I couldn't find it anywhere, so I ask you guys - what EXACTLY is the chance of OoC procing on hit?
I mainly hope to receive verified data from a trustable source, but any useful comments from your experience would be cool as well (like 'From how I saw it work, it seemed like x% or so to me').
respect.
·Theme
- Forums
- World of Warcraft
- Class Discussion
- Omen of Clarity clarification
Omen of Clarity clarificationFollow
It's completely random to my knowledge. I've had it proc twice in a row, or never, on a pull.
Edited, May 10th 2007 2:54pm by Mazra
Edited, May 10th 2007 2:54pm by Mazra
Please "talk up" if your comprehension white-shifts. I will use simple-happy language-words to help you understand.
Good catch I was looking for it just now. I prolly never would have thought to look in the clearcasting section tho.
It's good enough to make it worth the 1 talent point it costs thats for damn sure.
Quote:
It's completely random to my knowledge. I've had it proc twice in a row, or never, on a pull.
Say, if something has a x% chance to occur, but that x is a random number between 1-100 that changes randomly before every hit, the probability of the mysterious thing occuring is... 50%.
As a last resort, the Probability Calculus places an alternative, statistical definition of probability, which says that
probability = number of occurances/ number of attempts
That's why I asked for your experience with OoC - to empirically determine the chance ;].
Enough ******** on my part.
Thanks for the info, responds and for finding the wowwiki link. That's the verified info I was looking for.
Respect.
It's more a Poisson distribution. (copied from the wiki, I've been out of stats too long to do the formula from memory)
The probability that there are exactly k occurrences (k being a non-negative integer, k = 0, 1, 2, ...) is
f(k,\lambda)=\frac{e^{-\lambda} \lambda^k}{k!},\,\!
where
* e is the base of the natural logarithm (e = 2.71828...),
* k is the number of occurrences of an event - the probability of which is given by the function,
* k! is the factorial of k,
* λ is a positive real number, equal to the expected number of occurrences that occur during the given interval. For instance, if the events occur on average every 4 minutes, and you are interested in the number of events occurring in a 10 minute interval, you would use as model a Poisson distribution with λ = 10/4 = 2.5.
In your binomial distribution, you are assuming a black/white outcome, and that it will follow a consistent occ/chance ratio. It doesn't. You don't really have a 10% of getting OoC to proc on each swing, there are more factors than that.
Run the numbers if it makes you happy. It makes me happy, as you can tell. :) All the numbers will tell is what Maeliya said:
Regards,
"Manza" Ohio State University graduate student in the Program of Bio-statistics and Bio-metrics, class of 1998.
- I dropped out because I couldn't stand the ethical reality that statisticians get paid to tell the public something that is "probable" (or improbable) is "the truth".
The probability that there are exactly k occurrences (k being a non-negative integer, k = 0, 1, 2, ...) is
f(k,\lambda)=\frac{e^{-\lambda} \lambda^k}{k!},\,\!
where
* e is the base of the natural logarithm (e = 2.71828...),
* k is the number of occurrences of an event - the probability of which is given by the function,
* k! is the factorial of k,
* λ is a positive real number, equal to the expected number of occurrences that occur during the given interval. For instance, if the events occur on average every 4 minutes, and you are interested in the number of events occurring in a 10 minute interval, you would use as model a Poisson distribution with λ = 10/4 = 2.5.
In your binomial distribution, you are assuming a black/white outcome, and that it will follow a consistent occ/chance ratio. It doesn't. You don't really have a 10% of getting OoC to proc on each swing, there are more factors than that.
Run the numbers if it makes you happy. It makes me happy, as you can tell. :) All the numbers will tell is what Maeliya said:
Quote:
It's good enough to make it worth the 1 talent point it costs thats for damn sure.
Regards,
"Manza" Ohio State University graduate student in the Program of Bio-statistics and Bio-metrics, class of 1998.
- I dropped out because I couldn't stand the ethical reality that statisticians get paid to tell the public something that is "probable" (or improbable) is "the truth".
I declare that Wowwiki Clearcasting article hornswoggle. It looks to me as if whoever wrote that simply took the mage's maximum 10% per spellcast chance and decided on the basis of the little demon whispering in his ear to write that druids get the same chance per melee attack.
This contradicts the explanations offered elsewhere that its proc rate works like certain weapon enchantments, such as Crusader, which are normalized to occur per unit of time, not per attack. Attacking continuously in cat form with greater than one attack (including special moves) per second, attacking continuously in bear form with one normal attack per 2.5 sec, and attacking continuously in caster form with a 3.5s staff should all yield the same number of Clearcasts per unit of time.
If somebody can find a well-documented source explaining otherwise, I would like to see it. Wowwiki, for all its benefits, is not entirely trustworthy or authoritative.
So the answer to the original poster's question about OoC's exact chance to proc on hit is that it does not have a constant chance per hit. It has a chance that depends on one's attack speed for that hit.
This contradicts the explanations offered elsewhere that its proc rate works like certain weapon enchantments, such as Crusader, which are normalized to occur per unit of time, not per attack. Attacking continuously in cat form with greater than one attack (including special moves) per second, attacking continuously in bear form with one normal attack per 2.5 sec, and attacking continuously in caster form with a 3.5s staff should all yield the same number of Clearcasts per unit of time.
If somebody can find a well-documented source explaining otherwise, I would like to see it. Wowwiki, for all its benefits, is not entirely trustworthy or authoritative.
So the answer to the original poster's question about OoC's exact chance to proc on hit is that it does not have a constant chance per hit. It has a chance that depends on one's attack speed for that hit.
look it goes off often, very OFTEN. you will not be disapointed, sometimes I'll be super lucky and it goes off 3 times in a single fight. Sometimes it won't go off for like 3 min but when it does you know it!
I'd say through my experience it goes off rougly though at about a rate of 1 time for every 10-20 swings of a paw. I don't know though could be more seems to go off every time a I do a pounce > mangle > shred and I'm doing FB for free so it's nice. Or it goes off during FB and my next heal or pounce is free. Just get it see how you like it, you won't be disapointed.
I'd say through my experience it goes off rougly though at about a rate of 1 time for every 10-20 swings of a paw. I don't know though could be more seems to go off every time a I do a pounce > mangle > shred and I'm doing FB for free so it's nice. Or it goes off during FB and my next heal or pounce is free. Just get it see how you like it, you won't be disapointed.
XanNerull wrote:
Quote:
It's completely random to my knowledge. I've had it proc twice in a row, or never, on a pull.
Well, my guess is that the proc rate is something like 10% on hit, in Bear form, and 5% or less in Cat form. On average, but it's well worth it. I had it proc twice on one target today and ended up with a DPS of way over 1,000, because I did a Ravage, Shred, Shred, Mangle and Ferocious Bite, all crits.
Once in a blue moon experience, but damn it felt good. Especially since the target was this level 69 (I'm 66) Paladin who had been bugging me the entire day.
Please "talk up" if your comprehension white-shifts. I will use simple-happy language-words to help you understand.
It's nice that you remind me of what I'm carefully calculating every Monday recently and put it in correct English, the latter I wouldn't actually manage yet. My English ain't that 'pro' so far, as I'm a Pole.
Anyway, to speak of probability, we must choose a model, right? I assumed the chance is on hit and doesn't scale with any external factors, as the spell description says 'chance on hit'.
If it scales with time, then you're right, Poisson distribution (or one of the other ones used in probability) may be correct.
All in all, be it bullsh*t or not, since I/you/we/they don't seem to know what REALLY makes OoC proc when it does, the only respectable way of telling how often it does is by experience.
5% in cat, 10% in bear. Sort of kinda like that huh?
Well, I'm fine with that anyway.
Thanks for replying.
Edited, May 10th 2007 7:09pm by XanNerull
Anyway, to speak of probability, we must choose a model, right? I assumed the chance is on hit and doesn't scale with any external factors, as the spell description says 'chance on hit'.
