Stamina Addendum: Socket Stuffer?

Earlier this week, I made a pretty lengthy post discussing the merits of stamina as a smoothing stat.  One of the common (and expected) criticisms was that I used the usual itemization ratio of 1 haste : 1.5 stamina for the comparisons.  Those results are thus accurate for things like trinkets and socket bonuses, but what many people are interested in is whether they should gem stamina.  And in Mists of Pandaria, gems were tweaked to be more favorable to secondary stats, giving a 2 haste : 1.5 stamina ratio.  That’s a pretty significant swing (basically doubling the haste cost to add 1 stamina), so it would be nice to know how that affects the results.

All of the simulation details and analysis are the same as in the previous post, so I’ll skip the nitty-gritty details – if you’re interested, you can (and should, if you haven’t already) go back and read the first one.

Gear

This time around, we’re going to narrow our view to 5 gear sets.  We’ll keep Control/Haste and Control/Mastery, since those are interesting and serve as useful benchmarks.  Since fewer people care about the avoidance sets, we’ll axe those.  The results don’t change for any of the gear sets we simmed last time anyway, so there’s no point in repeating them.

We’ll look at 3 stamina sets.  C/St1 is the C/StH set from the last post, which trades 4000 haste for 6000 stamina (the 1:1.5 ratio found on trinkets).  C/St2 is a set that uses gem trade ratios (2:1.5), swapping 4000 haste for 3000 stamina.  C/St3 is the same as C/St2, except that we equalize haste and mastery at 4750 just to see if there’s anything to be gained through that synergy.

|    Set: |  C/Ha | C/St1 | C/St2 | C/St3 |  C/Ma |
|     Str | 15000 | 15000 | 15000 | 15000 | 15000 |
|     Sta | 28000 | 34000 | 31000 | 31000 | 28000 |
|   Parry |  1500 |  1500 |  1500 |  1500 |  1500 |
|   Dodge |  1500 |  1500 |  1500 |  1500 |  1500 |
| Mastery |  1500 |  1500 |  1500 |  4750 | 13500 |
|     Hit |  2550 |  2550 |  2550 |  2550 |  2550 |
|     Exp |  5100 |  5100 |  5100 |  5100 |  5100 |
|   Haste | 12000 |  8000 |  8000 |  4750 |     0 |

Data

Again, we’ll run this for 3 different attack sizes: 150k, 250k, and 350k.  The first set is the baby boss (or 10N/LFR boss):

Finisher = SH1, Boss Attack = 150k, data set smooth-10000-48

| Set: |   C/Ha |  C/St1 |  C/St2 |  C/St3 |   C/Ma |
| mean |  0.329 |  0.339 |  0.339 |  0.360 |  0.311 |
|  std |  0.119 |  0.120 |  0.120 |  0.125 |  0.118 |
|   S% |  0.522 |  0.482 |  0.482 |  0.455 |  0.411 |
|   HP |   755k |   876k |   816k |   816k |   755k |
|  nHP |  5.034 |  5.843 |  5.439 |  5.439 |  5.034 |
| ---- |  --- 2 | Attack | Moving | Avg.-- | ------ |
|  10% | 62.748 | 49.850 | 53.108 | 56.912 | 54.227 |
|  20% | 15.187 | 10.243 | 17.256 | 24.057 | 21.396 |
|  30% |  1.569 |  0.002 |  0.050 |  0.868 |  0.834 |
| ---- |  --- 3 | Attack | Moving | Avg.-- | ------ |
|  20% | 43.390 | 38.530 | 45.319 | 55.419 | 47.088 |
|  30% | 16.365 |  4.907 |  7.150 |  8.052 |  9.811 |
|  40% |  0.638 |  0.165 |  0.173 |  1.000 |  2.375 |
| ---- |  --- 4 | Attack | Moving | Avg.-- | ------ |
|  30% | 38.176 | 25.246 | 33.279 | 36.961 | 31.199 |
|  40% |  4.921 |  2.273 |  3.218 | 10.878 |  9.773 |
|  50% |  1.069 |  0.036 |  0.123 |  0.411 |  0.665 |
|  60% |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.009 |  0.001 |
| ---- |  --- 5 | Attack | Moving | Avg.-- | ------ |
|  30% | 60.027 | 49.349 | 56.637 | 60.793 | 55.091 |
|  40% | 24.926 | 16.529 | 20.776 | 31.289 | 24.342 |
|  50% |  6.257 |  1.979 |  3.383 |  4.791 |  3.432 |
|  60% |  0.107 |  0.017 |  0.087 |  0.380 |  0.360 |
|  70% |  0.009 |  0.000 |  0.001 |  0.012 |  0.068 |
| ---- |  --- 6 | Attack | Moving | Avg.-- | ------ |
|  40% | 47.572 | 36.588 | 43.843 | 53.476 | 42.834 |
|  50% | 19.931 |  9.618 | 15.542 | 18.535 | 15.640 |
|  60% |  4.769 |  0.209 |  1.917 |  4.980 |  3.674 |
|  70% |  0.138 |  0.004 |  0.047 |  0.447 |  0.292 |
|  80% |  0.003 |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.001 |  0.000 |
| ---- |  --- 7 | Attack | Moving | Avg.-- | ------ |
|  50% | 38.751 | 24.645 | 33.973 | 40.099 | 33.079 |
|  60% | 16.609 |  3.322 | 10.197 | 16.684 | 12.152 |
|  70% |  2.144 |  0.341 |  1.238 |  3.377 |  1.845 |
|  80% |  0.190 |  0.001 |  0.053 |  0.074 |  0.078 |
|  90% |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.001 |  0.002 |  0.006 |

