One of the features of this mod is to display the iLevel of an item. For those unfamiliar, the iLevel is a multi-part calculation that Blizzard uses to determine the relative strength of an item. There is a good breakdown of how it is calculated here http://www.wowwiki.com/Formulas:Item_Values.
Now, if you notice the last step of the calculation makes an adjustment to the iLevel value of the item to account for rarity (whether it is green, blue, purple, etc.). The problem with this is that it prevents a simple comparison of item strengths between differing rarity levels.
I would like to see the author add code similar to the following to strip off the last step and make it easy to compare the strength of items regardless of the rarity level:
if rarity == 2 then
ilevel = (ilevel - 4)/2
elseif rarity == 3 then
ilevel = (ilevel - 1.84)/1.6
elseif rarity == 4 then
ilevel = (ilevel - 1.3)/1.3
else
ilevel = ilevel
The iLevel displayed in the tooltip is just the value that the ingame API is returning, theres no calculations being done on it by ratingbuster and since we don't even know if that item value formula is still correct it wouldn't be a good idea to mess with the ilevel value before displaying it.
For everyone holding thier breath on tekiRate, I'm probably not going to finish it off. RB has since added a cache so that conversions are only done once (ignoring GC), so the performance hit isn't too bad at all now.
Hi,
Sorry for the slow updates, I'm currently serving in the Taiwan military, so I don't have much time outside where I can use the internet, but I'll do my best to keep RatingBuster and TankPoints updated :)
Hey whitey, you really should drop those tables from your descriptions, most users don't care about the numbers behind the mod. Make a google spreadsheet and link it up instead, it'll make your description a much friendlier read.
Or make nice pages on WoWWiki about the formulas and link there.
Most users don't that's true, but they can page down a couple times :)
I don't mind getting a glimpse at the work that went into something not just the end result.
Makes me appreciate it more.
There's alot of re-coding existing concepts and while I welcome functional improvements as much as the next guy,
an original work is still worth some (alot) of recognition.
i had this addon from wow interface for some time. it;s nice now to have it on SVN and updated daily :)
is the author posting here? :)
I love this mod! Welcome =)
Now, if you notice the last step of the calculation makes an adjustment to the iLevel value of the item to account for rarity (whether it is green, blue, purple, etc.). The problem with this is that it prevents a simple comparison of item strengths between differing rarity levels.
I would like to see the author add code similar to the following to strip off the last step and make it easy to compare the strength of items regardless of the rarity level:
if rarity == 2 then
ilevel = (ilevel - 4)/2
elseif rarity == 3 then
ilevel = (ilevel - 1.84)/1.6
elseif rarity == 4 then
ilevel = (ilevel - 1.3)/1.3
else
ilevel = ilevel
Yes, I'm using RB again myself.
Sorry for the slow updates, I'm currently serving in the Taiwan military, so I don't have much time outside where I can use the internet, but I'll do my best to keep RatingBuster and TankPoints updated :)
It's a bit vocal about performing scans etc :P
Or make nice pages on WoWWiki about the formulas and link there.
I don't mind getting a glimpse at the work that went into something not just the end result.
Makes me appreciate it more.
There's alot of re-coding existing concepts and while I welcome functional improvements as much as the next guy,
an original work is still worth some (alot) of recognition.
I grabbed StatLogicLib & TipHookerLib and this fixed the problem. (I'm a !!!StandaloneLibraries user)
So what is the procedure to get the lib files added to the !!!StandaloneLibraries folder?
and yes it works
everyone with a rogue, warrior, hunter.. etc should get it ! :)
I was thinking of writing a small mod to do it myself now I don't have to awesome work.