This is the talk page for discussing improvements to the Combat rating system article.  


Existing/old items Edit
Will items in WoW already be converted to this system? —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Iamdeadfish (talk • contr).
 Yes, any item with a "% to hit/crit/dodge/etc" type statistic will be converted to the corresponding rating. Karrion 21:06, 24 October 2006 (EDT)
Hit Avoidance rating? Edit
http://www.thottbot.com/?i=58018
I found this item in the auction house. The item tooltip matches the screenshot, which says "Improves Hit Avoidance Rating by 14".
What the hell is hit avoidance rating?
Chrazriit 17:26, 1 February 2007 (EST)
 Chance for enemies to get a miss on you, I expect; basically a negative hit rating for your opponents. There are a few talents that do this in a percentage based way, so I wouldn't be surprised if it's the same functionality. Esselte 01:37, 12 February 2007 (EST)
 The Necklace of Trophies was the only item in the game with a "Hit Avoidance Rating". As of the patch 2 weeks ago, the description has been changed to "Hit Rating".
 Tracer 19:46, 20 March 2007 (EDT)
Rating Question Edit
Quote from the article  "Unlike fixed percentages such as 2% critical strike chance, combat ratings diminish in potency as your character increases in level. 2% crit is the same at every level, while 28 critical strike rating grants 4% crit at level 34, 2% crit at level 60, and 1.27% crit at level 70. This allows Blizzard the ability to create and add new and better items to the world without eventually reaching a point where every character has a 100% chance to critically strike."
Does this really work like it sounds or is it really that a 28 critical rating gives 4% to crit against a level 34 opponent (2 vs 60 and 1.27 vs 70) or does this mean that if I have a level 34 character with a 28 rating and a level 70 character with a 28 rating attacking a 34th level mob that the 34th level character has 314% times the crit chance of the level 70 character (4 vs 1.27)? Or, since both have a 28 rating, do they both have a 4% chance? Dga 16:31, 3 November 2006 (EST)
 It really works like it sounds: a level 34 character will get 4% crit from 28 crit rating, a level 60 character 2%, and a level 70 character 1.27%. The level of the mob is not a factor in the calculation. Karrion 07:33, 4 November 2006 (EST)
 So if you level while out and about killing stuff, you will become less effective as you gain levels, until you put on new gear? Or does a character gain some of these ratings as a part of leveling (like stats). Dga 09:29, 9 November 2006 (EST)
 Has anybody actually tested this? It makes more sense if ratings will come into effect based on your opponent's level. Look at how armor works: a 60 with 15k armor will have their character sheet list 72% damage reduction and a 70 with 15k armor will have their character sheet show 59%, but if they are both attacked by level 60 mobs they'll both have 72% damage reduction and if they're both attacked by a 70 they'll both have 59%. The character sheet only gives information about fighting equallevel mobs. It would be unreasonable for a 60 to be more effective than a 70 who has identical skills and gear if they're both fighting a 60 mob.
 To back this up a little more... a 70 Prot Warrior with a 284 defense rating has a listed defense skill of 490 (including the +20 defense skill from talents); this should make them immune to crits from a mob with 365 (bosslevel) weapon skill, but I've seen statistics mentioned that show bosses still have slightly more than 0.1% crit chance against them. Some have declared this to be a minimum crit chance, but what if it's actually the case that 284 defense rating scales according to the enemy's level and only ends up adding 115 defense skill instead of 120? 485 defense skill leaves a crit chance of 0.2% from a mob with 365 weapon skill and the crits slipping through suddenly make sense. I'd like to see some stats from a warrior with a defense rating of 295 (comes out at 494 defense skill at level 70 and 490 at 73) and see if they get critted by bosses. Teaspoon 11:58, 10 July 2007 (UTC)
FormulaEdit
Looking at the values stored in the client, I'm getting the following formula for ratings, which are the same as Rating Buster (why didn't I notice Rating Buster before now?).
I'm getting an error margin of around 10^7, when comparing the values stored in the client to those from the formula, which I contribute to the data precision of the 32bit floating point number, which the numbers are stored in.
Level 1 to 60 (level 19 uses level=10):
base * ((1 / 52) * level  (8 / 52))
Level 60 to 70:
base / ((262 / 82)  (3 / 82) * level)
Level 70 to 100:
base * ((1 / 52) * level + (12 / 52))
Where base is the rating value at level 60:
Weapon skill: 2.5 Haste: 10 Hit (melee): 10 Hit (spells): 8 Crit (melee and spells): 14 Defense: 1.5 Dodge: 12 Parry: 20 Block: 5 Resilience: 25
Maldivia 07:31, 9 November 2006 (EST)
(L  1)/(70  1) ??? Edit
Why don't you just say (L  1)/69??
Gparent 17:20, 8 December 2006 (EST)
Mundocani's formula replaced Edit
Replaced Mundocani's (L1)/69 formula with the Rating Buster formula. Mundocani's formula is at best an untested wild guess, while Rating Buster's formula has been extensively tested with actual in game values for all levels except 68 and 69. A simple proof that Mundocani's formula is wrong can come from the observation that all Level 70 requirement is exactly 1.58x the Level 60 requirements, so the formula has to take the form of Rating = Base * Fn(Level), where Base is the Level 60 Rating, Fn(Level) is a formula that returns 1 at Level = 60 and 1.58 at Level = 70. Rating Buster's formula is consistent with this, while Mundocani's is not. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Tangedyn (talk • contr).
