Yeah, every single socket is +12 stam right now, and all enchants are stam-oriented other than Mongoose on my weapon.

Maybe he's including Commanding Shout?

__________________
"Battles are won by slaughter and maneuver. The greater the general, the more he contributes in maneuver, the less he demands in slaughter." -Winston Churchill

http://www.tankspot.com/signatures/u...ders/image.jpg

that's possible, or it could be raid buffed, soemthings fishy

__________________
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"

This being my first post, I'm not sure whether I should include a long sappy preface "I respect y'all so much thanks for doing such a great job," blah blah blah, or if y'all would prefer simply to get down to business.

Also, apologies for bringing up a months-old thread, but I read it and one point in particular really bugged me. Here's what I want to talk about:

I'm no Cronedog but that math and logic doesn't make much sense to me.

Speaking of the hypothetical druid, because Crushing Blows are above Normal Hits on the combat table, adding 1% dodge will generally cause 1% hit to be removed and have no effect on crushes. That's 1% hit turned into 1% dodge, which is 1% avoidance plain and simple.

Going back to your example, a feral druid with 415 defense (uncrittable) and 30% total dodge has a combat table something like this:

7% Miss (from defense)
30% Dodge
15% Crush
48% Hit

Over time, by which I mean averaging over multiple enemy swings, the average damage taken per 1 Raw damage dealt is .705 = 0(.07) + 0(.30) + 1.5(.15) + 1(.48). Any raw damage actually taken is then mitigated by armor, of course.

Adding 1% dodge changes it to
7% Miss
31% Dodge
15% Crush
47% Hit

Over time, the average damage taken per 1 Raw damage dealt is .695 = 1.5(.15) + 1(.47).

And obviously, .705 - .695 = .01 or 1%.

Raising dodge by 1% causes the druid to take 1% less raw damage, specifically BECAUSE crushing blows are unaffected.

Looking at the combat table of a warrior with shield block up, adding 1% dodge gives him the exact same 1% reduction in number of Blocked Hits taken, again because crushing blows are unaffected.

If hit was off the bottom of the table but crushing blows were still present, then adding 1% dodge would yield more than 1% avoidance, not less.

Maybe your words "Damage Reduction" mean something else entirely, and I'm misunderstanding your post?

Thanks for reading.

I think the reason why they are actually less effective in damage reduction because by removing hit from the table, you are effectively making it so if you DO get hit, it will be a crushing, and a crushing will hit for 150% which means it isn't giving the full benefit at all. The numbers were just made up.

__________________
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"

This is my first post, so forgive me if I am missing something here. Also, I love this site, and I adore all the work that goes on here. This is one of the most intelligent forums I've ever seen.

That said, this math confuses me:

Let's say you have 100 health and a mob hits for 10 base damage. Under the first situation, unless I'm missing something, you are taking 9 damage a hit (10 * (1-0.1)) which is 9% of your health, not 9.09%. You will need -twelve- hits to die this way. Under the second situation, you will be hit 90% of the time. The odds of a string of ten events occurring with a 90% chance is (0.9^10) or 34.9%. This means that 34.9% of the time, you will take ten hits in a row. Furthermore, the only way for this method to be superior to the AC method is to avoid at least three hits every twelve (as twelve would kill you in the AC situation), taking nine, and surviving. The odds for this happening are the inverse of the odds of 10, 11, or 12 hits occurring in the string (the only possible "fail" scenarios), so 1 minus {((0.9^10)*(0.1^2)) + ((0.9^11)*0.1) + (0.9^12)} or 1-0.317 or 68.3% of the time (this seems high; is my math off?). You fail to make the three avoids in twelve hits 31.7% of the time.


I don't mean to cast thread necro, but this got to me.

There were line graphs for this cider in a certain topic, do you happen to know which one? Or possibly link it here for this topic's support?

They were pretty simple like
(<-----health------><--avoidance--><-blah->
and several others like that.

Thanks

__________________
http://armory.mmo-champion.com.nyud....50784QgnEH.png

I recently started to gear up my feral druid to have some experience at tanking with other classes (I've done some with my prot pala as well).

