Page 27 of 28 FirstFirst ...
17
25
26
27
28
LastLast
  1. #521
    Deleted
    early SimC results shows slightly higher dps for all specs
    375465 34.2% Hunter_BM_T16H
    365437 33.3% Hunter_SV_T16H
    355865 32.4% Hunter_MM_T16H

    I think as reported to lokrick that the latest KC buff is missing here, but anyway you can see that the DPS delta compared to rogues is not that wide. There's also spec specific tunning missing here. Think also that in most scenarios hunters usually beat sims by a "fair" margin (or that sims sim us lower than they should).

  2. #522
    Quote Originally Posted by spaceape View Post
    Quote Originally Posted by Finick View Post
    I've been wondering... The introduction of mastery was originally to give classes a "balancing knob" to turn, wasn't it? Why don't they ever turn that knob?

    They always seem to mess with everything else, and completely ignore mastery. Not that I think it would fix all the problems we have, but it would be nice to see if buffed so it was at least not such a weak secondary.
    Yeam man, you hit the nail on the head for me. Exactly what I think when I see balancing/scaling issues.
    A blue post already said that was a miscommunication. They don't want to use mastery as a tuning knob, because then mastery just becomes the best stat and everyone reforges mastery.

    It doesn't really make sense in most cases to use a stat to tune/adjust the entirety of a classes damage. Not that our mastery in general couldn't use an adjustment, but that's different from DPS balancing. If we're at where they want us and then they want to buff mastery or improve it's scaling, they'd just nerf something else.
    Main - Spirál - Hunter

  3. #523
    Quote Originally Posted by pichuca View Post
    early SimC results shows slightly higher dps for all specs
    375465 34.2% Hunter_BM_T16H
    365437 33.3% Hunter_SV_T16H
    355865 32.4% Hunter_MM_T16H

    I think as reported to lokrick that the latest KC buff is missing here, but anyway you can see that the DPS delta compared to rogues is not that wide. There's also spec specific tunning missing here. Think also that in most scenarios hunters usually beat sims by a "fair" margin (or that sims sim us lower than they should).
    Why do people keep comparing sim numbers from different class modules, I thought that stopped being a thing in T14? People should know better.

  4. #524
    Did the most recent changes put us back in a competitive state? Or is no one testing PTR this late?

  5. #525
    Quote Originally Posted by Volant View Post
    Did the most recent changes put us back in a competitive state? Or is no one testing PTR this late?
    Put us back to where live is right now, give or take a few dps.

  6. #526
    Quote Originally Posted by Slot View Post
    Put us back to where live is right now, give or take a few dps.
    Which is as good as we're gonna get. Blizzard can't buff us any more to make up for a lack of any notable multidotting, or we will be op as hell on single target fights, not sure if that's really a bad thing. Then of course as we all know, as soon as any cleave/multidotting comes into a fight we will be in an uncomfortable position.

  7. #527
    Quote Originally Posted by Megabloks View Post
    Which is as good as we're gonna get. Blizzard can't buff us any more to make up for a lack of any notable multidotting, or we will be op as hell on single target fights, not sure if that's really a bad thing. Then of course as we all know, as soon as any cleave/multidotting comes into a fight we will be in an uncomfortable position.
    Well if our scaling was anywhere near most classes I wouldn't be worried, but as history has showed we have needed a mid patch buff because of our shitty scaling. I hope when they redo us in the next expansion that they fix our craptastic scaling.

  8. #528
    Quote Originally Posted by Kennyloggins View Post
    Why do people keep comparing sim numbers from different class modules, I thought that stopped being a thing in T14? People should know better.
    Gonna miss seeing you raid man.



    Quote Originally Posted by Volant View Post
    Did the most recent changes put us back in a competitive state? Or is no one testing PTR this late?
    I feel like I'm in a damn Lifetime movie with this class. Like, some day time movie where a guy gets sent to prison for a crime he didn't commit. So, they offer him the option to work on the chain-gang for 8 months to get a short sentence so he can see his kids. So he takes it, 'cuz he needs to get out and see his kids grow up, and there's that inevitable scene where it's glaringly bright, hot-as-hell, high noon, on a road out in the desert, and he's sweating and passing out from the heat, and the big tough "prison bully" type guy helps him up and is like "DO IT FOR YOUR KIDS", and he gets up, and he picks up the pickaxe and is breaking up stones and stuff and he's like "FOR MY KIDS!" and the prison guards all nod and are like "Respect", and everyone is cheering for him and stuff.

