Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst
1
2
3
4
LastLast
  1. #41
    Quote Originally Posted by Schizoide View Post
    This makes no sense. BT and RC have the same efficiency, but BT gives death runes. RC's only advantage is consistently paired runes, allowing for a more comfortable "rhythm" of play. But that is not a DPS improvement, unless you can't seem to make BT work and always spend those extra runes on a heart strike.
    assuming you are playing for survival, as in not using D runes on heart strike, RC is a gain over blood tap. They have roughly the same survival (again, not counting fights that favor one or the other) but they do it in different ways. RC does it by speeding up all runes, which results in a consistent and smooth DS return, and BT does it by allowing you to bank runes for DS.

    The dmg difference comes from the fact that RC's bonus also applies to B runes (heart strike/necrotic strike) whereas BT's benefit involves using B runes less and alotting more rune throughput to Death Strike, which is a dmg loss.

  2. #42
    You're right there are fights where BT is clearly better than RC. However there are also fights where they are basically equal, and RC DOES do about 10% more dps at no cost of survival. If there are burst mechanics (horridon, tortos, jikun, ra-den ect.) then you should be using BT. Fights with consistent damage (primordius, jinrokh, iron qon, consorts ect.) the two are basically equal for survival but RC does more damage without sacrificing any survival.
    Yes, but you can simple chose to use 1/3 (or more) of your death runes from BT on heart (or even necrotic) strike instead if survivability is a non-factor and bt will be at almost the same dps as RC (and still have the same/superior survival). That this generally will be a worse option than to simply keep using all your death runes on death strikes and gear for more dps stats or even letting your healers dps more is another matter.

    You can't really say that it's a fight where survivability doesn't matter and then assume that BT uses all its additional runes on death strikes, that simply doesn't make sense.

    If anything I would say that BT is going to be ahead of RC in dps as well in realistic situations. When necessary you can use all your death runes on death strikes, and when it isn't (not tanking/major cds up/low intake) you can dump all of them (instead of just 1/3'd) into necrotic strikes or even blood boils


    Regarding all the sims for the dps specs, macro'd blood tap has a greater lead on unmacro'd blood tap the more movement there is during the fight (for obvious reasons), so it's not "just" a *insert tiny number*% dps increase on every fight.
    Last edited by Cookie; 2013-05-09 at 01:52 PM.

  3. #43
    Legendary! Treelife's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2010
    Location
    England
    Posts
    6,811
    Quote Originally Posted by Schizoide View Post
    I can't imagine anyone short of Rain Man choosing unmacroed BT and going to all that trouble for a lousy 0.36% DPS with perfect execution.
    I like having to use my brain a bit.

  4. #44
    Quote Originally Posted by Reniat View Post
    The dmg difference comes from the fact that RC's bonus also applies to B runes (heart strike/necrotic strike) whereas BT's benefit involves using B runes less and alotting more rune throughput to Death Strike, which is a dmg loss.
    Do you have numbers to support that? Death Strike was buffed and heart strike greatly nerfed in 5.0.4 for precisely that reason.

    And like Cookie said, you can always spend those death runes on heart strike if you really want to. Then RC and BT would offer essentially identical DPS.

  5. #45
    Ill run a sim again, since it has been a while since i've run it. I've run it while I'm in class as post the results later tonight.

  6. #46
    Is there any reason to sim it, it's quite simple math, no? RC restores 40,5% of a rune, BT 40%. This means that if you chose to use 1/3 of BT's runes on heart strike the difference should be extremely slim, if you use 1/3 of the runes on necrotic over heart strike I'd assume that should bring BT to at least equal. This is just excluding the versatility of using less/more of your death runes for dps when the situation calls for it which generally always should result in more dps (unless you want to take advantage of the superior survival bt gives).

    The only way this isn't correct is if my assumption that RC being 40,5% isn't true.

