In defense of gear simulations

Josh Myers is not a scientist. The closest he's ever come to being one is winning the Science Fair in 8th grade and getting straight As in physics in high school. Despite these clear signs telling him to look for a career in science, he decided instead to go for a degree in English. His wallet hasn't forgiven him since.
"Just sim it" is a phrase almost everyone who has played World of Warcraft in the past few years is familiar with. Should my enhancement shaman use Tunic of Failed Experiments or Voltage Source Chestguard? Sim it. How much of a DPS increase is the four-piece Firelord's Vestments bonus? Spreadsheet it. How much DPS am I losing since I can't afford a Flask of the Winds on my hunter? SIM IT!
I'll be the very first to say that saying "just sim it" isn't a constructive thing to say. Beyond being slightly rude, it doesn't explain why simming is such a good idea. However, while I find "just sim it" to be in poor taste, the actual act of simming or spreadsheeting gear choices is a really good idea. This post aims to address why we encourage spreadsheeting your DPS choices.
"Just sim it" is a phrase almost everyone who has played World of Warcraft in the past few years is familiar with. Should my enhancement shaman use Tunic of Failed Experiments or Voltage Source Chestguard? Sim it. How much of a DPS increase is the four-piece Firelord's Vestments bonus? Spreadsheet it. How much DPS am I losing since I can't afford a Flask of the Winds on my hunter? SIM IT!
I'll be the very first to say that saying "just sim it" isn't a constructive thing to say. Beyond being slightly rude, it doesn't explain why simming is such a good idea. However, while I find "just sim it" to be in poor taste, the actual act of simming or spreadsheeting gear choices is a really good idea. This post aims to address why we encourage spreadsheeting your DPS choices.
Random number generator woes
In World of Warcraft, the random number generator owns your soul. If you mouse over any ability you have on your hotbar, you'll see that every damaging spell or heal has a minimum value and a maximum value. For a level 85 Starfire, the minimum value is 987 and the maximum potential is 1,229. This means that before any other multipliers on the ability are added (spellpower, critical rating, mastery, boss debuffs, etc.), the game makes an initial roll for the base damage of the attack between those two numbers. If a balance druid were to cast two Starfires in succession with identical conditions for both casts, it's almost doubtless that the two casts would hit for different amounts.
To add some more RNG to your RNG, we move from base spell value to critical strike chance. It's a fairly common misconception that a 25% spell critical strike rating means that you will critically hit with your abilities 25% of the time. What 25% spell critical strike rating really means is that every single time you cast, you have a 25% chance on that spell cast to critically hit. This means that you could have a 10-minute parse in which you actually crit 30% of the time or more because you get extremely lucky with your crit rolls.
On top of all of this RNG, add in random procs to the mixture. Affliction warlocks might end up with a lucky string of Nightfall procs, while a fire mage might go for 30+ seconds without a Hot Streak. The extremely lucky survival hunter might see a Lock and Load proc off every Black Arrow one fight and then see LnL proc once a minute the next. A shadow priest might see enough Shadow Orb procs to maintain Empowered Shadow 100% of the time, or might see it fall off when Orbs don't proc for 30 seconds straight.

Simulators are set up to try and combat RNG by running long simulation times. EnhSim, for example, simulates between 1,000 to 5,000 hours of 7-minute fights in order to bleed out the possibility of RNG ruining your DPS values. While it's very possible that you'll see an inflated number of critical hits during your 5-minute dummy test, 5,000 hours of simmed testing will see it even out to be very close to your actual critical strike chance.
DPS tests as a scientific experiment
RNG isn't the only argument in favor of simming your DPS. If you guys can remember 9th grade science with me, think back to your learning about how to construct an experiment. Your experiment in this case is a DPS test. Your dependent variable is your ending DPS. Your independent variable is what you're changing from one fight to the next; in most cases, this will be a gear upgrade. Your control variables are everything that remains constant from fight to fight.