If it scales with time, then you're right, Poisson distribution (or one of the other ones used in probability) may be correct.
All in all, be it bullsh*t or not, since I/you/we/they don't seem to know what REALLY makes OoC proc when it does, the only respectable way of telling how often it does is by experience.
5% in cat, 10% in bear. Sort of kinda like that huh?
Well, I'm fine with that anyway.
Thanks for replying.
Edited, May 10th 2007 7:09pm by XanNerull
Quote:
With the talent (mages must upgrade fully, it's one point for Shaman or Druids, but deeper in their trees), the Mage or Shaman will have a 10% chance to activate Clearcasting on each damage spell, and a Druid will have a 10% chance with each hit of her weapon with the Omen of Clarity buff up. This happens quite frequently, especially in groups when the caster can safely favor rapid-fire spells (such as Scorch for a mage) or fast-swinging weapons. Ideally, when Clearcasting activates, the caster will then use a more mana intensive spell to fully exploit the benefit of the talent.
From the link Scholar Norellicus put up...
I never said it was accurate, just provided what information we have.
Personally I don't really care; the buff is always on either way, and when it goes off, great.
Personally I don't really care; the buff is always on either way, and when it goes off, great.
doesn't it say right in the tool tip chance on hit to proc?
Heh, yea, circle closed.
It does say chance on hit.
The wowwiki does say it's 10%.
Experienced users of the OoC, however, claim that OoC doesn't really carry the 10% chance to proc on hit. This does not stay in conflict with the tooltip, as the tooltip doesn't say what chance it is or even that it is a constant value. What's more, tooltips of some abilities that carry a constant chance of procing do carry a number (x%). The fact that OoC's tooltip does not kind of supports the 10%-is-bullsh*t theory.
The votaries of the chance not being 10% or even not being constant claim ipso facto that wowwiki is wrong, leaving the thread open to all sorts of assumtpions.
I never thought of leaving OoC out of my feral build, I just wondered what the chance was.
Edited, May 11th 2007 11:33am by XanNerull
It does say chance on hit.
The wowwiki does say it's 10%.
Experienced users of the OoC, however, claim that OoC doesn't really carry the 10% chance to proc on hit. This does not stay in conflict with the tooltip, as the tooltip doesn't say what chance it is or even that it is a constant value. What's more, tooltips of some abilities that carry a constant chance of procing do carry a number (x%). The fact that OoC's tooltip does not kind of supports the 10%-is-bullsh*t theory.
The votaries of the chance not being 10% or even not being constant claim ipso facto that wowwiki is wrong, leaving the thread open to all sorts of assumtpions.
I never thought of leaving OoC out of my feral build, I just wondered what the chance was.
Edited, May 11th 2007 11:33am by XanNerull
It'd be pretty easy to test if someone grabs ProcWatch and wants to spend some time verifying it. I've heard anything from 2-3 PPM, though.
Just consider it like Nightfall. It isn't worth it when it doesn't procc when you need it, but when it proccs three times in a row right in the face of that pesky Rogue... Well, you couldn't think of a better place to put those talent points. Or in this case, 1 talent point.
My rule of thumb: it will proc once per fight, at a random point, against a same lvl regular mob.
Assuming a fight against a same lvl mob in cat form is about 20 seconds (that would be my guess but it might be more like 30 seconds, not sure), and given that a cat attack speed is 1 attack per second, I'd say around 5% is a good estimate.
Assuming a fight against a same lvl mob in cat form is about 20 seconds (that would be my guess but it might be more like 30 seconds, not sure), and given that a cat attack speed is 1 attack per second, I'd say around 5% is a good estimate.
GoedelOnNathrezim wrote:
This contradicts the explanations offered elsewhere that its proc rate works like certain weapon enchantments, such as Crusader, which are normalized to occur per unit of time, not per attack. Attacking continuously in cat form with greater than one attack (including special moves) per second, attacking continuously in bear form with one normal attack per 2.5 sec, and attacking continuously in caster form with a 3.5s staff should all yield the same number of Clearcasts per unit of time.
So the answer to the original poster's question about OoC's exact chance to proc on hit is that it does not have a constant chance per hit. It has a chance that depends on one's attack speed for that hit.
While your statement is correct in some respects, it is misleading. Weapon procs that are based on a PPM formula do not say "Oh, he already procced 3 times, it can't happen again" or "He's using extra special attacks, I need to reduce the proc chance". What they do is look at the procs per minute, look at the weapon speed (unknown if haste effects are taken into account), and figure out a chance per swing for that weapon speed that will average out to the correct PPM.
Example: If they worked in cat form: 3 PPM = 3 procs, per 60 attacks (1.0 attack speed), means on average 20 attacks per proc, means a 5% proc chance per hit. Now, it might actually proc not at all in that minute, it might proc 9 times in that minute, it's the average that's set.
Bear form: 3 procs per 60 seconds, 2.5 seconds per swing, 3 procs per 24 swings, 8 attacks per proc average, 12.5% proc chance per swing. Might have 0 procs in a minute, might have 9, on average will be 3.
If I'm using special attacks in cat form, those get the 5% proc chance. If I'm using swipe in bear form, each hit from swipe would have the 12.5% proc chance, for a total 33% chance per swipe of 3 mobs (anyone else notice it procs easily on swiping 3 mobs?).
Note: These numbers are IF it were a 3 procs per minute chance. I do not know what it actually is (actually, the numbers for 3 ppm don't sound all that far off from experience...well, maybe the swipe number seems a bit high...)
I didn't think my post implied any non-randomness in the proc, which I consistently described as having a chance per unit of time, translated into a chance per attack based on the attack speed. Of course one should not infer from that that the proc does something like saying "he already proc'd, so he can't again now", but if you did, I suppose others might as well.
I am honestly befuddled at how much discussion there seems to be about randomness. Each attack has a chance to proc that depends on the speed of that attack. Over a sufficiently large sample, one will see a number of procs depending only on the amount of time attacking. Because the exact distribution is random, in any finite sample one might see two, three, or more in a row, and there may be long periods without any. There are no contradictions here.
I am honestly befuddled at how much discussion there seems to be about randomness. Each attack has a chance to proc that depends on the speed of that attack. Over a sufficiently large sample, one will see a number of procs depending only on the amount of time attacking. Because the exact distribution is random, in any finite sample one might see two, three, or more in a row, and there may be long periods without any. There are no contradictions here.
Wow with so many insightfull scholars WoW could actually become a sience.
Now wouldnt that be funny.
Now wouldnt that be funny.
Icebabie wrote:
Wow with so many insightfull scholars WoW could actually become a sience.
Now wouldnt that be funny.
Now wouldnt that be funny.
Isn't it already? Checked the Oboards lately? The numbercrunching going on there is making my head hurt. Takes all the fun out of WoW in my humble opinion.
It's been happening on the D&D forums for years now, this is just a differant style of science. :)
Especially considering that not every skill has exact numbers to crunch. Nightfall, Omen of Clarity, and other proccs are argued over by all kinds of very intelligent people. Resulting in nothing but confused commoners like me.
What I like, though, is how often the conclusion to such discussions is that it doesn't much matter which one of several options one picks, and the "correct" choice is whichever a particular player prefers in style. (Sometimes this is used as a cop-out when it's not really true, but it often is.) Evaluating all these possibilities in such detail helps lead to such situations. I believe, for instance, that many classes now have three attractive and comparably viable talent trees, just resulting in more possbilities for variation. And variation means fun.
I didn't mean to host an argument. Didn't count on anyone actually debating on the thing.
Just wanted an answer. ;d
Just wanted an answer. ;d
Recent Visitors: 75
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (75)
- Forums
- World of Warcraft
- Class Discussion
- Omen of Clarity clarification
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC