Chi Explosion nerf

[Deleted]

Talents
Chi Explosion now deals reduced damage to secondary targets. Damage to the primary target remains unchanged.

the damage on the secondary targets is like ~20% of the damage on the main target.
Blackout kick is still ~20-25% stronger per 2chi.

any ideas how this will change the usefulness of Chex as a windwalker?

[Jocias]

It depends a bit on which spec we're talking about. Since each spec has different uses for ChEx and different level 100 talents as a basis for comparison, this question is best asked in whichever spec sticky you're interested in.

It appears that it works the same way that FoF does for damage. The theoretical combined maximum damage to all secondary targets approaches the damage done to the primary with a sufficiently large number of secondary targets.

Damage to Primary target: 100% damage
Combined damage to Secondary targets: ( 100% / ( n + 1 ) ) * n ; n = number of secondary targets

This means that it works the same way at 3 chi that it did previously. At 4 chi, things get a little complicated. Assuming there are secondary targets, the combined damage to secondary targets will be between 50% and 100% of the damage done to the primary target, depending on how many secondary targets exist.

The analysis below deals specifically with WW damage, but the same general model holds true for BrM and MW.

Aside from the capping of ChEx's damage, Blizz also saw fit to buff the damage of ChEx by 20% a couple of weeks ago.

Let's say ChEx did 100 damage to your primary target and 100 damage to each secondary target at 4 chi before the buff and damage cap. Post buff with the cap, it does 120 damage to the primary target and a scaling percent of damage per secondary target. The more targets it hits, the more damage it does overall, but the less damage it does per target. At most, it'll do 240 damage at 4 chi.

Let's compare damage:

	Damage from 4 Chi ChEx
Targets	Old (pre-buff and pre-cap)	New (post-buff and post-cap)
1	100	120
2	200	180
3	300	200
4	400	210
5	500	216

Graphs make everything easier to understand:


From this graph, you can see the old line bending the new line over and intersecting with its ass.

[Deleted]

sry, i wanna know how it effects ww dps.

100% / targets would be super weak, like, completely useless.
skk and jw are also so weak they aren't worth using at all.

while there's still time for a skk/chex buff, i guess right now we went from super aoe class to "worthless" in every fight with more than 3 targets.

(i didn't mean it as hard as it sounds)

[Deleted]

While those spells alone might seem weak, they are really strong in combination with SEF. The problem at 90 is that everything dies far too fast, especially if you have a warrior with bladestorm in the raid. The ramp-up time for the ful aoe / cleave damage potential of WW is higher than most other classes. So it might seem right now that we're quite weak on aoe and cleave. But I think that level 100 will fix that.

[Justwait]

Primary target: 100% damage
Secondary targets: 100% / n where n = number of secondary targets.

The correct formula is 100% to primary and 1/n to all additional targets, n being the total targets hit including the main target.

2 targets: 100-50
3 targets: 100-33-33
For 5 targets: 100-20-20-20-20
And so on.

It's exactly how fists of fury works.

[Jocias]

The correct formula is 100% to primary and 1/n to all additional targets, n being the total targets hit including the main target.

2 targets: 100-50
3 targets: 100-33-33
For 5 targets: 100-20-20-20-20
And so on.

It's exactly how fists of fury works.

Yeah. That's why it's bad to theorycraft after just waking up. Fixed my first post.

[FayrenPickpocket]

I'd be okay with it if it means they won't revert the 16.5% buff we got earlier this month. If they plan on reverting the change, with the chiEx nerf, then I'll be pissed.

[ztn]

Yeah. That's why it's bad to theorycraft after just waking up. Fixed my first post.

seems mathematics is not yours at all. numbers in you fixed post also all wrong.

[Jocias]

seems mathematics is not yours at all. numbers in you fixed post also all wrong.

Enlighten me. Where is my math wrong? It's not helpful to jump in, say, "You're wrong", and not offer any thought as to why.

I essentially modeled FoF, which is what ChEx is doing now.

[Gaje]

It's correct as far as I can tell......

[Jocias]

It's correct as far as I can tell......

Yeah. I took a bit of time and checked my math after my first blunder. If there's an error, I'm at a loss as to where I screwed up.

[Justwait]

He's probably referring to you adding the 20% buff to the graph, which is something that you shouldn't have done to give a comparison of what the difference is after the change.
It's 2 different fixes and the 20% changes nothing about how ChiEx scales. It's irrelevant to the graph, which is trying to show how the scaling differs.

Edit: and your current numbers are wrong.

Using : 1+((1/n)*(n-1)) where N is number of targets hit in total.
Then multiply by *1.2 to account for the 'buff' you want to have in.
Targets		Old		New
1		100		120
2		200		180 (secondary targets: 50%, (100+50)*1.2 = 180)
3		300		200 (additional targets: 33%, same calculation, use 33.)
4		400		210 (additional targets: 25%)
5		500		216 (additional targets: 20%)

[Jocias]

He's probably referring to you adding the 20% buff to the graph, which is something that you shouldn't have done to give a comparison of what the difference is after the change.
It's 2 different fixes and the 20% changes nothing about how ChiEx scales. It's irrelevant to the graph, which is trying to show how the scaling differs.

I view the buff and the damage cap as part and parcel. They were both added to the game within a week or two of each other. I'm hopeful that the hotfix buffs will remain in place after the massive ChEx nerf from the damage cap. If that's the case, then comparing the old, uncapped and unbuffed, version with the new, buffed and capped, version makes the most sense.

Fixed the graph and table. The spreadsheet formula I used was using total targets instead of secondary.

[Justwait]

edited my post with how you're current numbers are wrong.