+ Reply to Thread
Page 4 of 5 FirstFirst ... 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 61 to 80 of 95

Thread: Corpse Tongue Coin

  1. #61
    Join Date
    Jun 2010
    Posts
    26
    Ah, now i see where the numbers are off.

    However I think the temp Armour increase and the Increased dodge is at LEAST equal to the abilities of the Glyph. They just prioritize things differently. So for a higher armoured tank with large health pool, like myself, the Permanent Dodge bonus and Temporary HUGE armour increase is a little more important, versus a 1.7k perma armour increase and a temporary dodge.

    Since one equals no damage and the other equals mitigated damage.

  2. #62
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    5,618
    Your armor is actually pretty low at 32k, imo. The glyph still gives you REALLY good gains. 45k HP unbuffed isn't a ton either. Maybe for heroics/old content sure but not for progression content.
    "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

  3. #63
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Location
    Portland, OR
    Posts
    2,043
    Quote Originally Posted by Lepka View Post
    Since one equals no damage and the other equals mitigated damage.
    Again, the mechanics of Wow make this a theoretical truth but a practical falacy. Taking no damage is only important if something happens to your healers or you are on the wrong end of a bad hit streak. And then your 'no damage' is entirely left up to chance (RNG) if it will help you or not.

    You simply cannot count on taking no damage. You can always count on armor/sta being there to provide a bigger buffer between you and death (and subsequent raid-wipe).

    Avoidance is boom-bust and you don't control the dice. Our jobs as tanks is to stay alive. We should be the last to die (or very nearly and only after the healers have died). Gearing for EH will always make this more likley than RNG. If your personality is more risk-taking, you probably should be DPS-ing XD

    Tanking doesn't reward risk. If DPS' risk/reward fails, they just deal lower damage. If a tank's risk/reward fails, it's a wipe.

    No Damage sounds great, but it's really "A Very Small Chance Of No Damage When You Really Need It".

    If I'm at 70k health and avoid a 15k hit and then am hit with a 14k heal and 2k dot tick heal, that 15k damage not taken is irrelevent. It would have been healed up instantly anyway because of the proactive incoming heals.

    However if I'm at 70k health and I take 5 30k hits in a row with the same heals incoming (16k a second) I'm 'losing' 14k HP a second. After 5 straight hits, I'm dead. If I up my armor so those 30k hits are now 28k, I live. The extra dodge doesn't prevent all bad streaks, so when it does happen, and it will happen, me, taking 28k hits + 16k heals and you taking 30k hits + 14k heals, only one of us is still up.

    Thats why EH is the opitmal gearing strategy. Because it turns a terminal 5 hit streak into a painful, but non-leathal 5 hit streak. RNG Dodge doesn't do that. It reduces the chance of the 5 hit streak, but doesn't prevent it. I'll take a few extra 5 hit streaks and the ability to survive over fewer 5 hit streaks but every 5 hit streak is fatal.

    I know this is a 'perfect storm' example, but that's why I choose armor first, stamina second, and gladly taking any and all avoidance after that. To make perfect storms surviable and only then reduce the frequency.

    Tanks should always take "Guaranteed less damage/more health" over "A very small chance of no damage when you really need it."
    An introduction into WarTanking (no longer updated as I've retired from WoW - the concepts will still be mostly accurate but the numbers no longer will be.) - http://www.tankspot.com/showthread.p...101-The-Primer

  4. #64
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    723
    I hate to sound elitist but this one really bothers me. Will people PLEASE quit saying "Armor has diminishing returns". When anyone says this I cringe ... armor improves survivability linearly ... and if you can't understand that then please educate yourself BEFORE jumping into threads like this.

    Armor improves survivability in a linear fashion.

  5. #65
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    5,618
    Quote Originally Posted by feralminded View Post
    I hate to sound elitist but this one really bothers me. Will people PLEASE quit saying "Armor has diminishing returns". When anyone says this I cringe ... armor improves survivability linearly ... and if you can't understand that then please educate yourself BEFORE jumping into threads like this.