Haste ratings Edit
Bugman, could you please provide a source for your edit? Your numbers are different to the ones in the blue posts linked in the sources section... Karrion 04:50, 17 February 2007 (EST)
I changed the level 70 haste conversion numbers to 13.7. I tested this out on live 2.0.10. With a spell haste buff of 320 from Quagmirran's Eye, I get 2.5 second cast reduced to 1.92, 3.5 sec cast reduced to 2.68 and 10 sec cast reduced to 7.67. I don't know what it is for level 60, I can't test it. This makes sense when you look at the original Eyonix post of 15.8 per 1% haste, and a patch note from 2.0.7 which says haste got buffed. PiumossoUldum 21:47, 28 March 2007 (EDT)
The original values are correct, you are calculating haste values incorrectly. 320/((10/7.671)*100)=10.5..Whitetooth 02:45, 16 April 2007 (EDT)
The current equations for haste rating are incorrect (due to the buff in 2.0.7). At 31, 500 haste rating from Manual Crowd Pummeler gives my warrior a haste of 169.57% (making the MCP a 0.74 speed). Hopefully someone can use that to figure out a new equation :). Davivmcd 22:10, 12 May 2007 (EDT)
Official ratings update Edit
Eyonix posted an official summary of all the level 70 ratings, current as of patch 2.1. I am going to edit the page to reflect this. The only difference that was readily apparent to me was Spell Haste. Reference is here: http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=106616902&pageNo=1&sid=1 Docjowles 16:34, 30 May 2007 (EDT)
Factual correction Edit
The 2.3 changes to Expertise/Weapon Skill need to be addressed in this section in a more detailed way. For instance, does weapon skill (presumably capped at 350) still affect these formulas? I dont know what stat or attribute would take its place, but it stands to reason that the formulas have changed. Anyone have any ideas how, or doing any research into it? Be glad to help if so. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Valmorgul (talk • contr).
Rating Conversion Graph Edit
This graph is completely inaccurate for the 70100 range. It's obvious that the curve from 70+ is exponential in nature rather than the straight linear increase the graph sees, and it's also obvious just by plugging in L80 values in the conversion formula that the final value at 80 should be ~3.277, rather than the ~1.8 it's showing now. —The preceding unsigned comment was added by Sabotage (talk • contr).
Level 80 crit chance Edit
The rating needed for a level 80 char to get 1% critical hit chance seems to be wrong:
14 * (82/52) * (131/63) = 54.567
rather than 45.91
It's quite late, so I just wanted somebody to confirm this before editing. AlcatrazIV (talk) 23:44, 21 November 2008 (UTC)
 I could be missing something, but I get 45.91 (45.905982 rounded) from that calculation. It's also the number found at http://elitistjerks.com/f31/t29453combat_ratings_level_80_a/. Did you make a typo somewhere either above, or in your calculation? Murph (talk • contr) 07:39, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
 Nvm, now I get 45.91 too. Guess I messed something up with those fractions that night. AlcatrazIV (talk) 13:36, 27 November 2008 (UTC)
Accuracy of ratings per 1% Edit
Looking at the numbers on http://elitistjerks.com/f31/t29453combat_ratings_level_80_a/ (see "Level 80 Combat Ratings and Stats"), updated yesterday (2 Dec 2008), I see some minor differences with the numbers we have here. I'm not changing our article immediately, other than to add an accuracy tag to the page, as I want to make some effort to double check the data first (much as I trust EJ for these things, it's still prudent to verify, where possible). If someone can use the API_GetCombatRating and API_GetCombatRatingBonus to verify the numbers before me, great, that's what we need. If not, I'll try to do that ASAP. (The numbers on the default character sheet tooltips have insufficient precision to accurately calculate the coefficient to 4 significant figures, the API has no such limitation.) Murph (talk • contr) 10:13, 3 December 2008 (UTC)
 Having just done the precise calc through the API, 159 hit rating (4.85% melee hit on char sheet) is actually 4.8490409851074% chance to hit, and the rating for 1% is 32.789988884055, i.e. 32.79 to 4 significant figures. There might be some variation in results past 4 significant figures, but that doesn't matter for this article. 159 was just the hit rating I happened to have equipped at the time  nothing significant about that, and the 32.79 number is from GetCombatRating(6)/GetCombatRatingBonus(6). I'll update this article soon, unless someone beats me to it. Murph (talk • contr) 01:42, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 For reference, here's the magic LUA incantation to obtain melee hit numbers ingame from the API. For other ratings, change all instances of 6 to the appropriate number from API_GetCombatRating. (Modified version of script originally posted on Talk:Spell hit by Zalambar.)
/script DEFAULT_CHAT_FRAME:AddMessage("Hit Rating: " .. GetCombatRating(6) .. ", + Hit Chance: " .. GetCombatRatingBonus(6) .. ", Rating Per %: " .. GetCombatRating(6)/GetCombatRatingBonus(6))
 Murph (talk • contr) 06:45, 4 December 2008 (UTC)
 For reference, here's the magic LUA incantation to obtain melee hit numbers ingame from the API. For other ratings, change all instances of 6 to the appropriate number from API_GetCombatRating. (Modified version of script originally posted on Talk:Spell hit by Zalambar.)
Patch 3.1 Edit
Armor penetration rating has been updated to reflect the patch changes. Feel free to double check the conversion in game using the following script:
/script DEFAULT_CHAT_FRAME:AddMessage("Rating: " .. GetCombatRating(25) .. ", + Chance: " .. GetCombatRatingBonus(25) .. ", Rating Per %: " .. GetCombatRating(25)/GetCombatRatingBonus(25))
Zalambar (talk) 07:36, 23 April 2009 (UTC)