Mr. Robot and Legendaries

[Deleted]

hey y'all,

I just got lucky today and got another legendary, the Anund's seared shackles, and Mr. Robot is confusing me a bit, in wanting me to drop a lot of haste in order to equip it:

http://imgur.com/a/u6rvV

are the shackles THAT good to drop haste by that much and going even further up in mastery? I obviously need to get a better ring asap, but it's all I got for now.

[SirreASDF]

First off, don't trust mr.robot.

Second, the bracers are currently the best legendary for all situations, according to howtopriest.com. With the bracers simming just above 5% dps increase for every simulated scenario.

That said, ideally you'd want 10-11k haste, and still have the bracers equipped.

(Not sure from the top of my head how much haste% that would be, but I believe 25 as said in the screenshot would be acceptable. So I'd go for the bracers and then look to replace the Violet ring for a haste ring asap. Getting an 840+ ring with haste as the highest secondary roll shouldn't be to hard.

[MendUS]

First off, don't trust mr.robot.

Quote for truth.

[Ilir]

why is the SP community so butthurt about AMR ? just asking because when looking at other classes' forum you don't see that much hate

[Kilee25]

There's a handful of people near the top of the "food chain" in the community who have been propagating a mini war against them pretty much since they started. I did a writeup of my theories why in the guide thread at the top of the forum. I am too lazy to type it all out again, plus I just don't care anymore.

- - - Updated - - -

Follow up more on topic. The game changes rapidly and it's extremely difficult to hit a moving target. Any site or tc source can be "wrong" or outdated at a moments notice. AMR, like any other source of information, is run by people, who are fallible and have lives like everyone else. "Trust but verify" is a good policy. Also in my experience so far if you have a question about some of their information, they are usually very communicative and straightforward in emails or on their forums.

[SirreASDF]

why is the SP community so butthurt about AMR ? just asking because when looking at other classes' forum you don't see that much hate

I have seen the same occurance in most class forums, and not only regarding AMR, also against Noxxic (or whateveR?) and Icy-Veins. Basically, it boils down to, if there is a better source for theorycrafting, such as Howtopriest for priests, people should use that source for accurate information.

It was the same back in TBC for warriors, where people would use MaxDPS.com, instead of going to Elitist-Jerks.

That's my vision at least. Don't use a questionable source, if you have better information available. It applies to every subject, that you'd discuss on an internet forum. Use credible sources!

[Ponk]

why is the SP community so butthurt about AMR ? just asking because when looking at other classes' forum you don't see that much hate

What makes you think anyone here is butthurt about AMR? Both of the posters above you just said you shouldn't trust it. AMR has always been dodgy with regards to complex stat weights. It's a consequence of taking a simple approach to a complex problem. AMR has uses and is a good tool overall, but if you're interested in actually optimizing your character, you're better off learning from SimC and top-end players, not from AMR.

[MendUS]

There's a handful of people near the top of the "food chain" in the community who have been propagating a mini war against them pretty much since they started. I did a writeup of my theories why in the guide thread at the top of the forum. I am too lazy to type it all out again, plus I just don't care anymore.

- - - Updated - - -

Follow up more on topic. The game changes rapidly and it's extremely difficult to hit a moving target. Any site or tc source can be "wrong" or outdated at a moments notice. AMR, like any other source of information, is run by people, who are fallible and have lives like everyone else. "Trust but verify" is a good policy. Also in my experience so far if you have a question about some of their information, they are usually very communicative and straightforward in emails or on their forums.

Or... you know... AMR's information is just incorrect for nearly every spec. Mostly due to the fact it's a staff of 4 people who don't play the game.

[Kilee25]

My point is not how accurate they are, but that the level hostility thrown at them, and the reasons for that hostility, go beyond simply desiring accuracy. They offer a second opinion, and are attempting to give players without programming and mathematics backgrounds the means to tune their own characters. I do not think they are worthy of such contempt that they often receive.

