Diablo® III

ROS DPS question...and idea for staff...Doly?

01/30/2014 02:17 PMPosted by PieHole
01/30/2014 12:22 PMPosted by dolynick
Rare Staff
2500 dps (1 x 2500 avg)


Do staffs really have this high of an average DPS roll?
________________________________________________
Diablo III Wizard MVP |My street cred is limited to the friendly confines of the wiz forum
CM/SNS Wizard Guide: http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/8728753771 ......Danger:
SNS Video Guides: www.youtube.com/user/PieHole1628...Please do not feed the trolls!


I don't have beta access so I'm not entirely sure. I ball-parked it from hazy memory. It's why I made sure to mention that if I was off on the base item numbers, it changes things. It would be best if you could check and let me know. I don't have a problem with redoing the numbers if you have more accurate values.

-dolynick
Reply Quote
01/30/2014 02:05 PMPosted by dolynick
The problem with what you're saying is that they're really pigeon-holed into one specific build type if nothing changes. I would like to see 2H'ers more widely viable than in just CDR builds.

-dolynick


I agree.

They may need to 1) not roll any CDR--I hate this idea, pretty sure they already roll 50% less than 1H + Source combo, or 2) roll affixes that benefit spammy builds more, such as big (and I mean BIG) bonuses to spammy skills: E.g.,

Energy Twisters last twice as long,
Meteors do 50% more dmg,
Chance to double attack speed (Flying Dragon proc),
other conditional IAS buffs.

Things that don't benefit CDR builds as much.

They might also just lower the 2H avg dmg and move the power into affix bonuses. Why does a wizard staff need to hit like a brick house anyway? Gandolf didn't beat the demon by hitting it with his staff... Stupid D3 dmg formula. >.<
Reply Quote
01/30/2014 02:42 PMPosted by Vox
Things that don't benefit CDR builds as much.


Vox,

You and I have very different views about how good CDR builds are. I agree that lower APS is MUCH better for a CDR skill but for most of them, the numbers only start to look "ok" at 1 APS and 50% CDR and go downhill from there as you up APS and lower CDR.

Maybe I'm being a bit short-sighted or need to explore them a bit more but if they get buffed from a 2H weapon improvement, it's not going to be unbalancing. In order to get that CDR, you have to give up a lot of something in the first place (so you're either going to be lower DPS to start, or a glass cannon if it's mit/ehp).

Yeah, molten might add x2.93 eDPS multi (or EB x3.6) at 1 APS & 50% CDR (x4 from 2 APS and 0 CDR) but I don't see it as a problem if I gave up 4-6 primary affix dps stats to get it in the first place. My DPS is probably much lower than what it was without anyways. I would hope that I gained some multi in exchange for gimping my eDPS output with the rest of my skills.

-dolynick
Edited by dolynick#1290 on 1/30/2014 3:10 PM PST
Reply Quote
01/30/2014 02:22 PMPosted by dolynick
01/30/2014 02:17 PMPosted by PieHole
...

Do staffs really have this high of an average DPS roll?
________________________________________________
Diablo III Wizard MVP |My street cred is limited to the friendly confines of the wiz forum
CM/SNS Wizard Guide: http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/8728753771 ......Danger:
SNS Video Guides: www.youtube.com/user/PieHole1628...Please do not feed the trolls!


I don't have beta access so I'm not entirely sure. I ball-parked it from hazy memory. It's why I made sure to mention that if I was off on the base item numbers, it changes things. It would be best if you could check and let me know. I don't have a problem with redoing the numbers if you have more accurate values.

-dolynick


I crafted a Mark of the Magi legendary staff, 1.00atk spd. Base dps = 1091.5, with added dps the range is 2217..2705, mean = 2461. So your ballpark figure is good. (All numbers determined from Mystic.)
Reply Quote
01/30/2014 03:21 PMPosted by mou
I crafted a Mark of the Magi legendary staff, 1.00atk spd. Base dps = 1091.5, with added dps the range is 2217..2705, mean = 2461. So your ballpark figure is good. (All numbers determined from Mystic.)


That's a legendary staff though, is it not? We were comparing rares in the calculations so I may have been a couple hundred dps high. In retrospect, I probably used too little CHD as well. Higher CHD will favor the wand+source with more CC a little more.

Maybe I should redo the calculations with legendaries at 2250 wand + 350 source and 2500 staff with 150-200 CHD. I'd just need someone to confirm that a 1H 1.4 aps legendary does average 2250 dps. You've already confirmed the legendary staff.

-dolynick
Reply Quote
MVP
Posts: 6,229
View profile
So, Doly, here are some DPS ranges that I pulled from ROS tonight. They are slightly different than what you eyeballed, but not much different.

wand
base damage 196-363
damage max 1043-1296
total: 1239-1658 = 1448 avg x 1.4 = 2028 DPS (max DPS*)
not considering IAS and %dmg

source
max DPS 328-394 (crafted values)
total: 361 avg DPS

wand + source
1448+361=1809*1.4=2532 DPS

now,

staff
base damage 875-1308
damage max 1252-1556
total: 2127-2864 = 2496 avg x 1.0 = 2496 DPS (max DPS*)
not considering IAS and %dmg
(legendary staff's can roll up to 2705 max DPS)

so....essentially the same DPS for wand+source and staff However, like you showed in your math, giving up 10CC really hurts DPS as well as generating APOC.

Now, here are the max values for primary stats...these seems to have changed recently (they are different than what I have in a previous post. Perhaps a change at the latest patch).
wand: INT max is 625 (legendary, for comparison is 750 max)
source: INT max is 625
staff: INT max is 945 (legendary, for comparison is 1125 max)

These values are very different than what you did in your math. You also presumed that for a staff the max INT is 2x that of a wand...which isn't true. Maybe you can redo the math and update your post. If not, I'll do it in the morning. Its getting late.

We can rethink things and come up with a new recommendation. I kinda hate that the recommendation is "reduced resource" regen.....when the lower AS of the staff essentially already does that. However, without adding APOC or CC to a staff then that's what you're left with. Obviously allowing main stats to roll MUCH higher (2x that of a wand (i.e. 1250) is kind of a must. maybe a 5th primary roll to allow for +dmg for extra DPS (making up for -10 CC). Of course, a higher base or damage roll would do the same thing and you wouldn't need a 5th primary roll.

i'll put something together tomorrow.
Reply Quote
01/30/2014 10:09 PMPosted by PieHole
Maybe you can redo the math and update your post. If not, I'll do it in the morning. Its getting late.


Same here. I'll revisit it in the morning. Thanks for the numbers. I'm also going to use 150-200 CHD when I redo them, as that's a little more realistic I think. Perhaps I'll drop some IAS instead. I'll give it some thought for what's likely to be on an RoS dropped gear set.

-dolynick
Reply Quote
01/30/2014 10:18 PMPosted by dolynick
Same here. I'll revisit it in the morning. Thanks for the numbers. I'm also going to use 150-200 CHD when I redo them,


I haven't seen a ROS 2H over 50%CHD yet, this could be to the level 60 restrictions though.
Reply Quote
01/30/2014 10:32 PMPosted by Aphraell
I haven't seen a ROS 2H over 50%CHD yet, this could be to the level 60 restrictions though.


I was refering to the CHD from the base 50% and all slots other than the weapon (I'll be adding 120 CHD for the socket). Basically, what I was getting at was that it's more realistic that out test wizard have 270-320 CHD total instead of the 220 CHD he had in the original set of calculations. The first time around I chose an arbitrary CHD number that I didn't give enough thought to.

-dolynick
Reply Quote
I'll just revise the numbers in a new post.

I'm going to use some numbers I feel are more appropriate to our L70 wizard this time.
Let's assume our base wizard has 4000, 18IAS, int, 40CC and 180 CHD. He'll also have 10 APoC on his hat and 10% cost reduction.

Rare Wand & Source
Wand:
~2028 DPS (1.4 x 1428.5avg)
625 Int
625 vit
Socket (120 CHD)
1.652 APS

Source:
~361 avg dmg
625 int
625 vit
10 CC
10 APoC

Damage = 1789.5 x 53.5(int) x 2.5 (cc/chd) x 1.652(aps) = 395,398.97dps
RoF Cost: 1.652 x 16x0.9 = 23.789 AP/S
APoC/s: 10 + 1.652 x 2 x 0.5 x 20 x 0.333333 = 21.013 AP/s
Net AP: -2.776 AP/s

Rare Staff
2496 dps (1 x 2496 avg)
945 int
945 vit
Socket (120 CHD)
1.18 APS

Damage = 2496 x 50.45(int) x 2.2 (cc/chd) x 1.18(aps) = 326,896.63 dps (-17.32%)
RoF Cost: 1.18 x 16x0.9 = 16.992 AP/s
APoC/s: 10 + 1.18 x 2 x 0.4 x 10 x 0.333333 = 13.147 AP/s
Net AP: -3.845 AP/s

The new number still show the same two problems:
1) Significantly less damage
2) Running a bigger deficit for AP despite less damage
we can now add 3) Down 305 vit and 30.5 RA

If our staff was 3019 dps (+523 dmg), we'd have damage parity but still with vit & RA loss.
So instead...
If we had parity in Int and Vit rolls we'd end up with 346,659.46 dps (-12.33%) with no vit & RA loss.

If we could also have 50 (L60?) more CHD (extra primary), we would have 378,173.95 dps (-4.36%).
If we could also have 100 (L70?) more CHD (extra primary), we would have 409,688.45 dps (+3.61%).
If we could have 10% more Cost Reduction (extra primary), we would have a Net AP rate of -2.146 ap/s.

My recommendations?
-I think the 2H weapons should offer comparable int/vit rolls so they should have x2 main stat rolls from 1H weapons.
-Increase the damage of 2H weapons by ~100 dps. Not enough for parity even with the x2 main stat, but narrowing the gap to just -8.81%.
-Allow an extra primary affix roll. CHD (up to 100% at L70) should be available on 2H weapons. The Cost Reduction affix on a 2H should be ~5-10% than a 1H roll.

This would leave us with options. You could chose CHD as your extra primary for slightly better damage in exchange for worst AP sustain. Or you could choose better AP sustain for slightly worse damage. You'd also have other options like LoH for better life sustain.

We could then look at a 2H weapon and consider if any of those trade-offs suit our build style. As it stands, 2H offer few to no advantages at all.

-dolynick
Edited by dolynick#1290 on 1/31/2014 8:34 AM PST
Reply Quote
MVP
Posts: 6,229
View profile
Doly...I was writing up my post and saw yours. Awesome job...and thanks for showing me how to do the math!!!

I think we came to similar conclusions...but I did a much bigger DPS boost for the weapon, as opposed to adding an additional affix (to roll a second OS). I kept with the 4+2 just so that remains the same as what is currently in the game. Obviously, the "special resource reduction" is essentially an extra primary...but I kept it separate. Something has to give.

here it is:
Edited by PieHole#1628 on 1/31/2014 8:30 AM PST
Reply Quote
MVP
Posts: 6,229
View profile
So, here's what I'd like to see in a staff. It's still the standard 4+2 affix structure, but with bigger values and a "special" affix (i.e. essentially an additional primary roll).

--------------
  • DPS - max of 2870 ((875-1309)+(1571-1986))
  • Primary Affix - "Smart" Double INT roll (1250)
  • Primary Affix - Allow for Double EHP roll (VIT or %life)
  • Primary Affix - random (likely OS)
  • --------------
  • Secondary Affix - would roll +Max AP
  • Secondary Affix - random
  • --------------
  • Special Resource Reduction Affix - 8-10%*
  • --------------
    * Could affect all spells, or randomly roll between Ray of Frost, Disintegrate, Arcane Torrent, and Arcane Orb (i.e. channeling spells)


    - or, more simply, dropping the "special" affix for an additional primary so you could roll resource reduction. So, it'd be a 5+2 affix staff -

    --------------
  • DPS - max of 2870 ((875-1309)+(1571-1986))
  • Primary Affix - "Smart" Double INT roll (1250)
  • Primary Affix - Allow for Double EHP roll (VIT or %life)
  • Primary Affix - random (likely OS)
  • Primary Affix - random (could be resource reduction)
  • --------------
  • Secondary Affix - would roll +Max AP
  • Secondary Affix - random
  • --------------
    --------------
    * Could affect all spells, or randomly roll between Ray of Frost, Disintegrate, Arcane Torrent, and Arcane Orb (i.e. channeling spells)


    ----------------------------------------------------
    Justification and New theoretical calcs:

    Let's assume our base wizard has 4000 INT, 24 IAS, int, 40CC and 150 CHD. He'll also have 10 APoC on his hat and 10% cost reduction.

    Rare Wand & Source
    Wand:
    2028 DPS (1.4 x 1448 avg)
    625 Int
    625 vit
    Socket (120 CHD)
    1.75 APS

    Source:
    361 avg dmg
    625 int
    625 vit
    10 CC
    10 APoC

    Damage = 1809 x 53.5 (int) x 2.35 (cc/chd) x 1.75(aps) = 398k dps
    RoF Cost: 1.75 x 16 x 0.9 = 25.2 AP/S
    APoC/s: 10 + (1.75 x 2 x 0.5 x 20 x 0.333333) = 21.7 AP/s
    Net AP: -3.5 AP/s

    Rare Staff
    2496 dps (1 x 2496 avg)
    945 int
    945 vit
    Socket (120 CHD)
    1.24 APS

    Damage = 2496 x 50.45 (int) x 2.08 (cc/chd) x 1.24(aps) = 325k dps
    RoF Cost: 1.24 x 16 x 0.9 = 17.9 AP/s
    APoC/s: 10 + (1.24 x 2 x 0.4 x 10 x 0.333333) = 13.3 AP/s
    Net AP: -4.6 AP/s

    ---------------------------------

    So... We have 3 problems:

    1) We're doing less damage
    2) We're losing AP faster
    3) We're well behind in EHP (VIT and a little All Resistance (from less INT))

    The DPS of the weapon sets are about the same, so that's not the problem:
    wand + force = (1448 + 361) * 1.4 = 2533
    staff = 2496 * 1 = 2496

    The difference in INT and CC is what leaves the staff behind (-22%) in damage. As for AP, even with lower attack speed the Net AP for a staff is about 30% worse due to the loss of APOC (i.e. you're losing AP 30% faster).

    Possible Fixes - in order of ease and likelihood:

