PDA

View Full Version : Death Knight Upcoming WotN change



vine
02-19-2010, 02:39 PM
From the latest PTR patch notes. I love this change!


Will of the Necropolis: There is no longer a cooldown on the frequency at which this talent can be activated. In addition, this ability can now also be triggered by damage which deals less than 5% of your health.

Kazeyonoma
02-19-2010, 02:43 PM
Auto Shield wall?

tuffmuffin
02-19-2010, 02:49 PM
Auto Shield wall?
More of an Ardent Defender without the auto-revive.

Kazeyonoma
02-19-2010, 02:54 PM
nice buff to DKs imo.

Kaiyoko
02-19-2010, 03:12 PM
I'll be damned if this survives PTR. Its very nice (along with the other changes), but it just seems a tad too good. We'll see.

Kazeyonoma
02-19-2010, 03:17 PM
It's not any better than the current Argent Defender right? Lower damage reduction %, no auto heal component.

vine
02-19-2010, 03:19 PM
It's not any better than the current Argent Defender right?
Well you trade an auto-revive for no cooldown. AD still wins in my book, it's incredible, but I'm glad they are making WotN more attractive.

Kazeyonoma
02-19-2010, 03:25 PM
The damage reduction portion of AD still works, just the healing portion has a cd I thought.

Acidbaron
02-19-2010, 04:03 PM
To be honest 15% damage migation with no CD on big hits is pretty damn sweet.

Vrekgar
02-19-2010, 04:18 PM
Its a sweet change indeed. Idd trade the auto-revive and Heal for no cooldown on it. at low %hp ill be even harder to kill.

Acidbaron
02-19-2010, 05:25 PM
Yep PvP cries will change it again maybe, although they did say before they didn't mind getting DK survivability a bit higher on a few blue posts back.

And it's pretty deep in blood not sure if there are viable deep blood pvp specs, believe most were frost/unholy, but no expert on it.

Proletaria
02-19-2010, 05:56 PM
If there were any confusion that blood is the tanking tree (now and in the future).

There shouldn't be after the patch.

Dots
02-19-2010, 06:23 PM
WotN is definitely too good in this form, just like AD was for some time. It should really just work the same way as AD does now, even if that just turns it into AD lite.

vine
02-19-2010, 06:26 PM
WotN is definitely too good in this form, just like AD was for some time. It should really just work the same way as AD does now, even if that just turns it into AD lite.
Actually this change would make it almost identical to Ardent Defender (http://www.wowhead.com/?spell=31852), slightly worse in fact. So I'm not sure what your issue is.

Dots
02-19-2010, 06:30 PM
Actually this change would make it almost identical to Ardent Defender (http://www.wowhead.com/?spell=31852), slightly worse in fact. So I'm not sure what your issue is.

The current WotN reduces the entire hit by 15% if it would take you below 35% hp. AD only reduces the damage that actually drops you below 35% hp by 20%, so it only reduces a portion of the hit, that is any damage beyond the 35% hp barrier. That is a pretty big difference when dealing with very large hits like those from the Lich King, Sindragosa breaths, Festergut with 2-3 stacks and so on.

Xequecal
02-19-2010, 10:26 PM
Actually this change would make it almost identical to Ardent Defender (http://www.wowhead.com/?spell=31852), slightly worse in fact. So I'm not sure what your issue is.

Uhm, no. The new WotN is a +17.6% EHP boost to DKs. No permutations of size or number of hits will cause it to be any more or less. Ardent Defender is a +8.75% EHP boost for Paladins, WotN is MUCH better in this form. It will also reduce damage far more against raid bosses than AD does, as AD only reduces the portion of the hit that takes you below 35%, WotN reduces the whole hit.

Vrekgar
02-19-2010, 10:30 PM
True but the other half argent defender makes it one of the best cooldowns any tank has. and you dont even have to activate it it does it for you.

Thats not to say i dont see what your getting at. Im much more inclined to think Argent defender should be reworked to be more like this change than not.

Xequecal
02-19-2010, 10:51 PM
20% off any hit that takes you below 35%? Or a 25% EHP increase compared to an 8.75% one? You realize that this would leave Warriors with literally 66% of your EHP or less, right? With worse cooldowns?

vine
02-19-2010, 11:03 PM
What's the math on figuring out the EHP boost?

Edgewalker
02-19-2010, 11:09 PM
20% off any hit that takes you below 35%? Or a 25% EHP increase compared to an 8.75% one? You realize that this would leave Warriors with literally 66% of your EHP or less, right? With worse cooldowns?

Christ I wish people would stop looking at EH and EH only.
Seriously.
Stop.

vine
02-19-2010, 11:13 PM
Christ I wish people would stop looking at EH and EH only.
Seriously.
Stop.
Well how would you make comparisons of a talent that increases ehp/ttl? Enlighten us.

Edgewalker
02-19-2010, 11:22 PM
Well how would you make comparisons of a talent that increases ehp/ttl? Enlighten us.

I wouldn't compare tank to tank to tank on the sole basis of EH and EH alone.

vine
02-19-2010, 11:46 PM
You still haven't answered the question, you just said how you wouldn't do it. I think you missed the argument and focussed solely on the words "EH". Anyway, think what you will.

Edgewalker
02-20-2010, 12:02 AM
You still haven't answered the question, you just said how you wouldn't do it. I think you missed the argument and focussed solely on the words "EH". Anyway, think what you will.

He brought warrior EH into a talent discussion as though this change somehow makes warriors a bad tank.
There is a lot more to tank balance than EH. It's fallacy and flat WRONG to thing this change will be somehow game breaking, especially on most ICC content.
I don't HAVE to compare and contrast using EH/TTL... there's no need or point.

Acidbaron
02-20-2010, 04:02 AM
I've said it before and will say it again,

Comparing one talent of one tanking class versus 1 talent of another tanking class is pointless as you can intentionally 'forget' to mention all other differences to justify a boost or a nerf with such reasoning and even make it look valid to the those not fully informed, but such reasoning couldn't be more incorrect.

Cause i find it amusing that block and other migation talents aren't being taken into this whole 'amagawagad dk's get more migation then us noaw!' thing. Cause if you wanted to compare that it's a lot more complicated then sorry to say pulling random EH numbers from somewhere.


If this was added in the Frost tree of the death knight tank it would be overpowered, it being added in the blood tree doesn't going over the difference in talents and migation.

Seeing a large portion of tanks are blood, this talent would make both trees more equal in terms of flat migation.

Satorri
02-20-2010, 05:11 AM
I am assuming the math is founded on the idea that your last 35% has 15% increased EH value?

0.35 x 0.15 = 5.25%?

The thing about AD as noted above is that (and my info may be dated but) it only reduces the portion of the damage that takes you below 35%. So if you get hit and it only drops you 500 health below the 35% mark, you only apply that 20% to the 500, not the full hit.

I had suggested at one time that WotN may be the same but no one was able to prove conclusively one way or the other.

Here's the thing, I'm not sure why the talent has been the way it has, the overall damage reduction for a 15 sec ICD makes it pretty measily as an overall mitigation tool even if the proc was optimally size (i.e. if you got a heavy hit every 15 sec that was large-sized, dropped you below 35% but didn't kill you). And while this is a very nice mitigation change for Blood I don't think it is particularly game changing. Without the ICD it is nicer and free to play a bigger role if your healers are having trouble healing you back to full or if you are against a tank-buster like Festergut.

The issue with generalizing about its EH benefit is that it only applies to the hit(s) that drop you below 35%. Damage taken below that point is not reduced. It makes it a bit sticky especially with the minimum size removed.

This is a nice change, if it goes through, but not a game breaking one, and as far as I'm concerned it doesn't make the talent mandatory, only appealing.

Xequecal
02-20-2010, 09:55 AM
WotN does work if you take a hit below 35% health. It has always worked that way.

Panttz
02-20-2010, 10:07 AM
This is a nice change, if it goes through, but not a game breaking one, and as far as I'm concerned it doesn't make the talent mandatory, only appealing.


So you are saying that you may not be picking this up if/when it goes live?

I kind of find that hard to believe =/

Proletaria
02-20-2010, 10:08 AM
I would have settled for an ap debuff and some form of bandaid block, but this works too.

Rofl @ rollercoaster balance.

PS. To all the fanboys who parroted "DK IS FINE" for months while we were -the- worst tanks. Looks like the devs disagree with you.

PPS. I still want an ap debuff.

Edgewalker
02-20-2010, 10:46 AM
I DO find it hard to believe any tank would skip this talent for a 3 point investment.
Without the ICD it will be quite good for virtually every hard hitting boss.

I also don't think you fully understand how it works Satorri, you are undervaluing it a bit.

Either way, I lke getting new talents. I've had a fun month with the mad threat from Dancing Rune Weapon, I'll have another fun month with a buffed WoTN.

Darksend
02-21-2010, 05:59 AM
Just so everyone is on the same page: Source (http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=23329103342&sid=1&pageNo=18#341) (the entire thread (http://blue.mmo-champion.com/26/23329103342-333-patch-notes.html))




Ardent Defender and Will of the Necropolis work differently. Ardent Defender reduces less of the damage of a big hit that takes you over the threshold, but it has the Cheat Death component instead. They are just different abilities.

Initially we were worried when all the tanks but the DK with WotN fell over to the Patchwerk test on the PTR. Since then we haven't designed any bosses that actually hit like that, and convinced ourselves that the cooldown wasn't really doing much in reality.

Arthas hits very hard, but he'll hit less hard when you have better gear and the raid-wide buff. If you think that WotN is what's going to allow you to beat that encounter, we suspect you are mistaken. But like I said, if it looks like it's going to be a problem, we'll add a small cooldown or something back on. I think it's too premature to do that yet.

So WotN works for the entire damage you take if you go from 100-35 in a single hit which is why this change is so amazing.

keebz
02-21-2010, 11:23 AM
The problem with the current version of WotN has always been if you waste your ICD proc on a hit that isn't that great, and then you're locked out of that 15% mitigation for the next hit, like Satorri has said before. Granted, you shouldn't be at the < 35% mark for very long, or something is wrong.

Regardless, with the way the new talent is structured, WotN has neither a minimum limit for damage (i.e., 5% of max health) nor the 15 sec cooldown anymore. This is the superb combo - mitigation on any and everything anytime you are at or below the 35% mark.

However, as stated by Blizzard (quoted by Darksend as well in the preceding post), if the new WotN seems to be too powerful, they may add the cooldown back on, albeit a shorter one (say 5 sec). With a cooldown on the proc and no minimum limit on the damage, the proc would have a greater chance to be wasted on a small hit and not available when you need it most. The reintroduction of the original cooldown of 15 seconds would make this talent worth less than it is now, and I'll even go so far as to say it may be a waste. 15 second cooldown wasted on a 2000 damage hit when it's followed by a much larger hit?

Realistically, however, as stated before, you usually drop down below that 35% threshold once, or twice, in a short period of time and then should be healed back up past the 50% mark, leaving you in a generally safe zone. WotN is currently icing on the cake for its talent point cost, and the new WotN seems to have much better potential. Blood DK's with a proper self-healing rhythm, as Satorri has always suggested, can make up for their lack of any unique damage reduction components.

The argument has always been one of time: how long will you stay below 35%?

Küren
02-21-2010, 04:10 PM
.... WotN will trigger on every single hit. This is much more overpowered than Ardent Defender has ever been. Yes this means -15% dmg on every hit, compared to the paltry -7% dmg of AD over a full health bar.

I don't believe that is true using your example. I believe that WotN only reduces the damage of a hit that takes you to or below 35%. Once you are below 35% I believe it will not help. Ardent Defender will still help once you are below 35%. AD actually is at its best at that point since all of the damage would be reduced.

Ardent Defender still has the "save your life" feature every two minutes also. They are both very good though.

I would think any time healers are behind or try to heal re-actively that AD would be better. The WotN change seems to reduce damage on DKs any time there is high damage. I don't think it will magically save you if healers aren't constantly healing you.

Vrekgar
02-21-2010, 09:03 PM
I don't believe that is true using your example. I believe that WotN only reduces the damage of a hit that takes you to or below 35%. Once you are below 35% I believe it will not help. Ardent Defender will still help once you are below 35%. AD actually is at its best at that point since all of the damage would be reduced.

Ardent Defender still has the "save your life" feature every two minutes also. They are both very good though.

I would think any time healers are behind or try to heal re-actively that AD would be better. The WotN change seems to reduce damage on DKs any time there is high damage. I don't think it will magically save you if healers aren't constantly healing you.

On the first point Darksend already posted a Blue Post on how WOTN works. It reduces the whole hit that takes you under 35%.

I believe AD is better for situations where healers are a little looser. The super heal is good enough to save you if a healer slips up and doesnt get you back up as fast as it takes the next hit. Wotn is better for healers who are tighter. Theres no super save heal to top you off. and your last 35% isnt worth as much as with AD but with tight healers who can bring you back up above 35% fast it will be worth alot more than AD.

Overall this is going to be tested to death im sure, so please if people would not insinuate that balance is destroyed yet because we dont know just how much of a buff this is. As ive said before i think a more positive change would be to bring AD more in line with Wotn as the 35% mechanic of AD doesnt seem to be noticeably useful whereas Wotn does.

Küren
02-22-2010, 12:19 AM
Vrekgar, yes, but I meant that once you are under 35%, as I understand it WotN doesn't do anything. It either reduces the entire damage of a single hit or it doesn't. Not every large hit will get a 15% damage reduction applied. You have to start out at or above 35% and end at less than 35% for the 15% reduction to be applied.

It would be nice to have this confirmed. The tooltip has always been somewhat vague to me.

Küren
02-22-2010, 12:38 AM
I went to the PTR to test it. The combat log shows it as an absorb. I saw it kick in around 35% health and even once lower than 35% it was still absorbing damage. I guess that resolves it. It doesn't matter what your health is at before the hit, only after the hit is applied.

Molecule
02-22-2010, 01:51 AM
I am assuming the math is founded on the idea that your last 35% has 15% increased EH value?

0.35 x 0.15 = 5.25%?


The math doesn't quite work like that. A 15% damage reduction is a 1/(1-.15) - 1 = 17.6% increase in effective health for the applicable values. A minimum bound for the EH increase is therefore .35 x .176 = 6.2%. Of course, as far as I can tell WotN reduces ALL the damage you take from hits that drop you below 35%, so 6% is a minimum bound based on the assumption that no hit will drop you below 35% unless you are already exactly at 35%. In reality, the EH benefit it provides is quite a bit higher than this, since the size of dangerous hits is usually more than a third of your health.

Stengel
02-22-2010, 03:53 AM
There is a lot more to tank balance than EH. It's fallacy and flat WRONG to thing this change will be somehow game breaking, especially on most ICC content.
I don't HAVE to compare and contrast using EH/TTL... there's no need or point. This is what my comment actually refered to, and the choice of words was appropriate. WotN will be gamebreaking on hard modes of the hard hitters in ICC because it will proc every hit or nearly every hit depending on the boss. That's like the DK being *2* tiers of content ahead in gear (or roughly thereabouts I'd guess, since AD pre-nerf was equivalent to more than 1 tier). That is broken.

Acidbaron
02-22-2010, 05:00 AM
As stated AD and WoTN are 2 different mechanics.

WoTN will be beter below the 35% threshold -if- your healers are awake and don't have to move constantly, cause if a paladin tank or healer slips up it won't kill them instantly.

While in the same situation a DK tank will die.

On the flip side, paladin tanks have been in the most superior position for several tiers now, while DK tanks have been hanging behind at the back of the bus, having to rely on good timings to pull of the samething other tanks pull off as it's the downside to the double stat 'resources', mana or rage vs runic and runes.

So i do see most of this just as irrational whines of a still already powerful tanking class, yes above that 35% you'll still be superior by far and i've yet to see healers now considering keeping a tank below that threshold for just that proc.

Theorycrafting is all fine and dandy but i believe before people start shouting it's overpowered, it's too good and all other outbursts.

We have to run logs at actual hard hitting fights and stop assuming already that it will have an almost 100% up time at hard hitting fights, cause that's just making up things on the spot to proof ones own reasoning. And then when those logs are there we can compare how much WoTN damage will actually (not uptime) will reduce plus the damage reduced from AD+ the healing recieved from it.

And as blizzard has stated if undergeared dk tanks suddenly start to do content other similair gears tanks can't, it will be nerfed. Calling for a nerf already without actually knowing the effect is well just nerdraging.

