Real Proc Per Minute (RPPM) Trinket Changes

90 Human Paladin
8980
Why would you want any part of an encounter to be based on RNG luck?
Trinkets should all be ON USE with a static cool down.
Reply Quote
100 Dwarf Hunter
19005
Lastly, as just a commentary, I don't like this change because it alters the overall proc rate. This isn't just adjusting RPPM's pseudorandomness to make them more reliable. Shaving off the bottom of the bell curve on bad RNG without touching the top of it means the RPPM number is no longer an accurate measure of how many procs you should expect per minute(after adjusting for haste). I was hoping whichever approach was used would maintain the exact same number of average procs per minute and just steepen the bell curve's hump, meaning you'd see fewer unlucky stretches but also fewer lucky streaks.


Hush.

In general this sort of system increases the overall PPM value.

There are ways of implementing streakbreakers that do not alter the overall proc rate of whatever you're controlling, but the one that we implemented for the game I work on works in a very different fashion from the one that Blizzard are using.

I would just accept that the actual PPM rate you see is higher than the base, and assume that Blizzard have tuned the numbers to get these where they want to be. I know that while tuning in our game, I ran sequences of tens of millions of tests to make sure the numbers we cared about were correct: overall proc rate, and maximum losing streak length.

I haven't studied the Blizzard system completely, but unless it guarantees that the proc chance hits 100% at some point, it will never completely eliminate long streaks of bad luck. That was one of the things our system guarantees. At a certain point in it's operation, after a long streak of bad luck it is FORCED to proc, no matter what. This ensures a hard cap on the length of a losing streak.

FWIW, my understanding is that they use something akin to this for quest drops, which apparently do eventually hit a 100% drop chance. So it's possible this will. I'd just have to take the numbers apart and put them under the microscope to be sure.
Reply Quote
1 Blood Elf Paladin
0
Last night we hotfixed in a change for trinkets that use the RPPM system. Every time your trinket fails to proc, it increases the chance it will proc. Unlucky streaks will be more rare and extremely unlucky streaks should never happen. In addition, we increased the chance for these trinkets to proc on the pull. To top it off, we increased the proc rates of the Agility and Strength trinkets in Throne of Thunder by 10% and the Intellect and Spirit trinkets by 5%.


why not just go back to the ICD system? if reliability is the concern (and it is), and all.
Reply Quote
90 Undead Warlock
10530
Summary:

For 5.2, we made a change to trinkets to make them less predictable and less boring with the RPPM system. Sometimes you can get lucky and get several back to back procs. This feels cool.


Yes i was noting before how predictable my trinkets were and how routinely they line up with other cooldowns and i didn't have to watch trinket procs so much... then i longed for more excitement. Thinking about or paying attention to other things only exacerbated this effect.
Reply Quote
92 Troll Shaman
10075
Yes i was noting before how predictable my trinkets were and how routinely they line up with other cooldowns and i didn't have to watch trinket procs so much... then i longed for more excitement. Thinking about or paying attention to other things only exacerbated this effect.


"Less boring", "More interesting" ... Codewords for: "We don't want you to be able to line your rotation and CD use on the timing of a Proc"

why not just go back to the ICD system? if reliability is the concern (and it is), and all.


I think the point was to move all Procs to one system for ease.
Reply Quote
100 Undead Warrior
13660
no the actual response would be "The item you are using is working as intended. Please disable all third party UI, delete your WTF folder, and try again."
Reply Quote
100 Dwarf Hunter
19005
Sounds great. Anyone else wondering, though, why they can do this to trinkets and not for the poor people that are getting incredibly long losing streaks on their loot rolls? I'm not one of them, but it does make me wonder why the trinkets are easy to hotifx and the loot rolls aren't, since they technically should be basically the same kind of calculations going on.


Sure the math is the same, that's probably not the problem. Streakbreakers for quest drops or for trinket procs don't need persistent storage, the data never needs to leave the server that's actually running the fight / zone.

A streakbreaker for raid drops would require persistent storage in the backing database, and at the current time we have no idea how easy or hard it is for Blizzard to add a new column to the schema to hold this datum.

I worked on the now defunct City of Heroes MMO for some time, and in that game it was trivial to add a column. However, I'm now on a browser game with persistent storage, and due to it's very different architecture, it's quite a bit more work to add a column to the database.

So we just don't know.
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Paladin
6085
Summary:
For 5.2, we made a change to trinkets to make them less predictable and less boring with the RPPM system. Sometimes you can get lucky and get several back to back procs. This feels cool. Sometimes you can also be unlucky, and get long streaks when the trinket just refuses to proc. A trinket that is intended to proc every 1 minute could in theory go 8 minutes or more without activating.


The only reason many of us play is because of a lack of substitute product. Do not mistake your subscription numbers for approval of many of the stupid idea's your dev team keeps putting out. RNG is a horrible horrible system. The logic behind "COOLNESS" is absurd. Random does not make things feel cool. Unpredictability is simply another way of saying sometimes you will get screwed. You can put "cheats" in to aid players in bad probability strings but the end result is you are simply negating the true nature of RNG. In fact, Just remove it. RNG is pure garbage. Players play because of content creation consumption, not gambling; well a very slim portion of the population might (see AH). In game development, RNG only works on well tuned mechanics, and, the more you implement RNG the larger the the standard deviation. This would be fine in a static environment but it appears your development team is forgetting what the PC industry and programming industry have learned; when you have a very high number of combinations of builds, it is near impossible to cater to them all. Now parallel that with gear set bonuses, trinket combinations, potions, raid-wides and self buff abilities, the mean gear setup is not representation of the population. The sample size and differentiation is far too great. Yet, for some reason, your team still thinks putting RNG into a game at every chance is cool. Very poor logic. RNG is only cool when you get a benefit. I tell you this, RNG is not cool when you see some players getting 3-6 loots on the first day of patch and you get zero. If you want a better game, your total quality management needs to take control or be fired if they are already in control. Wow has a lot going for it but it is dated. RNG only works in small setups; for example, a small damage range of a spell or ability like shadow bolt. This provides a small fluctuation but wont dramatically change the result from fight to fight. Under your system, you are implementing RNG to the point where it is out of control and then have to "cheat" to help the player. It would help the player more to have a predictable outcome over a reasonable time.

tl:dr

RNG is a terrible system and does not equal cool or player favor. Players do not play to gamble. RNG systems should be limited in scope. It is impossible to out quality control the population. If you break something, players will find a way to exploit it or ignore it. Blizzard has been very lucky that no real substitute products have come out; meaning they failed because of stupidity.
Reply Quote
90 Blood Elf Paladin
15165
Blizz, sometimes you guys tweak to much. Remember the "KISS" example.
Reply Quote
90 Goblin Hunter
8260
How about just making the tier 15 trinkets better than the tier 14 trinkets? How hard of a concept is that. I feel that your developers are playing around trying to fix things that werent broken youre going to get filth flung in your face by the community.

I was excited about Bad Juju because it has a cool name and it summons gnomes but it sucks.

Its kind of like the whole 5.2 patch it sucks but its kind of cool.

Im not going to swap back in a lower ilevel trinket, my dps is going to suffer and its your fault, all I did was loot a 502 trinket out of the new raid.
Reply Quote
90 Night Elf Rogue
12195
I just want to confirm something, that was written in the post and im excited to try tonight. The proc chance is greatly increased when you pull? Just to break this down it is a higher chance when you initially enter combat? Am I getting this right?

Now to my point, did they just make vanish + prep give us the ability to somewhat control our trinket proc's and with that being said I may have to race change to NE for shadowmeld. (I am not sure if SM drops combat can anyone confirm?)

This would be a great buff for Rogue's in PVE. I have the Talisman of Bloodlust and will be testing this out tonight.
Edited by Vizimir on 3/14/2013 12:33 PM PDT
Reply Quote
90 Undead Rogue
8070
03/14/2013 12:32 PMPosted by Vizimir
Now to my point, did they just make vanish + prep give us the ability to somewhat control our trinket proc's and with that being said I may have to race change to NE for shadowmeld. (I am not sure if SM drops combat can anyone confirm?)


Go into a raid. Drink a Virmen's Bite, without pre-potting, then vanish and come back out and 60 seconds. Can you pot again? No. They don't break combat, unless you're doing dailies or PvP even then...why would you be using these in PvP?
Reply Quote
90 Undead Monk
4940
We increased the proc rate of the following trinkets by 10%:
• Renataki’s Soul Charm
• Talisman of Bloodlust
• Bad Juju
• Rune of Re-Origination
• Fabled Feather of Ji-Kun
• Primordius’ Talisman of Rage
• Spark of Zandalar
• Gaze of the Twins

We increased the proc rate of the following trinkets by 5%:
• Wushoolay’s Final Choice
• Breath of the Hydra
• Unerring Vision of Lei-Shen
• Cha-Ye's Essence of Brilliance
• Horridon's Last Gasp
• Inscribed Bag of Hydra-Spawn
• Stolen Relic of Zuldazar
• Lightning-Imbued Chalice


Was that an additive or multiplicative change? Would a 0.5 RPPM rate now be a 0.55 RPPM, or 0.6 RPPM?
Reply Quote
1 Blood Elf Paladin
0
nothing says fun like hitting enrage at 1% cause trinkets refuse to proc.

BUT THATS FUN RIGHT?

right guys?
Reply Quote
100 Human Paladin
18825
You need to buff Spark's proc rate by another 20%-30% at least, it's very poor. I shouldn't be thinking about swapping back in a 484 crafted trinket.
Reply Quote
100 Night Elf Druid
13235
03/14/2013 07:53 AMPosted by Stenhaldi
Calculate the proc frequency as normal. Based on that, you can figure out the expected average proc interval. We also now keep track of time since the last successful proc (this is different from the time since last chance to proc), capped at 1000 sec. Multiply the proc chance by MAX(1, 1+((TimeSinceLastSuccessfulProc/AverageProcInterval)-1.5)*3). For example, if a proc has an average proc interval of 45 sec, and it’s been 72 sec since your last successful proc, you’ll get a 1.3x multiplier to your proc chance. If you’ve been out of combat for a few min, and it’s been 5 min since your last successful proc, you’ll get a whopping 16.5x multiplier to your proc chance.