On my warrior, I'm the avoidance type of guy (sorry to all fans of EHT!). But I have the feeling that druids really shine in effective health, due to the insane amount of hit points they get from stamina (around 17 if fully buffed, even more if you're a Tauren, where you get less than 12 as a warrior). Now as a druid, you'll have really high armor as well of course.

Okay, getting to the point: how would the fact that you're not immune to crushing blows effect the EHT? Would you have to consider every attack as a crushing blow perhaps?

If you treat every attack as a crushing blow, druids suddenly get worse tanks. Some maths:

Suppose a 25K hit before mitigation.
Our beloved fluffy tonk has 75% reduction, so he'll take 6250 damage per hit. But on a crush we add 50%, which leads to 9375 damage.
Our steamtonk on the other hand has only 65% mitigation (numbers are a bit made-up, but should be fairly okay). From the 25K, he'll absorb 16250, leading to 8750, which is less already than the crush on the druid. Now substract 500 block value for example and we've got a clear winner.

Oh wait, I forgot to add defensive stance even. 8750*0.9 = 7875 before blocking. Subtract the 500 from this and the druid gets about 2000 more damage every hit. To be able to survive 3 (crushing) hits in a row, he would need 6K more health than the warrior.

Hmmm, this might be attainable indeed...

I think with raid tanking you have to focus on the worst case scenario events, be it parries, crushing blows, or whatever else an encounter has in store, and gear to survive those types of events. I don't think I've died too many times because a fight took too long and my healers ran out of mana, or i took too much damage over the course of a fight. You're pretty much always gonna die from quick and unfortunate events like several parries in succession and a crushing blow squeaking through, or some idiot rogue attacking from the front of the boss.

Certainly if you are a druid you'd have to acknowledge that taking crushing blows 15% of the time is your biggest weakness while raid tanking, so how you gear should mitigate that weakness as much as possible. Since the probability is pretty good that a druid is going take 2 or even 3 crushing blows in a row every once in a while, i'd say gearing in order to survive that kind of event is a pretty good idea.

I have read through these board forever and a day and find myself gritting my teeth. I will try not to come across too strong here.

My brother has been MT of our guild (along with another stam heavy tank) for almost a year now.

I just recently rolled my tank to prove a point to him and it has to to do with the argument taking place here - avoidance or stam.

I will only drop a snippet that I can prove if anyone cares to look at the actual numbers. Guess work does not exist to me and without proof I do not listen to arguments. I know I am hypocrite by posting so little info but I will try my best to make sense of my ramblings.

First things first - the only stam that you need is enough so that if the boss decides to hit you that your healers have enough time to heal you up. One of the largest causes of burst damage is parry. If you don't know this then go read more before you try to make sense of what I am about to post.

You need avoidance to dodge the bursts when they do happen so that they do not drop you below your total life. If you cannot dodge enough attacks in a 4-6 string crushing blow burst then you are dead. Stam will not make up for this.

The reason I point this out is:
This is completely untrue. Please do your math before assuming.

The math is posted here:
http://www.tankspot.com/forums/evil-...avoidance.html

Sorry if this is to brash I just want you to have the most information possible.

My conclusion:
Get enough stam to survive three hits from the boss you are fighting - avoidance for the rest. The 1.5% chance I will take ANY day over the 9% chance on the fourth and later consecutive crushing blows probability (which is typically what kills a tank imo)

One of the best guides I have read:
http://elitistjerks.com/f31/t18771-protection_warrior_guide/


-cain

You clearly haven't been reading very much here if you think that's new and groundbreaking news. (Not to mention missing the point of EH theory)

typical.

How to look like an R-tard in 3 easy steps:
1)Flame earlier participants in the thread for their ignorance and talk with a condescending tone.
2)Sum up those very same people's own arguements and positions (poorly and incorrectly) as if you are making some kind of original rebuttal through them. For extra credit, quote those very people's own outside work.
3)Conclude by linking another site as the holy grail of all truth.


well played.

__________________

"In raids, the reality is that most of a player's contribution comes from how well that player plays that character, regardless of the class."
~Kalgan, Blizzard Lead Developer

My apologies for trying to contribute. I'll go read elsewhere.

EDIT: I linked the site because they did the math unlike most people that just guessed. I did no amount of flaming, rather, got flamed... from an admi at that. I'm sorry but I do not wish to be a part of a community that reacts like that after making these brazen stickies stuffed FULL of opinion. Math or bust imo.

