonably large difference.

Having done that I went one step further and did the exact same test (with the same 32.57% haste) but this time also used an adrenaline rush during the test, making sure not to cap and without the glyph. Here I got 63 casts off with 78 energy remaining at the end, for a total regen of 2183. The total difference in energy regained was thus 195 (give or take a little bit given that I might have read the energy remaining bar slightly early/late). Without the glyph I would have expected 150 energy regained if there was no interaction with vitality, but this is significantly higher. It's a much closer match for it being 150*1.25 than it is for just the flat 150, but also pretty clearly not being influenced by haste.

I did a test of energy regen scaling with haste using a different method (prior to seeing this post).

My methodology (assumptions noted where they were made).

I dumped energy with fan of knives, standing outside of melee range with autoattack off. I then spammed fan of knives for 200 executes. I noted the activity on recount and divided this into the expected energy cost of 200 Fans of Knives. I did this at 0 haste rating, and 7 other incremental values of haste. I then plotted these on a spreadsheet and added a trendline using the built in least squares fit.

I then repeated the same experiment as subtlety (no benefit from vitality).

It appears as though vitality stacks multiplicatively with haste-based energy regen scaling.

Here is the chart:

(Note the outlier at around 20% haste on the subtlety line. Nature called about halfway through so that point only represents 100 FoK executes. EACH point represented 6-9 minutes of pressing the same button repeatedly. I was not about to start that data point all over).

I agree that this method has some error introduced that would increase the energy regeneration from the initial energy dump and if anyone is interested, I will refine my method to a more accurate one. By using time-stamps from a combat log, parsing them, and discarding initial executes to a point where the derivative of time-between-executes becomes tolerably close to zero. This should allow a more meaningful data set to be used.

##### Share on other sites
By the by, can you say a little more about what you mean (or link to the original posts) about 16 and 24?

24: Perhaps it's my imagination, but my impression on previous fights with snare-able targets (Freya comes to mind) was that the uptime on Blade Twisting isn't anywhere near the 90%+ you'd expect based on the tooltip proc rate. And since I don't recall anyone ever actually verifying what the proc rate is, it seems reasonable to at least to a sanity test to see if the proc rate is the 40% the tooltip suggests. Doesn't need to be big or fancy, just a couple hundred hits to verify it's in the right ballpark, confirm that it procs off SS, finishers, and KSp, etc.

##### Share on other sites

On Venomous Wounds, Potent Poisons and Vile Poisons stacking.

Interesting - particularly since Venomous Wounds implies the opposite. I wonder if the damage range on IP is dirtying the results? Regardless, we'll need more testing - we should probably look at WP and DP in addition to Venomous Wounds and IP to try to get the full picture. As a note to people testing this: beware of Master Poisoner.

Venomous Wounds doesn't gain from Vile Poisons which was also never implied in the earlier test. In my case, Venomous Wounds did 1203-1204 damage with and without Vile Poisons.

Regarding stacking, I tested with one deadly poison stack.

With only 20% Potent Poisons: 265-266.

With 20% Vile Poisons and 20% Potent Poisons: 309-310.

Worst case: 310/265=1.169.

On a more curious note, Venomous Wounds only works when your target is poisoned.

##### Share on other sites

7 How do Opportunity and Improved Ambush stack?

Tested with no proc enchants/trinkets and no meta gem (so crit is exactly 2 * normal nit)

1. Clean Ambush, no Imp. Ambush, no Opportunity.

Min. damage: 1852

Max. damage: 1859

2. Improved Ambush only:

Min. damage: 2130 (minimal crit/2)

Max. damage: 2138 (max. crit/2)

Calculated values:

```
min: 1852*1.15 = 2129.8  ~ 2130

max: 1859*1.15 = 2137.85 ~ 2138```
3. Improved Ambush + Opportunity: Min. damage: 2686 (minimal crit/2) Max. damage: 2696 (max. crit/2) Calculated values: 1. Multiplicative:
```
min: 1852*1.15*1.30 = 2768.74

max: 1859*1.15*1.30 = 2779.21```
```
min: 1852*(1+0.15+0.30) = 2685.4 ~ 2686

max: 1859*(1+0.15+0.30) = 2695.6 ~ 2696

```

So, Opportunity and Imp. Ambush do stack additively.

PS: Regarding Find Weakness:

It looks like it's not implemented on PTR - none of Ambush, Garrote or Cheap Shot does not modify damage of yellow attacks or autoattacks, at least for me.

##### Share on other sites
I can verify that autoattack damage gets boosted during KsP. Totally naked except for a white 1h level 1 sword (with flowers in the OH to prevent attacks).

For this test, can you confirm what weapon you were using? In particular, what speed it was?

##### Share on other sites
On a more curious note, Venomous Wounds only works when your target is poisoned.
That's actually not surprising at all. It's stated clearly on the tooltip that that's the way it works: Venomous Wounds - Spell - World of Warcraft

##### Share on other sites
I'm completely aware of the design principal; on the other hand, consider the wording of the abilities:

Leader of the Pack: "increases critical strike chance..."

Elemental Oath: "...bonus to their critical strike chance."

HAT: "Increases the ranged and melee critical hit chance..."

There's a very distinct difference in wording there. And it's not like they haven't shown a willingness to give some classes inferior versions of buffs - for instance, how there are both +10% and +6% spell power buffs. So it might just be a typo. Or we might actually have a weak version of the ability. And rather than making assumptions, it seemed sensible to test it.

Easiest to get directly from the according spells

```Effect #1	Apply Area Aura: Mod Crit Chance % - All

```
vs
```Apply Area Aura: Mod Spell Crit %

```
and
```Apply Area Aura: Mod Melee & Ranged Crit %

```

##### Share on other sites
31. Glyph of Hemo was exhibiting some buggy behavior during beta. Is this fixed? How does it react to Hemo crits vs regular crits? If you have a Glyph DoT ticking and you hemo again, does it refresh?

I am not familiar with the buggy behavior that was seen or what you mean by its reaction to hemo crits vs regular crits but hopefully this will cover some of that. Sorry if it's all stuff you already know.

First, the DoT is enhanced by the hemo bleed debuff even if the debuff is not present before the hemo strike and the DoT itself can crit.

`2551 * 0.40 / 8 * 1.30 = 165.815`
The DoT is updated to the damage of the most recent Hemo strike and damage is not carried over, here my AP dropped 7105 from to 785
```6274 * 0.40 / 8 * 1.30 = 407.81

3906 * 0.40 / 8 * 1.30 = 253.89```
Here a non-crit was refreshed to a crit
```2902 * 0.40 / 8 * 1.30 = 188.63

5426 * 0.40 / 8 * 1.30 = 352.69```
Here is a crit refreshed to a non-crit
```5917 * 0.40 / 8 * 1.30 = 384.605

2675 * 0.40 / 8 * 1.30 = 173.875```
The DoT is also multiplicatively buffed by Sanguinary Vein even if a bleed is not already present
`2255 * 0.40 / 8 * 1.30 * 1.10 = 161.2325`
And as one would expect the DoT is updated to the damage of a hemo buffed by Sanguinary Vein
```2383 * 0.40 / 8 * 1.30 * 1.10 = 170.3845

2533 * 0.40 / 8 * 1.30 * 1.10 = 181.1095```

##### Share on other sites

Re: bugginess. See here for the problems that were previously observed; this seems to be fixed.

To clarify a few minor details:

a) Is it a true refresh? i.e., does it preserve tick spacing?

b) Am I correct in assuming the DoT does not benefit from haste?

c) Can you receive crit ticks if the Hemo itself crit? I would assume so, but I don't see any in your testing above.

d) Can you tell if the initial Hemo that puts the DoT up gains the benefit of Sanguinary Veins, or does the buff not go up until after the Hemo has dealt its damage? This is probably best tested with a low-damage weapon and lots of AP. This would also be a good time to doublecheck the normalization status of Hemo.

##### Share on other sites

For all those testing Subtlety on the PTR:

Glyph of Backstab is BUGGED. It currently behaves BOTH like the live version of the glyph (extended Rupture duration by 2 sec per Backstab, up to a maximum of 6 extra seconds) AND the new model (5 energy refund on a Backstab crit), but this bug ONLY occurs on the initial application of Rupture; in other words, the bug does not occur when Rupture is refreshed to its original duration from a Serrated Blades Eviscerate.

Example: On a level 80 training dummy, I started from stealth and used Premeditation (2 CP), then Shadowstep -> Garrote (4 CP), Hemorrhage (5 CP), Rupture, and the next three Backstabs added two seconds each to Rupture's duration (like in the live model), but I was still seeing "+5 energy" in MSBT immediately following my Backstab crits (the new model).

Seeing as how the new Glyph of Backstab says "Your Backstab critical strikes grant you 5 energy" and says nothing about increasing the duration of Rupture, it seems fairly obvious to me that this is indeed a bug.

I've already reported this bug, but the point of this post is to warn Rogues testing Subtlety that this bug exists and that it may affect your test results.

##### Share on other sites
To clarify a few minor details:

a) Is it a true refresh? i.e., does it preserve tick spacing?

b) Am I correct in assuming the DoT does not benefit from haste?

c) Can you receive crit ticks if the Hemo itself crit? I would assume so, but I don't see any in your testing above.

d) Can you tell if the initial Hemo that puts the DoT up gains the benefit of Sanguinary Veins, or does the buff not go up until after the Hemo has dealt its damage? This is probably best tested with a low-damage weapon and lots of AP. This would also be a good time to doublecheck the normalization status of Hemo.

Thanks, no I did not see any of that described buggy behavior. Guess it would have been helpful to have timestamps on.

a) I do not know what "true refresh" means but the DoT ticking timer is reset when you land a hemo strike.

To narrate a little of the below log

16 sec: The first hemo strike lands

16 sec: The 30% bleed debuff applies

17 sec: The glyph bleed is applied (seemingly always one second after the strike)

20 sec: bleed tick

23 sec: bleed tick

24 sec: The next hemo stirke

24 sec: The 30% bleed debuff is refreshed

25 sec: The glyph bleed is applied (not refreshed)

28 sec: 8 ticks of bleed happen 3 seconds apart with 1162 haste (9.07%)

We do not see a bleed tick at 26 seconds from the original or second hemo strike, the first bleed tick of the second strike happens at 28 seconds which is 5 seconds after the last tick of the original strike and 3 after the second hemo glyph is applied.

b) Again, the above was done with 1162 (9.07%) haste and we saw 8 ticks spaced 3 seconds apart, we see the exact same thing below with 0% haste.

c) Yes, if the original hemo strike is a crit, the hemo DoT can crit as well.

d) The initial hemo does not benefit from Sanguinary Veins if a bleed is not already present and hemo is still normalized (at least for 1-handers, I'd assume it's the same for daggers).

Here with I am attacking a lvl 60 dummy and expect approximately 12.56% reduction in damage from armor as observed earlier. I am specced into Sanguinary Veins and only hemo after the DoT is finished. I have 6501 AP and am using a 2.2 speed, 7.0 dps sword.

`(2.2 * 7 + 6501 * 2.4 / 14) * 1.375 * (1 - 0.1256) = 1358.386 ~ 1360`

Here I just spammed hemo with the hemo glyph up, we see the hits are approximately 1494 = 1358 * 1.10 (notice no hemo DoTs happen because hemo is being constantly refreshed)

##### Share on other sites
For this test, can you confirm what weapon you were using? In particular, what speed it was?

A 2.6 speed white weapon: [item]2131[/item]. I can no longer reproduce those exact numbers now that the vitality buff is on the PTRs, but redoing the test with the same weapon (743 attack power naked) I get swings of 83/84 normally, 92/93 for the MH KS attack itself, and 99/100 damage for the melee swing during KS (on the heroic dummy). I assume that the difference in damage between the MH attack and the KS attack is normalization.

##### Share on other sites

Your previous results were wholly consistent with normalization for a 2.6 speed weapon, and your new results appear to be as well. Hence, I'm going to mark KSp as normalized and call it good.

##### Share on other sites

I did the following for blade flurry tonight:

Test 1. Naked except for a white level 1 throwing dagger, I spammed FoK for 60 seconds and in that time period got two full blade flurries in. 21 FoK, 56 energy remaining at the end, for a grand total of 791 energy. Subtracting off the 100 initial energy and the 12.5*30=375 energy that we know was regenerated while BF was down, we get 316 energy in 30 seconds or 10.5333 energy/second, almost exactly 2energy/second less than without BF. It appears if the 20% is additive with vitality. I repeated this test a couple of times and got very similar answers (within a couple of energy).

Test 2. Fully geared with 32.57% haste, same idea. End result of iteration 1 was 28 FoK and 32 energy and iteration 2 had 27 fok and 69 energy. Subtracting off the initial 100 energy and the 12.5*1.3257*30=497 energy we know regenerated while BF was inactive, we get 416.86 energy in 30 seconds or 13.895 energy per second. This is ~2.676 energy per second less than would be expected, almost exactly 2 * (1+haste%) energy per second.

##### Share on other sites

A quick comment on Haste vs. Energy Regen:

There is an existing API function call GetPowerRegen() that returns the current regeneration rate per second. However, this function seems to be bugged on the PTR since it doesn't include the effect of haste. It shows 10 without Vitality and 12.5 with Vitality. Though I haven't had a chance to test the regen rate for Combat spec yet, it feels like the game is treating 10 or 12.5 depending on the talent, as the base regeneration rate. So the haste effect should be multiplicative with Vitality. I will try to confirm this.