  • Buff the DPS of the weapon by about 15%. Easy. It would not require adding an additional primary roll for +damage%....and would solve alot of the damage problem. The would make up for alot of the DPS lost to the lack of a CC roll. So:
    +15% Damage = 2870 x 50.45 (int) x 2.08 (cc/chd) x 1.24(aps) = 373k dps
    overall: A 15% damage buff roughly makes up for not having a CC roll.
  • .
  • Allowing a double in roll for INT would help, and make sense from a wand + source standpoint:
    Damage = 2496 x 53.5 (int) x 2.08 (cc/chd) x 1.24(aps) = 344k dps
    overall: about a 5% increase in DPS. Plus a little AR.
  • .
  • Allow a "double roll" for primary stats....not just INT. You get DPS plus 6 additional primaries with wand + source...but only 3 additional primaries with a staff. If you allow double rolls for INT and VIT (or at least bigger than allowed now) you begin to remedy that, solve the EHP issue, and about 5% of the damage problem.
  • .
  • Allow a Special Resource Reduction Affix for a staff. This would help address the loss of APOC and bring AP generation in line with wand + source. A 8-10% cost reduction for instance. (It could be an reduction of all spells, or just randomly roll between channeling spells like Ray of Frost, Disintegrate, Arcane Torrent, and Arcane Orb.)
    10% reduction - RoF Cost: 1.24 x 16 x 0.81 = 16.1 AP/s
    APoC/s: 10 + (1.24 x 2 x 0.4 x 10 x 0.333333) = 13.3 AP/s
    Net AP: -2.8 AP/s
    overall: This would actually be superior to the wand + source example....by about 25%. You are still losing AP while channeling...just not as fast as with a wand + source. This would actually be desirable for a staff....which is geared toward channeling.
  • .
    -- The last 2 ideas reflect adding CC or APOC to the staff, which it seems like Blizzard does not want to do. Still:
    .
  • Allowing a CC roll would help for DPS and AP, and make sense from a wand + source standpoint:
    With a 10% CC Roll - Damage = 2496 x 50.45 (int) x 2.35 (cc/chd) x 1.24(aps) = 367k dps
    -and-
    APoC/s: 10 + (1.24 x 2 x 0.5 x 10 x 0.333333) = 14.1 AP/s
    Net AP: -3.8 AP/s
    overall: about 8% less damage than a wand + source, but better than 22% less. The AP loss is alot closer though...less than 10% behind.
  • .
  • Allow a roll for APOC. It could be a smaller roll, perhaps 5-7 (reflecting the lower AS of the staff). So:
    With a 7 APOC Roll: RoF Cost: 1.24 x 16 x 0.9 = 17.9 AP/s
    APoC/s: 10 + (1.24 x 2 x 0.4 x 17 x 0.333333) = 15.6 AP/s
    Net AP: -2.3 AP/s
    overall: This would also be superior to the wand + source example (and more than the resource reduction example). You are still losing AP while channeling...just not as fast as with a wand + source. This would actually be desirable for a staff....which is geared toward channeling.
  • .
    .
    .
    TLDR:
  • Increase base damage of the staff to make up for loss of CC
  • Allow higher INT rolls for more DPS and EHP
  • Allow higher higher EHP rolls for parity with wand + source
  • Allow for cost reduction of channeling spells, to make up for no CC or APOC
  • ________________________________________________
    Diablo III Wizard MVP |My street cred is limited to the friendly confines of the wiz forum
    CM/SNS Wizard Guide: http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/8728753771 ......Danger:
    SNS Video Guides: www.youtube.com/user/PieHole1628...Please do not feed the trolls!
    Edited by PieHole#1628 on 1/31/2014 10:29 AM PST
    Reply Quote
    01/31/2014 08:27 AMPosted by PieHole
    Doly...I was writing up my post and saw yours. Awesome job...and thanks for showing me how to do the math!!!


    You're welcome Pie. I probably should have used the actual breakpoints for the AP calculations but for quickness and clarity, these should be close enough.

    And yes, we did draw similar conclusions.

    I do truly believe that you're more likely to get some change if you suggest something that requires the least amount of new coding to be added and/or is most in line with what they are already doing. That's why I went with what I did recommend:

    -increase int/vit (just an adjustment to the already exisitng rolls
    -added primary (this would be the only addition out of the exising)
    -Cost Reduction and CHD as possibles for primary (are already rolling on 2H weapons, may just need to adjust the existing values)
    -small increase in base damage (mainly for better balance of CHD/non-CHD 5th primary)

    You're proposed changes would accomplish similar things but you're asking for changes outside of their usual item rules and/or that would require them to add completely new affixes. There is nothing wrong with them, I just think they have less of a chance of being implemented at this stage in development. It's just something you might want to keep in mind before you make an official request in the RoS forums.

    Potential problems:
    -Main stat rolls may be being capped lower because of the DH and the crusader. They can both use 2H weapons with an offhand. If stats were fully doubled, they would get a small advantage. I personally don't think this would be that big of a deal.
    -The numbers do swing a bit depending on cc/chd and aps values. What comes out balanced at the set of numbers we each used may not be quite so perfectly balanced at other ends of the spectrum for each stat. The trick will be to propose a solution that is a fair compromise over the entire range.

    -dolynick
    Reply Quote
    MVP
    Posts: 6,229
    View profile
    01/31/2014 09:36 AMPosted by dolynick
    -Cost Reduction and CHD as possibles for primary (are already rolling on 2H weapons, may just need to adjust the existing values)


    This was from the previous patch notes:

  • Maximum amount of Resource cost reduction you can roll on items has been reduced from 12% to 10% on weapons and 10% to 8% on non-weapon slots
  • .
    So, that's already there. But what about CHD? How much can roll now on 2H items?

