Azortharion's 6.2.2 MM Hunter Guide

[Atrais 38]

So? Again, what's good about it? If our AOE is underwhelming it means MS should be buffed, not boring passive brought back. 

Numbers is what important. If taking a certain passive reduces damage, then remaining abilities should be buffed accordingly, all there is to it. You're saying "we lost piercing shots" like we didn't gain anything in return. 

 

The biggest reason PS would have been nice for MS is that it would allow us to do AoE damage while still maintaining our main rotation.  For 2+ targets, we could weave in the occasional MS to apply the DoT and maintain to DPS on all targets while not sacrificing our ST rotation, for the most part.  I agree with you that PS on AiS, CS, and SS is meh, but for MS it would have added a lot for our AoE rotation. 

[Iridar 80]

The biggest reason PS would have been nice for MS is that it would allow us to do AoE damage while still maintaining our main rotation.  For 2+ targets, we could weave in the occasional MS to apply the DoT and maintain to DPS on all targets while not sacrificing our ST rotation, for the most part.  I agree with you that PS on AiS, CS, and SS is meh, but for MS it would have added a lot for our AoE rotation. 

PS is nothing like serpent sting. Serpent sting is a unique DoT, you apply it once and it does damage over time. If you override it with another application, it will bump up the duration to maximum, but that's it. 

Piercing Shots functions similarly to fire mage's Ignite: it accumulates all damage, then applies it over duration. 

 

For SV "MS weaving" may be beneficial because each MS applies a full-blooded, powerful DoT, while overriding it with further MSes bears little benefit.

 

But PS is only as strong as the shot that applied it. If you fire one MS that applies PS, PS will deal X damage. If you fire 3 MSes, PS will deal 3X damage. 

 

That's why PS was bad for us. All it did was stretching the damage over time, without any added benefit. Thank god it's gone. 

Edited November 13, 2014 by Iridar

[Atrais 38]

PS is nothing like serpent sting. Serpent sting is a unique DoT, you apply it once and it does damage over time. If you override it with another application, it will bump up the duration to maximum, but that's it. 

Piercing Shots functions similarly to fire mage's Ignite: it accumulates all damage, then applies it over duration. 

 

For SV "MS weaving" may be beneficial because each MS applies a full-blooded, powerful DoT. But PS is only as strong as the shot that applied it. If you fire one MS that applies PS, PS will deal X damage. If you fire 3 MSes, PS will deal 3X damage. 

 

That's why PS was bad for us. All it did was stretching the damage over time, without any added benefit. Thank god it's gone. 

 

As opposed to our current AoE rotation, which is basically "Continue ST rotation until target count > 6".  How is that preferential?  Piercing Shots could have easily been tweaked to apply more consistent damage, and applying a DoT would at least add some depth to our AoE rotation beyond mindlessly spamming MS.  Simply making MS do more damage is boring and uninspired.

[Iridar 80]

As opposed to our current AoE rotation, which is basically "Continue ST rotation until target count > 6".  How is that preferential?  Piercing Shots could have easily been tweaked to apply more consistent damage, and applying a DoT would at least add some depth to our AoE rotation beyond mindlessly spamming MS.  Simply making MS do more damage is boring and uninspired.

You don't understand. With PS nothing would change. The only difference would be that some of MS's damage gets wasted on targets that die before PS has time to fully tick through. 

Piercing Shots =/= Serpent Sting, those are two completely different mechanics. 

[Atrais 38]

You don't understand. With PS nothing would change. The only difference would be that some of MS's damage gets wasted on targets that die before PS has time to fully tick through. 

Piercing Shots =/= Serpent Sting, those are two completely different mechanics. 

 

PS doesn't "steal" 30% damage from the MS crit, the MS crit does the same amount of damage and then PS does 30% of it, in addition to the normal crit, over 8 seconds.  Otherwise what is the point? It was be a DPS loss to have as an ability...

So, in effect, our MS Crits would hit 30% harder, just over 8 seconds...

