Remove Advertisements

A new way to burst our bubble

Anything, including off-topic posts

Moderators: Fridmarr, Worldie, Aergis, Sabindeus, PsiVen

Postby Lore » Fri Jun 27, 2008 2:41 pm

Sabindeus wrote:
moduspwnens wrote:
Sabindeus wrote:Righteous Fury spam.


Yeah, I suppose you could probably do that if you have the GCDs.


Well it's not like Paladins spend all of their GCDs on something like Warriors do.


This. Plus I keep up my full threat rotation minus holy shield while he's on the other tank just for the extra damage. I'm usually around 25-30% mana when I taunt him back. It fills up quick, but until it does I'm getting some ridiculous TPS.

Clarification on Avenging Wrath: It may not be as immediately apparent as a "oh crap shield wall" save. However, it is on a MUCH shorter cooldown, and quite often simply killing the boss or even just getting to the next phase faster helps just as much as shield walling because the healers ran out of mana because the fight was taking too long.
User avatar
Lore
Global Mod
 
Posts: 7757
Joined: Wed Mar 21, 2007 11:52 am

Postby Worldie » Fri Jun 27, 2008 3:09 pm

Must agree with Lore on that, i can use RF at least twice per rotation :|
theckhd wrote:Fuck no, we've seen what you do to guilds. Just imagine what you could do to an entire country. Just visiting the US might be enough to make the southern states try to secede again.

halabar wrote:Noo.. you don't realize the problem. Worldie was to negative guild breaking energy like Bolvar is to the Scourge. If Worldie is removed, than someone must pick up that mantle, otherwise that negative guild breaking energy will run rampant, destroying all the servers.
User avatar
Worldie
Global Mod
 
Posts: 13364
Joined: Sun Sep 02, 2007 1:49 pm
Location: Italy

Postby Fridmarr » Sun Jun 29, 2008 1:47 am

Wow the hypocracy at the start of this tread is pretty intense, I'm glad things got a bit more on track.

In my opinion, we are 100% viable, but I do not think we are 100% fine. However, that will vary greatly on what your opinion of what it is we should be capable of doing and what concessions you are willing to make for our strengths.

As far as min maxing goes, I think that casual guilds do min/max to the extent that they can. Generally in casual guilds you'll have a bigger skill gap in your player base, where a class that on paper should perform better, won't, simply because of the person playing. The other issue, is that casual guids simply don't have the luxury of completely min/maxxing because of the amount of folks online with equal gear at raid time is far more variable than in bleeding edge guilds. That said, I do think tanking is one area where even casual guilds have the resources to min/max pretty often, and I do think that hurts us in any non AoE encounter.

In BT, we bascially use a prot pally for two boss encounters, phase 3 RoS and Akama. If we have our normal raid, which includes a prot warrior and two ferals, the prot pally will be healing on the 7 other bosses. That said, the biggest reason I don't get to do nearly as much tanking as I'd like, is because I can bring more to the raid as Ret, so that is my most common spec at the moment. So yeah, I think some improvement would not only be a nice thing, but is also needed.

Oh and to the OP's point. Blizzard messed up when they made the bubble dispellable and gave us nothing in return. Against good, organized PVPers the bubble was always more of a way to heal without being interrupted than it was for survival.

Sometimes people rely to heavily on the bubble

Honestly, blizzard is more guilty of this than anyone. If they continue to marginalize the skill, hopefully they'll actually rebalance us with that in mind for the next expac. And no, I don't buy Kalgan's notion that Crusader Strike was compensation for Mass Dispel.
Fridmarr
Global Mod
 
Posts: 9666
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 1:03 am

Postby Dorvan » Sun Jun 29, 2008 8:23 am

Fridmarr wrote:In BT, we bascially use a prot pally for two boss encounters, phase 3 RoS and Akama. If we have our normal raid, which includes a prot warrior and two ferals, the prot pally will be healing on the 7 other bosses. That said, the biggest reason I don't get to do nearly as much tanking as I'd like, is because I can bring more to the raid as Ret, so that is my most common spec at the moment. So yeah, I think some improvement would not only be a nice thing, but is also needed.


From a min-maxxing perspective it's absolutely a mistake not to use a Prot Pally on Bloodboil if you have one available. There's also no min-max reason to use a druid over a pally on Supremus/Mother/Council/Illidan. When you're first hitting the content, Pally threat on Gorefiend should outdo warrior threat (with the tradeoff of a little worse mitigation), and after it's on farm the fight is completely tank-neutral.

