This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.5
PTR
10.2.6
My rant about fire mages
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
karlusdavius
No need to provide evidence. Read the past few pages. Your argument is DoA. It is reliant on 2 talents points and RNG over a constant damage amount which you admit. it is below 1%. regardless of gear, it ins'tworth it. Sorry, but it just won't work.
Like before hand, do the content your trying to explain before bringing in these arguments.
DOA.
Post by
delani
No need to provide evidence. Read the past few pages. Your argument is DoA. It is reliant on 2 talents points and RNG over a constant damage amount which you admit. it is below 1%. regardless of gear, it ins'tworth it. Sorry, but it just won't work.
Like before hand, do the content your trying to explain before bringing in these arguments.
DOA.
No need to provide evidence when the math backs it up? I'm not trying to explain content, I'm explaining the exact same things Elitist Jerks would explain, using their same methods, and their same programs.
So by all means, keeping telling me my theory is Dead on Arrival, when the Simulations that Elitist jerks use are saying its not. Using their simulations, using their fight mechanics, and just changing the spec to include improved fire blast, and adding fire blast into the priority. So basically, I dont have to do the content personally, this program will do it for me, and its saying I'm right.
Wheres your prove? Its an increase regardless, and until you can tell me that ALL the talents we're taking provide more then a 1% increase in DPS, which they don't (Cauterize being a prime example, in order to save yourself, your burn much more then 1% of your total mana to do it, unless you pop a potion, which elitist jerks is saying not to do, as they use the double pot trick on volcanic potions, or the stars align, and evocation is off cooldown, and you have it glyphed, or you use Ice block, but if you do use ice block, you better hope Cauterize doesn't proc again within 5 minutes, or else that option is gone.
I've ran the numbers, using everything I've been told to use. Aside from physically entering the raid and trying out my theory there (which as I've already told you, SimC actually does FOR ME with its simulation program) everything I've done points to an increase.
its players choice, but its not DoA. Learn some math. Its not dependent on RNG, and even if it is, would you rather have 30% chance to crit, or 38%? You can factor RNG into a math formula, and figure out the average increase it provides. Its call
probability
and people do it all the time. Just because you don't understand it doesn't mean its wrong.
Post by
karlusdavius
I know math thanks. It's still DoA. I would rather have 30% crit chance as i don't use fireblast. Your argument is over before you even need math.
I've ran the numbers, using everything I've been told to use. Aside from physically entering the raid and trying out my theory there (which as I've already told you, SimC actually does FOR ME with its simulation program) everything I've done points to an increase.
Be VERY careful. Just because a spreadsheet says it, doesn't mean it will happen. SimC cannot replicate movement as well as actually moving. So you lack of content pretty much tells me you have no clue what a movement phase is all about. Fireblast, on movement phases, is just not used. Get over it. More spell power means scorch will over take fireblast. Quickly too, which you admit.
Do the content.
DoA.
I laugh at the fact that you say you don't care, yet still argue your point. You still have yet to show us those PM's from EJ. You got one reply, which was vague.
Edit: Its not dependent on RNG
I laughed. maybe you need to understand what RNG is.
Post by
delani
I know math thanks. It's still DoA. I would rather have 30% crit chance as i don't use fireblast. Your argument is over before you even need math.
I've ran the numbers, using everything I've been told to use. Aside from physically entering the raid and trying out my theory there (which as I've already told you, SimC actually does FOR ME with its simulation program) everything I've done points to an increase.
Be VERY careful. Just because a spreadsheet says it, doesn't mean it will happen. SimC cannot replicate movement as well as actually moving. So you lack of content pretty much tells me you have no clue what a movement phase is all about. Fireblast, on movement phases, is just not used. Get over it. More spell power means scorch will over take fireblast. Quickly too, which you admit.
Do the content.
DoA.
I laugh at the fact that you say you don't care, yet still argue your point. You still have yet to show us those PM's from EJ. You got one reply, which was vague.
So because YOU don't use it, its DoA. AH, i got it, because you don't want to change, that means my theory is wrong. Awesome.
I never admit that Scorch will quickly overtake Fire Blast. this is the latest thing i've mentioned into regards to the spell co-efficient arguement: Scorch has a 51.2% spell power Co-efficient but does 670-794 base damage
Fire Blast has a 42.86% spell power Co-efficient but does 955-1131 damage
in order for Scorch to match fire blast's damage, you need about 3750 spell power.
Now, I know what your about to say, that just about anyone can get that much spell power, and most raiding mages have nearly double (or more) that amount, so scorch is the winner hands down. The problem lies in the difference in crit. Even at 8k spellpower, assuming Improved Fire blast, scorch doesn't pull ahead, even with its higher spell co-efficient. That math has already been proved, so I don't need to repeat it.
