+ Reply to Thread
Page 11 of 17 FirstFirst ... 9 10 11 12 13 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 220 of 331

Thread: Tanking Topics #4: Cooldowns

  1. #201
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    11
    Quote Originally Posted by TomHuxley View Post
    But they have all pointed out very valid problems; surely now is the time to try and solve them.
    Sure but arguably the lack of combat mobility and fixed value damage reduction is a very valid problem for non-Warrior tanks.

    What I'm getting at is that these ARE valid concerns but from the viewpoint of what Warriors are missing. Where is the DK or Druid lobby that is receiving the same developer attention?

    Actually they were already scheduled for a nerf; I believe the thread helped show that nerfing HP (rather than armor) was a better solution, which will work out better for all classes in the long run. Also, druids are still getting a block-mechanic, so it's not really clear that they are getting an overall nerf in 3.1 yet.
    Well actually they're getting hit at both ends because their life got nerfed and their armour values will hit the cap. To be fair we need to see how the new mechanism works out in practice.

    I didn't see Druids as superior tanks for any boss except three drake Sartharion based on my gameplay experience. (Cleared all content as a healer). If they were comparable on every Naxx boss and Malygos and better on Sarth +3 does the nerf mean they will be worse on bosses that don't rely on one huge hit?

    I'm afraid you have totally misunderstood the point of these threads. This isn't a "let's get everyone nerfed" series, it's about getting the classes on more equal footing. As the recent PTR Patchwerk tests show, the issue of chainable CDs isn't just magic damage, it's all encounters. They can be used to trivialize essentially any form damage intake compared to classes, which basically means that all the other tank classes can't compete.
    My point is that by highlighting this inequality the first obvious fix that most people will think of is nerf the unequal class.

    That may be the best solution but I hope it is not the only solution considered. I also hope that nerfing the strengths of Druids and Death Knights doesn't turn the clock back to 2005 and Warrior Main Tanks for every guild.

    All other classes can benefit from Priest and Paladin targettable cooldowns. One solution, rather than nerfing DKs, might be giving the other 2 healing classes targettable cooldowns so one can reasonably expect enough cooldowns to cover any tank through high burst. Another might be raid design favouring more small hits, stunnable mobs or emphasis on damage reflection.

    Hopefully the balance problems can be solved without too much hogenization, but it's bad enough right now that I think a lot of tanks would be willing to settle for similarity if it also brought parity. After all, no one wants their "unique" identity to be "benched" or "trash".
    So, um, who is it exactly whose unique identity is benched or trash? Warrior tanks?

    Each of us has our own experience. As someone who has cleared current content with a Warrior tanking everything except Sartharion (and still having a crucial tanking job to do in that fight) I really am puzzled that people seem to be suggesting they are non-viable in general. Frankly if your Warriors couldn't tank Naxx it's not a problem with the Warrior class.

    Another question I have: are leading raid guilds jettisoning warriors to use these other classes in the way that happened in 2.0? In other words does what's happening in the game mirror the theorycraft presented in this thread?

  2. #202
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    248
    Quote Originally Posted by Bajumba View Post

    Another question I have: are leading raid guilds jettisoning warriors to use these other classes in the way that happened in 2.0? In other words does what's happening in the game mirror the theorycraft presented in this thread?
    I haven't seen anything of the such on Hellscream, In fact I think the druids/DK's are being shuffled between guilds while the warrior tank stays the MT.

    I've got through 4 OT's in 6 months, some due to my fault, some to their own.

    I think the latest podcast takes the notation here, as the ending segment get's to my point. The non-casual tanks, the ones who tank, and nothing but tank, are the vets. We've been through 40's, MC, Etc, plus the hell in BC. Warriors are comfortable.
    Or more-accuratly guilds are comfortable with warriors.
    November 23, 2004 8:27:03 AM - Glomgore 10+ Years of tanking? Priceless

  3. #203
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    EU-Scotland
    Posts
    103
    DKs do not take significantly more damage than the other classes, taking the Paladin case rather than Warrior (where we can assume 100% block uptime rather than a CD based one):