Stamina certainly does less well with gem trade ratios than it did with trinket ratios, but it’s still far ahead of C/Ha and C/Ma.   It’s still giving at least a factor of 2 or greater reduction in spike representation in the highest categories, and often more than that.  So even with gem trade ratios, stamina is still ahead for small boss swings.

There doesn’t seem to be any gain by shifting to equal amounts of haste and mastery. That said, I think something more subtle is going on here.  In other data sets where I vary the haste->stamina trade more continuously (i.e. in steps of 1000 haste for 1500 or 750 stamina), I see a distinct discontinuity between gear sets with 7000 and 6000 haste.  This leads me to believe that there’s some sort of break point happening in between those values, but I haven’t had time yet to nail down what exactly is causing it.  Thus, I can’t be sure yet whether it’s real or an artifact of the simulation.  The general trend still holds – despite that discontinuity, dropping more haste for stamina continues to reduce spike presence, but there’s always a small loss going from 7000 to 6000.

My best guess is that it’s the result of crossing the ~33% spell haste threshold, which happens in-between those marks.  That would drop the 6-second SS tick interval to 4.5 seconds, which is an integer multiple of our boss swing timer (1.5).  That ensures SS is active for every third boss swing, which is probably a fairly noticeable survivability gain.  This also means that, provided my guess here is correct, we may want to aim for keeping at least 15.44% haste, or around 6562 haste rating (which gives us 33.33% spell haste after raid buffs and SoI).

And before you ask, yes, I plan on publishing those other sim results. I just haven’t had much time to write.  Probably next week-ish, since it will be a short one and not a 6k+ word monstrosity like the last post was.

Onwards to the mama boss (or 10H/25N):