EDIT - FOr example, if my MS crits for 10,000 right now, with PS, it would crit for 10,000 and apply a 3,000 damage over 8 seconds DoT

Edited November 13, 2014 by Atrais

[Iridar 80]

PS doesn't "steal" 30% damage from the MS crit, the MS crit does the same amount of damage and then PS does 30% of it, in addition to the normal crit, over 8 seconds.  Otherwise what is the point? It was be a DPS loss to have as an ability...

So, in effect, our MS Crits would hit 30% harder, just over 8 seconds...

EDIT - FOr example, if my MS crits for 10,000 right now, with PS, it would crit for 10,000 and apply a 3,000 damage over 8 seconds DoT

I know. But blizzard balance around numbers. They also have a simulationcraft-like software. So they want us to have X DPS in AOE situations. If MS spam doesn't provide us with enough AOE DPS, they can add PS, or they can simply buff MS. 

 

The result is the same, we will have X AOE DPS. Without PS, MS will have to hit harder for us to achieve the same X AOE DPS. 

So in that sense, PS does indeed *steal* direct damage from MS. 

 

Blizzard don't just take and don't give anything in return. They might have taken a couple of passives from us, but they buffed other abilities in return. I agree, current MM AOE looks rather weak. They can fix it by adding PS, or by buffing MS. Buffing MS is preferable, because there's no advantage in doing damage over time in this case. 

[Atrais 38]

I know. But blizzard balance around numbers. They also have a simulationcraft-like software. So they want us to have X DPS in AOE situations. If MS spam doesn't provide us with enough AOE DPS, they can add PS, or they can simply buff MS. 

 

The result is the same, we will have X AOE DPS. Without PS, MS will have to hit harder for us to achieve the same X AOE DPS. 

So in that sense, PS does indeed *steal* direct damage from MS. 

 

Blizzard don't just take and don't give anything in return. They might have taken a couple of passives from us, but they buffed other abilities in return. I agree, current MM AOE looks rather weak. They can fix it by adding PS, or by buffing MS. Buffing MS is preferable, because there's no advantage in doing damage over time in this case. 

 

But following your logic every move that does a bleed or DoT effect in the game should just do direct damage instead because that would be better, so DoT classes shouldnt exist? 

Edited November 13, 2014 by Atrais

[Iridar 80]

But following your logic every move that does a bleed or DoT effect in the game should just do direct damage instead because that would be better, so DoT classes shouldnt exist? 

"DoT class" and "one DoT in a spec that's passively applied with certain abilities" is entirely different things, don't you agree? 

It's fine to have DoT classes, for variety if nothing else. But PS is not a usual DoT, it's more of a delayed damage mechanic. 

[Atrais 38]

"DoT class" and "one DoT in a spec that's passively applied with certain abilities" is entirely different things, don't you agree? 

It's fine to have DoT classes, for variety if nothing else. But PS is not a usual DoT, it's more of a delayed damage mechanic. 

 

You could apply the same argument to to any ability that causes the target to bleed.  The thing is that DoTs general do more total damage than a direct damage ability would, in total, but stretched out over time.  So it's not a choice between MS +30% or PS, its more like a choice between MS + 15% immediately and PS doing 30% over 8 seconds. 

[Iridar 80]

You could apply the same argument to to any ability that causes the target to bleed.  The thing is that DoTs general do more total damage than a direct damage ability would, in total, but stretched out over time.  

Yes, that's how DOT CLASSES function, with REAL DOTS. Piercing Shots is not a real DOT, FFS. How many times do I have to say this?

You don't make a conscious choice to apply Piercing Shots, nor do you have to do anything to do it. 

Your rotation wouldn't change to Piercing Shots -> Chimaera -> Aimed -> Steady, and you wouldn't apply PS to new targets as a first priority, like we used to with Serpent Sting. 

[Atrais 38]

Yes, that's how DOT CLASSES function, with REAL DOTS. Piercing Shots is not a real DOT, FFS. How many times do I have to say this?

You don't make a conscious choice to apply Piercing Shots, nor do you have to do anything to do it. 

Your rotation wouldn't change to Piercing Shots -> Chimaera -> Aimed -> Steady, and you wouldn't apply PS to new targets as a first priority, like we used to with Serpent Sting. 

 

Sure, but tons of classes have DoTs without being pure "DoT classes".  Are Boomkins a "DoT" class just because they have Moonfire and Sunfire? Are Arms warriors a DoT class because they have Rend? Are Gladiator Warriors a DoT class because they have Deep Wounds? Are rogues DoT classes because of their poisons?

You're missing the point that PS as a passive affect to MS would increase our AoE damage considerably while allowing us to apply pressure to adds and still follow our normal ST rotation.  We could maintain PS on targets 2,3,4,etc. through MS while still mostly doing our ST rotation.  It would give us options for times when simply spamming MS would be a DPS loss, which, as I said, is anytime there are less than 7 targets.  So, in effect, it would behave like Serpent Sting, a passive DoT you maintain on additional targets, but one that is based on Damage Done and thus more favorable to MM.

[Iridar 80]

Sure, but tons of classes have DoTs without being pure "DoT classes". Are Arms warriors a DoT class because they have Rend? 

Stop clinging to words. A class doesn't have to be "pure DoT" to have a real DoT ability.

 

Yes, Rend is a real DoT, even though it does a big portion of its damage directly, it's the DoT component that makes its worth using as a priority over other skills. When a warrior switches to a target, it's his first priority to apply Rend, provided it will live long enough to receive full/most of the DoT component's damage, otherwise it's not worth using over other skills. 

 

You're missing the point that PS as a passive affect to MS would increase our AoE damage considerably while allowing us to apply pressure to adds and still follow our normal ST rotation.  We could maintain PS on targets 2,3,4,etc. through MS while still mostly doing our ST rotation.  It would give us options for times when simply spamming MS would be a DPS loss, which, as I said, is anytime there are less than 7 targets.  So, in effect, it would behave like Serpent Sting, a passive DoT you maintain on additional targets, but one that is based on Damage Done and thus more favorable to MM.

And you're missing the point that PS is not a DoT that you "keep rolling", because it's based directly on the damage of the shot that caused it, and stacks with additional applications.

Serpent Sting always has the same DPS, Piercing Shots has variable DPS. When a fresh crit applies PS, the remaining damage of the existing PS gets rolled in the new PS DoT, while overriding SS merely prolongs the DoT. 

 

Apparently, I need to explain on fingers so you understand. Let's imagine two scenarios, for both SS and PS.

 

First scenario: you spam four MSs back to back, then wait 28 seconds. Total time: 32 seconds.

Second scenario: you cast four MSs, but with the pause of 8 seconds between casts. Total time: also 32 seconds. 

 

With SS applied on MS, first scenario will yield less PDS, because SS only lasts 17 (or 15?) seconds, so it will tick only first half of the time, and during the last ~16 seconds you won't do any damage at all. 

 

With PS applied on MS, there will be absolutely no difference in total damage between these two scenarios. There is no advantage in doing "MS weaving" with PS as opposed to MS spam.

 

I don't know how else simpler I can explain this. 

Edited November 13, 2014 by Iridar

[Atrais 38]

Stop clinging to words. A class doesn't have to be "pure DoT" to have a real DoT ability.

 

Yes, Rend is a real DoT, even though it does a big portion of its damage directly, it's the DoT component that makes its worth using as a priority over other skills. When a warrior switches to a target, it's his first priority to apply Rend, provided it will live long enough to receive full/most of the DoT component's damage, otherwise it's not worth using over other skills. 

 

 

And you're missing the point that PS is not a DoT that you "keep rolling", because it's based directly on the damage of the shot that caused it, and stacks with additional applications.

Serpent Sting always has the same DPS, Piercing Shots has variable DPS. When a fresh crit applies PS, the remaining damage of the existing PS gets rolled in the new PS DoT, while overriding SS merely prolongs the DoT. 

 

Apparently, I need to explain on fingers so you understand. Let's imagine two scenarios, for both SS and PS.

 

First scenario: you spam four MSs back to back, then wait 28 seconds. Total time: 32 seconds.

Second scenario: you cast four MSs, but with the pause of 8 seconds between casts. Total time: also 32 seconds. 