In your standard dummy DPS test, the problem becomes that you have no actual control over controlled variables. You don't have any way of telling the rude demonology warlock who just started testing on the same dummy as you that his 8% spell damage debuff is influencing your DPS test. You don't have any way of knowing that at 8:54 seconds into your test, you'll accidently misclick something other than Envenom and your Slice and Dice falls off. People make mistakes, debuffs get applied, things happen that will cause fight A to be different from fight B.

This isn't restricted to gear choices, either. If you want to see the benefit 10% melee haste is for your fury warrior, you just need to change that variable while keeping everything else the same. If you want to know whether your survival hunter should drop Explosive Shot in favor of Arcane Shot, you change your priority on Female Dwarf to reflect only that change. You use spreadsheets to control your control variables so that the only change between two simulations is in the independent variable, and the difference between results in your two fights is your DPS increase or decrease.
My charge to you
I'm not writing this out of any desire to shame people who aren't currently using the simulators and spreadsheets available to their class. I merely want to get the word out that there are legitimate mathematical reasons as to why spreadsheets are so heavily endorsed by the theorycrafting community. These are programs and applications written and designed by some very awesome individuals to help the World of Warcraft community out, and they're definitely worth checking out!
World of Warcraft: Cataclysm has destroyed Azeroth as we know it; nothing is the same! In WoW Insider's Guide to Cataclysm, you can find out everything you need to know about WoW's third expansion, from leveling up a new goblin or worgen to breaking news and strategies on endgame play.Filed under: Analysis / Opinion, Raiding, Cataclysm
Patch 5.2 interview with Dave Kosak
Inside an old alt's vault
The latest patch 5.2 news
All of the latest Mists of Pandaria news





Reader Comments (Page 3 of 4)
btraut Feb 4th 2011 7:27PM
I'm completely fine with people who don't think simulations (either spreadsheets or trial simulators) are necessary to perform. After all, it's a game and it's fun to play with or without heavy calculation. But please, don't try to push your target dummy results on me as definitive unless you sat on that dummy all day long (with the appropriate raid buffs).
Spreadsheets and trial simulators also have serious biases -- most are only configurable in a tank-n-spank (Patchwerk-style) scenario which is really only valid for, well, Patchwerk. Adding movement, phases, and other boss mechanics adds yet another variable into the experiment, and it's difficult to predict the results perfectly. But that doesn't make target dummies or daily/weekly boss kill parses any more reliable.
Make the game what you want it to be. For those of us who want to remain competitive, we'll use every tool we can get to stay on top, spreadsheets and sims included.
Jebediah54 Feb 4th 2011 7:41PM
If you want to test movement and other dps impairing phases, you can download SimCraft. In the options tab you can choose for the fight to be either Patchwerk or Helter Skelter, as well as many other options.
For example, on my fire mage if I choose helter skelter it will take into account that when I'm moving I have to cast scorch instead of the higher dps fireball. It will also introduce using counterspell on cooldown to interrupt spells. If I go over to my arcane spec though, it will use the movement capabilities of arcane (very limited) instead.
Really, for anyone that wants to get into the "simming" part of the game, I would highly recommend SimCraft. I also use Rawr to optimize my gear, which is really handy so you can say "I want to change to this piece of gear, but how would I have to reforge my gear to stay at the hit cap?" as well as just to maximize your mastery/haste/crit numbers according to their priority for your spec.
Brent Traut Feb 4th 2011 8:00PM
Oh yeah! I definitely use SimulationCraft and I often use the Helter Skelter numbers as closer to truth than Patchwerk. My comment was directed more towards spreadsheets which often have an easier learning-curve than SimulationCraft, but rarely give the option to simulate adds or movement.
Pyromelter Feb 5th 2011 12:46AM
Most of the complex simulators have settings to estimate movement heavy and add-type fights.
Regarding a target dummy, there are 3 things I think target dummies are good for
1. Working on your rotation. For example with 4.01 dropped, a lot of people had rotations changed up. Many of us took to the dummies for a bit before hitting up our first raid after that big patch.
2. Testing your own dps against yourself. You can use this to see your dps improve as your rotation improves. Or, you can use this to see if your dps goes up or down based on a piece of gear or a set of gear - something like maybe a trinket you're not sure about.