The nomenclature here is a little confusing because this system, due to how it alters the probability distribution of the proc interval, will itself alter the average proc interval. The way I am reading it, AverageProcInterval is a nominal value, computed from the nominal RPPM proc rate of the given trinket along with the player's haste. If my math is correct, the described system will shift the probability distribution in the manner depicted in the following diagram, <http://i.imgur.com/BhysHcm.png>, and this causes the actual average proc interval to be about 0.7259*AverageProcInterval.

Put another way, in addition to the explicit proc rate buffs mentioned later in your post, the described system also raises the actual average proc rate of every trinket by about 37.76%. Is this interpretation correct?

[edit: made diagram a little clearer]

Possibly our implementations are different. I did two simulations, for 10 minute fight, using about 1.8 proc opportunities per second uniformly distributed (typical Feral opp/sec). One was [10sec dur, 22sec icd]; the other was [10sec dur, 0sec icd].

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/2989349/RPPMChange.png

I made a histogram of ratios at various RPPM levels for the increase in uptime. Regardless of the ICD, I'm seeing a ~15% increase in uptime strictly due to this "AverageProcInterval" change. I also plotted the uptime coefficients for both implementations.

Warning: this simulation is simple, it was just a few lines of Mathematica; the ultimate test will be how this matches simulation (Catus/simc) and in-game data collection.
Reply Quote
100 Goblin Shaman
21295
Tested Inscribed Bag of Hydra-Spawn tonight on Ji-Kun, totaled 0.7% of my throughput on the log. This is not worth it when you lose 1749 average int from Qin-xi's Polarizing Seal. This is now 2 trinkets I have picked up and are just taking space in my bags. Can we please have someone address this thread? It is unreal that both Inscribed Bag of Hydra-Spawn and Lightning-Imbued Chalice are 12 item levels above my worst trinket yet both are not actually an upgrade. If Inscribed Bag of Hydra-Spawn is not good then I can just assume Stolen Relic of Zuldazar is also terrible. This leave Horridon's Last Gasp as the only healer trinket which is an actual upgrade this tier. This is something which should be top priority seeing as how heroic progression is happening now. All of this makes me question how useful this meta gem is going to be.

More detail on the proc:

Shield of Hydra Sputum
140090 Healing
0.7 % Total Healing Done
6 Proc
Fight Length 6:13

To put this into comparison, the Alchemist's Rejuvenation Potion also heals for 120k when giving you its mana........
Edited by Germinate on 3/14/2013 11:53 PM PDT
Reply Quote
100 Worgen Druid
16845
Possibly our implementations are different. I did two simulations, for 10 minute fight, using about 1.8 proc opportunities per second uniformly distributed (typical Feral opp/sec). One was [10sec dur, 22sec icd]; the other was [10sec dur, 0sec icd].

https://dl.dropbox.com/u/2989349/RPPMChange.png

I made a histogram of ratios at various RPPM levels for the increase in uptime. Regardless of the ICD, I'm seeing a ~15% increase in uptime strictly due to this "AverageProcInterval" change. I also plotted the uptime coefficients for both implementations.

Warning: this simulation is simple, it was just a few lines of Mathematica; the ultimate test will be how this matches simulation (Catus/simc) and in-game data collection.


You're right -- and thanks for checking. I made a mistake in deriving the pdf. In the continuum limit, the correct form of the probability density function f(t) of the proc interval t is

f(t) = k e^(-kt) , if kt <= 1.5
f(t) = k (1+(kt-1.5)*3) e^(-kt (1+(kt/2-1.5)*3)-3.375) , if kt > 1.5

where k = 1/AverageProcInterval. The corrected plot looks like <http://i.imgur.com/OvSqAi8.png>. The mean of this distribution is roughly 0.8844*AverageProcInterval, corresponding to a 13.07% increase in average proc rate.
Edited by Stenhaldi on 3/15/2013 5:51 AM PDT
Reply Quote
100 Worgen Druid
16845
After re-analyzing some of my trinket proc data from target dummies I have come to the conclusions that
  • The above interpretation is probably correct -- that is, the probability distribution is as described, causing the average proc rate to be 13.07% higher than the nominal proc rate.
  • These changes have been live since Saturday, if not earlier (as some of the data comes from as early as Saturday).
  • Following are histograms of the measured proc intervals for three trinkets. These are superposed with a prediction (red line) based on my above interpretation of this change, with this prediction using the announced nominal proc rate for each trinket (from <http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/7923993861?page=109#2169>) scaled by 1.1 in accordance with this thread.

  • Bad Juju (3h10m) - <http://i.imgur.com/UVQRBpO.png>
  • Talisman of Bloodlust (1h) - <http://i.imgur.com/jzTmfQY.png> (the prediction uses averaged haste -- not quite accurate but should be close enough)
  • Renataki's Soul Charm (5h50m) - <http://i.imgur.com/do5PNgX.png>
  • Edited by Stenhaldi on 3/15/2013 8:09 AM PDT
    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)
    Submit Cancel

    Reported!

    [Close]