Finisher = SH1, Boss Attack = 250k, data set smooth-10000-49

| Set: |   C/Ha |  C/St1 |  C/St2 |  C/St3 |   C/Ma |
| mean |  0.336 |  0.349 |  0.349 |  0.380 |  0.330 |
|  std |  0.123 |  0.123 |  0.123 |  0.127 |  0.121 |
|   S% |  0.523 |  0.482 |  0.482 |  0.455 |  0.411 |
|   HP |   755k |   876k |   816k |   816k |   755k |
|  nHP |  3.021 |  3.506 |  3.263 |  3.263 |  3.021 |
| ---- |  --- 2 | Attack | Moving | Avg.-- | ------ |
|  20% | 46.599 | 46.814 | 48.464 | 57.298 | 54.530 |
|  30% | 35.868 | 14.918 | 37.019 | 46.591 | 35.377 |
|  40% |  6.855 |  7.971 |  8.031 | 14.958 |  7.169 |
|  50% |  0.018 |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.615 |  0.832 |
|  60% |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.118 |  0.057 |
| ---- |  --- 3 | Attack | Moving | Avg.-- | ------ |
|  30% | 63.002 | 49.433 | 61.058 | 73.028 | 58.701 |
|  40% | 34.228 | 31.659 | 32.583 | 45.229 | 23.134 |
|  50% | 18.947 |  4.995 |  8.538 |  9.924 | 10.781 |
|  60% |  4.140 |  0.571 |  3.294 |  4.391 |  5.532 |
|  70% |  0.284 |  0.034 |  0.037 |  0.958 |  2.515 |
|  80% |  0.003 |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.402 |
| ---- |  --- 4 | Attack | Moving | Avg.-- | ------ |
|  50% | 44.797 | 28.942 | 32.639 | 43.537 | 35.977 |
|  60% | 19.819 |  2.359 | 14.921 | 26.114 | 19.980 |
|  70% |  1.329 |  0.436 |  0.903 | 10.932 |  8.005 |
|  80% |  0.202 |  0.024 |  0.386 |  1.999 |  1.654 |
|  90% |  0.003 |  0.000 |  0.027 |  0.428 |  0.147 |
| 100% |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.019 |  0.023 |
| 110% |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.005 |
| ---- |  --- 5 | Attack | Moving | Avg.-- | ------ |
|  60% | 43.078 | 27.818 | 38.551 | 50.308 | 43.030 |
|  70% | 23.250 | 13.814 | 17.652 | 31.444 | 22.810 |
|  80% | 11.857 |  3.256 |  8.146 | 14.254 |  7.508 |
|  90% |  4.299 |  0.156 |  2.055 |  4.593 |  1.924 |
| 100% |  1.465 |  0.013 |  0.032 |  0.579 |  0.842 |
| 110% |  0.003 |  0.000 |  0.003 |  0.147 |  0.374 |
| 120% |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.015 |  0.095 |
| 130% |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.009 |
| ---- |  --- 6 | Attack | Moving | Avg.-- | ------ |
|  70% | 46.328 | 32.299 | 39.334 | 54.475 | 42.759 |
|  80% | 29.121 | 14.994 | 22.867 | 34.062 | 24.130 |
|  90% | 13.768 |  3.917 | 11.938 | 17.375 | 12.623 |
| 100% |  6.363 |  1.068 |  3.794 |  6.670 |  6.001 |
| 110% |  1.315 |  0.009 |  0.022 |  2.553 |  2.107 |
| 120% |  0.006 |  0.000 |  0.002 |  0.614 |  0.431 |
| 130% |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.015 |  0.032 |
| 140% |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.001 |  0.002 |
| ---- |  --- 7 | Attack | Moving | Avg.-- | ------ |
|  80% | 48.072 | 33.141 | 43.482 | 55.545 | 45.096 |
|  90% | 31.029 | 16.779 | 28.119 | 38.536 | 29.729 |
| 100% | 19.007 |  6.684 | 14.021 | 22.413 | 17.184 |
| 110% |  8.809 |  1.328 |  5.146 | 10.695 |  7.668 |
| 120% |  3.034 |  0.205 |  1.346 |  4.089 |  2.425 |
| 130% |  0.826 |  0.017 |  0.213 |  0.842 |  0.463 |
| 140% |  0.072 |  0.000 |  0.018 |  0.089 |  0.088 |
| 150% |  0.002 |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.016 |  0.034 |
| 160% |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.009 |

Again, we see that C/St2 loses a little ground, but remains way ahead of C/Ha and C/Ma.  C/St3 still brings nothing attractive to the table (and honestly, based on the SS guess, likely never will – a better comparison might be a set that maintains 6562 haste and shifts the rest into mastery).

Finally, the papa boss (25H):

Finisher = SH1, Boss Attack = 350k, data set smooth-10000-50

| Set: |   C/Ha |  C/St1 |  C/St2 |  C/St3 |   C/Ma |
| mean |  0.347 |  0.359 |  0.360 |  0.361 |  0.340 |
|  std |  0.124 |  0.124 |  0.124 |  0.121 |  0.121 |
|   S% |  0.522 |  0.482 |  0.483 |  0.455 |  0.410 |
|   HP |   755k |   876k |   816k |   816k |   755k |
|  nHP |  2.158 |  2.504 |  2.331 |  2.331 |  2.158 |
| ---- |  --- 2 | Attack | Moving | Avg.-- | ------ |
|  30% | 46.649 | 46.804 | 48.485 | 53.357 | 54.784 |
|  40% | 40.467 | 32.002 | 38.552 | 40.765 | 41.178 |
|  50% | 12.476 |  8.093 | 14.797 | 18.589 | 22.078 |
|  60% |  6.717 |  7.785 |  8.067 |  7.577 |  6.567 |
|  70% |  6.428 |  0.001 |  0.000 |  0.009 |  5.921 |
|  80% |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.407 |
|  90% |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.002 |
| ---- |  --- 3 | Attack | Moving | Avg.-- | ------ |
|  50% | 46.591 | 37.575 | 41.153 | 47.030 | 48.599 |
|  60% | 30.707 | 26.953 | 32.580 | 27.925 | 22.117 |
|  70% | 23.178 |  7.278 |  9.083 |  9.370 | 17.159 |
|  80% |  7.126 |  3.268 |  5.084 |  4.934 |  8.000 |
|  90% |  3.279 |  0.040 |  0.622 |  1.625 |  3.578 |
| 100% |  0.294 |  0.040 |  0.043 |  0.334 |  2.596 |
| 110% |  0.005 |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.490 |
| ---- |  --- 4 | Attack | Moving | Avg.-- | ------ |
|  70% | 48.670 | 30.956 | 38.988 | 38.537 | 40.912 |
|  80% | 28.311 | 15.312 | 23.233 | 26.174 | 26.497 |
|  90% | 19.385 |  2.036 | 13.008 |  7.109 | 15.855 |
| 100% |  1.456 |  0.477 |  0.882 |  3.620 |  8.229 |
| 110% |  0.349 |  0.031 |  0.413 |  1.037 |  3.533 |
| 120% |  0.164 |  0.028 |  0.030 |  0.164 |  1.104 |
| 130% |  0.003 |  0.000 |  0.030 |  0.086 |  0.106 |
| 140% |  0.002 |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.073 |
| 150% |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.004 |
| ---- |  --- 5 | Attack | Moving | Avg.-- | ------ |
|  80% | 50.821 | 40.924 | 47.852 | 50.591 | 49.889 |
|  90% | 40.712 | 21.826 | 33.670 | 29.017 | 39.184 |
| 100% | 24.706 | 13.841 | 19.906 | 20.333 | 23.498 |
| 110% | 13.498 |  5.529 | 11.756 | 10.496 | 13.020 |
| 120% |  8.299 |  2.016 |  5.130 |  4.226 |  6.211 |
| 130% |  4.082 |  0.163 |  1.953 |  0.763 |  1.716 |
| 140% |  1.598 |  0.016 |  0.150 |  0.212 |  0.966 |
| 150% |  0.066 |  0.000 |  0.016 |  0.096 |  0.482 |
| 160% |  0.002 |  0.000 |  0.003 |  0.044 |  0.145 |
| 170% |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.002 |  0.106 |
| 180% |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.015 |
| ---- |  --- 6 | Attack | Moving | Avg.-- | ------ |
|  90% | 60.500 | 45.595 | 55.896 | 53.459 | 58.681 |
| 100% | 47.955 | 32.775 | 43.062 | 43.073 | 44.017 |
| 110% | 34.445 | 17.777 | 31.428 | 27.991 | 30.624 |
| 120% | 22.786 | 11.846 | 16.208 | 16.874 | 20.351 |
| 130% | 13.073 |  3.916 | 10.200 |  8.754 | 11.842 |
| 140% |  9.106 |  1.095 |  3.933 |  3.185 |  6.593 |
| 150% |  2.744 |  0.019 |  1.114 |  1.718 |  3.961 |
| 160% |  1.236 |  0.003 |  0.012 |  0.259 |  1.240 |
| 170% |  0.006 |  0.001 |  0.002 |  0.028 |  0.471 |
| 180% |  0.001 |  0.001 |  0.002 |  0.010 |  0.135 |
| 190% |  0.001 |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.000 |  0.024 |
| ---- |  --- 7 | Attack | Moving | Avg.-- | ------ |
| 110% | 54.338 | 38.252 | 50.338 | 50.335 | 51.903 |
| 120% | 42.523 | 28.300 | 35.667 | 36.260 | 39.804 |
| 130% | 30.438 | 15.656 | 26.514 | 25.422 | 28.936 |
| 140% | 23.351 |  8.838 | 15.502 | 13.769 | 18.752 |
| 150% | 14.246 |  2.722 |  8.881 |  7.946 | 12.727 |
| 160% |  7.375 |  1.291 |  3.706 |  3.511 |  6.470 |
| 170% |  3.716 |  0.217 |  1.357 |  1.322 |  2.623 |
| 180% |  1.325 |  0.020 |  0.221 |  0.585 |  1.087 |
| 190% |  0.413 |  0.002 |  0.032 |  0.102 |  0.380 |
| 200% |  0.077 |  0.001 |  0.001 |  0.006 |  0.095 |

Nothing surprising here.  Stamina still dominates, even at gem trading ratios.

Conclusions

So, as expected, stamina maintains its lead even when you halve its itemization ratio.  The reason this wasn’t a surprise is the sheer size of the advantage stamina held in the last sim.  It was about an order of magnitude better than haste in most cases, and that means that we’d need to crank the itemization ratio down by a factor of almost 10 to see haste compete.  A factor of 2 just isn’t going to cut it.

Nonetheless, it should be clear that if you’re shifting itemization into stamina from something else, you want to do it in the most efficient way possible. First, start with trinkets, since you get a 1.5:1 stamina:secondary trade on those.  Unfortunately, this tier only has one stamina trinket, so we’re actually stuck making a less efficient trade, often trading ~1500 secondary stats for ~1600-1700 stamina from a lower-ilvl trinket.  That’s still a 1:1 trade though, which is better than the 0.75:1 trade you get from gems.  Trinkets are also the easiest thing to swap out, which makes it convenient to switch to haste trinkets for a farm boss or for DPS parsing.

Enchants and what not are sort of variable – they don’t always use consistent ratios.  For example, you can get 170 haste from Enchant Gloves – Greater Haste, but only 150 stamina from a Sha Armor Kit.  On boots the armor kit competes with the 175 haste from Enchant Boots – Greater Haste or 140 Mastery from Enchant Boots – Pandaren’s Step.  In both cases, I think the armor kit is the better survivability choice, and the ratio is still better than sacrificing haste gems for stamina.  You’ll have to handle these on a case-by-case basis.

Gems should be your last place to give up haste (or conversely, the first place to start shedding stamina for more haste).  They give you the most efficient trade, which is good since you’ll already probably want to use some haste or haste/stam gems to pick up socket bonuses anyway.  It’s worth noting that socket bonuses can skew the results in either direction, depending on what you’re gaining or giving up.  For example, going from a haste/stam gem to a stam gem in a yellow socket that has a 60 haste bonus attached to it will be a steeper loss than normal (240 haste for 120 stam, or 2:1).  A similar trade with a 90 stamina socket bonus is even worse (160 haste for 30 stam, or 5.33:1).  But going from a haste gem to a haste/stam gem in a blue socket with any bonus is going to be a very efficient trade (160 haste for 210 stam, or 100 haste for 120 stam).  So when socket bonuses are involved, you’ll have to evaluate the net loss or gain according to the rest of your gear (this is where tools like AskMrRobot come in handy, since they do the math for you).

In previous expansions, I maintained a table listing all of the potential stamina-to-secondary-stat trade ratios for each potential swap, including socket bonuses and what not.  I haven’t gotten around to doing that this expansion, and time spent doing that is time not spent working on sims, so I probably won’t bother.  However, it’s not a particularly difficult mathematical task, so it might be a good project for someone who’s got more free time on their hands.  If someone does decide to put that together, I’d be happy to link to it to spread the word, or even host it here on the blog (maybe a mini guest post?).

But generally speaking, that’s the order you’ll use to make your stamina-to-haste or haste-to-stamina trades.  When going from haste to stamina, swap trinkets before enchants before gems; when going from stamina to haste, swap gems before enchants before trinkets.

This entry was posted in Tanking, Theck's Pounding Headaches, Theorycrafting and tagged , , , , , , , , , , , . Bookmark the permalink.

9 Responses to Stamina Addendum: Socket Stuffer?

  1. Astur says:

    Really nice read, confirms what was already expected, but at least there is visible data for gemming now, so there is nothing to hide behind.

  2. Wrathblood says:

    Wait a sec, what’s going on with C/St3? Its the same as C/St2, just with a few K haste moved into Mastery, right? Back in Sacred Bleu, didn’t shifting from C/H to C/HM result in a ~5% decrease in damage taken along with a modest but noticeable improvement in spike reduction? Here, it feels like the opposite is happening.

    There’s are fewer itemization points going around, but it seems odd that mixing in some Mastery results in an increase in damage taken and a modest but noticeable increase in spikes taken. You mention the discontinuous valuation of Haste vs Stam, perhaps the same thing is going on here since Haste is still over 6k in the Sacred Bleu one.

    • Theck says:

      Yeah, the increase in damage taken is really strange. I’d expect the spike increase to be caused by the Sacred Shield breakpoint, but I wouldn’t have expected a large change in damage taken. I’m hoping that the more detailed haste->mastery and haste->stamina sims will give us a clue what’s happening there.

  3. tailias says:

    Question for you Theck: Since you’re sticking with Stamina trinkets as your typical defaults, are you planning on using the Lei Shen one?

    These are pretty much our options for Stamina trinkets this expansion: http://www.wowhead.com/items=4.-4?filter=qu=4;cr=22:166;crs=1:5;crv=0:0 (to my knowledge, the heroic version of Jade Warlord is a datamined item that does not exist in-game, and the PvP trinkets only are on the list because wowhead is silly and views a temporary “max health” Battlemaster’s on-use as Stamina).

    Soul Barrier blatantly has a very weak on-use effect compared to last tier’s Stamina trinkets… even the i541 *Heroic Thunderforged* version merely shaves 13376 physical damage off of the next 5 physical attacks – I realize they have entirely different mechanics, but one can’t help but compare it directly to last expansion’s Stay of Execution from Fireland’s rep and wonder what’s going on. But on the other hand when you start getting to the better versions of it… that is a huge stamina boost. I can’t see myself using it as a sole Stamina trinket, not when using one version of Lao-Chin’s/Jade Warlord would have a such a fantastic interaction with Holy Avenger (that 3595 to 3873 Mastery, depending on upgrade level, is drastically multiplied when you’re timing it with HA), but what about the other trinket slot if you’re using two?

    • Theck says:

      Current plan is to use Soul Barrier and a 2/2 upgraded Lao-Chin’s to abuse the mastery proc’s interaction with Holy Avenger. Soul Barrier’s on-use is weak, but it’s still 65k damage absorbed on-demand, just spread out over 5 attacks. I like Fortitude of the Zandalari’s on-use as well, so I could see myself swapping the Lao-Chin out for that (reforged to haste) or the haste DPS trinket if I feel like I can give up the stamina.

      • jsantana says:

        Is the 1.5/1 stamina/haste ratio focus on 25m > 10m? I do recall a 1.3/1 ratio of stamina/haste being a good balance for 10m normal since the hits are lighter than 25m, but 10m heroic would you still prefer a 1.5/1 over 1.3/1?

        • Theck says:

          If you’re talking about the AskMrRobot stat weights, then I think that the 1.5 valuation on Stamina is probably the best survivability choice in all formats. However, since bosses hit more weakly on 10N (and probably 10H as well), the marginal survivability gain of that extra Stamina is often less useful than stacking more haste for DPS. Setting the weight to 1.3 will be a slight survivability trade-off for more DPS.

      • bryjoered says:

        Fort of Zandalari’s on-use is definitely useful, especially for those last couple heads on magaera when they are hitting like trucks or for directly following a quake stomp with the vampiric bats on you. I don’t have soul barrier so I’m basically sacrificing 25k health for 10 percent mastery and while I’m a big stamina guy I don’t think the trade off is that drastic especially with that great on-use to be honest.

  4. Bram says:

    Lovely! I read it already on weekend but had no time to reply. It is very surprising to see the new finding!

    I was looking extra on the old C/HM set definition and it had 6750 Haste and Mastery, thus being over the possible Haste soft cap. Should it be the case, it is definitely interesting question if the C/St4 set with soft cap on Haste and the rest into Mastery is not the optimal way to go. I hope AskMrRobot-guys will add Spell Haste soft caping into their paladin protection engine in that case.

Leave a Reply