Archived

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

Adoriele

WrathCalcs - Moonkin DPS Spreadsheet

94 posts in this topic

As noted before, 1.1.4 has the mana regen nerfs. It also changes the Eclipse Rotation Type field to be more intuitive (yet again), and changes IS,MF,Eclipse rotation to more accurately reflect newer thoughts in DoT upkeep. Namely, it assumes you cast both IS and MF twice, just as Eclipse ends and just before the ICD ends. The mana calculations for this, and the Wrath version of this rotation, or not yet fully-implemented.

So it assumes you clip MF right before starting to cast Wrath?

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
So it assumes you clip MF right before starting to cast Wrath?

Yeah. Technically, it just assumes you tick every 3s no matter what, but since I doubt anyone's going to have gear that results in a 48s average rotation, I'm content to leave that in. I can change it if it's an issue.

I also don't think it's necessarily the right way to go yet, but it's better than before.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Yeah. Technically, it just assumes you tick every 3s no matter what, but since I doubt anyone's going to have gear that results in a 48s average rotation, I'm content to leave that in. I can change it if it's an issue.

I also don't think it's necessarily the right way to go yet, but it's better than before.

For the MF+IS+Eclipse rotation, in TotalDamage, I changed ... D9/3*MFTickDamage ... to ... min(D9/3, 2*(MFNumTicks+IF(GSFActive,3,0)))*MFTickDamage ... Otherwise the SF glyph gets no DPS value.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
If you'd like to change it, though, go to the Starfire Calcs page and edit C3. Near the end should be 165, change it to 55 and you're all set. I may have changed this since release, though, so just to be safe you'll want to do it on the new version, 1.1.4, which I'm tossing up in the next few minutes.

For version 1.1.4, it now can be done in cell C3 like you said. (per your input I found it in cell C5 in version 1.1.3). Thanks for your help.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I think I may have discovered a problem with one of the rotations in version 1.1.4.

To replicate it do this:

Download the posted copy of 1.1.4.

Change the idol to S. Renewal.

Set the active rotation to: MF, IS, Starfire Filler

Set the eclipse rotation to: Solar

Now look at the dps coming from the Idol. It will read 0.00 dps. Since the rotation is 'solar' I assume the intent is to wrath during the proc, and starfire during cooldown and keep starfiring until the next proc. By doing that, you are wrathing about 10-seconds out of every minute, so I don't see how the idol could be producing 0.00 dps. Also, the total dps for those settings seems extraordinarily low (2300 dps using the defaults when every other rotation is 3,000+).

Edit: All of the 'starfire filler' choices seem to produce this same result (zero dps using the wrath idol).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I think I may have discovered a problem with one of the rotations in version 1.1.4.

To replicate it do this:

Download the posted copy of 1.1.4.

Change the idol to S. Renewal.

Set the active rotation to: MF, IS, Starfire Filler

Set the eclipse rotation to: Solar

Now look at the dps coming from the Idol. It will read 0.00 dps. Since the rotation is 'solar' I assume the intent is to wrath during the proc, and starfire during cooldown and keep starfiring until the next proc. By doing that, you are wrathing about 10-seconds out of every minute, so I don't see how the idol could be producing 0.00 dps. Also, the total dps for those settings seems extraordinarily low (2300 dps using the defaults when every other rotation is 3,000+).

Oops. I figured out what's going on here, I'll get it updated when I have a chance.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

ok this Wow Web Stats is latest WWS ( from last night ).

From some reason i only did about 4000dps ( probably has to do something with lack of shaman and his buffs and heroism ) since i average about 4600dps ( i don't have WWS since we don't have payed account ), but with my gear i should be close or even more then 5000dps so im doing something wrong, but don't know what.

I use IS, MF, IFF and spam wrath to proc on SF, then during eclipse i use SF during CD i recast MF and IS ( if needed IFF ) but that's just not enough.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WC 1.1.4 is using a 3.5 ppm formula for Omen of Clarity (based on untalented cast times). I recall a blue post during LK beta that seemed to fit that formula.

Other commenters (Wowwiki and Wowhead) have given proc rates of 6%. Graylo, in his regen post, said "about 2 per minute" based on looks at old logs. At 30-40 casts per minute, that is consistent with the 6% number.