    --------------------------------

    So, basically there are only 3 changes to ask for....to get a nice channeling staff:

  • Add one new primary
  • Allow the possibility of rolling up to 100 CD
  • Increasing the maximum INT roll to 1094 (1.75xINT from wand instead of 1.5x)
  • .
    then a nice channeling staff would look like:

    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  • Primary Affix - DPS - max of 2496 (unchanged)
  • Primary Affix - "Smart" INT roll (1.75x max from wand, 1094)
  • Primary Affix - random (likely OS with 120 CD)
  • Primary Affix - random (could be 8-10% resource reduction)
  • Primary Affix - random (possibility of up to 100 CD)
  • ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  • Secondary Affix - would roll +Max AP
  • Secondary Affix - random
  • ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    new addition or change

    .
    note: wand + source = 2533 DPS with 398k damage
    .
    .
    and, math:

    Damage = 2496 x 51.9 (int) x 2.48 (cc/chd) x 1.24(aps) = 399k damage
    RoF Cost: 1.24 x 16 x 0.81 = 16.1 AP/s
    APoC/s: 10 + (1.24 x 2 x 0.4 x 10 x 0.333333) = 13.3 AP/s
    Net AP: -2.8 AP/s

    overall, for a nice channeling staff:
  • Same DPS for weapon (no change here)
  • Extra primary allows 100% CD which gives damage parity with Wand + source
  • Rolling up to 10% resource reduction gives better results for AP management than for Wand + source and makes up for loss of APOC and CC
  • Still an EHP loss versus Wand + source, but that's the trade-off for better AP management
  • .
    Potential trade-offs:
    get a 1.75 EHP roll (1094 vit)....but lose the resource roll.
    get the resource roll, but give up DPS (i.e. no OS or CHD)

    So....that's where I'm at Doly. What do you think?

    ...pie

    ________________________________________________
    Diablo III Wizard MVP |My street cred is limited to the friendly confines of the wiz forum
    CM/SNS Wizard Guide: http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/8728753771 ......Danger:
    SNS Video Guides: www.youtube.com/user/PieHole1628...Please do not feed the trolls!
    Edited by PieHole#1628 on 1/31/2014 12:12 PM PST
    Reply Quote
    MVP
    Posts: 6,229
    View profile
    Of course, even simpler:

    Just 2 changes.....to get a nice channeling staff:
    .
  • Increasing the maximum main stat rolls to 1094 (1.75x from wand instead of 1.5x)
  • Increasing the DPS of the staff by 20%
  • .
    (this assumes that a 10% resource reduction stat can roll)
    .
    then a nice channeling staff would look like:
    .
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  • Primary Affix - DPS - max of 2995 ((875-1308)+(1677-2129))
  • Primary Affix - "Smart" INT roll (1.75x max from wand, 1094)
  • Primary Affix - random (likely OS with 120 CD)
  • Primary Affix - random (could be 8-10% resource reduction)
  • ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  • Secondary Affix - would roll +Max AP
  • Secondary Affix - random
  • ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    new addition or change

    .
    note: wand + source = 2533 DPS with 398k damage
    .
    .
    and, math:

    Damage = 2995 x 51.9 (int) x 2.08 (cc/chd) x 1.24(aps) = 401k damage
    RoF Cost: 1.24 x 16 x 0.81 = 16.1 AP/s
    APoC/s: 10 + (1.24 x 2 x 0.4 x 10 x 0.333333) = 13.3 AP/s
    Net AP: -2.8 AP/s

    overall, for a nice channeling staff:
  • 20% increase in DPS for weapon to provide damage parity with wand + force (then, there is no need for an extra primary (i.e. which would be used for up to 100CD)). This makes up for no CC and a lower INT roll
  • Rolling up to 10% resource reduction gives better results for AP management than for Wand + source and makes up for loss of APOC and CC
  • Still an EHP loss versus Wand + source, but that's the trade-off for better AP management
  • .
    Potential trade-ofs:
    get a 1.75 EHP roll (1094 vit)....but lose the resource roll (and roll that elsewhere)

    So....that's where I'm at Doly. What do you think?
    ________________________________________________
    Diablo III Wizard MVP |My street cred is limited to the friendly confines of the wiz forum
    CM/SNS Wizard Guide: http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/8728753771 ......Danger:
    SNS Video Guides: www.youtube.com/user/PieHole1628...Please do not feed the trolls!
    Edited by PieHole#1628 on 1/31/2014 12:12 PM PST
    Reply Quote
    Pie,

    All of your suggestions are significant improvements over the current balance. The question is which set of improvements gives the best overall "coverage" as a fix.

    At minimum, you need to consider the following scenarios:

    -Wand: 2000 dps, int, vit, OS; Source 361 dps, int, vit, CC, APoC
    -Wand: 2000 dps, int, cost reduction, OS; Source 361 dps, int, vit, CC, APoC
    Non Wizard:
    -Sword (1.4 aps): 2000 dps, main stat, vit, OS; Offhand: 2000 dps main stat, vit, OS
    -Sword (1.4 aps): 2000 dps, main stat, cost reduction, OS; Offhand: 2000 dps main stat, vit, OS
    All:
    -Sword (1.4 aps): 2000 dps, main stat, vit, OS; Offhand: 2000 dps main stat, vit, OS
    -Sword (1.4 aps): 2000 dps, main stat, cost reduction, OS; Offhand: 2000 dps main stat, vit, OS

    I'm fairly convinced at this point that the only way to provide a decent overall potential for improved balance is:

    -increase 2H dps 200-300 avg damage
    -increase 2H stat rolls to at least x1.75 that of a 1H
    -allow an extra primary affix roll (5+2). CC and/or CHD must be allowed but allowing both on the same 2H might be too powerful - Although it would come at the cost of another primary... Allowing CC is sort of a middle ground between dps and cost reduction (both better dps and resource regen, for the wiz at least).