    Armor improves survivability in a linear fashion.
    Well technically armor DOES have DR (the equation is A/(A+K) = M so as A -> infinity and becomes >> K then M approaches 1, therefore armor does have DR as A becomes >> K, however it hard caps out at 75% before it gets close to that), but the more you have the better it becomes in the since that 1% more damage reduction from 70% to 71% is better than 1% more reduction from 50% to 51%, so it all kind of evens out. It's hard to explain without going into more detail, and my brain kinda hurts atm.

    But ya, armor improves survivability linearly, that is a truth fact.
    "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

  6. #66
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    723
    Quote Originally Posted by Aggathon View Post
    Well technically armor DOES have DR (the equation is A/(A+K) = M so as A -> infinity and becomes >> K then M approaches 1, therefore armor does have DR as A becomes >> K, however it hard caps out at 75% before it gets close to that), but the more you have the better it becomes in the since that 1% more damage reduction from 70% to 71% is better than 1% more reduction from 50% to 51%, so it all kind of evens out. It's hard to explain without going into more detail, and my brain kinda hurts atm.

    But ya, armor improves survivability linearly, that is a truth fact.
    Yeah technically the damage reduction % suffers DR but that's a misleading truth, the way I always explain it to people that seems to make it clear is as follows.

    Tank has 50k HP and 0 armor (0% DR). It takes 50k damage to kill the tank. Add 25k armor and the tank now has 50kHP and 25k armor (~50% DR). It takes 100k damage to kill tank, doubling his survivability. Add 25k armor to them and now they have 50kHP and 50k armor (~75% DR). It now takes 200k damage to kill the tank, doubling his survivability. You can do the same exercise with 10k chunks of armor if you want, or even single points of armor at a time. Every point of armor increases survivability exactly as much as the one before it. Armor increases survivability linearly, regardless of what your character sheet says.

    I know you know that, but it always seems like most of the world does NOT whenever these kinds of arguments occur because it's a non-intuitive concept ... but it's also the KEY concept.

    The same is true for amount of healing required. Going from 0->25k armor halves the amount of healing required to keep a tank alive. Going from 25k->50k again halves it. Every point of armor reduces the amount of healing required (for physical damage) by the same amount as every other point of armor.

    Armor and stamina are basically the only linear concepts in the game. Compared to everything else that truly does suffer diminishing returns this makes them the inevitable stat "victors" in each end game. Was the truth in Vanilla (though we didn't quite have a hold on it then), was the truth in BC (by then we called it Effective Hit Points), and has been the truth for the end of ToC and all of ICC.

    In fact the only interesting discussion for the past 6-9 months has been at what point is Armor > Stamina ... avoidance has been lulz for a long time.

  7. #67
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Location
    Massachusetts
    Posts
    723
    The one concession I will make for the CTC is that if it's proc was significantly bigger it would be a killer item. Ardent defender is broken for obvious reasons and in the world of hard hitting, fast swinging bosses getting a proc that could give you an extra survived swing every time would be super powerful. That said for this to work right the armor proc would have to be higher (like on the order of 15k) or it would have to be something flat like a 20% reduction in damage for 10 seconds. I'm just throwing those out there but for anyone to care about the CTC the proc would have to be the strong point and the passive dodge would have to be the icing. As designed the proc is just too little too late (maybe if it kicked in any time you were below 50%, I dunno ... still too small), and it seems like blizzard put too much item budget into the dodge. As it stands TBH is a superior trinket in almost all circumstances with a more useful proc and a more useful passive.

    That said I will admit I have a dodge set that I wear for tanking heroic boat because dodge does slow down how fast he builds power ... but this fight is easy anyhow and I do the dodge set only because I'm a hardcore min-maxer and I fin that fun, not because it even remotely matters. It's not much of a dodge set (CTC + Glyph but I pop the glyph for the dodge) but if there were more fights like this where avoidance could affect the powering up of a boss then we might find trinkets like this put to task more often.
    Last edited by feralminded; 07-20-2010 at 11:25 AM.

