WOTLK Armor Pen Adjustment

Hey Yellow, with TOGC coming out next week, I was comparing BIS lists from the theory crafters vs what AMR is giving me. It’s actually really close right out of the gate (2 items off and some gems), but there seems to be a little adjustment needed regarding Armor Pen for the time being. The theory crafters are suggesting getting to about 700 ARP because Mjolnir Runestone procs for 700. That would bring us to the soft cap of 1400, making any additional ARP worth 0 while the trinket is proc’d. AMR is getting me to around 900 which would lead to 200ish being wasted while the trinket is proc’d. The sims show it within a few hundred DPS, so I don’t think it’s the end of the world. However, I figured I’d ask for you to take a look and see what the rules of the sim are, and if AMR is already considering the waste while being over-cap’d or if that’s something that should be adjusted because there is going to be some value with the extra 200 while the trinket is on CD for 45 seconds.

I imagine that this will not be a problem into ICC because we likely will be able to hit the soft cap without the fluctuation of procs (especially such a massive amount from one proc), but they’re estimating TOGC at 8-12 weeks… so it’s not an inconsequential amount of time to get there, plus the time gearing in ICC.

We can add an adjustment for some of these cases when we do the site update for phase 3 on tuesday.

Thanks for this change.

AMR’s interface is so much better than competitors that I’m really happy we can use Armor pen in this way in this system.

I maybe have a bug report however, I have tested a few times when I set a minimum the sim gives me 10% less than entered, examples here with minimums of 55>45 and 65>55:

@breytak I’m actually still working on this particular feature to deal with temporary armor pen procs, it was a little trickier than expected. I hope to finish it for tonight’s update though.

@JayHills Could you post a snapshot ID for your case? With that I can try your specific character and settings to reproduce the issue. Instructions on how to do that here:

I just posted an update that should have these armor penetration trinket cases working a bit better.

My guess at what is happening in @JayHills case is that the threshold is accounting for the average value of the Mjolnir Runestone, which comes out to around 10% when you factor in its duration and cooldown.

Hoping this is still timely: d5d18174dda940c7b454ccb5f7f5b8d4

Not sure about Breytak’s case. But i thought i’d offer some context for what the theory crafters are targeting for feral cat:

Thanks for your work, it makes playing wow classic much more pleasant :slight_smile:

Sorry guys, I don’t check forums open. I’ll try adjusting the rating later today or sometime this weekend and see what I get. If it still doesn’t look right I’ll send the ID over =] Thanks for your work yellow.

Hi Yellow is this your intended behaviour?

“My guess at what is happening in @JayHills case is that the threshold is accounting for the average value of the Mjolnir Runestone, which comes out to around 10% when you factor in its duration and cooldown.”

Yes, that’s the intended behavior.

It is one of those things we went back and forth many times back in the day… either perspective is valid (include temporary gains in some way when going for a threshold, or don’t).

In this case it’s pretty simple to work with the system though – just lower your threshold by around 10% if you have that trinket and you want to go for some specific amount without taking the trinket into account.

That said… with our latest changes, it really shouldn’t be necessary to target arbitrary armor pen thresholds… if armor pen is good for your spec, the optimizer will tend to get to a good value that also accounts for overcapping when the proc is active.

Hi I just bought AMR, im kinda confused and annoyed by several things.

So why does it not go for ARP when you have mjonir available and try aim for the 1400 arp by default?

I did some sims with wowsims

ARM by default should give the users the class best dps? by wowsims that is not that case?`
when you buy something like this tool, you really want best dps possible.

exact same gear,gems,enchants everything is exact the same with arm and wowsims, but yet it differs a lot in various stuff.

Sunder armor suddenly gives hit ratio buff to the class?

Look this video.

melee hit shows 8.17% on wowsims, but with arm and sunder debuff applied it shows 7.81% ???

A link for wowsim and you can manually change stuff if needed.


@yellowfive Perhaps I forgot to tag you, so you actually see this?

What I would really need is a snapshot of your specific setup on our website so that I can reproduce your case. Instructions on how to do that here:

Then I can check it out and see what’s up… in my tests after this update it was accounting for temporary armor penetration buffs just fine.

Sunder armor does not change your chance to hit on our site… something else must be different. With your snapshot I can try to figure it out.

I deleted it and moved on, I will have to check again to see if I can find right combination, else did you actually see the video of it, you can clearly see that its happening after changing only sunder armor on/off.

Just look the video where I point the mouse with the armor and sunder, then check hit go down and armor is actually ignore after you claim the new updates for amr went out.

I just tried with “normal/default” regulation without doing anything, it does not like the armor pen and removes over 25% for me.

btw is there any chance that you guys would be able to export support to https://wowsims.github.io as string support for simming?

I had more issues with AMR where it would suggest what to put on, then I would put it on, and do export string then re-optimize, then it would want me to suddenly change items again to something else, i would then again add those related items to my char, export the string and re-optimize once again, and it AGAIN kept doing it over and over in loop…

This was with me having bank and bags open all the time and just closing amr in-game and opening it again to make sure that it would refresh the export code.

When you have issues, please make snapshots using the process in the post that I linked, not videos or screenshots. It is very difficult to troubleshoot without the snapshot ID. You simply have to press the “help” link next to any of the big section headers like “Best in Bags”, and follow the on-screen instructions to generate a 32-digit snapshot ID, then copy it here.

The optimizer should not go back and forth between different solutions when you make changes – that is almost always caused by not actually making all of the suggested changes. Once again… if this happens, please make a couple of snapshots: one where it is giving you a suggested solution, then another after you go in-game and equip that solution and export again, and the optimizer tells you to do something different. With those two snapshots I can exactly reproduce your case and dig into it.

I guess this tool is not something for me then, if I have to do your guys work that I pay for, sorry to say but a simply logger on all customers to go back in history should be in its place for like a week back or something, it cost you guys nothing and would not fill much data, as you say your self its a snapshot id which you could fill 1000 times on each customer without filling data up.

Since you did not answer my question about adding support for other sites, I take that as a no.

I’m not interested going back and forth clicking on various buttons to remember when I have issues in a already very confused website scheme.

It’s a really simple process that we put in place to make it way easier to try out people’s cases… it really only takes two clicks on the website:

Then on the window that pops up:


That’s it, then copy the ID it shows, and then I can reproduce your exact case with your exact settings.

Sure I could keep a history… but how would I know which one to use for the case that you post? I don’t know if you may have changed something since you posted… it’s way easier for you to just snapshot it at the time you encounter the issue. The whole point of this isn’t to make you do work for me… it’s to make it easier for me to help you out more quickly. I can usually figure out an issue in a few minutes from a snapshot provided by a user… but it can take a few hours or more if I have to dig through database logs, try to recreate it from a video or image, etc.

I have not looked at this wowsims site much – I don’t know if/what kind of format they would support. I can add it to the list of things to check out int he future.

Today is patch day for wow retail (10.1.5 patch, a big one with a brand new spec), so our bandwidth is a bit limited for the next day or two.

I’m not talking about you finding a nail in the hay.

Give us an option to have history of lets say 50 reverts in history with timestamps we can click on to go back in time of whatever changes we made, that will make it easier for US to find the issue and provide the snapshot, than we have to do try figure out and remember what we had done…

This is just a plain default snapshot.

It wants to remove almost all my armor pen where I am almost perfectly armor pen capped manually by my self.


For the other addon and their website


Thanks for the snapshot.

Our model for feral favors agility slightly over armor penetration when gemming. Honestly they are so close you will not be able to tell the difference in-game. If you want some independent verification of that, I tried your simulation link on that other site above and replaced all your armor penetration gems with agility gems – it fell within the margin of error, thus indistinguishable for practical purposes according to that model as well.

I don’t know if I’ll have the time to reverse engineer that site’s import/export format in the short term… but I can put it on the list of things to explore down the road.

edit: it would be very unusual to raid without any buffs, debuffs, or consumables. You should make sure to enable what you usually have in-game or you could get different results than you expect.

Wait are you saying that its “ok” and not the best setup it try to aim for now?

For which such statement saying you cannot tell the difference, you are not playing wotlk as a feral druid, that I can tell.

You can actually tell the difference, its a the difference of being the TOP or just being sub par top in DPS.

If this is what the AMR is about, then change information about this site/addon because right now it does not live up to its information providing us users.

Get all of your inventory data to do best-in-bags optimizations and set up simulations.

If I wanted sub/semi improvement in dps I would do it manually my self without paying for it.

Until such things have been looked into, I regret I have paid for this and want to seek information about cancelling/refund.

I think you misread my post… if I run a simulation that says 7000 dps +/- 200… then another that says 6970 +/- 200… those fall within the margin of error of each other, so you can’t definitively say which is better. If you re-ran both of them, they might flip.

You also have to keep in mind that our website and wowsims are two completely independent tools. There is no guarantee that they will get exactly the same result, though they should be close. We have confirmed here that our models are getting very similar results (within 1% estimated DPS or so). When the margins get that small, it’s pretty tough to say which will win out in-game. No matter what anybody tells you, no theoretical model of the game can give you sub-1% accurate predictions of in-game performance. There are simply too many variables that such models have to leave out – everything from specific fight timing to your teammates to the nuances of human reaction time.

That said, I’m working with another user on WotLK feral druid who also would prefer to see more armor penetration. Since they are so close, I’m not opposed to trying to tweak our model to favor it slightly over agility. The point I’m trying to make though is that this change would simply be to make you feel better… it won’t actually make you play better.