  7. #47
    But if you start using D runes on necrotic/heart strike you've stopped using BT for survial. Can you make BT do about the same dps? yes, but you have to sacrifice death strikes to do so. RC's benefit is going to go to B runes and increases B rune throughput as part of your normal survival playstyle.

  8. #48
    Quote Originally Posted by Reniat View Post
    But if you start using D runes on necrotic/heart strike you've stopped using BT for survial. Can you make BT do about the same dps? yes, but you have to sacrifice death strikes to do so. RC's benefit is going to go to B runes and increases B rune throughput as part of your normal survival playstyle.
    Yes, so hence you can chose to either have (at least) the same survival AND dps as RC with BT, or you can chose to have superior survival but worse dps. I can't see how RC is better in either situation, it simply forces you to chose the route with less survival.

    To illustrate lets assume that each talent gains 30 extra runes each (in reality RC has like a third of a rune(?) extra but lets exclude that for now, should easily be offset by bt actually using necrotic over heart):
    Case one: BT spends 1/3 of its runes on heart strikes (or necrotic) and 2/3 on death strikes. Resulting in 10 extra heart strikes and 10 extra death strikes.
    RC spends 1/3 of its runes on heart strikes and 2/3 on death strikes. Resulting in 10 extra heart strikes and 10 extra death strikes.
    Exact same dps/survival (excluding that bt can chose when each goes out).

    Case two: BT spends all its runes on death strikes. Resulting in 15 extra death strikes.
    RC still spends 1/3 of its runes on heart strikes (duh) and 2/3 on death strikes. Resulting in 10 extra heart strikes and 10 extra death strikes.

    BT can freely chose between case one (same dps and survival as RC) or case two (superior survival but worse dps). This is completely excluding the additional perks of BT, e.g. being able to chose when to convert these runes and the specific amounts, which very well may result BT dealing more damage while also having more survivability.
    Last edited by Cookie; 2013-05-09 at 10:17 PM.

  9. #49
    You assume that if you don't spend D runes on non-DS abiltiies as BT it's somehow superior to RC. it's not. The consistency of RC is equally viable compared to the control of BT. BT is only superior for plannable burst in specific fights, like puncture ect.

    So in a survival oriented playstyle (D runes on DS only) RC and BT are about equal in survival (not counting fight specific mechanics) and RC will do slightly more damage.

  10. #50
    You assume that if you don't spend D runes on non-DS abiltiies as BT it's somehow superior to RC. it's not. The consistency of RC is equally viable compared to the control of BT. BT is only superior for plannable burst in specific fights, like puncture ect.
    Why is the "consistency" (very weird word to use for a on chance proc, if anything BT is more consistent) of RC superior to the control of BT? BT gives you options, RC takes them away and adds rng.

    So in a survival oriented playstyle (D runes on DS only) RC and BT are about equal in survival (not counting fight specific mechanics) and RC will do slightly more damage.
    How is random procs for 2/3 the amount of death strikes even remotely close to BT in survivability? You get a smaller amount of death strikes and less control for when you get them.


    There's absolutely nothing stopping you from exactly mimicing RC's rune spending with BT, both in regards to where and what runes you chose to use, bar that one extra rune every 10 minutes(?). Just that unlike RC you can chose what runes to use and when you use them. You can chose to deal and take more damage than RC, take and deal less damage, or take and deal exactly the same damage and when you want this to be the case. There's nothing that RC can do that BT can't, and the opposite is very far from the truth. There can really never be a case where RC is superior to BT (excluding that one rune), in the absolute best case scenario (you really really want to use exactly 1/3 of your extra runes on heart strike, for the entire fight) it's just the same.
    Last edited by Cookie; 2013-05-10 at 12:32 AM.