[MendUS]

My point is not how accurate they are, but that the level hostility thrown at them, and the reasons for that hostility, go beyond simply desiring accuracy. They offer a second opinion, and are attempting to give players without programming and mathematics backgrounds the means to tune their own characters. I do not think they are worthy of such contempt that they often receive.

These people have full-time jobs doing this.

The communities that they compete with do it as a hobby and for no money yet provide more accurate information, and more tools to improve their play and understanding in most cases.

The reason there is contempt is that AMR profits from doing what they do (ad's, premium memberships, etc) and their staff makes a living off giving inaccurate information. When people contribute time and effort to the community for nothing more than some recognition, and someone else is giving out inaccurate information for money, there is reason for some hostility. If you did something as a labor of love and someone else comes in saying "no this is accurate, pay me money please" wouldn't you feel a bit upset about that?

[Yunzi]

There's a reasonable analogy between fast food restaurants and homemade cooking and AMR versus knowledgeable sites. AMR is quick, easy, colorful, one might say *fun*, and user-friendly. So it's attractive to the relatively ignorant. But over time one becomes less and less healthy with more and more consumption of it.

The situation is complicated, and it's wrong to look down on people who eat at McDonald's or use AMR. But at the same time if you have empathy and compassion for other people you prefer them to select the healthy option.

There are real benefits to AMR, just like there are real benefits to fast food (especially, the speed and convenience). The best solution over time is for knowledgeable sites to lessen their deficiencies (become more user-friendly themselves) while maintaining their integrity and quality. This has happened in the Logs site - Warcraft Logs is far more user-friendly than World of Logs. And the result? It's popular - used by many of the "AMR people".

This is why arrogance is particularly problematic on an otherwise high-quality site. All it results in is driving people to the very places you don't want them to go - including to AMR.

[Kilee25]

You've reiterated one of the main reasons that I posted in the shadow thread. There are a few others too.

I did theorycrafting and simcraft work for the community "without pay" for 5+ years. I think it is why I understand the hostility towards AMR better than most.

I do not agree that people who do simcraft and community work receive no compensation. The reward is getting prestige and recognition for your efforts, and access to inner circles of community groups. In many ways, it is better than money - it's a sense of accomplishment and self worth.

AMR in some ways threatens that, hence the hostility. If they are inaccurate on some things, that's a more altruistic reason to attack them than the rest of it.

- - - Updated - - -

Update: I agree with your points Yunzi.

[MendUS]

You've reiterated one of the main reasons that I posted in the shadow thread. There are a few others too.

I did theorycrafting and simcraft work for the community "without pay" for 5+ years. I think it is why I understand the hostility towards AMR better than most.

I do not agree that people who do simcraft and community work receive no compensation. The reward is getting prestige and recognition for your efforts, and access to inner circles of community groups. In many ways, it is better than money - it's a sense of accomplishment and self worth.

AMR in some ways threatens that, hence the hostility. If they are inaccurate on some things, that's a more altruistic reason to attack them than the rest of it.

- - - Updated - - -

Update: I agree with your points Yunzi.

The issue isn't that AMR threatens anything; it's that they lead newer player astray with inaccurate information and cause a lot of headache for community folks since we have to constantly work against their information, which is almost always wrong. By no means does AMR pose a threat to community groups, the fact is community groups wouldn't exist if they could do their job properly. The fact that their recommendations prove to be less optimal than the competing playstyles is proof enough for people to not use their service.

I simply am making the point that people are going to have a hostility towards a group of people who are so often wrong, yet claim (and often times in threads or Discords) that their information is correct all while asking for money. In any other industry that is considered a scam.

I do agree, however, that doing what I do (and others do) for no pay is worth every minute. Recognition and feeling of accomplishment are definitely drivers for people to do this type of work. For me personally, it's seeing a player who was struggling to becoming a master of a spec over time.

[Kilee25]

I'm not even sure you and I disagree on anything here. It seems that we both agree that there is hostility above just the normal accuracy concerns, and it seems that we agree on what those additional reasons are. The only thing we seem to diverge on is whether they offer anything good as a counterweight, and whether that balance of positives and negatives warrants knee-jerk responses of "AMR sucks."

