Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst
1
2
3
LastLast
  1. #21
    Quote Originally Posted by Thorim View Post
    I know a lot of 'common sense' things sometimes turn out to not be true, but I still cannot wrap my head around how pooling energy and then getting the maximum number of CP generating abilities off in quick succession on a high duration rip would just not be absolutely better than this blogs suggestion that pooling doesn't matter.....that's the one thing I was/am having the hardest thing believing. Getting multiple 20, 18, 15 etc second ashamane's bite procs is *surely* better than being energy starved and maybe having it proc at 12, 10 etc seconds.......

    That's the big reason I was arguing against OP's blog post. Are they just basically BSing Zanzha?
    It doesn't seem like you're reading the blog post. Things that the blog post says:

    1. Pooling DOES lead to slightly higher uptime on Ashamane's Bite. But it's only very small. This is because:
    2. Specifically TRYING to pool does NOT always lead to you in fact having more energy available after your Rips. In other words, in many many situations you will end up having pooled despite not trying to pool. I can't emphasize that enough.

    In many situations you will end up having a pool of energy to use after Rip despite not consciously trying to make that happen.

    This could be just rotational timings lining up that way (ie you just have to wait for rip to get into pandemic range anyway) or it could be due to an item you have, or because your cooldowns are up and running. In other words, the strategy of consciously pooling only occasionally leads to you having more energy to spam CD builders after applying a Rip than you otherwise would've had.

    So, since the feral rotation naturally pools energy around Rip anyway, consciously ALWAYS pooling energy even when the rotation doesn't naturally pool energy doesn't make much difference to overall output.

    The upshot is that since Ashamane's Bite is such a relatively small chunk of your damage and because deliberately pooling only sometimes actually leads to a difference in ability usage right after a rip, you don't buy measurably more dps by making sure to always pool as opposed to following the natural flow of the rotation. In fact, whether you use Simcraft (as Swol does in his blog post) or the AMR simulator, pooling or not around Rip doesn't measurably improve your output.

    Again, to repeat, Swol's results follow from using Simcraft. They are not specific to AMR. It is not promoting AMR. It is just deep theorycraft. The main, very interesting to me anyway, result of the theorycraft is that the Feral rotation naturally pools energy around Rip. The result is not: DON'T POOL! The main result is that, in fact, unless you're poorly overwriting your rips because you're failing to refresh in the pandemic window, you end up pooling basically all the time anyway.
    Last edited by thedeisel; 2017-02-20 at 04:30 PM.

  2. #22
    Quote Originally Posted by thedeisel View Post
    It doesn't seem like you're reading the blog post. Things that the blog post says:

    1. Pooling DOES lead to slightly higher uptime on Ashamane's Bite. But it's only very small. This is because:
    2. Specifically TRYING to pool does NOT always lead to you in fact having more energy available after your Rips. In other words, in many many situations you will end up having pooled despite not trying to pool. This could be just rotational timings lining up that way (ie you just have to wait for rip to get into pandemic range anyway) or it could be due to an item you have, or because your cooldowns are up and running. In other words, the strategy of consciously pooling only occasionally leads to you having enough energy to spam CD builders after applying a Rip.

    The upshot is that since Ashamane's Bite is such a relatively small chunk of your damage and because deliberately pooling only sometimes actually leads to a difference in ability usage right after a rip. In fact, whether you use Simcraft (as Swol does in his blog post) or the AMR simulator, pooling or not around Rip doesn't measurably improve your output.

    Again, to repeat, Swol's results follow from using Simcraft. They are not specific to AMR. It is not promoting AMR. It is just deep theorycraft.
    I wonder why the worlds best feral druids call it bunk then? I'm talking rank 1 logging druids who've played the spec for years.........

  3. #23
    They don't call it bunk?

    I still think you (and possibly they!) don't understand the claim Swol is making.

    If you're minding your rips and CDs well, you just don't need to try to pool. You will pool whether you try or not. Pooling is part of the natural flow of the rotation. That's what his sims show. You will almost always end up pooling just by following the timers on your dots. They don't show that you should try to fight against pooling and keep your energy as low as possible at all times. And Swol doesn't claim that. His comparative sims show that you will pool anyway if you're doing the rotation well vis a vis dot refreshes.

    And again, this is all an argument conducted via simcraft. So, if others disagree, just write an APL that outperforms his by pooling in some way other than the way the current APLs implement deliberate forced pooling over and above the natural pooling that occurs.
    Last edited by thedeisel; 2017-02-20 at 04:43 PM.

  4. #24
    Quote Originally Posted by thedeisel View Post
    They don't call it bunk?

    I still think you (and possibly they!) don't understand the claim Swol is making.

    If you're minding your rips and CDs well, you just don't need to try to pool. You will pool whether you try or not. Pooling is part of the natural flow of the rotation. That's what his sims show. You will almost always end up pooling just by following the timers on your dots. They don't show that you should try to fight against pooling and keep your energy as low as possible at all times. And Swol doesn't claim that. His comparative sims show that you will pool anyway if you're doing the rotation well vis a vis dot refreshes.

    And again, this is all an argument conducted via simcraft. So, if others disagree, just write an APL that outperforms his by pooling in some way other than the way the current APLs implement deliberate forced pooling over and above the natural pooling that occurs.
    Except they DO call it bunk, these guys were banned from the feral discord for spreading misinformation. There's a reply just above mine from a feral druid better than me and dare I say you calling his ideas bunk.

    Also as someone said in another reply, SWOL's APL has SotF outperforming Incarnation, which is.............lol

  5. #25
    Quote Originally Posted by Thorim View Post
    Except they DO call it bunk, these guys were banned from the feral discord for spreading misinformation. There's a reply just above mine from a feral druid better than me and dare I say you calling his ideas bunk.

    Also as someone said in another reply, SWOL's APL has SotF outperforming Incarnation, which is.............lol
    It still seems like you're not addressing the issue. Swol might have had a bad advertising problem in his own blog post title. His sims do NOT compare

    (a) Pooling energy

    against

    (b) Not pooling, where not pooling means spamming abilities to keep energy as close to 0 at all times.

    That version of (b) is NOT the opposite of Pooling in the context of his discussion. In the context of this debate, not pooling just means not forcing a pool when you wouldn't already have a pool of energy after applying Rip.

    Nobody, not even Swol, is advocating for (b). All his results show is that you'll basically always have a fat pool of energy when you apply rip whether you try to or not, as long as you obey pandemic rules for refreshing. That's literally all his results show.

    What the blog post shows is that you can't help but pool in 90%+ of the situations in which you're applying Rip.

    And again, that point has literally nothing to do with AMR. It's fully conducted in Simcraft.

    RE: SotF outperforming INC in Swol's APL, I don't get that result at all. So, again, the only way to actually engage Swol's point is to come up with a pooling APL that outperforms his by a meaningful amount.

  6. #26
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Thorim View Post
    Except they DO call it bunk, these guys were banned from the feral discord for spreading misinformation. There's a reply just above mine from a feral druid better than me and dare I say you calling his ideas bunk.

    Also as someone said in another reply, SWOL's APL has SotF outperforming Incarnation, which is.............lol
    AMR Incarnation action list seems to be bad, giving far too low results. SR action list on the other hand seems to give good results very close to simcraft. I simmed my char in both tools and when comparing ability damages there is slight differences, for example Symbiote strike damage from belt legendary seem differ lot but no idea which of tools have it modelled correctly, seems its really hard to get all small details between abilities and their interactions right. For example just bit over week simcraft had multiple fixes done. Would not trust either sim to get everything modeled perfectly right but they are both giving close to same results.

    What comes to AMR peoples ban from discord, it was purely childish behaviour of channel admins, I was looking discussion when ban happened and basically reason for ban was hostility some "top" ferals there feels against AMR.

  7. #27

    Thumbs down

    Yeah silencing dissenting opinions is a very immature thing to do. Having a pair of eyes looking at a problem sideways will occasionally be of help.
    Plus it seems a lot of the negative reaction in this topic is people reacting to AMR not the blog post and missing/misunderstanding the points it was raises, as outlined by others above.

  8. #28
    @thedeisel understands the gist of what I was looking at. For instance, lets say you currently have a set of buffs that would replace your current Rip with a stronger one. The SimC APL will still wait and pool energy before using Rip. My APL will use Rip regardless of your energy because it is "greedy" and wants to get that better Rip ticking. That's just one example, but, it illustrates where you will see differences.

    The article clearly states that I am not telling anyone that pooling is a bad way to play. I'm just suggesting that actively pooling isn't a necessary way to play. The most important thing is to manage your combo points. If the easiest way for a player to do that is to think of the rotation as pooling energy, that's perfectly fine. If it's easier for you (as it is for me) to instead follow a couple of rules around Rip/SR refresh to manage my combo points, you can do that too. Both work, both favor the same stats, gear, etc.

    Regarding the conversation started about Incarnation and SotF - the APL I have in that post wasn't optimized for Incarnation - mainly the Rake refresh condition wasn't handling it as well as it could. I made some updates, and now here is the difference between the SimC and AMR rotations for incarnation:
    AMR Incarnation (564,000 DPS)
    http://www.askmrrobot.com/wow/simula...bc67f4aa9f018a

    SimC Incarnation (567,500 DPS)
    http://www.askmrrobot.com/wow/simula...ca4a56d927313c

    And, here is the difference for SotF:
    AMR SotF (581,500 DPS)
    http://www.askmrrobot.com/wow/simula...c695a7dd3eeb3a

    SimC SotF (557,500 DPS)
    http://www.askmrrobot.com/wow/simula...141cc0b5e41ba9


    The SimC APL is still a hair better for Incarnation, so I'll look into that. But, the AMR APL is much better for SotF. SotF just seems like the better talent for single target damage once you optimize the APL. Those tests were with no set or legendaries. A full look at alternate talents to Savage Roar would be another interesting theorycraft article to write. The big, obvious problem with the SimC APL for SotF is that it still pools before using Ferocious Bite, resulting in more wasted energy and nowhere near the number of Ferocious Bites or Shreds you ought to get.
    Last edited by Swol; 2017-02-20 at 07:55 PM.
    Mr. Robot Developer and Designer.

    Follow Mr. Robot on Twitter or Facebook for updates, feature releases, bug fixes.

  9. #29
    Quote Originally Posted by neiljwd View Post
    Yeah silencing dissenting opinions is a very immature thing to do. Having a pair of eyes looking at a problem sideways will occasionally be of help.
    Plus it seems a lot of the negative reaction in this topic is people reacting to AMR not the blog post and missing/misunderstanding the points it was raises, as outlined by others above.
    Keyword there, opinion. When you present that opinion as a fact of course it's going to be met with opposition.

    Like AMR's collective lack of knowledge about feral is appalling. Swol has literally posted an apl that pools, and then tried to use that to suggest that not pooling is good. Granted, it's a good thing they're improving their tool, but again, sure, that apl does pool less than simc, (why it performs worse) but that doesn't mean it's not pooling.

    Sadly time and time again they've proven to be unreliable, but again that's pretty unsurprising. You take the crowd sourced efforts of some of the top feral theorycrafters and pit it against that of a limited team that has to handle every class and specc. Couple this with it being a for profit operation, and their only interaction with the community being to pop up whenever someone badmouths their product it's pretty easy to understand why AMR is met with such disdain at this point. But yeh in terms of accuracy they're basically the Noxxic to Simc's Icy Veins.
    Feral Meme machine

  10. #30
    Bloodsail Admiral Slippykins's Avatar
    10+ Year Old Account
    Join Date
    Jul 2012
    Location
    Melbourne
    Posts
    1,128
    Let's stick to the discussion at hand and move away from attacking the posters and their affiliated organisations. You disagree with arguments, not people.

  11. #31
    The SimC APL specifically pools energy before using any finisher. The only time a low energy Rip could be used is if Rip is not ticking or Rake will fall off in less than 1.5 seconds. The only time a low energy Savage Roar can be used is if Rake will fall off in less than 1.5 seconds. Ferocious Bite is held as an energy dump and used only when in danger of capping energy or when you have Berserk or will soon use Tiger’s Fury.
    and
    For instance, lets say you currently have a set of buffs that would replace your current Rip with a stronger one. The SimC APL will still wait and pool energy before using Rip. My APL will use Rip regardless of your energy because it is "greedy" and wants to get that better Rip ticking. That's just one example, but, it illustrates where you will see differences
    are patently false.

    The SimC APL does in fact refresh rip instantly if the new modifer is stronger, as seen here:
    # Refresh Rip at 8 seconds or for a stronger Rip
    actions.finisher+=/rip,cycle_targets=1,if=(!ticking|(remains<8&target.health.pct>25&!talent.sabertooth.enable d)|persistent_multiplier>dot.rip.pmultiplier)&target.time_to_die-remains>tick_time*4&combo_points=5&(energy.time_to_max<1|buff.berserk.up|buff.incarnation. up|buff.elunes_guidance.up|cooldown.tigers_fury.remains<3|set_bonus.tier18_4pc|(buff.clear casting.react&energy>65)|talent.soul_of_the_forest.enabled|!dot.rip.ticking|(dot.rake.rema ins<1.5&spell_targets.swipe_cat<6))
    This section is even in your annotated APL link. Those differences we should be observing are coming from something else entirely.

