EU+US I noticed enchants at 111

[Charicore]

The enchants and gems at 111 look like they really offset that 1 level gap. My warrior had siphoning on his artifact and he has 2% leech before that enchant and that pushed it to 5%. The gems were +9 to mastery. As soon as I leveled, my leech went up to 11% and my mastery gem went from +9 to +40. So maybe 111s have some benefit if you fully enchant and gem. Just from what I see. Not say 110s are weak in comparison, just saying that maybe 111 might be viable

 

[necroaqua]

111 is definitely viable. The main downside of 111 afaik is its not anything special in ipvp. You scale up to 119 in that bracket, so lose any scaling advantages and legendaries stop working. If you're looking for a pve/wpvp toon though, 111 is definitely an option. Adds a few more gear options as well with crafted stuff, but I don't remember how good they actually are (225 maybe?)

 

[Winterly]

So, 110 for ipvp, pve etc, 111 for pve, what about 115? Whats the downside of that.

I'm wanting the best level for isle expeditions, and dungeon farming / selling.

 

[necroaqua]

115 has worse scaling than 110/111. And ipvp you have the same problem as 111 with leggos not working scaled up. So it might open up some higher ilvl stuff from quests, but your scaling goes down probably too much.

 

[norcal313]

Link some 111s so we can compare stats. I am interested in moving one of my 110s up because of the enchants and such.

 

[Emelia]

WTB character links to compare to my 110. Please and thank you!

 

[norcal313]

I forgot about this thread which has a perfect example for us to compare stats, thanks to MyPerfection. Granted the info provided is for a protection paladin you can see the secondary stats drop with the same gear equipped. I will work out the exact multipliers and hopefully be able to post them before I leave work tonight...

https://xpoff.com/threads/110-119-discussion.79860/
[doublepost=1536127377,1536126158][/doublepost]Wearing the same gear and leveling from 110 to 111 he gained/lost the following:

+5,000 raw Health (30,740 to 35,740)
+73 raw Strength (726 to 899)
-1.4% Crit (193 total crit)
-2.83% Haste (369 total haste)
-0.27% Versa (45 total versa)
-1.45% Mastery (200 total mastery)

So, it seems the higher raw value your secondary stats are the more you have to lose. If you have a M Antorus geared 110 with 250+ ilvl pieces, arti neck, 3x Azerite pieces, 2x legendaries, and a high ilvl artifact weapon you will "lose" more secondary stat percentages than if you are a 110 who is just using BfA gear.

The following multipliers can be used to figure out what your secondaries will be at 111 (rounded to the nearest hundreth):

1% Crit = 20.21 rating.
1% Haste = 19.08 rating.
1% Versa = 23.81 rating.
1% Mastery = 20.20 rating (prot paladin only, different classes have different multipliers).

 

[Rasta]

Started a 111 enhance sham myself, if you are on eu servers, I’ll happily show you it at some point

 

[Odal]

I forgot about this thread which has a perfect example for us to compare stats, thanks to MyPerfection. Granted the info provided is for a protection paladin you can see the secondary stats drop with the same gear equipped. I will work out the exact multipliers and hopefully be able to post them before I leave work tonight...

https://xpoff.com/threads/110-119-discussion.79860/
[doublepost=1536127377,1536126158][/doublepost]Wearing the same gear and leveling from 110 to 111 he gained/lost the following:

+5,000 raw Health (30,740 to 35,740)
+73 raw Strength (726 to 899)
-1.4% Crit (193 total crit)
-2.83% Haste (369 total haste)
-0.27% Versa (45 total versa)
-1.45% Mastery (200 total mastery)

So, it seems the higher raw value your secondary stats are the more you have to lose. If you have a M Antorus geared 110 with 250+ ilvl pieces, arti neck, 3x Azerite pieces, 2x legendaries, and a high ilvl artifact weapon you will "lose" more secondary stat percentages than if you are a 110 who is just using BfA gear.

The following multipliers can be used to figure out what your secondaries will be at 111 (rounded to the nearest hundreth):

1% Crit = 20.21 rating.
1% Haste = 19.08 rating.
1% Versa = 23.81 rating.
1% Mastery = 20.20 rating (prot paladin only, different classes have different multipliers).

Few issues here. The you lose more the more you have is only true beyond the hundreths decimal place, i.e. not really at all. Each secondary stat at 111 is roughly 87.2% of its value at 110. You do lose more as a flat value, but not as a proportion.

Also, I’m pretty sure each point of secondary stat is not linear. So stating things like Versa is 23.81 per 1% is only true when you have 45 versa. So if you have say 90 versa, you won’t come out with 3.78%

Edit- Also, just as gee wiz information, I suspect each level beyond 110 has 87.2% of the previous level’s secondary stats. This lines up with my experience that 119 has about 1/3 of 111’s secondaries. .872^8 = .334

 

[norcal313]

Few issues here. The you lose more the more you have is only true beyond the hundreths decimal place, i.e. not really at all. Each secondary stat at 111 is roughly 87.2% of its value at 110. You do lose more as a flat value, but not as a proportion.

Also, I’m pretty sure each point of secondary stat is not linear. So stating things like Versa is 23.81 per 1% is only true when you have 45 versa. So if you have say 90 versa, you won’t come out with 3.78%

Just because the difference is small doesn't make what I said untrue. If you have gear with a couple hundred of any secondary stat more than another set of gear then you will end up losing more. it's not a penalty, it's basic percentages. I feel like I explained it well enough, even showed the small % differences. There is one caveat; the difference can be very noticeable on classes with high mastery ratios since mastery scales differently on specific class/spec combinations.

Linear stats and diminishing returns haven't been provided (to my knowledge). Tertiary stats in legion, for instance, worked different. Leech was a flat increase as far as I could stack it. If I added X leech item then my percentage increased by Y every time (got up to 45% leech before I ran out of leech items). Speed and Avoidance, on the other hand, did not work the same way. Speed had increased diminishing returns and avoidance had a cap, according to some old tests a EU twink did. For BfA, so far, my secondaries increase linearly on my paladin just from taking gear off and adding it on one piece at a time. Maybe it is a late curve, or maybe there's no curve at all. Or maybe it's only for specific stats on specific classes? Who knows?

 

[Odal]

My point with the secondaries is that no stat seems to be disproportionately punished compared to others.

Just because the difference is small doesn't make what I said untrue. If you have gear with a couple hundred of any secondary stat more than another set of gear then you will end up losing more. it's not a penalty, it's basic percentages. I feel like I explained it well enough, even showed the small % differences. There is one caveat; the difference can be very noticeable on classes with high mastery ratios since mastery scales differently on specific class/spec combinations.

Linear stats and diminishing returns haven't been provided (to my knowledge). Tertiary stats in legion, for instance, worked different. Leech was a flat increase as far as I could stack it. If I added X leech item then my percentage increased by Y every time (got up to 45% leech before I ran out of leech items). Speed and Avoidance, on the other hand, did not work the same way. Speed had increased diminishing returns and avoidance had a cap, according to some old tests a EU twink did. For BfA, so far, my secondaries increase linearly on my paladin just from taking gear off and adding it on one piece at a time. Maybe it is a late curve, or maybe there's no curve at all. Or maybe it's only for specific stats on specific classes? Who knows?

You're right on the secondaries not diminishing. I made one mistake and extrapolated it and also didn't have the means to test it at the time.

As for difference from 110 to 111, all I'm saying is it's more accurate to state that your ratings effectiveness lowers by a fixed %, in this case about 12.8%. Saying that the higher raw value your secondary stats are the more you have to lose doesn't mean much.

 

[norcal313]

My point with the secondaries is that no stat seems to be disproportionately punished compared to others.

I gotcha. I guess it's a case of semantics because it definitely means enough to me to consider moving to 111 and taking advantage of gems, enchants, and possible quest upgrades. Is it huge? Nah. But that's what twinking is all about. Tweaking and tuning to get the most performance for whatever it is you like to do!