Closed Thread
Page 8 of 9 FirstFirst ... 6 7 8 9 LastLast
Results 141 to 160 of 178

Thread: By role By Boss EH vs Avoidance

  1. #141
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    721
    Most importantly, TEH is only relevant when maximized against a specific sequence of events. If you want to maximize it on Gormok, you're maximizing TEH against melee+impale+bleed tick(+melee, potentially). So you're going to look at your largest bleed tick, your largest impale, and your largest melee hit, add all those together, and figure out how good armor is against your worst-case burst based on the percent that can be mitigated. Anub is significantly more complicated, but the math can still be worked through. Add up the worst-case burst, figure out how much is nature, how much is physical, and how much is something else, and you'll derive TEH values for each stat. And NR will come out pretty well.
    It comes out well, but it isn't optimal.

    Which was my point.

    The 30k damage reduced by 10% (in the tick/slash/tick/melee scenario) isn't going to be as much EH as 1600 health at 70% armor reduction; even if you discount armor it's only barely comparable. Again, the point is that you're not doing it because it does TEH or EH; you're doing it because it gives the most benefit. It gives mitigation and survival and effective DPS on the boss.

    So no, Aggathon - you can be insulted all you like, but gearing for EH is not optimal in all situations. If that's why you're doing it, you're deluding yourself willingly or choosing to optimize for general cases and not specific ones.

  2. #142
    Darksend:

    Bear Tanking in 3.3 and beyond!!

    Updated: January 4, 2009
    First two lines of the post.

    And Kalon, c'mon....we've been over it and Anub is such a unique case that tanks gear VERY different for, that it's really a terrible example to be using in any context.

    Agg knows NR isn't "optimal" TEH on Anub. We all do, I think all of us said it at least once. But it is SOME TEH, and it helps enormously with the fight mechanics in general. And I can't think of another single encounter in all of WoW that encourages all the tanks to gear in really strange ways.

    So can we stop talking about Anub at all now?
    Last edited by Bovinity; 01-14-2010 at 01:49 PM.

  3. #143
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    3,897
    Quote Originally Posted by Bovinity View Post
    First two lines of the post.
    I know, but that doesn't mean each individual section was updated at the same time.



  4. #144
    Good point.

    But it's supposed to be 3.3 info and 61.6k buffed suggests 245-264 gear so I'm sure it was pretty recent.

  5. #145
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    721
    And Kalon, c'mon....we've been over it and Anub is such a unique case that tanks gear VERY different for, that it's really a terrible example to be using in any context.
    Okay, but why?

    I mean - we're looking at hard fights, and in each tier we've seen an encounter that encourages tanks to gear in what many consider suboptimal general ways because they are optimal for specific fights. Similarly, we haven't seen many fights where gearing for EH is specifically optimal AND it matters; there simply aren't that many fights that key around tank survival any more.

    Now, it turns out there are more fights that key on EH and tank survival than any other trait (FR isn't all that good on Anub or Vezax), but the notion that there's only one way to do things and it's optimal everywhere...is rubbish. It's naive and as Roana said, describes a stochastic healing model in far too simplistic terms.

    Furthermore, I had to argue that NR wasn't optimal because Edgewalker and other said it was. They were misinformed. I know you didn't, but you might try reading the other posters before blaming me for responding.

    Anyway - it's not that useful here. There's one fight so far that needs any kind of tank gearing, and that's Festergut, and it's clear that it favors EH. Festergut loooooves EH. Everything else is meaningless for a tank of the appropriate gear, and tanks can gem/enchant as they choose without issue.

    We'll see how far that goes for hard modes.

  6. #146
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    5,594
    Quote Originally Posted by felhoof View Post
    So no, Aggathon - you can be insulted all you like, but gearing for EH is not optimal in all situations. If that's why you're doing it, you're deluding yourself willingly or choosing to optimize for general cases and not specific ones.
    Look, obviously some fights are different, like anub and gunship. But so far gunship is the only fight I've seen that specifically favors avoidance over EHP in ICC, in fact, they bosses I have faced hit so hard that it's obviously EHP is the best choice. Yes, you gear for the fight, but you shouldn't be changing all of your best gear specifically for the one avoidance fight. You get other pieces of gear, trinkets, etc. that optimize for those fights, which is what I do.
    "If the world is something you accept rather than interpret, then you're susceptible to the influence of charismatic idiots." -Neil deGrasee Tyson

    Twitter @Aggathon || @Tankspot || Twitch.Tv/Aggathon

  7. #147
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    785
    I'm not misinformed at all. There are a lot of enchanting choices or gearing choices where you can choose NR over stamina at an almost point per point range. You seem to think it's in the 10,000 HP range, which is ridiculous, and obviously hyperbolic to the point that it will obviously immediately make your argument valid. Thanks though.

