+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 49

Thread: Devalueing of Dodge in ICC / Tanking with DPS Sigils

  1. #21
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    78
    With Respect to the sigil question, the new sigil (according to mmo-champ) is a stacking dodge buff from runestrike (10s duration but it refreshes with a new application of RS). In all other content its a great sigil as we'd be able to maintain the full stack through out a boss. However with the reduction of our RS procs, the value of this sigil will be under that of the current triumph sigil with its 20s duration.

    The other observation is the new 10man trinket is a stacking stamina buff (procs off dodge 24/stack, 10stack max), will be unable to stack to high enough to become better than the Direbrew trinkets.

  2. #22
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    122
    If your only consolation to DR to begin with was the more linear effect of increased avoidance then I can see why this would be described as "devaluing dodge." It is true that without the 20 percent reduction getting enough dodge rating to give you one additional percent when at 30 percent dodge meant a bigger number of your previously undodged attacks were now dodged (1/70) then it will under the effects of the 20 percent reduction (1/90). This means that the effective avoidance increases under dr will not have that neat linear look that has been discussed in detail in another topic post. It does not however devalue dodge relative to other avoidance. A point of doge rating will still be worth as much with the 20 percent reduction compared to a point of parry as it was before, and the fact that dodge diminishes towards a much higher number means it will still be the more efficient place to stack avoidance.
    Last edited by Nephelai; 11-02-2009 at 09:23 AM.

  3. #23
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    4,930
    Actually, Mecer inspired me to offer a different way to look at adding dodge.

    Ok, so we lose 20% off the top of our dodge, yes? If the typical tank was averaging 50% dodge+parry before, it will be 30% now. Now every bit of dodge you add is adding more RS proc chance value than before. Adding 1% dodge to 50% is a much smaller benefit to gaining RS threat, than adding 1% to 30%. In fact, for the sake of threat this change will enhance the value of dodge from the new baseline.
    The (Old) Book on Death Knight Tanking
    The New Testament on Death Knight Tanking
    -----------------------------------------
    Quote Originally Posted by Horacio View Post
    Who f-ing divided by zero?!?

  4. #24
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    122
    Quote Originally Posted by Satorri View Post
    Actually, Mecer inspired me to offer a different way to look at adding dodge.

    Ok, so we lose 20% off the top of our dodge, yes? If the typical tank was averaging 50% dodge+parry before, it will be 30% now. Now every bit of dodge you add is adding more RS proc chance value than before. Adding 1% dodge to 50% is a much smaller benefit to gaining RS threat, than adding 1% to 30%. In fact, for the sake of threat this change will enhance the value of dodge from the new baseline.

    lol.. because the effect of one more rune strike is bigger when the baseline is smaller. Thats kind of a funny place to find the roses, but it makes sense.

  5. #25
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    785
    Quote Originally Posted by Satorri View Post
    Ok, so we lose 20% off the top of our dodge, yes? If the typical tank was averaging 50% dodge+parry before, it will be 30% now. Now every bit of dodge you add is adding more RS proc chance value than before. Adding 1% dodge to 50% is a much smaller benefit to gaining RS threat, than adding 1% to 30%. In fact, for the sake of threat this change will enhance the value of dodge from the new baseline.
    That's not true though, mathematically and practically.

  6. #26
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    242
    Quote Originally Posted by jere View Post
    The -20% has absolute zero effect on the DR curve. DR gains do not change with Icecrown Radiance. Subtracting the 20% after DR ensures that (I.E. the DR has already occured before the reduction.