Satorri
02-22-2010, 05:38 AM
The math doesn't quite work like that. A 15% damage reduction is a 1/(1-.15) - 1 = 17.6% increase in effective health for the applicable values. A minimum bound for the EH increase is therefore .35 x .176 = 6.2%. Of course, as far as I can tell WotN reduces ALL the damage you take from hits that drop you below 35%, so 6% is a minimum bound based on the assumption that no hit will drop you below 35% unless you are already exactly at 35%. In reality, the EH benefit it provides is quite a bit higher than this, since the size of dangerous hits is usually more than a third of your health.

I know the math doesn't work out quite like that. My point was just to try to figure out what *he* was doing.

The bigger issue is that this does not apply universally to damage when your health goes below or is below 35%. It only represents a 15% reduction to the damage that crosses that threshold for you.

Worst case scenario, I have 55k health, so 19.25k is the crossing point. If I take big hits that knock me down to 20k, then I take a 1k dot tick (thinking Festergut as an example), the WotN will only reduce that 1k tick (sparing me 150 dmg).

Best case scenario (for getting the most value from the talent *not* at all best case for you as a tank), if you are bouncing back and forth over that threshold with *every* hit, then you will get 15% mitigation from it, or the 17.6% EH boost. Realistically that won't happen, and if you are bouncing above and below 35% health (20k health for me being the line to go over), you are in big trouble and probably shouldn't be taking that much damage, CDs should be popped, healers aren't able to be on task, etc.

The talent is good, but the budget is not off from any other survival talent, and generally the conditional nature of it will mean it is not a general power-mitigation talent, just a life-saver that you will be happy when it does proc, not for the total value.

Kazeyonoma
02-22-2010, 09:36 AM
This is what my comment actually refered to, and the choice of words was appropriate. WotN will be gamebreaking on hard modes of the hard hitters in ICC because it will proc every hit or nearly every hit depending on the boss. That's like the DK being *2* tiers of content ahead in gear (or roughly thereabouts I'd guess, since AD pre-nerf was equivalent to more than 1 tier). That is broken.

If you want to argue a point, argue the point, don't turn it into personal attacks, calling anyone retarded on this forum will warrant reaction from the moderation.

TomHuxley
02-22-2010, 10:11 AM
PS. To all the fanboys who parroted "DK IS FINE" for months while we were -the- worst tanks. Looks like the devs disagree with you.

PPS. I still want an ap debuff.

Wow, I'm amazed you aren't able to block attacks with that chip the size of a shield on your shoulder. DKs don't need an AP debuff, it's widely available already. I suspect this buff to WotN will be nerfed a couple weeks after release to something more like a 5 second ICD (ala what the devs have stated) as I can't see this not providing a huge benefit against really hard hitting bosses (hardmodes) but meh, I'm not really going to worry about it, and the result will still be a nice buff to the blood tree.

BTW, the other buffs (especially the burst threat on IT) look nice and much-needed. Grats to DKs.

Satorri
02-22-2010, 11:07 AM
They've made a point of saying WotN is what it is on the PTR right now because they don't think it will make a bit of difference, they don't think it needs an ICD. So, we'll see if their suspicions are right or not. I expect it's pretty right on.

I look forward to the IT change, I am curious to see how well it gets balanced though, thankfully they said in the same breath that they are watching for exactly that (that IT doesn't do so much threat that it supports all-IT rotations).

Dawnbreaker
02-22-2010, 11:24 AM
They've made a point of saying WotN is what it is on the PTR right now because they don't think it will make a bit of difference, they don't think it needs an ICD. So, we'll see if their suspicions are right or not. I expect it's pretty right on.
There's another way to look at this though. If the change goes live, will DKs flock to deep blood for tanking? Will the non-Blood DK tanks be looked at as "dumb" for not having the talent? If the answers to these is in the realm of "yes", then the talent is probably a bit too powerful in the scope of DK tanking. Knocking 15% off the damage that "would" take a DK below 35% is pretty huge, especially in fights like Sindragosa and LK, which the blue posts have sort of shrugged off, but I doubt they've done heavy testing with it. At least as far as Sindragosa tanking goes, I dip low quite a bit. Sure, the healers pick me back up, but an extra 15% reduction would give them alot more breathing room. Also, as far as tank balance is concerned, this does indeed leave warriors high and dry, which is going to cause all sorts of "drama" and they do seem to have the short end of the "talents that save lives" stick if this goes live. The bears seem to have an ample amount of HP/Armor compared to the other tanks to even need such a talent.

Miste
02-22-2010, 12:05 PM
They've made a point of saying WotN is what it is on the PTR right now because they don't think it will make a bit of difference, they don't think it needs an ICD. So, we'll see if their suspicions are right or not. I expect it's pretty right on.
In normal ICC, the cool down is not needed. Normally, my WotN accounts for 3-5K damage reduced and rarely saves my life. The only time I record WotN making a significant difference is LK on ICC10. I'm in a mostly alt run and we're still learning the basic mechanics. When I stop eating soul reapers, everything should go back to normal.

TomHuxley
02-22-2010, 12:50 PM
Yeah, in non-hard modes I can't see how the WotN changes will matter much; it should be a small buff to blood spec DK tanks, and that's fine. I am just concerned about what Dawn says, which is that for hard modes Blood will probably become the defacto tank spec for DKs. In this regard I'm more excited about the buff to Unbreakable Armor.

Don't get me wrong, I don't play a DK at all, so this doesn't effect me unless the WotN buff is truly game-breaking OP and I doubt it will be that (and I think it's easily solved if it needs to be tamped down a hair). I just expect that as hard modes become the purview of more guilds than just the top 100 raiding guilds it will turn out that WotN will scale a bit too well against bosses that hit hard enough to regularly knock you down past 35% health. But I don't think we'll see guilds throwing away their other tanks or anything. My largest concern is for my friends who play DK tanks, and the cumulative smaller buffs were needed IMO.

Proletaria
02-22-2010, 03:12 PM
Wow, I'm amazed you aren't able to block attacks with that chip the size of a shield on your shoulder. DKs don't need an AP debuff, it's widely available already. I suspect this buff to WotN will be nerfed a couple weeks after release to something more like a 5 second ICD (ala what the devs have stated) as I can't see this not providing a huge benefit against really hard hitting bosses (hardmodes) but meh, I'm not really going to worry about it, and the result will still be a nice buff to the blood tree.

BTW, the other buffs (especially the burst threat on IT) look nice and much-needed. Grats to DKs.


That is an amusing way to describe it, but yes, as one of the very very few progression dk tanks around I would have to say that it is vindicating to see the devs start to push us in the right direction after months of hearing other tanks tell us that our extremely low representation and effectiveness was fine and that tanks were very balanced. I suspect the wotn buff will be nerfed aswell, and I look forward to abusing it against arthas and heroic festergut (the only two places I see it being absolutely phenomenal), but the class is still going to be harder to manage in a raid environment due to needing a baby-sitter on anything that hit's hard and is being tanked alone by the dk.

Our warlock died on arthas attempts a few times in p3, melee hits against me went up by almost 10k in the absence of curse of weakness. Pretty neat.

PS. Despite what you read from heroic geared dk tanks the world over, blood is and has been the defacto raid tanking spec.

Edgewalker
02-22-2010, 03:27 PM
There's another way to look at this though. If the change goes live, will DKs flock to deep blood for tanking? Will the non-Blood DK tanks be looked at as "dumb" for not having the talent? .

Most raid tanks that aren't deep blood are already looked at as "dumb" in most situations.
This really won't change that a whole lot ;)

Dawnbreaker
02-22-2010, 04:28 PM
Most raid tanks that aren't deep blood are already looked at as "dumb" in most situations.
This really won't change that a whole lot ;)
The current state is that the tanking trees, in general, are at least "close" (with unholy way in the back) as far as tanking power goes. My point was the buff to WotN would blow the alternatives out of the water. It is no longer even remotely close to being a choice, all DK tanks will be blood for the mini-AD. The other two trees won't even have a situational equivalent, possibly acclimation for magic fights, but that's such a weak one as to be laughable.

Of course, this may just be a pre-cursor to Cataclysm and they structure the DK trees to fall more in line with one for tanking, dps, and pvp instead of trying to have all 3 trees tank/dps.

Molecule
02-22-2010, 07:02 PM
I know the math doesn't work out quite like that. My point was just to try to figure out what *he* was doing.

The bigger issue is that this does not apply universally to damage when your health goes below or is below 35%. It only represents a 15% reduction to the damage that crosses that threshold for you.

Worst case scenario, I have 55k health, so 19.25k is the crossing point. If I take big hits that knock me down to 20k, then I take a 1k dot tick (thinking Festergut as an example), the WotN will only reduce that 1k tick (sparing me 150 dmg).

Best case scenario (for getting the most value from the talent *not* at all best case for you as a tank), if you are bouncing back and forth over that threshold with *every* hit, then you will get 15% mitigation from it, or the 17.6% EH boost. Realistically that won't happen, and if you are bouncing above and below 35% health (20k health for me being the line to go over), you are in big trouble and probably shouldn't be taking that much damage, CDs should be popped, healers aren't able to be on task, etc.

The talent is good, but the budget is not off from any other survival talent, and generally the conditional nature of it will mean it is not a general power-mitigation talent, just a life-saver that you will be happy when it does proc, not for the total value.

Ah OK, I think we are on the same page then, my mistake.

However, I don't really see how it is different from any "always on" survival talent. Unless your healers are having mana issues, the value of any survival talent is that sometimes you won't die when you would have without the talent. This talent provides zero benefit if you never drop below 35% health, that's true. But so does a (roughly) equivalent 6.2% increase to your HP. Perhaps I am missing something, but if this talent only worked on damage where you were already below 35%, it would be exactly equivalent to a 6.2% HP buff in terms of an EH talent, would it not? That is, any sequence of hits with zero incoming heals on this hypothetical nerfed-WotN tank should have the same outcome (death or survival) as on the same tank, without the talent, with 6.2% more HP. So in my understanding, it really doesn't matter how often it happens, because if it doesn't proc it's not any more irrelevant than any other similar EH increase.

That being said, while it does seem kind of overbudgeted to me (a minimum increase of 2% EH increase per point, compared to 1% talents like blade barrier and improved frost presence), I don't think it's overpowered, given that it actually is likely to be only slightly more useful than the current live implementation is (and yes, that means I think the current live implementation is probably overbudgeted too).

Miste
02-22-2010, 08:04 PM
Yeah, in non-hard modes I can't see how the WotN changes will matter much; it should be a small buff to blood spec DK tanks, and that's fine. I am just concerned about what Dawn says, which is that for hard modes Blood will probably become the defacto tank spec for DKs. In this regard I'm more excited about the buff to Unbreakable Armor.

Don't get me wrong, I don't play a DK at all, so this doesn't effect me unless the WotN buff is truly game-breaking OP and I doubt it will be that (and I think it's easily solved if it needs to be tamped down a hair). I just expect that as hard modes become the purview of more guilds than just the top 100 raiding guilds it will turn out that WotN will scale a bit too well against bosses that hit hard enough to regularly knock you down past 35% health. But I don't think we'll see guilds throwing away their other tanks or anything. My largest concern is for my friends who play DK tanks, and the cumulative smaller buffs were needed IMO.
Progression tanks are moving away from Frost because of the relative strength of the 1-min cooldowns. With all of the bonus armor, UA is approaching a point where a portion of the bonus armor is not useful for additional mitigation, especially when glyphed. By contrast, VB gets better as the tank's gear gets better. It gets better as the healer's gear improves too. Overall, VB is stronger than UA, especially as we approach the apex of gear.

I don't think we'll see guilds swap in DK tanks like we saw for Vezax hard mode. Other than maybe Festergut phase 3, there aren't any mechanics that heavily favor DKs or that DKs can totally ignore. Even the superior DK cooldowns for Festergut are easily replicated with help from healer cooldowns.

TomHuxley
02-22-2010, 11:50 PM
That is an amusing way to describe it, but yes, as one of the very very few progression dk tanks around I would have to say that it is vindicating to see the devs start to push us in the right direction after months of hearing other tanks tell us that our extremely low representation and effectiveness was fine and that tanks were very balanced.

Wow. Just...wow. I'm sure all the other posts here and elsewhere by endgame DKs must pale in comparison to your talents, but the point remains that you seem to have nothing but avarice to share. Look, I don't know anyone who is serious about tank balance who didn't think that DKs needed a better snap-agro ability. Also, if the devs aren't going to provide a static damage-reduction ability for heroics (i.e. block or something similar) then at least a small compensating measure was in order. Much beyond that and we're into the land of lollipops and hyperbole. DK tanks are not under-represented in endgame, especially since they are the newest of the 4 tank classes.



I suspect the wotn buff will be nerfed aswell, and I look forward to abusing it against arthas and heroic festergut (the only two places I see it being absolutely phenomenal)

There's that winning attitude! Surely you can screw others if you just try hard enough... FWIW, I certainly hope WotN is not nerfed unless it really is OP on hardmodes (which I suspect it may be wihouth any ICD...but let the data fall as it may). In the mean time, I hope it is a useful and practical buff for blood DK tanks since most of them aren't actually planning on doing heroic LK just yet.


Our warlock died on arthas attempts a few times in p3, melee hits against me went up by almost 10k in the absence of curse of weakness. Pretty neat.

I know, it's awful to rely on your raid members. Probably you should open a ticket with blizzard asking that you not be beholden to the other 9 slackers you raid with.


PS. Despite what you read from heroic geared dk tanks the world over, blood is and has been the defacto raid tanking spec.

Actually, I know this. I've even explained it to my guilds DKs (who mostly tank heroics). Given that the original design concept was to let all three trees tank properly I think this is unfortunate, but it may also be inevitable. You'll forgive me if I still hold out some hope that all DK tanks won't be shoe-horned into one tree. OTOH, it may help balance issues a lot if they revert to the classic 1 tree = PVP, 1 tree = PVE DPS, the last = tanking breakdown. Still, the devs reached very high, and I'm still rooting for them, even if it doesn't work out.

Edgewalker
02-23-2010, 12:55 AM
I think you missed the ENTIRE tone and purpose of his post Tom.

Bosk
02-23-2010, 03:41 AM
Back in TBC I recall people arguing that AD was more valuable the more health you had. Is that argument valid now for WotN?

Satorri
02-23-2010, 05:38 AM
It is currently, Bosk, and it will be after the change. Higher your health the higher your threshold to proc it without dying.


And to Prolet, what people say/think in the Trade Chat think tank has little to do with what is actually best for you. This isn't news. For every person who actually understands how the game and how the DK class works there are at least 3 people who have no idea but will not hesitate to tell you how it *should* be played.

Proletaria
02-23-2010, 08:28 AM
Even the superior DK cooldowns.

Our cooldowns are not superior, with the exception of IBF, and the secondaries are all just avalible more often for less effect than other classes CDs. Describing DK cooldowns as superior is a throw-back really. The only thing i'd call them clearly better than is warrior cooldowns that need to be glyphed, and that is a whole problem unto itself.

Proletaria
02-23-2010, 08:28 AM
I think you missed the ENTIRE tone and purpose of his post Tom.

Indeed. I think Tom is, once again, off his meds.

Penlowe
02-23-2010, 08:38 AM
While I see no need for moderation here, I do feel the need to remind you all to be civilized. Name calling is not acceptable here.

Molecule
02-23-2010, 10:38 AM
Our cooldowns are not superior, with the exception of IBF, and the secondaries are all just avalible more often for less effect than other classes CDs. Describing DK cooldowns as superior is a throw-back really. The only thing i'd call them clearly better than is warrior cooldowns that need to be glyphed, and that is a whole problem unto itself.

We have better cooldowns than paladins too; the only real cooldown they have is divine protection. Ardent defender is certainly not something to discount, and on certain fights (e.g. Algalon) it does function like a cooldown, but on other fights (e.g. Festergut, Airship achievement mode) broadly applicable long term cooldowns like VB are stronger.

The only class that has really comparable cooldowns to DKs right now are druids (and that's only from the perspective of non-magical damage). Barkskin is pretty similar to VB (better from a pure EH point of view, but not as strong from an incoming-HPS point of view), and Survival Instincts and Frenzied Regeneration are individually weaker than IBF with longer invididual cooldowns, but can be chained together.

Muffin Man
02-23-2010, 01:08 PM
They've made a point of saying WotN is what it is on the PTR right now because they don't think it will make a bit of difference, they don't think it needs an ICD. So, we'll see if their suspicions are right or not. I expect it's pretty right on.

I look forward to the IT change, I am curious to see how well it gets balanced though, thankfully they said in the same breath that they are watching for exactly that (that IT doesn't do so much threat that it supports all-IT rotations).