To me, it sounds like you've got a combination of the fact that your guild is reluctant to use prot pallies in the first place and you've proven yourself quite able as a Ret Pally which makes for a good reason to have you switch roles rather than one of the other tanks.
Image

WHAT WOULD BEST DESCRIBE YOUR PERSONALITY?
Moonlight Sonata Techno Remix
Scriggle - 85 Fire Mage
Fizzmore - 81 Mut Rogue
Adorania - 80 Disc Priest
User avatar
Dorvan
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 8462
Joined: Wed Apr 04, 2007 3:28 pm

Postby Arcand » Sun Jun 29, 2008 8:45 am

Lore wrote:We don't have to meet or beat warriors in every way so long as encounter design compensates for it.


I suspect that 'encounter design compensation' means 'gimmick fights', and they're always going to tune those around a hastily-geared-up, inexperienced member of the class. We're not going to get to do cool stuff that way, and the existence of some of those fights isn't going to improve our reputation. (It's like fighting racial prejudice with affirmative-action hiring; all it does is reinforce the belief that this group is weak and needs handouts. Deadly.)

We also have to be wary of Blizzard's half-assed attention span. You're not going to convince me anytime soon that they're keeping score on 'tank balance', saying "We've done two bosses for the DKs, make sure the next three or four give some paladin and bear love"...the only reliable way to keep us equally employed is to tune our fundamental strength to the same as every other tank's.
Arcand
Moderator
 
Posts: 4525
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 11:15 am

Postby moduspwnens » Sun Jun 29, 2008 9:50 am

I guess what we're disagreeing on realistically here is the meaning of the word "viable."

Dictionary.com defines it below. The most likely definition is:
practicable; workable


Well, in the sense of being practicable (capable of being done, effected, or put into practice, with the available means; feasible), sure! We are 100% viable (aside from gimmick fights like RoS P2). In the vast majority of fights, Paladins can tank, as well as warriors. I suppose the problem I see is that I don't see a Paladin tank (read: Paladin with more than 20-21 points in Protection) as practical (mindful of the results, usefulness, advantages or disadvantages, etc., of action or procedure). Given the available encounter design, it seems like you would get much more bang for your buck by just having that Holy Paladin slap on ZA/Badge gear for gimmick fights and bringing another DPS (or feral dps/tank).

I suppose you could argue that it's only Min/Maxing guilds that make a big deal out of it, but realistically that happens all the time. If your main tank leaves, you're looking for another, and a warrior and paladin both apply with ~equal gear and application quality, who would your guild take? What if, in your raid, a warrior and equally geared paladin are available, and you're fighting Naj'entus / Supremus / Gorefiend / Mother / Rage / Anetheron / Kaz'rogal / Azgalor. Who tanks? Do you /roll, or do you let the better-suited player tank? Even if your guild doesn't min/max enough to sit you out, you're still getting min/max'd out of tanking.

I'm also going to disagree with Dorvan that Prot Pally offers any noteworthy advantage on Bloodboil (can bubble, but poor offtanking ability, a Druid would likely be more effective). The only advantage Paladins have on Supremus is easily worked around by following Supremus around as a tank. Mother silences, so I don't know why a Paladin tank would be good (dual wielder?), and I don't see any advantage for a Paladin tank on Council.

Another thing worth mentioning, though, is that the gear best suited to tank our niche encounters in Sunwell (Felmyst, M'uru) isn't T6. It's either block rating / block value (ZA/Badge) gear or SR. That's silly.
I rule.
moduspwnens
Moderator
 
Posts: 6211
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 12:28 pm
Location: Shattered Hand

Postby fuzzygeek » Sun Jun 29, 2008 10:34 am

I'd disagree with your practicality argument.

I think it's better to bring one prot paladin, one feral druid, and one prot warrior, instead of 2x ferals or whatever. Lately it hasn't been unusual for us to do MH and the first half of BT with just me and a feral druid. I don't think the warrior and druid could operate without me quite so efficiently or practically.

The warrior and I are fairly equally geared. But I tank almost everything, unless my not tanking frees me up to be more useful than him not tanking -- e.g., infernal adds (aneth), or when +1 healer makes a difference in a boss fight (naj) so we can run light on healers the rest of the raid for the sake of moar DPSes.

As for everything else, I generally tank because I'm a good tank and my raid trusts me to tank pretty much anything under the sun. It's not always just about class mechanics (with the notable exception of class-specific gimcrackery) it's a question of raid dynamics as well.
Image
User avatar
fuzzygeek
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 5130
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 1:58 pm

Postby cougarr » Sun Jun 29, 2008 10:46 am

I really believe, and have believed for a while, that the only way druids and pallies will ever feel happy with their role is if we feel useful in every fight. However, I stress that does not mean we need to be doing something every fight.

Right now it seems like blizz is going with making each tank a strong gimmick type tank with weaknesses or relative deficiencies when not in their element. The problem with this and its a problem people have seen in BT and sunwell is that gimmick tanks make for gimmick roles. When tankadins are not in their element they are usually healing or going ret for the encounter, so can they really be called tankadins then? Conversely, if a holy pally collects prot gear and just switches for the gimmick encounter are tankadins needed; do they even exist?

Gimmick encounters as a tanks defining attribute become very dangerous as you are constantly walking the line in either making each encounter essentially generic or alienating a tanking class if their gimmick is too sparse.

I still don't understand why blizz does not follow through with their original design philosophy for a hybrid. Slightly lesser than their "pure" counterpart but add to the raid with some kind of augmenting ability. Let us have our gimmicks but it would be nice to see it as an asset to have a tankadin in a raid when it is NOT their time to shine. I think this approach would alleviate a lot of the anxiety people feel from time to time as each class gets rebalanced. Druids are closer to this goal and lo and behold even after their Fotm time they are still much more populous.... coincidence?

Note: it would be nice if that augmenting ability required active utilization but as long as tankadins are in a raid and feeling like they are NEEDED or WANTED when not in their element as opposed to either not wanted or feeling an indifference to a tank type I think we have moved a giant step forward.
cougarr
 
Posts: 73
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2007 9:15 pm

Postby moduspwnens » Sun Jun 29, 2008 11:16 am

fuzzygeek wrote:I'd disagree with your practicality argument.

I think it's better to bring one prot paladin, one feral druid, and one prot warrior, instead of 2x ferals or whatever. Lately it hasn't been unusual for us to do MH and the first half of BT with just me and a feral druid. I don't think the warrior and druid could operate without me quite so efficiently or practically.


Well, yes, and I'm in a similar situation. I'm not saying it CAN'T be done. I'm saying that it's not practical. A Holy Paladin with 20-21 points in Prot would be absolutely capable of tanking all gimmick Paladin encounters, and for almost all the rest (exception: Illidan, Prince), a warrior or druid would be better suited. This, along with the fact that many of the top guilds don't take Prot Paladins to raids makes it not practical (mindful of the results, usefulness, advantages or disadvantages, etc.).

It doesn't mean it can't work for your guild or raid (which is, from what I can tell, what you were arguing against), it just seems like a not-so-efficient use of a raid spot, ultimately.
I rule.
moduspwnens
Moderator
 
Posts: 6211
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 12:28 pm
Location: Shattered Hand

Postby Fridmarr » Sun Jun 29, 2008 12:37 pm

Dorvan wrote:
Fridmarr wrote:In BT, we bascially use a prot pally for two boss encounters, phase 3 RoS and Akama. If we have our normal raid, which includes a prot warrior and two ferals, the prot pally will be healing on the 7 other bosses. That said, the biggest reason I don't get to do nearly as much tanking as I'd like, is because I can bring more to the raid as Ret, so that is my most common spec at the moment. So yeah, I think some improvement would not only be a nice thing, but is also needed.


From a min-maxxing perspective it's absolutely a mistake not to use a Prot Pally on Bloodboil if you have one available. There's also no min-max reason to use a druid over a pally on Supremus/Mother/Council/Illidan. When you're first hitting the content, Pally threat on Gorefiend should outdo warrior threat (with the tradeoff of a little worse mitigation), and after it's on farm the fight is completely tank-neutral.

To me, it sounds like you've got a combination of the fact that your guild is reluctant to use prot pallies in the first place and you've proven yourself quite able as a Ret Pally which makes for a good reason to have you switch roles rather than one of the other tanks.


It's not my guild, I'm one of the officers and anyone leading a raid knows and understands pallys pretty well. We actually have 3 prot pallys who come along fairly regularly. We just don't go out of our way to bring one with the exception of the fights I mentioned earlier.

For Supremus, it doesn't really matter. The druids will take slightly less damage, but we lose a little DPS having them in bear. There's no reason to do it that way, there's no reason to use a pally either. On mother, the extra damage reduction and the extra healing outweigh any reason to use a pally. On Council, Druids can interrupt the priest and pickup the rogue easier with moonfire/charge to deal with bop/bosw. For Gurtogg, in the context of our raids, it most certainly is not a mistake to have the pally healing. It's a very healing intensive fight and the extra healing is very helpful. The only reason for a tank death is when the fel rage target dies, and the extra healing helps prevent that. Also, the druids produce more threat when not getting hit here, increasing our phase 1 DPS quite a bit.

On teron, my experience doesn't match yours, and our warrior produces ample threat. Having the prot pally be a cleanser eases the healing burden quite a bit.

As long as blessings are covered, and with us they usually are, there's not much utility from a prot pally and with a ret pally in the raid there is almost none, plus the ret pally has some added benefits. There are good, well thought out reasons to not have a pally tanking in these fight, and they happen to match our typical raid makeup, so generally a prot pally will be healing.
Fridmarr
Global Mod
 
Posts: 9666
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 1:03 am

Postby Lieris » Sun Jun 29, 2008 1:22 pm

Quote from Bornakk:


The day one of the cutting edge guilds starts to use Paladins and Druids for MTs over a warrior on their PROGRESSION fights is the day you can say that warriors are not given bias in this game.



And if I say I know of guilds who use Druids as MTs, what then? They may not be "cutting edge", but do those guilds directly affect your play?


This bothers me a lot.

My guild still won't let me tank Brutallus because I don't have the armour of a druid or the emergency buttons of a warrior. To an extent they are right, I have to use two on use trinkets instead of a stamina one to live through stomps. Despite this I still have fewer abilities for Stomp than our warriors, I have A LOT less HP especially compared to our tauren MT, Ardent Defender is completely useless and I have a bit less avoidance. All I have going for me is paladin threat.

I am up against a generally negative perception of paladin tanks as being somehow less durable than the others. Most top guilds be it the ones chasing for world firsts or the well progressed guilds on each server use a holy paladin who has spent DKP on protection T6 to tank the add gimmick part of certain boss fights or in Hyjal.

This will persist until we get some dramatically good abilities (and itemisation!!) as opposed to being merely passable.

But apparently it's okay according to Bornakk because paladins are fine in content that has been cleared a year ago. :roll: If you are cutting edge paladin tank trying to clear Sunwell for server firsts in it's un-nerfed status where people do min-max you apparently don't count. Have fun tanking adds and the bosses when they're on farm.
Lieris
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 2181
Joined: Mon Jun 18, 2007 7:49 am

Postby Fridmarr » Sun Jun 29, 2008 1:27 pm

I found Bornakk's comments on that whole thread to be unfortunate to say the least. We are widely considered to be the best AoE tanks by a large margin, but squishy against big hitters. That's not really accurate, at least not to the degree of perception, sadly all the comments lately from blizz only seem to reinforce that stereotype. His comment about Brutallus earlier on that thread was especially bad.
Fridmarr
Global Mod
 
Posts: 9666
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 1:03 am

Postby Arcand » Sun Jun 29, 2008 9:08 pm

Bornakk wrote:And if I say I know of guilds who use Druids as MTs, what then? They may not be "cutting edge", but do those guilds directly affect your play?


Of course they do. They write the guides that the other 8,999,975 players read that say "We did it all with a warrior, never needed a tankadin or bear and why would you go with substandard mitigation anyway".

I hate the Blizzard reps sometimes. You cannot throw out the kind of vapid rebuttals they resort to if you have any respect for your audience.
Arcand
Moderator
 
Posts: 4525
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 11:15 am

Postby moduspwnens » Sun Jun 29, 2008 9:23 pm

Arcand wrote:I hate the Blizzard reps sometimes. You cannot throw out the kind of vapid rebuttals they resort to if you have any respect for your audience.


Well, he has a valid point, in that all tanks are 100% viable, and I'm sure plenty of guilds enjoy the game just as much as (or more than) the bleeding edge guilds in older content. It just would have been nice to be told before you roll your character (or in my case, before you start collecting prot gear) how the tanks are different and what difference it makes.
I rule.
moduspwnens
Moderator
 
Posts: 6211
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 12:28 pm
Location: Shattered Hand

Postby Fridmarr » Sun Jun 29, 2008 9:54 pm

moduspwnens wrote:
Arcand wrote:I hate the Blizzard reps sometimes. You cannot throw out the kind of vapid rebuttals they resort to if you have any respect for your audience.


Well, he has a valid point, in that all tanks are 100% viable, and I'm sure plenty of guilds enjoy the game just as much as (or more than) the bleeding edge guilds in older content. It just would have been nice to be told before you roll your character (or in my case, before you start collecting prot gear) how the tanks are different and what difference it makes.


My issue was with the comment he made (which you posted earlier) about Brutallus. He basically agreed with an ill-informed poster who basically said we are unable to tank Brutallus. To make it worse, Bornakk actually tried justifying that, by saying it's an unfair example because it's tough fight in a tough instance. That's horrible in many ways, and I'm still actually a bit surprised a blue would say something like that.

I think what Arcand was talking about, is the way Bornakk is acting like what bleeding edge guilds do, doesn't or shouldn't have any affect on what other guilds do. Wether it should or not, it's a bit naive to suggest it doesn't.
Fridmarr
Global Mod
 
Posts: 9666
Joined: Sun Apr 08, 2007 1:03 am

PreviousNext

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest


Remove Advertisements

Who is online

In total there is 1 user online :: 0 registered, 0 hidden and 1 guest (based on users active over the past 5 minutes)
Most users ever online was 380 on Tue Oct 14, 2008 6:28 pm

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest
?php } else { ?