  11. #51
    Quote Originally Posted by Cookie View Post
    Why is the "consistency" (very weird word to use for a on chance proc, if anything BT is more consistent) of RC superior to the control of BT? BT gives you options, RC takes them away and adds rng.
    Standard deviation of the DS interval frequency with RC is significantly narrower than that of RE and BT. This is due to RC's inherent synergy with 2-rune strikes compared to the singular return of RE/BT.
    "I have it all simmed."
    Euliat

  12. #52
    Quote Originally Posted by SSHA778 View Post
    Standard deviation of the DS interval frequency with RC is significantly narrower than that of RE and BT. This is due to RC's inherent synergy with 2-rune strikes compared to the singular return of RE/BT.
    I don't see how there's a deviation for RT unless you make one, you can simply hold the charges for a few seconds and place your death strike where you want it. I just hit a dummy for two minutes and had absolutely no issues doing one death strike roughly every 6,5 seconds (if I ever had more than half a seconds deviation, which I doubt, that was almost certainly my own fault) without wasting a single rune. I'm really struggling to see a talent based on pure rng having a more consistent death strike interval.

  13. #53
    I decided against BT just because it requires an extra button on the bar and also needs to be monitored to get the best effect out of it.
    Yes in theory BT offers more survivability, better DPS, but in practice you may not be able to micro manage BT while still doing your regular rotation.

    It may be great for patchwerk style fights like if you're tanking horridon, but on fights like Council where you need to swap adds and interrupt a few times per minute I just can't see it being worth it.


    RC just does about average in everything, but it's greatest advantage is requiring little to no attention to make use of it.
    Quote Originally Posted by Cookie View Post
    I don't see how there's a deviation for RT unless you make one, you can simply hold the charges for a few seconds and place your death strike where you want it. I just hit a dummy for two minutes and had absolutely no issues doing one death strike roughly every 6,5 seconds (if I ever had more than half a seconds deviation, which I doubt, that was almost certainly my own fault) without wasting a single rune. I'm really struggling to see a talent based on pure rng having a more consistent death strike interval.
    Well that's pretty simple - RC simply speeds up the rune regeneration and does so with a fairly reliable proc rate which is extremely consitant unless you're running into long streaks of procs/nonprocs.
    BT on the other hand only gives you 1 full proc every 5 RS, which ends up creating inconsitancies just because of how burst-y it is.
    Last edited by Nillo; 2013-05-10 at 02:11 AM.
    Armories:
    Pally: Chiaki
    Dk: Telare
    Warrior: Irlida

  14. #54
    I appologize for not being able to get more involved with this discussion. I'm sick as a dog and dont really have the energy for this right now.

    Im not using any fancy logic. here just is some simple math to show why BT can't be used to exactly simulate RC.

    Lets look at what it takes to get 1 rune back, regardless of type (which is ok since you are trying to make BT do the same FU/B ratio as RC).

    BT requires 5 charges to get 1 rune, which is 2.5 rune strikes, which is 75 RP.

    RC recharges 33% of each rune on proc, so 1 proc equals 1 "rune". It has a 45% to proc on each rune strike, so to get 1 proc you would need 1/.45 = 2.222222 rune strike, which is 66.7 RP per rune returned.

    To sum up:
    BT = 75 RP per rune
    RC = 66.7 RP per rune

    that's about a 12% increase in rune return cost for BT. So if you force the exact same rune patterns with BT as you would get naturally with RC, you would get about 11% less t75 throughput. I want to clarify before I go into a nyquil coma, that i'm not saying that the 12% layed out here is not the basis for the claimed 10% dps difference in the two. That was from a sim. All this is doing is pointing out that the control you get from BT DOES come at a throughput cost.
    Last edited by Reniat; 2013-05-10 at 02:24 AM.

  15. #55
    Quote Originally Posted by Schizoide View Post
    Shaftnberry, try this macro:

    Code:
    #showtooltip
    /use Frost Strike
    /use Blood Tap

    Alternatively if you're 2H frost, just spec into RE.
    is there anything i can add to this so it doesnt re-weild my weapons everytime i press frost strike without 5x BT up? rather annoying..

  16. #56
    I have no intention of taking sides.