  8. #148
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    721
    No, I don't. I explained what the difference was. I also showed that it's better from a TEH standpoint to go for stamina over NR at the bracer enchant level, and that was significantly biased in favor of the NR (70 resistance never gives by itself a 10% resistance boost).

    The cloak enchant? Sure. The head enchant? Sure. The flask? Nope. The bracers? Nope. There's all of two spots where the health loss is outweighed by the gain, and they give a fairly small amount of resistance. The two together + totem isn't enough to give 20% resistance always, and the only other piece that is remotely comparable is the 245 Ony ring - which is still about a 50 stam deficit from BiS.

    The 10k deficit is the difference between gearing normally (IE, normal stam expectations) and gearing for Anub (favoring armor and NR). As I stated, there's about a 6k difference between the NR gear and the lower ilvl 4-piece T9. There's another 4k from armor trinkets. If you choose to disqualify all that math because you didn't like the preciseness of the original statement that's your call to make, but it doesn't make the calculations any less correct. NR still lost to health from a pure TEH standpoint, either from the entire P3 basis or from a burst scenario basis.

  9. #149
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    785
    I'm not having this idiotic conversation with you anymore. This isn't even avoidance or EH... this is the mechanics of a gimmick encounter vs. EH.

  10. #150
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    5,594
    Quote Originally Posted by Edgewalker View Post
    I'm not having this idiotic conversation with you anymore. This isn't even avoidance or EH... this is the mechanics of a gimmick encounter vs. EH.
    I had the same reaction when felhoof and I originally had this conversation, and for NR on Anub he is correct because stam actually lowers TEH b/c of leeching swarm. NR and Armor become way better than stam, and freezing slash is also an attack that is 25% of your health, so going for armor and NR over stam doesn't really hurt and leeching swarm is by far more damage done than any other ability to the main tank. For Anub specifically, I agree with Felhoof. For almost any other fight I would disagree.
    "If the world is something you accept rather than interpret, then you're susceptible to the influence of charismatic idiots." -Neil deGrasee Tyson

    Twitter @Aggathon || @Tankspot || Twitch.Tv/Aggathon

  11. #151
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    721
    This isn't even avoidance or EH... this is the mechanics of a gimmick encounter vs. EH.
    Let's get back to that notion though - the idea of a 'gimmick' encounter.

    How many fights in WotLK are tough on tanks and stress tank survival? Here's my list:

    T7: Patchwerk (early on), Sarth3D, and maybe Maly if you squint
    T8: Thorim, Vezax (hard mode only), Mimiron P1 if you squint, Algalon
    T9: Beasts, Anub (both hard mode only)
    T10: Festergut, Sindragosa and presumably Arthas (though that's clearly unknown).

    Of those, which are pure EH fights (not TEH, just EH)?

    Patchwerk, Thorim, Beasts, Festergut. And maybe Algalon, though I'll get to that in a sec.

    The rest are 'gimmick' fights in some way that stress something else (cooldown use, avoidance & mana conservation for healers, . Yet there are as many gimmick fights as there are non, and (here's the interesting thing) the gimmick fights are the ones that happen later in progression in all cases.

    In each later situation progression guilds did something different than they normally do for their tanks to progress. For Sarth3D, this was a DK tank and silly CDs (or later, a bear with FR gear). For Vezax it was again a DK with silly CDs and good avoidance. For Anub it was shield block and NR gear (world first was done with both). Algalon actually encouraged block as a mechanic, though it wasn't as essential, and only if you're really squinty can you count block as EH.

    Why is it that we dismiss these things as gimmick fights when they've been the harder encounters to do compared to the EH ones? I realize that you're not wearing your shield block set to every single fight, but at the same time isn't it valuable to consider those cases as important?

