And also a factor is, how many items can roll that certain affix, and what is the maximum value that exists.
It's all math, in the end, and right now what the math says is: "the best way to increase your DPS is to stack CC + CD".
Btw, what you are saying doesn't makes sense, what numbers are you using?, please don't tell me that you are comparing 1% of CC against 1% od CD... please.
www.d3rawr.com for those of you interested in the actual math on it.
I have a 45% CC wiz with 200 CD and 79% IAS and a 7% elemental damage increase on a non-black weapon with a total Int of 2500.
My dps increases per unit from most to least is CC, Elemental Damage, Attack Speed, Crit Dmg, Min/Max dmg, and Int.
In terms of those stats I think I'm far ahead of some characters in terms of IAS and total Int, but that amount of CC and elemental damage is cheap, and the CD is terrible. You'd think that just by looking at my character that I could benefit from some cheap and easy CD but you'd be wrong.
You are broken ass CM wiz... Of course CD isn't the best for you.
How about some ratios, instead of a list? That list means diddly shit.
If its 1% IAS > 1% CD, then thats fine except CD rolls 5-11 times higher than IAS.
Regardless this isn't wow, so what good is paper doll dps?
^^That's what ONE dev TALKED about. It's a pretty big leap to say "that's exactly what the patch is going to do".
Barring unfortunate unforeseen complications, that's exactly what they are going to do:
Introducing more choice instead of less and giving players more ways to feel like they are customizing their character is what we want to see. If gloves also had the ability to roll +% School Damage, +Life on Hit, Skill specific affixes, plus a couple more things you want, than players may find themselves in a situation where trifecta isn’t as clearly defined anymore.
I guess it's just another wording for elemental damage (as in the elemental damage bonus on the wizard set). If we had skill trees like in D2, I'd say there are three schools of magic: fire, lightning, ice. Isn't that also used in Dungeons and Dragons and other RPGs? They probably use it internally to distinguish from the "adds x% to elemental damage" affix (which is still on the todo list to be reworded).
I think this is a case of just legit ignorance, nothing more.
No, it's pretty common to compare stats at the most granular level. That's been the status quo in WoW theorycrafting for years. There's not really a better way to do it. Why would anyone want to know what 5 int does for their DPS? It's more complicated math to multiply then divide by 5. It's far easier to understand what "one" of any stat does for your DPS.
It is obvious that you can get more critical damage than critical chance, but it's also obvious that 1% crit chance will ALWAYS be better than 1% crit damage. What differentiate things is at what point, for your spec, does crit damage outpace crit chance? Is it 8% crit damage > 1% crit chance? 12% > 1%?
Remember that paper doll DPS is not always indicative of actual DPS for all specs, nor is it necessarily indicative of farming speed. There are explanations of why this is the case in many of the spec-specific threads, I'm not going to dig it up.
I think this is a case of just legit ignorance, nothing more.
No, it's pretty common to compare stats at the most granular level. That's been the status quo in WoW theorycrafting for years. There's not really a better way to do it. Why would anyone want to know what 5 int does for their DPS? It's more complicated math to multiply then divide by 5. It's far easier to understand what "one" of any stat does for your DPS.
It is obvious that you can get more critical damage than critical chance, but it's also obvious that 1% crit chance will ALWAYS be better than 1% crit damage. What differentiate things is at what point, for your spec, does crit damage outpace crit chance? Is it 8% crit damage > 1% crit chance? 12% > 1%?
Remember that paper doll DPS is not always indicative of actual DPS for all specs, nor is it necessarily indicative of farming speed. There are explanations of why this is the case in many of the spec-specific threads, I'm not going to dig it up.
This isn't WoW where you attack the same boss for 6 minutes. Calculating paper DPS is all but meaningless in this game... Thus your analysis is flawed to the core.
You probably should read my whole post before nerdraging at me because my parting shot in that post was EXACTLY what you said. The only thing that's "flawed to the core" is your ability to fully read a post before opening up your mouth and sticking your foot directly in it.
Remember that paper doll DPS is not always indicative of actual DPS for all specs, nor is it necessarily indicative of farming speed. There are explanations of why this is the case in many of the spec-specific threads, I'm not going to dig it up.
It's possible to discuss paper doll DPS while still acknowledging that it's not 100% representative of your actual DPS. That doesn't make discussion of paper doll DPS "flawed to the core." It simply makes it one tool among many for people to tweak their performance since we have no real way to genuinely tell if our actual DPS has increased or we just got lucky on crits.