3. Testing a game or class mechanic. For example, let's say you wanted to be sure a trinket was working using dots - like maybe you think it was working on one dot, but not another. You can get completely naked except that trinket, and cast one dot at a time to test it. People do stuff like this all the time, and you can sit there and gather a lot of data using basic scientific method.
You are right in saying that dummy target dps is not indicative of raid dps, battle situations, or how good you are. For that you need to compare your own performance on each individual boss, that indeed is the true test of performance. But dummies do have significant purposes for testing both yourself, your gear, and the game itself.
Sheehun Feb 4th 2011 7:32PM
Math is Power!
Revynn Feb 4th 2011 7:42PM
Fun is relative. I know (and agree) that not everyone enjoys pouring over spreadsheets and combat logs or running simulations to figure out stat weights or optimize their gemming/reforging/enchants. However, "not everyone" doesn't mean "no one" and I will personally attest to the fact that some people just get a kick out of endless tweaking and toying with things to get the most out of them. I'm one of them. I like to peek under the hood and see how things work and all the constant sims and min-maxing is just part of the meta-game for me. Ultimately, it's not about being a super math geek or anything like that because, while there is certainly a lot of math involved, what we're doing with simulators and optimization programs is no different than what the guys working on Top Fuel drag motors or the uber-frugal shoppers are doing. Trying to take what we have and squeeze every single ounce of worth we can from it. The one or two extra horsepower, the 3 or 4 extra dollars per month, the 1-2% DPS increase.
As for Rawr and " alot of classes bagging on it", there's a very good reason for that. While Rawr has historically worked very well for certain classes and specs, it has also historically been anywhere from "not great" to "absolutely less than complete garbage" for others, and Warlocks are a prime example. Throughout the large majority of Wrath, Rawr just plain didn't function for 'locks. It once told me that my ToC 25 geared warlock could only turn 1,500 DPS, that my imp was incapable of doing anything besides stare at the wall and that my rotation should consist of spamming Shadow Bolt . . . as Destro. I know that Rawr works great for some classes (I believe Hunters, Mages and Kitty's swore by it), but for others it's just been plain terrible.
- "But the overwhelming majority of people play wow as an escape from work or school work, and looking at simulated numbers is flat out not fun."
Again, fun is relative. I don't see the fun in standing around in Orgrimmar all day getting in fights in trade chat or flinging random insults at people, but trolls do it all day long. I don't find scrapbooking fun, but my wife does. You may not find sims or spreadsheets fun, but that doesn't mean they aren't to someone else.
Revynn Feb 4th 2011 7:44PM
/groan
Reply fail, was directed at Pyromelter.
Deathgodryuk Feb 4th 2011 7:48PM
I think I've got a man-crush on you now.
Well said.
Saeadame Feb 4th 2011 9:24PM
Well said.
Pyromelter Feb 5th 2011 12:48AM
Dude, I hear ya, and it's all good. My only point is that requiring a simulation as many enhancement shaman commenters do is just plain not fun for most people. I'm glad you have fun with it, and that there are others that have fun with it too. But to require it is bad game design, in my opinion.
Harvoc Feb 4th 2011 7:47PM
I use simulations for my hunter only, because he's the only one that's max level. On my alts, I just use Pawn and the Wowhead scales. I know that it's not completely up to date but it doesn't really matter to me as they're not pushing endgame content.
Henry Feb 4th 2011 7:49PM
I like to think of "sim it" at being short for "I don't know off the top of my head, and there's no way for me to tell you how much of a DPS increase something is unless I knew your current gear was. The act of me finding all of your gear, putting it into the simulator and running it is quite a significant amount of work for you to ask me to do. So I recommend that you get the sim, learn how to use it, and empower yourself with the ability to make these decisions for yourself."
Ok, that became kinda dickish towards the end, but my point still rests.
And yes, sims tend to work under the assumption that the battle is 'Patchwerk style' but there is a completely valid assumption that the DPS increase your gain on any fight is a strictly increasing function of the DPS increase you'd gain on a 'Patchwerk style' fight.
Mr. Tastix Feb 4th 2011 7:57PM
Remember folks: The longer your sims, the more accurate the data is likely to be.