    That's all I'm getting at here. Especially since we don't have any real details on hard modes in ICC, which are very likely to stress tanks in various ways. I am willing to bet that there will be one fight in ICC hard that is definitely harder for bears than other tanks because of the discrepancy in avoidance they have relative to other tanks. I'm also willing to bet they kick ass because of (yet again) high armor, health and resistance.

  12. #152
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    785
    Nothing in T7 was challenging in the slightest for any guild, wearing any combination of gear. It was probably the easiest raid zone ever conceived.

    I would put Steelbreaker on the list of T8 content. Algalon was overblown when it came to blocking... it was more of a cooldown management boss. His damage was difficult from transitions, nothing else. 3 Tree Freya wasn't really a slouch either when it came to incoming damage.

    I would presume that hardmode Marrowgar, Saurfang, Festergut, Rotface, Sindragosa, Putricide, and Arthas will too.
    Normal mode Putricide hits quite hard on tanks as well in his current incarnation.

    Wouldn't it also be more fair to ask what encounters stressed avoidance instead of EH (again the original point of this conversation)?

    Anub'arak adds. HM Vezax for non-DKs (an extreme rarity). ????? Unseen encounter in ICC?

    I also don't consider many encounters to be gimmick encounters for tanks. If they aren't hitting tanks that hard, the difficulty is for the rest of the raid, not the tank, in which case you can probably get away with a mixture of DPS/tanking gear, or tank it in cloth, or with spirit gems, or whatever you want to do. The argument becomes moot. 3D Sarth was a gimmick (reminded me of NR tanking Hydross without transitions), and bad design. HM Anub is a gimmick, and in my opinion, terrible design. There aren't many other fights I throw in the gimmick boat, and haven't been many in WoW's history.

  13. #153
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    721
    Huh. I'd say Steelbreaker was as CD management boss as Algalon. And the major difficulty on Freya in my experience was not the damage done to the tank, but the damage and issues to the raid.

    And you're right - it's fair to say which fights stressed avoidance. HM Vezax, OT Anub, to a certain extent Algalon, and...who knows in ICC? Nothing that we're aware of so far does to any real extent, but looking at normal modes often doesn't tell you much.

    I think there have been a lot more gimmick tank fights than you give credit to though, especially history. This expansion we have Sarth3D, Anub, Yogg to a large extent, Vezax (any fight where your healers don't actually regen mana is a pretty big gimmick), Valkyrs (though not particularly towards the tanks), Putricide (the OT is a giant abomination that eats goo), possibly blood princes (one of the tanks is usually a ranged tank with resist gear). Before this we had Hydross, Mother Shahraz, Council, Maulgar, Illidan, Twins, Leotheras, Vashj, Kael, and even KJ (the 'tank' was often a feral in full cat gear or a lock). Heck, does RoS count as a gimmick fight?

    And that's not even counting the requirements of having (or at least wanting) a prot pally for Felmyst or Hyjal waves.

    I'm okay with calling things bad design, but it's tough to say where to draw the line on 'gimmick' fights. Is a gimmick fight anything where a tank has to change to different gear? Is it when a tank does something odd, like spell reflect on RoS? Is it when non-tanking classes tank a boss? Is it when they have to drive a vehicle to be the 'tank'? Point being that gimmick fights are not that uncommon, and there's a very good chance that Arthas will be a gimmick fight by that definition (given that Vashj, Kael, Illidan, KJ, Maly, Sarth3D and Anub are all gimmick fights as well for tanks to one degree or another).

  14. #154
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    580
    Quote Originally Posted by felhoof View Post
    Huh. I'd say Steelbreaker was as CD management boss as Algalon. And the major difficulty on Freya in my experience was not the damage done to the tank, but the damage and issues to the raid.
    I'd say steelbreaker was certainly a cooldown test, but Algalon was not really similar. Block trivialized algalon, deathknights (even when they had super-cooldowns) were not optimal for algalon. I have to agree, Freya's difficulty was entirely due to raid coordinating and not tanking.

    Quote Originally Posted by felhoof
    And you're right - it's fair to say which fights stressed avoidance. HM Vezax, OT Anub, to a certain extent Algalon, and...who knows in ICC? Nothing that we're aware of so far does to any real extent, but looking at normal modes often doesn't tell you much.
    I'd say vezax was another heavy mitigation/cooldown encounter, who in the world was worried about avoidance when he could easily 2-shot or 3-shot (if you were very geared at the time) the tank? OT anub and algalon, again, i realize you want to call these "avoidance" encounters because of the 100% avoid/block combo, but once again I'd suggest this is a "block" encounter. Even a frost dk with 70% avoidance would be thrashed by both of these encounters.


    Quote Originally Posted by felhoof
    I think there have been a lot more gimmick tank fights than you give credit to though, especially history. This expansion we have Sarth3D, Anub, Yogg to a large extent, Vezax (any fight where your healers don't actually regen mana is a pretty big gimmick), Valkyrs (though not particularly towards the tanks), Putricide (the OT is a giant abomination that eats goo), possibly blood princes (one of the tanks is usually a ranged tank with resist gear). Before this we had Hydross, Mother Shahraz, Council, Maulgar, Illidan, Twins, Leotheras, Vashj, Kael, and even KJ (the 'tank' was often a feral in full cat gear or a lock). Heck, does RoS count as a gimmick fight?

    And that's not even counting the requirements of having (or at least wanting) a prot pally for Felmyst or Hyjal waves.

    I'm okay with calling things bad design, but it's tough to say where to draw the line on 'gimmick' fights. Is a gimmick fight anything where a tank has to change to different gear? Is it when a tank does something odd, like spell reflect on RoS? Is it when non-tanking classes tank a boss? Is it when they have to drive a vehicle to be the 'tank'? Point being that gimmick fights are not that uncommon, and there's a very good chance that Arthas will be a gimmick fight by that definition (given that Vashj, Kael, Illidan, KJ, Maly, Sarth3D and Anub are all gimmick fights as well for tanks to one degree or another).
    I agree WoW has quite a few gimmick encounters past and present, but that doesn't make it a good idea. Also, I would strongly disagree than any gimmick has been more discriminatory than Anub's adds. Illidan comes close, but certainly not sarth or Maly (not sure why you even listed Maly, tbh).

  15. #155
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    5,594
    I took your list, and I really really REALLY want to know your definition of gimmick, here's what I think. I think any fight that requires you to radically change gear might be considered a gimmick fight

    Sarth3D - I'll give you this one
    Anub - Yes
    Yogg - No, definitely a no
    Vezax - MAYBE, but we did it with a feral druid pre-nerf no problems who only stacked EHP (didn't use resist gear though as I recall)
    Valkyrs - No
    Putricide - No, just because there's no OT until phase 3 so you typically use your OT to control the abom does not make this a gimmick fight, it's part of how you kill him and gear is not radically changed any way.
    Hydross - I'll give ya this one, resist gear was needed
    Mother Shahraz - Not for tanks, but yes the raid needed resist gear. Some guilds had tanks use like cloaks and necks though. I'll give this one a maybe. Also, f*** farming hearts of darkness
    Council - Huh? No. I call shenanigans on any fight you're calling gimmick just because some of the mobs specifically need caster tanks, and those caster tanks didn't even really need any special gear, they just needed gear in general. I *MIGHT* give these to you, but for actual tanks, they don't change their gear for avoidance or NR or something, so no... not a "gimmick" fight.
    Maulgar - No, see Council for reasoning.
    Illidan - Yes, phase 2, sort of with the warlock tanking in phase 4 but again see Council reasonings
    Twins - No, same reason for Council
    Leotheras - No, same reason for Council
    Vashj - No, I'm guessing you're talking about the kiters, this one is an emphatic no because even the kiters didn't need to change gear.
    Kael - No for the same reasons as putricide, no radical gear shifts were made other than the gear that is given to you in the encounter, which doesn't mean you go in with a completely different gearset for some reason. Not a gimmick fight, that's just how the fight mechanics worked.
    KJ - Prenerf the MT was usually a warlock, but I'd still land this in the same category as council.
    RoS - No, no radical gear shifts were needed.

    Like honestly the only 2 WotLK fights I'd consider "gimmick" are the original 3D sarth and Anub.
    "If the world is something you accept rather than interpret, then you're susceptible to the influence of charismatic idiots." -Neil deGrasee Tyson

    Twitter @Aggathon || @Tankspot || Twitch.Tv/Aggathon

  16. #156
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    5,594
    Quote Originally Posted by Proletaria View Post


    I agree WoW has quite a few gimmick encounters past and present, but that doesn't make it a good idea. Also, I would strongly disagree than any gimmick has been more discriminatory than Anub's adds. Illidan comes close, but certainly not sarth or Maly (not sure why you even listed Maly, tbh).
    I should have just said this, well said sir.
    "If the world is something you accept rather than interpret, then you're susceptible to the influence of charismatic idiots." -Neil deGrasee Tyson

    Twitter @Aggathon || @Tankspot || Twitch.Tv/Aggathon

  17. #157
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    785
    How were any of those fights gimmicks? I think people generally are using gimmick here to refer to a fight where you wear a set you would normally never ever ever wear (i.e. Frost resistance gear to stack stamina on Sartharion for bears, or all defense gemmed block gear). Aside from Hydross nothing you mentioned was even close to fitting that definition for the time. Illidan and RoS, requiring Shield Reflect / Shield block for Shear, would be bad design NOW for requiring shield tanks in a time with 4 viable tank classes, but not gimmicks then where there really was only 2 choices, and 99.9% of guilds still used warriors. High King Maulgar was an extremely straight forward fight, caster tanks had been used before since as early as AQ, for the tanks however it was a completely normal encounter that encouraged (lol) EH. Just like Gruul. And Mother Shahraz. And Vashj. And Kael. If you are calling gimmick fights anything but tank and spank, you might as well list everything in the game.

    Death Knights were also never that bad for Algalon in the original incarnation. It was, as most things are, overblown.

    Edit - I will also concede Illidan P2. And Ragnaros and Baron. So that's... 6 encounters out of a lot of encounters. Before someone says Viscidus, you wore normal tanking gear for Viscidus.
    Last edited by Edgewalker; 01-14-2010 at 07:11 PM.

  18. #158
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    785
    Quote Originally Posted by Aggathon View Post
    I took your list, and I really really REALLY want to know your definition of gimmick, here's what I think. I think any fight that requires you to radically change gear might be considered a gimmick fight
    .
    Man, we should really make a baby someday.

  19. #159
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    721
    Maly's phase 3 was why; a fight where a large portion of the success hinges on vehicle/pet combat is what I'd call a gimmick, especially for the tanks (who have nothing to do with tanking on that part).

    Some definitions of gimmicks in the above:
    Any gear changes (this seems to be agreed upon)
    Any non-tank doing a tanking role (this to me screams gimmick, but it doesn't affect the tanks)
    Any tank doing non-tank things as a tank (so FL, Maly, and Putricide to a certain extent)
    Anything that relies on a specific ability of a tank (Kael and CDs/being able to use a shield was certainly a gimmick that screwed over bears, as did Illidan's shear and RoS's spell reflect.) Council also fits in here with the reflect of the judgment being a crucial part of the fight.

    Also, world first KJ was done tanking by a feral wearing DPS gear (SK-gaming).

    If you'd like to narrow the scope to only fights that required specific tanking choices and gear (which I think is fair) you get Kael, Illidan, KJ, Sarth3D, Anub.

    Notice a pattern in those bosses?

    You might not like gimmick encounters - and that's fair. But like them or not, the chances that the hardest fights in the game will be gimmick encounters are fairly high. The chances that Arthas is in some way a gimmick encounter is quite high.

    And the chance that tanking success will rely heavily on something other than EH is also quite high.

  20. #160
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    785
    Quote Originally Posted by felhoof View Post
    If you'd like to narrow the scope to only fights that required specific tanking choices and gear (which I think is fair) you get Kael, Illidan, KJ, Sarth3D, Anub.
    Except Kael didn't, Illidan didn't, KJ didn't. Blizzard has already admitted they were wrong on Sartharion, and I assume they won't repeat the shenanigans that encompassed heroic Anub.

    Warrior tanks WERE Vanilla and TBC raiding tanks. You can't call it a gimmick for encounters that required them.

Closed 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