    Yeah, that's the damn scene every time I play my Hunter next tier. DO IT FOR YOUR GUILD. JUST ONE MORE TIER OF PROGRESSION AND YOU CAN REROLL. DO IT FOR YOUR GUILD. I dream fondly of the day I can stop playing this toon. I count it down on my calendar. Competitive? Hell no, we're a bundle of broken mechanics and flaming garbage. Can we *do* some fights? Sure, but the class has never been more half-assed.


    DO IT FOR YOUR GUILD.
    Last edited by subrosian; 2013-09-03 at 04:22 PM.

  9. #529
    SimC has also been updated with latest buffs, and the results are promising. From Lokrick's latest SimC results on EJ (we had asked for breakdowns of fervor/toth/db in T16 BiS):

    398572 16.9% bm_moc_db
    395119 16.8% Hunter_BM_T16H (bs_db)
    394942 16.8% bm_moc_toth
    391290 16.6% bm_bs_toth
    387667 16.5% bm_moc_fervor
    386034 16.4% bm_bs_fervor

    If this is even close to accurate, we should be very competitive in BM. SV numbers were looking like ~10k dps difference in single target from BM, but Lokrick hasn't posted any similar breakdowns as to the above and certainly hasn't done the same tweaking he has done for the BM profiles.

    Also, somewhat of a request for more information here. Esoth has picked back up the SV guide at EJ and is looking for feedback on 5.4 analysis of:

    • Proper target count for multi-shot dot upkeep, and proper target count for spamming multi shot.
    • Preferred trinkets

    Has anyone done analyses of the multi-dotting/multishotting? I would guess that the target counts should be similar to 5.2/5.3 for SV. I know hunters have been claiming that fights like Council can see excellent dps gains from stinging each boss as SV. What's the breaking point on that?

  10. #530
    So according to these numbers aMoC/DB is better than Blink Strikes/DB for BM. I find that hard to believe in real raid scenarios, perhaps in a patchwork type fight?

  11. #531
    Stood in the Fire Kuul's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Dec 2012
    Location
    Finland
    Posts
    496
    Quote Originally Posted by Windthorn View Post
    So according to these numbers aMoC/DB is better than Blink Strikes/DB for BM. I find that hard to believe in real raid scenarios, perhaps in a patchwork type fight?
    You are correct.

  12. #532
    What is the logic behind that. AMoC is weaker than it is on live, and blink strikes are not getting any nerfs that wouldn't affect AMoC too (Eg weaker trinkets).
    10 min fight -
    140% start
    280% 2 min
    420% 4 min
    560% 6 min
    700% 8 min.
    840% 10 min.

    10 min fight -
    200% start
    300% 2 min
    400% 4 min
    600% 6 min
    700% 8 min
    800% 10 min.

    And then readiness comes off again and it repeats (200% for live, 140% for ptr). Basicly, at some intervals, PTR AMoC is slightly ahead, on some live is. Can you test with different time intervals, just to make sure you aren't setting it to a "sweet spot" for PTR AMoC?

  13. #533
    Over 9000! Poppincaps's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Twilight Town
    Posts
    9,498
    Quote Originally Posted by Dracodraco View Post
    What is the logic behind that. AMoC is weaker than it is on live, and blink strikes are not getting any nerfs that wouldn't affect AMoC too (Eg weaker trinkets).
    10 min fight -
    140% start
    280% 2 min
    420% 4 min
    560% 6 min
    700% 8 min.
    840% 10 min.

    10 min fight -
    200% start
    300% 2 min
    400% 4 min
    600% 6 min
    700% 8 min
    800% 10 min.

    And then readiness comes off again and it repeats (200% for live, 140% for ptr). Basicly, at some intervals, PTR AMoC is slightly ahead, on some live is. Can you test with different time intervals, just to make sure you aren't setting it to a "sweet spot" for PTR AMoC?
    You have to take into account that the second AMoC with readiness has to be cast at 30 second in and then every two minutes after that.

  14. #534
    Quote Originally Posted by Shootandkill View Post
    You have to take into account that the second AMoC with readiness has to be cast at 30 second in and then every two minutes after that.
    Regardless, the overall output is at worst even, at best in favor of the current AMoC at the majority of time-intervals. You also have to consider things like not getting to use the full 30 seconds of AMoC on an almost-dying boss, or immunity phases etc, all part of the RNG of a "real" encounter.
    I am also not seeing an increase in DPS from using AMoC when enabling PTR on Femaledwarf.com - suffice to say that I remain unconvinced that it's supposed to be better.

  15. #535
    Oh boy, Blizzard wanted the min-maxers to use active instead of passive, but they are making TotH and BS best for BM.... Logic.jpg

  16. #536
    Quote Originally Posted by Dracodraco View Post
    Regardless, the overall output is at worst even, at best in favor of the current AMoC at the majority of time-intervals. You also have to consider things like not getting to use the full 30 seconds of AMoC on an almost-dying boss, or immunity phases etc, all part of the RNG of a "real" encounter.
    I am also not seeing an increase in DPS from using AMoC when enabling PTR on Femaledwarf.com - suffice to say that I remain unconvinced that it's supposed to be better.
    FD was last updated on 8/26 and is working off an earlier build. SimC was simming about 10k dps higher than FD for 17331 (the build that FD is using, I believe). SimC is now updated to build 17345, and Lokrick claims it is now more in line with BM mechanics on the PTR.

    Also, SimC has always been more accurate at modeling haste than FD. Zeherah has certainly acknowledged that. I know that for both simulators, they are not accurately modeling MM rotations (Lokrick detailed his attempts at addressing this here), but I'm not entirely sure about the limitations of the BM profiles. We'll certainly see updates to the simulators in the next 3-4 weeks as Lokrick and Zeherah have more time to adjust to the 5.4 changes.

    Edit: P.S. I am still recommending BS over AMoC on the BM guide. Such a small gain is negligible when considering in-game mechanics, the focus requirements of AMoC (especially given the increased focus cost of AS), etc. Besides, simulators tend to award more hits from pet-like abilities like crows and DB than what actually occur in average parses. We could be seeing something like that in SimC right now for AMoC.
    Last edited by Effinhunter; 2013-09-05 at 04:39 PM.

  17. #537
    Quote Originally Posted by Tehterokkar View Post
    Oh boy, Blizzard wanted the min-maxers to use active instead of passive, but they are making TotH and BS best for BM.... Logic.jpg
    I thought they wanted to remove how many buttons we have to press.

  18. #538
    Quote Originally Posted by Effinhunter View Post
    FD was last updated on 8/26 and is working off an earlier build. SimC was simming about 10k dps higher than FD for 17331 (the build that FD is using, I believe). SimC is now updated to build 17345, and Lokrick claims it is now more in line with BM mechanics on the PTR.

    Also, SimC has always been more accurate at modeling haste than FD. Zeherah has certainly acknowledged that. I know that for both simulators, they are not accurately modeling MM rotations (Lokrick detailed his attempts at addressing this here), but I'm not entirely sure about the limitations of the BM profiles. We'll certainly see updates to the simulators in the next 3-4 weeks as Lokrick and Zeherah have more time to adjust to the 5.4 changes.

    Edit: P.S. I am still recommending BS over AMoC on the BM guide. Such a small gain is negligible when considering in-game mechanics, the focus requirements of AMoC (especially given the increased focus cost of AS), etc. Besides, simulators tend to award more hits from pet-like abilities like crows and DB than what actually occur in average parses. We could be seeing something like that in SimC right now for AMoC.
    All the 08-27 notes added, was damage buffs to our main nukes. The balance between AMoC and Blink Strikes should be completly untouched. No mastery or haste scaling was changed, and the two spells themselves weren't either. The only difference that you should see is base damage increasing, the proportional damage difference between AMoC and Blink strikes should not change. If they are changing due to a Kill Command buff, then something's gone derp with the module.

    Also, I'm about 95% sure Zeherah's is up to date. The changes were data-mined the 26th, and the tool was updated the 26th. She just didn't wait for the officall patch notes before implementing the changes to the PTR-stats.

    As for Haste being hard to simulate for FD, it should not be affecting BS nor AMoC in any major ways. I concede that the overall DPS might be slightly off from the "real" value, but once again - with no haste procs etc, the amount of damage added by haste is fairly consistent apart from how many cobra shots etc we do, with no real or extremely minor effects on FD/AMoC.