And where do we lack math? We have an entire forum filled with theorycraft, mathcraft, and statistics. We have a thread posted by Hypatia where he draws out long formulae to show the differences in stam stacking and avoidance where it clearly shows that stam is exponentially better up to a point, and then avoidance shows higher gains. If you had read deeply into any of the numerous posts here, INCLUDING the one posted here BY Satrina labeled "Wanderlei - On Avoidance" (http://www.tankspot.com/forums/evil-...avoidance.html) you would know that we already know about what you are stating AND have advocated it since day 1. People read Ciderhelm's guides or Satrina's guide and fail to read the little part about "in a bleeding edge progression guild". If you aren't then you probably don't.

We also have posted EH minimums for raid instances, which tell you what is a safe EH to obtain and likewise a safe avoidance %. Once you reach those numbers you can do whatever the hell you want. We suggest threat stats at that point. The reason why you're being treated poorly is because of what joanadark said. You came in here with a condescending tone, with statements like "I've read this site" when you obviously haven't. Full of opinion? We put more math into our work here than any other site with the exception of elitist jerks, but we often quote them when their findings are sound. Just because it comes from Elitist Jerks doesn't make it gospel, but a lot of their information is good.

You state in your opening paragraph that you feel like a hypocrite for not posting your own math, and we're basically calling you out on your hypocrisy because you claim several things in your post that are already covered here on the site. You needn't apologize for trying to contribute, but you can take your condescending attitude with you if you want to keep posting like that. You didn't come here trying to contribute, you came here trying to flex your e-peen and trying to prove against the "status-quo" when in fact what you thought was the status quo, wasn't, and you know how we know you're trying to flex? You start your post with me and my brother are MT's and I rolled my tank to prove a point...etc...etc.

Only people who have a chip on their shoulders start posts with this. If you have sound information, it'll speak for itself, we don't need to know about your experiences or your brother's.

__________________
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"

MasterCain, The people here did the math.

The point of effective health theory is not to stack stamina to the extreme all the time. The theory itself deals with a gearing method of approaching content you don't outgear. At the time this guide was very significant because the only options were to socket stamina and take high stamina high avoidance items. Though Ciderhelm does say to take pieces like boots of avoidance because they are insanely balanced.

You posted like you had something to prove but gave no proof. I will give you proof that effective health theory works.

Ok a full t6 paladin tank (im a paladin but im ret now, I tanked all the way up to Bloodboil and Azgalor and had about 5 wipes on kalecgos), Has 53% avoidance 17.6k armor 16.3k health still lacking some upgrades but he managed to tank kalecgos. My stats with 2 new badge items and 1 t6 level item are 53% avoidance 17.6k armor and 16k health roughly so without getting 5 drops from T6 content I have enough to survive kalecgos right? Why? Because I chose the gear that was balanced I gemed for good socket bonuses and I picked up the avoidance on gear.

EH theory is about pushing into content you are not geared for if my paladin who hasnt got tank gear past najentus or past azgalor (I use that because i do have the exalted ring) yet I have the stats for practically all of BT. You can blindly read this theory and think its all about stamina, its not its about knowing when you need stamina and when you don't!

I'm sure your avoidance set up is working for you but what if you progress fast enough that you reach and EH limit? Brutallus you need about 22-23k buffed even if you had 80% avoidance you'd still die if you didnt have the minimum health needed. Kinda like the patchwerk example given in the article.

Random loot is random one of my guilds tanks is still using karazhan boots of elusion =).

Edit: Id like to mention that other posters on tankspot like edgewalker and joanadark (EDF!!!) have done great justice to avoidance as a stat prehaps read his posts because he does post the maths and does come up with good reasoning and arguments.

I have to ask did you even read the top of the page?
"
Notice - This guide needs to be updated. There are clearly encounters where Avoidance is superior to Effective Health, such as Prince in Karazhan. Will have an update ASAP. - Mar 28 '08"

__________________
My Epeen shot:http://img513.imageshack.us/img513/6...7012841wk3.jpg (Solo Arlokk ftw)

I'll make this brief:

1. I was simply pointing out that a stamina tank does NOT in fact have many less scary times.

2. I have read all of your tank posts on here and generally ignore the mis statements or don't even post simply because of situations like these.

3. I was not here to flex an e-peen:
This statement is moronic. Stop reading it like I'm trying to start something and read it as informative - maybe then it will make sense to you.

-cain

EDIT: I agree w/ the status quo and simply wanted to emphasize that balance (or at least not being one-sided toward stam/armor - without it making sense) was the better way to go.

Also if you would really like me to post all the stats and graphs and math I would gladly do so, however, I assumed that you all knew where to find it within the realm of this site or EJ and was trying to save time - both mine and yours.

If you can make assumptions about me, then I can make assumptions about you.

You didn't post anything informative, you posted something with the intention to rile up members. If that wasn't your intention, then you're terrible at posting because that is exactly what you did. But by all means, keep contributing.

__________________
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"

Hey guys.
I wanted to contribute to this discussion about avoidance and effective health. First of all you need to know that I am not yet a raid tank in any form. I am playing the game and I hope to be some time soon, but for now I have not been even to Kara. A lot of you may not want to read further on with me clearly not being an expert, but consider reading on as this gives me another perspective.

There are pretty good mathematics out there which tell you the chance of getting hit worst case some times in a row. For one build this happens more often, but they can cope with it for others really seldom due to high avoidance.

But a fact is regardless of how much avoidance you have it will happen! This is the crucial point.. it happens. With several hundredth boss attacks per fight it should happen once a fight or if you really stack avoidance maybe every other boss fight.

Same for the effective health tank. You will get several swings with damage nearly every fight that should kill you.

So why isn’t there a death and a wipe at least every other boss fight?

Because as a warrior you are prepared for such chancy situations… You have shield wall, health stones, trinkets and what the heck more.


So neither as a EH tank nor as an avoidance tank you should die in such situations. So why does it happen from time to time???

This brings me to my “other perspective”. Start by viewing a raid tank simply as a black box. This may help the new players and may be interesting for the experienced ones.

Every single raid boss stacks more damage on the tank than he can survive! This is a fact.


So you survive a fight when the amount of damage you get equals the amount of healing you get. This hold completely true if both damage and healing is continuous. If for example you have 21k health and get hit by 20k every second you survive be getting healed every second for 20k. So for continuous damage and health it is not important to have avoidance or more health than to survive a stroke.

Now you will say ohhhhh that’s not the game. You are right. But from this and from the difference to the real wow world we can derive the only ways why tanks die:

The healers do not have enough mana to heal the same amount as the boss makes damage.
What helps?
Damage reduction (armor, avoidance)
DPS -> Threat increase (Boss faster down)
More mana

The time between burst damage and “burst heal” (healing you back to a point where you can survive the next burst damage) is to long so you get killed by this next burst damage.
What helps?
Effective health (one or more extra strokes from the boss does mean several more seconds of healing income)
Avoidance to minimize this bursts

Global effects (Boss had to be brought down in 5 mins and now it’s a second later…), silences and so on.
What helps?
Get more Threat for more DPS


This is a simple view but it shows how complicated the actual tanking is. You have the Boss a one factor (his or her health, continuous damage burst damage, global effects), your healers (more +heal items may help you recover faster after a critical situation more mana allow longer fights), your damage dealers as threat and dps is also crucial.
This balance is crucial. It holds true for every fight and may be changed for every fight and team you do it with. That’s the fun of it.
So please stop arguing that a avoidance tank may only come into critical situations 9 times less than an effective health tank.

Depending on the other factors of your raid this may not be important at all.

Gear the best you can for your team, guild and encounter. Enjoy.
I hope I will join your Ranks as soon as possible.

I am posting this on tankspot, because I think it is a incredible site.

Lirk
(Lev. 62 prot warrior / Malfurion (European server)

This is the statement tankspot takes on EH vs. Avoidance, always has, always will be. People just fail to see it.

__________________
"Quis custodiet ipsos custodes?"

great read

Kazeyonoma saie, "We also have posted EH minimums for raid instances, which tell you what is a safe EH to obtain and likewise a safe avoidance %. Once you reach those numbers you can do whatever the heck(sic) you want." Would you post the link to that list please, it would be very helpful. Thanks, Kennetco

__________________
Life is good!