 

With SS applied on MS, first scenario will yield less PDS, because SS only lasts 17 (or 15?) seconds, so it will tick only first half of the time, and during the last ~16 seconds you won't do any damage at all. 

 

With PS applied on MS, there will be absolutely no difference in total damage between these two scenarios. There is no advantage in doing "MS weaving" with PS. 

 

I don't know how else simpler I can explain this. 

 

Except that in the first scenario you can spam MS to generate a large PS DoT, then use other moves while it is running for the 8 seconds, then re-do MS to maintain the DoT, etc.  In effect, you can "Weave in" multiple MSes to maintain a large DoT in much the same way a Fire Mage maintains a large Ignite.  So our DPS rotation on 2-6 targets  could potentially change, rather than being being maintain ST rotation.  Of course, getting a 30% damage bump is better than a 30% stacking DoT, but you could make that same argument for any move that causes a bleed effect, as I said.  So if you're arguing against damage-based DoTs, you're arguing against more than just PS...

[Iridar 80]

 

Except that in the first scenario you can spam MS to generate a large PS DoT, then use other moves while it is running for the 8 seconds, then re-do MS to maintain the DoT, etc.  In effect, you can "Weave in" multiple MSes to maintain a large DoT in much the same way a Fire Mage maintains a large Ignite.  So our DPS rotation on 2-6 targets  could potentially change, rather than being being maintain ST rotation.  Of course, getting a 30% damage bump is better than a 30% stacking DoT, but you could make that same argument for any move that causes a bleed effect, as I said.  So if you're arguing against damage-based DoTs, you're arguing against more than just PS...

 

1. There are no other damage-based DoTs except for ignite.

2. Fire mages don't maintain large ignite, because they can't, and neither can we, because that's not how PS / Ignite works. 

Source: http://www.warcrafthuntersunion.com/2010/11/how-piercing-shots-works/

The short version is this:

Every Piercing Shots proc from Aimed Shot, Chimera Shot, or Steady Shot crits gives you a bleed effect that does 30% of that crit damage. You get this effect for every single crit from those shots. It does not overwrite the existing buff. It does not refresh the existing buff — so you aren’t actually able to get more than the 30%, or less. You just get the full 30% extra bleed damage from every aimed, chimera, or steady crit, just like the tooltip says.

 

When you see the piercing shots debuff refresh, here’s what the game is actually doing:

The game looks at how much damage is left to be done on the existing piercing shots, then adds that to the total damage of the new piercing shots — it then takes that new total and divides it by 8 seconds, doing that damage each second.

 

Piercing Shots Example

 

So if your steady shot crits for 10,000 damage (for the sake of round numbers) it then gets a piercing shots proc that will do 3,000 damage over 8 seconds — or 375 damage per second for 8 seconds.

 

Now lets say three second later you get another steady shot crit for 10,000 damage, which will also get a piercing shots proc for 3,000 damage over 8 seconds. That first proc has ticked for 3 seconds at 375 per second, and has done 1,125 damage — but has 1,875 damage left to do over the next 5 seconds. We add that 1,875 to the 3,000 damage of our new proc, to get 4,875 damage that will be done over the next 8 seconds — so piercing shots now has a full 8-second duration, but will do 609 damage per second.

 

This is why if you look at combat logs, the average tick of the piercing shots bleed is so much higher than it should be based on your average crits.

---

You can have an 8 second 10k DPS Piercing Shots DoT, or you can have a 32 second 2.5k DPS Piercing Shots DoT, in the end you will do the same total damage. 

 

If you stack a powerful PS DoT, you won't get any DPS from "refreshing" it as it's about to fall off. 

[Atrais 38]

 

 

 

1. There are no other damage-based DoTs except for ignite.

2. Fire mages don't maintain large ignite, because they can't, and neither can we, because that's not how PS / Ignite works. 

Source: http://www.warcrafthuntersunion.com/2010/11/how-piercing-shots-works/

The short version is this:

Every Piercing Shots proc from Aimed Shot, Chimera Shot, or Steady Shot crits gives you a bleed effect that does 30% of that crit damage. You get this effect for every single crit from those shots. It does not overwrite the existing buff. It does not refresh the existing buff — so you aren’t actually able to get more than the 30%, or less. You just get the full 30% extra bleed damage from every aimed, chimera, or steady crit, just like the tooltip says.

 

When you see the piercing shots debuff refresh, here’s what the game is actually doing:

The game looks at how much damage is left to be done on the existing piercing shots, then adds that to the total damage of the new piercing shots — it then takes that new total and divides it by 8 seconds, doing that damage each second.

 

Piercing Shots Example

 

So if your steady shot crits for 10,000 damage (for the sake of round numbers) it then gets a piercing shots proc that will do 3,000 damage over 8 seconds — or 375 damage per second for 8 seconds.

 

Now lets say three second later you get another steady shot crit for 10,000 damage, which will also get a piercing shots proc for 3,000 damage over 8 seconds. That first proc has ticked for 3 seconds at 375 per second, and has done 1,125 damage — but has 1,875 damage left to do over the next 5 seconds. We add that 1,875 to the 3,000 damage of our new proc, to get 4,875 damage that will be done over the next 8 seconds — so piercing shots now has a full 8-second duration, but will do 609 damage per second.

 

This is why if you look at combat logs, the average tick of the piercing shots bleed is so much higher than it should be based on your average crits.

---

You can have an 8 second 10k DPS Piercing Shots DoT, or you can have a 32 second 2.5k DPS Piercing Shots DoT, in the end you will do the same total damage. 

 

If you stack a powerful PS DoT, you won't get any DPS from "refreshing" it as it's about to fall off. 

 

 

Okay, point taken, but at least with PS using MS would be viable on less than 7 targets, even if you cant weave it as I originally thought.  Sure, you could make the same argument for simply increasing the damage by 30%, but that is, like I said, bland and boring.  At least with PS we get a slightly different mechanism.  So MSes that hit 30% harder or MSes that apply a 30% damage DoT, I'll take the latter.

[Iridar 80]

With Aimed Shot refunding focus on crits, the priority of the Barrage / GT will most likely be lower, especially as we gain more and more crit from gear, because basically, the more crit we have, the cheaper Aimed Shot is on average, especially in relation to expensive Barrage. 

 

Pre-WoD Barrage would be casted on cooldown outside of CA, and during CA if it would hit at least one additional target. But with AiS crits refunding focus, maybe 2-3 additional targets will be required before Barrage is worth casting. 

 

Additionally, there will probably be a certain crit threshold where we wouldn't want cast Barrage against 1 target ever, but that I'm not sure that even T17 2pc and full BiS gear will be enough to get there. 

 

I assumed Barrage is 960% weapon damage, and AiS is 420%, and did some napkin math, and it shows that AiS completely takes over Barrage in single target rotation at 52% crit, provided we have T17 2pc. Without 2pc, threshold is 72%, and I don't think we're likely to achieve it even at the end of the expansion. We will most likely achieve 52% by the end of WoD, but I don't think we'd want to wear T17 by that time. 

But that's without Careful Aim. 

 

I have no idea how Barrage scales in multi-target scenarios, so I can't predict how many targets have to be there for Barrage to be worth casting during CA. 

 

Regardless, we'll probably want to use GT in most single target scenarios anyway. 

 

EDIT: Incorrectly formulated my thoughts. It's not that Barrage's priority will decrease, but rather AiS' priority will increase.

 

EDIT 2: I also completely forgot about Lone Wolf increasing AiS' damage by 30%. I'll redo the calculations to include that.

Edited November 14, 2014 by Iridar

[Iridar 80]

Okay, I've redone the calculations, now taking Lone Wolf into account. My conclusion is that you need > 25% crit chance with T17 2pc, and > 34.5% crit chance without, for AiS to be worth more in single target situation than Barrage. Both of these numbers seem quite reachable within this raiding tier. 

 

Of course, we probably will want to roll with Glaive Toss in single target situations anyway, but it's useful to know that Barrage might not even be worth casting on single target if you need to use Barrage to burst down some adds later during the fight. 

 

It's quite possible I made a mistake somewhere in my napkin math, so if there's a soul willing to proof it, I'd gladly post the algorithm. 

[Niix 169]

Today my focus will be simming the rest of MM gear slots in a bit more of a simplified fashion. I'll do M and MWF gear in all slots. I'm going to leave the weapon ranking as is but all of the other information is basically useless.

 

The main reason I'm opting for this is so you can distinguish if there are any M pieces that are better than a MWF counterpart.

[Atrais 38]

Okay, I've redone the calculations, now taking Lone Wolf into account. My conclusion is that you need > 25% crit chance with T17 2pc, and > 34.5% crit chance without, for AiS to be worth more in single target situation than Barrage. Both of these numbers seem quite reachable within this raiding tier. 

 

Of course, we probably will want to roll with Glaive Toss in single target situations anyway, but it's useful to know that Barrage might not even be worth casting on single target if you need to use Barrage to burst down some adds later during the fight. 

 

It's quite possible I made a mistake somewhere in my napkin math, so if there's a soul willing to proof it, I'd gladly post the algorithm. 

 

Okay, so I did some napkin math too, and I;m not sure where your numbers are coming from.

Heres mine:

Barrage: 960% weapon damage, 3 second base cast, 60 focus

AiS: 420% weapon damage, 2.5 second base cast, 50 Focus

Ignoring perks and set bonuses:

Barrage = 320% weapon damage per second / 16% weapon damage per Focus spent

AiS = 168% weapon damage per second / 8.4% weapon damage per Focus spent

So, without those bonuses, Barrage hits much harder, expected

With the perk that restores 20 focus on crit (no set bonus) and 100% crit chance (obviously too high, just making a point):

Barrage = 320% weapon damage per second / 16% weapon damage per Focus spent

AiS = 168% weapon damage per second / 14% weapon damage per Focus spent (420% / 30 Focus)

With the perk that restores 20 focus on crit, the 2-piece bonus, and 100% crit chance (obviously too high, just making a point):

Barrage = 320% weapon damage per second / 16% weapon damage per Focus spent

AiS = 168% weapon damage per second / 19% weapon damage per Focus spent (420% / 22 Focus)

So, with 100% crit chance and both bonuses, my admittedly simple math, is showing AiS barely above Barrage.  Let's reduce that Crit down to 50%.  In this case, the average cost of AiS with be 36 (50 + 22 / 2), since half your AiS will crit and half wont, using that number:

Barrage = 320% weapon damage per second / 16% weapon damage per Focus spent

AiS = 168% weapon damage per second / 11.7% weapon damage per Focus spent (420% / 36 Focus)

 

So even at 50% crit, Barrages looks better

Maybe I'm getting some numbers wrong, but I'm showing AiS being worse than Barrage (outside of CA obviously) both in terms of DPS and DPF unless you have an absolutely unattainable Crit %.

Edited November 15, 2014 by Atrais

[Niix 169]

 

Maybe I'm getting some numbers wrong, but I'm showing AiS being worse than Barrage (outside of CA obviously) both in terms of DPS and DPF unless you have an absolutely unattainable Crit %.

 

You're not wrong. The sims have already been done.

 

On a pure ST fight, Barrage shouldn't even be used first of all so this math is somewhat irrelevant to the current meta.

 

On a cleave fight, Barrage takes priority over AiS even within Careful Aim / Rapid Fire.

 

I'm not sure the reasoning behind the math being done at the moment when the above that I've mentioned has already been simmed and proven.

 

Edit: This is in BiS gear at 700 ilvl with 32% crit by the way. Which is close to impossible to achieve.

[Niix 169]

I feel like I'm missing something in this conversation.

[Atrais 38]

You're not wrong. The sims have already been done.

 

On a pure ST fight, Barrage shouldn't even be used first of all so this math is somewhat irrelevant to the current meta.

 

On a cleave fight, Barrage takes priority over AiS even within Careful Aim / Rapid Fire.

 

I'm not sure the reasoning behind the math being done at the moment when the above that I've mentioned has already been simmed and proven.

 

Edit: This is in BiS gear at 700 ilvl with 32% crit by the way. Which is close to impossible to achieve.