    But if there is any logic/math behind why AMoC would suddenly overtake Blink Strikes with 3K dps, I'm all ears tbh. I just can't for the life of me figure out why.


    Quote Originally Posted by BergErr View Post
    I thought they wanted to remove how many buttons we have to press.
    Not through making talent choises obsolete.
    Last edited by Dracodraco; 2013-09-05 at 05:55 PM.

  19. #539
    Quote Originally Posted by Effinhunter View Post
    FD was last updated on 8/26 and is working off an earlier build. SimC was simming about 10k dps higher than FD for 17331 (the build that FD is using, I believe). SimC is now updated to build 17345, and Lokrick claims it is now more in line with BM mechanics on the PTR.

    Also, SimC has always been more accurate at modeling haste than FD. Zeherah has certainly acknowledged that. I know that for both simulators, they are not accurately modeling MM rotations (Lokrick detailed his attempts at addressing this here), but I'm not entirely sure about the limitations of the BM profiles. We'll certainly see updates to the simulators in the next 3-4 weeks as Lokrick and Zeherah have more time to adjust to the 5.4 changes.

    Edit: P.S. I am still recommending BS over AMoC on the BM guide. Such a small gain is negligible when considering in-game mechanics, the focus requirements of AMoC (especially given the increased focus cost of AS), etc. Besides, simulators tend to award more hits from pet-like abilities like crows and DB than what actually occur in average parses. We could be seeing something like that in SimC right now for AMoC.
    im not a big fan of 30 sec dots that may not get wasted may get wasted. specially on adds fights. they really need to change those 2 talents AMoC and Lynx Rush. im still not sold on TOTH because the 3 gcd requirements i think is too much and it lock you down way too much, if they change that talent to reduce focus cost by 20 of next 3 abilities that cost focus would be much better and i will def take it over fevor or even dire beast.

  20. #540
    Quote Originally Posted by Dracodraco View Post
    As for Haste being hard to simulate for FD, it should not be affecting BS nor AMoC in any major ways. I concede that the overall DPS might be slightly off from the "real" value, but once again - with no haste procs etc, the amount of damage added by haste is fairly consistent apart from how many cobra shots etc we do, with no real or extremely minor effects on FD/AMoC.

    But if there is any logic/math behind why AMoC would suddenly overtake Blink Strikes with 3K dps, I'm all ears tbh. I just can't for the life of me figure out why.
    FD's haste system is based off the old plateau system. You can game the FD simulator to induce extra auto attacks, RPPM procs, and pet hits by adjusting the haste up or down by small increments, even though this is not how attacks work in game. Most people call this "shot shifting", and when I post FD BiS profiles on EJ, I tend to try to find these plateau marks, even though they're artificial. You can read more about testing of this mechanic in the DB section of this guide. This was also addressed in an update to Rogerbrown's guide on the Method site here.

    Unless the FD engine is fundamentally changed, you will always see these plateau marks with haste, and that's why the stat scaling that is generated for haste sometimes wildly varies when you change haste reforges in your profile in FD. The nice thing about FD's model is that you won't get deviations when running the same profile. However, this simplification of haste does insert artificial plateaus in FD for many types of procs and attacks, even though the plateaus do not exist in the game for hunters (and this will affect all abilities, especially where RPPM trinkets are concerned).

    SimC simulates thousands of runs without artificial haste plateaus. It tries to emulate the way the in game system actually works for hunters by having a random percent chance for each attack to generate an extra attack or proc. That's why the haste model is so much more realistic (in regards to in game performance) in SimC than FD. It's not perfect, and the modules are in a constant state of flux as developers try to approximate the in game engine, but fundamentally, it is more accurate than FD.

    This has been a known problem in FD since the haste plateaus were removed from some hunter mechanics and was compounded by RPPM (which will affect both BS and AMoC valuing in FD). FD gives a good overall picture, but SimC will continue to be more accurate for RPPM trinkets (Zeherah's comments on this), pet attacks, and anything else that is not based on haste plateaus. If you're interested in seeing the kind of simplifications that occur in FD, you can check the DB calculations in Zeherah's haste calculator. The fact that FD and SimC are ever close is remarkable and shows how much work Zeherah puts into the tool.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •