Jump to content


Photo

Pawn Values for all Specs: Updated to 3.3


  • Please log in to reply
149 replies to this topic

#1 frmorrison

frmorrison

    Protector

  • Allied Members
  • 11,427 posts

Posted 23 November 2008 - 07:31 PM

It is best to create your own stat weights, but mine are listed for reference. The original idea is flawed as least without giving context, such as this is for 245 gear, this is for 258 gear, etc. I am not going to update this again.

The mod Pawn allows you to enter values for each stat so that you can compare items quickly.

Note, these values change as gear is updated, but it is at a decent approximation of the value of each item. Rawr/Spreadsheets/Experience are superior sources of your personal stat weights. This values were created for 258 gear levels.

Copy the below strings and then use the import function of Pawn if you wish to use these values.

My personal Retribution Paladin values:
( Pawn: v1: "Ret PvE": ArmorPenetration=0.86, CritRating=1.17, Dps=6.15, Strength=2.1, Agility=1.13, ExpertiseRating=1.5, HasteRating=1.13, HitRating=2.2, Ap=0.82, MetaSocket=107, RedSocket=37, YellowSocket=35, BlueSocket=34)

My personal Holy Paladin numbers:
( Pawn: v1: "Holy": Intellect=2.7, RedSocket=33, CritRating=0.8, MetaSocket=155, HasteRating=1.4, BlueSocket=24, SpellPower=1, Mp5=2.4, YellowSocket=30 )

My personal Protection Paladin numbers:
( Pawn: v1: "Prot": Strength=0.3, DefenseRating=0.9, Stamina=1.5, DodgeRating=0.9, ParryRating=0.85, Agility=0.95, BlockRating=0.4, ExpertiseRating=0.5, BlockValue=0.3, HitRating=0.5, Armor=0.12)

Wowhead link to gear using the Protection string: Items - World of Warcraft

#2 gezmodean

gezmodean

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 9 posts

Posted 23 November 2008 - 08:26 PM

First of all, thank you for creating the thread. I'm sure that we can collectively construct some useful strings.

As the OP stated, these values change as the gear itself changes, but it does help approximate the value. Another couple of 'rules' to remember:

1. Each rating is relative only to itself.


Some pawn users assume that if they have two strings, that the rating that has the higher value is what the gear is better for. This is NOT the case. You should only use a rating to compare two items together, rather than using ratings to determine what an item is better for. (Note: This rule can be counterfeit, but that requires balancing points, something I'll get to later)

2. A rating that gives you numbers in the 100's is no better or worse than one that gives you points in the 10,000's

Remember, this is a relative comparison tool. So 900 - 1000 may be better than 90,000 to 95,000.

3. Pawn doesn't account for everything

The original poster mentioned raid buffs and gear changing. Talents factor in here as well. These are static values to help determine relative value, but raid buffs, talent changes, and changes from blizzard will affect the relative value of these statistics, so these strings will more than likely be dynamic.

Given that, I will try to present equivalence for ret and holy. If we have a prot pally with some experience, or even a strong spreadsheet, we can build those strings as well.

Looking forward to the discussion, and once again, thanks for making the thread.

#3 gezmodean

gezmodean

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 9 posts

Posted 24 November 2008 - 04:55 AM

FRMorrison's strings are up to date, and mine were drawing confusion. Removing the post.

#4 gezmodean

gezmodean

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 9 posts

Posted 24 November 2008 - 05:06 AM

Socket valuation is an interesting beast. First, from the technical side, as to whether or not Pawn accounts correctly, and second, providing an equivalence value.

First, the standing question is, does Pawn give the value for a socket whether or not it is filled ? If it is filled, this would introduce an interesting error, where a socket is 'double counted' (once for the socket itself, and once for the gem that the socket is filled with).

This is less of a problem in terms of evaluating new gear, but is a problem when comparing it with 'used gear'. I will attempt to evaluate this with some throw-away gear over the next couple of days, but if anyone has something they can run a quick test with, I would appreciate this data.

Second, with regard to valuing the sockets, I currently weight them with the value of the gems I would place in them. I am curious if anyone weights them a different way, perhaps in a more general fashion.

#5 sag_ich_nicht

sag_ich_nicht

    Von Kaiser

  • Members
  • 30 posts

Posted 24 November 2008 - 07:01 AM

( Pawn: v1: "Redcape DPS - SoB": ArmorPenetration=37.34, CritRating=73.56, Dps=528.1, Strength=168.09, Agility=69.6, HasteRating=41.78, ExpertiseRating=41.78, SpellPower=21.95, HitRating=126.59, Ap=66.36 )

I'm afraid there's an error in this one, this should be:

( Pawn: v1: "Seal of Blood": ArmorPenetration=37.34, CritRating=73.56, Dps=528.1, Strength=168.09, Agility=69.6, ExpertiseRating=79.55, HasteRating=41.78, SpellPower=21.95, HitRating=126.59, Ap=66.36 )

#6 gezmodean

gezmodean

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 9 posts

Posted 24 November 2008 - 07:16 AM

Nice catch sag. Updated.

#7 frmorrison

frmorrison

    Protector

  • Allied Members
  • 11,427 posts

Posted 24 November 2008 - 04:13 PM

Second, with regard to valuing the sockets, I currently weight them with the value of the gems I would place in them. I am curious if anyone weights them a different way, perhaps in a more general fashion.


That is how I value sockets, I add up the value (from the string) of the gem I would use for that socket. It is just a weaker approximation, since it doesn't account for socket bonuses and times you don't follow the socket color.

#8 Guest_Alarius_*

Guest_Alarius_*
  • Guests

Posted 24 November 2008 - 05:06 PM

I've been using Pawn for a little while now with just some arbitrary weights gathered from here and Wowhead.

One thing I'm concerned of is my usage of it. Right now I use three different scales, one for each talent tree and their respective uses (healing, tanking, dps). I'm primarily retribution specced for PVP but I've been levelling up and collecting gear based off of Redcape's Ret values which are weighted for raid DPS if I'm not mistaken. Is this the way to go or what? I don't cross compare my values across other scales, so when determining if an item is an upgrade I always compare using the same scale for what I plan on using it in.

Please correct me if I am wrong or if I should re-evaluate my scales. And I assume re-evaluating the scales would require knowledge of what I plan on doing with my Pally once I hit 80. What would be best for a mix of mainly PVP with casual PVE raiding? What would be best for soloing when someone isn't fully raid buffed? I suppose those are the questions that are fogged in my mind.



Edit: Also, some Prot values were posted recently on the Wowhead theorycrafting forum, Stat Weighting Suggestions (WotLK) - Theorycrafting - Wowhead Forums

The protection paladin weights are way off as of patch 3.0.2, which re-prioritized strength (and AP) over spell damage. Additionally, I'd argue that ATM defense should be prioritized a bit more highly since it help with reaching uncrittable, which will be a big deal when hitting level 80. The current values tend to give a lot of healing gear, which isn't really what paladins will want for tanking.

I'd suggest something like the following weights:

Armor - Items - World of Warcraft

The exact weights will vary slightly, but the following general ideas hold true:

1) Defense is still very important, as is stamina. You need to hit 540 defense and push stamina after that.
2) Agility is almost as good as dodge rating; you need 52 agi or 45 dodge to get 1%.
3) Parry is slightly better than it used to be in that it is in a separate DR bin from dodge; I'd guess that this would kick in around 5-6% dodge from items (15% base from anticipation + 540 defense)
4) Strength is a go-to stat; it increases AP and block value, making it very good for threat plus providing additional mitigation.
5) Shield Block Rating is only useful until you hit the "unhittable" mark, at which point it is 100% wasted.
6) Expertise is better than hit rating, because you're probably standing in front of the boss.
7) Resilience is not great because it provides no avoidance, but it lets you get some extra stamina or threat stat points on the item by lowering your defense cap, so there's a small weight for that stat.

