[Endure]

I've rambled a lot here. It's really an initial theory, so I'm hoping other people can verify what I'm saying and question the theory itself, or at least provide number where I'm missing them, or even correct the math. Edit: After the first post, I realized it would be nice to summarize the post. Basically, this post is to combat the generally accepted idea I see bantered around: that vigilance is used on your highest DPS and basically forgotten. The value of Vigilance in it's threat transfer shouldn't be as simple as giving one person a bit more room, but seeing how to maximize Vigilance to provide your entire raid the most room possible.

Vigilance on a Tank

I've seen lots of discussion about vigilance, and how it would be useful on high threat DPS. While it's an interesting thought, when looking at the raid encounters, any encounter where you have more than one tank, but only need one main tank, suddenly being able to trasition threat from an off-tank to a main tank becomes beneficial. Let's look at this from the perspective of two prot warriors in a raid.

Take any encounter where you have 1 tank. It's safe to say there are a LOT of encounters like this. And even in encounters where multiple tanks are needed, generally multiple tanks aren't always needed. In some cases, multiple tanks are needed only part of the time. In a 25-man raid, we might have 3-4 tanks, and some encounters might require 1, 2, or 3. Vigilance is useful now as a tool to help with threat by using it on a tank that isn't currently tanking. I'll try to demonstrate with some simple math.

Working off of Satrina's numbers, defensive stance provides a threat modifier of 207.35. A DPS warrior only outputs threat with a threat modifier of 80.

In this case, 1000 damage provides 80000 threat for the warrior in battle stance, and 1000 damage provides 207,350 threat for the warrior in defensive stance.

This same application applies to other DPS oriented classes as well. Other DPS classes average about the same level of threat. I'm not sure on the numbers, but I feel it's safe to say no DPS class is outputting 207.35 threat for every point of damage. However, since I know the DPS warrior numbers in battle or zerker stance, I'll continue to use those as a comparison.

Now, obviously a DPS class shouldn't be doing the same amount of damage as a prot warrior DPS'ing. But we do know that the intent of Blizzard is to make Prot useful in DPS'ing when they aren't tanking. So while we aren't outputting pure DPS numbers, we aren't worthless anymore.

Numbers are difficult to find at this point, as they keep changing the numbers around in beta, but we can make some basic assumptions using the 1000 point model. Assuming only the damage done, and not including the added threat that Devastate and Shield Slam generate (a warriors main DPS), we can come to some conclusions.

Let's assume the average DPS for a prot warrior is 1000 DPS in tanking gear at 80. That might be too much, I don't really know off hand as they are still making changes, but the actual number isn't important. What is important is the relative number. Let's go back to our threat numbers.

Prot Warrior: 1000 damage == 207,350 threat
DPS Warrior: 1000 damage == 80,000 threat

For the DPS warrior to apply the same amount of threat as the Prot warrior, he would have to be outputting 2591.875 DPS. So let's add that to the chart

Prot Warrior: 1000 damage == 207,350 threat
DPS Warrior: 1000 damage == 80,000 threat
DPS Warrior: 2591.875 damage == 207,350 threat

That's 2.59 times the damage of the prot warrior.

Now, I've seen Ghostcrawler posting numerous times regarding Prot Warrior DPS, and the average number I've seen thrown around for what level of DPS prot should do when compared to pure DPS is 25-35% less than that of the DPS. Assuming this is the case, we can adjust our numbers to account for that and see the result.

Prot Warrior: 1000 damage == 207,350 threat
DPS Warrior: 1000 damage == 80,000 threat
DPS Warrior: 2000 damage == 160,000 threat
DPS Warrior: 2591.875 damage == 207,350 threat
DPS Warrior with 35% more DPS: 1350 == 108,000 threat

I also tossed in a DPS class that did twice the damage of a tank, a fair estimate, I think.

Anyways, I think we've covered enough, and the point here is, the relative DPS increase that the DPS would need to have over the tanks is pretty significant and contrary to what the dev's have been stating as their goal for Wrath (as well as what players have experienced).

Now, to the point of all of this, and how it matters for Vigilance.