    If you are getting .6% dodge for every 1% you add now, you will still get 0.6% dodge for every 1% after Icecrown Radiance. None of that changes.
    The bolded statement is, factually speaking, a true statement. But I think you misunderstand what I mean when I say "Devalued", so let me see if I can explain myself better:

    when you say "If you are getting .6% dodge for every 1% you add now, you will still get 0.6% dodge for every 1% after Icecrown Radiance," you are correct in the sense that you will still get that raw rate of return both outside and inside the instance. but you are getting it at a lower avoidance bracket. A person outside of ICC with 30% avoidance will get more avoidance per point of parry/dodge rating than a person with 30% avoidance in ICC, because that person has to walk in with 50%, meaning any upgrades they get will give a reduced benefit than they would otherwise. This is because these future gains from gear are being diminished at the 50% DR rate, not the 30% DR rate.

    If you think describing this relationship as a "devaluation" is improper, I can deal with that. I did note that I think this change will have zero impact on survivability if they adjust swing speed and damage correctly. So if you define "devaluation" from that perspective, then it is correct that avoidance has not been devalued. But I think the original point is a valid one, however. It stands to reason that you will get less per point of avoidance gained at the same level of avoidance in ICC than you would outside the instance; this is because you have to walk in with 20% more to start, which puts you at a higher rate of diminishing returns, but without actually having the level of avoidance that coincides with that higher DR rate. It would be like if you shifted the tax burden in a country 2 steps down, such that the poorest start at a higher rate. This means that all future income gains will be taxed at a greater rate than they would before the change. that's basically the concept I'm trying to get at.

    To put this as succinctly as I can: A tank with 30% avoidance in ICC after the debuff is applied will have avoidance gains from future gear upgrades diminished as if he had 50%. That's what I'm trying to observe, and I think this can be defined as a form of devaluation. If you don't think it's fair to describe this as a devaluation, I'm prepared to relent in using that label, as I really don't care what you call it, so long as people are aware of how the mechanic affects future avoidance gains after the tax is applied.

  7. #27
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    785
    Quote Originally Posted by lyd View Post
    To put this as succinctly as I can: A tank with 30% avoidance in ICC after the debuff is applied will have avoidance gains from future gear upgrades diminished as if he had 50%. That's what I'm trying to observe, and I think this can be defined as a form of devaluation. If you don't think it's fair to describe this as a devaluation, I'm prepared to relent in using that label, as I really don't care what you call it, so long as people are aware of how the mechanic affects future avoidance gains after the tax is applied.
    It is a devaluation in that sense, I know I read it as "Dodge is losing it's value from the Icewell Radiance buff". Nice clarification.

  8. #28
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    4,930
    Quote Originally Posted by Edgewalker View Post
    That's not true though, mathematically and practically.
    You say that, but I don't understand why. The math makes fine sense to me, what did I miss?
    The (Old) Book on Death Knight Tanking
    The New Testament on Death Knight Tanking
    -----------------------------------------
    Quote Originally Posted by Horacio View Post
    Who f-ing divided by zero?!?

  9. #29
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    785
    Quote Originally Posted by Satorri View Post
    You say that, but I don't understand why. The math makes fine sense to me, what did I miss?
    Because going from 51% dodge from 50% dodge is more valuable than going from 10% dodge to 11% dodge. And now, with the change, going from 11% dodge from 10% dodge will be much more difficult than before.

    (Disclaimer, I don't think the decrease in RS will be much of a factor in the long run, especially with faster boss swing speeds)

  10. #30
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    122
    His math wasn't related to the fact that avoiding an extra 1/50 previously unavoided attacks is more significant to overall damamge avoidance then picking up an extra 1/70 previously unavoided attacks, but rather to the fact that increasing RS odds increases relative threat more when your rs odds are lower, which is an inverse relationship to the actual avoidance odds you are talking about. His post does assume an identical swing timer, and I like you am hoping that the ICC bosses swing faster but softer as part of the whole smoothing out damage output thing.

  11. #31
    Join Date
    Oct 2008
    Posts
    4,930
    Aye, for survival purposes going from 50%=>51% dodge is a bigger step than 30%=>31%, but in terms of RS proc'ing, it's the other way around.

    Adding that 1% now at 30% will be as easy as it was adding it at 50% (because it is actually adding it at 50% blah blah).
    The (Old) Book on Death Knight Tanking
    The New Testament on Death Knight Tanking
    -----------------------------------------
    Quote Originally Posted by Horacio View Post
    Who f-ing divided by zero?!?

  12. #32
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX USA
    Posts
    4,361
    This does not devalue dodge. If anything, it should increase the value of dodge comparatively to what it is now, depending on how boss swings work.

    Now, because of high avoidance totals, tanks get hit really really hard, so that 2 unavoided attacks in a row are a death threat. As we will now be avoiding less, the individual hits should be smaller. So instead of only being able to take 2 hits before dying, it should be 3, or maybe even 4 if we're lucky.

    If you have 50% avoidance and it takes 2 swings to kill you, there's a 25% chance of that happening. If you up your avoidance 5% to 55%, the chances of taking those 2 swings in a row is 20.25%. (correct me if my probability math sucks, btw). Raising your avoidance by 5% reduces the chance of the worst case scenario from 25% to 20.25%, or a 19% reduction.

    If we reduce avoidance 20%, however, and make it so it takes 4 swings to kill a tank, at 30% avoidance, there's a 24.01% chance to take all 4 hits. Upping your avoidance 5% to 35% means you have a 17.85% chance to be hit. Reducing your chance to be hit in this scenario reduces the chances of the worst case scenario from 24.01% to 17.85%, or a 25.7% reduction.

    So as we need more hits to die, we also gain more survivability out of avoidance. It doesn't necessarily trump Stamina, but it can. Stamina is important in "plateaus." It's important in the sense that if it allows you to take another hit, it's amazing. If getting more stam doesn't let you take another hit, then avoidance will probably help you survive more in a scenario where you can take 3 or 4 hits before dying.
    Last edited by Reev; 11-02-2009 at 01:06 PM.

  13. #33
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    2,021
    If I read your last paragraph correctly, I agree with it, however this is the part I was disagreeing with:

    Quote Originally Posted by lyd View Post
    when you say "If you are getting .6% dodge for every 1% you add now, you will still get 0.6% dodge for every 1% after Icecrown Radiance," you are correct in the sense that you will still get that raw rate of return both outside and inside the instance. but you are getting it at a lower avoidance bracket. A person outside of ICC with 30% avoidance will get more avoidance per point of parry/dodge rating than a person with 30% avoidance in ICC, because that person has to walk in with 50%, meaning any upgrades they get will give a reduced benefit than they would otherwise. This is because these future gains from gear are being diminished at the 50% DR rate, not the 30% DR rate.
    This is the incorrect part. The per-point gains do not change. Your starting point changes. You get the same avoidance per point of parry/dodge rating regardless of IC radiance. I believe I understand where you are trying to get at, but I think the above statement is very misleading and doesn't say what you mean it to say. Also, you were never in the 50% DR bracket. DR is not a function of total avoidance in reality. I know we pass around the crossover function fairly freely that way, but if you look at the underlying math, DR is only a function of DR'able avoidance, not total avoidance.
    Last edited by jere; 11-02-2009 at 02:16 PM.

  14. #34
    Join Date
    Apr 2009
    Posts
    67
    The other half of this issue isn't really known, and that is how the bosses are going to deal damage. There is no longer going to be the issue of 2 hits in a row...OMG im dead. The fight is going to no longer be dependant on avoiding half the hits, but rather reducing the mana depletion over time of healers.
    Avoidance is one way to possibly solve that, if the healers are not just going to spam, which is uncertain at this time.
    The other way is to increase DPS and end the fight faster. The latter is a more reliable way of solving the issue.
    Again we don't know exactly how it is going to work, but it is food for thought.

  15. #35
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    12
    Lyd, what you said was true (that it will be harder to go from X% to X+1% dodge inside ICC than outside it). But what I said, which Edgewalker restated, is also true - the value of 1% dodge (or avoidance of any sort) increases proportionally to how much you currently have. So this change is kind of a double-whammy. It will be harder to get to a certain amount of dodge, and it will be less valuable to increase avoidance from wherever you are. The former will be compensated for by bosses hitting more gently. The latter won't, and will weaken Frost and Unholy (which rely more on higher avoidance avoidance) relative to Blood. Of course, one could compensate in any number of ways (because imagination is fun... there are straightforward ways, like giving Bone Shield another bone and Improved Frost Presence another 1% mitigation per point, and novel ways: maybe roll something into Frigid Dreadplate where each melee attack that hits you increases your dodge by a stacking 1% until your next dodge, or the loss of a bone increases your dodge by 5% for 5 seconds). I have no idea if they will, or if it will be necessary.

    Satorri is also right that it will actually increase the value of avoidance stats from a threat perspective, for exactly the same reasons.

  16. #36
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX USA
    Posts
    4,361
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeges View Post
    Lyd, what you said was true (that it will be harder to go from X% to X+1% dodge inside ICC than outside it). But what I said, which Edgewalker restated, is also true - the value of 1% dodge (or avoidance of any sort) increases proportionally to how much you currently have. So this change is kind of a double-whammy. It will be harder to get to a certain amount of dodge, and it will be less valuable to increase avoidance from wherever you are. The former will be compensated for by bosses hitting more gently. The latter won't, and will weaken Frost and Unholy (which rely more on higher avoidance avoidance) relative to Blood. Of course, one could compensate in any number of ways (because imagination is fun... there are straightforward ways, like giving Bone Shield another bone and Improved Frost Presence another 1% mitigation per point, and novel ways: maybe roll something into Frigid Dreadplate where each melee attack that hits you increases your dodge by a stacking 1% until your next dodge, or the loss of a bone increases your dodge by 5% for 5 seconds). I have no idea if they will, or if it will be necessary.

    Satorri is also right that it will actually increase the value of avoidance stats from a threat perspective, for exactly the same reasons.

    Jeges, look up at my previous post, and I explain how bosses hitting more gently actually compensates for it being "less valuable to increase avoidance from where you are." Normally the less avoidance you currently have, the less valuable 1% more is. That still holds true, but the more hits in takes to kill a tank, the more valuable avoidance becomes as well.

  17. #37
    Join Date
    Dec 2008
    Posts
    242
    Quote Originally Posted by Reev View Post
    Jeges, look up at my previous post, and I explain how bosses hitting more gently actually compensates for it being "less valuable to increase avoidance from where you are." Normally the less avoidance you currently have, the less valuable 1% more is. That still holds true, but the more hits in takes to kill a tank, the more valuable avoidance becomes as well.
    right, that's part of why it has zero effect on overall survivability, assuming boss damage is balanced correctly in lieu of the ICC avoidance tax. the only point I was trying to make, which I hope has become apparent, is that avoidance gains from upgrades obtained in ICC will be diminished at an artificially inflated rate relative to your post-debuff avoidance score. this is entirely a question of perspective. Jere is also correct that if you gain .6% dodge from your next 1% worth of dodge rating now, the same will be true the day you enter the instance. it is devalued in the former sense, but not in the latter sense.

    one can also look at it this way: if they left avoidance alone, but simply increased boss swing speed while decreasing the damage they dealt per hit, the value of avoidance would go up. the faster, smaller hits make avoidance more valuable from a throughput perspective. But they are not trying to make avoidance better or more effective. In fact, as it stands, it's too good. What they are trying to do is make bosses hit less hard without reducing overall dps on the tank. in order to do that without simply giving all boss's super-fast swing speeds, they actually have to lower your total avoidance, in this case, decreasing it by 20%. By doing so, they can concurrently reduce boss damage-per-hit, both through a small static reduction, and by, assumedly, a small increase in swing speeds in some cases.

    so, from this perspective, you have a concurrent increase in the value of your *remaining* avoidance after the tax. you have 20% less avoidance, but you're taking faster, smaller hits, which increases the value of your remaining avoidance. the 20% reduction pushes down, and the reduction in damage-per-hit and assumed increase in swing speeds pushes back up. this is why there's zero effect on survival.