When I'm programming at work, I tend to prefer to iterate on a problem until I find an acceptable solution. In that spirit, I think these weightings are a lot better than the current ones, and should be substituted; the old weights prefere spell damage (mediocre threat stat) over block value (good threat stat, plus mitigation).



#9 Imala

Imala

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 17 posts

Posted 24 November 2008 - 05:51 PM

I noticed Pawn offers a slot to weight weapon speed. How would the .1 speed ~= 30 DPS translate in terms of weight value?

#10 frmorrison

frmorrison

    Protector

  • Allied Members
  • 11,427 posts

Posted 24 November 2008 - 06:08 PM

Please correct me if I am wrong or if I should re-evaluate my scales. And I assume re-evaluating the scales would require knowledge of what I plan on doing with my Pally once I hit 80. What would be best for a mix of mainly PVP with casual PVE raiding? What would be best for soloing when someone isn't fully raid buffed? I suppose those are the questions that are fogged in my mind.


If you are mainly into PvP, you want the PvP armor sets instead of instance drops.

Assuming you wanted the best non-PvP stuff to collect now to prepare for S5 (once that comes out, PvP vendors will be around), use the Seal of Command weights (instead of Blood) and lower hit rating by around 20%, so if hit rating was 1.2, then it would become 0.96 due to 9% vs 5% hit cap.

#11 Guest_Alarius_*

Guest_Alarius_*
  • Guests

Posted 24 November 2008 - 06:57 PM

If you are mainly into PvP, you want the PvP armor sets instead of instance drops.

Assuming you wanted the best non-PvP stuff to collect now to prepare for S5 (once that comes out, PvP vendors will be around), use the Seal of Command weights (instead of Blood) and lower hit rating by around 20%, so if hit rating was 1.2, then it would become 0.96 due to 9% vs 5% hit cap.


Sorry, but could you please explain to me the hit cap differences and why it requires a minor adjustment? I'm not up to speed with the way things are now since I came back to the game within the last month after a 1.5 year absence.

Also, now that you're pointing me in this direction with PVP gear (which makes perfect sense), I might start focusing my gear choices from rewards/drops around PVE values. In this case, I suppose I am good to go with the scales I'm using now for in preparation for hitting 80 and raiding Naxx with my guild. As it stands now I believe I'm using the Redcape's SoB values and just using the differences in score to determine whether or not something is an upgrade. Would you advise differently? I'm still a little unclear on some of the rules gezmodean laid out on relativity.

Thanks for you help.

#12 Left

Left

    Don Flamenco

  • Members
  • 466 posts

Posted 24 November 2008 - 08:07 PM

I used to use Pawn on my protection paladin prior to 3.0 (when I never bothered to update it for the new mechanics). It is relatively straightforward to set up pawn for Prot to give avoidance, mitigation, or threat numbers. Since you can set up multiple scales, I had all three scales set up when I used it before.

For avoidance, you simply weight each stat according to the amount of avoidance granted in percent. For example, since 39.35 dodge rating = 1% avoidance (dodge), 1 dodge rating is worth 1/39.35 in the pawn string. I don't have time now to do all the math, but you can weight each stat the same way. Then, the pawn value obtained will tell you the total avoidance on that piece of gear. (Diminishing returns throw this off somewhat, though.)

For mitigation, you have to make some assumptions about incoming damage, but you can weight armor, stamina, strength, and block value according to a time-to-live formula given a steady stream of blocked hits of a certain size. The size matters a lot in determining the relative weight of block value and strength. At one point I made a spreadsheet to help determine this, but it would be better done in a comprehensive tanking spreadsheet.

Finally, given a standard rotation, it shouldn't be too hard to come up with threat weights for all stats (including weapon DPS), but you have to assume the rotation as well as any % damage modifiers on the boss, the starting crit rate, and boss armor. Also likely better done in a spreadsheet.

Speaking of which, do any 3.0-compatible spreadsheets exist for prot paladin threat generation and mitigation? I could try to dig up my old time-to-live calculation, but it is pretty crude.

EDIT:
In response to the socket question, I can answer this as it came up a lot on my rogue.

First, the standing question is, does Pawn give the value for a socket whether or not it is filled ? If it is filled, this would introduce an interesting error, where a socket is 'double counted' (once for the socket itself, and once for the gem that the socket is filled with).

...

Second, with regard to valuing the sockets, I currently weight them with the value of the gems I would place in them. I am curious if anyone weights them a different way, perhaps in a more general fashion.


It counts a socket as valuable only if it is not filled. (At least, this is how it worked when I used it last summer.) Thus, like you, I weighted the socket according to the gem I would place in it. (For a rogue, this ended up weighting blue sockets at half weight, because I used them with agi/stamina gems and socketed agi or agi/hit elsewhere. Since all I cared about was DPS output, I weighted to equivalence in DPS contribution.)

The alternative is to weight them to a generic average of stats. For example, if you are scaling your weights such that 1 STR = 1 point, then a socket which can hold a gem is worth 20 points (the stat value of a gem that could be placed in it, regardless of whether it is STR or something else) because you are generic assigning all stats a weighting of approximately equal to 1 STR when dealing with gems. Since, in practice, you always socket the same type of gem in the same socket color (whatever is best for your class/spec), this method seems inferior to me than just using a specific weight as described in the previous paragraph.

#13 frmorrison

frmorrison

    Protector

  • Allied Members
  • 11,427 posts

Posted 24 November 2008 - 09:25 PM

Sorry, but could you please explain to me the hit cap differences and why it requires a minor adjustment? I'm not up to speed with the way things are now since I came back to the game within the last month after a 1.5 year absence.


In PvP, you attack the same level people (except in AV), so you only need 5% hit. However in a raid, you need 8% hit because boss kills are what matters.

Since you are interested in Naxx, I would recommend making two lists. One for SoB and another for PvP starting from the SoC list (adding a weight for stamina and resilience (resilience's value should be higher) while decreasing hit rating's value from the SoC list). This PvP list would help you decide what to use until you start filling out your slots with PvP gear.

Or you could just use the SoB list to make things easier.

#14 Guest_Alarius_*

Guest_Alarius_*
  • Guests

Posted 24 November 2008 - 09:42 PM

In PvP, you attack the same level people (except in AV), so you only need 5% hit. However in a raid, you need 9% hit because boss kills are what matters.

Since you are interested in Naxx, I would recommend making two lists. One for SoB and another for PvP starting from the SoC list (adding a weight for stamina and resilience (resilience's value should be higher) while decreasing hit rating's value from the SoC list). This PvP list would help you decide what to use until you start filling out your slots with PvP gear.

Or you could just use the SoB list to make things easier.


Sounds good enough to me. I really appreciate your input. And the hit rating in regards to level should've been a "duh" moment on my behalf. It's been a lazy day. :o:

#15 JettJaguar

JettJaguar

    Von Kaiser

  • Members
  • 67 posts

Posted 25 November 2008 - 07:54 AM

Socket valuation is an interesting beast. First, from the technical side, as to whether or not Pawn accounts correctly, and second, providing an equivalence value.

First, the standing question is, does Pawn give the value for a socket whether or not it is filled ? If it is filled, this would introduce an interesting error, where a socket is 'double counted' (once for the socket itself, and once for the gem that the socket is filled with).

This is less of a problem in terms of evaluating new gear, but is a problem when comparing it with 'used gear'. I will attempt to evaluate this with some throw-away gear over the next couple of days, but if anyone has something they can run a quick test with, I would appreciate this data.

Second, with regard to valuing the sockets, I currently weight them with the value of the gems I would place in them. I am curious if anyone weights them a different way, perhaps in a more general fashion.


According to the tooltip in Pawn, it uses the values you enter for empty slots and the actual values of gems for filled slots. Hence, if you are wearing an item with a 16Str gem in it but have valued for 20Str gems, the empty items will be a bit inflated.

I noticed Pawn offers a slot to weight weapon speed. How would the .1 speed ~= 30 DPS translate in terms of weight value?


The weapon speed was a little tricky. I used 3.5 as base weapon speed and then, because Redcape in this thread equates .1 weapon speed with 5.7 weapon dps, I made the speed value 570 (Pawn asks for a full second value). It seems to be working properly.

The one thing I am having troubles with is valuing metagems. For now, I just put in a really big number so it would be evident when comparing items with/without meta slots.

#16 Chmur

Chmur

    Von Kaiser

  • Members
  • 34 posts

Posted 25 November 2008 - 09:58 AM

According to the tooltip in Pawn, it uses the values you enter for empty slots and the actual values of gems for filled slots. Hence, if you are wearing an item with a 16Str gem in it but have valued for 20Str gems, the empty items will be a bit inflated.


I am not sure about how Pawn values are evaluated to be honest, so following is just very very rough maths. Please correct me if I am missing point somewhere

So, let's say we value red socket at STRx16 (assuming we gem with rare gems), so that's 168.09x16=2689.44 Now, rets will always gem red socket with red gem, so we go there for socket bonus part.

My other concern is weighting other sockets. There are many various and useful gem choices, especially orange with all those rating / STR and rating / rating gems. So the question there is - shall we count value for each of these gems and then use mediocre value, or just use % of base red socket value? I am more in favour of % option, as it more reflects the possibility to gem with 16STR, but as well maintains relative value of stick-to-color gemming for bonus.

#17 Voldin

Voldin

    Don Flamenco

  • Members
  • 265 posts

Posted 25 November 2008 - 02:10 PM

I am not sure about how Pawn values are evaluated to be honest, so following is just very very rough maths. Please correct me if I am missing point somewhere

So, let's say we value red socket at STRx16 (assuming we gem with rare gems), so that's 168.09x16=2689.44 Now, rets will always gem red socket with red gem, so we go there for socket bonus part.

My other concern is weighting other sockets. There are many various and useful gem choices, especially orange with all those rating / STR and rating / rating gems. So the question there is - shall we count value for each of these gems and then use mediocre value, or just use % of base red socket value? I am more in favour of % option, as it more reflects the possibility to gem with 20STR, but as well maintains relative value of stick-to-color gemming for bonus.


More often than not, the socket bonuses you'd gain by matching socket colors will not outweigh the benefit you would get just by socketing straight STR gems. You would most likely want to plan on having the gems get valued as if you were dropping a STR gem in them.

Pawn will calculate the theoretical value of an Item and the actual value of an item if your actual socketing doesn't match the value you'd set for each socket color. You'll see 2048 (2052) for example if your gem choices are 4 points less valuable than what you put in manually.
LodeRunner on The Baby Thread:

I came to this thread expecting to see a lot of whiny posts from Xi. Disappointing.


#18 Chmur

Chmur

    Von Kaiser

  • Members
  • 34 posts

Posted 25 November 2008 - 02:17 PM

More often than not, the socket bonuses you'd gain by matching socket colors will not outweigh the benefit you would get just by socketing straight STR gems. You would most likely want to plan on having the gems get valued as if you were dropping a STR gem in them.

Pawn will calculate the theoretical value of an Item and the actual value of an item if your actual socketing doesn't match the value you'd set for each socket color. You'll see 2048 (2052) for example if your gem choices are 4 points less valuable than what you put in manually.


So every socket should have same value and that of 16 (20) STR to reflect the possibility to gem it with STR?

That does not cover situation when I am loosing crit rating for red+yellow socket and haste let's say. Now I want to know the value of yellow socket as not pure STR, because I will be gemming crit there to regain loss, for example. if I am talking jibberish slap me, dead tired at work.

#19 Voldin

Voldin

    Don Flamenco

  • Members
  • 265 posts

Posted 25 November 2008 - 03:54 PM

So every socket should have same value and that of 16 (20) STR to reflect the possibility to gem it with STR?

That does not cover situation when I am loosing crit rating for red+yellow socket and haste let's say. Now I want to know the value of yellow socket as not pure STR, because I will be gemming crit there to regain loss, for example. if I am talking jibberish slap me, dead tired at work.


Strength=168.09
HitRating=126.59
ExpertiseRating=79.55
CritRating=73.56
HasteRating=41.78

In essentially all situations, you'd want to be gemming for STR other than meta-gem requirements.

Using 20STR gems, the only situation with those stat weights that would be worth gemming along socket colors would be when you use 10STR/10Hit gems to get a yellow socket and your socket bonus was worth more than the following values (per socket).

2.5 STR
3.3 Hit
5.25 Expertise
5.65 Crit
9.4 Haste

Unless you're looking at a STR socket bonus, or possibly hit, you can pretty much ignore colors and just stock up on STR gems.
LodeRunner on The Baby Thread:

I came to this thread expecting to see a lot of whiny posts from Xi. Disappointing.


#20 Redcape

Redcape

    King Hippo

  • Members
  • 543 posts

Posted 25 November 2008 - 05:05 PM

As far as pvp numbers go, I would personally weight hit much higher than my spreadsheet goes. Missing on a Hammer, Judgement or Repentance is so disastrous that being hit capped is absolutely key. I would personally make it a huge priority to be hit capped in pvp for those reasons, and at that point the weightings of things in my sheet are not the be all and end all.

If you want to weight for solo or pvp buffing levels it is pretty easy if you have the sheet.

Here

All you do is go into the TalentsBuffs and Numbers sections and edit the values there. If you don't expect to have Motw soloing you just zero the value in the blue box next to it, and the same holds true for all buffs. As long as you are level 80 you can edit any of the buffs or values in the sheet directly to make it reflect your exact situation. The issue is that the rotations described in my sheet are not at all applicable to those situations and in fact making rotations that accurately model those situations is close to impossible. That said, if you adjust the gear entries and the buff entries to reflect your situation and make the delays on your abilities something sensible the sheet will spit out numbers that are a very good starting point.

Basic things to do to make the sheet work for soloing/pvp

-Go to the TalentsBuffs section and put zeros (or just delete) the numbers in the blue areas for any buff or talent you do not have.
-Go to the Gear section and update the entries in the top blue area to reflect the gear you are using at the moment.
-Go to the Numbers section and change the bottom 'Target stats' section to the following:

Level – 80
Base Armor – 6000
Glance Redux - 0
Dodge – 5
Miss – 5
Resist – 4
Partial Resist – 0

Note the armor entry may well be different. That is my wild speculation for the armor on a random world mob, but that may be off. You may also want to change the armor entry to reflect what a player would have in pvp for example.

There will always be substantial issues in the fact that expertise is doubly valuable while soloing because the monsters are facing you and vastly less so in pvp since often your targets cannot parry or dodge. The nice thing is that pvp gear doesn't have much variety, you simply don't have 8 different pieces you can get in a slot so gearing is much more straightforward.

I built this spreadsheet with customizability in mind, rather than ease of use. If you want to use it for something that it doesn't seem necessarily suited for (like pvp) you can probably change the values on the back pages and make it work quite reasonably. If you can't and would like something added to increase the functionality of the sheet overall, just let me know and I can look into adding it in. I could for example have the sheet track the stamina and resilience on the gear you enter and post final health and resilience values. I don't think that would be particularly helpful since the kind of in depth analysis I am doing here isn't really very accurate for pvp situations, but it is something that could go in if there is a demand for it.




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users