My POV, is that Paladins don't have to be balanced around an improved ardent defender ( although it certainly is an option). Furthermore giving everyone WoTN doesn't solve anything since that changes how much damage bosses will be doing, it would be easier to rebalance WotN in the first place.
In truth we shouldn't be talking about either of these abilities since WotN is basically a 15% passive modifer that takes a little more mana to heal from weak attacks and AD is a passive modifier that only comes into play every once in awhile. Neither is a CD.
*Edit* On a side note I just realized -15% magice damage from FP and -15% from WotN , spell deflection, VB,IB and anti magic shell, wow where have I been all this time.
Last edited by Ipick; 03-04-2009 at 03:39 PM.
Dovie'andi se tovya sagain - it's time to roll the dice
Alent, I just tested on the PTR right now.
I have 30494 HP.
I target myself, cast Divine Plea and then I cast LoH. It healed me for 0 and 16162 overheal.
As a note, the higher heal is because of the the Improved Devotion Aura talent.
Last edited by jere; 03-04-2009 at 03:58 PM.
I frankly still think this is an issue of encounter design vs class design. In a game with classes that have strong differences by design, balancing encounters becomes an increasingly difficult task.
As we all know, most complaints come from the ability of different classes to tank a specific encounter, this encounter is designed to have single large bursts of magic damage every ~20 seconds, so it greatly favors chaining of damate reduction/absorption cooldowns. On the other hand you have one class that seems to be designed around the use of closely chained cooldowns. The encounter and the class are perfect match.
I really respect (and agree with) the developers' efforts to avoid class homogeneization, but the downside to their efforts is that encounters become much more difficult to balance in a way that specific classes are not favored too greatly.
The challenge of designing encounters that are balanced for heterogeneous class design is no small matter, but if it is done succesfully it will yield very entertaining encounters, where each different class is able to use their own unique advantages to succeed.
Paladin --- "A paragon of chivalry; a heroic champion."
<Journey> is recruiting, visit www.wowjourney.com for information and class needs.
I do imagine however that Blizzard itself has done thousands of hours of tests on just this issue and that it's within the margin of error they set themselves of X%.
Since you're so fond of "looking at the data" let's do just that.
An unbuffed frost presence (assuming a spec with toughness) DK tank in full naxx-25 gear has about 72% (from AC) physical damage reduction. Frost presence also provides 15% spell reduction.
(Note 72% from our Sarth+3 DK tank - chardev.org v6 ~ a World of Warcraft character planner)
DK, 1000 damage physical hit = 72% armor mitigation = 280 hits the DK
An unbuffed defensive stance (assuming a spec with toughness and improved defensive stance) warrior tank in full naxx25 gear has about 62% (from AC) + a 10% (from stance) physical damage reduction, totalling (OMG) 72% and 15.4% spell reduction.
(Note the 62% is from my armory gear)
Warrior, 1000 damage physical hit = 10% stance reduction = 900 damage physical hit = 62% armor mitigation = 342 hits the warrior
HOLD ON ... the DK takes less damage OMG! The balancing occurs in blocking - it's RNG based but them's the breaks.
The difference of block is offset by a DKs higher health pool and armor. Although warriors can critically block for up to 7k or so it's at the mercy of the RNG and a typical block of 1500 occurs only about 25% of the time.
The difference in avoidance ... I'm not sure how to explain but I imagine it's balanced by blocking as well.
In response to your feeling of inferiority over small hits from lots of mobs ... whilst certainly against many small hitting mobs like trash a shield is an advantage - NO ONE SPECS OR PLAYS FOR TRASH. A main tank's job is not the trash.
Last edited by Ratholorn; 03-04-2009 at 04:13 PM.
There are no men like me, there is only me.
Uh, Ratholorn, a warrior in full 213 gear has around 24k armor. No way is that only 62% reduction when coupled with Def Stance.
Dovie'andi se tovya sagain - it's time to roll the dice
I have been asking myself the following question lately. If I had a DK character as equal geared as my warrior why I wouldnt just always tank with the DK as things stand inside the game today in relation to the quality and smoothness of the tanking i.e wouldnt have to spam heroic strike constantly whilst tanking a boss as one example as well as other examples mentioned in this topic.
I hope blizzard pays close attention to this topic as it highlights in a detailed and non-whine way the grave inbalances between the tank classes as they stand especially in relation to differing cooldowns and "oh shit" buttons. I have have been thinking the same things in regards to the detrimental effect it is having on tanking in general as well as on raid groups.
I hope, as well as many of you, that the tank abilities, particularly in relation to cooldowns and threat production are streamlined at equal potential when tanks are at the same item/gear level. Chain cooldowns should definitely be a no go area....gear level is meant to show the quality of a tank not how well they can chain cooldown using glyphs and talents pressing a few buttons.
It would be really nice to know that the fellow, equal geared tank, be it a warrior, pala, druid or death knight was EQUAL to me in terms of all tanking aspects so we had the SAME potential so that we could hold respect for each other rather than point out why things are inbalanced or point out potential inbalances blizzard have made between the tanking classes. This is not what any of us want as we'd like to know that the right choices have been made for the future of tanking for all the classes.
A 4-way balance between the tanks needs to me made soon to avoid constant changes being made in the future, nerfs, moaning, whining etc which will continue unless something is done to address this issue.
It is becoming a regular occurence where I hear ppl say "get a dk tank they have grip, get a dk tank as they have the best aoe aggro etc etc" it is very worrying to the rest of the tank classes and inevitably makes us feel inferior, although that may be to strong a word.
Warrior mitigation from armor on a level 83 mob:
13444 + 7890 = 21334 armor (shield)
21334 * 1.1 * 1.02 = 23937 (talent, meta gem)
1 - (23937 / (23937 + 16635)) = 0.41 (59% damage mitigated through armor)
0.4100 * 0.9000 = 0.3690 (stance modifier)
Death knight mitigation:
13444 * 1.8 * 1.15 * 1.02 = 28386 (frost presence, talent, meta)
1 - (28386 / (28386 + 16635)) = 0.3695 (63% mitigated)
For all intents and purposes the warrior and death knight have an identical worst case hit. The warrior then has a possibility to block on top of that result, while the death knight has the higher avoidance to rely on. Small hits will favor block, while larger hits will favor avoidance. In the 2 minute Patchwerk case they're certainly in the 'favors block' stage of the fight.
Balance WotN by giving it to everyone, it solves our AD leapfrog issues and it evens out the non-DK classes panic button wise.
I just copied and pasted a reply I made to Xav on the test center forums, but I believe the post is applicable to this thread as well.
TLDR: The problem is being able to chain cooldowns for (near) 100% uptime. Constant re-active use of cooldowns is a trademark of the DK playstyle and, if implemented/used properly, does not make the class overpowered. Rather than increasing DK cooldowns to 2-3+ mins (thereby effectively nullifying this aspect of the playstyle) a better solution might be to decrease their durations.
I'm not a fan of constant pro-active cooldowns either, but I am a big fan of re-active cooldown usage and feel that it is a unique trademark of DK tanking that I would hope Blizzard preserves. I know that is not the message you are trying to send here (though something to that effect may be unintentionally communicated). I would be a biased fool if i tried to seriously convey that the use of cooldowns as they currently exist in the game, or rather the ability to maintain near 100% uptime on cooldowns, is balanced. However, I do think that it is possible to find the sweetspot where near-100% uptime cannot be achieved, yet DK cooldown availability is preserved such that the reactive playstyle is unaffected.
For example, I know many guilds rotate external cooldowns in conjunction with the DKs own cooldowns for 3-drake Sartharion so the tanking aspect becomes little more than one long cooldown chaining process. My guild does not. At most I might get one pain suppression or guardian spirit. For many of our kills I didn't receive any outside help. Furthermore I have often tanked Sarth as "pure" Unholy (10-8-53, not necessarily ideal, but definitely possible) so in addition to having to re-actively use cooldowns, I also have to be careful and smart about when to use boneshield. This type of fight/lplaystyle, and others like it, is something I greatly enjoy.
Aside from the issue of potential 100% CD uptime, many people consider DKs to be overpowered because of their unique ability to tank 3-drake Sartharion. Yet in some sense (depending on your approach), 3-drake Sartharion is very similar to pre-Wrath Illidan. Instead of sheer we have big magical breath bombs and instead of shield block, DKs use their cooldowns. In TBC, warriors, and to a lesser extent prot paladins, were also the only ones who could tank Illidan. Thus, it is not a DKs overpowered tanking ability/tank stats that makes them almost uniquely suited for this role, but their ability to respond with a "shield block"-like skill to counter Sartharion's "sheers". Frankly, I would have greatly enjoyed tanking Illidan in TBC on a warrior for this very same reason and would not be opposed if Blizzard decided to throw warriors and perhaps other tank classes a bone by adding fights where spell reflect or some other *reactive* ability gave them an edge.
As for DKs themselves, I do think an avoidance nerf is in order. Right now 70% or higher is definitely possible. What will happen with Tier 8? 9? In addition, I think lowering the duration of cooldowns like Vampiric Blood and IBF (to something like 15 seconds, maybe 20 post-glyph, and 8-10 seconds on IBF) could be in order. Bone shield probably needs fewer charges (4 with glyph perhaps) and increase the mitigation to 25% to compensate. A slight increase in cooldown time would not affect the playstyle too greatly either.
My armory is in fact full 213 gear (except head and ranged slot) and comes out at 61.24% from AC.
Xav's armory comes out at 62.02% from AC
To Norrath below - ya I had to edit it about 5 times because I kept leaving out important things like that - you just replied too fast
Last edited by Ratholorn; 03-04-2009 at 04:43 PM.
There are no men like me, there is only me.
Frost Presence - Spell - World of Warcraft
The death knight takes on the presence of frost, increasing total health by 10%, armor contribution from items by 80%, and reducing spell damage taken by 15%. Increases threat generated. Only one Presence may be active at a time.
What spec were the death knights for the test we saw? Did they spec into the best/most cooldowns and sacrificed more traditional forms of damage reduction to show it? Did they have Blade Barrier, Anticipation, and Toughness? Were they the optimal tank spec, or were they a cooldown spec for the test, is what I'm asking. I can't find the answer in the test post.
And what are you talking about DTPS being higher on the Death Knight than the warrior? The WWS logs for the first 2 minutes in the test you're quoting:
Wow Web Stats
Wow Web Stats
Death Knight TDPS: 3274.
Warrior TDPS: 4447.
This is also early on the fight where warriors are supposed to perform better than Death Knights. These stats are with cooldowns used though, so I don't understand why you're quoting these results since our discussion is about them without cooldowns? I feel like I'm not understanding what you're getting at. Perhaps I missed something. Maybe it's another test you're refering too.
Either way we're now dangerously off-topic unless the mods don't mind branching discussions. If they're okay with it, I look forward to your response. If they're not, shoot me a private message of where I've gone wrong with the data.