Again, the more fundamental issue is that the runes *only* modify dps and don't change how we use or look at the ability.
Rend Mutilate vs Lacerate.
70%/s base for 3 = 210%
90%/s Lacerate for 3 = 270%
70%/s Mutilate for 5 = 350%
At least those have slight differences, since one is better in an infinite rage situation and the other is better in a DPC. The difference between runes for Hungering just don't differ enough, which again leads me to believe that they will be changing the runes.
Overall it's kind of confusing. I'm not sure why you would take any one of these 3 runes over the other 2. Most skill runes are pretty easy to fit into a build, but Hungering Arrow is a bit more difficult.
Hungering is unique in this regard; all of its runes don't change its functionality much, only the damage. Additionally, they're typically limited in the number of hits, not area, resulting in something extremely comparable and not situational. Spray is the only 'typical' rune here and you'll note that it's the one rune without a number attached to it.
I'm honestly surprised not one of these runes says: piercing an enemy provides X additional hatred, piercing an enemy snares the enemy for 2 seconds, or removes the homing ability and increases the damage, etc. The only synergy with Hungering is possibly Night Stalker and Sharpshooter, where Puncturing, Shatter, and Spray are best for providing the higher number of hits.
Well, can test with rend possibly. I don't believe you got more damage per tick though. My immediate thought is how dots worked for wow, and possibly whatever that fire crit dot talent was called... /brain fart. Ill note that neither was perfect, and the first was for quality of life for keeping uptime only, not for increasing damage.
You could say the same about *many* runes for abilities that start more focused and end up spread out. Meteor shower is the first one to come to mind, along with ray of frost or one of fists of thunder. Cinder is in a similar place, where its benefit drops drastically in single target or higher aps situations. Not as drastic as what is possible for shatter, but still worth consideration.
I'm not sure overkill damage is enough of a reason to discount devouring being overpowered either. It just makes it stronger in groups or inferno where the hit may not still be enough, or where the % of overkill it is is low enough to be negligible.
Not #1 and not #2 IS a possibility, simply forcing it into and aoe/line situational ability. I see no reason for throwing that option away; its theoretical max damage stays the same at 233.
Edit: scratch that on devouring, your equation is wrong. When n = 1, that's one pierce, aka the 2nd hit should have the 70% bonus, which you've now removed.
Edit2: I now see what you were getting at with the 'consecutive' but I believe that to be a mistake in wording. Having only the 3rd and higher hits get the bonus is not very intuitive.
@Chippydip Yah I see Shatter maintaining the homing ability, but not pierce. Of course, it could definitely go another way too.
Honestly, either version would be nice, but I would like the runes better if it didn't home, just to provide improved incentives for others, specifically Spray, which is stuck being the only aoe-only rune otherwise. Devouring appears to need a nerf though. Reducing it to 50% bonus damage would bring it to a reasonable 242.
I think you did something wrong in your calculations. If all 3 pierce after the split then the average damage is about 300%, making it the best rune, but not wildly better than Devouring.
You are assuming the behavior of the skill by stating that the 3 spawned act as normal non-runed hungering arrows, just as he assumed the behavior that the 3 spawned act as runed Shatter Arrows, though his number should really be infinite.
Shatter Shot absolutely will not work like this. If every pierce split and each of the 3 arrows had a chance to pierce causing it to split again, etc, then the expected damage from a single shot would be infinite! (After the first pierce you have 3 chances at 35% to pierce so, on average, you will get 1.05 pierces, which leads to an exponential explosion in damage).
Most likely, but without testing or word from Blizzard...
Even without that though, it's in a good place as far as the runes go, doing a little bit more than Puncturing. Right now, Cindering is easily the weakest, but I forget if DH's get any kind of synergy with burning targets.
Scatter is also incorrect, but there's information missing. For example, do the 3 resulting arrows have the same behavior? If not, it's just:
115 + .35 * (3 * 115) = 235.75
If it does... I would need to sit down longer to simplify it. Recursively, it's:
Arrow = 115 + .35 * (3 * Arrow)
Problem with the image is, if it doesn't pierce the first time, it can't pierce a second time.
Also, i think the formula for Devouring may not be correct, the damage increase only occurs after a split, so i think it should be .35^n-1 x .7^n
The Devouring in image is correct, though missing the 'x' to keep it consistent. When n is 0, presumably for 0 targets pierced, it has no effect on the damage.
If Cinder continues to pierce (which it should because Blizzard has stated you should never want the unruned), the results are too timing based to successfully calculate with a simple equation. However, assuming it hits a new target every time (best case), it's simply:
Sum(150 * .35^n) = 230.77
If we assume it takes 1s to hit the same target every time (worst case), it's
Sum((115 + 35/3) * .35^n) = 194.87
194.87 - 230.77, giving it a decent place as the second rune you get.
Spray of Teeth is a little bit more complicated due to the unknowns about its aoe range and the situational unknowns.
For M targets in the aoe, and C for crit chance
SUM((115 * .35^n) + (.35^n * C * ((M * 50) + 57.5)))
.35^n chance to hit the nth target, but each hit is an independent crit check to do 50% WD on M targets. Because you're critting however, you have to add an additional 57.5% for the regular crit damage bonus of 50%.
If we assume M=3, you need a crit chance of ~17% to get 231, beating Puncturing. As M and C increase, it will do much, much more.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
Rend Mutilate vs Lacerate.
70%/s base for 3 = 210%
90%/s Lacerate for 3 = 270%
70%/s Mutilate for 5 = 350%
At least those have slight differences, since one is better in an infinite rage situation and the other is better in a DPC. The difference between runes for Hungering just don't differ enough, which again leads me to believe that they will be changing the runes.
I'm honestly surprised not one of these runes says: piercing an enemy provides X additional hatred, piercing an enemy snares the enemy for 2 seconds, or removes the homing ability and increases the damage, etc. The only synergy with Hungering is possibly Night Stalker and Sharpshooter, where Puncturing, Shatter, and Spray are best for providing the higher number of hits.
I'm not sure overkill damage is enough of a reason to discount devouring being overpowered either. It just makes it stronger in groups or inferno where the hit may not still be enough, or where the % of overkill it is is low enough to be negligible.
Edit: scratch that on devouring, your equation is wrong. When n = 1, that's one pierce, aka the 2nd hit should have the 70% bonus, which you've now removed.
Edit2: I now see what you were getting at with the 'consecutive' but I believe that to be a mistake in wording. Having only the 3rd and higher hits get the bonus is not very intuitive.
Even without that though, it's in a good place as far as the runes go, doing a little bit more than Puncturing. Right now, Cindering is easily the weakest, but I forget if DH's get any kind of synergy with burning targets.
Scatter is also incorrect, but there's information missing. For example, do the 3 resulting arrows have the same behavior? If not, it's just:
115 + .35 * (3 * 115) = 235.75
If it does... I would need to sit down longer to simplify it. Recursively, it's:
Arrow = 115 + .35 * (3 * Arrow)
Problem with the image is, if it doesn't pierce the first time, it can't pierce a second time.
The Devouring in image is correct, though missing the 'x' to keep it consistent. When n is 0, presumably for 0 targets pierced, it has no effect on the damage.
If Cinder continues to pierce (which it should because Blizzard has stated you should never want the unruned), the results are too timing based to successfully calculate with a simple equation. However, assuming it hits a new target every time (best case), it's simply:
Sum(150 * .35^n) = 230.77
If we assume it takes 1s to hit the same target every time (worst case), it's
Sum((115 + 35/3) * .35^n) = 194.87
194.87 - 230.77, giving it a decent place as the second rune you get.
Spray of Teeth is a little bit more complicated due to the unknowns about its aoe range and the situational unknowns.
For M targets in the aoe, and C for crit chance
SUM((115 * .35^n) + (.35^n * C * ((M * 50) + 57.5)))
.35^n chance to hit the nth target, but each hit is an independent crit check to do 50% WD on M targets. Because you're critting however, you have to add an additional 57.5% for the regular crit damage bonus of 50%.
If we assume M=3, you need a crit chance of ~17% to get 231, beating Puncturing. As M and C increase, it will do much, much more.