Jump to content


Photo

Hunter FAQ 4.x WotLK (read this before asking questions)


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
34 replies to this topic

#21 Nyth_

Nyth_

    Piston Honda

  • Members
  • 138 posts

Posted 24 October 2010 - 12:32 PM

There's a good chance that the lack of weapon damage normalization is intended, as all melee classes function that way.

If I understand it correctly, previously shot damage was based on weapon dps and now its based on weapon damage? As long as attack power is normalized, this isn't necessarily a bad change, it just means hunters will favor slower weapons like pretty much every other physical damage class/spec does currently, with rogues being slightly oddball because of poisons and dual wield and wanting fast offhands for dp and the like.

Proper itemization prevents hunters from having the option of using an extremely slow blue wep vs a faster epic, just don't put really slow blues in the game.


Only this is not the case.
Apart from enh shamans (although I don't know how that changed after WotLK) all melee dps have their weapon normalized.
And it SHOULD be, because an instant special is totally independent on weapon speed. Faster weapons can't use instants more often than slower weapons.

The reason most classes still prefer that slower weapons is simply because of the average weapon damage.
Saying that shot damage shifted from weapon dps to weapon damage is a bit of mistake. The only thing that changed is that people simplified the formula, so it seems there is something different when there is not.

Basically the formula is as follow for normalized damage (normalized speed is 2.8):

Shot Damage = Weapon Damage + ( AP / 14 * 2.8 ) + ( AP * ShotAPModifier ) + Static Shot bonus

Now Weapon damage is a range, which is the main reason you see differences between individual shots; so for convenience sake we often go for average weapon damage. There are 2 ways to obtain this:
1. Average Weapon Damage = ( Min Damage + Max Damage ) / 2
2. Average Weapon Damage = Weapon DPS * Weapon Speed

Take number 2 and substitute that into the formula and you get:

Shot Damage = (Weapon DPS * Weapon Speed) + ( AP / 14 * 2.8 ) + ( AP * ShotAPModifier ) + Static Shot bonus

That's the normalized formula. Take the unnormalized formula and you get:

Shot Damage = (Weapon DPS * Weapon Speed) + ( AP / 14 * Weapon Speed ) + ( AP * ShotAPModifier ) + Static Shot bonus

Now you can simplify that (due to underlined common multipliers) to this:

Shot Damage = (Weapon DPS + (AP / 14)) * Weapon Speed + ( AP * ShotAPModifier ) + Static Shot bonus

In the end though you're still talking about a shot consisting of a summation of 4 factors:
1) Average Weapon Damage
2) General AP contribution
3) Shot dependent AP contribution
4) Static Shot bonus

Now 1 is part of the reason why even with normalized numbers people still prefer slower weapons for instants. Because that number will always be higher.

Nr 2 should ideally be normalized to make sure that the damage is consistent for all hunters. The only exceptions are when the actual ability can be increased or decreased depending on speed. Like auto attack (faster weapons attack more often); on next hit abilities (like the old heroic strike); speed dependent procs (like the old windfury; where faster procced more often but hit for less).
Keeping this normalized always gives you 20% of your RAP as bonus damage; getting this unnormalized however causes huge disparities.
For example the difference between a 2.8 weapon and a 3.0 weapon with 14000 RAP is 200 damage. That might not seem like much but that's an 7,14% increase from AP contribution just because you picked a slower weapon.
A disparity like that might cause a seemingly inferior slow weapon to outclass a superior fast weapon.

Number 3 is of course shot dependent; as is 4

#22 hleusink

hleusink

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 3 posts

Posted 25 November 2010 - 10:52 AM

Has anyone been able to verify if the focus regeneration bug has been fixed as of patch 4.0.3a?

#23 Rivkah

Rivkah

    Great Tiger

  • Members
  • 841 posts

Posted 26 November 2010 - 01:06 AM

Has anyone been able to verify if the focus regeneration bug has been fixed as of patch 4.0.3a?


If you mean the bug with windfury/hunting party/etc. reducing focus regen instead of increasing it, no it's still broken, I just doublechecked. Improved serpent sting has been fixed to be based off physical hit, crit and crit dmg multiplier, and pets now properly inherit AP the hunter receives from % AP buffs. Those are the main bugs I know of that were fixed in 4.0.3a.

The ravager debuff being affected by diminishing returns, draenei hit buff not being inherited by pets and most likely other bugs I'm forgetting are not fixed in 4.0.3a. Also, aimed shot from procs is based off 95% weapon damage whereas aimed shot from slow cast is based off 100%.

#24 Guest_26thraider_*

Guest_26thraider_*
  • Guests

Posted 26 November 2010 - 02:31 AM

Also, aimed shot from procs is based off 95% weapon damage whereas aimed shot from slow cast is based off 100%.


Might not be a true bug. One of the builds that were datamined at MMO-Champ initially contained a 95% weapondamage scaling !Aimed Shot, later the information was pulled. At the time I thought it was just faulty information, but it is in?

#25 Rivkah

Rivkah

    Great Tiger

  • Members
  • 841 posts

Posted 26 November 2010 - 05:45 AM

Might not be a true bug. One of the builds that were datamined at MMO-Champ initially contained a 95% weapondamage scaling !Aimed Shot, later the information was pulled. At the time I thought it was just faulty information, but it is in?


It's definitely implemented that way. If you test aimed shot you can see the damage difference between the proc version and the slow cast version (you can also see the difference in the ingame tooltips). I really find it hard to believe it's intended though given the wording on Master Marksman says nothing about the proc aimed shot doing less damage. It may be something they put in for lower levels and forgot to adjust.

#26 Guest_26thraider_*

Guest_26thraider_*
  • Guests

Posted 26 November 2010 - 09:07 PM

Well, I think we can all agree that Master Marksman and Aimed Shot isn't exactly stellar in either fun or direct value, so it is a rather puzzeling place (and way) to weaken shots. But I'm not in agreement with the low level 'nerf', since a loss of 5% weaponscaling isn't going to make the shot go from overpowered to acceptable. However, we might need a low level Hunter to check these things out.

#27 Rivkah

Rivkah

    Great Tiger

  • Members
  • 841 posts

Posted 28 November 2010 - 05:35 AM

I've added experimental support for the new armory (for US and EU users). Note that since the data is in HTML format, the parsing is pretty fragile and there may be some issues. If you notice any problems please send me a PM. The plus side is that the reforging import should work now.

#28 Caecian

Caecian

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 2 posts

Posted 05 December 2010 - 12:49 AM

Has the min/max on max level cata professions been mathed out yet? Strongly contemplating dropping skinning (keeping LW) for something, but I can't decide what.

#29 danshot

danshot

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 12 posts

Posted 05 December 2010 - 10:42 AM

Well LW should be #1 along with JC according to my quick math just using weighted values at femaledwarf.com

#30 Nyth_

Nyth_

    Piston Honda

  • Members
  • 138 posts

Posted 05 December 2010 - 01:20 PM

It's really hard to value the use of some professions though. Especially engineering. It is stat wise the worst profession, but things like rocket boots have some value on fights. And in cataclysm there are a couple of fights where they could come in really handy.

#31 Guest_26thraider_*

Guest_26thraider_*
  • Guests

Posted 05 December 2010 - 02:36 PM

It's really hard to value the use of some professions though. Especially engineering. It is stat wise the worst profession, but things like rocket boots have some value on fights. And in cataclysm there are a couple of fights where they could come in really handy.


Like now, however it is only assumed that the Boost will fail less in Cataclysm raiding. And the simple fact is, you can get by without the Boost, so if it can fail and kill you and/or the raid, why even use it? They are at best a convenience when they work.
Currently Engineering looks to be the absolutely worst Profession, which I hope is very much wrong.

#32 Nakari

Nakari

    Piston Honda

  • Members
  • 196 posts

Posted 05 December 2010 - 04:06 PM

Nitro Boosts never ever fail while you are in an instance, they can only fail in the "outside world". I've raided the most part of WotLK as an Engineer and had zero fails unless I used them while doing dailies, questing etc (the failure chance when not in an instance is fairly high though).

#33 Fearkin

Fearkin

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 3 posts

Posted 05 December 2010 - 04:12 PM

Nitro Boosts never ever fail while you are in an instance, they can only fail in the "outside world". I've raided the most part of WotLK as an Engineer and had zero fails unless I used them while doing dailies, questing etc (the failure chance when not in an instance is fairly high though).


This has changed in a later patch -- now it *may* fail, even in a raid environment (tested on dreamwalker)

#34 Guest_26thraider_*

Guest_26thraider_*
  • Guests

Posted 06 December 2010 - 01:07 AM

Yes, this isn't some baseless assumption. They do fail now, and there has been a pretty big uproar, or QQ, depending on where you stand on the matter. In progression raiding, if the remain as it is now, they are useless. Nobody will pat you on the back when they work, but the first time they cause a wipe on progression encounters, a lot of people will frown at you, if not worse, as it was you who decided to use them, while they are stricktly not needed, knowing they could fail.

Engineering looks very weak, with the craftable epic ranged weapons worse than some blues (baffling really). So it comes down to, are you (general population) 'brave' enough to hold onto it with no promise that it will be worth it?

#35 Narcosleepy

Narcosleepy

    It's not you. Really. I hate everyone.

  • ♦ Administrators
  • 8,706 posts

Posted 06 December 2010 - 03:43 PM

Thread closed. Please see the current FAQ thread.
If this signature offends you please complain to the management.




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users