Jump to content
Sign in to follow this  
Aloise

DTR nerf

Recommended Posts

32 minutes ago, TheSzary said:

Bump, I want excuse to don't do it on my alts :13_upside_down:

Still going to remain bis for the individual player in most cases

better go farm for boomkin offspec

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

As mutch as I recall it was already nerfed before when blink was around so yeah GG :D 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

The current values we have are:
Mage - 12.5%
Priest - 13.6%
Warlock - 17%
Druid - 11%
Shaman - 17%

So this would seem the values are still pre nerf.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
7 hours ago, Jenova said:

The current values we have are:
Mage - 12.5%
Priest - 13.6%
Warlock - 17%
Druid - 11%
Shaman - 17%

So this would seem the values are still pre nerf.

Thanks for taking time to look up changelog :D 

I understand it being kept pre nerf for Firelands, but being pre nerf for DS hc would completely destroy any opportunity for any caster without the staff to get into raiding

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
18 minutes ago, Aloise said:

Thanks for taking time to look up changelog :D 

I understand it being kept pre nerf for Firelands, but being pre nerf for DS hc would completely destroy any opportunity for any caster without the staff to get into raiding

Actually not the changelog only directly from the core, cause many changes aren't added into the changelog and some users thought that the staff was already nerfed. If you can give me a list of what the nerfed values should be I can quickly add that.

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, Aviann said:

The problem of these forum posts is, the more of them you read, the more different informations you get. I have read already 10+ of them regarding the dtr nerf and every single one of them gave me different results. :/

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Here's an idea.     

Find top ranked logs of casters using DTR on Baleroc/Ultraxion-type fights, those would all be from 4.3.  
Run simulations of every caster spec with a very high number of iterations (say 500k at the very least).    

If findings on logs and simulations are similar, the gathered data can be used to estimate the extent of the nerfs for every spec, and the post-nerf proc rates. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 minutes ago, fluessig said:

can someone explain to me why this video shows an ICD on DTR

i mean those guys arent some random ppl, they got world first madness hc after all

 

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=OQkaysuV9WM

2:49 for example

 

That is his Power Torrent's ICD. 
You can see his VP cloak just to the left of it, and based on the time and portion remaining on the ICD, those are his Lightweave and Power Torrent.  

Go to 3:05 in the same video, and watch his buff bar. You'll notice a Power Torrent icon pop up just as the green timer starts on the DTR icon. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

They probably used a custom icon on purpose, Power Torrent's icon isn't exactly very distinctive.  

I read somewhere about an ICD added on DTR's proc, but I didn't find any other evidence to suggest there is.  
edit: 
http://www.wowhead.com/item=71086/dragonwrath-tarecgosas-rest#comments:id=1450301 
Here's a Blue post saying it has an ICD since 4.3. /edit 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

this dude insinnuates 20 seconds

 but he doesnt prove why

http://forums.wowmortal.com/howto-guides/21936-add-dragonwrath-tarecgosas-rests-proc-extracd.html

 

thinking about this blizzard might have just added a 20 second icd to the weapon and kept the proc rate the same but made sure icd only goes for direct dmg spells so dots still have no icd

cus if they added an icd it would be stupid to have that proc on a low dot

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
11 minutes ago, fluessig said:

thinking about this blizzard might have just added a 20 second icd to the weapon and kept the proc rate the same but made sure icd only goes for direct dmg spells so dots still have no icd


If so, they still would've had to have reduced the proc chance on DoT ticks.   
Putting a 20s ICD on an actual spell duplication, and nerfing the Tick duplication proc rate... that's a rather serious nerf.  

The simulations I've ran so far don't suggest an ICD being added, but they do show a significantly lower proc rate than what we're experiencing on Atlantiss. 

edit: just noticed the link you posted is from a private server forum, probably not the most reliable source out there. /edit

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On ‎11‎-‎02‎-‎2018 at 2:20 PM, Pròphet said:

Here's an idea.     

Find top ranked logs of casters using DTR on Baleroc/Ultraxion-type fights, those would all be from 4.3.  
Run simulations of every caster spec with a very high number of iterations (say 500k at the very least).    

If findings on logs and simulations are similar, the gathered data can be used to estimate the extent of the nerfs for every spec, and the post-nerf proc rates. 

Thanks for the tip, that is what I planned  to do as it is very difficult to gather enough (relevant) logs to get a consistent estimate. 

I have simmed every spec with 50k iterations as my SimulationCraft program does not allow further iterations. Now my time is mostly spent figuring out what spells belong to the proc named "dragonwrath_tarecgosas_rest" as SimulationCraft does not provide the proc of every spell in the output.

Also correct me if I am wrong. A blue on WoWHead is purely a community manager. He did not provide any proof and a nerf in shape of an internal cooldown is clearly not what is stated in the patch notes: "Dragonwrath, Tarecgosa's Rest: The chance for this item's effect to be triggered has been reduced".

 

Quote

He clearly states in the second line that they have a custom proc on their private server.

 

Edit: Missed a few words here and there

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Also. From sc_unique_gear we get the proc chance for DTR vaguely defined. In my edition (simc-433-2) it is still in early development.
Only confirmed rate one seems to be Boomkin being nerfed to 8% and they just scaled the other procs to 2/3rd of their initial value. Between the simc-433-2 and simc-501-1 we still have the comment "FIXME: Need the proper chances here" which might imply some laziness as the proc chances have been nerfed by approximately the suggested percentage that was stated in the Cataclysm edition and not that they still needed to fix proc rates.