    I want the community to have access to as many tools as possible, and I appreciate the effort that you make as well as the discussion. The outright hostility you encountered in feral discord was unfortunate, and out of line. But how am I supposed to take this kind of statement, when you've claimed that you know both the APLs in and out? It doesn't build trust at all.

    If pooling wasn't part of maximizing damage, it'd make my life a lot easier — but ingame experience says it does. Doing a quick and dirty edit of the SimC APL removing the "energy.time_to_max<1" line whenever it shows up (said line being the one that tells it to pool unless other conditions are met, like higher damage modifier or uptimes being compromised), and changing nothing else, shows this:


    SimC input here, if you want to run it yourself. I'm not an expert at this at all, I just know how to use the search function. If you find issues I'm all ears.

    This is a 28k DPS difference. It's also 3.8%, which is above your article's given threshold of 1-2% as "a meaningful difference". I'll grant there are surely more elegant ways of doing this, but it seems to me like this is a very good argument in favor of pooling as an important factor in getting the most out of your feral, which is also what you're looking for when simming yourself.

    Re: 'natural' pooling, that just seems like a semantic mess. Either you're pooling, or you're not. Of course you can't always, that's how the timers end up working. Oftentimes however there are times when you could cast something but shouldn't — that's pooling.

    I am calling [...] the AMR APL “No Pooling”.
    So, there are a few times when some passive, incidental pooling will occur
    In conclusion, pool energy if you want to, or don’t! It is not crucial to Feral DPS.
    Do we really need to ask people to not say "You don't need to pool" when the model you're using to reach that conclusion is, in fact, pooling?
    Last edited by ghostydog; 2017-02-22 at 01:10 AM. Reason: clarity

  12. #32
    actions.finisher+=/rip,cycle_targets=1,if=
    (!ticking|(remains<8&target.health.pct>25&!talent.sabertooth.enabled)|persistent_multiplier >dot.rip.pmultiplier)&
    target.time_to_die-remains>tick_time*4&
    combo_points=5&
    (energy.time_to_max<1|buff.berserk.up|buff.incarnation.up|buff.elunes_guidance.up|cooldown. tigers_fury.remains<3|set_bonus.tier18_4pc|(buff.clearcasting.react&energy>65)|talent.soul _of_the_forest.enabled|!dot.rip.ticking|(dot.rake.remains<1.5&spell_targets.swipe_cat<6))

    The persistent multiplier condition is in a block of conditions that is joined by an AND operator to the block of conditions that includes the pooling. So, my statement is not patently false! This line will indeed not allow Rip to be refreshed unless one of the following conditions is met:

    Energy will max out in less than 1 second,
    You have Berserk,
    You have Incarnation,
    You have Elune's Guidance,
    The cooldown on Tiger's Fury is less than 3 seconds,
    You have the 4pc T18 bonus,
    You have clearcasting AND more than 65 energy,
    You have soul of the forest,
    Rip is not ticking,
    Rake has less than 1.5 seconds remaining AND less than 6 targets are in range of Swipe

    Simply taking out the energy.time_to_max<1 line is not going to be a fair comparison of a pooling vs non-pooling strategy, as you yourself pointed out. I wrote my APL because I wanted to see if there was another way to think about the feral rotation besides pooling energy before finishers. I also made it because I like to make APLs and I find Feral druids to be complicated and interesting from a rotation standpoint.

    As I pointed out in my update to the article, you can go to the extreme with my APL if you want and make sure it never waits when you have 5 combo points by adding in this line after Ferocious Bite in the finishers:
    actions.finisher+=/rip,if=(energy>=50|buff.berserk.up&energy>=25)

    The only point my APL could ever wait while at 5 combo points is if you have more than 12 seconds left on Savage Roar and less than 8 seconds left on Rip, but more than 4.8 seconds left on Rip. Adding this line will make you just use Rip instead of waiting for Rip to tick down to 4.8 seconds or Savage Roar to tick down to under 12 seconds.

    Here is the DPS of the rotation with the APL I used in the article:
    689,456 DPS - http://www.askmrrobot.com/wow/simula...e66b143af2df67

    And here it is with that line added in, which ENSURES no pooling ever occurs:
    689,383 DPS http://www.askmrrobot.com/wow/simula...cb1cb103f0d4c3

    (You can see in the "rotation" section of the result that it only ever reaches that extra condition 2.3 times. This means that the APL I used in the article will only actively pool energy 2.3 times the entire fight, for maybe a second or two. If it will make the Feral TC discord happy, I can change the APL in the article to this one to avoid confusion.)

    I don't know what else I have to do to prove to you that the APL I wrote really, really does not pool energy. It will use a finisher when you reach 5 combo points unless you just don't have enough energy to even cast the finisher.

    I personally think it is exciting to find two different ways to play a spec that both work.
    Last edited by Swol; 2017-02-22 at 04:40 AM.
    Mr. Robot Developer and Designer.

    Follow Mr. Robot on Twitter or Facebook for updates, feature releases, bug fixes.

  13. #33
    Deleted
    Quote Originally Posted by Swol View Post

    The SimC APL is still a hair better for Incarnation, so I'll look into that. But, the AMR APL is much better for SotF. SotF just seems like the better talent for single target damage once you optimize the APL. Those tests were with no set or legendaries. A full look at alternate talents to Savage Roar would be another interesting theorycraft article to write. The big, obvious problem with the SimC APL for SotF is that it still pools before using Ferocious Bite, resulting in more wasted energy and nowhere near the number of Ferocious Bites or Shreds you ought to get.
    Something still not right with Incarnation, maybe talent implementation broken in AMR so even with simcraft action list it does far too low results when used inside AMR?

    Boss scripts used:
    Simcraft: 300sec+-20sec
    AMR: Single Target 300

    With Savage Roar close:
    simcraft: 634,864
    AMR: 636,812

    With Incarnation, 6% difference:
    simcraft: 625,346
    AMR: 590,269

    Would be nice if AMR simulation result spell list had "DPS" column like simcraft has, would be much easier to compare results per abilities.

  14. #34
    I personally think it is exciting to find two different ways to play a spec that both work.
    I'd be excited too if I could find any evidence it actually held ingame.
    Izem - Argent Dawn
    Armory | Logs

  15. #35
    Seems like a whole bunch of 'please pay for our product instead of using the free (and arguable better) alternatives'.

    I personally think it is exciting to find two different ways to play a spec that both work.
    This would be exciting if it translated into an in game dps equivalent or increase. But the fact is if you dont pool properly in game you will lose dps

  16. #36
    Quote Originally Posted by ghostydog View Post
    I'd be excited too if I could find any evidence it actually held ingame.
    There are a couple of things that could be happening:
    1.) We need to create a better pooling APL, since the current one in SimC is not out-performing a non-pooling APL.
    2.) We are seeing the effects of long-running confirmation bias. All top feral druids think pooling is necessary, so, they all pool energy. As a result, all top parses are from feral druids who pool energy. To give a fair test in-game, many top feral druids would have to practice and perfect the non-pooling rotation and use it on hundreds, thousands of fights to give it a fair empirical comparison.

    Another point I forgot to mention regarding your "quick and dirty test" where you removed the energy.time_to_max<1 lines from the SimC APL: That actually has the opposite effect from your intended test. Removing that line causes the SimC APL to pool too MUCH energy and over-cap, which is why you are seeing the DPS loss.

    If you guys ever want to take a break from trying to discredit me, let me know and we could instead try to work out an improved pooling APL.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by Morg View Post
    Seems like a whole bunch of 'please pay for our product instead of using the free (and arguable better) alternatives'.
    The AMR simulator is free. The AMR gear optimizer is free. My entire analysis was done using SimC.

    - - - Updated - - -

    Quote Originally Posted by sahtila View Post
    Something still not right with Incarnation, maybe talent implementation broken in AMR so even with simcraft action list it does far too low results when used inside AMR?
    I took a look at this and the problem was with Ferocious Bite. There was a little bug in how the energy cost was being handled while Incarnation is up, which resulted in the damage being too low on FB during Incarnation. I'll post an update to the simulator later today that includes the fix, thanks for pointing it out.
    Mr. Robot Developer and Designer.

    Follow Mr. Robot on Twitter or Facebook for updates, feature releases, bug fixes.

  17. #37
    Deleted
    Would it work for APL to pool all possible extra energy when there is Shadow Rip on target. And when there is no Shadow Rip, APL would burn actively all spare energy to try force proc it, of course still following basic rules to keep bleed and SR uptimes. Would this work with energy ring legandary so that there is enough room for that?
    Though I guess gains would be minimal even if it worked, shadow rip is just soo small part of damage.
    Last edited by mmoc5089588ed8; 2017-02-22 at 03:34 PM.

  18. #38
    Quote Originally Posted by Zanzha View Post
    I mean, there's a reason you guys got kicked off the discord for spreading misinformation
    I got kicked off the discord for saying that 7.1.5 had nerfs, especially if you had legendary gloves and rip relics. Was that spreading misinformation?

  19. #39
    We need to first examine both the factual and situation benefits of pooling beyond simply increasing your average AB uptimes before drawing the conclusion that pooling may or may not affect your dps.

    While AB uptime is the most readily accessible point of data to examine when discussing pooling, whether directly coded into the APL (SimC) or incidentally so (AMR---see So, there are a few times when some passive, incidental pooling will occur if you have more than 12 seconds left on Savage Roar and less than 8 seconds left on Rip, but more than 4.8 seconds left on Rip. It will wait until Savage Roar drops below 12 seconds or Rip drops below 4.8 seconds to act.) There are several other equally significant benefits obtained from pooling resources which have not been mentioned here or in the aforementioned article.

    The idea of pooling energy stems from two basic concepts.

    1. You have a finite amount of energy available over the course of a given fight.
    2. It is desirable to allocate that energy into abilities which will deal the most damage in a given scenario without wasting energy.

    With this in mind it is not difficult to understand why you should wait as long as possible before using an ability in order to ensure it is the highest damaging ability you can cast without wasting energy. Within the Vacuum of a ST patchwork simulation the value gained from pooling in this manner is very difficult to quantify however in any kind dynamic raid environment where unavoidable downtime or add spawns occur meaning you want to refresh dots early or apply a second set of dots asap (think Elerethe or M Ursoc respectively), the value of having a pool of energy available to react to said changes is significant. If we were to play as Swol’s APL suggests, meaning you simply refresh dots/SR at a specific threshold when the resources are available to do so, you will have less energy available to react to changes which occur in a dynamic raid environment than an APL which focuses on pooling energy to max before casting a finisher.

  20. #40
    Quote Originally Posted by Scarbrohelpme View Post
    While AB uptime is the most readily accessible point of data to examine when discussing pooling, whether directly coded into the APL (SimC) or incidentally so (AMR---see So, there are a few times when some passive, incidental pooling will occur if you have more than 12 seconds left on Savage Roar and less than 8 seconds left on Rip, but more than 4.8 seconds left on Rip. It will wait until Savage Roar drops below 12 seconds or Rip drops below 4.8 seconds to act.)
    This statement underestimates the amount of pooling the "no pool" APL will do. Every time you have a rip that is buffed by X Y and Z snapshots it will wait to apply the next rip if the next rip won't also have X Y and Z.

    On top of that, it's important to remember that none of these APLs shred as soon as they have the energy for it. They shred only to avoid capping energy. That in and of itself leads to energy being pooled naturally.

    The benefits of pooling in a non-patchwerk situation are important to mention, but again, the kind of pooling in question in this debate is only the pooling that happens around Rip. Nobody is doubting that in general sitting on energy is a good thing. But again, that's captured in the idea that the APLs shred only to avoid capping energy rather than in order to keep energy at 0 as much as possible.


    Edit: Actually, reading through the annotated APLs from Swol's blog post, it's not clear to me that the default SimC APL (the 'pooling' APL) actually does only use shred to avoid capping energy while Swol's clearly has that as a condition of using Shred. That might be one source of why there isn't much of a difference between the two APLs—they both pool just differently. The default SimC pools specifically around Rip. Swol's pools by default and only shreds to avoid capping energy. As a result, Swol's will consistently end up having pooled around Rip anyway.


    Default SimC shred condition: "/shred,if=combo_points<5&(spell_targets.swipe_cat<3|talent.brutal_slash.enabled)"
    Swol shred condition: "shred,if=spell_targets.swipe_cat<3&(dot.rake.remains>(2+1*talent.jagged_wounds.enabled)|e nergy.time_to_max<1)"

    edit again: nevermind again, the energy condition in Swol's apl is an or, so it'll shred as soon as there's energy for it as long as there are fewer than three targets and there's enough time left on rake.
    Last edited by thedeisel; 2017-02-23 at 03:00 AM.

Posting Permissions

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