+ Reply to Thread
Page 5 of 20 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 15 ... LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 392

Thread: Tanking Topics #3: Health

  1. #81
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    913
    Quote Originally Posted by Hamburglar View Post
    The big issue I see is this: High health is nearly the solution to any survival situation in WoW.
    If one stat is disproportionately useful, then one thing that must be done (eventually) is to bring its importance in line with other survival stats. While normalizing mitigation overall is a good thing (tm), that alone won't fix everything as long as encounters are designed around "tank killer" abilities in order to make them challenging.

  2. #82
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,022
    Quote Originally Posted by Xav View Post
    They were just numbers thrown out as an example as how to easily create equal scaling. It doesn't matter if paladins are nerfed or not. Paladins and warriors are in extremely similar boats as it is right now.

    It seems often enough using the words "example" or "possible solutions" causes people to overlook it (not necessarily concerning just you, jere), and to instantly hit "reply" and scream "NERF"
    Sorry, I probably didn't word my post correctly. I wasn't really screaming nerf at all, but asking more asking "why?". I understand that they are just examples, as I highlighted in my post. I guess I was more trying to understand the objective behind it. In order for there to be a solution there must be something you saw that needed fixing. My guess is that you expect paladin scaling to go too far going into the upper tiers (T10), which definitely is a concern. We definitely shouldn't be totally eclipsing warriors by any means.

    My point was more that your example didn't really show the reasoning behind the discussion on it (since the example fell within the bounds of the desired end state before a change was enacted), so I was trying to find out what the driving force is for the change so I could better understand where it was coming from. It's hard to comment on something if you don't know what you are really commenting on. If it was the fact that the higher scaling is scary and could lead to problems down the road, then that could be looked at. If it was that the health levels should be much closer than 3%, then that too could be looked at. If there was some other objective, that could be looked at too. I am just trying to understand. But I do agree with you in that paladins and warriors are pretty close already and are definitely in a similar boat.

    By the way, I thought the opening post on the whole was a very good post. I like looking at issues like these because they are important.

    EDIT:
    I think my discussion with you might actually drive the conversation away from the points I believe you are making. I guess the thing I wanted you to take away from this was I wasn't trying to accuse you of wanting to nerf us. I am simply a details person and got to curious. Perhaps I will ask you at a more appropriate time than this topic, since this discussion doesn't really go into the large EH differences and is more a of curiosity on my part. But in either case, I don't think you are trying to get us nerfed by any means, I am just OCD is all . I don't want this post to derail a good topic, though, so sorry about that.
    Last edited by jere; 02-21-2009 at 08:49 AM.

  3. #83
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    11
    Most TBC players remember how effective and prefered in the early content druids were. Eventually the situation changed and warriors became the most reliable tank became the warrior.

    Thing is that blizzard planned to change the philosophy of tanking by overhauling all classes and introducing 1 new while stating that there will never be any encounter that cant be pulled without any specific type of tank.
    The irony is that when we talk about absolutes we want to brink in the best possible solution, especially in progress as the thread greatly illustrates.

    The best for the job can be determined by many factors such as DPS, avoidance, EH , survivability overall through cds or blocking and even TPS.
    When DKs were introduced they were supposed to have as forte the magic heavy fights ( correct me if wrong ) so we cant expect that blizzard has not taken the strong and weak points into consideration. Question is if they balanced them correctly. A solo tanking ( no external help) sartharion or a 15k HP difference is a great example in the article why facts lead to cause annoyance.

    What we should ask ourselves should be if we want to have certain types having advantage in specific fights and moreover how much advantage is acceptable. No matter what though, perfection seekers will still prefer the 'best' even if that means 1k more HP.

    Also do not forget that the classes are designed and balanced by taking into consideration their potential in every aspect of the game overall ie a paladin can also be a healer so if he was the best tank by far it would not be accepted, same logic with the arguments between pure and hybrid dpsers.

    To sum up if the question is what type of tanks we want. Impersonal meatshields (or without shields) that differ only by name or certain individuals that have a forte? And if the concern is mainly the magic damage heavy encounters this can be easily fixed if there is official interest just through glyphing, no need to redesign talents and scaling. But progresswise the handicap will always be there especially in 10 men and given the encounter someone will always be slightly better.

    Thing is .....where/when should each tank be better at..

  4. #84
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    26
    GC has stated repeatedly that one of their goals is to make maximizing EH at the expense of damage and threat output a failing gear strategy for a tank. Which reinforces the fact that looking at EH in a vacuum without considering special abilities and oh shit buttons is really rather pointless.

