"So when you say "DPM of the spells cast" this seems strange. If we only compare the two aspects of each trinket that scale at a 100% ratio we get 2.54% for the Gem with no dpm change and 1.44% with the Eye with the same increase in mana cost.Īll of this of course assumes that you're not hit capped on the target but for boss fights it is something to consider.Ĭomment by xgevangelistQuoted from Peabo. The Gem totals a 3.37% dps increase at no increase in dpm using the model while the Eye hits 2.94% while increasing the cost of your spells by 1.44%. Then we take the combined dps increase from both the passive and non-passive abilites and compare them. (Note that here the Eye scales better the higher your average dps becomes but that the eye also worsens your dpm ratio.) Using the model above of 3k average shadowbolt hits this works out to a 5% dps increase 1/6th of the time or 0.83%. The Gem's on use ability adds 150 damage on spell cast (again assuming 100% coefficient) or 60 dps on a destruction 'lock's shadowbolt for 15 seconds out of every 90.
Now if we compare the chance on use and proc abilities of the two, assuming a cool down on the eye of 45s and perfect procs, we come to find that the Eye gives a 13% DPS increase for 5 out of every 45 seconds, or roughly a 1.44% DPS increase overall. (Something to note is here the Gem scales faster the higher your average dps becomes.)Ĭomparing the passive abilities side by side the Bloodgem adds about 1% more dps. Now take into account an average crit rate of 30% and the dps increase of the Eye gets closer to 1.5%. With the passive bonus from Quag's Eye your dps would hit 1,214. Assuming perfect casting with no crits your dps would hit 1,200. For example, take an average Shadowbolt hit of 3k. Comment by 48776For raiding destruction warlocks (and possibly other classes that struggle with +hit) Scryer's Bloodgem is slightly better while also providing a more stable dps increase without an increase in dpm.Ĭompare 2.54% overall DPS increase to an extra 37 damage per cast assuming a 100% coefficient.
0 kommentar(er)
