+- SWTOR Mechanics Forums (http://mmo-mechanics.com/swtor/forums)
+-- Forum: Class Discussion (/forum-7.html)
+--- Forum: Sith Inquisitor and Jedi Consular (/forum-9.html)
+--- Thread: [Archive] Sith Sorcerer/Jedi Sage Lightning/Telekinetics Compendium (/thread-574.html)
RE: Sorc DPS Abilities Dissection - Anubis Black - 08-12-2011 08:07 AM
Undead Prince, check Arcane Missiles. I believe this is exactly how FL will be modelled and I doubt it can be seen as a DoT. Also check Missile Barrage which is where LB is copied directly from. It simply does not make sense for FL to be seen as a DoT. Take into account all the DoT- enhancing talents and all the FL- enhancing talents. Does it make sense to you that they are separated and combined make up half of the trees?
Pred and Kalarie, we are not talking about haste from gear. It is not a stat as such. We are talking about haste effects, such as the one provided by Polarity Shift. Surely it is not a singled out case.
Ah, Kalarie, I just read your last two posts. Whenever I hear clipping, I imagine losing the last tick due to premature refresh. If the damage was added, then it is a huge relief and takes a lot of the timing skill out. I'd say model it as clipping being a damage loss (last tick lost), since it's always better to underestimate rather than overestimate. But as I pointed out twice already, we need confirmations on DoT mechanics. Tick frequency, clipping, general mechanics (or differences to our assumptions).
(08-12-2011 08:12 AM)Undead Prince Wrote: It makes sense in terms of making overpowered builds
lol, nice
RE: Sorc DPS Abilities Dissection - Undead Prince - 08-12-2011 08:12 AM
(08-12-2011 08:07 AM)Anubis Black Wrote: Undead Prince, check Arcane Missiles. I believe this is exactly how FL will be modelled and I doubt it can be seen as a DoT. Also check Missile Barrage which is where LB is copied directly from. It simply does not make sense for FL to be seen as a DoT. Take into account all the DoT- enhancing talents and all the FL- enhancing talents. Does it make sense to you that they are separated and combined make up half of the trees?
EDIT:
There are only 2 talents that affect "periodicals" as such and not concrete spells: Seeping Darkness and Parasitism. Both are very low-level abilities.
The FL-enhancing talents only affect FL, and would not affect "periodicals" as such even if FL was considered one.
So I don't see much imbalance here (well, maybe a little bit
).Also, I had a look at Arcane Missiles. Here's what it says under "Effect 2": "Apply Aura: Periodically trigger spell Arcane Missiles". See - periodically
Anyway, I'm just asking. Mindspy said that usually channeled spells are considered periodicals, with some exceptions (one of which is exactly Arcane Missiles), so I pounced at the possible implications in light of the other data we have regarding FL.
RE: Sorc DPS Abilities Dissection - Undead Prince - 08-12-2011 10:37 AM
(08-11-2011 10:18 PM)Anubis Black Wrote:
Let's see if we can go higher than that, and without using that pesky Polarity Shift at all
Check out this build, for instance. (Note that it has 2 skill points remaining free, so these can be put anywhere).
I'm introducing Death Fields and Shocks into the rotation. Though less damaging, their advantage is instant casting time, so in terms of DPS they may prove more efficient than pure FL spamming.
I'm also adding Deathmark for more DOT damage output, and Seeping Darkness for higher DOT crit, which in particular should give me an extra LBFL from Affliction.
Damage calc for each spell:
FL: 914.76
WCL: 1.2*(0.8*474.88 +0.2*712.32) = 379,904 +142.464 *1.2 = 626.8368 // No Forked Lightning in this build
Death Field: (0.8*487 + 0.2*487*1.6) = 545.44 // Using the same approach you used for TB;
AFF + CD: 3550.8 * 1.2 {Deathmark damage bonus} * 1,03 {+6% critical chance bonus from Seeping Darkness} = 4388,7888
SHOCK: 391 {average from Tattoine video} > 430.1 {with criticals} > + 45% chance of +50% damage {Chain Shock} = 526,75
1 minute breakdown:
3 AFF + 3 CD = 10.5
5 LBFL = 7.5
4 WCL = 6
4 DF = 6
8 FL = 24
4 SHOCK = 6
TOTAL DAMAGE:
11891,88 {8 FL +5 LBFL} + 4388,7888 {3 Aff + 3 CD} + 2507,2 {4 WCL} + 2142,76 {4 DF} +2107 {4 Shock}= 23036,84
EXTRAS:
Damage: Death Fields and WCLs are AOE, so any enemies caught in the area are fried as well. (double-edged sword, as allies or CC'd critters may be affected, but you said DPS so we're doin' DPS!
)Healing: up to +480 hp/minute from Death Field & +1.3% of hp and force pools per DOT critical from Parasitism, with +6% critical chance bonus from Seeping Darkness.
Apprentice did good?
RE: Sorc DPS Abilities Dissection - Anubis Black - 08-12-2011 12:16 PM
Damn, I was just going to sleep...
Ok. Let me check. You haven't picked up Convection, which I assume you want if you want to deal more damage. Next up, the
are just averaging out the amount of hits you will have with an ability (80% of the time) and the amount of crits (20% assumed crit chance). If you add in Seeping Darkness, Aff and CD need to be recalculated using
Also, I'm not sure where this 1.6 comes in your Death Field calculation. Usually, the crit modifier is 150% or 1.5. In the case of Aff, CL and TB when taking 5/5 Reverberating Force, it's 200% or 2. But you don't have that, so all crits will be 1.5 * (normal hit).
Your WCL calculation seems correct, I'm getting 626.84 as well. Let's look at DF. Base is 241, you've used the TB approach adding 246, 487 correct. Now crit will be 1.5 times that, which is 730.5
Negligible adjustment. Aff and CD need to be recalculated, using the updated crit chance (26%).
Lastly, let's look at Shock. I'm not sure where you picked that number up. In the Tatooine video the ability is used once and crits for 512 damage as seen here. In the James Ohlen video (assuming they use the same character) the ability hits for 350 and crits for 526 (analyzed here). (Which reminded me I can use the numbers for the abilities from that spreadsheet, but then the mix- up will be even bigger, better stick to this.) Anyway, so disregarding the second video, from the Tatooine one we can assume Shock hits for
So then we can calculate the total damage of Shock (w/ and w/o Chain Shock proc) on average:
(55% of the cases CS won't proc, 45% of the cases it will)
So let's combine all that and see what we get.
Now, calculating the DoTs damage is a bit trickier. The 20% increased damage from the Deathmarks is applied to Aff and to the DoT part of CD. Since CD has a direct damage component, it has to be calculated separately.
Just as I was about to plain boost all DoTs by 20% from DF and get the total
I realized a minor flaw. Casting 4 DF's will give you 32 Deathmarks. But you will cast 3 Aff's (7 ticks each, totalling 21) and 3 CD's (6 ticks each, totalling 18) so you will have 39 ticks combined. Thus 7 ticks will not benefit from the 20% increased damage (since each tick will consume a Deathmark). A better estimate will be then
Finally, when I reached the conclusion above, I realised that with Aff's duration of 21 seconds, the last tick will occur 63 seconds into the fight and should not be included in this "minute" we've been discussing (which again, is not a very good idea for comparisson, as fights will be much much longer at about e.g. 10min.). It is included in both rotations though, so it isn't an issue.
Regardless, you are picking up, doing very well. I hope some of the explanations cleared up the basis behind the calculations.
RE: Sorc DPS Abilities Dissection - Alratan - 08-12-2011 06:22 PM
(08-12-2011 07:33 AM)Undead Prince Wrote: Thanks, that's great to hear
Glad I could help! I have no idea where the +rep button is right now, either.
(08-12-2011 07:35 AM)Anubis Black Wrote: Argh, I'm usually so rigorous, my apologies. But yes, you need to change it due to peer pressure. It'll become overwhelming eventually
Never! Don't worry, happens to everyone.
(08-12-2011 07:35 AM)Anubis Black Wrote: A major reason why I've not decided yet if I'll play competitively or not. My personal feeling is that macros are a must for flawless execution.
Perhaps, but you can still have very clean executions without macros. As long as everyone is on a level playing field in that respect, it's not too bad, as there's still plenty of room for player skill. After I played LotRO for a little bit, I stopped missing them. I imagine that macros will be in some time after launch, though, along with basic UI configuration.
(08-12-2011 07:45 AM)Kalarie Wrote: On this page the links suggest that picking an AC is meant to be permanent, and respeccing that AC is meant to get more expensive and so discouraged. So either you get it right the first time or you pay higher prices down the road. That is unless they cap the repec fee like WoW did.
(I apologise if I am repeating what you already know. I don't wish to be condescending, I simply want to establish the basic information we have in order to clarify nomenclature.)
We're both in agreement here, except that you're using 'respec' interchangeably. An AC in SW:TOR is not the same as a spec in WoW, nor is the same thing as a spec in SW:TOR. In SW:TOR, each AC has three separate skill trees to choose from (one of which is shared with the other AC from the same base class, so Assassins and Sorcerers both have the Madness tree). From what we know of, you can respec within your AC at your leisure by visiting an NPC and paying money (as it was in the TBC days of WoW). If they've learnt anything from WoW, this will have a cap on the fee, and they haven't ruled out adding Dual Spec capabilities down the line.
Changing your AC is not respecing, as it is changing to a different set of possible specs, along with changing base abilities. Changing an AC and respecing your skill trees within an AC are not comparable, both because of different base abilities available, and because of the way Bioware have implemented penalties of it. Calling it 'respecing' at all is just confusing, and makes the terminology very imprecise.
(08-12-2011 07:45 AM)Kalarie Wrote: Clipping of DoTs always seemed odd to me at first too, and I don't have a good answer for why it happens, but I think it has to do with accounting for lag in variables of play. For example, in WoW a warlock can refresh their Bane of Doom DoT at 15s remaining and the extra time is added to the new refresh giving the new DoT 75s versus the original 60s. When the ticks hit doesn't change, but the calculation of when to refresh does. With clipping you are not penalized for striving for 100% uptime. Without clipping you might have DoTs fall off in favor of getting the extra tick. It just plays a part into your mana management and timing of your casts for keeping your priority in check. Clipping will affect how we simcraft too though.
Interesting, and very useful for maximising dps/hps/tsp. I haven't played WoW since TBC, so clipping wasn't in then, nor have I played another game with it in. It will be interesting to see if SW:TOR adds it.
Undead Prince, I believe that FL will trigger Parasitism, which will make FL spam in a Madness build potentially very useful for alleviating the healer's strain on raid fights with lots of minor raid damage. Might not be worth it for the dps loss, however, but it's certainly something to consider.
RE: Sorc DPS Abilities Dissection - Undead Prince - 08-12-2011 07:03 PM
(08-12-2011 12:16 PM)Anubis Black Wrote: Damn, I was just going to sleep...
Sorry
This thing's eating a bit of my time as well, good thing I'm on vacation Quote:Ok. Let me check. You haven't picked up Convection, which I assume you want if you want to deal more damage.
Yes, of course you're right, Convection would be useful for both WCL and CD.
Quote:Also, I'm not sure where this 1.6 comes in your Death Field calculation. Usually, the crit modifier is 150% or 1.5.
That came from a previous build which incorporated one level of Creeping Death (+10% crit damage for DF and DOTs). I thought I dealt with that by reducing the final damage number for DF in the final calc, gotta check it.
Quote:Aff and CD need to be recalculated, using the updated crit chance (26%).
I did that by *1.03 (26%*50%). But your way is more precise.
Quote:
Quote:Lastly, let's look at Shock. I'm not sure where you picked that number up. In the Tatooine video the ability is used once and crits for 512 damage as seen here. In the James Ohlen video (assuming they use the same character) the ability hits for 350 and crits for 526 (analyzed here). (Which reminded me I can use the numbers for the abilities from that spreadsheet, but then the mix- up will be even bigger, better stick to this.) Anyway, so disregarding the second video, from the Tatooine one we can assume Shock hits for
So then we can calculate the total damage of Shock (w/ and w/o Chain Shock proc) on average:
(55% of the cases CS won't proc, 45% of the cases it will)
I got the 391 average damage from the Tattoine video tooltip, and then added criticals to get 430. Afterwards I added the probability of Chain Shock to get an overall average of 526,75. Are you saying criticals are already included in the tooltip damage?
If your calc is correct, then Shock is useless and should be removed from the rotation in favour of more FLs which do the same damage but with various added bonuses.
Quote:I realized a minor flaw. Casting 4 DF's will give you 32 Deathmarks. But you will cast 3 Aff's (7 ticks each, totalling 21) and 3 CD's (6 ticks each, totalling 18) so you will have 39 ticks combined. Thus 7 ticks will not benefit from the 20% increased damage (since each tick will consume a Deathmark).
Huh, this did not occur to me
You are truly looking deep into the calc!Quote: A better estimate will be then
Almost a +700 damage improvement over my previous build, and only 487 damage behind your 31 Lightning build (or, 2.1% difference). Not as good as I hoped, but still reasonable (although we do have to keep in mind the whole coefficients deal).
Quote:Regardless, you are picking up, doing very well. I hope some of the explanations cleared up the basis behind the calculations.
Thank you, I'll try to be more precise next time
(08-12-2011 06:22 PM)Alratan Wrote: Glad I could help! I have no idea where the +rep button is right now, either.
Maybe only high-level users can give +rep?
Quote:Undead Prince, I believe that FL will trigger Parasitism, which will make FL spam in a Madness build potentially very useful for alleviating the healer's strain on raid fights with lots of minor raid damage. Might not be worth it for the dps loss, however, but it's certainly something to consider.
That would be awesome
Because not only then FL would be a Parasitism machine with its 4 critical chances per 3 seconds, but it would also benefit from Seeping Darkness (+6% crit chance) and - which did not at first occur to me - Deathmark which gives a massive +20% boost to periodic damage! In that case an FL +WCL + Death Field build would be pretty sweet!A quick calc: 4 Death Fields/Minute would give 32 Deathmarks, enough for 8 FLs (4 ticks each), which would give us
and that is not even taking into account the +6% critical chance boost to all FLs.
RE: Sorc DPS Abilities Dissection - Alratan - 08-12-2011 08:41 PM
I must admit, I am very curious to see if they will make Force Lightning not count as periodic, in the same manner as Arcane Missiles. This might make more sense from a balance perspective, but also makes a lot more sense from an immersion/lore perspective, in that when we have seen Force Lightning used it definitely seemed to interrupt people! That's purely speculation, however.
RE: Sorc DPS Abilities Dissection - Anubis Black - 08-12-2011 09:20 PM
(08-12-2011 07:03 PM)Undead Prince Wrote: Sorry
No worries, I'm just stubborn and VERY pedantic and would recalculate some things in my mind while falling asleep, then suddenly would realise I didn't multiply an ability by e.g. 1.06 and jump out of bed, switch on the computer and quickly correct myself.
(08-12-2011 07:03 PM)Undead Prince Wrote: I got the 391 average damage from the Tattoine video tooltip, and then added criticals to get 430. Afterwards I added the probability of Chain Shock to get an overall average of 526,75. Are you saying criticals are already included in the tooltip damage?
Oh, you mean this tooltip. It's from an Assassin video I watched (again from E3), it was never hovered over by the guy in the Tatooine video, so I cheated a bit. Sorry if I mislead you.
(08-12-2011 07:03 PM)Undead Prince Wrote: If your calc is correct, then Shock is useless and should be removed from the rotation in favour of more FLs which do the same damage but with various added bonuses.
4- 5 damage more is still more damage than FL. After launch when simulcraft and possibly an equivalent of Rawr are developed, you will see how a tiny bit of damage is preferred over any "added bonus". Shock also has its uses on the move, as mentioned previously. It's just not very viable in a rotation (most instants aren't).
(08-12-2011 07:03 PM)Undead Prince Wrote:(08-12-2011 06:22 PM)Alratan Wrote: Glad I could help! I have no idea where the +rep button is right now, either.
Maybe only high-level users can give +rep?
MK is playing around with the feature. We initially allowed everyone to be able to give rep, then decided only people with high enough rep can. We'll see what the final verdict will be.
(08-12-2011 08:41 PM)Alratan Wrote: I must admit, I am very curious to see if they will make Force Lightning not count as periodic, in the same manner as Arcane Missiles. This might make more sense from a balance perspective, but also makes a lot more sense from an immersion/lore perspective, in that when we have seen Force Lightning used it definitely seemed to interrupt people! That's purely speculation, however.
To be fair, I was really surprised to hear channels might be considered periodic. I've played for so long and never even thought about the possibility. They are a class of spells on its own in my eyes. After all, would you consider Blizzard (the spell) a DoT too? I just checked some Shadow Priest abilities and it seems that Mind Flay was never a DoT until Cata. And Mind Sear still isn't from what I gather. Even though the possibility is really tempting, I'd rather not get my hopes up. In my mind it still doesn't make sense.
RE: Sorc DPS Abilities Dissection - Alratan - 08-12-2011 10:24 PM
(08-12-2011 09:20 PM)Anubis Black Wrote: To be fair, I was really surprised to hear channels might be considered periodic. I've played for so long and never even thought about the possibility. They are a class of spells on its own in my eyes. After all, would you consider Blizzard (the spell) a DoT too? I just checked some Shadow Priest abilities and it seems that Mind Flay was never a DoT until Cata. And Mind Sear still isn't from what I gather. Even though the possibility is really tempting, I'd rather not get my hopes up. In my mind it still doesn't make sense.
Ditto, as I stopped playing in TBC and I'm fairly certain that Hurricane wasn't a DoT and Tranquility wasn't a HoT back then. I had to correct myself when I checked the Interrupt page for Undead Prince.
RE: Sorc DPS Abilities Dissection - Kalarie - 08-13-2011 04:32 AM
(08-12-2011 06:22 PM)Alratan Wrote: (I apologise if I am repeating what you already know. I don't wish to be condescending, I simply want to establish the basic information we have in order to clarify nomenclature.)
We're both in agreement here, except that you're using 'respec' interchangeably. An AC in SW:TOR is not the same as a spec in WoW, nor is the same thing as a spec in SW:TOR. In SW:TOR, each AC has three separate skill trees to choose from (one of which is shared with the other AC from the same base class, so Assassins and Sorcerers both have the Madness tree). From what we know of, you can respec within your AC at your leisure by visiting an NPC and paying money (as it was in the TBC days of WoW). If they've learnt anything from WoW, this will have a cap on the fee, and they haven't ruled out adding Dual Spec capabilities down the line.
Changing your AC is not respecing, as it is changing to a different set of possible specs, along with changing base abilities. Changing an AC and respecing your skill trees within an AC are not comparable, both because of different base abilities available, and because of the way Bioware have implemented penalties of it. Calling it 'respecing' at all is just confusing, and makes the terminology very imprecise.
Yeah we are on the same page, just different semantics. I would expect them to cap the cost of the respec, but so far they have only said that the cost would increase so I am operating under the idea that they are discouraging it.