There's a reason Elitist Jerks doesn't give a crap about your 10-minute dummy test, and that's because not only are dummies a flawed mechanic (some spells simply don't work on them - an example of this is the Enhancment Shaman's "Searing Flames" DoT debuff) but because 10-minutes is simply not enough time to account for RNG.
Also remember that sims are -not- necessary to be able to know your class, or to perform well. The people who sim are generally min/maxers looking for the next upgrade that'll push their dps beyond the accepted boundaries.
Pyromelter Feb 5th 2011 7:35AM
In my opinion the heaviest users of Sims are people who are trying to push theorycraft in unique directions. For example, there was a time in WotLK where frost DK's were using a spec that was colloquially called the "machine gun" spec. It was based around spamming Icy Touch as much as possible. A lot of people questioned this, but they simmed the everlasting crap out of it, and along with logs, they found that it was actually optimal for that time.
Blizzard of course did not intent for DK's to play like that, so they fixed DK's pretty quick so that couldn't happen.
Also things like unholy dual-wielding. That is still being tested and simmed even now.
Usually you don't need a sim (in my opinion) when you have a relatively standard thing going on. It's only when you want to do something outside the box, like use a spellpower MH weapon for enhance shaman. Or again back in wrath, when people were talking about armor penetration caps, simming also helped there.
The other thing you'd try a sim on is using a certain ability with different stacks. Like, say as an ele shaman, you want to see what your DPS would be if you hit earth shock at 5 stacks of lightning shield, instead of 6. Or maybe 8 stacks. Or if you are a CP class, using abilities at less than 5 cps. Things like that.
Kevin Feb 4th 2011 8:00PM
Baseball is a game. Football is a game. Lacrosse is a game. Hockey is a game. Basketball is a game. Hell, bowling is a game.
Do you really think that in order to excel at these games you don't have to work for it? Same with WoW, if you don't want to put any work into it, expect to be mediocre and no better.
Pyromelter Feb 5th 2011 1:05AM
Out of all of those games, only 1 (football) requires large quantities of outside-the-field work.
For the rest, even when you are practicing or "working," you are still in essence playing the game. Fielding 100 ground balls is still playing baseball. Shooting 100 jumpers, or doing dribbling drills for 30 minutes, you still have a ball in your hand. Passing drills (lacrosse, hockey, basketball), still part of the game. This is akin in WoW to farming your mats or doing daily quests, or maybe even spending some time working on a dummy. You don't need to study or utilize spreadsheets that utilize calculus to work on your game.
And as a former football player, trust me, there are very few that enjoy off-the-field studying and work. The ones that do enjoy it end up playing professionally, or become superstars. You can tell a guy like Peyton Manning loves football, and enjoys that type of work. But how many quarterbacks get drafted high, and then wash out? Most of them have the talent, but they don't have the drive to go that extra mile.
I think some out-of-game things are worthwhile, like looking up lore on wowpedia, or searching for, say, 2 handed axe upgrades to your main weapon. But those don't require many minutes or possibly hours of study and importing and fiddling with simulation settings.
This is why I advocate for rawr - simple to import, simple to use. Anything beyond that feels like work.
Fingal Feb 4th 2011 8:06PM
Sim-ing is great, but I don't think it should replace BiS lists. (which is what I'm beginning to see in quite a few places)
While item X might not be the best dps increase right now, i would like to know what pieces i should shoot for to get the maximum dps on my toon.
And while yes i could go through all the permutations to find that out, i'm pretty sure someone else already has, so they might as well just post it.
Revynn Feb 4th 2011 8:25PM
You know they generate those BiS lists?
By running sims.
Fingal Feb 5th 2011 2:11PM
I believe i said that..
Rommster Feb 4th 2011 11:02PM
@Deius (and Josh) -
I stand corrected! For some reason, I missed the ENTIRE second page of the article where Josh mentions EnhSimm. However, YOU, Deius, know about Aldriana...she's not mentioned personally in Josh's article. He just mentions "certain awesome individuals". But for those of us who don't know these individuals personally, I was just saying it would be nice to be given a clue where to find them.