1. I try
Join Date
Oct 2007
Posts
253
Originally Posted by Lizana
Please show me how i am applying the information from the attack table incorrectly.

And the argument about it havering the chance to reduce a hit is not valid because i am not arguing the probability of something to happen. I am using your logs and the data that are in this thread to show real metrics on the enchant. I am not arguing what it has the possibility to do, but instead looking at what it is really doing based on the data provided.
Often in this thread you've posted a metric you've postulated to a fight the actual tank stated would be a faulty parse to evaluate because of the amount of trash and having to at some point stop attacking. Still you continue to use those numbers to support your position. (see posts #14, 15 & 16 in this thread.)

Otherwise the biggest faulty reasoning sticking out at this moment is this idea that you're trying to look at a server roll of a specific number with the buff active (lets say it rolled a 37 for clarity sake) and comparing it to another instance of the exact number rolled again with the buff up this time. This is not a proper way to develop a metric under statistical reasoning. Each must be evaluated to compare to eachother as the entire sum of possible outcomes without buff against the entire sum of possible outcomes with buff. This is how you compare one table against another. It is improper to evaluate one of the 100 possibilities against only one of the 100 possibilities to develop a metric.

You owe me some tuition and need to call me professor now. (And I said I wasn't going to give freely the fruits of my education attempting to inform the unwilling.)

To echo what SquishemHard said: "It is being applied incorrectly."

Just to throw some real world numbers at you. The WoL that SquishemHard posted shows that for the XT-002 fight during the 19.2% of the fight that was the uptime he yielded the damage proc 12 times. Sense he was melee attacked 167 times 19.2% equates to 32 swings. That means that during the up time 37% of incoming attacks were parried. Now that's a really huge and very favorable number to present to support my argument that this enchant is worth more than what you say. Its what really happened. However I'm not going that route because it fails to give a reasonable metric founded in logic, mechanics and proper statistics. In other words it is also being applied incorrectly in the same way you did. (Although it is real world data and somehow might make you scream this enchants praises cause thats how you roll it seems. Damn a proper application of the numbers. AmIright.)
Last edited by Superspy23; 06-23-2009 at 02:34 PM.

2. Banned
Join Date
Apr 2008
Posts
1,399
Actually the trash was on Razorscale who i did not look at as far as numbers due to the trash. The other fights X02 and ignis were trash free from the MT standpoint. And i use those numbers because no one has provided any additional numbers to work with.

Also theres no proof the parse was faulty, and without another parse to work with, i use what i have access to.

And as i said, i am not looking at the statistical probability of the chance you will get a parry. I am instead looking at the results and saying this is what you got with blade ward, this is what you would have gotten without it. That is a fair comparison. Comparing results you got with it and comparing the results you would of had without is a valid comparison.

And yes, on the x02 fight he had quite a few parries while he had the buff up. But as i have said i am not wanting to look at just one fight, i am wanting to look at the effectiveness of the proc as a whole. The burden to provide data to prove its a good enchant isnt on me. I have the data to show my stance and my beliefs on it compared to mongoose. It would need over 25% uptime for it to have comparable avoidance or greater than one stack. And it still would not provide the threat and mitigation that mongoose does.

So please stop trying to agrue against me, and argue why you think bladeward is a good enchant compared to mongoose.
Last edited by Lizana; 06-23-2009 at 03:20 PM.

3. I try
Join Date
Oct 2007
Posts
253
Originally Posted by Lizana
The burden to provide data to prove its a good enchant isnt on me.
No one is trying to prove Blade Ward to be a good enchant. We're trying to establish the value. You have many times posted logically unsound numbers and therefore received many criticisms because your posts about the value of the Blade Ward enchant are full of misinformation. We continue to address specifically you and your posts because you perpetually endorse a low value of the enchant based on faulty math.

Here's an example:
Originally Posted by Lizana
It would need over 25% uptime for it to have comparable avoidance.
This is incorrect. Additional information is required. It should actually read "It would need over 25% uptime and for it to be impossible for it to stack more than once for it to have comparable avoidance." to be close to being true. Also that wasn't your revelation. Its a pick and choose of facts that suit your bias leaching on someone else's numbers while you disregard the facts in those numbers that you don't like. That person actually mentioned the limitations of their numbers but you failed to adopt the limits cause they didn't suit you. Its a blatant misquote on your part. You obviously have an agenda with your postings and we realize that is the source of your propaganda. Please stop posting.

4. Banned
Join Date
Apr 2008
Posts
1,399
Your right, i should have added in the with 1 stack of the buff into the 25%, but that still doesnt change the statement that mongoose provides greater avoidance than blade ward (at one stack) does with the current proc rates and uptimes as seen in this thread and the other threads on tankspot.