    If you want all tanks to be equally effective in all situations, just say it. I'm down for that. I'll trade my EH advantage as a bear tank for all the really cool things Warriors, Pallies, and DK's can do any day. But don't pretend some low single digit advantage in EH for bears will balance against the one quarter to one third less avoidance we have vs. the other tanking classes, or will balance Shield Wall vs. Barkskin, or balance passive Block vs. crit-based Savage Defense, or balance the DK shield vs...oh wait. I'm out of abilities. Nvm.

    We will know long before 3.1 goes live what the largest possible burst damage a tank can take in Ulduar is. Once you have enough heath to survive that plus a small safety margin, you have enough health and anything you stack beyond that is wasted stats that should be spent on mitigation, threat or dps.

    All classes will be able to reach that practical limit. How we do our jobs once that practical limit is reached is flavor. Taking EH out of that context makes for a misdirected discussion at best, which is the only way arguing about who has the highest potential EH makes any sense at all.

  5. #85
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Posts
    66
    All classes will be able to reach that practical limit.
    If they set the practical EH requirement low enough that every tank can reach it, it won't have the desired effect. A minimum EH for a hard encounter that requires warriors and paladins to stack stam to the exclusion of everything else is going to be a trivial EH level for a druid/DK to reach, and druids and DKs will be the best tanks (not to mention having the lowest gear requirements for the fight) by far: either your healers can practically nod off keeping a druid/DK alive, or they can stack high threat stats, more avoidance, etc. while paladins and warriors are busy regemming for stam and barely avoiding dying to that 3-shot combo.

    But don't pretend some low single digit advantage in EH for bears will balance against the one quarter to one third less avoidance we have vs. the other tanking classes...
    That's exactly the problem right now. Blizzard has balanced EH with other tanking stats as if they're interchangable - this tank can have the most EH, this one gets less but has some block, this one can have less but more avoidance, etc.

    The problem is that this works most of the time (e.g. I would say on Noth it honestly does not matter whether you're that EH tank or the block tank), but falls apart on difficult tanking content, when EH is objectively the best combination of stats to have.

    Whether or not druids would be "fine" if you took away their EH advantage is really another discussion entirely, but it certainly seems obvious to me that they wouldn't.

  6. #86
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    3
    The point i was trying to make before my post was deleted was. Blizz introduced Dk to be magic tanks and druids being a close second. They could fix this discussion by just putting in fire resist cloth gear and let a lock stand in front of a bosse spaming searing pain. And if the argument is for progression who should blizzard accommodate the 1% that might clear ulduar in the first week or two or the 95% that will be clearing it for the months to come?

    Thats also not taking into account that the DK build would have threat issues if it had group aoe pull and druids would be in about the same boat. There is much more to take into consideration besides just hp for Dks, more so than other classes. If we spec for hp like your blood build we lose cooldowns and threat if we spec frost we lose hp and some aoe threat if we spec unholy we lose some hp and single target threat.

    Each class/ spec brings its own advantages to the table we each have to find our own place. Even with with non tank classes this is the case. Who would not bring a shaman to guild progressing in 3d sarth, a rogue with tricks trade,a priest with guardian sprint/pain suppression or who has downed instructor without priests.

  7. #87
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Canadia
    Posts
    3,523
    Quote Originally Posted by Oiysters View Post
    GC has stated repeatedly that one of their goals is to make maximizing EH at the expense of damage and threat output a failing gear strategy for a tank
    I'd love to see this, but I will believe it when I see it for progression fights.
    Got a question? Try here: Evil Empire Guides and here: Tankspot Guides and Articles Library first!

  8. #88
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    3,897
    Quote Originally Posted by Hidro View Post
    Sry to say that mate but u're very wrong. I'm a prot warrior with only 27k hp unbuffed and with a decent pug we down sartharion 25 very easy with me as main tank ... I also have a drood friend with only 30.5k hp unbuffed who also tanked sarth 25 fairly easy as well .. Best regards
    have you ever tried 3 drake sarth ?



  9. #89
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Italy
    Posts
    1,555
    Quote Originally Posted by Satrina View Post
    I'd love to see this, but I will believe it when I see it for progression fights.
    Tecnically, if they put a strict enrage timer on a boss, it will perfectly make sense.

    Back in TBC, one of my biggest selling points for tanking Brutallus was my 800 DPS compared to the much lower one of a prot war or even druid.
    Worlde - Prot Paladin
    Darkworldie - Tank DW Frost DK
    Uord - Prot Warrior
    Huordie - Feral / Resto Druid

  10. #90
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    your moms house
    Posts
    1,619
    Quote Originally Posted by Hidro View Post
    Sry to say that mate but u're very wrong. I'm a prot warrior with only 27k hp unbuffed and with a decent pug we down sartharion 25 very easy with me as main tank ... I also have a drood friend with only 30.5k hp unbuffed who also tanked sarth 25 fairly easy as well .. Best regards
    have you tried sartharion with 3 drakes up? his breaths would literally one shot a tank with that low of health..

