Jump to content


Photo

[MoP] Marksmanship Guide


  • Please log in to reply
51 replies to this topic

#21 Whitefyst

Whitefyst

    Great Tiger

  • Members
  • 771 posts

Posted 28 October 2012 - 10:41 AM

Steady Focus Duration Change from 10s to 20s on PTR

Concerning the change to SF proposed for 5.1, I will not complain about having the buff duration extended since it does provide MMs a little more flexibility in shot choices since we are not required to do as many SS pairs as previously; however, to be honest, I really do not see this change as much of a benefit, at least not currently.

Here are my thoughts on this change:

1) First, on average to balance focus, MMs still need to do at least 2 SSs per CS cycle. In the best case scenario during the Standard phase of an AS focus-dump cycle during a RF with doing only 2 SSs at 12.93% haste from gear without the T14 4P and 9.09% haste from gear with the T14 4P (which very few hunters if any can achieve currently), here is the focus cost in different scenarios:

Scenario|Focus Cost w/o T14 4P|Focus Cost w/ T14 4P
CS-SSx2-ASx6|-38|-40
CS-SSx2-ASx5-GT|-33|-35
CS-SSx2-ASx5-MMM AI|-18|-20
CS-SSx2-ASx5-DB*|-8|-10
CS-SSx2-ASx4-MMM AI-GT|-13|-15
CS-SSx2-ASx4-GT-DB|-3|-5
CS-SSx2-ASx4-MMM AI-DB*|+12|+10
CS-SSx2-ASx3-MMM AI-GT-DB*|+17|+15


*Note that at this haste level that DB should perform 10 attacks. Hence, it provides 50 focus over 15s. You can expect for about 6 of the DB attacks at most on a CS cycle if the DB was cast during the cycle. This is a benefit of 30 focus.

So even in this best case scenario (with not assuming that other haste effects are stacked on RF), most of the cases are still focus negative and require 2 SSs. The rare cases that do generate a positive amount of focus do not generate enough focus where an SS could be replaced with another AS, which requires 23.32 (amount of focus gained over a SS cast) + 20 (AS focus cost) - 43.32 focus. The best case of 17 focus gained when a MMM AI proc occurs and both GT and DB are available is less than 40% of the focus needed to do that substitition.

Furthermore, the focus gained on these cycles are needed to help balance the focus loss of other cycles, which it does not fully do requiring an extra SS about every third cycle.

Even with considering the case with additional haste on top of RF, 2 SSs are still required. Since the SS casts are already at the 1s GCD with RF, all BL does on top of RF is increase focus regen by 1.9 FPS. Thus, over a 9s CS cycle, another 17.1 focus is generated making the best case generate 34.1 focus, which is still too small to allow an AS for SS replacement since it is only 79% of the cost. Furthermore, this situation is moot anyway, since if you are stacking haste buffs on top of RF, you will want to be using AI as the focus dump instead of AS anyway, which requires a lot more than 2 SSs per CS cycle ( 4 to 5 actually) to counteract the larger AI focus cost.

So from the average CS cycle focus balancing point of view, the change has little impact for most of the fight. This applies to the CA phase too in which we use AI and need extra SSs to balance focus.

2) The is one on average situation though where these extended duration can possibly help currently - during the KS phase. Below is an updated version of the table with including cycles with 2 KSs (since you would normally shoot a pair). Note that at beast 2 KSs every 11s that some CS cycles would have no KSs and revert to those in 1).

Scenario|Focus Cost w/o T14 4P|Focus Cost w/ T14 4P
CS-SSx2-ASx4-KSx2|+2|0
CS-SSx2-ASx3-GT-KSx2|+7|+5
CS-SSx2-ASx3-MMM AI-KSx2|+22|+20
CS-SSx2-ASx3-DB*-KSx2|+32|+30
CS-SSx2-ASx2-MMM AI-GT-KSx2|+27|+25
CS-SSx2-ASx2-GT-DB-KSx2|+37|+35
CS-SSx2-ASx2-MMM AI-DB*-KSx2|+52|+50
CS-SSx2-AS-MMM AI-GT-DB*-KSx2|+57|+55


As can be seen, every one of these CS cycles is at least focus neutral, with most being way focus positive. In fact, the last 2 cycles are sufficiently focus positive where an SS can be replaced by another AS. Thus, the extension of the SF buff could possible allow for one to perform only 1 SS on some CS cycles during the KS phase when under the effects of RF and make up the focus loss on the cycles with the 2 SSs to maintain SF. In fact, it is even possible to perform no SSs on 1 of the cycles during a RF pair and make up for the focus loss on other cycles.

There are a few rubs to this though:
- You do not always have RF available during the KS phase.
- If RF is available during the KS phase, it only covers about 1.5 to 3 CS cycle depending on whether you have a single or RF pair available.
- As gear scales, AI should become increasingly better as a focus dump choice during RF (as opposed to the option choice with the T14 4P), making this situation moot.

3) The next consideration is whether this flexibility has any real benefits to shot order in the CS cycle.

For an AS focus dump cycle, where ASs are instant and only cost 20 focus each, it is not difficult at all to cast an SS pair and avoid focus capping in most situations. An SS pair gains about 46.64 focus over the cast for most cycles. Even with starting at 100 focus, casting a CS and an AS clears enough focus for an SS pair without overcapping in most situations. During a RF, an SS pair could cause a little overcapping if starting at 100 focus, but its not a concern if you are not near 100 focus and can be avoided by casting CS and 2 ASs before the SS pair.

The thing that complicates the situation and where the flexibility helps is the impacts to the rotation due to MMM AI procs and when abilties like DB, GT, and Readiness (which allows an extra DB and GT) come off CD. In the rare situation where many of these are available during a CS cycle, its nice to have the flexibility to shift where the SS pair occurs in the CS cycle or to even skip the SS pair one cycle every so often if trying to burn down a low health target (like the energy cores on Elegon).

For an AI focus dump cycle, the situation is a little different since AI costs 50 focus. With factoring in the regens over the cast time, an SS pair regens a little more than the focus cost of an AI. However, during a RF, which is when we usually cast AIs, the extra focus from RR results in AIs cost being less than 8 focus more than the focus regened from a single SS. If a single DB is active too, then an SS cast actually regens more focus than the cost of the AI cast where casting a single SS for each AI is sustainable during the DB.

4) The next consideration is how the increased flexibility can potentially help us reduce or prevent focus overcapping in real game play and let us use that focus instead to cast more ASs instead of SSs. There is definitely a possible DPS gain here; however, it is not much if at all. First, if doing things properly, you should ideally be wasting little to no focus. But then again, no one is perfect.

But with considering that an AS for SS substitution requires 43.32 focus, it requres a significant amount of overcapping having to previously been done to see any DPS improvements. With assuming that the increased flexibility does allow enough focus overcapping prevention to power an extra AS, the damage difference gained using the Max MM T14H DPS case is about 27K. Over a 5 min fight, this is only an 89 DPS improvement, which is only about a 0.08% DPS improvement.

5) The final consideration is how this change affects your ability to maintain the SF buff. For most players in most situations, maintaing the SF buff should not have been a problem. I know it usually was not for me since once I found the "rhythm" of the MM CS cycles, it was not hard to maintain usually.

However, if you are not paying enough attention, moving a lot, stunned/CCed at the wrong time, or trying to burn a target, it is easy to have the buff fall off, resulting in a DPS loss.

This change makes it a little easier to maintain the SF buff in game play situations.

However, it is a two-edged sword. This flexibility also reduces the "consistency" and rhythm in the MM CS cycles (since you are not required to perform a SS pair every CS cycle) where it is possible to actually end up losing the buff more often now if one is not careful.

6) Small possiblity for more MMM AI procs. The extended SF duration allows us to more often insert a MMM AI proc between SSs instead of waiting until after the SS pair. This results in additional SSs that can apply to a new MMM AI proc instead of being cast when MMM AI is already fully stacked.

Similarly, abilities coming off of short CDs, like KS, GT, and DB, no longer have to wait for an SS pair to complete every cycle. If there is still plenty of time on SF, we can insert one of these shots between SSs if they have come off CD. In rare cases, this lack of delay could possibly result in an extra one of these shots, but it is doubtful.