I agree with Satorri on this one. I even fished up a blue post explaining why the dev's don't think the lack of an ICC will make a real difference.

http://blue.mmo-champion.com/26/23329103342-333-patch-notes.html

Now, I will admit that I haven't seen all of the limited attempt ICC bosses even. But just a quick scan of their abilities show that GC is right. Boss nuke abilities don't happen more often than 15 seconds (and are really designed for tank swaps or something similar) - ie Soul Reaper is every 30 seconds, the Blood Prince fireball of death is longer than 15 seconds (and should be mitigated through the raid anyways), ect.

One boss I can see being problematic is Festergut since he just hits hard and fast, and will probably be the 'ideal' boss for WoTN dmg reduction. Even Saurfang doesn't hit that hard, he just hits really fast, in which case most of the dmg reduction will be unrealized since he'll spend the majority of his hits chipping you down to the threshold.

I do wonder what how dots that essentially prevent you from ever being at 100% health (ie - delirious slash) will effect the relative power of WoTN since it forces DKs closer to the threshold, in which case more normal hits will trigger WoTN.

We'll see how ICC hard modes work out. But since the hope was Chill of the Throne removed the need for bosses doing damage for > 50% of our lifebar / hit, I don't think WoTN will be overpowered.

Proletaria
02-23-2010, 03:26 PM
We have better cooldowns than paladins too; the only real cooldown they have is divine protection. Ardent defender is certainly not something to discount, and on certain fights (e.g. Algalon) it does function like a cooldown, but on other fights (e.g. Festergut, Airship achievement mode) broadly applicable long term cooldowns like VB are stronger.

The only class that has really comparable cooldowns to DKs right now are druids (and that's only from the perspective of non-magical damage). Barkskin is pretty similar to VB (better from a pure EH point of view, but not as strong from an incoming-HPS point of view), and Survival Instincts and Frenzied Regeneration are individually weaker than IBF with longer invididual cooldowns, but can be chained together.

It's a dangerous thing to direct compare cooldowns cross class, but VB is probably the weakest "cooldown" around, aside from UBA in an magical encounter.

Looking at primary cooldowns: BS(1min 20%), SW (2min, 40%), DP (2min, 50%), IBF (2min 50+%) you could easily say IBF/DP>SW, but with the others, it's not so strait forward, espcially when you need rp to use ibf.
Looking as secondary cooldowns: SI, LS, and espcially AD's proc are FAR more effective at preventing a burst-death than VB. VB provides the least protection from a short term burst, and it's only more effective when you know you can survive the hit and the healers get that bonus healing to bring you back to full.

Again, I wouldn't say a direct comparison is always fair, but I seriously do not consider dk cooldowns "superior" anymore, both in terms of effective use and opportunity cost.

Dawnbreaker
02-23-2010, 04:07 PM
Now, I will admit that I haven't seen all of the limited attempt ICC bosses even. But just a quick scan of their abilities show that GC is right. Boss nuke abilities don't happen more often than 15 seconds (and are really designed for tank swaps or something similar) - ie Soul Reaper is every 30 seconds, the Blood Prince fireball of death is longer than 15 seconds (and should be mitigated through the raid anyways), ect.
With the current CD, WotN isn't that powerful at all, not even close. Remove the CD and it becomes enormously powerful. The faulty assumption you, and GC, are making is that we needed the 15% reduction to survive those big bang attacks. The fact is, we don't. Pretty much any tank can take the ~35K frost breath from Sindragosa or the ~40K Soul Reaper from LK, and they'll live, whether it gets the 15% DR on it from WotN or not.

The super power of removing the CD is that the 15% is now applying to every attack *after* the big bang attack, precisely when it is needed, automatically and every time. Knocking off 15% off of Sindragosa's frost breath or the LKs Soul Reaper isn't a big deal, but knocking 15% off of those big attacks *and every attack that threatens to kill the tank immediately afterwords* is pretty huge. These are usually sizable melee swings, whether they be from Fester, Sindragosa, or LK, the 15% will kick in automatically when needed most and is slightly stronger than the pallies AD DR component, which is also a very powerful ability.

Blizzards statements regarding WotN's current power w/ the 15 second CD are correct, it really does not factor in much to tank survivability currently. However the proposed change makes it immensely powerful, and I hope the above examples illustrate that for you.

Muffin Man
02-23-2010, 05:18 PM
The super power of removing the CD is that the 15% is now applying to every attack *after* the big bang attack, precisely when it is needed, automatically and every time. Knocking off 15% off of Sindragosa's frost breath or the LKs Soul Reaper isn't a big deal, but knocking 15% off of those big attacks *and every attack that threatens to kill the tank immediately afterwords* is pretty huge. These are usually sizable melee swings, whether they be from Fester, Sindragosa, or LK, the 15% will kick in automatically when needed most and is slightly stronger than the pallies AD DR component, which is also a very powerful ability.

I do see your point. It's like Cider used to preach, it's a string of hits that kill tanks not a single hit (unless undergeared or whatnot). I'll admit I hadn't fully considered that, but I still don't see it as a big deal.

I mentioned that these mechanics are currently resolved through tank swapping or I guess blowing a cooldown and I don't think WoTN changes that. Allowing WoTN to chain to subsequent normal swings after the big blow may give you a bigger fudge factor, but if you take a 40k frost breath (which WoTN reduces to 34k currently and after this change) still leaves you plenty vulnerable to subsequent normal swings normal swing. But let's assume that Sindragosa melees a tank for 20k (is that too high?) The new WoTN reduces those swings to 17k. Guess what, a warrior's shield block does the same thing (with an admittedly large delta both ways from critical block and individual gearing). Now Warriors have a 40 second cooldown on SB, so overtime the DK gets a slight edge here. Which I just don't see as game breaking.

While I'm skeptical, this is on the ptr for a reason. So we'll see what happens once the Devs see the numbers.

Miste
02-23-2010, 06:15 PM
It's a dangerous thing to direct compare cooldowns cross class, but VB is probably the weakest "cooldown" around, aside from UBA in an magical encounter.

Looking at primary cooldowns: BS(1min 20%), SW (2min, 40%), DP (2min, 50%), IBF (2min 50+%) you could easily say IBF/DP>SW, but with the others, it's not so strait forward, espcially when you need rp to use ibf.
Looking as secondary cooldowns: SI, LS, and espcially AD's proc are FAR more effective at preventing a burst-death than VB. VB provides the least protection from a short term burst, and it's only more effective when you know you can survive the hit and the healers get that bonus healing to bring you back to full.

Again, I wouldn't say a direct comparison is always fair, but I seriously do not consider dk cooldowns "superior" anymore, both in terms of effective use and opportunity cost.
I will agree that VB is a relatively weak cooldown when it comes to saving your life from a blow that would otherwise kill you. VB is not designed to be a skill that keeps you from dieing if you are in dire straits. That's why Blood has WotN. WotN is much closer to SI, LS and AD as a secondary cooldown. Rune tap is a weaker form of both SI and LS and is more comparable as a reactive, life saving cooldown.

Used during a known cycle of expected heavy damage, like Festergut 3 inhale, VB is very strong. The 15% extra health is nice, but the 35% extra healing is unparalleled raid synergy. VB is not reactive like most tank cooldowns. VB and BS are proactive cooldowns intended to be used on or near every cooldown. That philosophy for the 1 minute DK cooldowns is not replicated by other tanking cooldowns. I think it is something Blizzard likes and I won't be surprised if each tanking class gets a more proactive tanking cooldown in 4.0/Cataclysm.

Proletaria
02-23-2010, 10:23 PM
I will agree that VB is a relatively weak cooldown when it comes to saving your life from a blow that would otherwise kill you. VB is not designed to be a skill that keeps you from dieing if you are in dire straits. That's why Blood has WotN. WotN is much closer to SI, LS and AD as a secondary cooldown. Rune tap is a weaker form of both SI and LS and is more comparable as a reactive, life saving cooldown.

Used during a known cycle of expected heavy damage, like Festergut 3 inhale, VB is very strong. The 15% extra health is nice, but the 35% extra healing is unparalleled raid synergy. VB is not reactive like most tank cooldowns. VB and BS are proactive cooldowns intended to be used on or near every cooldown. That philosophy for the 1 minute DK cooldowns is not replicated by other tanking cooldowns. I think it is something Blizzard likes and I won't be surprised if each tanking class gets a more proactive tanking cooldown in 4.0/Cataclysm.

You could say the same thing of Bear EH making up for barksin, AD's passive mitigation making up for it's insant proc that isn't a duration, etc. The point is that VB is not a "superior" cooldown. The bonus healing is in most cases either not enough, or completely wasted. Consider how many encounters slowly whiddle you down in hp to zero rather than attempt to burst you there. Almost none since hardmode vezzax. VB is a proactive cooldown (like just about every cooldown, dk or not), but it does not function the same way other cooldowns do. It's purpose is to provide bursts of added healing while you use another cooldown to survive the actual burst (and after 3.3.3 wotn willl be more reliable at catching those bursts you cannot use another cd on).

SO, as I said, functionally, it does fit with the tree, and i agree it is by no means underwhelming. I consider it to be the best cooldown (in most situations) that dk's currently have since unholy is pitiful and therefor bs is not in the equation. That being said, none of our secondaries are superior cooldowns, and if anything they are marginally worse at their indended use, espcially given the rune cost.

I am not suggesting blizzard does or does not like the system, or that it should change significantly, but the common argument that "well, dks have better cooldowns, so it's ok for them to lack X, Y, and Z," is a bit dated.

swelt
02-24-2010, 03:17 AM
The point about the ICD removal is that it lets you build your strategies around it.

Boss Ability X (call it soul reaper or frost breath or impale, whatever makes sense to you) is going to land every 30 seconds. It will do YYY damage normally but ZZZ damage if WOTN reduces it. With current WotN, it was always possible that regular damage could drop you to 30% or so and put you on cooldown, which means that you could not rely on WOTN reducing that damage. Since you can't rely on it, you have to build your strategies on the assumption that it won't reduce it and use other cooldowns or tactics to survive it. With the ICD being removed, you always know that ability X will hit for ZZZ damage and you can build your strategies around that.

Satorri
02-24-2010, 05:37 AM
With the current CD, WotN isn't that powerful at all, not even close. Remove the CD and it becomes enormously powerful.

The super power of removing the CD is that the 15% is now applying to every attack *after* the big bang attack, precisely when it is needed, automatically and every time. Sindragosa, or LK, the 15% will kick in automatically when needed most and is slightly stronger than the pallies AD DR component, which is also a very powerful ability.

I don't think you understand how these abilities work.

WotN *only* reduces damage of hits that take you across the threshold. In other word, if Soul Reaper knocks you below 35%, WotN will reduce the damage of that hit, but it will have no effect at all on the hits taken when you're below 35% already. The only place it *could* become "immensely" powerful is if there is an encounter where the tank is routinely bouncing below 35% and back up. The only place that is currently a concern for this is actually the Soul Reaper ability, and it *is* Soul Reaper mitigation that they are concerned about.


I think Blizzard has a better handle on the situation than you do. =(

jere
02-24-2010, 05:51 AM
Are you getting this info due to testing on the PTR?

Bosk
02-24-2010, 06:42 AM
WotN *only* reduces damage of hits that take you across the threshold. In other word, if Soul Reaper knocks you below 35%, WotN will reduce the damage of that hit, but it will have no effect at all on the hits taken when you're below 35% already. The only place it *could* become "immensely" powerful is if there is an encounter where the tank is routinely bouncing below 35% and back up. The only place that is currently a concern for this is actually the Soul Reaper ability, and it *is* Soul Reaper mitigation that they are concerned about.
(

Are you saying that if I am standing at 30% health with a mob hitting me for, say, 1K, that damage is not affected by WotN? That is not my experience of AD in PvP when you appear to beat helplessly on a prot pally in his AD zone.

Angriff
02-24-2010, 07:11 AM
I don't think you understand how these abilities work.

WotN *only* reduces damage of hits that take you across the threshold. In other word, if Soul Reaper knocks you below 35%, WotN will reduce the damage of that hit, but it will have no effect at all on the hits taken when you're below 35% already. The only place it *could* become "immensely" powerful is if there is an encounter where the tank is routinely bouncing below 35% and back up. The only place that is currently a concern for this is actually the Soul Reaper ability, and it *is* Soul Reaper mitigation that they are concerned about.


I think Blizzard has a better handle on the situation than you do. =(

I don't know why you keep spouting this as a fact when it's pretty clearly NOT the case, as it always reduced damage on all hits below 35% before they put a cooldown on it, and has no reason to perform differently now. It's also quite easily proven by getting meleed by any mob on PTR until you go sub 35%, for example Thrym:

[10:01:22.663] Thrym hits Angriff 2256
[10:01:24.697] Thrym hits Angriff 1949 (A: 343)
[10:01:26.755] Thrym hits Angriff Miss
[10:01:28.739] Thrym hits Angriff Dodge
[10:01:30.685] Thrym hits Angriff 1904 (A: 335)
[10:01:32.765] Thrym hits Angriff 1560 (A: 275)
[10:01:34.766] Thrym hits Angriff Dodge
[10:01:36.811] Thrym hits Angriff Dodge
[10:01:38.772] Thrym hits Angriff Dodge
[10:01:40.719] Thrym hits Angriff Dodge
[10:01:42.727] Thrym hits Angriff 1825 (A: 322)
[10:01:44.877] Thrym hits Angriff Parry
[10:01:46.784] Thrym hits Angriff Miss
[10:01:48.804] Thrym hits Angriff Parry
[10:01:50.802] Thrym hits Angriff 1497 (A: 264)
[10:01:52.826] Thrym hits Angriff Dodge
[10:01:54.758] Thrym hits Angriff Miss
[10:01:56.824] Thrym hits Angriff 1715 (A: 302)

As you can see, every swing that connects after the first one that takes me under 35% is being reduced by the full 15%. (The first swing is being reduced by a full 15% rather than just the part taking me under 35% like AD does, if you were looking for evidence of that as well.)

As a side note, it took forever to finish off Thrym with Rune Strike being broken to never trigger on PTR.

Satorri
02-24-2010, 07:26 AM
Your combat log excerpts need more information, like what your health is at and what your max health is. Not that it isn't helpful and potentially informative. To the best of my understanding this has *not* been demonstrated yet and as such is *not* "obviously clear."

The absorb data is helpful though, it does support the 15% value.

Edgewalker
02-24-2010, 08:55 AM
I don't think you understand how these abilities work.

WotN *only* reduces damage of hits that take you across the threshold. In other word, if Soul Reaper knocks you below 35%, WotN will reduce the damage of that hit, but it will have no effect at all on the hits taken when you're below 35% already. The only place it *could* become "immensely" powerful is if there is an encounter where the tank is routinely bouncing below 35% and back up. The only place that is currently a concern for this is actually the Soul Reaper ability, and it *is* Soul Reaper mitigation that they are concerned about.


I think Blizzard has a better handle on the situation than you do. =(


I'm thinking you are still greatly undervaluing exactly how often a tank goes from the 36-100 range to under the 35 range, even if just briefly.

Also it may change, but on PTR it definitely is effective at all %s. Hits that take you below 35%, and all hits taken below 35%. It's very, very, very easy to test. You may want to double check things like that before you go on condescending on someone with the sad face ;)

jere
02-24-2010, 09:14 AM
Your combat log excerpts need more information, like what your health is at and what your max health is. Not that it isn't helpful and potentially informative. To the best of my understanding this has *not* been demonstrated yet and as such is *not* "obviously clear."

The absorb data is helpful though, it does support the 15% value.

Well he is not getting any heals in that and he is just letting Thyrm whack on him, so once he is below a certain level, he should continue to stay below that. EDIT: Unless I am misunderstanding something?

Miste
02-24-2010, 09:34 AM
WotN *only* reduces damage of hits that take you across the threshold. In other word, if Soul Reaper knocks you below 35%, WotN will reduce the damage of that hit, but it will have no effect at all on the hits taken when you're below 35% already. The only place it *could* become "immensely" powerful is if there is an encounter where the tank is routinely bouncing below 35% and back up. The only place that is currently a concern for this is actually the Soul Reaper ability, and it *is* Soul Reaper mitigation that they are concerned about.
I think you misunderstand exactly how WotN worked before the cooldown was implemented. In addition to absorbing damage for an attack that takes you below 35%, it absorbed damage occurring after you were below 35%. The boolean expression is very linear:

If (current HP) - (incoming damage) <= .35 * (max HP)
then (incoming damage) = (incoming damage) * .85

It does not care if your current health is above 35%. That's why Blood DKs were OP on Sarth 3D. We could absorb the initial hits and the subsequent smaller damage done during the encounter. With the cooldown, only the hit that takes you below 35% will be reduced because your healers will bring you over 35% before the 15 seconds are up. If you stayed below 35% for the entire 15 second cooldown, the next damage you take will be reduced by WotN.

Proletaria
02-24-2010, 09:58 AM
It does not care if your current health is above 35%. That's why Blood DKs were OP on Sarth 3D. We could absorb the initial hits and the subsequent smaller damage done during the encounter. With the cooldown, only the hit that takes you below 35% will be reduced because your healers will bring you over 35% before the 15 seconds are up. If you stayed below 35% for the entire 15 second cooldown, the next damage you take will be reduced by WotN.

The hybrid VottW / AMZ spec was better than blood for sarth 3d. Sorry.

Dawnbreaker
02-24-2010, 10:57 AM
I don't think you understand how these abilities work.

*incorrect WotN information removed*

I think Blizzard has a better handle on the situation than you do. =(
I have removed your WotN description due to inaccuracy. There are a few posts above this one which demonstrate that the PTR version is as I described, and I can cut someone slack for not being up to the minute informed on PTR developments. However, your understanding of the _current_ WotN is incorrect as well.

The PTR patch notes mention something important that is often overlooked, as I do not see anyone talking about it:
Will of the Necropolis: There is no longer a cooldown on the frequency at which this talent can be activated. In addition, this ability can now also be triggered by damage which deals less than 5% of your health.

In essence, the damage that triggers the WotN (old/current) proc does not have to occur at (or including or crossing) the 35% threshold, and it never had to. If a blood DK took a hit that took him from 36% to 33%, the WotN (old/current) proc did not trigger due to that 5% condition. If he then went from 33%->23% in the next hit, the WotN proc kicked in and shaved off 15% of that damage. If somehow the CD on WotN comes up again when the DK is sitting at 30% health, then WotN applies when he takes that next hit from 30% to 5% health. These are all situations where WotN can kick in on damage taken that do not need to "cross" the 35% threshold. In fact, if an encounter involved an attack that hit a blood DK tank 50 times for 2% per hit, the current WotN never triggers, and the DK dies.

These are the current live mechanics of WotN and the basis of why I, and others, are describing this ability as "very very powerful" in its current PTR form, pretty much blowing away the other tanking trees completely if this were to make it live.

In other words, I am going to politely disagree with your assessment that I do not know what I am talking about and if we need to scrounge up some evidence that support/negate claims we can do that. I'm always interested in finding out when my understanding is incorrect, and I have no problems admitting I am in error if someone can provide contrary evidence.

TomHuxley
02-24-2010, 11:07 AM
I think you missed the ENTIRE tone and purpose of his post Tom.

Really? Please explain the tone you see then. Because what I saw (and saw again when I reread it just now to make sure I wasn't off my rocker) was a post thematically more in line with the official forums than for tankspot. I saw someone whine about how "others" (what others? trade chat???) had been saying that DKs didn't need any tweaking, which was not the general conclusion on these forums. I saw glee exclaimed over the fact that this is a "told you so" by the devs to whoever these strawman tanks are that think DKs must be kept down at all costs. I saw someone talking about how happy they would be to "abuse" a mechanic until it was nerfed (if indeed it needs to be nerfed). And it was in line with prots other posts in this threat, which all come across as if they have a huge chip on his shoulder.

This thread should have been an honest discussion of whether the WotN change will be just fine, or need to be tweaked. A couple of posters have even tried to supply numbers for the discussion (although tbh nothing conclusive yet IMO). But Proletaria's posts are littered with hyperbole and what seems to be a giant chip on his shoulder. But perhaps I'm over-reacting and Prol just wants to have an open, and frank discussion rather than sling BS and personal attacks around:


Indeed. I think Tom is, once again, off his meds.

Oh right, maybe not.

The TL : DR of my take over several posts is this: WotN buff is certainly nice. Maybe (but only maybe) too nice for some of the hardest hitting ICC hard modes, but time will tell. Other buffs made to DKs are IMO even more important because there are several areas where DKs deserve a quality of life upgrade, although they will probably be less important to end game progression tanks.

And given the original intent of the DK trees, I think it's unfortunate (but possibly unavoidable) that DPS/Tanking is getting shoehorned into individual trees now.

Proletaria
02-24-2010, 11:20 AM
Really? Please explain the tone you see then. Because what I saw (and saw again when I reread it just now to make sure I wasn't off my rocker) was a post thematically more in line with the official forums than for tankspot. I saw someone whine about how "others" (what others? trade chat???) had been saying that DKs didn't need any tweaking, which was not the general conclusion on these forums. I saw glee exclaimed over the fact that this is a "told you so" by the devs to whoever these strawman tanks are that think DKs must be kept down at all costs. I saw someone talking about how happy they would be to "abuse" a mechanic until it was nerfed (if indeed it needs to be nerfed). And it was in line with prots other posts in this threat, which all come across as if they have a huge chip on his shoulder.

This thread should have been an honest discussion of whether the WotN change will be just fine, or need to be tweaked. A couple of posters have even tried to supply numbers for the discussion (although tbh nothing conclusive yet IMO). But Proletaria's posts are littered with hyperbole and what seems to be a giant chip on his shoulder. But perhaps I'm over-reacting and Prol just wants to have an open, and frank discussion rather than sling BS and personal attacks around:



Oh right, maybe not.

The TL : DR of my take over several posts is this: WotN buff is certainly nice. Maybe (but only maybe) too nice for some of the hardest hitting ICC hard modes, but time will tell. Other buffs made to DKs are IMO even more important because there are several areas where DKs deserve a quality of life upgrade, although they will probably be less important to end game progression tanks.

And given the original intent of the DK trees, I think it's unfortunate (but possibly unavoidable) that DPS/Tanking is getting shoehorned into individual trees now.

If you don't like the thread devolving into over-reactions, ad-hominem, and baseless rants, you might want to keep your own out of the thread aswell. The icy touch change is not more important, it's a simple quality of life change that gives us a little snap threat at the start of our otherwise weak disease-disease-strike rotation which takes quite a few globals to ramp up. Is it hyperbolic to suggest the DK class is one that I am intimately familiar with? No. Is it way off base to suggest that I can put that in the context of the content i'm currently experienced with? No. What makes everything I say, in absence of a flow-chart and pie graph, nonesene and conjecture?


DKs don't need an AP debuff, it's widely available already. I suspect this buff to WotN will be nerfed a couple weeks after release to something more like a 5 second ICD

Or was that supposed to be the end of the debat on this topic? You really cannot discuss a change to one talent in a vacume. If the class wasn't lacking survivability or utility in it's absence then we wouldn't see what (by most accounts i'm reading here) could be a huge buff. I merely pointed out why that was the case. You might have been personally offended given your own stance on the ap debuff issue or against the dk class in general getting fixed before warriors, but I assure you it was not meant to bait you (though it certainly did that).

Miste
02-24-2010, 11:47 AM
The hybrid VottW / AMZ spec was better than blood for sarth 3d. Sorry.
Gee...that would have been such an accurate response if we were actually discussing the best tank specs for Sarth 3D way back in 3.0. Blood DKs were OP on that fight because of the WotN change from bonus armor to % damage reduction. The spec you mention depended on better execution by the DK and superior DPS. Outside of the top 5% of WoW guilds, most raids can't pull off that kind of execution until they out gear the encounter, in which case it doesn't really matter. Sorry.

Proletaria
02-24-2010, 11:49 AM
Gee...that would have been such an accurate response if we were actually discussing the best tank specs for Sarth 3D way back in 3.0.

?


That's why Blood DKs were OP on Sarth 3D.

This seems to indicate we were.


Blood DKs were OP on that fight because of the WotN change from bonus armor to % damage reduction. The spec you mention depended on better execution by the DK and superior DPS. Outside of the top 5% of WoW guilds, most raids can't pull off that kind of execution until they out gear the encounter, in which case it doesn't really matter. Sorry.

After sarth was zergable post-nerf (in which case, you could tank it with anyone who could survive 2 breaths) sure, blood would have been easier to use. I hardly think utilizing and AMS/IBF/AMZ/BS rotation too "superior" anything from the raid. And in it's original form, the spec i mentioned was "the" sarth spec. There were no blood subsitutes. I was merely pointing out your recollection of dk history was off. It's a common mistake.

So the fact "most guilds" didnt kill sarth pre-nerf means it doesn't matter? Interesting.

TomHuxley
02-24-2010, 12:24 PM
The icy touch change is not more important, it's a simple quality of life change that gives us a little snap threat at the start of our otherwise weak disease-disease-strike rotation which takes quite a few globals to ramp up.

I said it won't be more important to DKs that are doing progression endgame content. That isn't the same thing as not being important. DK tank numbers dropped off a bit when they were nerfed from OP to "as poor as warriors" in late summer, and while people can (and do) condescendingly claim this is because people stopped wanting to play when the class wasn't OP, it also created a separate problem. While the 3.2 changes left damage taken on bosses very close between warriors and DKs (with DKs perhaps needing a bit more armor and being more CD reliant) it left DKs pretty screwed in heroics since they lacked a snap agro device and a static damage reduction mechanic ala block. I suspect this has caused more players to not continue to try and gear up their DKs for tanking (and certainly makes the process less fun even if they do stick with it).

So in terms of overall class balance I'm not at all convinced that WotN is more important, although I grant you without any hesitation that it's the change of largest significance to endgame DK tanks.


Is it hyperbolic to suggest the DK class is one that I am intimately familiar with? No. Is it way off base to suggest that I can put that in the context of the content i'm currently experienced with? No. What makes everything I say, in absence of a flow-chart and pie graph, nonesene and conjecture?

Ok, the funny thing is I don't think we are very far apart on the WotN issue. I don't think it's going to be game breaking on most encounters, and at most will be too OP on some hard mode encounters (and maybe not). I gather you feel fairly confidence that it isn't OP. That's fine and I have no objection to what should be a productive discussion. My problem is you didn't merely say "As a DK endgame tank..." you instead classified yourself as "one of the only" endgame DK tanks, which especially on these boards is a hyberbolic claim, and since not all DKs are in lockstep on the issue of the WotN buff if comes off (to me at least) as an attempt to elevate your opinion above almost everyone else. Since your post was totally devoid of the sort of data that Sartorri's, Jere's, or even Angriff's brought, this feels like litte more than an attempt to bypass data and argue from authority (which is a classic rhetorical flaw). If that's not how you intended it, you have my apologies, but that sure how it reads.

BTW, notice that the people I mentioned don't agree in this thread. That's the wonderful thing about being explicit about mechanics and (even better) providing quantitative data is that we can figure out who is wrong and were. The important thing isn't to be the one single person who is right, but rather that as a community we figure out what actually IS the correct answer. My resentment was that your posts felt like they were detracting from this process. I'm sure our tarrying on like this means that we're both sidetracking the thread now.


Or was that supposed to be the end of the debat on this topic? You really cannot discuss a change to one talent in a vacume. If the class wasn't lacking survivability or utility in it's absence then we wouldn't see what (by most accounts i'm reading here) could be a huge buff. I merely pointed out why that was the case. You might have been personally offended given your own stance on the ap debuff issue or against the dk class in general getting fixed before warriors, but I assure you it was not meant to bait you.

But you didn't discuss an AP debuff in light of WotN or any other change, you merely stated that you still want one. Which is nice, I want Heroism, AMZ, GotW, and a bubble, but I don't really believe I should be given them. If you think there is a meaningful way to integrate an AP debuff or other balance changes into the conversation and show why/how they effect WotN, great. But just flatly stating you want something is not contributing any data at all to the conversation.

swelt
02-24-2010, 04:01 PM
Perhaps we can get past the bickering and focus on the facts please? This is the theory forum after all...


I think you misunderstand exactly how WotN worked before the cooldown was implemented. In addition to absorbing damage for an attack that takes you below 35%, it absorbed damage occurring after you were below 35%. The boolean expression is very linear:

If (current HP) - (incoming damage) <= .35 * (max HP)
then (incoming damage) = (incoming damage) * .85

Do we need any more evidence or testing to confirm whether the above matches the current PTR implementation? Are we sure it hasn't been made more like AD, in particular around the actual hit that takes you across the 35% threshold.

What happens if the incoming damage, once reduced by 15% doesn't actually take you below 35%. Is this a universe ending paradox? (ie. if I have 100 max health and get hit for 66 damage)

Molecule
02-24-2010, 04:11 PM
Do we need any more evidence or testing to confirm whether the above matches the current PTR implementation? Are we sure it hasn't been made more like AD, in particular around the actual hit that takes you across the 35% threshold.

What happens if the incoming damage, once reduced by 15% doesn't actually take you below 35%. Is this a universe ending paradox? (ie. if I have 100 max health and get hit for 66 damage)

Angriff's data above shows pretty conclusively that it doesn't behave like AD. Every single absorb is for 17.5-17.6% as much as the damage actually taken, which is the same as 15% of the damage dealt being negated.

As for universe ending paradoxes, I don't know that there's any evidence thus far one way or the other, but based on the literal wording of the talent the absorb should happen even if it results in you taking not enough damage to go down to 35%.

An interesting question though is what happens if you have damage absorption from another source (e.g. PW:S). Is this removed prior to the WotN determination, or can you actually have WotN occur on a hit that doesn't bring you anywhere near 35%?

Vrekgar
02-24-2010, 06:22 PM
Angriff's data above shows pretty conclusively that it doesn't behave like AD. Every single absorb is for 17.5-17.6% as much as the damage actually taken, which is the same as 15% of the damage dealt being negated.

As for universe ending paradoxes, I don't know that there's any evidence thus far one way or the other, but based on the literal wording of the talent the absorb should happen even if it results in you taking not enough damage to go down to 35%.

An interesting question though is what happens if you have damage absorption from another source (e.g. PW:S). Is this removed prior to the WotN determination, or can you actually have WotN occur on a hit that doesn't bring you anywhere near 35%?

afaik all static damage reduction is applied before absorb effects. thus the 15% reduces the hit, then the PW:S absorbs its amount.

Penlowe
02-25-2010, 04:34 AM
Proletaria & TomHuxley:
STOP IT!

Satorri
02-25-2010, 06:57 AM
I'm thinking you are still greatly undervaluing exactly how often a tank goes from the 36-100 range to under the 35 range, even if just briefly.

Also it may change, but on PTR it definitely is effective at all %s. Hits that take you below 35%, and all hits taken below 35%. It's very, very, very easy to test. You may want to double check things like that before you go on condescending on someone with the sad face ;)

We've had this discussion before. You understand I value it just fine, I just don't take it. It is a fine talent for being there when you want it most, I'm just trying to keep a handle on the people who are proclaiming its god-like-ness, as it is not *that* big a deal, it is just nice and useful.

There was also no intention of condescension.

Acidbaron
02-25-2010, 02:54 PM
And it seems us DK tanks actually are on the same line as the developers with how much of a buff it will actually be versus the no offense 'illusion' others have that this will make us near 'immortal'.

And i quote


Will of the Necropolis Buff
As I've said several times now, the Will of the Necropolis change wasn't an "OMG DKs are vanishing - let's buff" decision. A couple of designers looked at the cooldown, evaluated how often it really mattered, concluded not often, and thought the ability would be simpler to understand, less frustrating, and perhaps a small DK buff without the cooldown. The paladin and warrior health adjustments were a result of seeing progression on hard mode encounters, where bosses tend to melee for a lot all the time so health might trump cooldowns. Neither of them were huge changes and you can make the argument that things might have been fine without the changes at all. We thought a small adjustment was appropriate. I concede that these things are often subjective and others might have made a different call than we made.

Edgewalker
02-25-2010, 06:21 PM
I'm just trying to keep a handle on the people who are proclaiming its god-like-ness, as it is not *that* big a deal, it is just nice and useful..

You are really doing a disservice to people that take what you say to heart then. If you are going to die as a tank, ever, in any situation, WoTN is a very, very, very good talent. It IS that big of a deal. Not taking it after the change is completely insane.

Dawnbreaker
02-25-2010, 08:02 PM
Well, on the one hand, you have myself and Edge here saying that WotN is a very powerful talent in its PTR form. I've also taken the time to explain how it works on the PTR and on live.

And on the other hand, Satorri says the talents isn't that powerful, has implied I was clueless, and has spread misinformation about how the talent works on live and on the PTR (and this incorrect information has been countered by examples earlier in the thread and is easily verifiable).

Pretty much anyone with half a brain in the tanking realm is going to be able to figure this one out. If the PTR version makes it to live, there really is no more choice about which tree to spec into for tanks, it will be blood or nothing.

Proletaria
02-26-2010, 01:11 AM
Well, on the one hand, you have myself and Edge here saying that WotN is a very powerful talent in its PTR form. I've also taken the time to explain how it works on the PTR and on live.

And on the other hand, Satorri says the talents isn't that powerful, has implied I was clueless, and has spread misinformation about how the talent works on live and on the PTR (and this incorrect information has been countered by examples earlier in the thread and is easily verifiable).

Pretty much anyone with half a brain in the tanking realm is going to be able to figure this one out. If the PTR version makes it to live, there really is no more choice about which tree to spec into for tanks, it will be blood or nothing.

Better blood be the tank spec than have substantially less effective but independent tanking specs in blood and frost.

KnThrak
02-26-2010, 01:23 AM
We've had this discussion before. You understand I value it just fine, I just don't take it. It is a fine talent for being there when you want it most, I'm just trying to keep a handle on the people who are proclaiming its god-like-ness, as it is not *that* big a deal, it is just nice and useful.

It makes sense really. In nowadays heal-spammy world the only situations in which a tank should dip below 35% HP unless the auto-attack-damage of the boss is >65% of his health (and then you got bigger issues ;) ) is when either a) the big hit comes on or b) the shit-hits-the-fan-phase comes.

For example Frost Breath on Sindragosa or 3-stack on Festergut.
But realistically, in the first case the current WotN is nearly as good as the new one. In the second case it makes a large difference, but given Festergut's attackspeed I think the actual gain in survival is ~nil. Either you get so much healspam that you are up to full after every unavoided hit, or you're dead. The only way the new WotN would save you there is if the incoming healing-per-Festergut-hit is less than his hit, but more than the WotN-reduced hit. But again, how often does that realistically happen that your raid is set up like that?


I would say mostly this removes the "ARGH" moment where a hit brings you to 36% HP, area damage kills another 7% triggering WotN, you get healed up, 12 seconds later you take an 80% blow which cannot be mitigated because the cooldown is running.

Satorri
02-26-2010, 05:47 AM
Ok, we've beaten this horse into the ground enough. Any back and forth from this point is just sticking our fingers in our ears and yelling "lalalalalalala can't hear you."

People will make what they will of the talent, and spec accordingly.

Edgewalker
02-26-2010, 09:15 AM
Ok, we've beaten this horse into the ground enough. Any back and forth from this point is just sticking our fingers in our ears and yelling "lalalalalalala can't hear you."

People will make what they will of the talent, and spec accordingly.

It's really been a one way conversation. The only argument the people against WoTN being anything less than great have given is that healers will always keep you above 35%, or that no hits will do more than 35% of your damage. The first part of the statement is just flat wrong (if everyone in whatever guild everyone is in played perfectly, we would all be 11/12 heroic 25M ICC). Even WITH perfect play, some bosses do output enough damage that you will hit below the threshold constantly. The second part of the statement is even more wrong. If it's a hard boss, it hits for that hard.
Your argument is the equivalent of "nah, you shouldn't spend 3 talent points for 6000 life", or "nah, tanks don't need survival tools that take no human skill or reactions to operate". It's not an argument, It's a fallacy. It misleads tanks that may be coming here looking for advice and see your name in green. It misleads other tanks that may be just dipping into raiding and aren't quite sure what to make of the changes. It's misleading to yourself.
Fine, this will be my last post on it, but don't let pride or a stubborn attitude make you look a fool.

Satorri
02-26-2010, 09:50 AM
Insulting me or trying to dismiss me on a whole does not help your case either. Not that you presented one.

vine
02-26-2010, 10:15 AM
Could likely just close this thread up now, thanks for turning a decent discussion into a slinging match guys.

Bashal
02-26-2010, 11:01 AM
Hm.

There was always an argument against not bothering to spec into WotN when I used to read the WoW forums. It was the same as the argument against bothering with rune tap: "the healers are spamming on me anyway, it'll just produce more overheal." They were instead focusing on talents which generated more threat/dps.

It's a valid point of view on the surface of it, at least, considering that DK tanks with neither WotN or RT were clearing hard modes -- or so they claimed. I never bothered to armory them. But I'm guessing if they were lying, the whole "armory and insult" culture on the WoW forums would have caught that.

OTOH: both WotN and RT can cover for (very) temporary healer failure. It can decrease the number of wipes that a group may have to go through before getting a boss kill. How often that actually comes in to play though is debatable, which is where I think Satorri gets his somewhat "meh" response about WotN from.

Satorri
02-26-2010, 11:30 AM
It is funny too, because I've always been a big fan of Rune Tap but rarely found WotN missed when I didn't have it. I think the big difference in that example though is that I've always enjoyed Rune Tap for being an active response, and that's what I've enjoyed about Blood in general. It gains in value the better it is used. WotN I don't handle, I just sit back and say, "hey it proc'd! Cool."

Admittedly the change makes me curious to pick it up for the late ICC fights, but I'm always remiss to swap points around in my spec once I've had a tried and true spec for more than a month.

One of my primary issues with WotN before was that the ICD made it very limited when you really wanted it. In other words, when your health dropped you would get one proc and that was it, regardless for the next 15 sec. Generally speaking if your health drops that low, there is something going on that you will want your protection up. Removing the CD means you can get continued effect, now that I've seen it working on every hit that goes below 35%.

I think Blizzard is right that in general it should not be a big deal as you will not be hanging out below 35% health, but it still could be a clinch save in the times where you want it most. In the places where you're learning, where your healers miss a beat, where you take that soul-crushing hit...

KnThrak
02-26-2010, 11:36 AM
To get the conversation more back on track though, what can they do to make Frost and Unholy competitive to this? Technically if buffed for uptime, Acclimation could do the trick for Frost (but could get PvP iffy, though this can be fixed to make it 100% proc from using RS I suppose) but I wonder about Unholy. The best I could think of would be another talent passively generating Bone Shield charges from some mechanic.

Proletaria
02-26-2010, 11:55 AM
To get the conversation more back on track though, what can they do to make Frost and Unholy competitive to this? Technically if buffed for uptime, Acclimation could do the trick for Frost (but could get PvP iffy, though this can be fixed to make it 100% proc from using RS I suppose) but I wonder about Unholy. The best I could think of would be another talent passively generating Bone Shield charges from some mechanic.

Unholy needs a lot of work to come in line with the other trees for physical damage. Problem is, it really does offer quite a bit for magic mitigation. It's just not a mechanic you often see anymore since sartharion really (imo) scared blizzard away from the huge magic burst niche. They seem to be uncomfortable with any encounter where extra mitigation on ams/amz would be too terribly useful. In my opinion, they ought to just nerf those talents and throw a bit of passive mitigation/stam into the unholy tree either by replacing some of the bloat, or just tacking it onto some of the more off-beat talents deeper in the tree. Either way, that's the kind of work-up I don't think we're likely to see until cataclysm. For now it's a safe bet you're looking at blood and frost to tank with and both specs have more than enough to offer. What is being debated here is just how much wotn will bring to the table, and frankly there are too many people at the poles (it's too good or it's not going to change much) to tell one way or the other. Even the EJ theorycrafters haven't given a definitive answer on the topic. Their simcraft from the ptr is far from complete. Although the census opinion I gathered from talking with Suno last night was that the new wotn will only truly shine on an encounter were very heavy damage (tank-death swings) are coming back to back. Take that for what it's worth. One could certainly argue a few hardmodes are suited for this, but it remains to be seen since I highly doubt many guilds at that point are taking time to get on the PTR and help their dks test specs.

Splug
02-26-2010, 11:57 AM
Personally, I think it's in the right direction - anecdotal evidence is anecdotal, but death knights have been hurt for EH relative to paladins and druids recently. I feel this is clearly a move in the correct direction, as it provides a reliable increase to the lifespan on the deathknight tank. Now, whether they went in the right direction and then kept going past the mark, that I'm less certain on. As stated, this is something the talent did anyway - just without reliability. Making it reliable is going to be pretty significant for fights which put a high focus on tank effective health. There are two places where the change will be very significant: boss encounters where damage occurs in sustained high bursts (>60% of tank health) or boss encounters with a very large volume of small hits. In my experience, there are a couple of each of these in Icecrown; off the top of my head, Arthas and Festergut contain sustained large hits, and add tanking for Deathwhisper can add up surprisingly quickly. Sindragosa falls somewhere between the two, as the breath spray provides a large spike followed by small ticks of aura, autoattack, and possibly chilled to the bone. The change would be largest for LK and Festergut, where it really does become a static 15% DR when no cooldown is active (which is, arguably, trying to cover up a strategy flaw or execution error). Then again, that 15% may not be enough to survive without a cooldown anyway - in which case, it doesn't change the two cases: a major CD is up and the tank lives, or it is not and the tank dies.

So it's potentially very strong, but we'll have to see how it plays out. I'm with Edgewalker that the talent is appealing now, and will be a key pick for blood in 3.3.3. As to whether it's overpowered or not, that will become clearer when it goes live; theory and non-raid PTR testing are only going to go so far.

-Splug

Havenwood
02-26-2010, 12:58 PM
WotN tooltip reads, "Damage that would take you below 35% health or taken while you are at 35% health is reduced by 15%." Was curious so I went on today's PTR Version 0.3.3 (11599) and can confirm that any damage taken whatsoever while you are below 35% health is also reduced by the 15%.

Hence, a more clear tooltip might read, "Damage that would take you below 35% health or taken while you are below 35% health is reduced by 15%."

http://img189.imageshack.us/img189/2402/wotn.jpg

Edgewalker
02-26-2010, 01:09 PM
Although the census opinion I gathered from talking with Suno last night was that the new wotn will only truly shine on an encounter were very heavy damage (tank-death swings) are coming back to back. Take that for what it's worth. One could certainly argue a few hardmodes are suited for this, .

That's the entire point in my book. There are few fights in the game where tank death is an issue, and WoTN helps (in 3-6K burst reduction at least) in every single one of them. I can appreciate the argument people are making against it if the extent of their tanking is Marrowgar and Gunship, but the harder the content becomes, the more valuable WoTN becomes. It's not really exaggeration to say that WoTN is a game changer... it is, and you really don't even need PTR experience if you have live experience with HMs to know that it is. Suno is right in that it only shines in the harder fights, but it definitely has at least some use in a majority of fights.

And Satorri - It isn't meant as a personal attack, but it is an attack on your viewpoints on DK tanking. You've shown several cases in this thread alone of not really understanding WoTN, or it's implications or ability in hard mode encounters, and you have shown little desire to correct yourself after being repeatedly told "You are wrong". That is being ridiculously stubborn in my book, sorry.

Bashal
02-26-2010, 01:25 PM
It's not really exaggeration to say that WoTN is a game changer...

If the devs are correct, then this is only a slight buff to WotN, and most times there'll be little to no discernable difference. Thus, if it's valuable to spec into now, then it was valuable to spec into before. If you felt it wasn't worth it before, then it isn't worth it now, either.

If WotN was right on the edge of being an insanely good talent, but not quite, then this slight change is game-changing, sure, and Blizzard has been wrong before. But they've also been right before.

KnThrak
02-26-2010, 02:07 PM
But in that case they'd just nerf it again in 3.3.4 at lates, like GC said they would if it turns out a larger buff than they want it too. And considering how proud they are of having at least two viable trees for Tanking/ DPS each, they would nerf it again if this pushes Frost off the table.

Vorps
02-26-2010, 03:34 PM
Well, the issue is whether reducing say a 59,000 Sindragosa breath down to 50,000 is overpowered or not. If Will of the Necropolis becomes like Ardent Defender then it would only reduce a 59,000 breath down to 56,000. This is with a DK having ~60k health. 3k is a lot less overwhelming than 9k.

Having it reduce damage by 3k puts it a lot more in-line with Warrior passive reduction. (I use Warrior as a reference because it seems Blizzard balances around them)

Having it this way also makes times where you're bouncing between 100% and <35% a lot less insane in terms of EH increase.

Capitalism
02-26-2010, 03:52 PM
As this discussion is developing it seems like there is a clear pattern opening. Those who have killed Lich King claiming it will be borderline overpowered and those who haven't killed Lich King claiming it won't make a difference. Although it supports the argument that the talents get stronger the harder the boss hits.

I can see where satorri is coming from since at his level of progress bosses hits for 12-15k every 2s and tank deaths is mostly because the healer feel asleep or similar, WotN in that case isn't much help. On the opposite end you got tanks in heroic ICC with bosses that hit for 40k every second, once you reach this level of dmg even the simple task of refreshing beacon will be enough to have a tank die and here WotN will really shine.

Stengel
02-27-2010, 01:07 AM
If the devs are correct, then this is only a slight buff to WotN, and most times there'll be little to no discernable difference.

Devs have been wrong in the past. It's not incorrect to say that it will make little difference most of the time, but that's only because most fights do not stress tank survivability and most players will not do later parts of ICC or hardmodes before the zonewide buff activates. On the fights that do stress tank survivability, the new WotN becomes better and better the harder the boss hits, easily surpassing AD in terms of passive reduction. It's hard to argue that this is appropriate or needed or won't make a noticable difference.

Personally I've written this off as yet another heavy handed balance change resulting in the rollercoaster balance that we have had so far in this expansion.

Satorri
02-27-2010, 04:24 AM
I'm getting the sense from side conversations and private messages that my point here has been misconstrued.

I don't dislike WotN or think it is worthless, weak, or otherwise not worth taking. I have actually been trying to design an adjustment to my spec so I can take it (mentioned that a week ago).

The change will be a buff to WotN, but less, *I think* to its constant use so much as to its potential availability, which is why I want to take it. The fine print is that the talent is still no better for anyone not working on tough hitting content (read: ToGC, ICC, or ICC hards depending on gear these days), but for the tanks working on that content it is a wonderful clinch coverage when you want it most.

In the past we never had a way to confirm how it worked because it was rare for you to take the hit that proc'd it when you were already below 35%. Now we know it works like AD used to, functionally extending the value of our health below 35% (which is wonderful as a Blood tank).


My *only* point I've been trying to make here is that this is not a "omg Blood tanks are broken, why play anything else?!" kind of change. It just patches the value of this talent up to a place where it is very competitive for its purpose. If I (and the Devs) are wrong about that, then it will be changed, possibly before it goes live if there is sufficient testing. If we aren't, then it still won't be a bad thing for the people who took it. The world goes on.

kolben
02-27-2010, 08:23 AM
Personally I've written this off as yet another heavy handed balance change resulting in the rollercoaster balance that we have had so far in this expansion.

This.

Proletaria
02-27-2010, 10:04 AM
As this discussion is developing it seems like there is a clear pattern opening. Those who have killed Lich King claiming it will be borderline overpowered and those who haven't killed Lich King claiming it won't make a difference. Although it supports the argument that the talents get stronger the harder the boss hits.

I can see where satorri is coming from since at his level of progress bosses hits for 12-15k every 2s and tank deaths is mostly because the healer feel asleep or similar, WotN in that case isn't much help. On the opposite end you got tanks in heroic ICC with bosses that hit for 40k every second, once you reach this level of dmg even the simple task of refreshing beacon will be enough to have a tank die and here WotN will really shine.

I've got the Kingslayer title, and I don't think it's going to break us anymore than bears or paladins are already broken in the present patch. I grant anyone who says it is a big buff to the talent that they are correct, but the idea that dks are going to suddenly hop to most effective tank again seems off base. Bears and paladins can already eat soul-reaper raw, without cooldowns, if they need to. At present a warrior or dk can only cross their fingers, but while the warrior can play an important role stunning valks, safeguard/intervening the main tank, etc. there is no such niche for the deathknight. I think blizzard intended for us to be more like bears: truly able to soak a large amount of damage.

As the tank with the least raid utility, weakest secondary cd in terms of burst survival (vb), and no personal ap debuff avalible, I don't see us going out of line anytime soon. The buffs are going to bring long-needed snap threat to the class and allow a blood dk to survive big hits like soul-reaper+auto from Arthas. It's like someone said on the WoW boards yesterday, they aren't willing to further homogenize, they don't want to make the difficult changes (ie. giving dk's block mechanic, ap debuff, or more raid utilities unique to the class like the former raid auras). All they want to do is turn the nob on something simple, tweak a text file, and let it be the pre-cata bandaid that it is supposed to be.

Vorps
02-28-2010, 05:24 AM
I don't think it's going to break us anymore than bears or paladins are already broken in the present patch.

