Remove Advertisements

Dev Watercooler - Threat

Anything, including off-topic posts

Moderators: Fridmarr, Worldie, Aergis, Sabindeus, PsiVen

Re: Dev Watercooler - Threat

Postby KysenMurrin » Tue Aug 16, 2011 12:46 pm

Thinking of how the game is now, and not how it was three years ago, will threat continuing not to matter, as it currently does not, negatively impact your enjoyment of the game?

In other words, if you're living with it now, why does this make things suddenly a problem? It won't affect the way you're currently playing.

They already made this change. They did it when the beta jumped modifiers from 2x threat (threat mattered) to 3x threat (threat mattered only if dps were on the wrong target).
I don't play WoW any more.
Donnan - Nangun - Kysen - Kysen - Mardun - Timkins

Mostly-Book Blog.
KysenMurrin
 
Posts: 6825
Joined: Thu Jun 26, 2008 6:37 am
Location: UK

Re: Dev Watercooler - Threat

Postby fuzzygeek » Tue Aug 16, 2011 12:50 pm

Depends on what else they do to tank mechanics. Making threat easier is only half of it. Making things "more dynamic" is the other half.

If I lose the ability to play the metagame -- leading raids to kill bosses dead -- because of various tomfuckery with tank mechanics, then I will probably finally hang up my spurs after six years. I personally do not find the "game" all that much fun. The metagame is far more enjoyable.
Image
User avatar
fuzzygeek
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 5130
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 1:58 pm

Re: Dev Watercooler - Threat

Postby Sabindeus » Tue Aug 16, 2011 12:52 pm

fuzzygeek wrote:Depends on what else they do to tank mechanics. Making threat easier is only half of it. Making things "more dynamic" is the other half.

If I lose the ability to play the metagame -- leading raids to kill bosses dead -- because of various tomfuckery with tank mechanics, then I will probably finally hang up my spurs after six years. I personally do not find the "game" all that much fun. The metagame is far more enjoyable.

Well, MAYBE Blizzard wants the game to be enjoyable! /gasp

And just to be contrary, I personally enjoyed the GAME more than the metagame, which is why I always tried to pass raid leadership duties off and eventually stopped raiding multiple times due to the difficulty of running a raiding guild.
Image
Turn In, an NPC interaction automator - http://wow.curse.com/downloads/wow-addo ... rn-in.aspx
User avatar
Sabindeus
Moderator
 
Posts: 10472
Joined: Mon May 14, 2007 9:24 am

Re: Dev Watercooler - Threat

Postby Paradine » Tue Aug 16, 2011 1:03 pm

Hi, I'm new to the Maintankadin forums. I just had a few ideas about the upcoming changes to threat that I would like to throw in here. What if we thought about these changes in this way (All speculation on my part):

Blizzard wants us to worry less about threat and more about survivability. They are planning to create a system in which your rotation can be tweaked to either increase threat or increase survivability. Mostly survivability. And this system may require hit and/or expertise in order to maximize survivability.

This leads to less time spent on using abilities to generate threat/dps and more time spent increasing survivability. Overall threat/dps will drop and overall survivability will either stay the same or increase depending on how they implement this system.

If they allow our threat/dps to drop, it would be akin to making threat matter again, which they don't want. So in order to remedy this, they need to buff our threat and dps. Probably to the levels they are at today. The buff to dps will probably go along with making hit and expertise more attractive and the buff to threat is what will be happening sometime soon. It just so happens that it is easier to make the changes to threat first, which causes confusion within the tanking community because they are only looking at the short term effects of such a change.

If this is their ultimate goal, I'm happy with it. We spend less time pushing buttons for threat and more time pushing buttons for survivability.
Last edited by Paradine on Tue Aug 16, 2011 1:05 pm, edited 1 time in total.
User avatar
Paradine
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Tue Aug 16, 2011 12:43 pm

Re: Dev Watercooler - Threat

Postby Raeli » Tue Aug 16, 2011 1:04 pm

I like that Vengeance will ramp up quicker, that's nice, though they could have made the overall vengeance cap lower. I like the idea of having to maintain all my threat while managing defenses. We just did Majordomo and at times, when I would get a few misses, threat would be very hard at the start, but it's the first timer in Cataclysm we've had to use Hand of Salvation in raids at all. Buffing it by another 200% and then also fixing Vengeance seems a little too much.