And I think I've even used your own numbers to support my claim, here let me find them.. ((9770*.35)+(4873*.65)) or about 6586.95 scorch damage on average, counting critical chances
((9335*.43)+(4656*.57)) or about 6667.97 fire blast damage on average, counting critical chances
That's factoring in critical strike chances, which you HAVE to do in order to properly compare the spells to each other. Just saying 'Well, my scorch says it does 6k damage, and my fire blast says it does 5.8k damages means scorch is better' just doesn't work out, when BOTH spells can crit, and with Improved Fire Blast, fire blast crits more often. They both have the same critical multiplier, so its all just figuring out the average damage they do when you factor in crit. Which I've done.
If you don't want to take Improved Fire Blast, by all means, Don't take it. But if you do, then you
should
use fire blast on movement phases as it
will
increase your DPS compared to not using it.
And, actually because a spreadsheet does say it, especially the spreadsheets that Elitist Jerks use themselves, does mean it will happen. Everything on the Elitist Jerks forums is based about either simulated data from SimC, or Rawr input on simulated Best in slot gears. Do you really think people are walking around in best in slot gear all the time? No, they have to start somewhere, and thats exactly what Elitist Jerks is doing.
So, if I'm doing everything elitist jerks would do, and your telling me I'm wrong, then is Elitist Jerks wrong too?
Are you saying you know more then they do about game mechanics?
And RNG is a
Random Number Generator
but for this case, its more like a
Pseudorandom number generator
as its not entirely random, and limited by other factors, like critical strike chances.
Post by
karlusdavius
And, actually because a spreadsheet does say it, especially the spreadsheets that Elitist Jerks use themselves, does mean it will happen. Everything on the Elitist Jerks forums is based about either simulated data from SimC, or Rawr input on simulated Best in slot gears. Do you really think people are walking around in best in slot gear all the time? No, they have to start somewhere, and thats exactly what Elitist Jerks is doing.
Interpreting Rawr and SimC Results
The text below is a quoted post made by Kavan, who is responsible for the Mage Module of Rawr.
If you do some changes to your gear because Rawr suggests it and you don't see the expected results there can be many reasons for this. The first conclusion most make, and it definitely is one possibility, is that Rawr is wrong. But there are other options to consider such as rng, buffs and when you introduce real raid events it becomes even more tricky.
So how do you determine what is really going on. Tools like Rawr and simulationcraft operate on averages. Rawr uses theoretical averages based on mathematical models while simulationcraft gives you averages based on thousands of runs. Now you make one small change in gear and go do a couple of runs with it. If you look at simulationcraft damage spread for Fire you'll see that there's a 15% deviation in either direction from average. When you make a change that the tools say will result in 100 dps increase on average when the actual value can vary up to 8k between repeated attempts with no change you have to be very careful what you're attributing that to.
I hope the above was a strong enough warning to take rng very seriously into consideration. Now let's assume that we're accounting for rng and we still think there is something wrong. What can you do to help figure out why that is the case and help us improve our tools in making better predictions. The best thing you can do is to save combat logs and look at detailed breakdowns of damage by spell. Both Rawr and simulationcraft give you their breakdown by spells as well and comparing against this will give you the best indication of where the source of the problem is.
Check things like crit percent of individual spells, check contribution to total damage of individual spells, check damage ranges of spells, check dot uptimes and anything else that might be relevant. Now do this before and after the change to gear and compare it. What kind of changes do you see in practice vs what is predicted by the tool? In general this will be hard to distill because of the above mentioned rng, but this is the best thing you can do in pinpointing the problem.
In some cases if you're comparing results on actual bosses the reason for difference might be something like aoe or other raid mechanic that is not modeled. In that situation there's not much you can do other than to help in developing better models that support those situations.
No points in Improved Fire Blast were taken. This means you'll need to be within 30 yards to use Impact, which is the base Fire Blast range. Whether players deem this range to be unacceptably low for AOE fights is highly subjective
Cauterize is picked up. During new Heroic and Progression content, this talent is extremely useful. Cauterize is not only passive, but on a 1 minute cooldown. Remember that Cauterize can also situaionally be used for DPS, in addition to its survival passive.
Pyromaniac is picked up, but be mindful that it's still a very situational talent.
And to finish this
Originally Posted by rathe101
In the OP, the movement rotation is this:
Movement Rotation: This is a rotation you can cast 100% while moving: Scorch, Pyroblast!, Living Bomb, Flamestrike, Blastwave.
Why is flamestrike mentioned, but fire blast isn't? especially with impact?
After some PM discussion with you, it's clear there are actually two questions here. Firstly the line you've quoted is from the "mana management" section, and can't be taken as "forbidding" the use of fire blast especially since the rest of the OP constantly waxes lyrical about the use of impact. Secondly, you've done calculations that show me that the inclusion of fire blast into a scorch rotation is possibly a dps gain with improved fire blast talent, especially after the patch where the high-mana rotation will be cheaper. Kavan is aware of the suggestion,
but he reports that Rawr.mage isn't currently able to model movement rotations correctly
Also, note how they have edited the OP with updated info constantly. Yet Fb is still no included.
To reiterate.
when you introduce real raid events it becomes even more tricky.
Rawr.mage isn't currently able to model movement rotations correctly.
DoA.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.