Mage Haste Rating

Report issues and ask questions here that need to be answered.
Post Reply
petaar
Posts: 4

Mage Haste Rating

Post by petaar »

One of GM's told me to post some proof here for this haste problem. How is it possible to have the same casting time for my Frostbolt with 187 and 242 haste rating. Here are some pictures that i uploaded. (http://postimg.org/image/dwp8wv0bj) (http://postimg.org/image/ju2kwahwj/)
Image
Image
User avatar
Bucovsky
MVP
MVP
Posts: 650

Re: Mage Haste Rating

Post by Bucovsky »

I recommend using Imgur to upload your photos.

EDIT.

It appears to be the same for me:

Image

Image

However, according to the spell tooltip there is a difference: 2.14 vs 2.07

Addon shows it as 2.1 in both cases because in the first case 4 is lower than 5 so it shows it just as 2.1 and in the second case 7 is higher than 5 so the number is closer to 2.1 than 2.0
User avatar
Exsurgo
Game Master
Game Master
Posts: 558

Re: Mage Haste Rating

Post by Exsurgo »

I do believe this is due to Quartz not being super accurate while reporting cast times (it does a bit of rounding).

I tested with your two haste values using pyroblast and the difference according to quartz was 5.0 vs 5.1.

Note I did test multiple spells with a stopwatch and the values seem to match the tooltips :)
Feel free to test/confirm, a few extra sets of eyes never goes amiss.
Retired Developer.
petaar
Posts: 4

Re: Mage Haste Rating

Post by petaar »

Yes i know what you want to say, but with 242 haste rating am i not suppose to cast frostbolt something between 1,7 to 1,9 seconds? Because it isnt logic to cast the same time with 100 and 200 haste rating. Then it wouldn't be haste rating in the game included. Im totally mind-fucked.
User avatar
Exsurgo
Game Master
Game Master
Posts: 558

Re: Mage Haste Rating

Post by Exsurgo »

With ~ 243 haste rating, and 5 points in improved frostbolt, your frostbolt cast should be ~2.16 seconds. Pretty sure the issue here is the Quartz casting bar you are using is not that precise with it's readings.
Retired Developer.
petaar
Posts: 4

Re: Mage Haste Rating

Post by petaar »

Please explain it more simple i didn't understand a word you said to be honest.
User avatar
Exsurgo
Game Master
Game Master
Posts: 558

Re: Mage Haste Rating

Post by Exsurgo »

I can talk you through the formulas if it helps.

Assuming Improved Frostbolt, which has a base 2.5s cast time.

First to get your spell haste percentage plug values into formula 1:

Spell Haste % = (Total Spell Haste Rating / 15.7) / 100

which in our case gives us:

(243/15.7)/100 = 0.1547

which is roughly 15% spell haste as reported in game by the tooltips.


To get the final time of a improved frostbolt, we plug the above value into formula number 2:

New cast time = Current cast time / (1 + spell haste %)

with out values, this gives us:

2.5 / (1 + 0.1547) = 2.165s, the final cast time of our frostbolt.

That is the maths covered, and it is what the in-game tooltips display.

Quartz seems to round the numbers quite a lot.

It looks like it is rounding a 242 spell haste frostbolt to 2.1 seconds, and also a 330 spell haste frostbolt to 2.1 (which is really 2.06 seconds in-game).

Quartz seems rounding 2.165 and also 2.06 seconds to 2.1.


With issues like this, it's always best to pick the longest cast time spell possible. The reason for this is it amplifies the differences that the game reads out to us, hence why quartz gives us two different readings with 242 haste vs 331 but with frostbolt it does not.
Retired Developer.
petaar
Posts: 4

Re: Mage Haste Rating

Post by petaar »

Yes, with mathematics you are right. Now I get it. Maybe the whole problem was that i didn't calculated like this and it was a rough calculate by myself that if with 188 haste is 2,2 sec and with 242 it would be something like 1,8 and 1,9 sec. Thank you anyway for your time. Have a nice day.
User avatar
Exsurgo
Game Master
Game Master
Posts: 558

Re: Mage Haste Rating

Post by Exsurgo »

Np. Have a good evening :)
Retired Developer.
Post Reply

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest