[PvP] The BiS for the current content (updated for 1.8!)

[Fayeie]

hey lazer aren't the updated r13 shoulder new bis?

[iii]

Assuming the OP is not yet changed for updated r12 and r13 pieces?

I could add the r13 helm to honorable mentions, thats about it. The set is very good, but in terms of pure damage, it's not the best available.

The blue set items are in the BiS list for gloves and shoulders, how can the upgraded epic set not replace them??

[Dreez]

The blue set items are in the BiS list for gloves and shoulders, how can the upgraded epic set not replace them??

simple, the 2 set bonus of the blue set is 23 spelldmg while the 2 set bonus of the epic set increases your stamina by 20

[sumail]

The higher your damage, the better hit and crit becomes.

If you ignore things that make you deal more damage, how are you supposed to know how good hit and crit is?

Is your reasoning that it increases the worth of your crit, hit and spell power by exactly the same amount?

Are you talking about damage multipliers like COE/Nightsfall/etc? They just scale all your damage up so it doesn't matter when comparing crit/hit/spellpower. Like if you use arcane power then your hits increase by 30% and so does your crits and so does the damage gained by having the +hit on your gear (hits that would have been resisted). Perhaps you are unsure if the equation is correct. If it is correct then it clearly shows how hit/crit/spell power relate.

[Dervin20]

The higher your damage, the better hit and crit becomes.

If you ignore things that make you deal more damage, how are you supposed to know how good hit and crit is?

Is your reasoning that it increases the worth of your crit, hit and spell power by exactly the same amount?

Are you talking about damage multipliers like COE/Nightsfall/etc? They just scale all your damage up so it doesn't matter when comparing crit/hit/spellpower. Like if you use arcane power then your hits increase by 30% and so does your crits and so does the damage gained by having the +hit on your gear (hits that would have been resisted). Perhaps you are unsure if the equation is correct. If it is correct then it clearly shows how hit/crit/spell power relate.

The value of hit and crit goes up much more drastically for any of the damage increases you mentioned in comparison to spellpower.

Critting and not resisting can essentially be seen as casting an extra frosbolt which means you have an entire extra frosbolt taking advantage of coe/nightfall/ect/.

While increasing spellpower just causues the extra damage on each frostbolt to deal whatever % more damage.

[sumail]

Found a possible error in the equation. Before I was assuming A = 446.5 which was based on http://db.vanillagaming.org/?spell=10181. However I looked in my spellbook the frostbolt damage ranges show that the average is actually A = 486.

Anyway I updated that so let's do an example to show that the ratio between crit and spell power holds true even if you consider damage multipliers.

So let's say your frostbolts hit for 1000 unbuffed (Sp = 631) and you have 25% chance to crit. We want to know how much spell power is equivalent to 1% crit for Sp =631. So I come up with 1% crit = 9.8 spell power. Now let's check to see if this ratio holds up if we take 100 frostbolts and COE (1.1 damage multiplier) the mob we're attacking. For simplicity let's say we have 100% chance to hit.

So we will have 74 hits and 26 crits = 1.1*1000*74 + 1.1*1000*2*26 = 138,600 damage.

Okay now let's instead increase our spell power by 9.8 and set crit back to 25% and see how much damage we do.

So we will have 75 hits and 25 crits and our new hits with the added spell damage will be 1008.

So our damage is 1.1*1008*.75 + 1.1*1008*2*.25 = 138,600 damage.

As you can see the damage the same as if we added 1% crit by adding 9.8 spell power. Now you can't get items with 9.8 spell power this is just an example but if an item had 10 spell power it would be clearly better at this condition. The point of this example is to show that damage multipliers don't make a crit ratio all the sudden become better in favor of crit it remains constant because damage multipliers are applied to everything.

[Lazermon]

I think you're right, multipliers have nothing to do with it, atleast your logic makes sense. I will do the math myself when I care to and make sure its true, and take this into consideration for the next patch.

This does not make up for the differences you and me have regarding the value of hit and crit, I would have to calculate with frostbolts dealing ~825 damage to arrive at crit only being worth 10 sp (which is what you suggest crit is worth since you think ringos are comparable with bloodvine boots).

[sumail]

I believe the disparity is from how you are determining how to value crit. I used to just say that if you crit once per 100 attacks it's like getting 1 more frostbolt or increasing your damage by 1%. However I began to question this method since assumes you are going from 0 -> 1% crit. If you calculate crit this way then it over values what damage crit gives you.

For example let's say you have 99% chance to crit then adding 1% wouldn't be a 1% damage increase. Reason is you basically get 99*2 crits and 1 non-crit frostbolt at 99% crit per 100 attacks. So going from 99% ->100% is basically 1/(99*2+1) = 1/(199) damage increase which is about half the value you get out of going from 0% -> 1% crit.

I saw that the value of crit and hit depends how much you already have. They also depend on your current spellpower because as you increase spellpower crit becomes better since it doubles you spell power (and base damage) when you crit. Same idea for hit you basically get an extra attack per 100 casts and the damage is determined by your spellpower + base damage.

[Lazermon]

The disparity is definitely that we value crit differently. That we can agree on. The majority of the things you write are incredibly hard to decipher in a way that makes sense to me, and I simply have no interest in spending my time on doing that when I am as sure as I am on the values myself. I can still be wrong with things (the multiplier thing is interesting and will come into play when considering items that are extremely close), so it's not like I refuse input, but the way you have chosen to come with input in this thread is just not worth my time (im not getting paid to do this). If you KNOW you are right, you're simply gonna have to try some other method of convincing me. If that is by convincing other respectable people first or by cleaning your stuff up and explaining your math in a way that doesn't require more effort than deciphering heiroglyphs, (or by making another bis thread or something) that's up to you.

I'm not saying you are wrong, I'm not saying what you have written contains errors, I am saying I consider it a large effort in reading, understanding and debating.

[Dervin20]

I believe the disparity is from how you are determining how to value crit. I used to just say that if you crit once per 100 attacks it's like getting 1 more frostbolt or increasing your damage by 1%. However I began to question this method since assumes you are going from 0 -> 1% crit. If you calculate crit this way then it over values what damage crit gives you.

For example let's say you have 99% chance to crit then adding 1% wouldn't be a 1% damage increase. Reason is you basically get 99*2 crits and 1 non-crit frostbolt at 99% crit per 100 attacks. So going from 99% ->100% is basically 1/(99*2+1) = 1/(199) damage increase which is about half the value you get out of going from 0% -> 1% crit.

I saw that the value of crit and hit depends how much you already have. They also depend on your current spellpower because as you increase spellpower crit becomes better since it doubles you spell power (and base damage) when you crit. Same idea for hit you basically get an extra attack per 100 casts and the damage is determined by your spellpower + base damage.

Going from criting on 1/10 spells to 1/5 can be very good for your dps.