But please once again, stop attacking me, and either post in relation to the OP question or get out of the thread. A question was asked about comparing the two enchants. At this point i do believe that has been answered. If you want to go create your own threat about how you feel i am not giving a fair shot to blade ward, please go make another blade ward analysis post and we can debate it in there.

5. I try
Join Date
Oct 2007
Posts
253
Originally Posted by Lizana
Your right, i should have added in the with 1 stack of the buff into the 25%, but that still doesnt change the statement that mongoose provides greater avoidance than blade ward (at one stack) does with the current proc rates and uptimes as seen in this thread and the other threads on tankspot.
This statement is also inaccurate. Current information is that it does stack and that stacks actually happen in game. We haven't gotten any proper modeling to give the average parry rating given numbers of stacks. First off we can't be conclusive because not enough logs have been presented. Secondly the one XT-002 fight I've looked at showed a couple 3 stacks and some 2 stacks. This will hugely skew your claim that at 25% uptime is needed for equal avoidance with mongoose. The true statement is that there isn't enough information yet because the current proc rates and up times are thus far incomplete. Basically a statement about its value if it was some other enchant that doesn't stack is totally irrelevant... cause it does stack.

6. Banned
Join Date
Apr 2008
Posts
1,399
Yes it can stack, i never said it didnt.

But the statement "mongoose provides greater avoidance than blade ward (at one stack) does with the current proc rates and uptimes as seen in this thread and the other threads on tankspot." Is not incorrect. Please read every word in order before claiming something to be incorrect. It clearly states the conditions necessary for the statement to be true.

7. I try
Join Date
Oct 2007
Posts
253
It is incorrect as a frame of reference to this enchant cause you added a factor (non stacking) to your statement which is false. Current proc rates and uptimes as seen in this thread and the other threads on tankspot actually show the presence of this stacking thing. It would only be true if you said "mongoose provides greater avoidance than blade ward (If they changed the mechanics to never stack more than once) does with the current proc rates and uptimes as seen in this thread and the other threads on tankspot if you disregard the contents of those statements which refer to it stacking."

In short you cannot be on topic in this thread if you intend to make up some imaginary enchant that only has the values you want in it. I could try to say how lousy Blood Draining is and support it night and day as long as I keep presenting its worth at only one stack of the buff. This would be illogical. Understand?

8. Banned
Join Date
Apr 2008
Posts
1,399
Prove to me that the stacking is something that happens enough to be of merit. And i did not say the enchant did not stack, i instead said at 1 stack. There is a big difference in that. In every thread you will read of people rarely seeing stacks. But once again, your still debating with me. I realize that i am a sexy man beast and all, but please provide actual help for the topic at hand. And thats a comparison of two enchants. Something i have done in multiple posts now, something you have yet to do. My statement is still a true statement about mongoose compared to blood ward at one stack.
Last edited by Lizana; 06-23-2009 at 05:28 PM.

9. I try
Join Date
Oct 2007
Posts
253
Your comparison is an over time evaluation of the buffs. However over time it will stack which makes your comparison at one stack about as relevant to the value of the enchant as a story about my campfire building skills.

And for the record, I'm not arguing with you at all or in any way singling you out. I'm simply addressing every measure of flawed reasoning and scientific malfeasance I find in this thread. You just happen to feel special because you're a veritable fount of misinformation thus drawing to you much criticism... And not just from me.

Oh and just because you got caught on your disregard to the stacking value of the buff does not mean that somehow new information is available about this quality you're demanding that I present to you. I'm not demanding that you evaluate anything. I'm just asking you to stop spreading misinformation. (Also, I simply have no trust in your evaluation skills.)

10. Banned
Join Date
Apr 2008
Posts
1,399
Originally Posted by Superspy23
Your comparison is an over time evaluation of the buffs. However over time it will stack which makes your comparison at one stack about as relevant to the value of the enchant as a story about my campfire building skills.
It can stack, that doesn't mean it will always stack or you should always evaluate it at best possible circumstances(ie it does stack to 4 or 5 stacks). You keep talking about "scientific malfeasance" yet you then go and post things without any data or proof behind it. In all of the logs i have looked at, i have found one 4 stack, five 3 stacks and about a dozen two stacks compared to overwhelming majority of 1 stack. I have never claimed that it could not stack. What i have said multiple times though is that due to the low proc rate and the short up time the chances of getting a multiple stack isnt very high. Please understand the difference.

Every number and statement(some have been corrected due to not being clear enough) is accurate using simple math. I welcome criticism and other people posting their own results and data. You have provided nothing to this thread. Please find a mistake in my math, that would at least be a start of a reasonable discussion. Instead you keep posting saying i have flawed reasoning, so how about you post what you consider non flawed reasoning about the comparison of bladeward to mongoose?

11. Established Registrant
Join Date
Jun 2008
Posts
718
They did the same comparision and went thru same crap arguement over statistics at maintankadin only alot submitted stats

basic view is the same the three enchants 26 agi (Pally only), mongoose and blade warding all come out about the same as avoidance you can split hairs on it over certain situations.

Threat enchant get accuracy

The most important thing about selecting weapon enchant you however forgot ... WHAT COLOUR DOES IT GLOW.
Last edited by uglybbtoo; 06-23-2009 at 09:47 PM.

12. New Registrant
Join Date
Mar 2009
Posts
2
Thanks Lizana fro view on accuracy vs mongoose

13. Established Registrant
Join Date
Jun 2009
Location
Posts
367
Originally Posted by Lizana
Also anyone that has bothered to read should be able to see that from Tarigar's avoidance calculator, that with the observed uptimes of blade ward vs the observed uptimes of mongoose that mongoose wins in the amount of total avoidance given. Please use the tools already posted in the thread and plug in your own numbers for blade ward and the numbers provided for mongoose uptime.
I actually tested this. Note: All calculations were assuming fully raid buffed.
Mongoose~
Mongoose (120 Agility)
120 Agility from Mongoose
40.00% ~ % Uptime of Mongoose

Total
28.47% Dodge
18.66% Parry
9.29% Miss
56.42% Player Avoidance

120 Agility from Mongoose
30.00% ~ % Uptime of Mongoose

Total
28.37% Dodge
18.66% Parry
9.29% Miss
56.32% Player Avoidance

Bladeward~If you pull parses from boss fights it is an average of 15-20%.
Wow Web Stats Note: This is only assuming 1 stack
20.00% ~ % Uptime of Bladeward

Total
28.04% Dodge
19.22% Parry
9.29% Miss
56.55% Player Avoidance

15.00% ~ % Uptime of Bladeward

Total
28.04% Dodge
19.08% Parry
9.29% Miss
56.42% Player Avoidance

So when comparing the two enchants and there relative proc rate. Let's compare the total avoidance as you will see that there has to be about a 25%+ gain for Mongoose to be more effective.

Now Bladeward we know that not everytime we buff the proc will go off. This is for 1 of 2 reasons.

1. The buff fell off plain and simple. It may have caused a block for you or you may have still been hit.
2. The buff stacked again. So now you were buffed twice and it will proc once. You will gain bladewarding even though another stack is applied. So you are already at a 50% disadvantage when looking comparing this.

-Downside to bladeward is the effective uptime is hard to measure since stacks fall off during a given fight. So someone fighting a boss dummy may have 30-40% uptime because there is no way for the buffs to expire.

-Upside to bladeward we can see when a boss parries us when bladeward is active due to the dmg it may have done during the fight. Yes this may have been due to base parry but we do know bladeward was active. You gain threat from a Bladeward proc.

-Downside to Mongoose is there is no way to see when a dodge occurs while Lightning Reflexes is active unless you are closely looking at your combat logs.

-Upside to Mongoose is the effective uptime is easier to measure since the buff doesn't expire. You gain threat from the increased ArV and Haste.

I spoke with one of Tanks from the top progression guild on my server as he is wearing bladeward, I asked him "What do you think of Bladeward". His response was "All enchants suck"

So probably the rule of thumb is go for the one you like the most and you find most beneficial to you.

14. Established Registrant
Join Date
Jun 2009
Location
Posts
367
Originally Posted by Lizana
It can stack, that doesn't mean it will always stack or you should always evaluate it at best possible circumstances(ie it does stack to 4 or 5 stacks). You keep talking about "scientific malfeasance" yet you then go and post things without any data or proof behind it. In all of the logs i have looked at, i have found one 4 stack, five 3 stacks and about a dozen two stacks compared to overwhelming majority of 1 stack. I have never claimed that it could not stack. What i have said multiple times though is that due to the low proc rate and the short up time the chances of getting a multiple stack isnt very high. Please understand the difference.
@Superspy
Honestly for this enchant if I were to get up to a 4 or 5 stack then the RNG gods are hating me as my total avoidance would go to 81%.

Me personally I would rather have the buff expire due to a proc around the 1st to 2nd stack. So really a legitimate comparison of 1 stack is ideal.

Lizana I quoted you because I agree with the statement that we will rarely see a 4 or 5 stack .

15. I try
Join Date
Oct 2007
Posts
253
Originally Posted by Tarigar
@Superspy
Honestly for this enchant if I were to get up to a 4 or 5 stack then the RNG gods are hating me as my total avoidance would go to 81%.

Me personally I would rather have the buff expire due to a proc around the 1st to 2nd stack. So really a legitimate comparison of 1 stack is ideal.

Lizana I quoted you because I agree with the statement that we will rarely see a 4 or 5 stack .
Its obviously easier to do the math at one stack but considering the shorter overall buff period it would seem that any instance of additional stacks would be like a significant increase in its overall value. In the WoL I was looking at earlier it seemed that if the stacks were instead un-overlapped it would have represented a significant increase in the uptime up to perhaps 30%. Being that its value is equalized at such a lower uptime any stacking would have a greater ballooning of the averaged avoidance value. Therefor I think neglecting stacking is perilous to a proper evaluation.

16. Established Registrant
Join Date
Jun 2009
Location
Posts
367
Originally Posted by Superspy23
Its obviously easier to do the math at one stack but considering the shorter overall buff period it would seem that any instance of additional stacks would be like a significant increase in its overall value. In the WoL I was looking at earlier it seemed that if the stacks were instead un-overlapped it would have represented a significant increase in the uptime up to perhaps 30%. Being that its value is equalized at such a lower uptime any stacking would have a greater ballooning of the averaged avoidance value. Therefor I think neglecting stacking is perilous to a proper evaluation.
Yes that is true. But you also have to realise the longer the buff is applied the less effective it is at actually causing you to avoid an attack. So out of preference having 1 stack with a lower uptime I will take any day, because then I know I am actually utilising the effectiveness of the enchant since it will most likely be causing me to avoid an attack.

17. I try
Join Date
Oct 2007
Posts
253
Originally Posted by Tarigar
Yes that is true. But you also have to realise the longer the buff is applied the less effective it is at actually causing you to avoid an attack. So out of preference having 1 stack with a lower uptime I will take any day, because then I know I am actually utilising the effectiveness of the enchant since it will most likely be causing me to avoid an attack.
Actually the numbers of parries while the buff is up is only valuable to evaluating the threat portion of the enchant. Remember in the combat table, when you increase a stat you decrease what's on the bottom of the table. Effectively this enchant decreases the normal hit portion of the hit table. Kazeyonoma referred to this in post #26, SquishemHard refers to it in post #42, I've mentioned it before as well. Basically it will be less likely to hit and who cares which other specific avoidance happened in place of the hit.

Consider this except think about what it does to the combat table. Think also about if you have over 50% avoidance already an increase of 2% avoidance is actually 4% less damage than you would have previously received cause you've pushed 4% of the remaining possible number of hits off the table. Furthermore if it helps you can replace the word parry with the word avoidance cause you can break down the combat table to 'avoid-mitigate-be hit.' Consider this table and tell me that stacking doesn't have a significant decrease in overall incoming damage.

1st stack - 2.55% parry (reduction of hit)
2nd stack - 4.79 % parry (reduction of hit)
3rd stack - 6.75% parry (reduction of hit)
4th stack - 8.5 % parry (reduction of hit)
5th stack - 10.06% parry (reduction of hit)

18. Established Registrant
Join Date
Jun 2009
Location
Posts
367
Originally Posted by Superspy23
Consider this except think about what it does to the combat table. Think also about if you have over 50% avoidance already an increase of 2% avoidance is actually 4% less damage than you would have previously received cause you've pushed 4% of the remaining possible hits off the table. Furthermore if it helps you can replace the word parry with the word avoidance cause you can break down the combat table to 'avoid-mitigate-be hit.' Consider this table and tell me that stacking doesn't have a significant decrease in overall incoming damage.

1st stack - 2.55% parry (reduction of hit)
2nd stack - 4.79 % parry (reduction of hit)
3rd stack - 6.75% parry (reduction of hit)
4th stack - 8.5 % parry (reduction of hit)
5th stack - 10.06% parry (reduction of hit)
I am not using this enchant for threat. I am using it for avoidance.

So I would want the enchant to proc once or twice and having a 2-4% increase pushing a hit off the table and causing a parry. So by having a 1-1-1 proc I have an effectiveness of 100% from buff - proc. If I go to a 5-1 I have an effectiveness of 20% from buff to proc. I needed the addtional 7.5% to push that next hit off the table...

Again I would rather have a 2% increase and have it go off then have it wait to get the 5th stack. Since the buff wears off when you parry.

19. Banned
Join Date
Apr 2008
Posts
1,399
Because as it has already shown in this thread, that if you are not parrying with the buff up, at best your turning a hit into a block. That is mitigation, not avoidance. The only way you would turn an attack that would have been a hit into avoidance is if and only if the amount of parry you gain from blade ward is greater than your total block chance.

A dodge would have been a dodge with or without the enchant, a miss would have been a miss with or without the enchant. You are either turning mitigation into avoidance or turning a regular hit into a mitigated hit (block).

an increase of 2% avoidance is actually 4% less damage than you would have previously received cause you've pushed 4% of the remaining possible hits off the table.
This is incorrect because you are not replacing hits with avoidance

20. Registrant
Join Date
Mar 2009
Posts
63
Could you not be turning a hit or block into a parry? (Forgive me if I am reading the attack table wrong)