    Wow Web Stats - 3845 DTPS Blood DK 67.7% AVD - A/M 10621 / 18428
    Wow Web Stats - 2374 DTPS Unholy DK 72.1% AVD - A/M 7586 / 15614
    Wow Web Stats - 3605 DTPS Druid 61.1% AVD - A/M 8201 / 13702
    Wow Web Stats - 2851 DTPS Paladin 72.9% AVD - A/M 9370 / 16067
    Wow Web Stats - 3228 DTPS Warrior 65.2% AVD - A/M 8070 / 17571

    Blood DK (no CDs), takes ~ 1.2k more damage per hit than the paladin, 1k more DTPS, that is the effect of block on this encounter, however that is not the whole story as we must consider avoidance in terms of overall damage (individual damage per hit is irrelevant if it: won't kill you, your healers aren't spamming mindlessly and the chance of a killing streak is minimal, the "mana sponge with high avoidance" isn't a true type, high avoidance = lower rate of sponginess, Druids with low dodge, high stam were sponges because they had to eat more blows)

    Being generous, a Paladin with 60% avoidance (D/P/M) and a DK with 70% (60% Paladin + blade barrier) will see a 25% reduction in overall damage over an infinite fight, the individual hits might be larger due to the lack of block, but you take significantly fewer of them. What we see though is that DK CD usage is ~ twice as effective in DR from the baseline damage (Paladin - Block) as Block is, coupled with higher avoidance (which would overtime equalise the DTPS, leaving spikier damage). This suggests that the DK class really needs something of the following:

    Avoidance nerfed to similar levels to other tanks.
    Chain CDs nerfed 50%. (its block Jim, but not as we know it), assuming a 15s uptime per ability this is still used (and more effective) than a Paladin pressing Holy Shield every 9s (our charges can be eaten, there is no ICD on Holy shield)
    1-2 Longer CD CDs added for "oh crikey" moments.

    Druids from those numbers appear to need an armour nerf (bringing mitigation closer), a health nerf (can't be seen on pure phyiscal numbers), and an avoidance increase.

    And Warriors, actually appear to be fairly right, ie: lower min damage taken, higher max damage taken than the Paladin, assuming this is balanced reasonably it should come out very similar.

    We don't need to be the same, you can still have short chainable CDs (or overlapping CDs if you want) on a DK, some kind of insane bear stand (+100% health for 20s every min or something?), and Warriors and Paladins as more generic tanks, but we need to be looking similar to start with to allow fights to be balanced, otherwise I want to see:

    "Cake Town: This boss uses "this is cake town", if this attack is not blocked you bleed for 9001% of your health over 3s" -- "This is Cake Town". (used every 2s)

    I am sure a Warrior, DK and Bear can survive this with a properly tooled raid (chain casting Guardian spirit every 2s?, BoP + taunts?) however that fight says Paladin like no other, and seems highly unfair :P.

  4. #204
    Join Date
    Jun 2008
    Posts
    261
    2.Nin The dk's average damage is 13% higher then the paladin and the dk's biggest hit is 15% higher the the paladin according to the wws you are using. Thats not significant? Seriously?

    Could you guys discuss the mitigation part in another thread?

  5. #205
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    11
    I didnt play WoW in the old skool days. I was level 45 with my first character ( warrior tank) when tBC came out. Now during tBC warrior tanks werent benched but where the least prefered tank in general. A Pally was wanted for AoE tanking and a druid was wanted for hard hitting bosses due to thier large health pool. A friend of mine with a t6 pally tank was shocked to here i was tanking prince with my warrior and surprised at my typical success ( due to the high tendency for crushing blows).

    Now theres a new tank on the block. Warrior tanks can do a good job at AoE tanking (assuming the dps is intellegent) encroaching on the typical palladin role. My observation is that most pally tanks respeced Ret and are having a blast. They are next to immpossible to find. That leaves basically 3 tanking classes in reality (which i think why most of the discussion excludes paladins).

