Jump to content


Photo

Cataclysm Mage Changes


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

#21 Paulten

Paulten

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 15 posts

Posted 10 April 2010 - 10:25 AM

I expect haste to play a large part in the talents for mana regen as you get more haste in the mastery bonus. Making you run out of gas faster without compensation for refilling would be bad design and I'm sure they'd avoid that.


Im sure we will see a talent in the arcane tree being X amount of mana return for X haste, seeing as how the mastery alone grants more haste, and now fire spec and frost spec have haste bonuses, one being IV and the other being Pyromaniac. The "haste" direction has a few different openings in all trees now and it seems to be what blizz is focusing on as the main point in arcane.

And if this were the case, where mana regeneration was controlled by haste for arcane, then the arcane tree would truly be a haste dependent spec for the pure reason that if you have more haste you would pull higher DPS because your mana pool will constantly be regenerated. And as side effect because of your mana regeneration rate you DPS over a longer fight would be substantial higher, unlike how arcane drops with CD's on now. Basically meaning, the bigger and better gear with haste you have, the higher DPS you do because of high mana regeneration.

The rotation then wouldnt be so hard. It would simply be adjusting to your mana regeneration in adjacent to DPM, then your gear would determine not only how much damage you do from a SP and Int basis, but also your mana bar being as close to 100% as possible though haste.

If this were the approach to the arcane tree that blizz had intended, I would love that. Having my gear with int, crit, gems, and haste, with haste being the big part of the gear, determine how much DPS I will pull..... I can get used to that most definitely.

#22 Maje

Maje

    Don Flamenco

  • Members
  • 487 posts

Posted 10 April 2010 - 10:35 AM

They mentioned all dots benefiting from haste, will LB be a part of the change. No anouncements about TtW. Is Ignite going to be fixed once and for all, both the munchng part and somehow dealing with lost ignite due to targets death; not to mention Ignite being partially resisted.

Time Warp sounds cool but in practise it's somewhat of a faulty design, the choise to use heroism isn't yours it's the raid's, it's used when the raid benefits the most from it not when you need to move quicker from place to place (blink?).

#23 numbliveson

numbliveson

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 3 posts

Posted 10 April 2010 - 10:36 AM

Very pleased with some of the new changes. A new fire aoe sounds situational at best which brings little in the way of substantial single target dps. Scorch fixes and ignite changes sound amazing overall for fire. Changes to burnout sound gimicky to me. Are they planning on making fire as mana intensive as arcane to the point where this talent is viable? Will they move it up so other specs can access the utility? This also sounds much more like a lock playstyle ability. With am procs, fb and scorch i see a much more interesting fire playstyle as well as a dps come back.

Deathfrost sounds amazing. Weaving frostblt with am procs, brain freeze procs and ice lance just sounds like fun for pve. Very proc heavy spec using all three classes of spells (ironically). I could see this actually working as a pick up that frost needed as well as being useful for pvp. The fog sounds like amazing utility and an added bonus for mage pvp. Seems to me catyclysm that movement and burst are going to play a much bigger role in raiding. Perhaps they plan on bringing cc back.

My biggest complaint is arcane. No additional spells and a terrible sounding mastery just seem tedious. Mana management seems like a chore rather then a bonus. Sure it challenge mages to be more aggressive with mana cooldowns but it seems to me id spend more time worrying about keeping my mana topped off rather then efficiently using the mana i have to produce the closest possible balance between balls to the walls and simple mana saving spam. This pretty much takes away arcanes most interesting aspect. I hope im wrong but it doesn't look good for arcane where im standing.

BLOODLUST hehe im stoked.

Having given it a second thought the arcane mastery acts very similar to rage mechanic in catclysm. More rage/mana bigger hits. Using an optimal dmp rotation at first only switching when 3 ab spam exceeds damage from optimal dpm rotation at a whatever percent mana that happens to be. Again this brings up the problem of either arcane gets a huge utility overhaul or current mana regen abilities need to change to be more balanced or more frequent. currently id ab abarr over and over pop cds etc and only switch to ab x3 rotation at low mana if im reading mechanic right. sounds backwards to me

#24 narrepanne

narrepanne

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 2 posts

Posted 10 April 2010 - 10:37 AM

I feel that the mana adept changes can imply that arcane mages will use arcane spells until we've spent X per cent of our mana, then possibly change to a fire rotation.

#25 Xentropy

Xentropy

    Don Flamenco

  • Members
  • 251 posts

Posted 10 April 2010 - 10:43 AM

The main issue I see with Mana Adept is it will be very difficult to design it so it feels like a bonus instead of a penalty. That is: So that the max damage bonus doesn't feel like what our "normal" damage should be and the damage we're doing with lower amounts of mana a reduced amount. At what level of mana pool will we be "balanced"? Will we be forced to have over 50% mana at all times or risk falling below other classes and specs? Or will, say, 20-80% mana do the same damage as everyone else, 80%+ more, and 20%- less? It will be a very difficult sweet spot for Blizzard to hit. The wider the "normal damage" midrange, the easier to balance, but the more lackluster the mastery would feel since it's rarely in play, and the narrower the midrange, the more difficult to balance (and the more likely "normal" needs to be weighted nearer a full mana pool to avoid arcane being overpowered in shorter fights, bringing us back to it feeling like a penalty rather than a bonus).

I'm glad our masteries didn't turn out as boring as the warlock ones; I feared something like theirs with just increased damage by x% to the proper school. But arcane's in particular will be a tough thing to balance properly. I eagerly await the initial values from beta and where they end up over time.

Other stuff:
I wanted to note briefly that Ignite now applies an extra DoT on all fire spell attacks, not just crits (a distinction I didn't notice until my second read, so I thought I'd point it out in case I'm not alone in that). That'll result in a reduced crit scaling factor for the spec compared to the old Ignite mechanic. Conversely, frost's crit scaling factor will grow in relation to its mastery.

Also, Time Warp has one significant flaw the way it's written currently. In fights where you use heroism early, I'm still going to want a shaman to pop it so I can save the movement speed cooldown for myself, and in fights where you must save heroism for a certain phase or frenzy, I'll be unable to use the cooldown for the movement speed without ruining the timing of the haste for the rest of the raid. This will potentially be an even worse issue in PvP, where a nearby mage in your battleground with blink on cooldown popping Time Warp to get away from an enemy melee will put you on Exhaustion at a time when you may not be able to utilize the haste portion of the buff effectively (and then can't benefit from that portion of the buff until 10 minutes later or after a death and respawn). The only solutions for this I can think of are either that increased movement speed become a part of the heroism buff from all sources (and tied directly to it), or the two effects are decoupled and made two separate abilities for the mage.

#26 Skurel

Skurel

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 4 posts

Posted 10 April 2010 - 10:56 AM

Also, Time Warp has one significant flaw the way it's written currently. In fights where you use heroism early, I'm still going to want a shaman to pop it so I can save the movement speed cooldown for myself, and in fights where you must save heroism for a certain phase or frenzy, I'll be unable to use the cooldown for the movement speed without ruining the timing of the haste for the rest of the raid. This will potentially be an even worse issue in PvP, where a nearby mage in your battleground with blink on cooldown popping Time Warp to get away from an enemy melee will put you on Exhaustion at a time when you may not be able to utilize the haste portion of the buff effectively (and then can't benefit from that portion of the buff until 10 minutes later or after a death and respawn). The only solutions for this I can think of are either that increased movement speed become a part of the heroism buff from all sources (and tied directly to it), or the two effects are decoupled and made two separate abilities for the mage.


It's not really rocket boots for all mages. Like Kurisu mentioned earlier, it lets you squeeze out more from the BL if you need to move during that time. Yeah, you can use it if your blink is down in a BG and you screw over everyone else with sated. But you're in a BG. They'll probably die eventually and the can get their BL kicks later. I mean, shaman make me sated all the time when I'm riding past them to a flag or whatever. It's not particularly 'wasted'. Now if you are already sated then you just happen to have a rocket boots in your toolkit. It's not always available as an on demand rocket boots in a raid environment, but that's not particularly damning to the skill.

#27 Dóga

Dóga

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 6 posts

Posted 10 April 2010 - 11:32 AM

The main issue I see with Mana Adept is it will be very difficult to design it so it feels like a bonus instead of a penalty. That is: So that the max damage bonus doesn't feel like what our "normal" damage should be and the damage we're doing with lower amounts of mana a reduced amount. At what level of mana pool will we be "balanced"? Will we be forced to have over 50% mana at all times or risk falling below other classes and specs? Or will, say, 20-80% mana do the same damage as everyone else, 80%+ more, and 20%- less? It will be a very difficult sweet spot for Blizzard to hit. The wider the "normal damage" midrange, the easier to balance, but the more lackluster the mastery would feel since it's rarely in play, and the narrower the midrange, the more difficult to balance (and the more likely "normal" needs to be weighted nearer a full mana pool to avoid arcane being overpowered in shorter fights, bringing us back to it feeling like a penalty rather than a bonus).


This is my concern as well. Added to the wording of Arcane Focus it sounds like it wouldn't be unheard of for mages to pop missiles when they proc to recover mana and try and blast with a spell at a higher mana spot. Playing a class that can't afford to waste a GCD to begin with, now having mages do more damage at higher mana just sounds like it might be a wasted talent. If I can do more damage in the "midrange," wider area than I can in the higher ranges because I don't have to stop dpsing to recover the mana, I'm not going to use that ability.

Its rather late, so my ability to convey my thoughts may be a little lackluster at the moment, so I'll try and reiterate. My concern is that the damage buff to arcane spells at higher mana won't be used because taking the time to stop dpsing to recover mana for what could ulimately be one buffed spell seems a dps loss. Unless they make the damage buff huge, it could be something looked over easily in a raid rotation. It just seems like something that will be very hard to implement without either 1) making us way too overpowered, 2) making it an ability that nobody cares about, or 3) making it an ability that works great, and dpses well, but is too complicated to look appealing when fire has so many cool buffs to it and will probably do the same dps as arcane, with easier rules to follow for high dps.

#28 Anathar

Anathar

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 2 posts

Posted 10 April 2010 - 12:37 PM

This is something I missed on my first few scans of the mage preview. Is this a typo? Because it doesn't fit in with the utility part of the spell. If not, then it looks like TW isn't like hero at all; it's just a permanent haste buff.


I'm surprised more people haven't jumped all over that. Passive implies that it's not like bloodlust at all, however you're right, the Utility suggests that it's a castable spell, not just a constant buff. My guess (and biased hope) is that it's just a typo.

#29 Frah

Frah

    Von Kaiser

  • Members
  • 72 posts

Posted 10 April 2010 - 12:38 PM

Wall of fog! Got to say I am loving that and the way it falls into how the mage class has so much control over enemy's. Even just in ICC there are many uses for it let alone in cataclysm where people are suggesting there will be more movement requiring more control over adds.

Mana adept is going to be very difficult to balance. Also somewhat of a strange ability given that AP consumes more mana in its present form. Arcane mages will probably be top of the priests PI list though.

Burnout seems just wrong to me. With all the tools a mage has to avoid damage I find it strange that a mage would choose to take damage. I also am concerned by its implications that we will be oom a lot. The talents either going to become mandatory in which case we will be oom a lot and a drain on a raid or useless because we dont oom that much and never have to use it.


Edit
I also just noticed that ignite is not just crits any more. Awesome :)

#30 epoh

epoh

    Piston Honda

  • Members
  • 119 posts

Posted 10 April 2010 - 01:40 PM

I'm going to go out on a limb and say that talents like AP are going to end up being removed, or completely reworked.

They've already said they are planning on dumping the '+Xdmg' type talents... I wouldn't be shocked at all to see AP missing, or completely changed to something else.

My impression of the fire changes was "Oh.. fire in pvp again." Sending a nice big ball of burning flames at the flag? Good times.. blast wave available when you get melee'd? I can't really see how those two spells will work in a PvE environment... especially given their comments in the Rogue preview about control and CC becoming far more important in Cata. I can't see rogues being told they'll have to cc and stop just FoK'ing, but the mages being able to toss of an orb of fire that goes for 30yrds. We'll see though.

The frost changes are interesting. I'm assuming/hoping they made a type and it's supposed to be deathfrost increases frost/fire/arcane dmg on the target. Why would the frost mage be routinely casting fire and arcane spells? Makes me very very curious.

Also, sad panda about the wards and amp/damp magic. As someone who enjoyed figuring out which fights benefited I'll be sad to loose that little edge.

#31 Jollyroger86

Jollyroger86

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 15 posts

Posted 10 April 2010 - 02:57 PM

The main issue I see with Mana Adept is it will be very difficult to design it so it feels like a bonus instead of a penalty. That is: So that the max damage bonus doesn't feel like what our "normal" damage should be and the damage we're doing with lower amounts of mana a reduced amount. At what level of mana pool will we be "balanced"? Will we be forced to have over 50% mana at all times or risk falling below other classes and specs? Or will, say, 20-80% mana do the same damage as everyone else, 80%+ more, and 20%- less? It will be a very difficult sweet spot for Blizzard to hit. The wider the "normal damage" midrange, the easier to balance, but the more lackluster the mastery would feel since it's rarely in play, and the narrower the midrange, the more difficult to balance (and the more likely "normal" needs to be weighted nearer a full mana pool to avoid arcane being overpowered in shorter fights, bringing us back to it feeling like a penalty rather than a bonus).


This is my biggest concern as well. In any case, I feel that Mana Adept is probably the coolest mastery idea that blizzard has come up with along with druids balance mastery. It will be very exciting to try it out and to see what they come up with talent wise for us to manage our mana.

#32 Tyrian

Tyrian

    Bald Bull

  • Members
  • 2,376 posts

Posted 10 April 2010 - 03:24 PM

Is AM intended to be part of the 'normal short' Arcane spec rotation still, after the spell is moved to its new place as an on-use proc? There was no mention of how much AM will proc, and whether it's still something that will proc specifically more for arcane (perhaps via Missile Barrage still), such that we can still do ABx4-Mbarr rotations.

If AM procs are intended to be rarer (maybe every 15 to 30 seconds) it's going to affect Arcane rotations more. We'd either need another filler spell, to use Arcane Barrage, spam Arcane blast (might not be practical, especially with Mana Adept) - or simply use other school spells instead - until AM procs.

#33 Ivorthemage

Ivorthemage

    Piston Honda

  • Members
  • 126 posts

Posted 10 April 2010 - 03:43 PM

Hard to know how to interpret most of these as their effectiveness is determined by so many unknowns.

Flame Orb: Sounds like fire-and-forget damage to anything in its path. I see possibility as a PVE dot or aoe attack, depending on dps. But mostly I see pvp utility.

time warp: Definite utiility but the movement speed buff is a mixed blessing. Either I can't use it for fear of screwing up the timing of Hero, or I use it and get everyone mad at me. This really feels like it should be a separate spell or talent, so you can use the cooldown at different times.

wall of fog: who the hell knows. Depends on damage, how long it lasts, cooldown, what type of snare, how long the snare lasts, etc. The comment that mana will make it less efficient for single target scares me. Thinking about pvp, there is obvious utility in a trap like snare in 1 v 1 fights. Kiting a rogue back and forth across the wall to make him re-snare himself, for instance. How high would the mana have to be to deter me from using it in that way? 50% of my mana pool? 75%? Feels like something that Blizzard hasn't really nailed down, and will end up getting constantly reworked, like invisibility.

arcane missiles. I like it. AM use is one of the best parts of the current arcane playstyle.

No more wards. IA still has some use for pvp with mana shield in pvp, or if the talent trees make an ice barrier/IA build viable, but it sounds academic if they are getting rid of IA anyway.

Dampen/amplify. I liked dampen in pvp, and will miss it. I don't think Blizz balanced around it being up, which made for an advantage if I used it.

scorch: Fire's pve playstyle is dynamic enough without having to weave scorches into it. But I suspect scorch will be the bread and butter spell for keeping the new pyromaniac talent running.

arcane focus: the description might as well be in Greek.

playing with fire: damned cool. That talent might single handedly make fire viable in pvp, depending on how it is implemented. And its a clever design.

burnout: It fits with how Blizzard thinks fire mages want to play, and how fire mages say they want to play, but whether it has the slighest bit of use depends on how often fire mages are going to run out of mana. My hunch is that burnout is just Blizzard washing their hands of fire mage mana in pve. If they don't run out of mana, fine. If they do, they can always spec burnout and draw down on healer mana instead.

pyromaniac: sounds annoying. Will make fire mage dps vary depending on whether they can keep the effect up using adds. So on a lot of fights its useless. On others it will be a big buff. So does Blizz balance our dps on it being up or down?

Mana adept: Arcane is already based on the principle that you vary your spells based on your mana pool. This won't change anything. Shortly after Cat comes out, there will be a new arcane spell rotation that optimizes the dps of the spells themselves in conjunction with the dps from your mana pool, and it will be something like "ABx4AM, switch to ABx2AM if you fall below 90% mana". Its merely one more variable for the linear programmers to account for. On the bright side, it is likely some sort of damage multiplier, which in conjunction with having haste as a passive bonus, looks very good for arcane scaling in contrast with fire and frost which remain dependent on bonuses that don't scale as well, like crit.

deathfrost: I like the playstyle impact, but when I think this over I suspect it is going to suck for pve, but work well for pvp. How much of a buff does this have to be for it to scale on par with mana adept or ignite? Imagine the best case for this talent, and frost rotations turn into spells that fish for a proc: (brain freeze, AM, or an FoF letting you throw a deep freeze or ice lance). That will still keep frostbolt around 70% of casts. So the damage buff to the non-frostbolt procs have to be much larger than those for mana adept and ignite bonuses are, as those apply to *all* spells, where as the deathfrost bonus doesn't boost the damage of the bread and butter frost tree nuke. You know, I know, and the American people know, that too large of a buff on those procs will be game breaking in pvp. As such, I suspect this will have a nice impact on a frost playstyle that no one will want to play because frost will still have crappy scaling in PVE. Should be cool while levelling though, and for pvp. Maybe they are giving up on frost as a raid spec.

I am a little disappointed. We won't be able to tell how these work in the game until we see them live, of course, but in principle there is little here that makes me go "ooh, that will be a lot of fun", which is the reaction I had when I saw shammies being able cast on the move, priests getting a "life grip", etc.

#34 Zeldyrr

Zeldyrr

    Piston Honda

  • Members
  • 233 posts

Posted 10 April 2010 - 04:16 PM

Mana adept: Arcane is already based on the principle that you vary your spells based on your mana pool. This won't change anything. Shortly after Cat comes out, there will be a new arcane spell rotation that optimizes the dps of the spells themselves in conjunction with the dps from your mana pool, and it will be something like "ABx4AM, switch to ABx2AM if you fall below 90% mana". Its merely one more variable for the linear programmers to account for. On the bright side, it is likely some sort of damage multiplier, which in conjunction with having haste as a passive bonus, looks very good for arcane scaling in contrast with fire and frost which remain dependent on bonuses that don't scale as well, like crit.


Are you sure it is linear? My initial thoughts on how one might model this suggest it is more complicated. To continue your example, what if ABx3AM does less damage but keeps you at >90% mana longer than ABx4AM. Which rotation should one start with then? Your damage is now a function of mana, mana is a function of what rotation you pick during a period of time, but that rotation of course affects your damage. Integrating that over the time of a fight and including mana regeneration (both passive and active) seems to me to be anything but linear.

(I'm happy to be wrong of course. If it is linear can someone sketch out what a reasonable form of the objective function and constraints would be?)

deathfrost: I like the playstyle impact, but when I think this over I suspect it is going to suck for pve, but work well for pvp. How much of a buff does this have to be for it to scale on par with mana adept or ignite? Imagine the best case for this talent, and frost rotations turn into spells that fish for a proc: (brain freeze, AM, or an FoF letting you throw a deep freeze or ice lance). That will still keep frostbolt around 70% of casts. So the damage buff to the non-frostbolt procs have to be much larger than those for mana adept and ignite bonuses are, as those apply to *all* spells, where as the deathfrost bonus doesn't boost the damage of the bread and butter frost tree nuke. You know, I know, and the American people know, that too large of a buff on those procs will be game breaking in pvp. As such, I suspect this will have a nice impact on a frost playstyle that no one will want to play because frost will still have crappy scaling in PVE. Should be cool while levelling though, and for pvp. Maybe they are giving up on frost as a raid spec.


I think we simply don't have enough information yet to make a judgement here. If this deathfrost buff increases with the number of frostbolts cast (ala AB), then those 30% of on-a-proc spells could certainly be boosted enough to make frost raid-competitive. And building up a stack of deathfrost with a chain of frostbolts would certainly be difficult in pvp situations. But until we know more on how deathfrost actually works, I think it is too soon to bury frost raiding once again.

#35 Joneleth

Joneleth

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 10 posts

Posted 10 April 2010 - 04:26 PM

I, like others, am a bit wary of the Mana Adept mastery. If a mage had only his own personal mana cooldowns to work with, I could see it encouraging a more dynamic (i.e., mana managing) playstyle, but external mana sources complicate matters. Innervate has already been mentioned, but on top of that, will Arcane mages clamor to be grouped with Resto shamans for Mana Tide? Will they ask priests to Hymn of Hope during a high-burn cycle? Then again, if healer mana is going to be a very carefully managed resource, then healers may have to save those cooldowns for their own use in any fight of consequence.

The Deathfrost mastery might need some clarification (e.g., Is the buff consumed when a non-Frostbolt spell is cast? Would it stack like Shadow Weaving? Or might it may as well read "passive +% damage to all non-Frostbolt spells.")

Also, reworked Burnout talent concerns me somewhat--while it's good that fire mages will have the option to continue casting, even when OOM, if a fight actually got to that point, the healers might be running dry as well. The situation is subtly different from a warlock's Life Tap, since warlocks have ways of regenerating health independent of healers (Fel Armor, Siphon Life, Soul Leech.) Still, the concept is attractive from a flavor perspective--very much a blood mage feel. What it also looks like, though, is that Frost mages, without Arcane's mana management or Fire's health pool options, are the only ones left who can go truly 'hard-OOM' (though perhaps the design is that they have such built-in efficiency that this isn't a concern except on mana drain/AoE fights).

#36 Ivorthemage

Ivorthemage

    Piston Honda

  • Members
  • 126 posts

Posted 10 April 2010 - 04:50 PM

Are you sure it is linear? My initial thoughts on how one might model this suggest it is more complicated. To continue your example, what if ABx3AM does less damage but keeps you at >90% mana longer than ABx4AM. Which rotation should one start with then? Your damage is now a function of mana, mana is a function of what rotation you pick during a period of time, but that rotation of course affects your damage. Integrating that over the time of a fight and including mana regeneration (both passive and active) seems to me to be anything but linear.

