Ah, so it's just a linear growth numerical relation. Still though, my haste is 18.54% and my energy regen is just 13.94. With vitality it should be 14.1875 energy regen. Idk how big of a difference 13.94 and 14.1875 make, but probably not much...
-
ShiznitzGuest
-
Banned
On my fresh 85 Rogue:
17.61% Haste total
10.96% Haste rating
12.5*(1+.1761)=14.70 ER
12.5*(1+.1096)=13.87 ER
I have 13.87 ER.
This means that ER works 100%.
I am guessing that until now the formula was using the total Haste %, where auto-attack increasing effects and talents are also included. The fix was simply fixing the formula, so that it takes the Haste rating % instead of the Haste total %.
Let's take the example of pre-fix SnD. It gives 40% bonus attack speed:
12.5*(1+.1096+.4)=18.87 ER
Now, let's add Bloodlust/Heroism/Time Warp:
12.5*(1+.1096+.4+.3)=22.62 ER
So, pre-fix, I would have almost double the ER, which I actually should have, with just SnD and BL/Hero/TW up.
.
.
.
Now, just for the trollz, let's add Altairus's wind (dragon boss in VP):
12.5*(1+.1096+.4+.3+1)=35.12 ER
HUEHUEHUHEUHE!!!1!!
-
Banned
I am guessing that you are looking at your total Haste % and not at your Haste % from rating.
This is where the bug was before. Read my post above.
-
ShiznitzGuest
It's good that the've fixed this then, as well as the other lingering bugs :D
Guess that's a technical nerf...
On a completely different note, how bad of a dps loss is a 1.4 off hand to a 1.8? How big of an ilvl difference is need for the two to balance out?
-
Banned
A 1.4 OH would be better than a 1.8. More Combat Potency procs, more DP procs. The only loss would be in Killing Spree, which doesn't really matter in a boss fight.
So, on your question: such a small speed margin would be insignificant enough, so that you would rather look at the weapon stats than at the speed.
-
Member
You are doing a logical mistake. It does not matter whether you use Revealing Strike at the beginning of your cycle or at the end with 4/5 CP, the resutl is the same. The average amount of lost CPs is the same. It's simple logic, if you can't see it, I'm sorry.
It just seems to be something different but it isn't.
(If you don't belive me, lookt it up at EJ, should be there something since it's a commonly made mistake)
-
Banned
And what will you do when you have 3 CP, no RvS up, you SS and the glyph procs?
1) Evi? DPS loss from not having RvS.
2) RvS? DPS loss from lost GCD, Energy & CP.
If you have RvS up, 4 CP and you SS, you don't have to give a single fk about the glyph proccing or not. Even if it procs, you don't care and it is not any kind of GCD, Energy or CP loss, because that's an unreliable, 20% chance free bonus, which is outside of your main cycle. It's not the same. Using RvS at 4 CP means relying on luck that SS glyph won't proc to break your CP cycle and relying on luck for performance is bad.
-
Member
Wrong, it is the same, you're doing a logical mistake. It's like saying "If I can't see how I waste my CPs, they are not wasted." I'll try to explain:
Let's assume we have 3 CP, no RvS up. Your logic implies that I could now use RvS in the middle of the cycle and it would be the same as using at the beginning, right? The situation now is 4 CP and RvS up with 100% chance. The same as if I used RvS at the beginning.
Use now SS, 20% chance on proc and wasting a CP.
-> We used RvS and SS, which means
2 GCDs, 80 energy used and 20% chance on wasting a CP
Now let's use RvS at the end of the cycle, no matter how many CP we have.
1) SS procs, use RvS -> used 1 SS and one RvS, one CP guarantueed wasted (here's your mistake)
THIS EVENT'S CHANCE IS 20%!
means with a chance of 20%: 2GCDs, 80 energy and wasted CP
but there is also
2) SS doesn't proc, use RvS -Y used 1 SS and one RvS, no CP wasted
THIS EVENT'S CHANCE IS 80%!
means with a chance of 80%: 2 GCDs, 80 energy and NO WASTED CP
Do you see it now? In both scenarios we have a 20% chance of wasting a GCD, energy and a CP.
EDIT: From elitisk jerks (just to clarify it, I was smart enough to figure it out on my own. It still is a commonly made mistake)
Q: How should RvS be used?
A: Optimal use involves using it only when at exactly 4 CP. This will mean that not all of your finishers will benefit from it, as sometimes Glyph of SS will take you straight from 3 to 5. However, this is the only way to be sure that you never waste combo points, and current estimates show the damage lost from wasting combo points is more than you gain from being able to do every finisher with RvS up.
Q: What about RvSing at 2 or 3 CP instead?
A: Doing so wastes the same amount of damage on average as RvSing at 5, and when you work out the numbers its pretty clearly behind the recommended approach of RvSing at 4 only. Note, however, that the differences we're talking about are not large; proper use is only about 2% ahead of dropping it from your cycle entirely, and the difference between using it for every finisher vs only at 4 CP is less than that.
-
Banned
So what this Q&A is telling me is that:
1) I can entirely ignore RvS.
2) Losing CPs, on which I don't rely, results in a DPS loss.
3) Not losing GCDs, by RvSing early, results in a DPS loss.
Dude...
Stop reading that **** already. I am NOT relying on getting or not getting SS procs. I do not like chances, I do not like percentages. I am thinking analytically. Should I be at 4 CP with RvS up and SS would proc - FINE, I don't care! I am not losing any Energy, as I have reached 5 CP with the minimum amount of GCD and Energy. Should I be at 3 CP without RvS and SS would proc - I will either have to ignore RvS (+35% damage) or waste a GCD, both of which will result in poorer performance.
My logic is perfectly fine. You're just not following it. One should not give a flying fk about SS procs if he's on 4 CP with RvS up. It's a glyph proc, it's a bonus proc, it doesn't result in any GCD loss and you cannot count an unreliable CP proc as a CP loss. The GoSS is not a DPS boost, it's just a faster way to reach 5. RvS + Evi is a DPS boost.
-
NikkoitalioGuest
You never use facts in anything bro the people are EJ have proved through numerous calculations and math that RvS is only used at 4 combo points or you are wasting dps. Learn the real logic and don't make up your own.
-
Banned
The logic that they are using claims that if SS procs at 3 CP, it would be a GCD, CP and Energy loss to use RvS afterwards for Evi. This is correct.
The logic also says that if I use RvS at 3 CP and then SS procs a CP, it would be a GCD, CP and Energy loss too. This is wrong. I am not losing GCDs. I am not losing Energy. The CP wasted is not a loss, because it's a mere 20% chance to proc anyway.
My logic says, that you should use RvS at the start, at 1-2 CP (1 GCD), so that you will be at 2-3, then SS for 3-4(2 GCD), then another SS for 4-5 CP [color="yellow"](3 GCD) and then Evi. If the first SS procs CP, then I would be at 4-5, which means that I would need one more SS or just Evi straight away. If the second SS procs CP, then I would be at 5-5+1, which means that I waste one situational CP. This is the only time when I get a waste.
The only way, where you can get to 5 CP with just 2 GCDs, is if Ruth procs a CP and both SSes proc a CP and this is highly unlikely. In all other cases, you will need at least 3 GCDs and RvS can easily be put there, at the start.
-
Member
People forgetting to note that combat dps is not as much as pushing it up at any cost, but rather not letting it drop below some certain value. Not using RVS is much better option than losing even a single combo point. RVS only increases your evi and, hopefully soon, rupture by 35% (45% glyphed) FOR A GLOBAL COOLDOWN, but ONE combo point increases ALL of your FINISHERS by 20% FOR FREE.
Additional combo point is priority over RVS buff, and as such RVS SHOULD only be used WHEN combo point bonus CANNOT be gained = at 4 combo points.
1 rvs = 1 combo point for one gcd plus 45% damage increase for evi. 40 energy.
1 ss = 1.2 combo point for one gcd plus roughly 1.2 base * 1.3 lethality crit damage. 39 energy.
5x rvs + 20x ss = 5x1.45 evis. total 30 seconds.
5x1.45 = 7.25 evis = 6.04x5 combo points = 30.2 ss. 30.2+7.25/30 = 1.24 more time to do same amount of damage with evis.
Lets cut down to same time. 30.2/1.24 = 24.35 glyphed SS.
NOW COMPARE 4.35xSS with 5xRVS in damage. 4.35*1.2= 5.22 base weapon damage. 4.35*300 = 1305 base added damage. 0.65/5 = 0.13 , plus 2.5% less energy per SS. 5.22*(1/(1-0.13-0.025))= 6.18.
At 40% crit rate, add lethality bonus = 6.18*(1+0.3*0.4)= 6.92.
Now. what is bigger. 1/(1-0.24)=1.32 EVIs worth of damage or 1.92 more damage worth of RVS+1305 base damage (base damage is further increased too, i just dont count it as it is obvious at this point).
Your average eviscirate must hit almost 5 times more than average RVS for RVS to take priority over additional combo point. If take for example my highest RVS crit from last raid - 18k - then my highest evi should do at least 90k to just balance out the single combo points loss.
Remember, loosing an RVS means WINNING a global cooldown. And for those that do not understand I compared two extremities above - first one is using rvs at start and losing every SS proc on 4 combo points. Second one is the SS proc spread ideally among all combat so that no RVS was ever used.
Ideal situation will not happen, but it should be easy to notice how much more benefit a combo point out of global cooldown gives over certain RVS. AND ITS GLYPHED IN MY CALCULATIONS. In real life its even worse since no one glyphs RVS.
-
Banned
thx misams. Always appreciated. :)
-
Member
"I do not like chances, I do not like percentages. I am thinking analytically."
That's contradictory.
I give up. You logic is not fine and you are not analytical.
"The logic also says that if I use RvS at 3 CP and then SS procs a CP, it would be a GCD, CP and Energy loss too. This is wrong. I am not losing GCDs. I am not losing Energy. The CP wasted is not a loss, because it's a mere 20% chance to proc anyway."
Wrong. Simply wrong. But the mathematically proven FACT that both cases are absolutely equivalent doesn't seem to matter, does it?. Who are those at EJ anyway and who am I to question your authority. Just a bunch of geeks with well-founded mathematical knowledge capable of mathematically describing the complex mechanics that lead to one's potential dps output. But math seems to be unimportant at all.
And a mathimatical proof can be wrong anyway, right? Better guess what the right answer is.
My problem here is that you
A) do not recongnize the FACT that using RvS at a random point in the cycle leads to the same goal, as long as you force the buff. That's mathematically proven. God you can show that in less than a minute, that's not even university level, a high school student can show that.
B) you don't support your hypothesis. You simply assume that your way is better than the one which was mathemtically evaluated as the best.
I'll stop arguing at this point since it leads nowhere. Do whatever you want.
I only wonder why only so few question what you say.
-
Banned
I quit on it too. I do not follow common logic and I always try to think different. This does not mean that I blindly believe in what I say. I haven't seen any mathematically proven results. I have only read "you should do this, because it's better".
Anyway, misams's words are enough for me. He explained it nice.
Quote