    The reason you need the extra primary is so you have the flexibility to cover the various 1H + offhand scenarios. There is just no way to allow for better balancing of it all with only 4 primaries when you're trying to balance it vs 8.

    Unfortunately, Blizzard might be very opposed to adding a 5th primary affix. If we're stuck at 4+2, then the x1.2 damage increase on 2H weapons (500 in our examples) would gain importance.

    -dolynick
    Reply Quote
    MVP
    Posts: 6,229
    View profile
    01/31/2014 12:43 PMPosted by dolynick
    The reason you need the extra primary is so you have the flexibility to cover the various 1H + offhand scenarios. There is just no way to allow for better balancing of it all with only 4 primaries when you're trying to balance it vs 8.


    Yeah....it really cuts down the possibilities when you're tied to 4+2 as opposed to (4+2)+(4+2). Now, with wand + force its more like DPS +7 primaries. And if both roll INT and VIT, then combined it's really like DPS + INT(big) + VIT(big) + 3 primaries.

    With my second suggestion, a staff is like: DPS(big) + INT(big) + VIT(big) + 1 primary. So, that's like 7 affixes (one short of 8 from wand + source). And, yes, you might feel like you have to take the VIT(big) roll on a staff...(since its like 2 rolls) as opposed to 10% resource reduction....but resource reduction only rolls to 8% on other pieces. So, all in all, you're swapping a VIT roll for better resource reduction. And still kinda coming up short.

    Dunno. I'll propose both the 20% DPS increase and the extra primary affix. Though it largely gets you to the same place, DPS wise. It will give you more flexibility, but people of course will feel like that HAVE to take CHD and OS....so, no *real* flexibility. I'll propose the CC for and extra affix...since that kinda solves both problems.

    Thanks Doly.

    ________________________________________________
    Diablo III Wizard MVP |My street cred is limited to the friendly confines of the wiz forum
    CM/SNS Wizard Guide: http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/8728753771 ......Danger:
    SNS Video Guides: www.youtube.com/user/PieHole1628...Please do not feed the trolls!
    Reply Quote
    Posts: 8,294
    View profile
    There are going to be a lot more spender/generator/spender/generator builds for all classes as well. In my opinion, those builds play a lot clunkier with a 2h weapon because of the inherent slower attack speed.

    How about a berb running cleave/HotA/weapon throw?

    Monk running uhh...anything.

    WD running ghost bomb/polar bears/spirit barrage.

    You've got slower resource gen, slower LoH returns, less frequent chances to proc CC effects or interrupt enemy attacks. That should be compensated by the chance to reach more epic DPS and devastating damage per attack. Tell Blizz to read this thread, PieHole. Shake that green money maker.
    Reply Quote
    MVP
    Posts: 6,229
    View profile
    Ok...here is my "final" writeup. I changed the initial resource reduction to 8%, because that's the most it can roll (I think) on non-weapon item. I also need to make sure that resource reduction can roll on a staff (at up to 10% I believe). So, yeah. I make three staff suggestions. I don't know how many of the suggestions can translate into 2h for other classes. I tried to keep it as generic as I could so the changes might translate.

    Thanks Doly for the suggestions. I'm not sure when the best time to post this would be so that blizz would actaully pay attention to it? Now? Tonight (after I check some things)? Monday morning first thing?

    I'm also going to mail it into ROS Feedback, as well as posting on ROS boards. Here it is...suggestions (maybe!) are welcome. I've tried to combine my ideas and Doly's as best I could.
    ________________________________________________
    Diablo III Wizard MVP |My street cred is limited to the friendly confines of the wiz forum
    CM/SNS Wizard Guide: http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/8728753771 ......Danger:
    SNS Video Guides: www.youtube.com/user/PieHole1628...Please do not feed the trolls!
    Edited by PieHole#1628 on 1/31/2014 2:04 PM PST
    Reply Quote
    MVP
    Posts: 6,229
    View profile
    So, here are my thoughts on how to fix Wizard staffs. I'm not sure exactly how this would translate over to fixing 2H's for all classes, but I've kept the ideas as basic as I could…without adding any special wizard based ideas. All the math is based around channeling spells for wizards…I'm not sure what the equivalent math would be for other classes. I'm a wizard MVP….and, yeah, that's all I know about. I've broken it down into three sections

    I. Current state of 1h wand + source vs 2h staffs
    II. Possible solutions
    III. Three possible wizard staffs.

    I. Current state.

    Let's assume our base wizard has 4000 INT, 24 IAS, int, 40CC and 150 CHD. He'll also have 10 APoC on his hat and 8% cost reduction.

    Rare Wand & Source
    Wand:
    2028 DPS (1.4 x 1448 avg)
    625 Int
    625 vit
    Socket (120 CHD)
    1.75 APS

    Source:
    361 avg dmg
    625 int
    625 vit
    10 CC
    10 APoC

    Damage = 1809 x 53.5 (int) x 2.35 (cc/chd) x 1.75(aps) = 398k dps
    RoF Cost: 1.75 x 16 x 0.92 = 25.8 AP/S
    APoC/s: 10 + (1.75 x 2 x 0.5 x 20 x 0.333333) = 21.7 AP/s
    Net AP: -4.06 AP/s

    Rare Staff
    2496 dps (1 x 2496 avg)
    945 int
    945 vit
    Socket (120 CHD)
    1.24 APS

    Damage = 2496 x 50.45 (int) x 2.08 (cc/chd) x 1.24(aps) = 325k dps
    RoF Cost: 1.24 x 16 x 0.92 = 18.3 AP/s
    APoC/s: 10 + (1.24 x 2 x 0.4 x 10 x 0.333333) = 13.3 AP/s
    Net AP: -5.0 AP/s

    ---------------------------------

    So... We have 3 problems:

    1) We're doing less damage
    2) We're losing AP faster
    3) We're well behind in EHP (VIT and a little All Resistance (from less INT))

    The DPS of the weapon sets are about the same, so that's not the problem:
    wand + force = (1448 + 361) * 1.4 = 2533
    staff = 2496 * 1 = 2496

    The difference in INT and CC is what leaves the staff behind (-22%) in damage. As for AP, even with lower attack speed the Net AP for a staff is about 30% worse due to the loss of APOC and CC (i.e. you're losing AP 30% faster).

    II. Possible solutions - in order of ease and likelihood:

  • Buff the DPS of the weapon by about 15%. Easy. It would not require adding an additional primary roll for +damage%....or adding CD or another OS. It. would solve alot of the damage problem. This would make up for alot of the DPS lost to the lack of a CC roll. So:
    +15% Damage = 2870 x 50.45 (int) x 2.08 (cc/chd) x 1.24(aps) = 373k dps
    overall: A 15% damage buff roughly makes up for not having a CC roll.
  • .
  • Allowing a double in roll for INT would help, and make sense from a wand + source standpoint. Even 1.75x the roll for a wand would be better than the 1.5x now. Here is what it would look like with a double roll of INT:
    Damage = 2496 x 53.5 (int) x 2.08 (cc/chd) x 1.24(aps) = 344k dps
    overall: about a 5% increase in DPS. Plus a little AR.
  • .
  • Allow a "double roll" for all primary stats....not just INT. You get DPS plus 7 additional primaries with wand + source...but only 3 additional primaries with a staff. If you allow double rolls for INT and VIT (or at least bigger than allowed now) you begin to remedy that, solve the EHP issue, and about 5% of the damage problem.
  • .
  • Resource Reduction. This already rolls on staffs at 8-10%. When this rolls on a staff it would actually make the staff usable for channeling spells….slightly better than a wand + source actually. It also makes up for not having APOC and CC. It almost seems mandatory.
    10% reduction - RoF Cost: 1.24 x 16 x 0.83 = 16.5 AP/s
    APoC/s: 10 + (1.24 x 2 x 0.4 x 10 x 0.333333) = 13.3 AP/s
    Net AP: -3.2 AP/s
    overall: This would actually be superior to the wand + source example....by about 25-30%. You are still losing AP while channeling...just not as fast as with a wand + source. This would actually be desirable for a staff....which is geared toward channeling.
  • .
  • Allowing a CC roll would help for DPS and AP, and make sense from a wand + source standpoint:
    With a 10% CC Roll - Damage = 2496 x 50.45 (int) x 2.35 (cc/chd) x 1.24(aps) = 367k dps
    -and-
    RoF Cost: 1.24 x 16 x 0.92 = 18.2 AP/s
    APoC/s: 10 + (1.24 x 2 x 0.5 x 10 x 0.333333) = 14.1 AP/s
    Net AP: -4.1 AP/s
    overall: about 8% less damage than a wand + source, but better than 22% less. The AP loss is nearly the same now.
  • .
  • Allow a roll for APOC. It could be a smaller roll, perhaps 5-7 (reflecting the lower AS of the staff). So:
    With a 7 APOC Roll: RoF Cost: 1.24 x 16 x 0.92 = 18.3 AP/s
    APoC/s: 10 + (1.24 x 2 x 0.4 x 17 x 0.333333) = 15.6 AP/s
    Net AP: -2.7 AP/s
    overall: This would also be superior to the wand + source example (and more than the resource reduction example). You are still losing AP while channeling...just not as fast as with a wand + source. This would actually be desirable for a staff....which is geared toward channeling.
  • .
    III. Three possible wizard staffs.
    .
    Here are three potential ideas that I have. I really tried to keep it simple for the first one, and a little more complicated for the additional ones.
    .
    ------------------------------------------------------------
    ------------------------------------------------------------
    .
    Here is #1. Just 2 changes.....to get a nice channeling staff:
    .
  • Increasing the maximum main stat rolls to 1094 (1.75x from wand instead of 1.5x)
  • Increasing the DPS of the staff by 20%
  • .
    (this assumes that a 10% resource reduction stat can roll)
    .
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  • Primary Affix - DPS - max of 2995 ((875-1308)+(1677-2129))
  • Primary Affix - "Smart" INT roll (1.75x max from wand, 1094)
  • Primary Affix - random (likely OS with 120 CD)
  • Primary Affix - random (could be 8-10% resource reduction)
  • ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  • Secondary Affix - would roll +Max AP
  • Secondary Affix - random
  • ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    new addition or change