I do ultimately like the idea of having to cap Hit and Expertise though - if it's something that is worth doing to increase our survivability, it won't make me feel bad. As it is, I don't like the situation of having to go against threat stats, and having those annoying miss streaks - ultimately it doesn't make a shred of difference to threat (I wish it would), outside of the first 30 Seconds (which it seems that window will get much smaller too), but still, it's not fun to be missing my attacks. Somehow making us want to cap Expertise and Hit, to me, would be a good thing - I would like to see threat mattering more than it does right now. If it's a problem for Random Dungeons, then, as Worldie said, why not just add an additional bonus for Tanks to the Luck of the Draw buff to increase their threat.

Personally, although I hated the RNG where I would get lots of misses, I did love the first part of Majordomo, it was some really intense tanking, extremely fun, I wish it were always like that - just enough to get by. Tanking these days feels more like a leisurely stroll in the park, you barely have to pay attention, and most of the tasks required of us in Firelands are relatively simple (Though I can't speak of anything about Heroic Ragnaros).

So yeah, I'm not so fond of making threat pointless. Even if they manage to make us have a set of abilities we push instead for survivability, I still would like threat to matter, but we'll see how things go I guess.
Raeli
 
Posts: 124
Joined: Wed Oct 31, 2007 10:23 pm

Re: Dev Watercooler - Threat

Postby benebarba » Tue Aug 16, 2011 1:10 pm

Sabindeus wrote:hmmm... forgive the pedantry but this is what I'm hearing so far:

In This Thread
I don't like resource management!
I don't like when Blizzard changes the focus of my role!
I don't like the concept of gearing for survivability!
I don't like change! Make the game how it was before!


I think you can summarize a good deal of it concisely by saying 'These changes stink!' and allow 'stink' to be a variable quantity, but usually of positive value. :P

this is even more true on wowinsider or the official forums.
benebarba
 
Posts: 2469
Joined: Tue Oct 19, 2010 7:30 am

Re: Dev Watercooler - Threat

Postby Meloree » Tue Aug 16, 2011 1:20 pm

Sabindeus wrote:No, but here's the way I approach large game system changes:

1. Ignore everything about how the game worked previously.
2. Take all the changes described.
3. Backfill anything not covered by said changes.
4. Does this sound like a fun game?


K. We're getting a hotfix that basically removes threat as a component of the game. With a 70% threat buff and Vengeance it will literally be possible to autoattack and hold threat from some of the best DPS in the game. In a future patch, we'll get some active mitigation. I like that part. I'm not sure I love the in-between.

There is no longer any co-operative element binding DPS and Tanks together in a raid. Post 4.3 with tank active mitigation there will STILL be no co-operative elements between the tanks and DPS.

This does not sound like a fun game. It sounds like the raiding game got significantly worse today.

I'm not sure how that phrasing is materially different than what I said earlier, but hopefully it fits with your formatting requests now.
Meloree
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 1420
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2008 10:15 am

Re: Dev Watercooler - Threat

Postby econ21 » Tue Aug 16, 2011 1:25 pm

kaanman36 wrote:I've really got no problem with this change, and let me explain why. . .

Active defensive abilities? I remember BC. Keep Holy Shield up or be one shot (and subsequently replaced by a warrior). End of story.


I like the present active holy shield mechanic, I like our impressive array of CDs and I welcome the prospect of a more active defensive play style, and of hit/expertise mattering, but I am not a fan of such unforgiving shot mechanics as the above. Maybe heroic raiders can enjoy it, but I don't think it is fun for the whole raid to wipe if one player makes one forgivable error. [I still remember the sweat dripping from my brow the first time I faced Magtheridon and my horror when, after I died, I wondered if I had forgotten to press Holy Shield.] One thing I thought Cataclysm had done well with threat was by boosting the stamina of dps, preventing loss of threat leading to your dps being one-shotted.

I am not sure why threat is not fun. At least in 5 man PUGs, that's much - most - of what I do: keep the threat on me. Hitting the mobs to keep them on me is about as much fun as hitting the mobs to top the dps chart, I'd wager. It's quite active and - at least on my warrior - reactive. It's more fun than looking to make sure you are not standing in the fire or doing whatever silly dance is required for a raid boss fight.
econ21
 
Posts: 1378
Joined: Tue Apr 01, 2008 8:53 am

Re: Dev Watercooler - Threat

Postby thegreatheed » Tue Aug 16, 2011 1:26 pm

fuzzygeek wrote:Depends on what else they do to tank mechanics. Making threat easier is only half of it. Making things "more dynamic" is the other half.

If I lose the ability to play the metagame -- leading raids to kill bosses dead -- because of various tomfuckery with tank mechanics, then I will probably finally hang up my spurs after six years. I personally do not find the "game" all that much fun. The metagame is far more enjoyable.


Right, so far, these changes won't make anything more dynamic. These changes make tanking less dynamic, less engaging, and thus, less fun. I'm sorry, but does anyone really expect the play difficulty of our classes to rise? Blizzard approached the subject of the RDF in the changes, and we all know that's where the changes stem from. But making any class less demanding, less interactive, and less engaging won't lead to an increase of tanks for the RDF or an increase in the quality of tanks in the RDF. If any class actually gets a mechanic change that makes survival demanding, interactive or engaging, the flood of QQ will vastly overshadow my QQ.

Yes, there will be more changes coming, but the hotfix will do what I described above. Less demanding = fail.




My only saving grace is that "a friend" is in the SW:TOR beta.... so I'm not bored.
Image
thegreatheed
 
Posts: 886
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2007 12:02 pm

Re: Dev Watercooler - Threat

Postby tlitp » Tue Aug 16, 2011 1:35 pm

  • Encountering the term "fun" fifteen fucking times in this God-forsaken post made me facepalm twice. Literally.
  • "We want threat stats to be interesting, but the reality is that they aren’t. Any decent tank will usually choose survivability stats over threat stats" is a job half-done. Conveniently, there's no mention of encounter design. Uh-uh, the survivability checks are overflowing... why do those clueless tanks choose to ignore damage-oriented stats like there's no tomorrow ?
User avatar
tlitp
 
Posts: 556
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 3:25 pm

Re: Dev Watercooler - Threat

Postby fuzzygeek » Tue Aug 16, 2011 1:37 pm

Sabindeus wrote:Well, MAYBE Blizzard wants the game to be enjoyable! /gasp

And just to be contrary, I personally enjoyed the GAME more than the metagame, which is why I always tried to pass raid leadership duties off and eventually stopped raiding multiple times due to the difficulty of running a raiding guild.


Sabin being contrary? No! /gasp

Mel touched on it better: completely removing an aspect that barely matters now: sure, fine. Future plans to change things: ok, great. In between: Hmm.

My post was directly in answer to Kysen's question, and not an analysis of how halfassed hotfixes and implementing incomplete changes were going to affect the game as a whole and tanking in particular, or whether or not Blizzard (gasp) wants the game to be "enjoyable" for some values of "fun" for certain segments of their audience.

We don't know how they're going to make tanking more "fun" or "engaging" or "attractive." We don't know what they think the core issues are that they are trying to address. How are they going to balance and design four classes around being able to perform in a group/teamwork setting, and still function in the random FFA that is the RFD? How can you design a class so a new tank in 350 ilevel can do his job against 390 ilvl dps, such that the tank doesn't give up tanking because he thinks he is horrible, and DPS isn't stuck in 45 minute queues all the time? They don't want DPS to feel throttled by the tank -- but if they are designing for RFD to be viable (without also forcing DPS to "eat their carrots" -- e.g., don't be fucking stupid -- e.g., "feeling throttled"), then in raiding guilds it will be a complete joke.

It's the same problem they have for designing raids for such a large audience -- if they make content accessible to the social guilds, the Methods and Paragons are going to steamroll that shit.

If they make tanking more "accessible" and "attractive," I suspect the same thing will happen.

It would be nice if mechanics could be simple and deep. A cursory understanding will get you by. A deep understanding will set you apart. Perhaps more active tank abilities will bring that out. I don't know: we have no information about what the second part of The Plan is.

Is there anything to complain about now? No, not really, other than "why are they addressing this horrible problem with a horrible solution that doesn't even address the root problem." And even that might not be entirely fair, if the second half of their plans somehow wraps into this and gives us all unicorns and rainbows. I think a certain amount of skepticism is justified, but we'll see how it goes.
Last edited by fuzzygeek on Tue Aug 16, 2011 1:39 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
User avatar
fuzzygeek
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 5130
Joined: Wed Aug 01, 2007 1:58 pm

Re: Dev Watercooler - Threat

Postby Flex » Tue Aug 16, 2011 1:39 pm

tlitp wrote: Conveniently, there's no mention of encounter design.


Totally is.
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 kaanman36 » Tue Aug 16, 2011 1:41 pm

econ21 wrote:
kaanman36 wrote:I've really got no problem with this change, and let me explain why. . .

Active defensive abilities? I remember BC. Keep Holy Shield up or be one shot (and subsequently replaced by a warrior). End of story.


I like the present active holy shield mechanic, I like our impressive array of CDs and I welcome the prospect of a more active defensive play style, and of hit/expertise mattering, but I am not a fan of such unforgiving shot mechanics as the above. Maybe heroic raiders can enjoy it, but I don't think it is fun for the whole raid to wipe if one player makes one forgivable error. [I still remember the sweat dripping from my brow the first time I faced Magtheridon and my horror when, after I died, I wondered if I had forgotten to press Holy Shield.] One thing I thought Cataclysm had done well with threat was by boosting the stamina of dps, preventing loss of threat leading to your dps being one-shotted.


I wasn't proposing a return the the "use x ability at y time or die" mechanic. I was simply giving an example of how I enjoyed a more active playstyle and having my personal performance (not just my internet search skills) tied to my ability to survive.
Staring at boss crotch since 2005.
Gathorc - 85 Paladin
Eitrigg US

Read my blog http://bigshinyshield.blogspot.com...or don't.
User avatar
kaanman36
 
Posts: 68
Joined: Mon Jun 30, 2008 1:19 pm
Location: Aubrey, TX

Re: Dev Watercooler - Threat

Postby Amirya » Tue Aug 16, 2011 1:47 pm

econ21 wrote:One thing I thought Cataclysm had done well with threat was by boosting the stamina of dps, preventing loss of threat leading to your dps being one-shotted.

On the other hand, I really didn't like this change. If dps are dumb enough to pull threat in the first 30 seconds because they're having a penis measuring contest with each other, I would prefer that they be one-shotted.

"Why yes, your penis is longer than his because you hit 30k dps in the first 10 seconds. But guess what? That raid boss has a dick bigger than your ego."

Reserving judgement on the rest of it, but for me, having more buttons to push for the sake of pushing isn't fun.
Fetzie wrote:The Defias Brotherhood is back, and this time they are acting as racketeers in Goldshire. Anybody wishing to dance for money must now pay them protection money or be charged triple the normal amount when repairing.
Amirya
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 3935
Joined: Tue Dec 18, 2007 2:59 am

Re: Dev Watercooler - Threat

Postby Flex » Tue Aug 16, 2011 1:48 pm

Meloree wrote:Every threat problem in WotLK came down to "run your rotation better". It was largely outside of the ability of any given DPS to pull agro if the tank executed correctly. The point remains, you needed to actually run your rotation.


But it has never been something geared for, outside of certain encounters. If I hear the phrase "threat matters" to me it implies gearing for it in some manner, not just doing your rotation correctly. I don't think I've had a "threat matters" fight where the threat that mattered was boss threat in all the time I've been tanking.
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

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