    Of the 3 tanking classes the warrior is again the least desired. Any PUG looking for a tank doesnt care the class as long as they are competent. My guild is more a casual guild that does some raiding and besides myself the other main tank is a unholy DK. If we are both in the same run we each have different bosses to tank. He tanks the first boss of spider wing due to his resistance to the locust swarm. Hes easier to heal. I tank the widow and he tanks all the adds. His Dps is so high he can beat down the sacrifices alone long before the first enrage. I tank the last boss because his DnD and what not is superior for the adds.

    We, as a guild, cannot do 25 man raids so we havent had tanking issues. I've PUGed 25man OS no drakes and MT the boss no problem. However even as a more casual raider, i have been disgrunted at apperent advantages my DK guild mate has. I do have some 25 man gear from naxx from PUGs and my guildmate still had blues. He had more HP, Armor, and advoidance with blues and some epics while i was in all epics (except a trinket) while a couple peices of naxx25. Plus he was much easier to heal due to chained coldowns. No number crunching here, but that doesnt seem very balanced at all. (and this sint argueing for progression either)

    We cant just call DK's a failed experiment (which is what i think they really are) and delete them because there would be a massive tank shortage. Not many prot pallys running around anymore.

    Yes thats right i said delete. I dont even bother running my mage in Winters grasp anymore. As is, if my warrior gets stuck in, there are three DK's jerking him around the battlefield. At least he can survive long enough to turn around and get a swing in.
    Last edited by Joel_D; 03-06-2009 at 08:46 AM.

  6. #206
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    116
    Quote Originally Posted by Darmon View Post
    What you propose is a nerf to DK tank as a class, based on the performance of one spec in one particular situation. That is far from acceptable by the other 2 DK tank specs, which are not as effective, even compaired with non-dk tanks.

    For example, from the tests on ptr made by the members of Premonition, Frost DK tanks were not even considered an option.
    Darmon... the suggested changes would help the other DK specs... A changed to a % mitigation in Frost Presence will assist them as much as Blood, and the CD extension would nerf them less then Blood which is more reliant on CDs than Frost(and no one in any way considers Unholy to be a MT spec of any kind). Besides... Blood is the progression tanking spec and that is where the CD chain issue is really going to raise it's stupid, ugly head.

    And the reason that Frost was not tested was that the result of the Frost test was predictable. Again, Blood stands out as the progression DK spec, Frost is great for a MT in standard content (trash and on-farm bosses), and no was quite sure where Unholy would land as Bone Armor is powerful, but (as shown) insufficient.
    Last edited by Jayson; 03-06-2009 at 10:07 AM.
    Paladin --- "A paragon of chivalry; a heroic champion."
    <Journey> is recruiting, visit www.wowjourney.com for information and class needs.

  7. #207
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    EU-Scotland
    Posts
    103
    Quote Originally Posted by nips View Post
    2.Nin The dk's average damage is 13% higher then the paladin and the dk's biggest hit is 15% higher the the paladin according to the wws you are using. Thats not significant? Seriously?

    Could you guys discuss the mitigation part in another thread?

    Yes 13/15% is significant, however not when a similar decrease in absolute magnitude is seen between the CD DK test (Unholy) and the Paladin as between the no CD test (Blood) and the Paladin. The difference in magnitude in the latter case is pretty much block, the DK CDs are twice as effective as block. As for absolute magnitudes of hits, its largely irrelevant if it doesn't force you over a survival boundary (1/2/3/4.../n hits to die), and that streak is determined by your avoidance. What we see is that a DK is virtually equivalent to a shield tank with stance reduction when block is not considered and CDs ommitted, and the DK can pull a tool of approximately double the value of the shield tank for reducing constant damage (for spikes theirs becomes much more valuable as the scaling nature of the hit will be reduced further by a CD than a static reduction).

    You cannot consider CD use outside of Mitigation, Avoidance and EH / MEH, the discussions are linked. GC and co admit that CDs are linked to tank survival, as we can see easily from the test DK survival is better than Paladin when CDs are considered (even if we assume a 50% reduction on 12s worth of hits, the Paladin will come off worse), coupled to the ability to avoid short term spike damage (tank killers). As such you can't ignore mitigation or avoidance in the discussion, because if you do you get the "DK is worse at surviving" picture because they can discount a large proportion of their DR (the don't ignore block crowd as well).

  8. #208
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    8
    Do death knights really have three viable tanking trees?

    Part of the Effective health of pally tanks and war tanks comes from BV for reducing physical hits. Instead of giving death nights a semi invincible Cool-down rotation, give them a reactive magic damage reduction mechanic. (that works apart from resistance).

    it could scale with BV so they would get use out of the tank plate.

    then death nights would get physical damage reduction by stacking armor value and avoidence, and magical damage reduction by stacking BV gear

    Lengthen their cool downs, but give them a spell which lets them place a magic damage reduction charge on themselves to create a stack up to N high. As they tank they use runicpower to buy a charge of damage reduction determined by their BV. When the boss hits them with a magical attack, as much of the stack as possible is used to stop the incoming blow. Now you have a tank that can smooth out spikey or constant magical attacks, that is vunerable,( and hence must use cool downs) to mitigate large physical blows
    The death night has to incoperate into their rotation the ability to buy enough charges to mitigate the next large magical attack.

  9. #209
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,055
    A thought on DK cooldowns: If their "rotational" cooldowns were adjusted to work as mutually exclusive "holy shield" type abilities with matching duration/CD, (IE - say, 100% uptime on vampiric blood or bone barrier, as an arbitrary example, with both abilities' effects adjusted to 100% uptime) would this continue to be an issue?

    Edit: That is to suggest, if DKs had their cooldowns split between "100% uptime, small effects tailored to damage" with icebound fortitude, as pure panic buttons.

  10. #210
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    8
    Source: TomHuxley
    I'm afraid you have totally misunderstood the point of these threads. This isn't a "let's get everyone nerfed" series, it's about getting the classes on more equal footing.
    I dont want all the tank classes on equal footing. There are two types of encounters now. 10 man and 25 man. Bliz has made is clear that 10 man is not progression because udar10 =nax25 gear <uldar 25. 10 man bosses need to be different then 25 man bosses.
    in a 10 man, yes any tank class needs be able to tank 100% of the bosses because who knows what classes your 10 man guild or pug has.
    In a 25 man, if i can tank 70% of the bosses in my regular tank suit and maybe 1 or 2 more with a specialized gear set, I'm happy. I have plenty to tank. I have a fight or two off that i can DPS. and the puzzle is harder because we have to figure out everyones roles.

    we need to get away from this eight-person, chained-cooldown supertank that can tank everything or were going to lock 10 man raid composition.

    design the 10 man bosses to be tanked by everyone, and the 25 man bosses to be tanked by "almost everyone but some better then others" durring progression and the rest after they are over geared.

  11. #211
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    116
    Quote Originally Posted by LtBean View Post
    Part of the Effective health of pally tanks and war tanks comes from BV for reducing physical hits.
    Only Paladins can use BV as part of their EH calculations. Warriors cannot yet achieve Block Cap, therefore you cannot assume BV in an EH equation for them because there is no way to predict when you will block or not. Even Paladins have to often (depending on what they have) change out gear from their best at a given slot to achieve a 100% chance to Dodge/Parry/Block every attack. (i.e. Lvl 70 BR libram, double avoidance trinkets [instead of Gossamer], crappy tier BR set instead of Dodge/Parry gear.)

    The calculation for this EH addition from BV is also complex to get accurate because it is dependant on how much health/armor the tank already has and how hard the bossis hitting them. As has been stated in the past, the ability to block on bosses is an extremely small advantage that is also very situational being based on how much damage the boss is doing per hit.
    Paladin --- "A paragon of chivalry; a heroic champion."
    <Journey> is recruiting, visit www.wowjourney.com for information and class needs.

  12. #212
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    493
    Vigilance should be in the list of "open to all casts" right? It's not a cooldown per se but cooldown is something of a misnomer anyway.

    My concern about a debuff is that people will only use "the best cooldown" and that diminishes the value or perceived appeal of the other abilities. I guess I'm in the minority audience here but I'd rather they bring the abilities and number of abilities more inline with one another. They're already halfway there already: virtually everyone has a self-heal, virtually everyone has a shield wall, etc.

    Edit: Additionally I think we should be more concerned about the notion of needing other classes abilities to do our jobs. I can accept dieing if a healer was a split second late on a heal but I don't think we should have to count on them for "oh snap" effects. Let that be our contribution to our own survival.
    Last edited by mistersix; 03-06-2009 at 11:06 AM.

  13. #213
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Location
    New Mexico
    Posts
    116
    Quote Originally Posted by LtBean View Post
    I dont want all the tank classes on equal footing. There are two types of encounters now. 10 man and 25 man. Bliz has made is clear that 10 man is not progression because udar10 =nax25 gear <uldar 25. 10 man bosses need to be different then 25 man bosses.
    in a 10 man, yes any tank class needs be able to tank 100% of the bosses because who knows what classes your 10 man guild or pug has.
    In a 25 man, if i can tank 70% of the bosses in my regular tank suit and maybe 1 or 2 more with a specialized gear set, I'm happy. I have plenty to tank. I have a fight or two off that i can DPS. and the puzzle is harder because we have to figure out everyones roles.

    we need to get away from this eight-person, chained-cooldown supertank that can tank everything or were going to lock 10 man raid composition.

    design the 10 man bosses to be tanked by everyone, and the 25 man bosses to be tanked by "almost everyone but some better then others" durring progression and the rest after they are over geared.
    Your post doesn't make sense at all. Sorry.

    To a 10man guild... Ulduar 10 is progression. To a 25man guild, Ulduar Heroic is progression.

    Blizzard wants all tanks to be "roughly equivalent". So let's get it that way.

    Source: LtBean
    25 man bosses to be tanked by "almost everyone but some better then others"
    Is a completely non-sensical statement. You are contradicting yourself in the space of 7 words.


    Let me break down what you said, "25 man bosses to be tanked by 'almost everyone'..." That means that your desire is that in 25 mans, only 1-3 of the tank classes should be able to tank each boss, and the others should have to be benched/respecced or that fight.

    A: Against Blizzard wishes. B: Try being benched for 3 weeks while your guild beats its head against the wall (hasn't happened yet in Wrath, doesn't mean Blizz won't create truly difficult encounters) on a guild-shattering boss because you can't tank it and your DPS is worse (even with a respec) than all the other DPS since you aren't geared as a main-spec DPS.


    Then you said, "but some better then others". Indicating, as Blizzard has said they want it to be, that all tanks should be capable of tanking every fight, but 1-2 classes standing out on each fight as slightly more ideal (but not game-breakingly so).

    What exactly is it that you want?

    I want relative parity across all tanking classes in all encounters, even if it is easier for me as a Paladin because I have a shield or harder, requiring me to bring more skill to the table to overcome the fact that a DK might have a somewhat easier time on a fight.
    Last edited by Jayson; 03-06-2009 at 11:03 AM.
    Paladin --- "A paragon of chivalry; a heroic champion."
    <Journey> is recruiting, visit www.wowjourney.com for information and class needs.

  14. #214
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    1,630
    Quote Originally Posted by Ratholorn View Post
    That post is complete and utter nonsense. Mitigation and avoidance can't be balanced independantly of each other.

    What Devium is essentially saying is when a DK is hit and a Warrior blocks the same attack, a warrior takes less damage. Well duh. How about when a DK is hit and a Warrior is hit? How many times is the warrior hit compared to the DK? Can you see the problem with it? Maybe you still can't?

    The espoused line of "DKs need to take less damage without cooldowns" was based on a single strike scenario and Devium's math also included block on a warrior.

    His end result (post 153) was not incorrect, I agree in the most part with that post, his methodology for getting there is terribly flawed.
    This is what I was arguing.

    Now by post 153 Devium had managed to post what he meant, however until then we could only go off his statement "Death Knights absolutely do take significantly more damage than other tanks" which is blatantly incorrect.

    I admit I got my back up since I was called a troll for disagreeing with what the high and mighty Premonition tanks said, and you threatening the ban hammer was absurdly childish (although probably no more than my two preceeding posts deserved).
    The fact is that the evidence provided to support the DK damage claims was flawed. The model Devium in particular was espousing cannot correctly be applied to his hypothesis. Whether you and he believe this or not is irrelevant - enough people will do the math as Aerona and I have and come to the same conclusion we did.

    Going right back to post 68, the "nonsense" part is still wrong (i.e. they do in fact "add out" as Devium puts it) and the "sense" part is still sensible.

    To answer Xav (why do you ignore that part?), I didn't, Devium did in his modelling which is what I was arguing. You can't balance mitigation and avoidance separately.
    Well Ratholorn, the reason we may have been quick to dismiss you and perhaps call you a troll is because of what you just said. Your first post used some incorrect numbers and math. And you yourself mentioned block as the balancing factor in damage taken per hit.

    Including or not including blocked hits into mitigation is going to be someone's personal preference. I don't consider Block to be avoidance, so there's no other place to put it but mitigation. You may disagree (apparently you and others do disagree).

    I still don't think it's fair to look at a few sentences without the greater post/point being made. Devium assumes DK's are going to see a nerf of their cooldowns and likely avoidance. Which is what, right now, you need to look at when comparing average damage taken over time. (See, obviously I agree with you that you can't leave out avoidance when comparing average damage taken). If DK's suddenly had a bunch of avoidance lopped off (and maybe some Cooldown uptime), their average damage taken over time could definitely be higher than the other tanks, if it isn't already.

    Perhaps this all got blown out of proportion by the word usage of "significantly". Ultimately it doesn't matter, because every party understands what is really happening and what the ultimate result or suggestion is.

    It seems your biggest issue is with the two of us in general, and just had a bone to pick. You didn't understand me using the word "stances" and brought up something completely irrelevent (detrimental aspects of stances), so I corrected you and clarified.

    On a somewhat related note, since we all know we don't have enough data to really accurately have the discussion of "who takes more damage?", an independent party has taken up a project involving a lot of "calculations" and code and such to do exactly this, and simulate every possible tanking spec in every possible scenario, to see what the averages really are over thousands of attempts. He's nearly finished, so hopefully soon we'll have some fun numbers to mill over.
    Xav
    Formerly Xavastrasz
    Quote Originally Posted by Rak View Post
    control+c control+v amirite?
    Quote Originally Posted by Magnuss View Post
    Hell no, its Xav, he is gonna type that bitch till his fingers fall off.

  15. #215
    Join Date
    Mar 2009
    Posts
    1
    First off, I am a DK tank, and I agree that there are some issues that need to be looked at within our Blood tree. But I do not agree with some of the comments going on. Now I dont have any fancy math to demonstrate anything, just months of actual experience tanking with a DK and what my healers tell me. I DO take more dmg when no cooldowns are up. Ask any healer that heals a DK tank. It may just be RNG and getting multiple heavy strikes in a row at a bad time, or something else that cant be proven by your math. But listen to the people that have the actual experience of either tanking or healing DK's.

    Also please keep in mind that the chaining cooldown issue only really hits the Blood tree....mostly because of Vampire blood being able to reach 30seconds of up time out of every minute. This in conjustion with WotN makes it a very powerful CD. Which is why most 3D Sarth DK tanks respec for that fight specifically. I usually go back and forth between blood and Frost depnding on what I am doing. And when it comes to Frost, I cant get near the uptime of CD's then I can with Blood, and they are nowhere near as powerful.

    I agree about the avoidance nerf to DK's with an mitigation buff to Frost presence to add a flat dmg reduction to keep our Armor from hitting the wall with T8 gear....

    In short, I like the idea of Exhaustion type debuff on external CD's usable by other classes, and Lowering the ability of VB + WotN down to a accectable level, maybe lowering WotN to a 7% reduction and maybe lengthing the VB cooldown to 2 minutes. I think Blizzard should start with something like this, and then reevaluate the class. I think any drastic changes to Internal CD's across the board is not going to be the answer. But who knows!!!

    Tordane

  16. #216
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    8
    Actually what i'm trying to say is, instead of having a 8 person cool-down rotation to allow your one class-unspecific main-tank to tank anything, Give each tank class their specialization. Overlap specializations between the tank classes so that no 25 man raid boss can only be tanked by just one type of tank and blur the lines of specialization further by allowing "ill fitting" tanks to gear up for encounters to make themselves suitable.

    Rapid small attacks<-------------Physical Damage----------> Slow Large Attacks
    /\
    |
    |
    |
    Magic Attacks
    |
    |
    |
    V
    large slow attacks

    There's a huge tank space from which to create bosses. there's no reason to put everyone in the center of it. For 25 mans there's no reason not to bring three different type of tanks and dual specs is just going to make it easier to do just that.

    10 man is different. you dont have enough people to bring all the "right types of tanks" and it would be alittle harsh to require a pug tank to have 4 gear sets to complete an instance. However, level the playing field in 10 mans with boss design, not by homogenizing tanks and not some infinitely streamed chained of cooldowns to make an individual invincible.
    example
    25 man boss hits tank for 75K frost breath
    -tank has to deal with a 75k frost breath through stam gear, resist gear, and cooldowns to get that large number to fit inside of his health bar
    same boss on 10 man hits tank for 95% of their health before mitigation and resist gear.
    -tank has to add enough resist or damage reduction gear or blow cool-downs to shave off enough damage so that their healers can top the him off sufficiently before the next attack kills.

    the 10 man version could be done by anyone, and lets everyone whose geared and modestly skilled kill the boss and see content.

    The 25 man version takes strategy. Do i give this to my pally tank? Will a resist war tank and a dodge war tank work? Can our bear muscle through this, or will death night in a stam set suffice?
    Last edited by LtBean; 03-06-2009 at 12:15 PM.

  17. #217
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    7
    I wonder if bliz could "fix"/avoid allot of these problems, simply by how they tune the content. In other words, it seems to me that allot of the cooldown chaining, and even tank disparities seem to shine on the big ugly tank killers.
    Why even have fights that are all about that. I mean fights like patchwork are pretty damn boring if your not a healer. Why not more fights with elements like Mally phase2 where your whole raid is taking dangerous hits and constant tough placements. Leave tank testing/gearchecks/stressing whatever you wanta call it to smaller parts of the fight, in that min or two you might only get a couple cooldowns in anyway.

    Tanks enjoy being the drake or add tank on sarth3 for example, so why is all the stress on the sarth tank. A boss that hits for 100k is not fun, its something you just have to figure out how to manage and survive. Why make it like that at all, the whole traditional i stab it in the face, it hits me hard, you stab it in the rear concept needs to be less used as the entire basis of a fight, and this stuff will change.

    What if for example each of the drakes on sarth all came at once, and needed a separate tank, and each was capable of occasional 30-40k damage on there respective tanks. With there busts on say a 1min timer. Combine random raid splash damage doing 10-20k. Suddenly you have a fight where each tank needs to save his cooldowns and save himself, will most likely even if hes a war/pally whatever have enough cooldowns, if raid dps is high enough and he is careful. And raid cooldowns are most likely being used on general raid members.

    We all like the big dragon fights, but if no fights required a 10min super tank then no one would care if you could make one. Plus its much easier for bliz to ballance all the tanks around smaller periods of really high EH, or test us for cooldown usage. Anyway i hope this makes sense. But if in a 10min fight you only had a couple min here and there where a single tank was goint to be stress tested, then building/tweeking a raid to be a cooldown chaining machine would be silly. In other words, dont give us onyxia 3.0 unless he is going to fly into the air every 60 sec and blast the whole raid with deep breaths that are barely survivable by everyone, unless they are healed a certain way, move a certain way and do a certain thing to make him come down.

  18. #218
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    VT
    Posts
    88
    Quote Originally Posted by LtBean View Post
    Give each tank class their specialization.

    You're trying to swim upstream. I wouldn't expect a return to tank specialization before the next xpac, if ever. Blizz is very much intent on moving in the opposite direction, and any suggestions that are completely contrary to Blizzard's design goals are really just a waste of time.

    Ultimately, what's needed is as much parity as possible, while minimizing homogenization. Personally, I think the best form of tank differentiation comes in what buttons you push, when you push them, how often, and why, and in gear choices. Differentiating tanks through raw numbers (druids are the EH tank, DKs are the high avoidance tank, etc) seems bad to me for a few reasons. The first and foremost being that EH is just too big a deal in raiding to allow one tank to have more of it than another. Additionally (and I'm afraid I'm not going to articulate this well), differentiation through stat amounts (which is not to say stat choices) is just plain boring. Playstyle is a much more interesting way to introduce variety. That's why I think it's important to retain the DK style of chaining defensive abilities in some form, but Druid EH needed to come down.

    Despite some similar abilities and very similar stats and gearing, Paladins and Warriors play very differently; Paladins have strict, complicated rotations, and Warriors work on a priority system (and, sadly, HS spam). That strikes me as the best approach, and it probably means that Druids need the most attention and improvement.
    Last edited by Orenus; 03-06-2009 at 01:06 PM. Reason: Spelling and better wording.

  19. #219
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Posts
    44
    First off, regarding the great 'block, is it mitigation or avoidance debate?' Mitigation, to me, solely looks at the absolute worst case hit a tank can take. Can block be factored in to mitigation? Yes, but only when normal hits are completely pushed off the table. Paladins can reach this state fairly easily using their standard rotation - which is why block is essentially treated as mitigation for them.

    Warriors are a completely different case. While shield block is up their mitigation is enhanced by double their block value. When shield block is not up it becomes difficult to define because it is a change to reduce damage from a hit, which is not mitigation. It falls more into the avoidance camp at that point (to me), solely because it starts to rely on the RNG. The worst case for a warrior while shield block is not up is an unavoided, unblocked hit - which happens to be almost the exact amount of damage that a death knight takes if they fail to avoid the same strike. That is why I think death knight and warrior mitigations are approximately the same outside of cooldowns. Now, I fully agree that when warriors can push all unblocked hits off the combat table then, and only then, can block be counted as cold hard mitigation.

    As far as the many posts claiming that DKs take more damage outside of cooldowns go I'm reminded of the optical illusion of the same color square on varying intensity backgrounds. To the outside observer they appear to be different colors, even though the paint is the exact same shade. I think we're seeing a similar effect here due to going from varying overpowered cooldown abilities to nothing. It just 'feels' like the death knight is taking more damage due to the spikiness.

    Now, regarding the varying other topics:

    1) If DK avoidance goes down relative to the other tanks, then Blizzard should increase their mitigation. I fully agree. Though I got the impression that Blizzard was considering nerfing avoidance across the board for all tank classes if we're referring to the Ghostcrawler post.

    2) Armor and the armor cap. I think that in relative terms all the tanks are actually fine - the problem lies in the buffs we recieve. Ancestral Healing (and the like) are the real problem. They're just too good! On a 35k armor tank that buff alone is worth 8.75k armor. I think those sort of armor buffs should be moved to a flat value, or far lower percentage. This change would essentially move the armor cap, and all associated problems with people reaching it, off to another day.

    3) Chaining cooldowns is bad for the game. I think everyone realizes this point, and is why so much of this thread has gone off topic.

  20. #220
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    22
    Quote Originally Posted by Draks View Post

    1) If DK avoidance goes down relative to the other tanks, then Blizzard should increase their mitigation. I fully agree. Though I got the impression that Blizzard was considering nerfing avoidance across the board for all tank classes if we're referring to the Ghostcrawler post.

    3) Chaining cooldowns is bad for the game. I think everyone realizes this point, and is why so much of this thread has gone off topic.
    Newest PTR build impacts many of the issues discussed in this thread:

    Blade Barrier no longer grants 10% parry. It's currently a 5% flat damage reduction. That should significantly lower DK avoidance.

    A cooldown has been added to Will of the Necropolis.

    The miss chance has been removed from Lichborne.

    The cooldown has been lengthened on both Vampiric Blood and Bone Shield (keep in mind Vamp Blood had a 50% uptime before this change if glyphed.)

    Looks like someone over at Blizzard reads this forum ;P

+ 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