Vigilance is a 10% threat transfer and reduction. So, looking at the numbers once again, here we see where vigilance could potentially play a bigger part than we realized.

Prot Warrior: 207,350 threat == 20,735 threat transfer
DPS Warrior: 80,000 threat == 8,000 threat transfer
DPS Warrior: 160,000 threat == 16,000 threat transfer
DPS Warrior with 35% more DPS: 108,000 threat == 10,800 threat transfer

Now, here is where it get's interesting. We have to remember that the threat transfer is not only a threat increase for the tank, but also a threat decrease by the same amount. The question becomes, where is that threat transfer better applied. To the top DPS, or to the tank.

But one thing we are forgetting is that in the case of the Prot Warrior in our example is that he's using Devastate and Shield Slam, tools that apply their own innate threat. In our case above, I see a few things.

Overall Conclusions
* Vigilance on the DPS warrior with the 35% damage increase results in a net gain of 21,600 threat over that single DPS'er and only 10,800 threat over the entire raid.
* On the DPS warrior with twice the damage, we see a net gain of 32,000 threat over that particular warrior and 16,000 threat over the raid.
* In all cases above, the Vigilance on the Off-Tank (prot warrior) provides 20,735 threat over ALL raid members, the highest for raid wide threat increase.

Now, my understanding of Vigilance is that it's not retroactive. It applies to threat generated while the target as the buff. It's not like Hand of Salvation, which removes total threat (Please, correct me if I'm wrong here, as it fundamentally changes much of this post). Also, our numbers are based on base battle and zerker stance modifiers. This doesn't include things like Improved Berserker stance (and other classes have similiar talents, like Destructive Reach for Warlocks and Arcane Subtlety just to name a couple) which would affect the threat values even more in favor of the Prot warrior.

Obviously, this assume the Prot warrior remains in defensive stance, but with the overall increase in damage warriors are doing, even account for the lack of Improved Defensive stance, it makes you wonder if Vigilance is really just for DPS.

A lot of theorycrafting went into this, and I made a lot of assumptions, but all of the assumptions were based on relative numbers. If DPS is higher across the board, this will effect prot as well. The relativity of the numbers are what's key, and we are still left with a DPS warrior in battle of zerker stance needing to do 2.59 times the DPS of a prot warrior to provide the same amount of threat via vigilance.

Once we start to see better numbers, it will be interesting to see where classes stand as far as DPS goes. If DPS is routinely doing enough DPS to account for their lower threat modifier, than we can safely ignore this post. But it's still something to consider.

[talisfears]

If you're in a single tank situation you would just put Vigilance on the person generating the highest TPS next to you.

If you need Vigilance that means there is a dpser nipping at your heels. You can't get any more threat than that unless you have the offtank nipping at your heels, which kinda defeats the purpose doesn't it?

I can see another use though, think of things like Gruul or the stupid iceblocking servants in Karazhan. Vigilance on the MT and have him give some of his threat to you. Clean way to help equalize threat between MT and OT. It reduces the MT threat, but if you have a good MT and a weak OT - I can think back to lots of Gruul kills where this kind of thing would be a godsend.

[mero12513]

This is really interesting stuff and something I don't think has really gotten a lot of discussion around here. I guess your point is that an offtank can make a major, major contribution to the raid even when not tanking, well beyond what their sub-par dps would provide by itself. Vigilance still has balance issues in regards to other tanks, but I think you've just convinced me to take it.

Edit: in regards to talisfear's post, I think perhaps the broader implication of the math here is that an offtank will LIKELY have little trouble in being #2 on threat. On live, this is often not the case (especially for paladins, who have a really hard time with it from what I've seen). Even outside the context of vigilance the math here is a case for optimism looking forward to more encounters like Gruul, Moroes, or those stupid iceblocking bastards.

[Endure]

Source: talisfears If you're in a single tank situation you would just put Vigilance on the person generating the highest TPS next to you.

That's the point of this thread. The problem is your average discussion regarding vigilance talks about putting it on your highest DPS without any consideration for off-tanks TPS. I feel that this undervalues the amount of threat Vigilance can generate in much of the discussions.