They remade the proc chances on the MoP client (simc-501-1) to:

switch ( p -> type )
  {
  case DRUID:   chance = 0.08; break;
  case MAGE:    chance = 0.08375; break;
  case PRIEST:  chance = 0.09112; break;
  case SHAMAN:  chance = 0.1139; break;
  case WARLOCK: chance = 0.1139; break;
  default: break;
  }
 

Compared the cataclysm client (simc-433-2) which stated :

switch ( p -> type )
  {
  case DRUID:
  case MAGE:
  case PRIEST:
  case SHAMAN:
  case WARLOCK:
    switch ( p -> primary_tree() )
    {
    // Until we get actual numbers adjust each spec's chance based off testing done against Tier 11 sets.
    // Should probably be re-done when all the Tier 12 sets are available.
    case TREE_BALANCE:      chance = 0.11; break; // http://elitistjerks.com/f73/t110353-balance_cataclysm_4_2_a/p13/#post1998686
    case TREE_ARCANE:       chance *= 1.25; break;
    case TREE_FIRE:         chance *= 1.25; break;
    case TREE_FROST:        chance *= 1.25; break;
    case TREE_SHADOW:
    case TREE_DISCIPLINE:   chance = 0.136; break;
    case TREE_ELEMENTAL:    chance = 0.17; break; // Needs more data
    case TREE_AFFLICTION:   chance = 0.17; break;
    case TREE_DEMONOLOGY:   chance = 0.17; break;
    case TREE_DESTRUCTION:  chance = 0.17; break;
    default:
      // Get a real spec...
      break;
    }
    break;
  default:
    // Seriously?
    break;
  }
  // 4.3 PTR nerf seems to be roughly a 2/3rding of the proc chance - only tested warlocks so far, 2011/10/26
  chance *= 0.67;
  // Moonkin was nerfed to 8% http://elitistjerks.com/f73/t114017-balance_wrathcalcs/p14/#post2041883 and followup posts
  if ( p -> primary_tree() == TREE_BALANCE )
    chance = 0.08;
 
We see that simc-433-2 data for DTR is developed during early firelands where the MoP client is clearly made after gathering enough empiri to get the proc chance.
 
It's by no means any sort of confirmation about DTR's proc rate. This is the best I can do with the time I have currently, though.
 
TL;DR : Use MoP client's proc rates

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
2 hours ago, Aloise said:

I have simmed every spec with 50k iterations as my SimulationCraft program does not allow further iterations.

 

Go into the Overrides tab, and add 
iterations=x 
Make x your preferred number of iterations, that way you can run 500k+ if you wanted to. It shouldn't make a *huge* difference, but still worth noting. 
 

As for the other stuff...     
Looking through MoP versions could be viable, provided those were actually updated with a proper proc chance.  
You can find download links here if you didn't have those already. http://simc.heroicstrike.org     
 

There is no evidence of an ICD being added beyond that Blue post, but.
It *could* have made sense for Blizzard to add a short ICD. Might be a little harsh, especially along with the nerfed proc chance. 
 

edit: I found the EJ thread cited in Simcraft's code. 
https://web.archive.org/web/20120208051315/http://elitistjerks.com/f73/t114017-balance_wrathcalcs/p14/ 
We get three different numbers from that page. 6.87%, 8% and 8.2%.  /edit 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
4 minutes ago, Pròphet said:

As for the other stuff...     
Looking through MoP versions could be viable, provided those were actually updated with a proper proc chance.  
You can find download links here if you didn't have those already. http://simc.heroicstrike.org     
 

These lines are taken from early MoP beta version (5.0.1):

switch ( p -> type )
  {
  case DRUID:   chance = 0.08; break;
  case MAGE:    chance = 0.08375; break;
  case PRIEST:  chance = 0.09112; break;
  case SHAMAN:  chance = 0.1139; break;
  case WARLOCK: chance = 0.1139; break;
  default: break;
  }

From http://wowwiki.wikia.com/wiki/Patch_5.0.1 we see that there was no changes in existing items, so from 4.3.4 to 5.0.1 no changes to DTR were made. Therefore I believe it makes sense to use the 5.0.1 SimulationCraft's proc rates.

A ICD goes against the intentional design of the staff. I don't trust the community manager on a fan site enough to believe that an ICD was added when patch notes does not mention it.

 

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
Just now, Aloise said:

These lines are taken from early MoP beta version (5.0.1):

switch ( p -> type )
  {
  case DRUID:   chance = 0.08; break;
  case MAGE:    chance = 0.08375; break;
  case PRIEST:  chance = 0.09112; break;
  case SHAMAN:  chance = 0.1139; break;
  case WARLOCK: chance = 0.1139; break;
  default: break;
  }

From http://wowwiki.wikia.com/wiki/Patch_5.0.1 we see that there was no changes in existing items, so from 4.3.4 to 5.0.1 no changes to DTR were made. Therefore I believe it makes sense to use the 5.0.1 SimulationCraft's proc rates.

A ICD goes against the intentional design of the staff. I don't trust the community manager on a fan site enough to believe that an ICD was added when patch notes does not mention it.

 

 

 

Yes, these numbers do make sense when compared to the pre-nerf values Atlantiss currently uses. 
Assuming it was a nerf to around 2/3. (which it is safe to assume)   
 

And while I agree with your two other points, Blizzard has been known to make undocumented changes and design things in ways that do not make sense. 
I'm not saying they did, but it's a possibility. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

From what I remember from retail, no ICD ever existed. Not 100% sure about the proc rates, my memory recalls me a 8-9% for all classes and something between 11-13% for Warlocks and Shamans. But again, this is just my memory and what we used to talk about, don't have any proofs. 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Please sign in to comment

You will be able to leave a comment after signing in



Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this  

×