From some recent Archavon WWS's of mine I see 33 OoC procs from these cast counts:

Wrath 268

SF 166

Instants (MF, IS, FoN, Sfl) 198

that is a proc rate in the 5-6% range. The WC formula would predict about 80 OoC procs from those casts.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WC 1.1.4 is using a 3.5 ppm formula for Omen of Clarity (based on untalented cast times). I recall a blue post during LK beta that seemed to fit that formula.

Other commenters (Wowwiki and Wowhead) have given proc rates of 6%. Graylo, in his regen post, said "about 2 per minute" based on looks at old logs. At 30-40 casts per minute, that is consistent with the 6% number.

From some recent Archavon WWS's of mine I see 33 OoC procs from these cast counts:

Wrath 268

SF 166

Instants (MF, IS, FoN, Sfl) 198

that is a proc rate in the 5-6% range. The WC formula would predict about 80 OoC procs from those casts.

Hmm. OoC used to be a 6%, with an internal cooldown if I remember right. At some point in Beta, it was changed to PPM for feral forms (for sure), and I assumed that it was changed for spells as well. I'm gonna leave PPM in for the next release, for the simple fact that it's today, but I'll check out my WWS and see which it seems to correspond to for me.

And with that:

WrathCalcsv1.2:

- Eclipse rotations are now fully modeled, including all permutations of DoTs. Finally.

- Fixed Kug's discovery with Solar Eclipse rotations (was off by one cell, stupid copy/paste)

- Includes new control for Moonfire during Eclipse. Setting this to single-refresh assumes a refresh at the end of Eclipse. Setting it to 100% uptime (which is a misnomer) will refresh Moonfire just before the ICD finishes as well. Setting it to single refresh will assume you have no MF up during Eclipse, but will have it up during the force-proc phase if you're aiming for Solar eclipses (among other, similar assumptions). Insect Swarm is always treated as two casts if enabled (and has, again, similar assumptions).

- Included support for Force of Nature and Starfall. Everyone's DPS should go up accordingly. Accordingly, modeled brambles as well.

- Added relevant 3.1 changes, including: 1% attribute buff per rank from iMotW, previously mentioned Spirit regen/Intensity changed (fixed a bug in this), and the new Starfall glyph.

v1.2 will be attached within a few minutes of this post.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Treants modeling seems very far from reality. With my settings (current armory gear, assuming all raid buffs) I get these numbers:

Brambles - 25906.84

No Brambles - 22527.69

The 1.15 factor is fine, the assumed damage for a cast is very far from any other scenarion than attacking a target dummy though. Are you considering the raidbuffs they will allways benefit from?

- Reduced armor.

- 10% AP

- 5% melee crit

- 3% crit

- 20% melee haste

- Str+Agi totem

Even before adding the buffs that requires some efford the assumed damage number is very far from reality.

------

I like the changes to the cycle, allthough I would not recommend people to blindly trust that clipping MF is better. The 1 moonfire pr rotation is coded to cast that MF at just about the worst time possible, normally the alternative to double MF with clipping will provide a pretty decent MF uptime during eclipse.

But for what its worth wrathcalc is still a very good tool if you understand how to use it - keep up the good work!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Treants modeling seems very far from reality. With my settings (current armory gear, assuming all raid buffs) I get these numbers:

Brambles - 25906.84

No Brambles - 22527.69

The 1.15 factor is fine, the assumed damage for a cast is very far from any other scenarion than attacking a target dummy though. Are you considering the raidbuffs they will allways benefit from?

- Reduced armor.

- 10% AP

- 5% melee crit

- 3% crit

- 20% melee haste

- Str+Agi totem

Even before adding the buffs that requires some efford the assumed damage number is very far from reality.

------

I like the changes to the cycle, allthough I would not recommend people to blindly trust that clipping MF is better. The 1 moonfire pr rotation is coded to cast that MF at just about the worst time possible, normally the alternative to double MF with clipping will provide a pretty decent MF uptime during eclipse.

But for what its worth wrathcalc is still a very good tool if you understand how to use it - keep up the good work!

I chose to put Single MF just as Eclipse runs out because it's usually when IS goes up. I could change it to just before ICD finishes, but there's a couple issues. First, you're going to have a long period of time when you technically could cast MF, and you aren't. It's gonna be odd-feeling in practice. Second, it gets messy as to whether MF will be up for the whole Eclipse duration, so accuracy goes down. I'm still debating changing it.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
I chose to put Single MF just as Eclipse runs out because it's usually when IS goes up. I could change it to just before ICD finishes, but there's a couple issues. First, you're going to have a long period of time when you technically could cast MF, and you aren't. It's gonna be odd-feeling in practice. Second, it gets messy as to whether MF will be up for the whole Eclipse duration, so accuracy goes down. I'm still debating changing it.

I posted in favor of delaying MF not too long ago. It's probably worth putting in some kind of first-order model for that.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

I understand why you opted to code it as you did -- Im checking that option as dot clipping is something im very much against. Let me explain how I apply MF.

- I'll never clip (unless im out of other cast options & moving)

- I'll never cast during Eclipse if I can still realistically land 1 more SF.

- Outside of Eclipce & during hidden CD ill refresh just after it drops off (Taking prio over IS if both drop at the same time).

- If it drops towards the end of hidden CD ill use it together with IS to easy the phase transition from SF into W spam.

- If it drops during W spam, my cycle will look like this :

a) W repeat.

b) W cast (SCT shows Nature's Grace)

c) W cast (allready queue'd)

d) MF (Too soon to know if the crit procced elipce or not)

e) Usually you know if Eclipse procced or not while waiting for GCD to clear -- If not theres two options, if c also resulted in a crit then I go SF, if not I go W again.

Using the above steps as an alternative to clipping towards the end of eclipse hidden CD will lower your eclipse proctime slightly on average, but has positive side effects aswell (Activating potion is easier during a GCD than after a W cast before SF // small position adjustment possible just before 15seconds of forced standing still).

Not really expecting you to model this, just my 2 cents to why Im against clipping (Even though the sheet shows me a slight dps gain for doing so). That the two options are so close dps-wise gives me a pretty good indication that the non-clip style is a better ingame approach, a side note is that it has better dpm aswell!

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Not looked at the new WC in too much detail yet, but at first glance upon putting my stats in, I noticed that marginal DPS value reported for Int is very high (0.73 DPS/Int). Something might be up here.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Not looked at the new WC in too much detail yet, but at first glance upon putting my stats in, I noticed that marginal DPS value reported for Int is very high (0.73 DPS/Int). Something might be up here.

Downloading 1.2, and just changing character-sheet Int by 1, I see the value of int jumps up and down substantially.

In Basic Calcs, C14 (Total Int), the formula is

"=FLOOR(big_long_expression,1)"

changing that to just

"=big_long_expression"

makes things smoother and reasonable (0.39 DPS/Int).

Spirit has a similar issue, same fix in Basic Calcs, C13.

Every other use of FLOOR in the spreadsheet seems to be associated with Mana, not Damage. I don't know if there may be similar problems with mana. I believe it is appropriate to measure spell costs with

FLOOR(pct_cost*base_mana*moonglow_reduction)

but regen talents (Intensity, etc) should probably use a floating-point result (and it appears they do).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Downloading 1.2, and just changing character-sheet Int by 1, I see the value of int jumps up and down substantially.

In Basic Calcs, C14 (Total Int), the formula is

"=FLOOR(big_long_expression,1)"

changing that to just

"=big_long_expression"

makes things smoother and reasonable (0.39 DPS/Int).

Spirit has a similar issue, same fix in Basic Calcs, C13.

Every other use of FLOOR in the spreadsheet seems to be associated with Mana, not Damage. I don't know if there may be similar problems with mana. I believe it is appropriate to measure spell costs with

FLOOR(pct_cost*base_mana*moonglow_reduction)

but regen talents (Intensity, etc) should probably use a floating-point result (and it appears they do).

Aye, I added the FLOOR calcs to attributes for 1.2 for accuracy, didn't even think about how it would change the scaling numbers. I don't think the added accuracy is worth the potential confusion, they'll come back out in the next revision.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Few things:

1) I saw you mentioned the lack of proper IFF support further up. This would be really useful - I'm in a raiding guild that insists that I keep Faerie Fire up on every boss. (Heck, the guild leader, who is currently inactive, would yell in vent if he saw it had fallen off.) This was no problem when I was tanking, but as boomkin it hurts. I'd like to make an argument against doing so, at least until 3.1 with the 5 minute FF hits, but I can't tell how bad it nerfs my DPS - if I wanted to add the affect of it in, where should I start?

2) While 99% of the time, single target DPS is all we care about, there are times when measuring AoE is useful. I see that Starfall damage is mixed into the rotation (damage changes as the talent is selected/deselected in 1.2, and the cooldown tab shows this), but it'd be interesting to add support for Hurricane. I can see this being useful for guilds struggling with Sarth+3, as well as any Ulduar AoE fights (I've not followed the Ulduar info closely enough). I may try to add this based off of your Starfall calculations.

3) I saw a comment earlier about you wanting to avoid entering pre-LG spellpower. That raises a question - do we enter humanoid or boomkin SP? Crit and haste are modified on a percentage basis, so I don't think that they would matter. I would have guessed that it would be boomkin SP, but I'm not sure. What I do find odd is that the LG field is modifying DPS, so it almost has to be pre-LG. The difference is much smaller than I'd have expected - about 7 DPS per point in the talent.

4) In OO.org 2.4 and 3.0, I get Err:522 in almost all DPS/MP5 calculation fields on the main page. This refers to circular references, and OO.org recommends turning on iteration options - doing so, however, just makes all DPS/MP5 values in this be zero. Excel Viewer 2003, however, is giving valid values and MUCH higher overall DPS. Looking at Erdluf's comment explains why. The bad news, however, is that even editing the spreadsheet in OO.org breaks it, causing Excel Viewer 2003 to spit out #VALUE? errors in these same fields and give the same low numbers that OO.org gives. Has anyone found a workaround for this, or am I going to just need to get Excel 2003 (at least to do the edits)? The document is in one of the older binary office formats, so I can't edit these values manually, either.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Few things:

1) I saw you mentioned the lack of proper IFF support further up. This would be really useful - I'm in a raiding guild that insists that I keep Faerie Fire up on every boss. (Heck, the guild leader, who is currently inactive, would yell in vent if he saw it had fallen off.) This was no problem when I was tanking, but as boomkin it hurts. I'd like to make an argument against doing so, at least until 3.1 with the 5 minute FF hits, but I can't tell how bad it nerfs my DPS - if I wanted to add the affect of it in, where should I start?

2) While 99% of the time, single target DPS is all we care about, there are times when measuring AoE is useful. I see that Starfall damage is mixed into the rotation (damage changes as the talent is selected/deselected in 1.2, and the cooldown tab shows this), but it'd be interesting to add support for Hurricane. I can see this being useful for guilds struggling with Sarth+3, as well as any Ulduar AoE fights (I've not followed the Ulduar info closely enough). I may try to add this based off of your Starfall calculations.

3) I saw a comment earlier about you wanting to avoid entering pre-LG spellpower. That raises a question - do we enter humanoid or boomkin SP? Crit and haste are modified on a percentage basis, so I don't think that they would matter. I would have guessed that it would be boomkin SP, but I'm not sure. What I do find odd is that the LG field is modifying DPS, so it almost has to be pre-LG. The difference is much smaller than I'd have expected - about 7 DPS per point in the talent.

4) In OO.org 2.4 and 3.0, I get Err:522 in almost all DPS/MP5 calculation fields on the main page. This refers to circular references, and OO.org recommends turning on iteration options - doing so, however, just makes all DPS/MP5 values in this be zero. Excel Viewer 2003, however, is giving valid values and MUCH higher overall DPS. Looking at Erdluf's comment explains why. The bad news, however, is that even editing the spreadsheet in OO.org breaks it, causing Excel Viewer 2003 to spit out #VALUE? errors in these same fields and give the same low numbers that OO.org gives. Has anyone found a workaround for this, or am I going to just need to get Excel 2003 (at least to do the edits)? The document is in one of the older binary office formats, so I can't edit these values manually, either.

iFF is one GCD every 40s or so, ~3.75% DPS loss just in time spent casting before Haste is factored in. If you wanted to be more specific with Eclipse rotations, you'd probably be putting it up in the post-Eclipse phase, so just subtract GCD+Latency from the post-Eclipse time field. I'll probably add in a FF field in the next version, with options for whether you, someone else, or no one is keeping up FF.

I'll also be fleshing out the AoE fields in DPET, I just need more solid data on the coefficients and such for Hurricane and Typhoon.

Enter your stats as you see them from the Armory in caster form. Everything else is taken care of.

I don't, nor do I plan to, support OOO.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Looking at the sheet, why is there no DPS contribution for Owlkin Frenzy? I see a lot of builds that do not have any points into this talent and it thought it would behoove me to put points toward a scalable % rather than dreamstate or +3% haste...

I just lvled to 80 still with my 2xT6 4xT5 and doing decent DPS, I believe, because of the T5 four set bonus. I will be running for T7 four set tonight, should get all pieces because my guild is offspecing them atm... but still just wondering about those three points. Thanks!

Lath

EDIT: Raid geared and buffed do I really need two in BoP (+4% spl hit)? thx again

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Looking at the sheet, why is there no DPS contribution for Owlkin Frenzy? I see a lot of builds that do not have any points into this talent and it thought it would behoove me to put points toward a scalable % rather than dreamstate or +3% haste...

I just lvled to 80 still with my 2xT6 4xT5 and doing decent DPS, I believe, because of the T5 four set bonus. I will be running for T7 four set tonight, should get all pieces because my guild is offspecing them atm... but still just wondering about those three points. Thanks!

Lath

EDIT: Raid geared and buffed do I really need two in BoP (+4% spl hit)? thx again

http://elitistjerks.com/f73/t37800-wrathcalcs_moonkin_dps_spreadsheet/p2/#post1053283

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

For contrast, imagine how nice a talent OF would be if the current content included Kil'Jaeden, M'uru, Twins, Kalecgos, and Illidan.

Well put

I guess I'm living in the past. I remember having to spam Wrath on Essence of Desire because that was the only way with my haste I could punch out another cast before getting tacked for the aura without getting pushback... I guess I'll spec brables and try trenets in my rotation as it seems to be the norm. And with aprox 20k damage per cast it seems to be worth it's weight for now.

I expect 3.1 or later to spec back to OF... it seems like a useful talent that, as stated before, it just not needed... yet.

Thanks much for the quick response, you sir, are a gentleman and a scholar.

-Lath

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

WCv1.3:

Added split between Reaction Time and Latency. Per Erd's testing in another thread, spellcasts bottom out at 1s+Latency, and Reaction Time is always applied. I haven't built the ISV fields for Reaction Time, but they should be similar to what latency used to be. Notice that the Latency field is now much less important, which should be true in most cases; if you're queueing correctly, Latency will only matter with spells close to the GCD.

Added other 3.1 changes, including the NG change, new IS coefficient, new Starfall cooldown and glyph change, T8-2 bonus (the option exists for T8-4, it isn't implemented yet). Did the minor bump to base damage of spells to coincide with leveling that Erd mentioned in the same thread as before. Mucked minorly with raid buffing (Added Fel Intelligence). I also made a consistency pass through most fields to make sure things were being calculated properly. Mostly, this meant MP5 calculations for most rotations got fixed, thought there were some other minor changes. Changed 1-MF rotation to place MF at the end of the ICD instead of the beginning.

[edit] Just as I finish uploading, GC strikes again! Per MMO-Champion BlueTracker - Vanquish the evil!--More Moonkin stuff, 1.3.1 increases the T8-2 bonus, which makes it pretty much on par with T7-4 (even a little better).

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Ah the main thing that's surprised me with the changes for 3.1 is how haste is now valued. it was from nearly being equal to spell power to being vastly weaker (from like 1.2 dps to .86 with my setup). hmm?

-- Love your work, thanks for the quality/excellence

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
WCv1.3:

Added split between Reaction Time and Latency. Per Erd's testing in another thread, spellcasts bottom out at 1s+Latency, and Reaction Time is always applied. I haven't built the ISV fields for Reaction Time, but they should be similar to what latency used to be. Notice that the Latency field is now much less important, which should be true in most cases; if you're queueing correctly, Latency will only matter with spells close to the GCD.

Added other 3.1 changes, including the NG change, new IS coefficient, new Starfall cooldown and glyph change, T8-2 bonus (the option exists for T8-4, it isn't implemented yet). Did the minor bump to base damage of spells to coincide with leveling that Erd mentioned in the same thread as before. Mucked minorly with raid buffing (Added Fel Intelligence). I also made a consistency pass through most fields to make sure things were being calculated properly. Mostly, this meant MP5 calculations for most rotations got fixed, thought there were some other minor changes. Changed 1-MF rotation to place MF at the end of the ICD instead of the beginning.

[edit] Just as I finish uploading, GC strikes again! Per MMO-Champion BlueTracker - Vanquish the evil!--More Moonkin stuff, 1.3.1 increases the T8-2 bonus, which makes it pretty much on par with T7-4 (even a little better).

I was looking at your latest version and noticed normalized values of SP, haste and crit (per pt) where unchanged for a Lunar eclipse rotation, while the values for a Solar eclipse rotation have changed. Below I copy/pasted from the spreadsheet using my current stats.

The World of Warcraft Armory

This example is for a Solar eclipse rotation


		                        	∆ DPS   Normilization per SP Pt.

[B]Spell Power[/B]	2222	2223		

5591.313	5591.313	5592.720	1.407	[B]1.000[/B]

[B]Haste[/B]	581	582		

5591.313	5591.313	5592.150	0.837	[B]0.595[/B]

[B]Crit Rating[/B]	472	473		

5591.313	5591.313	5592.195	0.883	[B]0.627[/B]
This example is for a Lunar Eclipse rotation:

                         	                ∆ DPS   Normilization per SP Pt.

[B]Spell Power[/B]	2222	2223		

5789.564	5789.564	5790.991	1.427	[B]1.000[/B]

[B]Haste[/B]	581	582		

5789.564	5789.564	5790.850	1.286	[B]0.901[/B]

[B]Crit Rating[/B]	472	473		

5789.564	5789.564	5790.391	0.827	[B]0.580[/B]
I was expecting to see a decrease in the gap between normalized Haste and Crit values using a Lunar eclipse rotation. This is a Lunar Eclipse rotation using version 1.1.4

			                        ∆ DPS	Normilization per SP Pt.

[B]Spell Power[/B]	2222	2223		

5056.983	5056.983	5058.273	1.290	[B]1.000[/B]

[B]Haste[/B]	581	582		

5056.983	5056.983	5058.149	1.166	[B]0.904[/B]

[B]Crit Rating[/B]	472	473		

5056.983	5056.983	5057.747	0.764	[B]0.592[/B]

As you can see, it appears the Haste/Crit gap has widened.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Hey Adoriele,

I just want to start out by saying I'm a big fan of your work. Thank you so much for the awesome spreadsheet and addon.

Anyway, I was wondering if you could clarify the reaction time and latency fields a little more for me. I've realized that these values have huge effects on the dps value of haste, so it is crucial that the spreadsheet accurately reflects my in game experience. Basically, my question is what's the best way to determine my reaction time and latency. However, I have some notes about my attempts to do this on my own:

-Entering in 0 for reaction time and my in game latency (taken from putting my mouse over the little menu button) doesn't seem to give accurate calculations. For example, I spammed wrath on a target dummy for something like 85 seconds was able to get off 72 of them. My tooltip cast time for wrath was 1.24 sec and NG was something like 1.01. My latency was 250 ms. Entering 0 for reaction time and 0.25 for latency led to your "WrathCalcs" section predicting a 1.25 sec avg cast time for all wrath casts (normal, NG'ed and avg). However, 85/72 = ~1.18. What this tells me is that more haste would still be effective in speeding up my wrath casts and should therefore be valued the way it is when I enter 0 for reaction time and 0 for latency.

In short, the way you calculate latency me be incorrect and what's a good method to find my reaction time?

P.S. When haste is "wrath capped", i.e. wrath is no longer benefiting from haste because of latency or reaction time, haste is valued only slightly above crit (0.64 compared to 0.59 dps). When uncapped, it can shoot up anywhere from 0.86 to 1.07 (compared to spell power being ~1.26). So I really need to know if I should treat haste as roughly equal to crit or as vastly superior to it!

Thanks in advance,

Himtaurgar from Tichondrius

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.