Summary:

The extension of SF duration from 10s to 20s is a quality of life change and not an overall DPS change. Over the course of the fight, we still have to cast the same number of SSs to provide the focus gains to power our focus costing abilities. The main benefit of the extended duration is a little more flexibility in our shot selection. We can better adjust our shot order to accomodate boss strategies, such as having a short burn stage with limited SSs. Another quality of life benefit is that it makes maintaining the SF buff in real game play easier to do. The only potential DPS benefit of the change is the shifting of shots may prevent a little focus overcapping for potentially a very minor DPS improvement.

FD Analysis:

Since the FD "Enable Public Test Realm Changes" Setting incorporates the extended duration of the SF buff, we are able to simulate the effect to the MM rotation. I did a before and after simulation using the MM Max DPS case for the T14H gear.

FD actually simulated the extended SF buff case as a 171 DPS loss. This DPS loss is due to shot shifting in the case.

Looking more closely at the shot numbers, here are the differences:
- CS -1
- AS +3
- SS -3
- Auto -3
- WQ -1

The loss of the CS is due to shot shifting due to focus levels at the time of the CS cast requiring an SS to get enough focus. This resulted in more focus later for more ASs instead of SSs. If the CS was not lost due to shot shifting, 2 of the 3 AS for SS replacements would not have occurred, leaving only the one AS for SS substitution.

Looking at the extended SF case, of the 45 CSs, 27 (60%) of the CSs had an SS pair to refresh SF before it and 18 (40%) of the CSs did not. The situations in which the SS pair was skipped include:
- Inserting an instant that has come off CD.
- Performng the MMM AI proc immediately after proc on the first SS instead of waiting until after the pair.
- Better focus balancing
- Use of Readiness resulted in a lot of instant cast abilities to be available.
- A RF supporting a lot of ASs

These results basically verify my analysis that the change is a quality of life improvement but not really a DPS improvement.

#22 wilegenuis

wilegenuis

    Von Kaiser

  • Members
  • 49 posts

Posted 29 October 2012 - 11:00 PM

I agree that the change of doubling the SF duration is quality of life improvement from the theoretically POV, but the hunters that still plays MM (we are so few based on raidbots) wonder if this change will make MM a valid spec once again, the reason why MM is so lame is that with all the extra focus changes, MM biggest issue is over-focus. The duration it takes to generate SF every 10 sec cause us to waste signature shots/new toys for 2 X SS is various non-optimal situations (and more when we will have T14 4pcs).
With this change the cases where you have 80% focus and SF is down will be less frequent and raidbot will show after 5.1 the MM as a valid spec once again

#23 Whitefyst

Whitefyst

    Great Tiger

  • Members
  • 771 posts

Posted 30 October 2012 - 05:21 PM

I had not thought of that perspective.

My analysis was with assuming that you were choosing to keep 100% SF uptime currently. If you were, then the SF duration change would not affect you too much but would provide more flexibility.

However, if you are currently choosing to (or being forced to) have the SF buff drop off in certain situations, then I can see how the extended duration would be a DPS gain since you will now have greater SF uptime while still making the same choices.

Having the longer SF duration will indeed help make it easier for MMs to better perform closer to their maximum DPS potential. However, it will not increase their maximum DPS potential by much, which means that MMs will still be well behind BMs.

#24 Whitefyst

Whitefyst

    Great Tiger

  • Members
  • 771 posts

Posted 03 November 2012 - 08:23 PM

On the PTR, it looks like they are looking to return Careful Aim back to is applicability to boss health > 80%, which basically doubles the duration of this huge beneficial period.

Although this is a buff for MM hunters, it is not that big of a buff. Using the Max MM DPS case in FD and increasing the duration of the CA period from 10% to 20%, it is only a 1134 DPS increase or about a 1.07% increase for a 7.5 min fight. Part of the problem is that a lot of the CA period was unhasted. For a shorter fight where more of the CA period is unhasted the benefit would be larger. For a 5 min fight, the increase was 1511 DPS or 1.4%.

My initial reaction was to state that MMs would get further benefit to make sure that the whole CA is under dynamic haste effects if possible. For instance for the 5 min fight, with starting BL at 20s so that it will cover the last 40s of the 1 min CA period (with RF covering the first 30s with some overlap), I thought there would be further benefits. But I was wrong. FD showed that doing this is a 928 DPS decrease due to the still relative weakness of AI and with it still requiring too low of a cast time to make it most benefical.

#25 wilegenuis

wilegenuis

    Von Kaiser

  • Members
  • 49 posts

Posted 03 November 2012 - 09:09 PM

I'm toying with the option that 5.1 will make the Glyph of Aimed Shot a valid selection for a major Glyph. We will be using the AI for a longer period in 5.1 with the extended CA phase, Bloodlust, Rapid Fire, trinket haste buff and raid specific haste scenarios. Our of the 7 minutes of a raid, we use the AI as the main focus dump for (CA ~ 84 sec , Bloodlust - 30 sec, , Rapid Fire 2 X 15 sec) 2:40 mins. There is no way to theoretically say how many AI will we miss due to movement and therocrafters would claim that with proper movement planning no AI should be interrupted.
The current alternatives for Major Glyph are not very attractive and focus of survivability over damage, MfD is a must for multi target fights, Animal Bond is life saver, but I think that the AI Glyph can replace in 5.1 the Deterrence Glyph unless until you are a Zen master hunter that can plan his moves and avoid any AI interrupt

#26 Neruse

Neruse

    Piston Honda

  • Members
  • 157 posts

Posted 03 November 2012 - 09:19 PM

I'm toying with the option that 5.1 will make the Glyph of Aimed Shot a valid selection for a major Glyph. We will be using the AI for a longer period in 5.1 with the extended CA phase, Bloodlust, Rapid Fire and raid specific haste scenarios. Our of the 7 minutes of a raid, we use the AI as the main focus dump for (CA ~ 84 sec , Bloodlust - 30 sec, , Rapid Fire 2 X 15 sec) 2:40 mins. There is no way to theoretically say how many AI will we miss due to movement and therocrafters would claim that with proper movement planning no AI should be interrupted.
The current alternatives for Major Glyph are not very attractive and focus of survivability over damage, MfD is a must for multi target fights, Animal Bond is life saver, but I think that the AI Glyph can replace in 5.1 the Deterrence Glyph unless until you are a Zen master hunter that can plan his moves and avoid any AI interrupt


It's a dps loss to cast Aimed <80% with BL or RF. It takes <1.4s Aimed cast time just to break even and that requires double stacking haste cooldowns. The glyph will be situational and only be worth taking if movement is possible in the CA phase.

#27 Whitefyst

Whitefyst

    Great Tiger

  • Members
  • 771 posts

Posted 04 November 2012 - 02:01 PM

To provide some more points over what Neruse stated, my default 3rd glyph of choice is still Deterrence since so far there are plenty of progression fights where I have found the need to use Deterrence to either improve survivability, especially when healer CDs are on CD, and/or healer resources.

Also, just because the CA phase got extended does not make the AI glyph that much better. Even if assuming that you are moving the whole CA phase, the glyph is only really useful when you are under large dynamic haste effect since that is where it is really worth casting AI over AS. When you are in the CA phase unhasted, which is more likely now with the extended duration, having to replace an AI with ASs due to moving is not really that big of a deal currently. (It may be in later raid tiers but not in T14, and especially not where we currently are in T14 gearing.)

The AI glyph is an option but only in the correct situations. These are the situations where you do not need the Deterrence glyph or other survivability options like the CS glyph to help the boss fight to be successful and where you think you will need to move a lot while casting AI.

#28 Whitefyst

Whitefyst

    Great Tiger

  • Members
  • 771 posts

Posted 12 November 2012 - 09:03 PM

As a reminder to folks, although I may list a certain spec to be used generally, there are definitely situations where alternative choices may be better.

For instance, for the last couple weeks on Will of the Emperor, I have specced into Narrow Escape and Binding Shot to help with add control. I have been pleasantly surprised on how well both talents help on this fight to control the Rages and reduce the amount of damage that they do.

#29 wilegenuis

wilegenuis

    Von Kaiser

  • Members
  • 49 posts

Posted 13 November 2012 - 01:56 PM

I’m far from describing myself as OP hunter (playing MM somehow say it), but I’m trying to understand how 5.1 theoretical minor changes will have impact of real game play of MM hunter. Currently there is no accurate data as most hunter population stopped playing MM due to the raid phrase data that showed that MM are not compatible spec. I know that doing the math only based on my hunter performance is misleading, but I see myself as above average hunter playing in above average guild.
Based on the WOL data of my guild [5/16 norm atm] I’ve uptime of SF is 82% of the raid duration. I assume that the double duration of SF will allow me to increase the SF up time to 95% of the time (there are rare cases when you are frozen or have to kit adds so it will not be always 100%)
That’s bring me to additional 15% attack speed for 13% of the fight duration (+some additional extra focus). With my current gear and based on FD, 15% attack speed for 13% of the fight duration provides me extra 640 DPS. For that we need to add the 1134 DPS that extending CA period provides and the tiny DPS gain for MM from buffing the wild quiver (+360 DPS) I see a real increase of over 2K DPS (3.5% in my case).
3.5% DPS gain is a major gain, but the bigger factor is that playing MM will become damn easier to play than before and keeping SF will become child play, therefore I see the MM spec back on the raidbots charts as 5.1 shines

#30 Whitefyst

Whitefyst

    Great Tiger

  • Members
  • 771 posts

Posted 13 November 2012 - 04:09 PM

Another factor that you left out is that increased SF uptime is also increased focus since SS casts with SF up gain 3 more focus. The focus gains from the improvement will not be large, but it should be enough to be able to cast an additional AS or two instead of SSs.

I definitely agree that playing MM will be easier in 5.1 but I do want to caveat the situation some. For end game players with the T14 4P, I believe that MM will become a viable option since only 9.09% Haste from gear is needed for a tight 3 SS CS cycle (which is the most frequent number of SSs that MMs need to perform to balance focus). However, for those behind the gear curve, I still do not think that MM will be a viable option for them yet since the max MM DPS case is so dependent on both haste and crit and is not a viable option until sufficient gear is acheived. Also, until sufficient gear is achieved, AI is relatively weak.

I am thinking that MM will become even more viable of an option as gear scales since AI should start hitting harder relatively and making the haste plateau on top of the hit and exp caps will be easier and easier to achieve while still being able to load up on crit.

#31 wilegenuis

wilegenuis

    Von Kaiser

  • Members
  • 49 posts

Posted 28 November 2012 - 10:20 PM

Despite the theorycrafting pre-analysis I can report that 5.1 did a massive DPS gain for me in MOP raids. For sure the data collected by one hunter during single raid night does not represent the entire MM population. The bow upgrade and the blue upgrades also does not help to have apples to apples comparison. I've compared my DPS on 2 fights that I've done last week and this week on norm HoF's Zor'lok and Ta'yak. Both were done on MM spec with the same guild group. Same glyph, talents, pet, full raid buffs were used in both evenings.
Zor'lok, last week (pre 5.1) 55K, this week (post 5.1) 61K --> +11%
Ta'yak, last week (pre 5.1) 59K, this week (post 5.1) 65K --> +10%
It is hard to say which element provides the biggest buff as MM got so much love, CA extension, SS on the move, AotIH surprising last minute buff, item (epic and blue) upgrades. But for me it was clear that the SF duration double made the twist. It now never drops and does not require the massive attention it used before.
One buff that seems to be left outside of the official patch was the buff that was mentioned few weeks ago about buffing and changing the damage type of wild quiver (80%-->100%), it is fine, MM got tons of other love

#32 Whitefyst

Whitefyst

    Great Tiger

  • Members
  • 771 posts

Posted 29 November 2012 - 05:39 PM

Despite the theorycrafting pre-analysis I can report that 5.1 did a massive DPS gain for me in MOP raids. For sure the data collected by one hunter during single raid night does not represent the entire MM population. The bow upgrade and the blue upgrades also does not help to have apples to apples comparison. I've compared my DPS on 2 fights that I've done last week and this week on norm HoF's Zor'lok and Ta'yak. Both were done on MM spec with the same guild group. Same glyph, talents, pet, full raid buffs were used in both evenings.
Zor'lok, last week (pre 5.1) 55K, this week (post 5.1) 61K --> +11%
Ta'yak, last week (pre 5.1) 59K, this week (post 5.1) 65K --> +10%
It is hard to say which element provides the biggest buff as MM got so much love, CA extension, SS on the move, AotIH surprising last minute buff, item (epic and blue) upgrades. But for me it was clear that the SF duration double made the twist. It now never drops and does not require the massive attention it used before.
One buff that seems to be left outside of the official patch was the buff that was mentioned few weeks ago about buffing and changing the damage type of wild quiver (80%-->100%), it is fine, MM got tons of other love


First, when I talked previously about the benefits of the changes for MM (not including the steal AotH buff), I was referring to how it affects that maximum potential DPS mostly and not actual DPS outputs.
- The buff to SF duration should have no to little impact on maximum theoretical DPS. However, it can have an impact to actual DPS depending on how well (or poorly) you previously maintained the SF buff to how well (or poorly) you maintain it now.
- The buff to the duration of the CA phase is definitely a DPS gain to the MM potential. Howeverm the gain is not twice that of the difference of the DPS gain of the old CA phase compared to the old non-CA phase since the extended CA duration is less likely to be hasted or to have buffs from trinket procs.
- The change to be able to perform SS on the move has no impact to maximum potential DPS but can improve your actual DOPS depending on how much movement their is on a fight and on how well you were previously able to manage having focus pooled to use instants while moving.
- The new Aimed SHot glyph also does not impact maximum potential DPS. It can increase actual DPS if having to move during the CA phase; however, I do not recommend the glyph in most cases since it applies to only over 20% of teh fight current and only if having to move a lot over that period.
- I did not discuss the LR change since it is not currently a recommended talent for MM.

Second, you really cannot directly compare the DPS between before and after to see how well the MM changes benefited us. The AotH buff providing 5% more AP (which is multiplicative in effect) and the increased DPS due to item improvements to your gear, especially your ranged weapon, makes it that you are comparing apples to oranges.

Using the max case in FD, the new maximum potential DPS with the same gear is 109977, which is an increase of 3608 DPS or 3.4%. Of the 3608 increase, I can somehwat isolate the increase in the CA phase duration to be +883 DPS, but some of that increase is due to the AotH buff. Doing a double upgrade on the range weapon only is a 3512 DPS increase. Hence, most of the DPS increase you are seeing is from the AotH buff and the upgraded gear. The increased SF uptime is a DPS gain, but should not be a gain of a large amount of DPS, unless you had really poor SF uptime before.

#33 Whitefyst

Whitefyst

    Great Tiger

  • Members
  • 771 posts

Posted 03 December 2012 - 08:06 PM

Just wanted to add some quick thoughts on how the SrS buff (doubling its tick damage) benefits MM.

1) Using SrS and CS was already recommended during the CA phase. It is even more recommended now. By itself, SrS does almost half the damage of a AI crit with including the PS effect and costs 30% of the focus while being instant cast. Hence, add in the CS damage with including the PS effect and the extra WQ and auto damage, and it is not even close.

2) The SrS damage buff makes multidoting more profitable for MMs. A SrS that runs to duration is about 2.16 times the damage of an AS according to FD. Even with factoring in that the secondary targets probably have no debuffs on them, FD still shows that SrS on a secondary target is 1.97 times the damage of an AS on the primary, fully debuffed target. With both being instant cast shots and SrS costing 5 less focus now than AS, it is now usually even more profitable to toss a SrS on a secondary target in place of an AS on the primary if you can do so without interrupting your rotation much on the primary target (e.g., using mouseover macros).

3) The next question is when to multidot and when to AoE. We know that MS beats out AS on 3 or more targets. On a single target with including the WQ effects, SrS does 110K to about 30K for MS. Hence, its beneficial to multidot instead of AoE on up to 3 targets, which is the cut off for AoEing already. Thus, if there are 1 or 2 secondary targets, the recommendation is to multidot the secondary targets with maintaining the single rotation on the primary target, unless the boss strat requires full focus on the primary target or if their is no benefit to damaging the secondary target.

#34 wilegenuis

wilegenuis

    Von Kaiser

  • Members
  • 49 posts

Posted 21 December 2012 - 09:21 PM

While pew pewing Wind Lord Mal'jarak I wondered if the AOE rotation for this specific fight is optimal, this fight is unique in the sense it is you have a 2.5 minute period that most of your activities are 100% AOE damage (I didn't have any CC role in our 10 man combo).
Looking at the MM WOL top ranking hunters for this fight I noticed that there were various options, one option was to totally ignore the use of Explosive Trap and Barrage in this fight. Another way was to ignore the use of Glaive Toss. I can only assume that TotH was use in by all top ranked hunters
Based on WF guide for AOE most abilities should be used as part of the fight (KS, RF, SF, MoC, DB, GT, Readiness, Stampede, ET, MS) I wonder if the use of all such single target abilities as part of a long AOE fight is not a waste of too many GCDs and it is better to select a sub-set of AOE abilities for such a unique fight?
Also for such long and multiple target AOE fight, do you think that GT or Barrage would generate better DPS?

#35 Nooska

Nooska

    King Hippo

  • Members
  • 540 posts

Posted 22 December 2012 - 10:08 AM

While there is an extended period of AoE inthat encounter, remember that it is not indiscriminate aoe. While you want to output as much damage as possible overall, you also want to be able to focus your damage. MoC on 2 menders for example is better than MoC, wait 30 seconds, MoC.

#36 TheRazorsEdge

TheRazorsEdge

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 4 posts

Posted 24 December 2012 - 07:17 AM

Wind Lord is as close as you get to a pure AoE phase.

Dumping Dire Beast for more focus via either Fervor or TotH seems reasonable. They are all fairly close on one target, and Fervor/TotH will be substantially better on multiple targets.

Assuming Whitefyst's 30K per target for Multishot averages crit/WQ to get that figure, MoC is still more DPCT and thus very likely worthwhile---especially given that you want to focus damage on one set of adds. If you CC more than 2 adds, it should definitely be more damage per focus.

Having said that, however, SV is far better in P1. There just aren't enough stats on gear for MM AoE to really shine. Maybe in the next tier higher weapon DPS and mastery will help.

#37 Whitefyst

Whitefyst

    Great Tiger

  • Members
  • 771 posts

Posted 29 December 2012 - 03:56 PM

Yes, my MS numbers averages in crit and WQ. The crit is averaged in by FD already in the average damage and I manually calculate the expected WQ damage per target per shot.

And I agree that SV does more AoE damage than MM currently, mostly due to the Serpent Spread damage.

Concerning the single target abilities used in AoE;
- RF: Unless you need to save it for something later, RF is an awesome AoE burst. You should use it in long AoEs.
- Readiness: It is useful in AoE situations mostly for the extra RF, but the extra damage from other CDs is also good.
- Stampede: If its worthwhile to use your RF/Readiness, then it is worthwhile to use your Stampede as well, especially if you have a primary target that you want to get down faster than the general AoE, which you do on Windlord.
- ET: My belief is that you want to use ET on CD. It does a lot of DPS in large AoE packs and only costs 10 focus every 30s. I suggest only forgoing ET if the AoE pack is small.
- DB: DB is a large amount of damage, especially when hasted by RF, on the primary target while also generating enough additional focus for more MSs
- GT: Does a large amount of AoE damage for only 15 focus.
- MoC: As Soulgin stated, MoC does great damage per GCD on the primary target and is good for AoE in general, but great in Windlord where bringing down the primary target faster actually kills 3 targets. Also with Readiness, as he stated you can place MoC on 2 targets.
- SF: With the 20s duration now, I see no reason not to maintain it over the AoE once you done your initial focus depletion, which is usually done under RF, and need to cast a couple SSs to regain focus. It is not necessary to have 100% uptime, but you generally deplete your focus, then you should have plenty of opportunities to refresh it. One benefit is increased autoshot and WQ damage on the primary target. The primary benefit is that when you cast SSs to regain focus, you get 3 extra focus per cast and each cast takes less time, meaning that you have to spend less GCDs of SS during the long AoE and more GCDs on higher damage abilities.
- KS: Generally, KS does not buy its way 100% onto AoE fights with the exception being when you have a primary target you want to finish off fast or where the number of remaining targets is small enough where the KS damage and focus savings outweighs the MS or other abilitiy damage.

#38 wilegenuis

wilegenuis

    Von Kaiser

  • Members
  • 49 posts

Posted 23 January 2013 - 03:07 PM

It seems that Bliz got a quest in life to push more and more hunters back to the warm hug of MM, but the hunter community refuse to go to this direction and leave small population of MM around. Patch 5.2 is no different: AI duration is getting shorter, Glyph of Aimed Shot can be used instead of MfD that is cancelled, and based on GC last post AI will also trigger the 4PCS buff.
I didn’t see DPS analyze of these changes and the comparison between specs and I didn’t see if AI will become part of out standard rotation yet but I've this feeling that unless MM will gain a clear advantage, most hunters will stay as BM and SV. It is kind of pity to get ranked on WOL every time as MM, but no one said MM life is easy. Do you see any change in 5.2?

#39 Whitefyst

Whitefyst

    Great Tiger

  • Members
  • 771 posts

Posted 24 January 2013 - 06:43 AM

It seems that Bliz got a quest in life to push more and more hunters back to the warm hug of MM, but the hunter community refuse to go to this direction and leave small population of MM around. Patch 5.2 is no different: AI duration is getting shorter, Glyph of Aimed Shot can be used instead of MfD that is cancelled, and based on GC last post AI will also trigger the 4PCS buff.
I didn’t see DPS analyze of these changes and the comparison between specs and I didn’t see if AI will become part of out standard rotation yet but I've this feeling that unless MM will gain a clear advantage, most hunters will stay as BM and SV. It is kind of pity to get ranked on WOL every time as MM, but no one said MM life is easy. Do you see any change in 5.2?


Sorry, I have not said anything yet, but I usually do not get too excited about proposed changes on PTR until they have been out there for a while or unless we are close to the patch and have a good idea the change willl exist in the patch. However, I did talk a little about the change in the Simple Question forum since a direct question was asked.

Since the change is still preliminary in my mind, I have not done a detailed analysis yet, but here is what I think about the proposed change of reducing the base cast time of AI from 2.9s to 2.5s. Currently in T14 gear, the cut off where casting AI instead of AS as the focus dump is worthwhile is around 1.3 to 1.4s cast time. I still need to evaluate when we get closer to the patch and see the gear whether the cut off point will be the same. I am hoping that with AI scaling realtive to AS that it will become a little higher.

Even is the cut off point for using AI does not increase, the reduced AI cast time appears like it will make AI both more usuable and usable more often. Below is a table of haste levels needed to make the cutoff points under different scenarios.

Haste from gear needed to meet AI use points with a 2.5s AI base cast time
Scenario|1.4s|1.3s
T14 4P Unhasted|29.87%|39.86%
T14 4P BL|0%|7.58%
T14 4P RF|0%|0%
Unhasted|41.16%|52.02%
BL|8.59%|16.94%
RF|0.83%|8.59%


As can be seen, while we still have the T14 4P and using the recommended at least 9.09% haste from gear, using AI as the focus dump is beneficial now not only just during RFs in the CA phase, but during all RFs and even BL. Note that during BL that the AI cast is already below the 1.4s cut off without any haste from gear at 1.398s. The AI cast time is naturally below the 1.3s cut off during RF without any haste from gear.

Once we lose the T14 4P, more haste is required to make using AI an option; however, with the at least 9.09% haste from gear, AI is recommended for use during any RF since the cast time will be below 1.3s and is probably worthwhile to use during BL since the cast time is below 1.4s. I assume that with gear scaling that the cut off will rise a little and be closer or over 1.4s, such that it will be beneficial to use AI during BL outside the CA phase.

What still needs to be evaluated is whether it is still maximum DPS for MMs to stack both RF and BL during the CA phase or whether it is better to have BL outside the CA phase to allow more AIs. I am anticipating that still stacking them during the CA phase will be best, but I am not certain on that.

Regardless, this change will make it worthwhile to cast AI more often. It helps that the T15 4P will proc off either of the MM focus dumps. If we are using AI more often, then I agree its beneficial to use the AI glyph in most situations.

#40 Whitefyst

Whitefyst

    Great Tiger

  • Members
  • 771 posts

Posted 28 January 2013 - 12:02 AM

Just to make sure since I didn't see it mentioned in the post, do these numbers include the 10% ranged haste buff?


Of course, these numbers include both the 10% raid buff and the pertinent SF buff (15% or 25% with T14 4P) as well as the major dynamic haste effects (RF and/or BL). These would not be good indications of required haste from gear otherwise. It is also very easy to verify the math yourself. For instance:

2.5 (base AI cast time) / 1.1 (10% haste raid buff) / 1.25 (SF buff with T14 4P) / 1.4 (desired AI cast time) = 1.2987 or 29.87% haste from gear




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users