Apoc vs Reduced Resource Cost - Simulator

Wizard
Hey guys

I created a simulation for comparing apoc vs reduced resource cost...
I have some questions about some variables in it though.
FO has 0.067 proc coefficient. FO hits 3x. I assume each hit has a chance to crit. So if all 3 hit, then the proc is 3 x 0.067 for apoc. correct?

and does this make sense for the fight :

While $currentAP >= $reducedFOCost

$currentAP = $currentAP - $reducedFOCost + (1 / $APS * $passiveApRegen) + $Apoc * $cc * $FoCoEff_3x * $NumMobs
$FO_Casts += 1
$time = $time + 1 / $APS
While $currentAP < $reducedFOCost
$currentAP = $currentAP + (1 / $electrocuteCastSpeed * $passiveApRegen) + $prodigyRegen + $Apoc * $cc * $electrocuteCoEff * $NumMobs
$electrocute_Casts += 1
$time = $time + 1 / $electrocuteCastSpeed
WEnd

If $time > $lengthOfFight Then
ExitLoop
EndIf
WEnd


basically simulates you casting FO until no AP, then uses electrocute to refill AP.
takes in to account (not sure if I forgot anything ?)

apoc,
resource reduction
aps
#mobs
FO/electrocute coeff
electrocute cast speed multiplier
length of fight
max AP
passive AP regen
prodigy regen per cast
crit chance

it can also convert dmg done by electrocute into equivalent # of FO casts.

people can use this if they want. If everything works out then I'll just release the code for whoever wants to use it. I don't want to release now incase it is wrong, so use at your own risk.

it seems for my gear that if i reach 67% resource reduction I can cast FO infinitely. Thou that maybe quite difficult to actually achieve, and may gimp my char overall. Will have to check in a edps calc.

thanks.
one more thing it can help you do is figure out if you should reroll apoc, +dmg on your skill or resource reduction
Anyone?
67% reduction is unrealistic but also not required. With 40% or above reduction and 16-17 ap regen per second (using arcanot, astral vision, tal's bonus and templar) and a low attack speed, you only lose about 3-4 arcane power per second which lets you cast enough frozen orbs before you have to stop.

Even if you do somehow run out, you regen so fast that only 1 out of 3 or 4 casts will be the wand throw spell, the rest will still be frozen orbs.
Of course 67% is unpractical. That's why I wrote a simulator to optimize instead of saying something like 1/3 of my FO will be wand casts and essentially lose ~1/3 dps.

04/05/2014 12:59 PMPosted by nitrocan
67% reduction is unrealistic but also not required. With 40% or above reduction and 16-17 ap regen per second (using arcanot, astral vision, tal's bonus and templar) and a low attack speed, you only lose about 3-4 arcane power per second which lets you cast enough frozen orbs before you have to stop.

Even if you do somehow run out, you regen so fast that only 1 out of 3 or 4 casts will be the wand throw spell, the rest will still be frozen orbs.


Now can anyone see something wrong with it? I expected I forgot something when I wrote it.
Anyone?

Join the Conversation

Return to Forum