If you need Vigilance that means there is a dpser nipping at your heels. You can't get any more threat than that unless you have the offtank nipping at your heels, which kinda defeats the purpose doesn't it?

That's the problem. A DPS'er nipping at your heels doesn't mean he has the highest TPS. What it means is he merely has the second highest threat.

Again, the problem is that in many discussings, people look at using Vigilance on DPS with high threat, and I think this should be reevaluated in a raiding situation.

[Endure]

Source: mero12513 Edit: in regards to talisfear's post, I think perhaps the broader implication of the math here is that an offtank will LIKELY have little trouble in being #2 on threat.

Be careful with confusing #2 on overall threat and #2 in TPS. There are many classic cases of encounters where the two are not always the same. Moreso, bosses on many occasions have means of a threat wipe or a threat reduction.

There is the idea that threat will no longer be an issue with Wrath, and while I believe threat will be easier to obtain, I don't believe it will be a non-issue. Otherwise, what's the point of implementing a threat meter? Just make tanks produce 1000% threat and be done with it.

No, threat sensitive fights will become more common, especially now that they are providing more accurate threat information.

[Archfiend]

What would happen if the MT puts vigilance on the OT, and the OT in turn puts it on the MT?

[Wars]

In a specific raid setting, I think I would be calling for a top dps to do a "cooldown blow" in this example.

With the right person, this could count for HUGE TPS numbers. AKA Destro-lock going balls to the walls for a few seconds giving me a major major buff in tps for the duration.

My overall feeling of this is that, with good communication, your best dps, blowing its cds will out-tps any offtank, regardless of how hard they are trying.

A destro-lock does what, near 5k dps in naxx atm on most examples? Compared to an off-tanks paltry 2k max dps and that might be stretching it. I believe w/this same lock blowing CDs for the duration of vigilance, we'll have a higher increase in tps from these dps. DPS are still going to be far and away better tps when threat is not an issue than an offtank.

I am at work atm, so I can not go into in-depth math analysis on this. But example math from naxx stuff would work.

Destro-lock: Can push probably 5.5k dps max at this point, naxx. With buffs resulting in what, 3.8k tps blowing cooldowns?

Off-tank: Pushing atm, probably no more than 2k dps w/multiplier being something like 4k.

Just from my assumptions it seems like OTs might be a viable option but of course, your OT is losing threat in this situation. We will have to see eh?

[Wars]

Source: Archfiend What would happen if the MT puts vigilance on the OT, and the OT in turn puts it on the MT?

To quote spaceballs, "Absolutely Nothing!" -Dark Helmet.

Actually what would happen would be the OT would gain more threat from the transfer than the MT since the MT would hopefully have more threat.

This is what they were talking about earlier w/Moroes, Ice Tomb guys, and Gruul.

[talisfears]

I think you're missing a crucial point (or I am - it's happened before). You don't NEED more TPS unless there is a dps toon generating AS MUCH or MORE TPS than you. An offtank cannot possibly do more threat than that or they'd pull the boss off you. You're better off siphoning off the out-of-control dps toon.

[Kamani]

You are over analyzing. Vigilance will always be best off on the person who is generating the most threat.

Yea a prot warrior with DPS gear on can do ridiculous threat, but he will be capped by the main tank if he stands in defensive stance, thus making him slow down and stop attacking.

You could have a prot warrior intentionally stay at the 109% threshold, but that could be dangerous on any non tank and spank fight.

[Wars]

Well I think what we are trying to figure out further than who is more valuable to put it on, is why.

Do we incur such situations that require the siphoning from offtanks for maximum tps?

Do we need to use vigilance to keep a out of control critical strike machine dps from hitting 130% of our aggro(provided its a ranged).

In each situation I believe the answer to be different.

In a perfect raid setting such as a gruul type encounter where we have 1 offtank eating whatever 2ndary threat moves there are(strikes etc). Then we have dps going balls out most of the time but trying to stay <2 on threat.

In this situation, and the warrior is the MT, we can have 2 ideas at play.

1)Siphon threat to us from DPS, giving us a bigger lead on overall TPS.

2)With this siphoning action from the top DPS(TPS at the time) keep the OT in 2nd place easier.

[Worldie]

Source: Endure No, threat sensitive fights will become more common, especially now that they are providing more accurate threat information.

This kinda collides with one of the latest statements from blues saying that they don't want threat to be a issue.

[Ciderhelm]

Source: Worldie This kinda collides with one of the latest statements from blues saying that they don't want threat to be a issue.

Bingo. I doubt Threat is going to be a serious issue again in the us-vs-them game it has been in the past unless classes get out of whack.

[Galushi]

I see 3 main uses right off the bat for my vigilance.

1: Apply to my healer in 5man. I gain some ae threat, healer generates less threat (less healing agro), and if healer does get healing agro, refreshes taunt so i can save him/her.
2: Apply to high/crazy dps player to buff my threat and give them a higher threshold. Possibly on an AE'er during trash.
3: As an OT, apply it to high tps dps'er in order to get threat boost to keep up with MT.

It gets kinda repetitive but i think it be pretty simple to use it on who needs a threat drop. Chances are the effective threat you gain will be relatively equal among the many options you'll have. Guess if you wanted you coudl put it specifically on a player that has highest innate threat (hunter, or possibly a caster without threat reduction talents)

[nips]

1. Gc said tanks would generate 70ish% dps compare to a dps class when tanking not as ot dps'ing. The rage you get when not tanking is very poor atm unless there is some splash dmg. personaly I think questing/tanking/pvping is all good since you get rage from dmg, but our dps is realy poor otherwise.

2. As other said, you are making up a problem here. A good raidleader will know who is generally on top when it comes to threat. So for simplisity just give it to them and be done with it.

[Macksie]

Edited post because I feel stupid, I had either completely missed the 'and transfers 10% threat to you' part of the tool tip or was reading something entirely different.

However in regards to OP of putting it on the OT or not I would say that I would still stick it on my top dps because they are the ones that are normally higher on threat than the OT. Also on events like those freezing mobs in kara then it would be even worse for Vig being on the OT as it would mean his threat is lower and the dps have to do even less than normal - still better to put it on the top dps.

For my guild we still just play in Kara due to guild numbers/gear/time/skill and it will be quite a nice tool for me and the other tank to throw onto our top dps'ers for the threat boost.

[Enkinu]

How about cross-vigilance between main tanks?

New Vigilance works in following way:
- 3% damage mitigation
- 10% threat transfer
- refresh Taunt cooldown every time target is hit

Isn't it perfect for bosses/mobs that require multiple tanks fighting for highest treat (before DPS)? It can work well on TK Void Reaver, Skeletal Ushers in Karazhan, and greatly help offtank to catch up with threat generation.

Additionally if offtank uses Vigilance on main tank does it mean he has Taunt ready all the time (cooldown resets every time MT is hit, what happens pretty often)? In some cases this 10% threat less on main tank doesn't make big difference (like on Moroes), and helps offtank keep just after him and taunt mobs (which break CC) from healers/DPS.

Am I wrong or I missed something?

Enkinu

[Brunson]

How about an OT putting it on the MT in fights like FLK in SSC?

The MT gets such a huge lead that the 10% threat reduction wont mean anything to him. But the 3% damage reduction could help, and if he happens to die. Maybe FLK will go to the OT instead of some random healer. This could change a wipe into a possible win.

[Tenraiel]

I personally, am still just not impressed. The main benefit to vigilance to me right now is that I feel I have a free talent point to put somewhere else. That sounds like crying I know, but I don't mind having 1 joke talent when there is SO much awesome stuff in reach now.

[Forklift]

What talisfear and Kamani have already said, namely:

1. You don't need the threat transfer proposed in the OP unless DPS is at your heels. An OT at your heels can just back off, so V is unneeded there.
2. If DPS is at your heels, he's clearly #2 in threat. Thus, you want to take his threat, not your #3 OT's threat.

Pretty cut and dried.