    personally i think the amount of health one tank class has VS another one is just another thing to set the classes apart. its not game breaking, and i think its fine where its at.
    -DK's and Druids have high health because they cannot block, so their incoming damage will be higher then a warrior or paladin of the same gear levels (in a case where they arnt using CD's)

    Boss mechanics should be tuned so every class can tank it about the same. some boss mechanics do favor other types of tanks, but i do not believe that this requires a class overhaul simply because one class has higher health.

    yes, sartharion with 3 drakes is near impossible to be tanked by a paladin or a normal geared warrior, but we dont yet know that any of the bosses in ulduar will be like this. I think its safe to say it wont be the case.

    in terms of magic damage, it would IMHO be best to put a mechanic into spell reflect, or a whole new ability, that gave us a certain resistance to magic spells for a short amount of time

    PS-spell out your words please.. u're /twitch and drood? wtf is a drood?

  11. #91
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Posts
    7
    Being that the topic is primarily based around magic damage it seems like the best solution would be to remove the itemization cost from non-specialized resist gear and add +resist all to tank pieces so that for genneral use the differences between 2 tanks as far as magic mitigation and eh become smaller. Essentially if for instance a t7 geared tank had 40% magic mitigation the differences between a bears 12% and a warriors 10-16% magic mitigation become much less important. While pallies and dk's would still have their magic mitigating ablitities as well as having the passive magic resistance from the tank gear. This could alternitively be passed on to all classes providing some level of mr based on ilvl.

    On a side note this my have the (non-)desired effect of boosting tank pvp serviveablity to magic burst damage.

    Being a warrior however and not having great insight to other tanks, although im familure with some of the differences it seems that the best solution would be to add some amount of magic resistance to holy shield and a 20s magic resistance to spell reflect, in this way even if boss spell damage remains unreflectable you could pop spell reflect to mitigate some of the damage. Given the differences in the ablities and the existant difference in hp it seems that holy shield would probably have to have a lower value then the resistance though reflect because of the lower cost and constent uptime in a boss fight. In this way pallies and warriors would at least be comperable to druids as a second best for magic fights to dk's without doing a massive game altering mechanic change that would nerf druids and dk's significantly, yet fix a gennerally accepted short fall in pally/warrior design.

  12. #92
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    41
    If two tanks of different classes have 40k and 50k respectively, you can balance them by closing the gap between their health or ensure the 50k tank mitigates less damage than the 40k tank (which isn't happening now and there are many good suggestions for how to do this). However, this only works if mana efficiency of the healers is a factor (which it totally isn't now).

    Currently, Blizz has kinda screwed themselves twice. For most encounters, mana efficiency is not a major concern. That means it makes no difference if they have to spend 20% more mana to keep the 50k tank alive. There is almost no endurance factor involved. That makes taking the tank with 50k health the easy choice.

    Enrage timers are a nice mechanic, but only impacts the DPS of the raid (and is almost a benefit to healers as they can burn mana at a higher rate if they know the encounter will only last 4 minutes). Personally, I would like to see fewer enrage timers and more encounters that are endurance based.

    In endurance based scenarios, you might want the 40k tank because he could (with some improvements to their talents/cooldowns) takes less damage thereby increasing the amount of time your DPS has to down the boss, but you have an increased chance he may die in a spike. Or if you take the high HP tank, he will have a reduced chance to die to a spike (have fewer or less effective cooldowns which ensure he takes moderate but steady damage), but you are pouring more resources into him to keep him alive and thereby decreasing the amount of time you have available to down the boss before the healers are bingo on mana.


    Yes, there are definitely problems with the tank balance, but I think the OP of almost all classes in PvE currently makes choosing a tank for an encounter one dimentional.

  13. #93
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    your moms house
    Posts
    1,619
    Quote Originally Posted by Naaven View Post
    Also, while this is kind of an ancillary concern, and definitely not as applicable to the "cutting edge progression" guilds, the fact remains that hp level is what the average joe uses to determine who's the better tank. I would think that since Blizz is trying (appropriately or not, but I think the former) to cater to the average joe, that big hp difference puts the warrior tank at a big disadvantage.

    I'm thinking specifically of <random guild name> who receives 2 raiding apps from 2 tanks. One has 40k hp, the other has 45k. How many of those GM's have the appreciation for tanking theory necessary to determine who's the better geared dude?
    if you get your app denied because of the pure fact that you have less HP then another tank, yet the rest of your stats are better... you dont wana be in that guild

  14. #94
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Location
    United Kingdom
    Posts
    1,644
    Quote Originally Posted by Oiysters View Post
    GC has stated repeatedly that one of their goals is to make maximizing EH at the expense of damage and threat output a failing gear strategy for a tank. Which reinforces the fact that looking at EH in a vacuum without considering special abilities and oh shit buttons is really rather pointless.
    Think about that for a moment, though.

    Which classes will have it easiest gearing for high threat or damage--the ones with naturally high EH or the ones which already struggle to meet EH targets?

    Warriors, especially, are massively dependant on stacking Expertise and Hit on their gear to maximize their threat, often at the expense of a couple thousand HP or more.

    If you have classes with an 8k lead in health over the maximum of another class, it means that even if they balanced around the lowest maximum health the class with the HP lead could trim down a significant portion of his gear budget off of Stamina and put it into avoidance and/or DPS/TPS.

    The higher EH classes would still have a massive advantage in fights where a balance of both high EH and high DPS is needed.

  15. #95
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Posts
    913
    Quote Originally Posted by Labguy23 View Post
    For most encounters, mana efficiency is not a major concern.
    They supposedly want to fix that in 3.1, though I have to admit how the major mechanic change involved (reduce OOFSR mana regen a bit, keep mana regen unchanged inside the five second rule) is supposed to accomplish that.

    There are other mechanics by which they can make avoidance more attractive than EH (or at least encourage balanced gearing), though. (Whether all WoW players are math-savvy enough to figure that out is another question, of course.)

  16. #96
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Tampa, FL
    Posts
    20
    OMG I just lost 45 Min's of typing because my INTERNET went down, oh well here it is short and sweet.

    If you going to buffed warrior/pally health, then you have to give druids block, parry, shield, and let them wear plate, then give DK's a shield and block. There is a reason why druids/DK have more health and it to make up for the avoidance.

    As healer is my main spec now, I healed all 4 classes and pally is the easiest with warrior a very close 2nd and druid/DK way behind. They require far more heals.

    I mean if you going to equal all the tanks then fine, get rid of all the 10 classes and make 3 = tanking, dps and healing. Let each person choose the abilities, stats and spells they want and go from, there.

    Edit for spelling

  17. #97
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Location
    Kuna, Idaho
    Posts
    955
    On the subject of Druids. I've never quite understood the logic behind a Bear not being able to parry. It's quite a bit more realistic for them to parry an attack than get that great big bear ass out of the way to dodge. In short, they should be able to do both.

    Blocking is interesting. It is technically accurate for a combatant wielding a 2 hander to block an attack with a sword. This is not the same thing as a parry. As far as game mechanics go, there should be no harm in providing similar levels of mitigation between the four tanking classes, I think a problem area here is the simple fact that the shield wearing classes get armor value directly from items + talents, and the non shield wearing classes get it as a modifier/coefficient thingy. That needs to be looked at.
    Quote Originally Posted by Kalken View Post
    "I'll let the dragon hit me in the face, you stab it in the ass."

  18. #98
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    Arlington, VA
    Posts
    593
    Quote Originally Posted by Bearncat View Post
    OMG I just lost 45 Min's of typing because my INTERNET went down, oh well here it is short and sweet.

    If you going to buffed warrior/pally health, then you have to give druids block, parry, shield, and let them wear plate, then give DK's a shield and block. There is a reason why druids/DK have more health and it to make up for the avoidance.
    Well if thats the only way you can imagine equalizing the tanking classes then ok thats the way it has to be. I'm pretty confident that talented game designers will come up with a much less drastic solution to the problem that the one you propose. You are a healer but do you understand the problem? If you think there isnt a problem and its totally ok for 2 classes to be good progression tanks and 2 classes to be uber trash tanks thats probably something most of us would disagree with you on.

  19. #99
    Quote Originally Posted by squats View Post
    -DK's and Druids have high health because they cannot block, so their incoming damage will be higher then a warrior or paladin of the same gear levels (in a case where they arnt using CD's)
    Why do people keep saying this? I never read a blue post stating they have higher health because they cannot block. What is more likely is that they have higher armor because they cannot block. The health is just a bonus on top that shouldn't be there. And DKs use CDs more often than not. Correct me if I am wrong but wasn't it a Blood DK that could keep up a chain of IBF, VB and 1 min trinket basically indefinitely?

  20. #100
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    14
    Can't post on US forum, but passive mitigation is very important here and don't feel its emphasized enough in this thread. Correct me if I am wrong on these numbers:

    Passive mitigation (from stance/presence/form etc):
    Deathknight: 0% melee, 15% magic
    Druid: 12% melee, 12% magic
    Paladin: 6% melee and 6% magic
    Warrior: 10% melee, 16% magic

    To buff warriors with 10% melee mitigation up to DK's hp level while keeping DK at 0% melee mitigation hardly seems fair. The druid 12% bonus from bear form while having a huge HP advantage seems pretty insane tho.

+ Reply to Thread

Bookmarks

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts