Dev Watercooler - Threat

Anything, including off-topic posts

Moderators: Fridmarr, Worldie, Aergis, Sabindeus, PsiVen

Re: Dev Watercooler - Threat

Postby Klaudandus » Sun Aug 21, 2011 7:31 pm

Koatanga's wall of text


I agree with so many of your points.

I just hope, that when the dust settles and the model is proved wrong --if that's the case at least-- that Blizz will bite the bullet and revert all tanking changes.

I've said it before, it scares me that Blood DK is going to be the standard on which all other tanks are gonna be based on, and people that play Blood DK say that their tanking needs fixing to begin with!! Just like you said, I tried Blood DK as well and didn't find it fun at all.
The Element of Forum Hyperbole
Image
---
Flüttershy - Draenei Protection Paladin, Aerie Peak
Klaudandus - BE Protection Paladin, Feathermoon (Semi-retired)
User avatar
Klaudandus
 
Posts: 11146
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:08 am
Location: Texas' Armpit

Re: Dev Watercooler - Threat

Postby benebarba » Sun Aug 21, 2011 8:17 pm

Klaudandus wrote:
Koatanga's wall of text


I agree with so many of your points.

I just hope, that when the dust settles and the model is proved wrong --if that's the case at least-- that Blizz will bite the bullet and revert all tanking changes.

I've said it before, it scares me that Blood DK is going to be the standard on which all other tanks are gonna be based on, and people that play Blood DK say that their tanking needs fixing to begin with!! Just like you said, I tried Blood DK as well and didn't find it fun at all.


Yep - I'm there with ya (or at least if they don't revert they retool things entirely and perhaps address things in a more fine-grained manner). It'll be interesting to see what shakes out. I hope in 6 months to a year a paladin isn't just a blood DK with yellow effects and a shield.
benebarba
 
Posts: 2469
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 7:30 am

Re: Dev Watercooler - Threat

Postby halabar » Mon Aug 22, 2011 8:57 am

benebarba wrote: I hope in 6 months to a year a paladin isn't just a blood DK with yellow effects and a shield.


That does seem to be their design goal... /shudder
Amirya wrote:... because everyone needs a Catagonskin rug.

twinkfist wrote:i feel bad for the Mogu...having to deal with alcoholic bears.
User avatar
halabar
 
Posts: 9379
Joined: Fri Jun 08, 2007 8:21 am
Location: <in the guild that shall not be named>

Re: Dev Watercooler - Threat

Postby Flex » Mon Aug 22, 2011 9:22 am

Dantriges wrote:I dimly recall people saying when I started with T4 content that raid loot isn´t worth it in the beginning. They still raided but yeah they felt that one aspect of the game was lacking. I still remember people being outraged when the first token loot appeared, the "welfare epics".


Depends when you started Tier 4. Original Karazhan gear was simply worse than level 70 blues, both normal and heroic content. A patch or two later all T4 and T5 loot was redone to be better than what they were and it shifted the path end game path from: Normals>Kara>Heroics>25 mans to Normals>Heroics/Kara>25 mans.

halabar wrote:
benebarba wrote: I hope in 6 months to a year a paladin isn't just a blood DK with yellow effects and a shield.


That does seem to be their design goal... /shudder


The issue with Death Knights is that their mastery is not on the combat table like block is. To make paladins and warriors as "bad" as DKs they would either have to downplay block greatly or remove block from the standard combat table and be on a secondary roll system.
We live in a society where people born on third base constantly try to steal second, yet we expect people born with two strikes against them to hit a homerun on the first pitch.
User avatar
Flex
 
Posts: 7500
Joined: Tue Jul 10, 2007 7:29 am

Re: Dev Watercooler - Threat

Postby Dantriges » Mon Aug 22, 2011 10:36 am

Flex wrote:Depends when you started Tier 4. Original Karazhan gear was simply worse than level 70 blues, both normal and heroic content. A patch or two later all T4 and T5 loot was redone to be better than what they were and it shifted the path end game path from: Normals>Kara>Heroics>25 mans to Normals>Heroics/Kara>25 mans.


Ah yeah that was the issue. I entered play shortly before stuff was redone.

One issue they never fixed were the epic gems from heroics, but IIRC most were realy bad. I still remember def/mp5 gems and people saying "Oh look a gem for you".
Dantriges
 
Posts: 1252
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 12:39 am

Re: Dev Watercooler - Threat

Postby fuzzygeek » Mon Aug 22, 2011 10:53 am

Dantriges wrote:I still remember def/mp5 gems and people saying "Oh look a gem for you".


Hahaha. I remember that. I used to say, "thanks!" and vendor that shit.
Image
User avatar
fuzzygeek
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 5130
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 1:58 pm

Re: Dev Watercooler - Threat

Postby thegreatheed » Mon Aug 22, 2011 12:17 pm

yappo wrote:While planning my blog-post, an underlying reason for the hysterical threat buff struck me. It would indeed be tied to five man heroics.

Assume that the three new ones drop 372 gear rather than 391 (matching the trolls against the three old raids). It makes sense if they want to avoid content to go thermonuclear on non-raiding puggers in 360-something gear.

Now assume a decently competent tank in, say, 365 gear. How is that tank supposed to tank raiders partially geared in Deathwing 397 gear with lacking slots being ilevel 378. Even worse, later during that content patch you'll have a 25 average ilevel difference between pugging tanks and non-hardmode raiding dps.

The old threat system (even had it been correctly implemented) wouldn't be able to handle that kind of discrepancy. Indeed, a lot of the arguments in this very thread are based on the opinion that a correctly implemented treat system SHOULDN'T be able to handle it.

However, the three new five-mans are likely to be the only source of VP for a pugger, and an important source for a slowly progressing (normal mode) raider. That means we're bound to see LFD grouping together players with, quite frankly, hysterical differences in average ilevel gear.


So fix the threat game correctly, and tie the 300-500% threat boost into the Luck of the Draw buff.

Problem solved, raiders happy, puggers happy.
Image
thegreatheed
 
Posts: 886
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2007 12:02 pm

Re: Dev Watercooler - Threat

Postby Koatanga » Mon Aug 22, 2011 2:22 pm

Flex wrote:The issue with Death Knights is that their mastery is not on the combat table like block is. To make paladins and warriors as "bad" as DKs they would either have to downplay block greatly or remove block from the standard combat table and be on a secondary roll system.


Block could be moved to an active ability, rather than passive. Perhaps something using Holy Power, since SotR is no longer needed for threat. You block X% of incoming damage for 10/20/30 seconds depending on how many charges of HP you have.

One issue I have with Death Knights (not the only one) is that, apart from cooldowns, they have two ways of reducing damage taken, being their diseases and their blood shield, and there is no non-hasted rotation that allows them to do both optimally due to rune availability. For example, if you go on a training dummy, you cannot maintain diseases and stack up your blood shield endlessly. In real encounters, blood shield would be removed constantly - I understand that - but the concept still remains that if you apply diseases regularly you will lock yourself out of blood shield for a period of time until your runes are available, versus not applying diseases.

The equivalent for the paladin would be the having Judgements of the Just use Holy Power as well as whatever other acvtive mitigation we are given (let's say block) such that you had to choose between JotJ and block for a period of time because you would not have enough Holy Power to maintain both.

I suspect from the dev perspective, that is Working As Intended, because other classes can bring the boss debuffs that the diseases apply, and because in the absence of another class providing those, the tank actively chooses which form of mitigation he uses, which makes it "interesting". To me, that's just frustrating.
Retired. Koatanga, Shapely, Sultry, Doominatrix of Greenstone - Dath'Remar
Koatanga
 
Posts: 1995
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 12:46 pm

Re: Dev Watercooler - Threat

Postby Dantriges » Mon Aug 22, 2011 2:47 pm

So we start bugging the raidlead and the other classes that melees have to apply the debuffs.

Yeah fun. :roll:
Dantriges
 
Posts: 1252
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 12:39 am

Re: Dev Watercooler - Threat

Postby Klaudandus » Mon Aug 22, 2011 2:50 pm

Koatanga wrote:
Flex wrote:The issue with Death Knights is that their mastery is not on the combat table like block is. To make paladins and warriors as "bad" as DKs they would either have to downplay block greatly or remove block from the standard combat table and be on a secondary roll system.


Block could be moved to an active ability, rather than passive. Perhaps something using Holy Power, since SotR is no longer needed for threat. You block X% of incoming damage for 10/20/30 seconds depending on how many charges of HP you have.

One issue I have with Death Knights (not the only one) is that, apart from cooldowns, they have two ways of reducing damage taken, being their diseases and their blood shield, and there is no non-hasted rotation that allows them to do both optimally due to rune availability. For example, if you go on a training dummy, you cannot maintain diseases and stack up your blood shield endlessly. In real encounters, blood shield would be removed constantly - I understand that - but the concept still remains that if you apply diseases regularly you will lock yourself out of blood shield for a period of time until your runes are available, versus not applying diseases.

The equivalent for the paladin would be the having Judgements of the Just use Holy Power as well as whatever other acvtive mitigation we are given (let's say block) such that you had to choose between JotJ and block for a period of time because you would not have enough Holy Power to maintain both.

I suspect from the dev perspective, that is Working As Intended, because other classes can bring the boss debuffs that the diseases apply, and because in the absence of another class providing those, the tank actively chooses which form of mitigation he uses, which makes it "interesting". To me, that's just frustrating.



This is something from last year...
I got a question for you GC: Are you afraid the changes are gonna alienate new tanks, decreasing the total number of tanks overall? What about the changes in the population between all classes that tank?


This is a tricky one, and we are having similar conversations regarding healing. I feel that sometimes the question that is really getting asked is "Shouldn't tanking / healing be so easy that a chimp could do it?" The answer to that is no. We think we probably lost some tanks or healers because their roles weren't as engaging as they used to be. The opposite is extreme is "Should tanking or healing be so frustrating and thankless that nobody wants to do it?" The answer to that of course is no.

It's true that if tanking and healing have more going on, then we might lose some bad tanks and healers that were only capable of doing their job when things were super easy. I don't think we can be held hostage by those players though. We want tanking and healing to be fun for people who like to tank and heal -- not so easy that victory is assured for anyone.

I used simple comparisons like easy vs. hard above, but it's not quite that simple either. A better word is "engaging." When threat is trivial, then tanking becomes a lot more boring. When mana is irrelevant, then healing becomes a lot more boring. Driving a car, even in a race, isn't about just mashing down the accelerator as hard as you can. There are a lot of decisions to be made about various sorts of resources. Managing them well lets the good drivers maximize their overall speed.


The problem derides on whether what they consider engaging is actually engaging, or just like you said, and I think, is ends up being frustrating.

And I really hope they keep their word and revert changes if they dont work.
The Element of Forum Hyperbole
Image
---
Flüttershy - Draenei Protection Paladin, Aerie Peak
Klaudandus - BE Protection Paladin, Feathermoon (Semi-retired)
User avatar
Klaudandus
 
Posts: 11146
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:08 am
Location: Texas' Armpit

Re: Dev Watercooler - Threat

Postby Mukat » Mon Aug 22, 2011 4:27 pm

Koatanga wrote:wall of text

make a deep blood talent reduce cooldown of outbreak to 30 seconds, or make icy touch/plague strike refund runes or 50% chance each cast to make next death strike cost no runes, or something along those lines.
Mukat
 
Posts: 237
Joined: Tue Jul 13, 2010 11:30 pm

Re: Dev Watercooler - Threat

Postby Koatanga » Mon Aug 22, 2011 5:07 pm

I figured out what really bothers me about the threat change.

It is the personal connections between the roles. The healer and tank obviouasly relate to one another, so there is an automatic personal connection.

When threat was meaningful, there was a relationship between the tank and the DPS. The tank could ask a DPS to slow down, while mashing buttons harder in order to raise the threat cap and give the DPS more room to work. The DPS in turn had to respect the threat cap of the tank and work within the boundaries he set.

With threat being irrelevant, there is a disconnect between the tank and the DPS. The DPS might as well be hitting a target dummy because they can focus solely on their performance and ignore the existence of everyone else. The tank could be a player or an NPC and it would make absolutely no difference to the DPS.

It's like people are playing their own single-player game joined by a chat window instead of having the actions they perform impact the actions of others.

Active mitigation might be engaging, but it will again be about how you perform vs an NPC, not how you relate to others in the group, apart from the healer who you already interract with. The DPS may as well be NPCs for all they are relevant to you.

This is cool for the random pug scene because people for the most part don't want to know eachother. It's "Hi all" at the start and "ty" at the end, and that's it. Apart from that, it may as well be a single-player game. No threat cap means the elimination of the the drama of a DPS having to regulate himself or adjust to an under-geared tank.

That's great, but the result of that drama reduction is a reduction in human interraction, which is fundamentally what keeps people playing MMOs. For that reason alone, making threat irrelevant is a terrible move for the game as a whole. There was drama the other way, but at least there was interraction.
Retired. Koatanga, Shapely, Sultry, Doominatrix of Greenstone - Dath'Remar
Koatanga
 
Posts: 1995
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 12:46 pm

Re: Dev Watercooler - Threat

Postby masterpoobaa » Mon Aug 22, 2011 5:41 pm

While the active mitigation model may work with 'professionals' who raid, I just cannot see it working in RDF land.

Tanks are already thin on the ground as we have to:
A. Be expected to know All instances and Boss fights.
B. Be the de-facto dungeon guide.
C. Be able to position the boss.
D. Taunt the Adds
E. Avoid AOE
F. Interrupt Bad stuff - 95% of the time im top of interrupts by a loooong margin.
G. Pop cool downs for non-interruptible stuff.
H. Do acceptable TPS (easier now) on all targets at all times, even when the DPS attack everything but skull.
I. Protect the DPS from themselves - Random body pulls, hunters shooting new packs for fun etc.
J. Be gracious when a plate wearing DPS who consistently did less DPS than yourself rolls on tank gear.

Yeah, i can see active mitigation working ontop of all of that.
RDF was a good TECHNICAL solution to a problem, but poor implementation has killed the SOCIAL side and RESPONSIBILITY.
Ellifain @ Khaz'Goroth does not approve of torture, save where there's experience/rep/loot involved.
masterpoobaa
 
Posts: 2230
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 5:14 pm
Location: Brisbane, Australia, Earth, Sol, Orion Arm, Milky Way, Local Group, Virgo Supercluster, Universe.

Re: Dev Watercooler - Threat

Postby Klaudandus » Mon Aug 22, 2011 5:54 pm

masterpoobaa wrote:While the active mitigation model may work with 'professionals' who raid, I just cannot see it working in RDF land.

Tanks are already thin on the ground as we have to:
A. Be expected to know All instances and Boss fights.
B. Be the de-facto dungeon guide.
C. Be able to position the boss.
D. Taunt the Adds
E. Avoid AOE
F. Interrupt Bad stuff - 95% of the time im top of interrupts by a loooong margin.
G. Pop cool downs for non-interruptible stuff.
H. Do acceptable TPS (easier now) on all targets at all times, even when the DPS attack everything but skull.
I. Protect the DPS from themselves - Random body pulls, hunters shooting new packs for fun etc.
J. Be gracious when a plate wearing DPS who consistently did less DPS than yourself rolls on tank gear.

Yeah, i can see active mitigation working ontop of all of that.
RDF was a good TECHNICAL solution to a problem, but poor implementation has killed the SOCIAL side and RESPONSIBILITY.


I'd give you 10000g if I could if you were to post that on the official forums
The Element of Forum Hyperbole
Image
---
Flüttershy - Draenei Protection Paladin, Aerie Peak
Klaudandus - BE Protection Paladin, Feathermoon (Semi-retired)
User avatar
Klaudandus
 
Posts: 11146
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:08 am
Location: Texas' Armpit

Re: Dev Watercooler - Threat

Postby Koatanga » Mon Aug 22, 2011 6:34 pm

Sorry, I simply refuse to do J. Thankfully, my tanks are geared enough not to need drops from anything I can get to via the RDF, but assuming they implement a Random Raid Finder, I reserve the right to be butthurt when scrub-ass plate DPS roll need on dodge/parry gear.

I accept the A-I responsibilities, so I deserve to have first choice on tanking gear over someone who doesn't. Call me entitled if you will, but that's how I am.
Retired. Koatanga, Shapely, Sultry, Doominatrix of Greenstone - Dath'Remar
Koatanga
 
Posts: 1995
Joined: Mon Nov 17, 2008 12:46 pm

PreviousNext

Return to General

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: Google [Bot] and 1 guest

Who is online

In total there are 2 users online :: 1 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: Google [Bot] and 1 guest