  8. #68
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    5,618
    Quote Originally Posted by feralminded View Post
    Yeah technically the damage reduction % suffers DR but that's a misleading truth, the way I always explain it to people that seems to make it clear is as follows.

    Tank has 50k HP and 0 armor (0% DR). It takes 50k damage to kill the tank. Add 25k armor and the tank now has 50kHP and 25k armor (~50% DR). It takes 100k damage to kill tank, doubling his survivability. Add 25k armor to them and now they have 50kHP and 50k armor (~75% DR). It now takes 200k damage to kill the tank, doubling his survivability. You can do the same exercise with 10k chunks of armor if you want, or even single points of armor at a time. Every point of armor increases survivability exactly as much as the one before it. Armor increases survivability linearly, regardless of what your character sheet says.

    I know you know that, but it always seems like most of the world does NOT whenever these kinds of arguments occur because it's a non-intuitive concept ... but it's also the KEY concept.

    The same is true for amount of healing required. Going from 0->25k armor halves the amount of healing required to keep a tank alive. Going from 25k->50k again halves it. Every point of armor reduces the amount of healing required (for physical damage) by the same amount as every other point of armor.

    Armor and stamina are basically the only linear concepts in the game. Compared to everything else that truly does suffer diminishing returns this makes them the inevitable stat "victors" in each end game. Was the truth in Vanilla (though we didn't quite have a hold on it then), was the truth in BC (by then we called it Effective Hit Points), and has been the truth for the end of ToC and all of ICC.

    In fact the only interesting discussion for the past 6-9 months has been at what point is Armor > Stamina ... avoidance has been lulz for a long time.
    This is just more of a reason why you won my favorite person of the day award!
    "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

  9. #69
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    339
    one thing i didn't see mentioned here (unless i missed it), is how the way the CTC procs actually diminishes it's value significantly. as has been explained many times, armor and stamina are interrelated - more of one makes the other better.

    sitting at 75k hp, each bit of additional armor makes each of those hp a little better because it slows down the rate at which you take damage. if CTC provided a use effect that let you mitigate predictable incoming damage, it would actually be much better because you could time it before the big blow while still at full health.

    because it only procs at 35% health, it only "boosts" the last 26k of your health pool. (until you get healed back up of course, but at that point the immediate danger is past, unless you're worried about near-death twice within the 10 sec proc.)

    so the base effect is of questionable value already with the ICC dodge debuff, and the proc effect short-circuits it's own value significantly. bad trinket design.

  10. #70
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    5,618
    I actually think the proc is the most valuable part of CTC. It doesn't DIMINISH it's value at all. Would it be better if it was an on use? I would contend so, but you still get a metric f*** ton of armor for 10 seconds (in which you will probably be healed to full and you'll get the full effect for "all your Hit Points" and more importantly it increase effective healing per second for the duration it is up.
    "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. #71
    Join Date
    Mar 2008
    Posts
    339
    once you get healed up though, it's somewhat irrelevant (on most fights anyway) since the moment of danger has passed. the proc happening so late in your health pool means it only "interacts" with a small part of your hp.

    it would be a hell of a lot better if you could get that armor when your health is full.

  12. #72
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Chicago
    Posts
    855
    Quote Originally Posted by marklar View Post
    it would be a hell of a lot better if you could get that armor when your health is full.
    Just use the Black Heart, lol.

  13. #73
    Join Date
    Jul 2009
    Posts
    27
    If you still do not understand why the CtC is considered bad, head back to the front page and watch the 2 cata healing discussion videos.

    Armor is always on, more health is always there, Proc,s are just shiny things that happen sometimes.

    Is it a terrible trinket better dis enchanted than used? i would say no . Will you ever see me wearing one in ICC or RS? hell no.

  14. #74
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    19
    When I evaluate I tend to split the powers of the items up in the "oh shit" help, which is mostly based on EHP, and the "less attention needed from healers". The basic here is to look at how much is need to raise your "oh shit" survivability by 1% and how much is need to increase your "less attention needed from healers" by 1%.

    If we look at the 3 stats we want to look at we find out the following:

    Stamina, aka hp:
    Stamina, Appart from %hp return mechanics and healer mentality changes, is mainly only usefull in "oh shit" scenarios, so it only carries a value there. To increase your EHP by 1% you need 0.01*HP extra hp, with 1% of accuracity (due to a factor originated from the size of the iteration: 1%). The good thing about increasement is that it works for both magical and physical damage bursts, and is in general very reliable under the condition that you are very often healed to full health, which is the case of almost all hight-end raiding content (this is not the case in leveling content, which is why gearing is different there).

    Armor:
    Armor's value is hightly depending on the amount of the damage that is physical, since it only works on this. Therefor the following values must be adjusted by a factor of the importency of physical damage for the appropiate encounter. Armor increases bouth the "oh shit" survivability, aka worst case scenario, and the "less attention needed from healers" with almost the same value only distiguesed by the same form of itteration factor from sta, so the following values are with 1% accuracity: Armor nessesary for a 1% increase in EHP and a 1% decreases physical damage taken by 0.01*(armor+K) where K is around 17000 or 19000, honorstly cant remember, chech the base armor formula, it is the same number. This basicly means that the highter numbers of armor and hp you get, the more favorable it gets to work on armor, since the constant K becomes a smaller and smaller part of the equation compared to hp. If you want a armor vs sta for pure EHP, the the fomular says you can equate: sta*1.1(BoK)*10(hp/sta)*1.x(class modifyer)=(armor+K)*PhysicalDamageOfBurst%

    Avoidance/dodge:
    Avoidance has a very very low impact on worse case scenarioes, and according to the statistics, it is not really noticible before you have an effective avoidance of 70%, and first remotely reliable around 85-95% effective avoidance. As you will probably only get around 50% effective avoidance in icc if stacking avoidance, then we can descard this effect for being a really small number (an increasement of 10% avoidance here will move you from around 99.5% probability of oh shit scenarior, to around 99%, but those numbers are probably off, check the "why we do things as we do" tread for the correct values). So back to the thing that avoidance helps you with, they reduce the average damage you take. Now for 1% of base avoidance increasement you need around 45 rating (cant remember the exact number), however, at standard gearing levels there will be around a flat deminiting returns of 50% (from 30-70%, only getting worse if you stack it), now the end needed avoidance for a 1% decreasement in average damage taken is 45/0.5(DR)*(1-Avoidance%)=90*(1-Avoidance%). The next problem here is that a reduction in average damage taken is not equal to the same amount of recudion in attention need from healers, since it hightly depends on the healing model and the centent run, it can however always be saied that the less attention needed due to less average damage is capped at a factor of 1, and will in almost all scenarioes be lower.

    Now lets take an example of a tank having say 50k buffed (without the 30% nerf buff), 30k armor and 40% avoidance after nerf buff. The nerf buff is ignored since it the factor simply disappears when talking about procential increasements. Lets now look at how much of each stat would be needed for 1% increasements:

    for 1% increasement in "Oh shit" you would need:
    50000*0.01/10(hp/sta factor)= 50 sta
    (30000+17000)*0.01/PhyscialDamageOfBurst% = 470 armor * 1/PhyscialDamageOfBurst%

    for 1% decrease in physical damage taken, you would need:
    (30000+17000)*0.01 = 470 armor
    90*(1-0.4) = 54 dodge rating

    so if we evaluate the 2 trinkets, we will find that for the always up part, that:
    CTC gives around 3% reduction in average damage taken
    Armor trink (asumes around 1792 armor), gives around 3.8% reliable less damage from all physical (translating much better to less attention needed).

    for procs we will use the uptime value for armor trinktet to calculate the average damage reduction, with a 20 secs duration of 2min cd, it will have an uptime of 1/6th if used on cd. This gives the that it does around 1.5% average damage taken reduction.
    For CTC proc, we can asume that it doesnt get to proc very often, maybe once every min in a hight damage burst encounter, so uptime is around 10-20%, the real deal comes in how it under the right cercumstances provides you with a larger EHP, but only for the part below 35% hp, since it only procs after the damage, and we are looking at 4 or 5 hit scenarioes, we can asume that it is only active the last 25% of your hp at best. While it is up, it will provide roughly 12% decreasement in damage, this gives us a 3% in EHP (since 0.25*0.12=0.03), while it gives an average damage reduction of 0.15*0.12=1.8%.

    So in total:
    CTC does the following:
    4.8% decreasement in average damage taken, roughly equal 2-3% reduction in healing attention
    3% increase in EHP

    while the armor trinket does:
    3.8%+1.5%=5.3% decrease in average taken, roughly here equal to 4-4.5% reduction in healing attention (due to the much larger part being reliable armor)
    3.8% increase in EHP

    This simple evaluation show us the following:
    First off, CTC is not as bad as people make it out to be, but this is done in favorable conditions for it, so its value in actual content will be lower.
    Second off, the armor trinkets wins EVERY single catagory, bouth average damage taken, reduction in healing attention and help on EHP and oh shit scenarioes. It simply is preferable and the math clearly shows that there is no reason to choose CTC over the armor trinket.

    Feel free to use the above formulas on your own situation, just note that many of slightly simplified (with a small inaccuracity, which is acceptable on low iterations, but will show up more clearly on larger ones), and they have been manipulated to get in their pressent form. It is also very interesting to see, that say 100 armor in icc setting will provide roughly the same in terms of "oh shit" help and "less attention needed from healers" as around 6-9sta and 15-35 dodge rating, so it is clearly one of our best stats to stack, with stamina only really being preferable on "magic burst" bosses, while still being a good choice otherwise.
    From general logic, it also calls that the highter end of the content you are doing, the more important the "oh shit" part becomes, since that is where the encounter might fall, while the "less attention from healers" becomes less important since you will be running with very good healers anyway, and they have plenty of attention to throw around. Earlier on, the amount of attention you need from healers is far more important, because the amount of attention healers can throw around is fairly limmited with non-godly healers, and any attention you take is attention not gone to save all the other raidmembers, which basicly makes the entire encounter harder to complete.

  15. #75
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    16,438
    The slippery slope/fatal flaw here in your evaluation (while fun to read) is taking into account average damage taken. NO one cares about this. your average damage taken could be 5k and constantly be healed through it but if the boss has the capability to hit once ever 3 minutes for 100k damage to create that 5k average, you better hope you have a means to survive that damage via cooldowns + EHP. whenever discussing avoidance, it is important that yes it does decrease your AVERAGE damage taken, it does nothing to decrease your worst case scenario, just how often it can occur. but when it does happen, you'll die. This is why EHP > Avoidance in all progression content.

    READ THIS: Posting & Chat Rules
    Quote Originally Posted by Turelliax View Post
    I will never be a kaz.. no one can reach the utter awesomeness of you.
    http://i.imgur.com/3vbQi.gif

  16. #76
    Join Date
    Sep 2009
    Posts
    5,618
    And to extend Kaze's point: Avoidance levels are too low atm to push the probability of a "worst case scenario" from even happening via avoidance either off the table or to a point where it would be very unlikely (you'd need 70-80%+ avoidance for that, depending on fight mechanics). With the ICC buff you'd have to sac way too much EHP to even get to 50%+ avoidance and it's still not enough to prevent the inevitable. This is why tanks that gear for avoidance are seemingly easy to heal then all of the sudden just drop.
    "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. #77
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    19
    I will in the following asume that kazayonoma and aggathon are addressing my post.

    I would kindly like to point out that almost all the things you wrote actually stand somewhere in the post. I seperated everything into worst case scenario (the "oh shit" scenario, where we are working purely on EHP) and into a form of reduction in healing attention needed, which is most easily seen if you have tons of armor, since even if things are hitting you, they still wouldnt hit you as hard, which makes you easier to heal in the nonburst scenario. They are seperated, the average damage taken is a Third variable, which is afterwards translated to some value of reduction in healing attention. All of that has nothing to do with EHP, that thing is mesured seperately.

    I am kind of irritated that people starts shouting all around when I seperate the use of things in the classic worst case scenario which most tanks (especially progression tanks) are gearing for, and into the non worst case scenario, which is basicly how much healer resurces you have to give the tank, which is resurces not used to save other people, which is more important in non hight-end content (it also tells you how good of a healer you will need througput wise to make sure the tank is safe in nonburst periodes).

    If you carefully go through the post, you will find that most of the things you 2 just sayed are almost qoutes from the middle of the post, it is a bit like "everyone, we all know that abc increases X while defg decreases Y, but we also know that H also decreases Y but to a much lesser degree" "but you are forgetting that abc increases X, which everyone forgets when talking about defg", ehm, didnt I just say that? I hope you understand, because whenever I write something, it seems like people dont care to real all the important details, skip all the finesses which makes the arguments sound, and just cut it all through and say "you didnt acount for Z in X" while it was clearly stated how it did.

  18. #78
    Join Date
    May 2009
    Posts
    375
    Death, no offense, but your posts are hard to read and decipher. You're pretty emotionally charged on a point and then when you manage to put that aside and talk theorycrafting it's pretty abrupt and the questions and points you're making aren't conveyed very well.

    This makes it hard to follow and to be able to address in a meaningful manner in the midst of the soap box chest pounding. So I wouldn't exactly say you're clearly stating anything. They're doing the best they can to respond to someone who is rambling with emotionally charge bravado and not very concise theorycrafting.

  19. #79
    Join Date
    Feb 2010
    Posts
    19
    I should probably admidt that I am not the best at conveying those type of things, heck it really often go wrong, and my second posts was written in the middle of the night so that doesnt make it any better.

    I simply just go very irritated over people trying to criticise over things which to me seemed like they only read the headline of or barely understood the argumentation. It falls on me to not be better at conveying my points, but also a bit on the people rushing in a bit to fast and reacting to a missunderstood point.

    So back to the point of theorycrafting (hope this will be understandable), I will here try to boil down the mathematical points of the former post. We will be putting the 2 trinkets up against each other, and comparing them in 3 catagories: EHP, reliable decrease in damage taken, total descrease in damage taken. It is common accepted that EHP is the thing we gear for, the other 2 parts are more there to describe the other things they do, but which we are less interested in. Here DR= damage reduction

    ______________ EHP ___ reliable DR __ total DR
    CTC: _________ 3% ____ 0% ________ 4.8%
    armor trinket: __ 3.8% __ 3.8% _______ 5.3%

    Taking a quick look, then the armor trinket wins over CTC in EHP, meaning it is better for bursts, it provides a reliable damage reduction, which makes healing you easier, and on top of it, it wipes all need for talking about the help of total damage reduction (or average damage reduction for that mater) off the table, since it also wins that catogory. You can argue day and night long about what those 3 things will mean for your tanking, the math is clear, the armor trinket is a clear winner in all catagories. End of story.

  20. #80
    Join Date
    Jul 2007
    Posts
    16,438
    you cannot quantify avoidance as EHP, if you're saying the CTC's armor proc provides 3% EHP, it's a bit skewed because you're going to already be at a near death scenario where it largely won't save you, being <35%, and it has a internal cd which prevents you from having it up all the time when getting ping ponged. It'd be nice if we could somehow create a Quotient factor (hint: Agg tried to, for days, and couldn't) that somehow combined avoidance in with EHP and gave us some magical survivability #, but we simply can't because of the random nature of avoidance.

    READ THIS: Posting & Chat Rules
    Quote Originally Posted by Turelliax View Post
    I will never be a kaz.. no one can reach the utter awesomeness of you.
    http://i.imgur.com/3vbQi.gif

+ 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