Few Bugs/Missing Things

Greetings! I’ve been an avid spreadsheet user in the rogue community but lately have found this website and have been using it on a regular basis because I believe it is very useful and underrated. Just wanted to give a few areas of feedback to help make it even better.

  1. Magic Resistance Potion is missing from consumables list. It doesn’t stack with Paladin Resistance Auras or Aspect of the Wild.
  2. For rogues, is there a chance poisons/stones (elemental, sharpening, etc) can be calculated as enchants instead of part of our “setup?” This way it will simulate if poisons are better vs elemental sharpening stone, for example, based on different gearsets.
  3. The simulation here matches nearly perfectly with the most trusted spreadsheets that rogues use so far, which lends it credibility. Only area that it varies in outcome significantly is when it comes to the viability of Darkmantle for rogues. Most spreadsheets have it as about a 15-25dps upgrade over 8/8 Bloodfang. This website has it rated lower. I wonder how you all calculate the proc mechanics of the set and if you take into account potential energy waste (especially for dagger rogues). From what I was able to glean it’s 1ppm per weapon (regardless of speed) and even higher with haste buffs (avg of ~2.3ppm). Just find it strange that the sim here and the spreadsheet shows significantly differing values despite agreeing in almost every other way.
  4. Lastly, I’m not sure if this is only I problem I have encountered or if I’m misinterpreting data incorrectly, but it seems that sometimes when I “force” the sim to use one particular piece/set of gear, the “dps increase” is larger than the one that the sim calculated as BiS. If we had the ability to compare theoretical item sets against eachother using the sim I could verify if it was real or just a glitch, but it seems like I can only compare item sets that I am currently using against ones the sim comes up with (instead of manually entered set vs sim sit, or sim set vs sim set, etc).

Thanks for your time, and thanks for this great tool! Really appreciated.

Hey, glad you’re enjoying it!

  1. We can add magic resistance potion as another option for resistances.

  2. I’d have to think on this one… it might be possible to do this, but it would take some coding. The simulator isn’t set up right now to handle more than one enchant per weapon. We do plan to implement a new approach to handling enchants/gems in the Shadowlands version of the site that we’re currently working on, which might handle this better, and could be ported to the classic version.

  3. I’d have to ask @Swol to check out how we are estimating Darkmantle and get back to you. I can’t remember off the top of my head.

  4. If you have a specific case where you think that locking in a piece is finding a better solution, click the “help” link next to the big Best in Slot or Best in Bags header, then follow the instructions to create a snapshot ID and copy it into a post here. We can then take a look at the specific case and see what’s up. It’s not impossible that locking an item could cause the optimizer to find a better solution due to having a more restricted input, but it should be rare, and the difference should be very small. When we get specific cases from users of this happening we use it to tweak the algorithm as needed.

1 Like

I am using a 3% proc rate on Darkmantle, which was the best information that I could find. It is very hard for me to believe that it is as good as people think… just from the item level alone, unless the proc rate is in fact much higher than 3%. As far as I could find, it does not use an actual PPM mechanic, it uses a flat % proc rate - which would explain whey you see more procs when you have faster autos.

I am not wasting any energy in my calculations. I think it is generally possible to avoid wasting energy in classic, unless you are specifically trying to pool energy at some point and then get a lucky proc. If wasted energy is a big issue, I could incorporate that into the calculations, but as you mentioned, I seem to be getting reasonable results across the board for rogue gear.

1 Like

Makes sense. And yeah 3% flat proc does seem to be about correct, as reverse engineering the “ppm” translation that the spreadsheets use using 3% as the baseline I get the same results as the spreadsheets, so you seem to agree on the proc mechanics. Perhaps the simulation is overestimating the BF 8pc bonus? It’s virtually a consensus that the darkmantle 4pc is better than full 8/8 t2 right now (for SWORD rogues in particular, Alliance side). If you are using the same proc mechanics as multiple spreadsheets are for darkmantle, the variation has to come from somewhere and idk where that would be. It’s entirely possible your simulation is correct but I can’t see the backend calculations myself like I can for spreadsheets, which is why I ask. :slight_smile:

Thanks for the reply so quick!

Thanks so much! I appreciate it and I for sure will do that next time I come across this situation. I’ve been trying to spread the word about this sim because I had never heard of it before about a month ago and it seems vastly underrated and underutilized. Keep up the good work

564536b88188420e961756bfcb46357e – Here is me locking the 8/8 t2 and it coming back as +0.87% versus equipped.

d7658ac71bd349a7abe4089f4a4a1662 – Here is with no restrictions, which favors 4pc Darkmantle with +0.41% versus equipped.

Thanks, I’ll take a look. Ideally we can tweak it to handle this case, but the difference is quite small (0.46%), so it might still slip under the tolerance of the various algorithms.

Ah okay I see. The algorithm has a tolerance for when to ignore certain combinations or something then, I didn’t know that. I suppose that reduces the calculation load significantly.

There are so many combinations that an exhaustive search is not feasible – you can see for your gear that we estimate approximately 59 trillion possible combinations. Simply enumerating those would take forever, let alone scoring them.

So we use several algorithms and heuristics that can identify subsets of those 59 trillion combinations that have a very high probability of containing the optimal result. Thus there’s always a chance that a combo will be missed. But the algorithms are designed such that it would be near impossible to miss a combo that scores “significantly” higher than one that was found – if it does happen it will be a case like this where the difference is small enough that it’s hard to prove one way or the other which set of gear is actually better in-game.

1 Like