 

I trust your Sims, but SIms break sometimes, sometimes they are wrong, its never a wasted exercise to break out some napkin math and test what the sims are showing, in this case it looks like my napkin math matches your sims, which only reinforces their accuracy

[Niix 169]

I trust your Sims, but SIms break sometimes, sometimes they are wrong, its never a wasted exercise to break out some napkin math and test what the sims are showing, in this case it looks like my napkin math matches your sims, which only reinforces their accuracy

 

Yeah, I agree, but in my own experience my napkin math is more susceptible to a fuck up than a calculation done by a computer. That's my reasoning for mentioning a simulation. I like seeing real evidence that my simulations are correct, I feel more confident about them now so thanks to you both.

[Orthios 271]

I feel like I'm missing something in this conversation.

You and me both.

[Iridar 80]

 

Okay, so I did some napkin math too, and I;m not sure where your numbers are coming from.

Heres mine:

Barrage: 960% weapon damage, 3 second base cast, 60 focus
AiS: 420% weapon damage, 2.5 second base cast, 50 Focus

Ignoring perks and set bonuses:

Barrage = 320% weapon damage per second / 16% weapon damage per Focus spent

AiS = 168% weapon damage per second / 8.4% weapon damage per Focus spent

So, without those bonuses, Barrage hits much harder, expected

With the perk that restores 20 focus on crit (no set bonus) and 100% crit chance (obviously too high, just making a point):

Barrage = 320% weapon damage per second / 16% weapon damage per Focus spent
AiS = 168% weapon damage per second / 14% weapon damage per Focus spent (420% / 30 Focus)

With the perk that restores 20 focus on crit, the 2-piece bonus, and 100% crit chance (obviously too high, just making a point):

Barrage = 320% weapon damage per second / 16% weapon damage per Focus spent
AiS = 168% weapon damage per second / 19% weapon damage per Focus spent (420% / 22 Focus)

So, with 100% crit chance and both bonuses, my admittedly simple math, is showing AiS barely above Barrage.  Let's reduce that Crit down to 50%.  In this case, the average cost of AiS with be 36 (50 + 22 / 2), since half your AiS will crit and half wont, using that number:

Barrage = 320% weapon damage per second / 16% weapon damage per Focus spent
AiS = 168% weapon damage per second / 11.7% weapon damage per Focus spent (420% / 36 Focus)

 

So even at 50% crit, Barrages looks better

Maybe I'm getting some numbers wrong, but I'm showing AiS being worse than Barrage (outside of CA obviously) both in terms of DPS and DPF unless you have an absolutely unattainable Crit %.

My math is similar, but I also take into account the focus that you regen while casting the ability, with 4 focus per second base regen. Thus, "real" cost of the AiS is 40, and Barrage is 48.

Lone Wolf also increases the value of AiS, as it doesn't increase Barrage's damage - on second thought, there are two tooltips, saying different things, so this is probably worth checking. Will do later. 

 

 

So, by creating a simple equation

 

DPSPF_AiS = DPSPF_Barrage 

 

we can find the breaking point of crit at which casting AiS is more profitable on average than casting barrage, assuming TotH is not up.

 

218.4 / (40 - 28*crit) = 6.6

transform into:

 

crit1 = (40 - 218.4 / 6.6) / 28 

or crit2 = (40 - 218.4 / 6.6) / 20 when using the case without T17.

 

crit1 = 0.25, or 25% crit chance raid buffed, and crit2 = 0.345. At crit levels higher than these, Barrage becomes obsolete in single target rotation even when TotH isn't up.

You're not wrong. The sims have already been done.

 

On a pure ST fight, Barrage shouldn't even be used first of all so this math is somewhat irrelevant to the current meta.

 

On a cleave fight, Barrage takes priority over AiS even within Careful Aim / Rapid Fire.

 

I'm not sure the reasoning behind the math being done at the moment when the above that I've mentioned has already been simmed and proven.

 

Edit: This is in BiS gear at 700 ilvl with 32% crit by the way. Which is close to impossible to achieve.

I'm just acting on a thought I had while leveling. Sims are good, but I like to do my own research when it's possible, just a redundant measure.

Edited November 15, 2014 by Iridar