I agree with this completely.

So then, the real question becomes...why is it alright for Druids, Paladins, and Death Knights to have superior survivability over Warriors? I don't buy popularity as a valid excuse.

It's gotten so out of whack that Blizzard finally deemed Warriors as worthy for some increase to HP. Too bad that even with the increase to HP, Warriors are still about 11-15% behind the other three tanks in terms of how much burst they can survive.

60,000 damage hit from Sindragosa's Breath using Warrior as base... (these are rough numbers, but accurate enough to serve my point)
DK takes 52,530 damage, lives easily. (+3% from less base magical mitigation, -15% from Will of the Necropolis)
Druid takes 62,400 damage, lives due to having higher health pool. Or takes significantly less damage by using resist gear. (+4% from less base magical mitigation)
Paladin takes 54,840 damage, lives as well. (-2% from Glyph of Divine Plea, -3960 from Ardent Defender)
Warrior w/o cooldown takes 60,000 damage and dies.

What?

jere
02-28-2010, 07:23 AM
I agree with this completely.

So then, the real question becomes...why is it alright for Druids, Paladins, and Death Knights to have superior survivability over Warriors? I don't buy popularity as a valid excuse.

It's gotten so out of whack that Blizzard finally deemed Warriors as worthy for some increase to HP. Too bad that even with the increase to HP, Warriors are still about 11-15% behind the other three tanks in terms of how much burst they can survive.

60,000 damage hit from Sindragosa's Breath using Warrior as base... (these are rough numbers, but accurate enough to serve my point)
DK takes 52,530 damage, lives easily. (+3% from less base magical mitigation, -15% from Will of the Necropolis)
Druid takes 62,400 damage, lives due to having higher health pool. Or takes significantly less damage by using resist gear. (+4% from less base magical mitigation)
Paladin takes 54,840 damage, lives as well. (-2% from Glyph of Divine Plea, -3960 from Ardent Defender)
Warrior w/o cooldown takes 60,000 damage and dies.

What?

Where is the 11-15% coming from? Do you have any math for that number? What gear levels does that apply to? Warriors will definitely have a decent health lead over paladins, and maybe over Death Knights. Is that accounted for in the 11-15% or is that number just purely mitigation differences? As a note, the Divine Plea number you listed is off. Damage reductions are multiplicative, not additive. The numbers you provided above don't seem to support the 11-15% you suggested (at least as a global range). I am not saying warriors are not behind in damage reduction, but I think you should flesh out the stuff for more accurate numbers at least (or at least show the math so that others can see they are accurate).

Edgewalker
02-28-2010, 09:26 AM
Warriors consistently undervalue everything else they bring to the table. EH is not everything. I would take a warrior over any other tank for a huge majority of fights.

KnThrak
02-28-2010, 12:32 PM
Warriors consistently undervalue everything else they bring to the table. EH is not everything. I would take a warrior over any other tank for a huge majority of fights.

I think one has to be non-tanking raidleader often enough to value Warriortanks though. ;)

Vorps
02-28-2010, 11:15 PM
Warriors consistently undervalue everything else they bring to the table. EH is not everything. I would take a warrior over any other tank for a huge majority of fights.

Until you're tanking something which has potential to burst you dead...then EH is pretty up there in importance.

I stated my numbers are rough, but the point remains. In that case all but warriors survive. Doesn't that mean something?

11-15% is the amount of extra burst that other tanks can survive over warriors. Compare a warrior with 60,000hp to a druid with 70,000hp; warrior effectively has 4% more health due to extra damage reduction... so 62,400 / 70,000 = roughly 11% more effective health.

If both Warrior and DK have 60,000hp, roughly +3% for warrior due to more DR... and +15% for DK due to WotN: 61,800/69,000 = about 11% again.

*shrug* I can see things pan out well for Cataclysm, but how does that help us in the meanwhile in ICC? +3% stamina isn't gonna balance things.

Edgewalker
02-28-2010, 11:36 PM
Nothing you posted has ANY relevance to my comment, at all.
Thanks for rehashing information though?

Vorps
03-01-2010, 12:03 AM
Nothing you posted has ANY relevance to my comment, at all.
Thanks for rehashing information though?

Okay... I don't think that warrior's raid utility warrants them having less burst survival. Do you?

Other tanks bring plenty of their own flavor of utility to raids. It shouldn't be considered towards balance for survivability.

Edgewalker
03-01-2010, 12:05 AM
Okay... I don't think that warrior's raid utility warrants them having less burst survival. Do you?

For a lot of current content, yes.
They were certainly the best tanks for every end-game boss this expansion, last expansion, and vanilla. (Maybe not on LK or Anub himself/itself, but FAR and away the best for add tanking, aka the difficult part of the fight).

KnThrak
03-01-2010, 12:12 AM
People also misestimate just how often things like Shockwave / Spell Reflect / Intervene / Charge / Intercept (traversing a large area quickly) save lives. Yes, averaged out over 1500 fights maybe someone else is bigger but if they don't have the tool to save the life that specific moment there's still deaths.

It's like rating healers by HPS. It misconstructs the relative importance of micromanagement. You can't average out things like Shockwave (except for threat when spammed, and in no fight where you can use it to stun you want to spam it on something it cannot affect) without ignoring it's primary functionality.

Vorps
03-01-2010, 12:13 AM
Well I also think that Anub add tanking was horribly unbalanced as well. As for all the other 'end bosses' I don't know what you're talking about. I don't remember any aside Anub'arak's adds where warriors really shined in an overpowered way. Content before WotLK doesn't count, because the vision for tank balance wasn't the same then either.

So basically because a warrior can potentially lock things up, or utilize mobility better... it means they should die to damage that other tanks can survive? That doesn't seem right to me.

Icy Touch, Deathgrip, Faerie Fire, Feral Charge, Bash, Avenger's Shield, Hammer of Justice,etc...all serve these purposes as well.

What of the increased maintained AoE threat that Druids, DKs, and Paladins can put out? I'm fine with that... but to make all the other classes survive burst 10%+ better is absurd.

Hammerfists
03-01-2010, 12:27 AM
Until you're tanking something which has potential to burst you dead...then EH is pretty up there in importance.

I stated my numbers are rough, but the point remains. In that case all but warriors survive. Doesn't that mean something?

11-15% is the amount of extra burst that other tanks can survive over warriors. Compare a warrior with 60,000hp to a druid with 70,000hp; warrior effectively has 4% more health due to extra damage reduction... so 62,400 / 70,000 = roughly 11% more effective health.

If both Warrior and DK have 60,000hp, roughly +3% for warrior due to more DR... and +15% for DK due to WotN: 61,800/69,000 = about 11% again.

*shrug* I can see things pan out well for Cataclysm, but how does that help us in the meanwhile in ICC? +3% stamina isn't gonna balance things.

This is such a narrow view but here i go:

1) Theres no attack so far in the game that will kill a warrior in one hit but the others will survive
2) You are only comparing EH not cooldowns nor boss mechanics
3) warrior vs dk should calculate Shield Wall vs Vampiric Blood atleast
4) warrior vs druid should calculate thorns vs shield wall

Really if you are going to take talents, cooldowns, and boss mechanics your setting yourself up for fail. Just because it looks weird on the board doesnt mean that when you go live on a boss you are weak. Also Pallies have less HP than Warriors with same gear.

Vorps
03-01-2010, 12:37 AM
1) Sindragosa's Breath, Enraged Shambling Horrors... also, hits don't have to be one shots in order for EH to have significance. Take Soul Reaper, tanking two Shambling Horrors, 3 stack Festergut, or Valithria adds for examples.
2) I am, because it matters.
3) Cooldowns are not always available.
4) See number 3.

If you're going to insist I go into cooldowns... how's this for a doozy? 2 min cooldown Shield Wall vs. Icebound Fortitude vs. Divine Protection.... 40%, 50%, 50%.... still +10%.

Hammerfists
03-01-2010, 12:46 AM
Now that you got that out of your system think and make a list of the short coming of the other tanks. If we are looking at EH then hands down Druids are the best tanks. Personally you created some "nice" models to illustrate your point where really logs of the encounter would be much better. As a pallie i can list any fights where we have to debuff cleanse with BoP we are at a disadvantage because bubble wall puts up forbearance. My thing is your not looking at critical block nor are you looking at shield block which is one more cooldown than the other tanks nor are you looking at spell reflect. You appear to me to be taking a situation where a tank is standing there just getting open hit without using his toolbox nor trinkets.

Vorps
03-01-2010, 01:00 AM
I totally agree there are other issues that are not balanced either. Other tanks could definitely use some tweaks as well. The biggest I can think of off the top of my head is DKs not having an AP debuff.

Burst survival is just one issue that has reared its ugly head again since hitting the last few bosses in ICC and hard modes. Critical block, spell reflect, and shield block do nothing to prevent damage from spells that could realistically kill a warrior. Also, critical block and shield block are also not always present. If they were, like Ardent Defender, Will of the Necropolis, or Druid HP... then they could be a very viable comparison for survival against physical damage.

I also created that model after real events. I've had Sindragosa breathe on me for 59k and kill me. Other tanks in comparable gear would survive that. I've also had Shambling Horrors hit me for 60k. Another instance where other tanks would survive, but warrior cannot. Yes, you can survive with cooldowns, but at the given time it occurred cooldowns were all exhausted. Last Stand, Shield Wall, Shield Block, Pain Suppression, Guardian Spirit, Trinket, Shockwave, and Concussion Blow had all been used by that point. If I was any other tank aside a warrior, I would have lived. Yes, a hunter could have removed the enrage and it would have been fine. Shit happens though, and the point remains. 10% less effective health is 10% less. It does matter.

KnThrak
03-01-2010, 01:54 AM
Only in edge-cases though, undergearing a specific ability which specifically fits into the 3k-5k EH gap we're talking about.
This is like me stating that our DK repeatedly dies on Festergut due to not having blocks, where a Warrior surivives due to the high amount (very fast attacks!) of blocked incoming damage helping his overall intake quite a bit.

Does it make a big difference? Yep.
Is this one specific border case and it'd be unfair to ignore all 22 million other cases? Yep.


I really think the disconnect we're having from the devs here is because they look at overall statistics, we look at single abilities or even single encounters. They say "In the band of 25k-40k blows, overall tank survival is spread on a minimal spectrum of no more than 2% in raids averaging gear of ilvl260 or higher". We say "Festergut Heroic 3-stack ate my face and if I hadn't rolled such a shitty class I would have survived it".
(edit) To clarify that point, from their side it looks like this: Sindragosa's breath, Druids die in 9,9% of cases, Death Knights in 10,0% of cases, Paladins in 10,05% of cases and Warriors in 10,2% of cases. (/edit)
Both statements are valid, though the personal anecdote about differen classes is risky because until you got the other char the rollercoaster is on the next incline and all balance is changed again. Still, the real difference here is that the point of view is different.

It does not matter (to Blizzard) if one ability kills one spec of one class in one encounter. It matters if 20% of abilities kill one spec of one class on 20% of encounters, or one ability kills one spec of 20% of classes on 20% of encounters... or stuff like that.

At least that's my explanation for their WotN change, and many balance changes. They say their statistics pothead (because I don't think you can do statistics sober, sorry :P ) says the current WotN and the new WotN will only have a marginal difference in actual survival ability of the Blood DK, no matter what the drymath says. We cannot say Yes or No to that, only take it for what it is because we lack the more advanced datamining they can do.

Stengel
03-01-2010, 03:09 AM
DK tanks are unpopular because they have poor survivability in heroics where the majority of players will first see them in action and form their opinion regarding them. They're also unpopular because they bring less to a raid than others and depend on someone else for the AP debuff. None of these will be fixed by making WotN overpowered on hardmodes, but it's a hell of a lot easier to do that than to work on the real issues.

Satorri
03-01-2010, 07:38 AM
DK tanks are unpopular because they have *relatively* poor survivability in heroics where the majority of players will first see them in action and form their opinion regarding them.
Forgive my editing, but this is only compared to shield block vs small hitting mobs you find in heroics.


They're also unpopular because they bring less to a raid than others and depend on someone else for the AP debuff.
I'm confused here, what do other tanks offer in the grand balance that is so much more than a DK?

KnThrak
03-01-2010, 07:42 AM
You keep forgetting that all the other tanks already bring 10% AP, Windfury and CoE, Satorri. ;)

Edgewalker
03-01-2010, 08:57 AM
Forgive my editing, but this is only compared to shield block vs small hitting mobs you find in heroics.
K?

His entire statement was about heroics... .a properly blue/naxx geared paladin will take less damage than a completely 264 geared DK. It's really not relative...

Edgewalker
03-01-2010, 09:04 AM
You keep forgetting that all the other tanks already bring 10% AP, Windfury and CoE, Satorri. ;)

No other tanks bring those debuffs. Over DKs, Warriors bring AP debuffs, C.Shout, Sunder Armor. Paladins bring a blessing, an aura, divine sacrifice, single target hands, judgement, an ap debuff. Druids bring innervate, battle res, mark of the wild, 5% crit aura, LoTP, an ap debuff, thorns. DK's have either WF, an AP debuff, or a CoE effect. We also likely have Hysteria and Mark of Blood if we are Blood, which we probably are.

Proletaria
03-01-2010, 10:03 AM
We also likely have [...] Mark of Blood if we are Blood, which we probably are.

No, and that talent is of very limited use.



I'm confused here, what do other tanks offer in the grand balance that is so much more than a DK?


Honestly, you have to be joking to start this up again, but i'm bored so here goes:

*=single target
Underlined=AP debuff

Deathknight
Blood: Hysteria*, Abom's Might, Horn of Winter, Icy Touch
Frost: Icy talons, Horn of Winter, Icy Touch
Unholy: Ebon Plague, Horn of Winter, Icy Touch

Druid
-Mark of the Wild, Thorns, Battle-Rez, Demo Roar, Feral FF, Infected Wounds

Warrior
-Sunder Armor, Battle/Commanding Shout, Demo Shout, Thunderclap

Paladin
-Vindication, Judgment, Blessing of Sanc/Kings/Might/etc., Divine Sacrifice, Hand of Salvation*, Hand of Sacrifice*, Blessing of Protection*, Lay on Hands*, Auras


As you can see, there is always more raid utility in another tank, regardless of what the dk's spec is. We don't bring a significant source of buffs to a raid that dps cannot better provide (given unholy's general weakness, and the fact that icy talons is hard to sqeeze into a tanking spec, as well as the fact blood's buff is concurrent with the most effective hunter spec in the game).

TLDR: We need an ap debuff.

Edgewalker
03-01-2010, 10:22 AM
Mark of Blood is really a decent cooldown for the 1 point investment, especially against certain bosses. I won't argue it further, but simply stating "No" is just wrong.

Muffin Man
03-01-2010, 01:00 PM
For a lot of current content, yes.
They were certainly the best tanks for every end-game boss this expansion, last expansion, and vanilla. (Maybe not on LK or Anub himself/itself, but FAR and away the best for add tanking, aka the difficult part of the fight).

Wait, are you saying this with a straight face?

Gormok - Pallies and Druids lived through this; Warriors and DKs joined hands on the official forums to complain about this one (hard mode that is, we all laughed at normal together)
Anub - again Pallies and Druids, while Pallies and Warriors have a huge advantage on the adds
I'd argue the other ToC bosses were pretty balanced in terms of tanking.

Just about everything in Ulduar favored a DK or was relatively fair between the tanks (DKs have been nerfed quite heavily since, but at the time it wasn't even a contest for things like Vezax or Steelbreaker or Mimiron). The warrior 4pc changed things a bit, poor Paladins never got that leg up though. Not sure about Druids...

And of course the infamous Sarth 3d which got Druids hit with the nerf bat and started the DK nerf cycle (Should be mentioned that Voidwalkers were better than Pallies and Warriors on this fight too :p).

I'm not really sure what you mean by most end game bosses, but going by end of tier/content KT/Malygos didn't seem to favor anyone and Yogg isn't exactly a traditional tanking fight. And that's half of them... so saying every is a bit much.

But it's a little hard to do a fair assessment on this topic when there were clear imbalances like Pallies having less hp and less cooldowns than the other tanks. Or the period of time when DK's had more hp, more armor and more cds than Warriors/Pallies. Or when Druids could double down on HP so to speak...

It should also be mentioned that the majority of the above fights could be completed with the disadvantaged tanks, so I'm not complaining. Just disputing the accuracy of your statement. After writing that though, I'm quite thankful for the stability the warrior class has had through this expansions (really only our threat/dps numbers have been tweaked other than the upcoming vitality change).

Edgewalker
03-01-2010, 02:35 PM
End game boss - as in Ulduar (Algalon and Yogg+1), ToC (Anub'arak), and ICC (Lich King). While they aren't the best tanks for tanking Anub'Arak and The Lich King himself, they are far and away the best tanks for the adds in both of those boss encounters. The design of both encounters as such that the boss itself is not the crux of the fight... it's the adds, and how well you handle the adds, that determines your success or failure. So yes, I am saying it with a straight face. I will continue to say it with a straight face. Warriors have never been the FoTM uber class, but they've never been bottom of the barrel, and they have certainly never been in a bad overall state as far as tanking goes.
There's a reason they are so popular - utlity, and usability, on every fight out there.

I also never got behind the Sarth 3D train. It wasn't an overall very challenging fight, it was a limited one boss encounter in the middle of a completely dreadful raiding scene, and if it had occurred at any other time in WoW beyond the very beginning of Vanilla no one would have complained about the mechanics behind it.

Muffin Man
03-01-2010, 02:54 PM
Ok, but blue posts even mention that DKs hold up just fine compared to Warriors on Algalon (despite the conventional wisdom about dual wielding and block tanks).

Yogg + 1, I already stated I feel is a little gimmicky to really compare tanking, but sure a Warrior's mobility is great on tentacles, ect.

If you ignore Sarth 3D... then there's Malygos and KT from the initial ship as end game... which one did Warriors outshine everyone on? I really feel that those 2 fights were an equal playing field.

You can argue that add duty on Anub and LK is best suited for Warriors but that kind of pigeon holing is something we shoull strive to do away with. Like what was attempted between TBC and WotLK. I know you don't like that Druids/DKs are basically prohibited from even trying anub adds. Why are you ok with the reverse? (not that I believe Warrior's can't tank LK or Anub).

I'll agree that Warriors have never been a bad state. I'm happy with how Warriors are. But you underestimate longevity and image when it comes to why people roll warriors. I rolled a warrior because I knew what a warrior was, I didn't know what druids did (the D2 incarnation sucked imo) and I didn't have a choice for pallies or dks back then. Then people said warriors tank stuff, so I tried it and I liked it. I didn't put much more thought into my class than that. I suspect that the vast majority of players did something similar. And this is ultimately why Blizz avoids to balancing around representation. Because class choices often are irrational. Maybe not in the top 1% of guilds... but you know... by definition they're quite a minority.

Proletaria
03-01-2010, 03:07 PM
Mark of Blood is really a decent cooldown for the 1 point investment, especially against certain bosses. I won't argue it further, but simply stating "No" is just wrong.


It really isn't, but you are correct in asserting that it is "just one point." If you can name me a place in ICC where you feel it's worth the blood rune i'll give you a cookie.

Proletaria
03-01-2010, 03:18 PM
Ok, but blue posts even mention that DKs hold up just fine compared to Warriors on Algalon (despite the conventional wisdom about dual wielding and block tanks).

Yogg + 1, I already stated I feel is a little gimmicky to really compare tanking, but sure a Warrior's mobility is great on tentacles, ect.

If you ignore Sarth 3D... then there's Malygos and KT from the initial ship as end game... which one did Warriors outshine everyone on? I really feel that those 2 fights were an equal playing field.

You can argue that add duty on Anub and LK is best suited for Warriors but that kind of pigeon holing is something we shoull strive to do away with. Like what was attempted between TBC and WotLK. I know you don't like that Druids/DKs are basically prohibited from even trying anub adds. Why are you ok with the reverse? (not that I believe Warrior's can't tank LK or Anub).

I'll agree that Warriors have never been a bad state. I'm happy with how Warriors are. But you underestimate longevity and image when it comes to why people roll warriors. I rolled a warrior because I knew what a warrior was, I didn't know what druids did (the D2 incarnation sucked imo) and I didn't have a choice for pallies or dks back then. Then people said warriors tank stuff, so I tried it and I liked it. I didn't put much more thought into my class than that. I suspect that the vast majority of players did something similar. And this is ultimately why Blizz avoids to balancing around representation. Because class choices often are irrational. Maybe not in the top 1% of guilds... but you know... by definition they're quite a minority.

Blue posts? Algalon is a block tank's delight. Perhaps pre-critical block warriors were down with DKs in effectiveness there, but these days they'd be up with paladins. Blue posts around the same era were prequals to dk 3.2 nerfs, nerfs that were grossly over-zealous. Clearly the blue posts at that point had a slight disconnect from reality.

I'm gunna pass on the continued historical alaysis of when tanks were competetive, as i don't think it adds much to the conversation other than "I deserve to be OP," stuff.

You can argue, fairly convincingly, that a dk has no place in that encounter at all. Druids are much better Anub tanks, and DKs tanking the adds is a cruel joke.

Top guilds do not irrationally use the warrior/druid paladin/warrior combo. If you think a group of people who is willing to re-rolll CLONES of their mains and raid the same content double-time in order to progress around limited attempts is using a sub-par tanking staff just for old time's sake, you're sadly mistaken. Warriors are, and will continue to be, strong all around tanks: Something most of us haven't really had between stops at the top or bottom of the rollercoaster ride this expansion. Be glad you weren't riding it.

Edgewalker
03-01-2010, 03:25 PM
It really isn't, but you are correct in asserting that it is "just one point." If you can name me a place in ICC where you feel it's worth the blood rune i'll give you a cookie.

DBS hard pre 30% where it procs off Blood Boil and Melee swings, effectively adding 2-3 hits in a life spam, LK as an additional health buffer on Soul Reaper/Melee, Sindragosa HM for Melee/Breath/ then a 25 pulse tick...
it's a good talent. There are a LOT of top tanks that take it, a lot of top tanks that can effectively use it, and you lose virtually nothing to pick it up. I really won't argue it beyond this point for real this time.

TomHuxley
03-01-2010, 03:26 PM
So yes, I am saying it with a straight face. I will continue to say it with a straight face. Warriors have never been the FoTM uber class, but they've never been bottom of the barrel, and they have certainly never been in a bad overall state as far as tanking goes.
There's a reason they are so popular - utlity, and usability, on every fight out there.

You shouldn't be saying with a straight face. You are ignoring T7 encounters (which I grant were mostly so easy that it didn't matter, but warriors had no special advantage and were a poor choice in Sarth 3d whether you "get on the train" or not) you are ignoring that warriors (along with pallies) where the worst hard mode tanks in Ulduar, that warriors were in the bottom half for several encounters in ToGC, etc. Yes, shield tanks did great on heroic Anub adds, but that was just about the only place where a warrior tank hadn''t show systemic weaknesses in harder encounters in almost 2 tiers.

Now, it was perfectly possible to complete the encounters, but let's not tunnel vision on 3-4 of the last 40 or so raid bosses and pretend like that means that warriors have had some privileged status in this expansion, because that is patently false.

Also, warriors aren't popular in the sense you imply (i.e. because of current utility). Sure, relative numbers are high for warrior tanks, but they are lower than they were at the beginning of LK, implying a loss of popularity, not a gain. That doesn't exactly support your "people roll warrior tanks 'cause they bring lots to the table in LK" comments. They are well represented because they were the defacto raid boss tanks until 3.0 went live.

Now, that said, I am not convinced that prot warriors are at a dramatic disadvantage right now in survivability, especially after 3.3.3 goes live. There are fights that don't favor them, but nothing that seems really out of line.

TomHuxley
03-01-2010, 03:31 PM
FWIW, I don't really understand why this discussion has devolved from attempts to plug in numbers and clarify the mechanics for the WotN buff to a lot of "the devs think it's fine/the devs are wrong" sort of arguments. If WotN is fine now, then the devs were wrong, since they are the ones who put the ICD in it in the first place.

Not saying they are wrong, just that it seems largely immaterial to the discussion.

Muffin Man
03-01-2010, 03:40 PM
I specifically mentioned that the top 1% of guilds probably don't roll classes the same way most people do. I wouldn't disagree with you, but I don't assume since I've seen top end raiders QQ about how their class doesn't compare to another... and yet they don't change mains. The main point is, although a small minority min-max their toons doesn't mean that every warrior plays one because they're awesome.

You want the quote about how Algalon didn't favor warriors? http://wowraid.com/tracker/b12/t17367599527/dk-armor-nerf.html#294 GC speculates that Algalon might, but that DKs are 'still really good on him too'.

If you want to represent my posting as "I deserve to be OP' fine, but let me clarify that all I'm responding to is the feeling that Warriors don't need better survivability b/c hey can handle adds or that they've always been the best on all end game bosses, when end game means the adds on the last two end-of-raid encounters.

I'm not disagreeing that Anub adds is an unfair tanking situation, ToC radiance would have changed things and forced guilds to actually kill the adds or use more tanks or something. But why is that justification for any belief that warriors should be marginalized on LK proper (and this is why I probably shouldn't have posted, since I'm arguing people's opinion...)

Edgewalker
03-01-2010, 04:55 PM
Just because he (GhostCrawler) says something doesn't make it even remotely true.

Edgewalker
03-01-2010, 04:57 PM
You shouldn't be saying with a straight face. You are ignoring T7 encounters (which I grant were mostly so easy that it didn't matter, but warriors had no special advantage and were a poor choice in Sarth 3d whether you "get on the train" or not) you are ignoring that warriors (along with pallies) where the worst hard mode tanks in Ulduar, that warriors were in the bottom half for several encounters in ToGC, etc. Yes, shield tanks did great on heroic Anub adds, but that was just about the only place where a warrior tank hadn''t show systemic weaknesses in harder encounters in almost 2 tiers.

Now, it was perfectly possible to complete the encounters, but let's not tunnel vision on 3-4 of the last 40 or so raid bosses and pretend like that means that warriors have had some privileged status in this expansion, because that is patently false.

Also, warriors aren't popular in the sense you imply (i.e. because of current utility). Sure, relative numbers are high for warrior tanks, but they are lower than they were at the beginning of LK, implying a loss of popularity, not a gain. That doesn't exactly support your "people roll warrior tanks 'cause they bring lots to the table in LK" comments. They are well represented because they were the defacto raid boss tanks until 3.0 went live.

Now, that said, I am not convinced that prot warriors are at a dramatic disadvantage right now in survivability, especially after 3.3.3 goes live. There are fights that don't favor them, but nothing that seems really out of line.


You have a habit of taking a post and completely destroying the content of it, so I'm really not even going to bother responding to you anymore.

Proletaria
03-01-2010, 07:00 PM
I'm not disagreeing that Anub adds is an unfair tanking situation, ToC radiance would have changed things and forced guilds to actually kill the adds or use more tanks or something. But why is that justification for any belief that warriors should be marginalized on LK proper (and this is why I probably shouldn't have posted, since I'm arguing people's opinion...)

That is the point: warriors are not any more marginalized than other classes (like the deathknight). You even get highly important niche roles like on Arthas and Anub and the rest of the content (with very few exceptions) is fine for just about any tank. If you think warriors are currently marginalized on the Lich King, what does that make deathknights pre-3.3.3? We don't have stuns, we can only soak one reaper with IBF (the rest, even with 4piece t10 bonus- secondary cooldowns will not suffice) as opposed to a bear who can eat them all, and to top it all off we need an assist to re-apply an ap debuff to Arthas constantly so that we aren't getting hit even harder. We have no notable raid utility that isn't covered by the enhancment shaman in the raid to make up for this lack of synergy with the encounter mechanics other than ebon plague (unholy tanking is a poor option right now, so you may as well dismiss that). Basically, we're bears with less hp, less effective burst surviving cooldowns, no savage defense, parry, and a 10s interrupt (that is on the spell hit cap, btw, loads of fun to fully gear out in hit gear and wear a hit trinket when i actually need to interrupt things reliably).

I'm all in support of the warrior vitality buff, and i'm certainly not suggesting warriors are OP because of safeguard and Anub' adds. The point is: encounter design has played a huge role in dictating which tanks were fine and which were in trouble, and since 3.1 most of the tank-check content has been very fairly lenient to warriors, paladins, and bears, and very anti-deahtknight. This is why I'm absolutely confused by the sheer number of tanks (dk and otherwise) who are willing to come screaming that wotn is going to solve all of our problems and make us overpowered once again. This simply does not mesh with reality.

Edgewalker
03-01-2010, 07:44 PM
Don't forget that our spell interrupt IS a spell, effectively negating it's usefulness on one of the only encounters where interrupting is a boon to survivability (P1 of hardmode LDW).
QQ

Splug
03-02-2010, 11:28 AM
we can only soak one reaper with IBF (the rest, even with 4piece t10 bonus- secondary cooldowns will not suffice)Vampiric Blood, shell, and blood tap is sufficient for soul reaper, though I haven't looked at hard mode 25 yet - that may not be the case. Actually, I was experimenting a bit with BS/Tap and AMS/AMZ on split rotations, and that seemed to work just fine. If you completely remove the magic damage taken, it's just a few 40-45k melee swings, which are survivable. Ironically, Unholy is a very strong spec for LK p2/3 as a result.

Claiming that death knight damage utility is covered by damage classes is no different than claiming AP debuffs are covered by damage classes - either way, someone else has to be there to provide a buff/debuff.

-Splug

Proletaria
03-03-2010, 01:54 AM
Vampiric Blood, shell, and blood tap is sufficient for soul reaper, though I haven't looked at hard mode 25 yet - that may not be the case. Actually, I was experimenting a bit with BS/Tap and AMS/AMZ on split rotations, and that seemed to work just fine. If you completely remove the magic damage taken, it's just a few 40-45k melee swings, which are survivable. Ironically, Unholy is a very strong spec for LK p2/3 as a result.

Claiming that death knight damage utility is covered by damage classes is no different than claiming AP debuffs are covered by damage classes - either way, someone else has to be there to provide a buff/debuff.

-Splug

Under ideal conditions (ie. holy pally and disc priest are able to stand still and turret me with the whammy heals) my secondary+4p saves me, but more often than not they're in no position to turret and have to run from defile/reposition for valks/reposition for vile spirits. I usually have the OT taunt after reaper to solve my problem, but if he's off stunning valks, taunting a spirit in to eat, or otherwise pre-occupied I can be very skrewed in a hurry.

The diffirence between damage utility and ap debuffs: when i tank arthas away from the rest of the raid during a defile, valks, or spirit phase i'm not asking a raider (usually a warlock) to stop what he's doing and apply a damage utility, i'm asking him to apply an ap debuff so the next reaper doesn't kill me. Lack of an ap debuff is quite possibly the most frustrating thing to deal with out of all the class issues.

Dawnbreaker
03-03-2010, 01:38 PM
This is why I'm absolutely confused by the sheer number of tanks (dk and otherwise) who are willing to come screaming that wotn is going to solve all of our problems and make us overpowered once again. This simply does not mesh with reality.
I think this is a bit of an exaggeration. I've certainly been calling the talent as very powerful in its PTR form, but my comparisons are Argent Defender and the other two DK tank trees.

Like many others, I am a bit surprised AD went in, and that it has stayed around for so long. While I have been in the MT spot for quite a while as a DK tank, I am putting our pally tank in that role just because it makes sense to do so. Speaking purely based on class mechanics, paladins have it pretty nice right now, and it's been that way since late Ulduar and ToC/ToGC.

As far as the new WotN goes in the context of DK tanking, show me a deep Frost or deep Unholy talent that is even close to the value of the new WotN. DK tanks often talk about VB vs UA vs BS as our cooldown comparisons. We also talk about 3% stam vs 2% DR, 3% miss vs 10% magic reduction. I mean, those are the trade-offs, but when you put in WotN we weigh it against... what exactly? Acclimation? Anti-magic zone? I honestly don't see anything remotely close in value as the PTR WotN.

Ghostcrawler is right when he has (repeatedly) mentioned that the designers looked at (the live) WotN and it really does not affect a DK living vs dying hardly ever. No one disagrees with that. However the reason why it made such a minuscule difference is that 15 second CD, which will be removed. This transforms the talent from something that hardly affects a tank death, to a huge absorbtion buffer when the DK is at critically low life.

Consider any fight with a "big hit" followed by melee attacks on a DK blood tank. I'll use LK here, but you can generalize this to other encounters. To make math easier, assuming our big hit is a 40K hit, our tank has 50K life, and our healers are working to counteract the damage:


Event# Current Life Incoming Hit/Heal WotN Absorbed Remaining Life (life w/o WotN)
0 50K -40K Soul Reaper 6000 16000 (10000)
1 16K +20K Holy Light 36000 (30000)
2 36K -20K Arthas 3000 19000 (10000)
3 19K +10K Flash Heal 29000 (20000)
4 29K -20K Arthas 3000 12000 (0) *You're dead
5 12K +12K Holy Light 24000 (12000)
6 24K -20K Arthas 3000 7000 (-8000) *Dead again
7 7K +15K Penance 22000 (7000)
8 22K -20K Arthas 3000 5000 (-13000) *And again
So in this example, the tank takes 120K damage, is healed for 57K, and absorbs 18K damage via WotN. The absorb amounts to ~2 free disc priest PW:Shields, at the cost of no GCDs to anybody.

Popular counter-arguments for the above:
You should use a CD during this time! Sure, I don't argue that it is a better idea to CD this since we know it is coming and plan for it, I am only illustrating a sequence of events when we do not have one. There are fights where the spike damage comes suddenly and a CD isn't available (missed interrupt on LDW, Sindragosa breath + melee attack, among others).

The example ping-pongs the life above/below 17.5K! Yes, it does, applying WotN to every hit. The example is aimed at illustrating the life saving effect this talent can have when dangerously low on HP as the healers struggle to top the tank off versus continued boss damage. In the "life threatening" situation, as you can see it might be a struggle to get our DK tank here above 37.5K health.

My blood DK tank has 60K+ HP! 50K is low, no argument there. At 60K the threshold is 21K life, and WotN will still be absorbing alot of damage for you in situations similar to the above.

My healers top me up right away! OK, so your healers are pro, even if you only get 1 or 2 absorbs from WotN, that's still anywhere from 6-10K damage absorbed by your talent, automatically. That is at least 1 free "fast heal" from about any heal class (Flash heal, flash of light, LHW).

Frost and Unholy are still viable tanking specs! I'm not arguing that they are not, I am only illustrating how very powerful this talent is when bosses hit you anything close to hard. My point is, what do you compare this PTR WotN talent to in Frost or Unholy? Nothing comes close to being this useful. Possibly Acclimation or AMZ on magic damage fights, but since WotN applies to all damage sources that makes it superior.

Proletaria
03-03-2010, 03:06 PM
I may have mentioned before: I don't care about spec equity. My argument is that wotn isn't going to break the class.

I always have a cooldown for soul-reaper be it ibf, vb/4p, or outside cd from a priest. In theory, those should save my life. Right now, vb+4p does not accomplish that unless i get lucky with wotn and rng. Post-patch we'll be a lot safer in that regard. I think this is working as intended. If the side-effect happens to be that we're quite durable vs. festergut type encounters: so what? We aren't talking about encounters trivialized by dk tanks, and we certainly aren't talking about a large number of encounters that can potentially be trivilized either. Factor in my disc priest's shields, hots, and well timed holy lights and I think you'll find that more encounters than not will have the 60+ tank above the threshold during non-burst mechanic damage. Coincidentally, how often do you think your 60k tank drops to 21k hp when arthas isn't using reaper? He certainly doesn't hit for 40k then *unless you're allowing redicuously stacks of plague.* I would hazard a guess, but i'd rather not pollute the thread with more guesstimation.

I understand the math you're working with, and I get your point, but I honestly don't believe we're seeing a repeat of the AD revamp.

Edit: I've decided to see if i can intentially drop stam to hit a given boss' sweet spot whereby wotn procs on every hit (probably won't be possible on all of them, but heavy hitters sure). Maybe i'll be single-handedly responsible for our return into nerf-oblivion come cataclysm!

/giddy

Satorri
03-04-2010, 05:50 AM
Nice table Dawnbreaker, I appreciate that sort of explanation rather than furious hand-waving and blind speculation.

That exact example is why Blizz is keeping an eye on the change for it trivializing *that* encounter for DKs even with weaker gear than their counterparts.

That's the only standout they mentioned as being a concern though.

Dawnbreaker
03-04-2010, 12:40 PM
That exact example is why Blizz is keeping an eye on the change for it trivializing *that* encounter for DKs even with weaker gear than their counterparts.
Throughout the expansion the damage on the tank has been high, and the scenario I illustrated is found more often than not in the encounters of WotLK. Just in ICC folks have already mentioned Festergut, Sindragosa, and LK, and we're not even talking hard modes yet. Putricide p3 is another I'll throw out there, as well as if you are MTing BQL, it will reduce the damage you transfer to the OT if you take a hit that would dip you under the 35% mark.

Let's back up a tier, the new WotN will be very powerful for Northrend Beasts (Gormok, enraged Worm, Icehowl), Twins (we usually had 1 tank take both twins, even on hard mode), and Anub'arak (slash+melee hit combo, can't CD that!).

Back up another tier, XT hard mode (when that fight actually hit the tank worth a damn), Council (steelbreaker last, hi fusion punch), Algalon (who you probably don't want to tank with a DK anyway, go shield blocks), Hodir (frost attack), Thorim (unbalancing + stacking damage buff), Mimiron (p1 laser beam), and Vezax (Blood DKs already trivialized this guy) would all benefit significantly from this ability.

I mean, I'd bet heavily that the bosses in the Ruby Sanctum are going to come at us with something that hits harder than a fluffy pillow, but that's just my opinion.

So, instead of this talent being quite powerful on just the one encounter, it is quite powerful on many (most?) encounters. It is fascinating that the idea of "WotN is a very powerful ability" is such a hard sell to "tanks" around here, but hey, I've made my case.

Edit: Since I guess it wasn't clear, the above isn't a history review. I'm just pointing out fights where there is a burst damage on the tank where WotN would come strongly into play. Illustrating that the LK Soul Reaper is by far just a one-off, it happens all the time.

Proletaria
03-04-2010, 03:33 PM
Sindragosa hits hard on normal mode? Try again. I wear a full FR set and her melee tickles me, breaths are more often almost fully resisted than not. Any tank can do this. Sindragosa is not one of the "lolwotn" encounters, and from what i've seen on 10m hardmode, it doesn't change.

Let's back up a tier, warriors ruled the adds of anubarak, paladins' newly buffed AD and fantastic threat trivilaized anything in between. Deathknights were absolutely pathetic in all ways and their population went from the Ulduar highs down to what we see today, miniscule. Back up another tier and you're in zomg dk patch 3.1 where blood tanks reigned supreme on vezzax (and encounter that was spoon fed to the self-healing of death strike), mimiron (an encounter spoonfed to deathknights with baseline ams), and thori... wait, we weren't even the best tanks on thorim, what are you trying to pull here?

I'll bet in ruby sanctum there will be a more-or-less stand-out tank for whatever encounter(s) lie within, but that is not new. The wotn talent is going to be more powerful than it is now because deathknights are, at present, the weakest tanking class - bar none - and have no valued raid utilites, are incapable of debuffing their own target's ap when necessary, and have no niche roles baked into content like warriors had in togc. I find it funny we're not seeing a 10page debate about why blizzard is allowing safeguard to be too good on the Lich King encounter, how bears (far more prevalent than deathknight tanks) are so far beyond the rest of the classes in terms of EH: with some of the best cooldowns in the game, or how paladins are now seeing even-more astronomical dps and threat numbers while tanking due to the buff aura implemented this week in icc.

Six months ago, when we were closer to the time of being demi-god super tanks, I would have agreed that wotn should be VERY carefully tuned so that we aren't going to just swarm the tanking roles of every raid in existence. Right now; i'd say it's a matter of getting it out in time to save the last holdout deathknights still tanking endgame. Like it or not, they place emphasis on tanking populations. Ours is very small porportional to the rest. Even the rarified bear tank whom everyone accuses of being "too boring to play," has seen continued growth at the expense of dk tanks. Did all the deathknights go back to their BC mains? Did they re-roll paladins, warriors, druids? Did they swap to DPS? The answer seems to be all of these things and it's disturbing to be one of the few remaining dk tanks around hearing "WAIT, WHAT ABOUT 3.1 WHEN YOU WERE TOO GOOD" every time a buff comes down the pipe.

Edgewalker
03-04-2010, 03:52 PM
Sindragosa hits hard on normal mode? Try again. I wear a full FR set and her melee tickles me, breaths are more often almost fully resisted than not. Any tank can do this. Sindragosa is not one of the "lolwotn" encounters, and from what i've seen on 10m hardmode, it doesn't change.
.

On 25 man the melee hits for an average of 34-35,000 damage (to a maximum of 45,000) with a frost breath that base values around 65,000. The frost breath of course can almost always be cooldowned, but it's a pretty hard hitting combo.

Proletaria
03-04-2010, 10:35 PM
On 25 man the melee hits for an average of 34-35,000 damage (to a maximum of 45,000) with a frost breath that base values around 65,000. The frost breath of course can almost always be cooldowned, but it's a pretty hard hitting combo.

So you don't wear FR gear then?

KnThrak
03-04-2010, 11:47 PM
Six months ago, when we were closer to the time of being demi-god super tanks, I would have agreed that wotn should be VERY carefully tuned so that we aren't going to just swarm the tanking roles of every raid in existence. Right now; i'd say it's a matter of getting it out in time to save the last holdout deathknights still tanking endgame.

I like the defeatist attitude for reading purposes, but the truth of the matter is that outside of using all-DK-tanks, raidleaders generally don't give a damn. They expect the healers to keep the stuff up, healers expect the tanks to cooldown whatever they cannot baseline-tank, and then just heal the remaining damage. Very few healers actively have a proper sniffer for "Hey, this guy takes I'd say 5% more damage than the other guy!". Most healers can tell you that Blood DKs are spikey. The same healer will then tell you Frost DKs feel so much easier to heal.
Is that guy really going to tell me that he can feel the 2% mitigation? Ofc he can't, actually it's the opposite, he feels the selfhealing of the blood tank making his health jump up in short bursts all the time. In 10man this is very noticeable, but the constantly bouncy HP bar (not syncing up with the bossswings) makes you perceive that your tank is spiking.

But I can assure you, no healer can actually feel a 2%, 3%, 5% difference.
There are too many variables for that.

No raidleader can point the finger at a DK tank and say "If we didn't have you, we'd avoid 4 wipes every week".
Again, there are too many other reasons why those wipes were wipes anyways.


And as long as the raidleaders don't care, Blizzard's stats will look quite good, because the tanks get taken. And tank the content. And stuff gets killed.

Edgewalker
03-05-2010, 12:30 AM
So you don't wear FR gear then?

I do, but the melee is what is more dangerous to me. Well... melee + unchained RNG under 30%.
Stupid fight :(

Proletaria
03-05-2010, 06:57 PM
I do, but the melee is what is more dangerous to me. Well... melee + unchained RNG under 30%.
Stupid fight :(

I had assumed (along with most other tanks i've spoken with) the frost damage was a much greater portion of the tank-threatening damage. Perhaps this deserves a closer look.

Proletaria
03-05-2010, 06:59 PM
I like the defeatist attitude for reading purposes, but the truth of the matter is that outside of using all-DK-tanks, raidleaders generally don't give a damn. They expect the healers to keep the stuff up, healers expect the tanks to cooldown whatever they cannot baseline-tank, and then just heal the remaining damage. Very few healers actively have a proper sniffer for "Hey, this guy takes I'd say 5% more damage than the other guy!". Most healers can tell you that Blood DKs are spikey. The same healer will then tell you Frost DKs feel so much easier to heal.
Is that guy really going to tell me that he can feel the 2% mitigation? Ofc he can't, actually it's the opposite, he feels the selfhealing of the blood tank making his health jump up in short bursts all the time. In 10man this is very noticeable, but the constantly bouncy HP bar (not syncing up with the bossswings) makes you perceive that your tank is spiking.

But I can assure you, no healer can actually feel a 2%, 3%, 5% difference.
There are too many variables for that.

No raidleader can point the finger at a DK tank and say "If we didn't have you, we'd avoid 4 wipes every week".
Again, there are too many other reasons why those wipes were wipes anyways.


And as long as the raidleaders don't care, Blizzard's stats will look quite good, because the tanks get taken. And tank the content. And stuff gets killed.


Actually, I am a raid leader and I have changed my 25man raid composition due to the fact that I am a deathknight and my 10man raid composition has changed DRAMATICALLY due to this fact aswell. Please check the hand-waiving at the door.

Our 10man began as a melee stack with a hunter. In ICC we decided to add some ranged to the mix. However, we ended up with our prot pally, and ret pally being the only ap debuff in the party (aside from a hunter would could have used a carrion bird). Long story short, we ended up dropping two dps in order to pick up a lock for CoW and he was accompanied by another ranged, and our third/optional healer was subsequently changed aswell.

In before10mannotbalancedaroundapdebuff.

KnThrak
03-06-2010, 12:19 AM
No, but I think you're an edge case then. How many 10mans are run every night in a week with 20-30 players online of which the more active 15+ pug 10man runs when there's no guildraid (that's 3 nights at least, 5 nights if someone can't make all runs). During discussions only the Feral Tank with a Frost DK as alt and me as a Resto Shaman with a Blood DK for an alt remembered running into AP Debuff issues.

Like you said, you had a hunter - the strongest AP debuffer in the game due to sheer flexibility, coverage and sustainability. No active GCD usage from the hunter, not limited to current target only, AoE, spec-strength without investing points. Plus you had a Prot and a Retridin, that's two current-target debuffs, so I just don't see where you had any issues with the AP debuff.

And in the 25man, I it's ~impossible to not have AP debuff. Any Hunter, any Warlock, any Warrior. 25man runs with none of these are really rare. Then come Retridins, Protadins, Feral Bears. So that's 12 specs of 30 to not have in the raid at all. Haven't ever seen a raid get even close to achieving that. Plus it'd be easy to fix just by letting a Holy Pally finally go DPS and pulling a Shammy/Priest/Druid up to healing, assuming you only use 1 DK tank.

Just saying, don't overstate the issue. In your case it sounds a lot like you had it locked in your mind that you're the weak link no matter what, so you changed the raidlayout without any specific evidence calling for it.

jere
03-06-2010, 04:18 AM
Our 10man began as a melee stack with a hunter. In ICC we decided to add some ranged to the mix. However, we ended up with our prot pally, and ret pally being the only ap debuff in the party (aside from a hunter would could have used a carrion bird). Long story short, we ended up dropping two dps in order to pick up a lock for CoW and he was accompanied by another ranged, and our third/optional healer was subsequently changed aswell.

In before10mannotbalancedaroundapdebuff.

Just be careful going that route. Unless they are hit/expertise capped, the chance of the AP debuff falling off is actually pretty decent on a boss. We've been exploring this over at maintankadin, and despite what wowhead was indicating, we actually were seeing parses where it fell off for a good 15s or so in some cases. It really hurts as you approach your top end BiS gear because you tend to lose a lot of hit and expertise going for that. If that is your only source of AP buff, make sure they gear for enough hit (expertise can probably get away with soft cap and be ok). Though if you have two on the same target at all times, that should probably be alright. I hope the ret paladin would be hit capped and expertise softcapped anyways, then it is just a matter of the PPM being nice.

Proletaria
03-06-2010, 02:48 PM
Just be careful going that route. Unless they are hit/expertise capped, the chance of the AP debuff falling off is actually pretty decent on a boss. We've been exploring this over at maintankadin, and despite what wowhead was indicating, we actually were seeing parses where it fell off for a good 15s or so in some cases. It really hurts as you approach your top end BiS gear because you tend to lose a lot of hit and expertise going for that. If that is your only source of AP buff, make sure they gear for enough hit (expertise can probably get away with soft cap and be ok). Though if you have two on the same target at all times, that should probably be alright. I hope the ret paladin would be hit capped and expertise softcapped anyways, then it is just a matter of the PPM being nice.

Having a ret paladin sitting on arthas for the duration of the encounter is not really an option. Between defile, movement, valkyrs, tanking spirits from ledge phases, and spreading out for vile spirits (just to name a few things, the list goes one) you cannot have a melee babysitting for the MT on this encounter. If you are utilizing a dk tank, a warlock is really your only ap debuffing option.

jere
03-06-2010, 04:49 PM
Sorry, I should have been a bit clearer. I was saying to be careful in groups where only a paladin (specifically a prot paladin though)can apply the AP debuff. Their hit levels may come into play for debuff uptime. I quoted the whole post by mistake. I wasn't referring to the warlock part. That was definitely a smart move.

Proletaria
03-06-2010, 09:05 PM
Sorry, I should have been a bit clearer. I was saying to be careful in groups where only a paladin (specifically a prot paladin though)can apply the AP debuff. Their hit levels may come into play for debuff uptime. I quoted the whole post by mistake. I wasn't referring to the warlock part. That was definitely a smart move.

Ah, I see.