You really need to chill out when it comes to raging at people who disagree with you. The world simply isn't that black-and-white. There are better, more constructive, ways to facilitate discussions. This approach you've taken is exactly what these forums DON'T need. We have tons of people here whose reading comprehension is horrible and plenty more who don't bother to read the whole post first before responding to it and making themselves look stupid.
Is that really so much to ask? For people to read a whole post, comprehend it, and THEN post without flinging poo at the walls?
Shaggy, it could be pretty common to make comparisons like that, but in Diablo 3, comparing CC to CD point per point, is not an useful or realistic comparison, and the flawed logic lies in what JKlimek posted, and the conclusions he made about it.
Shaggy, it could be pretty common to make comparisons like that, but in Diablo 3, comparing CC to CD point per point, is not an useful or realistic comparison, and the flawed logic lies in what JKlimek posted, and the conclusions he made about it.
You keep missing the point. Your opinion is that his logic is "flawed" but you refuse to rebutt it. You refuse to explain why you believe that and give any kind of facts or evidence to support that.
I am fully aware that you cannot develop a "stat priority" based on point-for-point comparisons. I'm very much aware that 1% Crit Chance is *always* going to outpace 1% Crit Damage in terms of worth - that's obvious, and that's why Crit Damage comes in larger sums.
But arguing that it's not important to know what 1% of each is worth is stupid and pedantic. It's very important for people who are really trying to max their throughput to have a clear idea what adding 3% Crit Damage is going to do for their damage versus adding 7 primary stat. This is accomplished by looking at each stat as granularly as possible and then doing the math.
So yes, he's wrong to say Crit > IAS > Primary > Crit Damage > blah > blah > blah on a point-for-point basis, but the point-for-point stat weights are still valuable information to have and to know and it has a very important role in making gear decisions. As I said, those point-for-point stat weights allow you to understand that 1% Crit Chance is worth ~9% Crit Damage for your spec & gear, or that 2% IAS is worth about 1% Crit Chance (ignoring resource generation benefits). Those are important comparisons, whether or not you like it and they still have meaning even if paper doll DPS isn't 100% accurate in terms of actual DPS.
You can argue in D3, aside from some specs which are very dependent on critting, there's really no point to stat "priorities" to begin with because most of the time we're not making "either/or" choices. Rarely are you picking between 5% Crit Chance and 25% Crit Damage. Most of the time you're trying your best to get both. In a situation where your ultimate goal is to "get everything" then it really has no bearing whether one of the stats is "OP" or not because you still want the others. People aren't skipping over IAS, Crit Chance, primary stats, or minmax damage because Crit Damage is "too good." People are actively trying to get as much of all of it as possible. What we're arguing about here is non-BiS-type gear and that seems really silly.
Which brings me full circle. This whole "Crit Damage is OP, nerf it" is more like a US Congress sound bite and less like a reasonable position to hold. Blizzard is on the right path by trying to give us alternatives instead of just nerfing Emeralds and Crit Damage on weapons. Provided they can make the other stats attractive (and perhaps mutually-exclusive so that we don't keep down the "get everything" path) it sounds like a very functional approach to breaking up the "trifecta."
Until we have to make choices between stats and we're not simply getting as much of all of it as possible, the whole idea that Crit Damage should be nerfed because it's OP is myopic. Instead of suggesting rubbish like this we should be waiting to see exactly what Blizzard is proposing to do and THEN scrutinize it.
Shaggy, it could be pretty common to make comparisons like that, but in Diablo 3, comparing CC to CD point per point, is not an useful or realistic comparison, and the flawed logic lies in what JKlimek posted, and the conclusions he made about it.
You keep missing the point. Your opinion is that his logic is "flawed" but you refuse to rebutt it. You refuse to explain why you believe that and give any kind of facts or evidence to support that.
I am fully aware that you cannot develop a "stat priority" based on point-for-point comparisons. I'm very much aware that 1% Crit Chance is *always* going to outpace 1% Crit Damage in terms of worth - that's obvious, and that's why Crit Damage comes in larger sums.
But arguing that it's not important to know what 1% of each is worth is stupid and pedantic. It's very important for people who are really trying to max their throughput to have a clear idea what adding 3% Crit Damage is going to do for their damage versus adding 7 primary stat. This is accomplished by looking at each stat as granularly as possible and then doing the math.
So yes, he's wrong to say Crit > IAS > Primary > Crit Damage > blah > blah > blah on a point-for-point basis, but the point-for-point stat weights are still valuable information to have and to know and it has a very important role in making gear decisions. As I said, those point-for-point stat weights allow you to understand that 1% Crit Chance is worth ~9% Crit Damage for your spec & gear, or that 2% IAS is worth about 1% Crit Chance (ignoring resource generation benefits). Those are important comparisons, whether or not you like it and they still have meaning even if paper doll DPS isn't 100% accurate in terms of actual DPS.
You can argue in D3, aside from some specs which are very dependent on critting, there's really no point to stat "priorities" to begin with because most of the time we're not making "either/or" choices. Rarely are you picking between 5% Crit Chance and 25% Crit Damage. Most of the time you're trying your best to get both. In a situation where your ultimate goal is to "get everything" then it really has no bearing whether one of the stats is "OP" or not because you still want the others. People aren't skipping over IAS, Crit Chance, primary stats, or minmax damage because Crit Damage is "too good." People are actively trying to get as much of all of it as possible. What we're arguing about here is non-BiS-type gear and that seems really silly.
Which brings me full circle. This whole "Crit Damage is OP, nerf it" is more like a US Congress sound bite and less like a reasonable position to hold. Blizzard is on the right path by trying to give us alternatives instead of just nerfing Emeralds and Crit Damage on weapons. Provided they can make the other stats attractive (and perhaps mutually-exclusive so that we don't keep down the "get everything" path) it sounds like a very functional approach to breaking up the "trifecta."
Until we have to make choices between stats and we're not simply getting as much of all of it as possible, the whole idea that Crit Damage should be nerfed because it's OP is myopic. Instead of suggesting rubbish like this we should be waiting to see exactly what Blizzard is proposing to do and THEN scrutinize it.
They are not applicable at all. Paper doll dps is only useful if you are attacking the same target, or targets for a long period of time. Maybe this happens in high level UBERS, but thats about it.
In D3 you are the tank, the healer, and the DPS. Thus all these stats are important. Here is a stupidly simple example.
100 AR
vs
+10% dps
AR isn't even an offensive stat by nature, but it can increase your dps. Maybe that 100 AR is sufficient to enable you to tank the mob, instead of running around gathering health globes. Maybe it doubles your time on the mob, thus doubling your dps. 10k Dps is nothing compared to that!
Or another exmaple,
CM wizard doesn't value CD highly, and ignroes the paper dolls dps. Yet the spec does insane dmg...
Or another example,
I just made a DH build revolved around Crit%. 91% critical hit chance for multishot, which practically guarantees almost anything hit twice dies in Low to Mid MP. Guess what? IAS = Worthless. It might make the DPS on my paper doll go way up, but its worthless! Firing two shots and walking is much more effective and faster than firing three, thus wasting time and hatred (Which you then have to regen using much less efficient generator spells).
IAS also doesn't take into consideration of resources. I know WDs fall into this category greatly! Your resource regen scales inversely to your attack rate, thus forcing you to use less powerful generators more often.
Rollback Post to RevisionRollBack
To post a comment, please login or register a new account.
And also a factor is, how many items can roll that certain affix, and what is the maximum value that exists.
It's all math, in the end, and right now what the math says is: "the best way to increase your DPS is to stack CC + CD".
Btw, what you are saying doesn't makes sense, what numbers are you using?, please don't tell me that you are comparing 1% of CC against 1% od CD... please.
You are broken ass CM wiz... Of course CD isn't the best for you.
How about some ratios, instead of a list? That list means diddly shit.
If its 1% IAS > 1% CD, then thats fine except CD rolls 5-11 times higher than IAS.
Regardless this isn't wow, so what good is paper doll dps?
Barring unfortunate unforeseen complications, that's exactly what they are going to do:
Introducing more choice instead of less and giving players more ways to feel like they are customizing their character is what we want to see. If gloves also had the ability to roll +% School Damage, +Life on Hit, Skill specific affixes, plus a couple more things you want, than players may find themselves in a situation where trifecta isn’t as clearly defined anymore.
How dare you kitty-face after that question.
I think it'l be along the lines of 'fire damage increased by 10%' type thing.
No, it's pretty common to compare stats at the most granular level. That's been the status quo in WoW theorycrafting for years. There's not really a better way to do it. Why would anyone want to know what 5 int does for their DPS? It's more complicated math to multiply then divide by 5. It's far easier to understand what "one" of any stat does for your DPS.
It is obvious that you can get more critical damage than critical chance, but it's also obvious that 1% crit chance will ALWAYS be better than 1% crit damage. What differentiate things is at what point, for your spec, does crit damage outpace crit chance? Is it 8% crit damage > 1% crit chance? 12% > 1%?
Remember that paper doll DPS is not always indicative of actual DPS for all specs, nor is it necessarily indicative of farming speed. There are explanations of why this is the case in many of the spec-specific threads, I'm not going to dig it up.
This isn't WoW where you attack the same boss for 6 minutes. Calculating paper DPS is all but meaningless in this game... Thus your analysis is flawed to the core.
It's possible to discuss paper doll DPS while still acknowledging that it's not 100% representative of your actual DPS. That doesn't make discussion of paper doll DPS "flawed to the core." It simply makes it one tool among many for people to tweak their performance since we have no real way to genuinely tell if our actual DPS has increased or we just got lucky on crits.
You really need to chill out when it comes to raging at people who disagree with you. The world simply isn't that black-and-white. There are better, more constructive, ways to facilitate discussions. This approach you've taken is exactly what these forums DON'T need. We have tons of people here whose reading comprehension is horrible and plenty more who don't bother to read the whole post first before responding to it and making themselves look stupid.
Is that really so much to ask? For people to read a whole post, comprehend it, and THEN post without flinging poo at the walls?
You keep missing the point. Your opinion is that his logic is "flawed" but you refuse to rebutt it. You refuse to explain why you believe that and give any kind of facts or evidence to support that.
I am fully aware that you cannot develop a "stat priority" based on point-for-point comparisons. I'm very much aware that 1% Crit Chance is *always* going to outpace 1% Crit Damage in terms of worth - that's obvious, and that's why Crit Damage comes in larger sums.
But arguing that it's not important to know what 1% of each is worth is stupid and pedantic. It's very important for people who are really trying to max their throughput to have a clear idea what adding 3% Crit Damage is going to do for their damage versus adding 7 primary stat. This is accomplished by looking at each stat as granularly as possible and then doing the math.
So yes, he's wrong to say Crit > IAS > Primary > Crit Damage > blah > blah > blah on a point-for-point basis, but the point-for-point stat weights are still valuable information to have and to know and it has a very important role in making gear decisions. As I said, those point-for-point stat weights allow you to understand that 1% Crit Chance is worth ~9% Crit Damage for your spec & gear, or that 2% IAS is worth about 1% Crit Chance (ignoring resource generation benefits). Those are important comparisons, whether or not you like it and they still have meaning even if paper doll DPS isn't 100% accurate in terms of actual DPS.
You can argue in D3, aside from some specs which are very dependent on critting, there's really no point to stat "priorities" to begin with because most of the time we're not making "either/or" choices. Rarely are you picking between 5% Crit Chance and 25% Crit Damage. Most of the time you're trying your best to get both. In a situation where your ultimate goal is to "get everything" then it really has no bearing whether one of the stats is "OP" or not because you still want the others. People aren't skipping over IAS, Crit Chance, primary stats, or minmax damage because Crit Damage is "too good." People are actively trying to get as much of all of it as possible. What we're arguing about here is non-BiS-type gear and that seems really silly.
Which brings me full circle. This whole "Crit Damage is OP, nerf it" is more like a US Congress sound bite and less like a reasonable position to hold. Blizzard is on the right path by trying to give us alternatives instead of just nerfing Emeralds and Crit Damage on weapons. Provided they can make the other stats attractive (and perhaps mutually-exclusive so that we don't keep down the "get everything" path) it sounds like a very functional approach to breaking up the "trifecta."
Until we have to make choices between stats and we're not simply getting as much of all of it as possible, the whole idea that Crit Damage should be nerfed because it's OP is myopic. Instead of suggesting rubbish like this we should be waiting to see exactly what Blizzard is proposing to do and THEN scrutinize it.
So.. what are we discussing again?..
In D3 you are the tank, the healer, and the DPS. Thus all these stats are important. Here is a stupidly simple example.
100 AR
vs
+10% dps
AR isn't even an offensive stat by nature, but it can increase your dps. Maybe that 100 AR is sufficient to enable you to tank the mob, instead of running around gathering health globes. Maybe it doubles your time on the mob, thus doubling your dps. 10k Dps is nothing compared to that!
Or another exmaple,
CM wizard doesn't value CD highly, and ignroes the paper dolls dps. Yet the spec does insane dmg...
Or another example,
I just made a DH build revolved around Crit%. 91% critical hit chance for multishot, which practically guarantees almost anything hit twice dies in Low to Mid MP. Guess what? IAS = Worthless. It might make the DPS on my paper doll go way up, but its worthless! Firing two shots and walking is much more effective and faster than firing three, thus wasting time and hatred (Which you then have to regen using much less efficient generator spells).
IAS also doesn't take into consideration of resources. I know WDs fall into this category greatly! Your resource regen scales inversely to your attack rate, thus forcing you to use less powerful generators more often.