Anyway, I think that they are doing better this expansion than they have in past.

However, the game has gotten frighteningly more complex this expansion than any other. I think keeping up with just one spec of one class is an almost insurmountable task for one person, so doing this for all the classes and variations of their weapon systems and talents seems impossible to me. It would shock me if you couldn't find something wrong with any of them.

However, my interest is in whether Joe Schmoe who just wants to play wow with his buddies and never step foot in mythic raiding can go to AMR and quickly balance their character to a degree that they can set, forget, and start having fun without initiating a 5-month research plan into the intricacies of the spec. If AMR gets you 80% of the way there with a fraction of the hassle, then I consider it a net positive.

[MendUS]

I'm not even sure you and I disagree on anything here. It seems that we both agree that there is hostility above just the normal accuracy concerns, and it seems that we agree on what those additional reasons are. The only thing we seem to diverge on is whether they offer anything good as a counterweight, and whether that balance of positives and negatives warrants knee-jerk responses of "AMR sucks."

Anyway, I think that they are doing better this expansion than they have in past.

However, the game has gotten frighteningly more complex this expansion than any other. I think keeping up with just one spec of one class is an almost insurmountable task for one person, so doing this for all the classes and variations of their weapon systems and talents seems impossible to me. It would shock me if you couldn't find something wrong with any of them.

However, my interest is in whether Joe Schmoe who just wants to play wow with his buddies and never step foot in mythic raiding can go to AMR and quickly balance their character to a degree that they can set, forget, and start having fun without initiating a 5-month research plan into the intricacies of the spec. If AMR gets you 90% of the way there with a fraction of the hassle, then I consider it a net positive.

I can agree to what you said completely, actually. I guess my blood pressure goes up when Joe Schmoe gets the itch to raid harder content and continues to use AMR, leading to confusions and ultimately them having a bad feeling towards AMR after finding out the information they have used for months or years has been inaccurate. I think that's where this growing and perpetual dislike of the service comes from and why it won't go away. Players always start in easier content and work their way up (if they ever do) to harder content and ultimately find out that community driven groups are almost always more optimal.

I think AMR knows it's not going to get the more hardcore players that are min-maxing their characters. The issue that most of us in the Priest community take aim at is that we are also looking to help newer players learn the proper methods from the start, and AMR just complicates that process for newer players (offering them an easy option versus reading through some information). In most cases there are "beginner guides" for brand new players to get them off and running.

Regardless, I don't have that much hostility towards them more than I am disappointed about the current situation. I do agree though that the game is infinitely more complex than previous expansions. Almost all content is crowdsourced at this point with several/dozens of peoples input and contributions.

[elmoe420]

AMR makes great software in my experience. You just have to be willing to actually use it yourself rather than simply relying on their preset stat weights. Their new ML based approach to gear selection is particularly interesting although not very useful in its current incarnation for healers in my opinion. My only real issue with their classic stat weights system is that they do not accept normalized weights.

I'm personally more than happy to pay a little money to fund their continued development. My frustration is really more with the fact that they don't open source most of their software. I think the entire theorycrafting community would benefit immensely from this (as would AMR's relationship with this community) and there is hard proof of this with the work done on SimC over the years. It is particularly strange because Zoopercat even did this whole blog post that talked about how the community benefited so much from SimC being open source yet has chosen to keep everything closed source to the best of my knowledge.

[MendUS]

AMR makes great software in my experience. You just have to be willing to actually use it yourself rather than simply relying on their preset stat weights. Their new ML based approach to gear selection is particularly interesting although not very useful in its current incarnation for healers in my opinion. My only real issue with their classic stat weights system is that they do not accept normalized weights.

I'm personally more than happy to pay a little money to fund their continued development. My frustration is really more with the fact that they don't open source most of their software. I think the entire theorycrafting community would benefit immensely from this (as would AMR's relationship with this community) and there is hard proof of this with the work done on SimC over the years. It is particularly strange because Zoopercat even did this whole blog post that talked about how the community benefited so much from SimC being open source yet has chosen to keep everything closed source to the best of my knowledge.

Bingo......

[Yellowfive]

My frustration is really more with the fact that they don't open source most of their software.

I wrote the simulator, and used simc for many years before that -- the way that I ended up doing it was a direct reaction to my experiences with simc as a developer.

Firstly... there is usually only one guy at any given time who knows how the "core" simulation engine works in simc. If anyone needs anything changed in it, they have to ask that guy. Even though the code is technically open source... the "engine" is a black box to most people working on it, and pretty much everybody using it. The point being: "open source" is not some magical thing that all of a sudden makes the simulator more accessible to even most programmers. Even though I used it for years, I still couldn't go in and modify the guts of simc unless I found someone who really understood it and sat down with them and had them walk me through it.

So the core engine of AMR is really no more opaque than simc for all but about... 2 people.

That said, most people don't care about the core engine -- it's the class modules on top of it that define how each spec works that are more interesting to most people, and that more people contribute to. So I chose that as the "cutoff" point for where AMR becomes open source. All of that information is open and can be edited and reviewed by anyone, just go to http://www.askmrrobot.com/wow/theory

I chose to do it this way because I found even the class modules in simc to be very opaque to most people... including myself. It's just a pain to figure out how anything works. You really need to know at least some C++, and also sit down and talk to the people currently developing it. Otherwise you're pretty much lost. I wanted to improve on this, and make the "interesting" parts more transparent and verifiable, and increase the number of people who could potentially contribute (namely non-programmers who are good at the game and really understand the mechanics).

The system has worked out really well -- Swol wrote almost all of the mechanics for AMR, and he is not a programmer. We've had a few other people help out as well, and would like to encourage more people to get involved.

A lot of people feel that because these pages are not "code" it is not "open source". But... there just... is no code! There are no class modules written in C# hiding out anywhere, those web pages ARE the code. They get dynamically compiled and run each time you start a simulation.

Hopefully that explains it a bit more... AMR is actually MORE open than simc in every way that matters. Or at least that was my intention, and how it seems to me. If there is anything in particular that you want to know more about and can't find on the theory pages, I am glad to provide details -- just have to ask.

[Kilee25]

As a programmer with 15 years of experience, and someone who has downloaded, compiled, and modified SimC, I can confirm the frustrations with learning the engine and code part of the program. It is, in some universal sense of the word, technically open to everyone, but it would take me months/years to come to grips with how everything works without a guiding hand beside me during the initial stages.

The deepest I ever got into it was that I figured out how to add and modify trinkets so that I could fix some minor typos and experiment with behavioral bugs, and even that has changed since the last time I did it.

Also, the last time I worked on SimC many of the instructions were not documented, and some did not do what they said that they would. There were also many undocumented minor bugs and variances that you wouldn't know about it unless you crawled through the output log step by step, or unless someone just told you about it off the cuff.

There's some phrase about "Trust but verify." Basically this became my mantra during theorycrafting sessions. I couldn't trust ANYTHING that came out of it. Every single thing, even simple things, had to be cross-checked and verified painstakingly... I would publish something in my guide, and it would stand for weeks or even months, and then I would get some random PM on a midnight that would invalidate a trinket or a set bonus that I'd had posted in my guide... I learned to start doing practical "real life" tests for everything that I simmed, immediately red-flagging anything that didn't match up almost identically. I had a copy of every single trinket in the game in my bags, and would sit at target dummies checking up times, proc values, cast rotations...

Don't get me wrong - I really appreciate that the opportunity is there. But to borrow a phrase from Boromir, "One does not simply download the SimC code..."

I do not know if it's gotten any better this expansion, but to put it bluntly, just because it's open source doesn't mean its accessible. If anything it's been getting progressively less accessible with each new expansion.

[elmoe420]

AMR is actually MORE open than simc in every way that matters.

Perhaps not in every way that matters to at least some members of the theorycrafting community (look at the posts in this thread).

SimC is GPL v3, free software. This creates a relationship with community contributors that is fundamentally different. This can matter a lot to some people.

That said I've been a happy AMR subscriber for a long time. Keep up the good work!