(I'm happy to be wrong of course. If it is linear can someone sketch out what a reasonable form of the objective function and constraints would be?)


"linear programming" is the mathematical tool behind programs like Rawr that calculate optimal spell cycles. Linear programming - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. I was referring to something different than you think.

I think we simply don't have enough information yet to make a judgement here. If this deathfrost buff increases with the number of frostbolts cast (ala AB), then those 30% of on-a-proc spells could certainly be boosted enough to make frost raid-competitive. And building up a stack of deathfrost with a chain of frostbolts would certainly be difficult in pvp situations. But until we know more on how deathfrost actually works, I think it is too soon to bury frost raiding once again.


The problem is that you are robbing Peter to pay Paul. if you avoid casting your procs to force the bonus to stack, you are throwing away damage, meaning that the value of the buff has to be extremely high to compensate.

I have trouble picturing a plausible scenario where all of the following are true:

1) Passive bonuses are meaningful - greater than 10-20% dps boost (Blizzard seems to want to penalize builds that don't go deep into a tree).
2) The frost mage has a dynamic playstyle
3) The deathfrost bonus is large enough to match the bonuses from other trees in PVE scaling
4) The deathfrost bonus is small enough to be manageable in pvp.

Yes, violating assumption #2, and making the bonus a 3% stack per frostbolt would be small enough in pvp, but it isn't remotely large enough even after stacking it 30 times to compensate for a flat buff of 10-20% to every nuke in the other trees.

Based on Blizzard's track record, if forced to choose between rendering frost mages unviable in pve and overpowered in pvp, they nerf them in pve every time.

Maybe I am just not imaginative enough, or there is some simple programming mechanic (deathfrost bonus does half damage against pvp targets) that solves the problem.

The gist is that the devil is in the details. My problem with almost every change listed is that it is either boring, or extremely dependent on implementation details that are sorely lacking and where Blizz doesn't have the greatest track record for our class (frost hasnt been really raid viable since Blackwing Lair).

#37 Zeldyrr

Zeldyrr

    Piston Honda

  • Members
  • 233 posts

Posted 10 April 2010 - 04:58 PM

"linear programming" is the mathematical tool behind programs like Rawr that calculate optimal spell cycles. Linear programming - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia. I was referring to something different than you think.


Aye, I have some (professional, non-WoW related) experience working with linear programming. To be clear, from your wiki link:

Linear programs are problems that can be expressed in canonical form:
Maximize: cTx
Subject to: Ax ≤ b.


Many linear optimizers can only handle linear objective functions and linear constraints. More sophisticated versions can handle quadratic objective functions.

My only point was that I was having trouble formulating a linear objective function for a linear optimizer that would model "damage varies as a percentage of current mana relative to max" in addition to all the other constraints. I'm curious as to what Kavan and the other modelers come up with though.

#38 Ivorthemage

Ivorthemage

    Piston Honda

  • Members
  • 126 posts

Posted 10 April 2010 - 05:05 PM

My only point was that I was having trouble formulating a linear objective function for a linear optimizer that would model "damage varies as a percentage of current mana relative to max" in addition to all the other constraints. I'm curious as to what Kavan and the other modelers come up with though.


Ah, in which case I apologize for trying to teach a grandmother how to knit. :)

My experience is limited to playing around with it using Excel's solver function in a grad school modelling class. So I will shut up, beyond saying that Kavan seems to have solved harder problems already.

#39 Eriella

Eriella

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 1 posts

Posted 10 April 2010 - 05:21 PM

One thing about Time Wrap: Would this stack with Speed Pots and/or Icy Veins?

#40 Darkside

Darkside

    I find your lack of faith disturbing.

  • Allied Members
  • 9,820 posts

Posted 10 April 2010 - 05:23 PM

One thing about Time Wrap: Would this stack with Speed Pots and/or Icy Veins?


Bloodlust already stacks with them, so what do you think?

ginger booty get on with yo bad self





0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users