    (there might be a small net increase, in fact, due the reduction in spike damage)

  18. #38
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX USA
    Posts
    4,361
    Right. After Icewell Radiance, a 1% increase in avoidance is worth less in absolute terms. Going from 30-31% avoidance is a much smaller improvement than going from 50-51%. But in terms of survivability, in a world where bosses connect more often for less damage, a 1% increase in avoidance actually nets you significantly more chance to survive than going from 50-51% does without Icewell Radiance.

  19. #39
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Posts
    12
    Reev, lyd, you're talking about avoidance as a way of preventing deadly spikes. It can do this - say there's a situation where a boss does a couple nasty unavoidable things, and if they happen at about the same time, and the melee swings on either side of them also connect, you're dead. Say also that this unfortunate convergence of damage happens about once per fight. At 50% avoidance, you've got a 75% chance of surviving. At 70% avoidance, you've got a 91% chance of surviving.

    From what I've read, a lot of people who post on tank boards tend to undervalue this kind of survival assistance. There's a mentality that the only kind of survival enhancement is the one you can count on 100%. This is silly, because in real fights there are a lot of different reasons a tank can die, not all of which are the absolute worst-case happening. I agree with y'all that there's value in avoidance here.

    Now, Ghostcrawler has said that they won't be speeding up boss swing timers, they'll just be reducing (or maybe failing to increase?) the damage when they connect. Reev, it's true that avoidance is better at helping to survive a deadly series of events when that series involves four melee swings than when it involves two. That's just multiplying probabilities. However, people don't generally worry about "oh my gosh, if I get hit four times in a row, I'm going to die!" We have healers. If they can't throw a heal or two on us during the six seconds that it would take for that to happen, chances are something else has gone wrong. So while this change increases avoidance's ability to prevent deadly sequences of unavoided hits, it also extends those sequences out far enough in time that they shouldn't really be a problem anyway.

    It looks like the developers are trying to make avoidance more exclusively a throughput stat, rather than a "hope that it saves your life when the poop hits the fan" stat. Decreasing avoidance along with boss damage accomplishes this. As a throughput stat, ICC radiance nerfs avoidance more the more avoidance you have.

    They have said that there will still be big unavoidable spikes, so there will still probably be situations where things get very hairy very quickly. In these cases, as now, avoidance will still have a chance to save you - just less of one, because you'll have less of it.

    There are some related questions here. Will overall survivability go down? (not if they tune the fights right) Will we avoid less damage in ICC? (yes) Will avoidance prevent crazy spike-induced tank death less often? (almost certainly) Will it be harder to obtain a given level of avoidance? (yes) Will the marginal value of more avoidance be lower? (yes) Will different specs be affected to a different degree? (probably, unless they change other things) Most importantly, will we all still be able to tank? (unless Blizzard really screws up, yes!)

  20. #40
    Join Date
    Jun 2009
    Location
    Houston, TX USA
    Posts
    4,361
    That sounds about right Jeges. The only scenario I can think of where 4 hits in a row is really a tank threat on its own without a hard hitting instant thrown in, is where the healers are unable to heal during that time period, or healing effectiveness is reduced, or the boss is dual wielding. For example, on heroic Gormok, when a snobold lands on a healer and silences them for a time, or really any encounter where the healers are required to move a lot or where half the healers have to peel off to heal up the raid. In these scenarios, I think that even the 6 second time period it takes for 4 hits to land can be a dangerous time period, and avoidance plays a large role in letting us get through that.

    I'm not saying avoidance > stam, by the way, to head off people who might attack my thought with that. Just that I think it will have increased significance in ICC.

+ 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