    Quote Originally Posted by Cookie View Post
    I don't see how there's a deviation for RT unless you make one, you can simply hold the charges for a few seconds and place your death strike where you want it. I just hit a dummy for two minutes and had absolutely no issues doing one death strike roughly every 6,5 seconds (if I ever had more than half a seconds deviation, which I doubt, that was almost certainly my own fault) without wasting a single rune. I'm really struggling to see a talent based on pure rng having a more consistent death strike interval.
    Right, but this is a deliberate effort on your part to accomplish that, and, in doing so, you have taken away what you valued most with BT: control. RC will do this with no thought process whatsoever (and return more blood runes than BT performing this behavior).

    I'll agree with you that BT is more versatile and, with some effort, can mimic the behavior of RC (and more so), but there's something of value in the sheer simplicity of RC and its synergy with 2-rune strikes.

    ---
    Edit: As for your comment on the interval deviation, which I missed, you can change BT's around based on how often you use it (as you demonstrated). While that's certainly controllable (by you), that doesn't necessarily imply that it is consistent. These are not the same terms.

    With RE, you have rune desynchronization affecting how quickly you can DS because of the single rune restorations. Restoring a single rune doesn't necessarily guarantee a DS, and RE causes frequent desynchronization events (not the state of being desynchronized but the act of desynchronizing).

    For RC, even if you do desynchronize your runes (at a singular point or not regularly), the interval between regeneration to use DS doesn't change (provided no further desynchronizations). Naturally, RC will not cause any further desynchronizations--that's something you would cause by using DnD or some other F/U ability. So, if I have a frost rune that regenerates 4s later than my unholy rune, the difference in time intervals between DSs isn't going to change; it is simply "shifted," because every other time I use DS, it will be 4s later than when my unholy rune comes off cooldown (more or less).
    ---

    Quote Originally Posted by Reniat View Post
    RC recharges 33% of each rune on proc, so 1 proc equals 1 "rune". It has a 45% to proc on each rune strike, so to get 1 proc you would need 1/.45 = 2.222222 rune strike, which is 66.7 RP per rune returned.
    Small error, but changes your conclusion entirely.

    Zero haste (since we know haste cancels out anyway):
    RC duration is 3s. Rune regeneration timer is 10s.
    3s / 10s = 30% of each rune per proc, not 33%.

    RC returns 0.405 runes / 1 RS ==> 4.05 RP (pre-cycle) / 30 RP.
    BT returns 0.40 runes / 1 RS ==> 4.00 RP (pre-cycle) / 30 RP.

    Normalizing that to 1 rune (since you did),

    RC: 10 RP (pre-cycle) / 74.07 RP
    BT: 10 RP (pre-cycle) / 75.00 RP

    Not significant.
    Last edited by SSHA778; 2013-05-10 at 02:44 AM.
    "I have it all simmed."
    Euliat

  17. #57
    I appologize for not being able to get more involved with this discussion. I'm sick as a dog and dont really have the energy for this right now.

    Im not using any fancy logic. here just is some simple math to show why BT can't be used to exactly simulate RC.

    Lets look at what it takes to get 1 rune back, regardless of type (which is ok since you are trying to make BT do the same FU/B ratio as RC).

    BT requires 5 charges to get 1 rune, which is 2.5 rune strikes, which is 75 RP.

    RC recharges 33% of each rune on proc, so 1 proc equals 1 "rune". It has a 45% to proc on each rune strike, so to get 1 proc you would need 1/.45 = 2.222222 rune strike, which is 66.7 RP per rune returned.

    To sum up:
    BT = 75 RP per rune
    RC = 66.7 RP per rune
    It's cool, I'm a bit sick as well and off to bed now anyways so you can take your time responding:P. Either way, I guess I got the reason why we're coming to different conclusions, different starting-point. To my knowledge RC recharges 30% of each rune on each proc, not 33%. If this is correct the costs instead becomes:

    BT = 75 RP
    RC = ~74,1 RP

    so essentially the same rune return cost (the difference would add up to like one rune/fight, which is neligable).

