New Devastate Parsing and Mathcraft

[Arrowson]

so whats the date that were gonna march on Blizz's headquarters then?

[Kazeyonoma]

sorry for the hastily reported #'s i got excited over nothing, damn rogue modifier.

[Arrowson]

I've never heard of that rouge modifier before...

[Premed]

Why would blizz go through all the trouble to convince warriors that this is the "sunder replacement" if its still not better threat wise until 3 sunders?

ps. first post

[Arrowson]

because Blizz hates us >.>

PS. Grats

[thugthedum]

Well, a buff is a buff. I'm likely to devastate a little more conscientiously now, maybe even ask the other wars to demo/tclap.

[Ciderhelm]

Rouges are overpowdered.

I laughed out loud at this.

[Kazeyonoma]

well if devastate hits for over 151 even on the first hit, it outscales sunder no?

[Ciderhelm]

Kazeyonoma,

The correct conclusion from these tests is that the innate threat from devistate is no more than 200. There's two errors. One is that defensive stance and defiance is 1.3 * 1.15, not 1 + 0.3 + 0.15. The other is that it takes more threat than the mobs current target to pull aggro, not less so it's * 1.10, not / 1.10. Finally you trying to find the minimum threat needed to pull aggro so the average is irrelevant. Rather it's the lowest calculated innate threat from all the tests. That just sets an upper bound for the innate threat and it would take many more samples to say, with confidence what the actual innate threat is. 200 is a starting guess.

http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/th...=1&pageNo=4#75

That's a post in your thread on the Warrior forums. Would one of you check what he's saying and respond there (as well as here)?

As far as I can tell, he's tripped up a bit in the / 1.10 portion, which yours looks correct to me, not his (but I'm only glancing, and I'm not terribly mathematically inclined either).

//edit: got lazy and did it myself.

[Satrina]

The defensive stance + defiance modifier is 1.3 x 1.15 = 1.495; hasn't been additive for a while now

Total Damage needed to pull threat: 1885
1885 * .71 (rogue threat modifier) = 1338.35
1338.35 / 1.10 (10% extra threat needed to get agro) = 1216.68
1216.68 - ((24+79+111+145+44)*1.45) = 632.33 threat generated

632.33 / 4 devastates = 158.0825 threat per devastate

You forgot to divide the average devastate innate threat by 1.495 to account for d-stance and defiance. (or simply divide the entire 1216.68 term by 1.495 to begin with)

158/1.495 = 106

I think they forgot to change the innate threat value.

Also: Why not test with two warriors in battle stance? You could commutate out the threat reductions and not have to worry about defiance. (I'd do it, but I am in the damn PTR copy queue)

[LilBudyWizer]

Yeah, certainly looks like it didn't change. It would be nice to get a statement from blizzard as to whether that's a mistake or not.

When it comes to the test averaging is not the way to combine test results. Rather the hit that pulled aggro establishs an upper and lower bound on the innate threat. The actual aggro gain line has to be somewhere above the total threat before the hit that pulled aggro and below after the hit. You combine tests by finding the intersection of the windows found for each test. Assuming the window from each test is not identical then the intersection is smaller. With enough tests and variation in those tests you eventually get a window containing only one integer. Assuming it is an integer then it has to be that value.

Applying that logic here I think you'll find you have a problem, the intersection is empty. The assumption as to which hit drew aggro seems suspect. My guess would be that the invalid assumption is that the mob will immediately hit an individual upon changing targets rather than continuing with their swing timers or reseting it. I suspect you would also find, with enough tests, that, sometimes the hit that pulled aggro shows up in the log after the person pulling aggro gets hit. If the swing timer reset then that wouldn't happen, but I suspect it does not reset. So you end up with the equivalent of delivering the killing blow after the mob is dead according to the log.

I think it was a very informative posts in that I now have a good idea how to test innate threat on a power. I'm also wondering if it wouldn't be possible to write a mod to assist in doing this. Maybe monitor the targets target and pause Recap when it changes.

[Kazeyonoma]

well i'm on the ptr now, any hordies that can get on i'm willing to test it with, test were conducted by fame in a short amount of time, before i could get on the ptr. But i'm pretty sure its down to 101 threat only, that blows chunks -_-'

[Fame]

kaz if you want to set something, the both of us can do it. just communicate via vent. im going to be on the ptr tonight at around 7-12 est under the name "FAME"

[Urhan]

Kaz, it might be a good idea to go back and edit the math in your first post to reflect the corrected numbers. Cider's post in the PTR forum is pointing to this thread, and it might be a little confusing for the devs if they read it (miracle of miracles) and see a number other than 101 as the conclusion.

[Spaceknight]

So basically, BLizz lies to us again. Isn't 101 the base of the Old devestate?


and when do i get my cool sig =D

[Meia]

Isn't 101 the base of the Old devestate?

yes it is Spaceknight.

[Spaceknight]

GFG, why even bother with this change...

[Donar]

GFG, why even bother with this change...

Very small buff for soloing with dual wield I guess

I honestly figured that they wouldn't buff the base threat any, so I'm not surprised that it's apparently still 101. I'm not exactly confident that they'll buff it either. Though, it would be nice to have a 41 point Protection talent that could compete (for tanking) with our 31 point Protection talent.

[Kazeyonoma]

I will edit it right now, according to sat's findings

[Kazeyonoma]

I think this is the correct values now.