    note: wand + source = 2533 DPS with 398k damage
    .
    and, math:
    .
    Damage = 2995 x 51.9 (int) x 2.08 (cc/chd) x 1.24(aps) = 401k damage
    RoF Cost: 1.24 x 16 x 0.83 = 16.5 AP/s
    APoC/s: 10 + (1.24 x 2 x 0.4 x 10 x 0.333333) = 13.3 AP/s
    Net AP: -3.2 AP/s
    overall: Same DPS as wand + staff, better AP's, big loss of VIT
    .
    ------------------------------------------------------------
    ------------------------------------------------------------
    .
    Here is #2. There are 3 changes to ask for.

  • Add one new primary
  • Allow the possibility of rolling up to 100 CD
  • Increasing the maximum INT roll to 1094 (1.75xINT from wand instead of 1.5x)
  • .
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  • Primary Affix - DPS - max of 2496 (unchanged)
  • Primary Affix - "Smart" INT roll (1.75x max from wand, 1094)
  • Primary Affix - random (likely OS with 120 CD)
  • Primary Affix - random (could be 8-10% resource reduction)
  • Primary Affix - random (possibility of up to 100 CD)
  • ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  • Secondary Affix - would roll +Max AP
  • Secondary Affix - random
  • ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    new addition or change

    note: wand + source = 2533 DPS with 398k damage
    .
    and, math:
    .
    Damage = 2496 x 51.9 (int) x 2.48 (cc/chd) x 1.24(aps) = 399k damage
    RoF Cost: 1.24 x 16 x 0.83 = 16.5 AP/s
    APoC/s: 10 + (1.24 x 2 x 0.4 x 10 x 0.333333) = 13.3 AP/s
    Net AP: -3.2 AP/s
    .
    overall:
  • Same DPS for weapon (no change here)
  • Extra primary allows 100% CD which gives damage parity with Wand + source
  • Rolling up to 10% resource reduction gives better results for AP management than for Wand + source and makes up for loss of APOC and CC
  • Still an EHP loss versus Wand + source, at least the you have the choice between DPS and EHP.
  • .
    ------------------------------------------------------------
    ------------------------------------------------------------
    .
    Here is #3. There are 3 changes to ask for. This is my favorite.
  • Add one new primary
  • Allow the possibility of rolling up to 10 CC CD
  • Increasing the maximum INT roll to 1094 (1.75xINT from wand instead of 1.5x)
  • .
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  • Primary Affix - DPS - max of 2496 (unchanged)
  • Primary Affix - "Smart" INT roll (1.75x max from wand, 1094)
  • Primary Affix - random (likely OS with 120 CD)
  • Primary Affix - random (could be 8-10% resource reduction)
  • Primary Affix - random (possibility of up to 10 CC)
  • ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
  • Secondary Affix - would roll +Max AP
  • Secondary Affix - random
  • ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
    new addition or change

    note: wand + source = 2533 DPS with 398k damage
    .
    and, math:
    .
    Damage = 2496 x 51.9 (int) x 2.35 (cc/chd) x 1.24(aps) = 377k damage
    RoF Cost: 1.24 x 16 x 0.83 = 16.5 AP/s
    APoC/s: 10 + (1.24 x 2 x 0.5 x 10 x 0.333333) = 14.1 AP/s
    Net AP: -2.4 AP/s
    .
    overall: Only about 5% behind in DPS vs wand + source….but 100% better for AP management! Best yet, you could drop the roll for resource reduction (and roll VIT instead) and be near parity with the wand + source. Or drop resource reduction from another piece of gear in favor of VIT or % life. It's just nice that CC works for both DPS and AP generation. It kinda solves two problems. This is really my favorite. It's asking the most - an extra affix and the possibility to roll CC on the weapon. This would do the most to make staffs viable.

    Thanks for your attention.

    ...pie
    ________________________________________________
    Diablo III Wizard MVP |My street cred is limited to the friendly confines of the wiz forum
    CM/SNS Wizard Guide: http://us.battle.net/d3/en/forum/topic/8728753771 ......Danger:
    SNS Video Guides: www.youtube.com/user/PieHole1628...Please do not feed the trolls!
    Reply Quote

    Please report any Code of Conduct violations, including:

    Threats of violence. We take these seriously and will alert the proper authorities.

    Posts containing personal information about other players. This includes physical addresses, e-mail addresses, phone numbers, and inappropriate photos and/or videos.

    Harassing or discriminatory language. This will not be tolerated.

    Forums Code of Conduct

    Report Post # written by

    Reason
    Explain (256 characters max)

    Reported!

    [Close]