    Math for RC:
    Rune recharge time is 10 seconds/rune. RC increases the regen rate by 100% for 3/10 seconds=30%/rune. So each RC proc should restore 90% of a rune, not an entire rune. I'm quite certain that I'm right about this, but if you prove me wrong I'll agree that there's a point in using RC (apart from the ease Nillo mentioned).

    that's about a 11% increase in rune return cost for BT. So if you force the exact same rune patterns with BT as you would get naturally with RC, you would get about 11% less t75 throughput. I want to clarify before I go into a nyquil coma, that i'm not saying that the 11% layed out here is not the basis for the claimed 10% dps difference in the two. That was from a sim. All this is doing is pointing out that the control you get from BT DOES come at a throughput cost.
    If what I stated above is true I'd assume that the sim difference is due to the bt sim not using 1/3 of the regened runes on heart/necrotic strike.

    Edit: Well, Sha beat me to it.

    ---

    Right, but this is a deliberate effort on your part to accomplish that, and, in doing so, you have taken away what you valued most with BT: control. RC will do this with no thought process whatsoever (and return more blood runes than BT performing this behavior).
    Not sure if control is what I value most about blood tap really, I'd say that it's versatility. I have the option of turning blood tap into RC's pattern (not that I would, since I don't find it optimal for any situation that comes to mind), or any other regen pattern I'd like. I really like the ability to turn a few death runes into blood boils when I have cds up, and then go back to pure death striking once they drop, or even just to throw out necrotic strikes when I'm not tanking.

    I'll agree with you that BT is more versatile and, with some effort, can mimic the behavior of RC (and more so), but there's something of value in the sheer simplicity of RC and its synergy with 2-rune strikes.
    Yes, RC is simpler. I'd never disagree with that and considering that there's usually a fair bit to think about for a tank, in combination with death strike and cd usage that's a very good (and to me, the only) argument for RC. If you feel like BT takes away from your ability to perform the previous tasks, by all means don't use it (except on fights where survivability is incredibly cruical). To me this isn't really relevant since I'd need to pay more attention to RE or even RC than I do to BT, simply because I'm so used to it.
    Last edited by Cookie; 2013-05-10 at 02:45 AM.

  18. #58
    Its already been talked about the math has already been done its been on EJ forums forever don't know why a thread was made asking about something that came with MoP launch.
    "I'm Tru @ w/e I do" ~ TM

  19. #59
    Quote Originally Posted by tru View Post
    Its already been talked about the math has already been done its been on EJ forums forever don't know why a thread was made asking about something that came with MoP launch.
    Because the math is non-trivial and it can be highly confusing. That's why we all campaigned so aggressively to change the L75 tier in MoP beta. Sadly, we failed.

    Threads like this come up all the time. The L75 tier is just poorly designed, that's all.

  20. #60
    I don't feel like gaining any control with BT over RC, as the control of RC is nearly optimal already. RNG is completely a non-issue, as major spikes happen spaced enough for the extra DS to be up more than early enough. I had an extra DS for 99% of Thrashes on Sha, and it never gets any closer than that.

    The part I dislike about BT is its binaryness (for lack of a better term) where it simply gives you Death Strikes in one go whereas RC closes the gap pretty simply.
    I also dislike the fact it's an extra button (and don't get me started on raid instance lags on stuff like Lei Shen/Megaera/whatever where instant spells take a full second to get casted). I personally used my old LK/Cata BT keybind on something else(soul reaper) upon its disappearance in MoP and I honestly have no clue where to put it now, it's just confusing whenever I try to put it somewhere else and even more confusing if I try putting it back where it belongs.

    The main reason I'm tempted to try to force myself to BT (for the n'th time) is the sheer throughput of DS you can obtain while retaining control, not the control itself which I feel is completely equal as long as you play it right with RC.
    Last edited by Mionelol; 2013-05-10 at 05:16 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
  •