Mitigation Comparisons – 4 tanks

All things related to the expansion

Moderators: Fridmarr, Worldie, Aergis

Postby Ubung » Fri Oct 03, 2008 2:42 am

Yeah, that is why I was baffled that everyone was seeing the graphs and thinking "oh, we're close after all, it's fine".


Dont know if you know but originally the graphs had missed out on a couple of essential factors (shield block, ranged slot) and this meant the warrior and paladin figures were much closer due to this. The orginal graph reflected this and the first couple of pages were replies to this orginal graph.

Thats where the "oh, we're close after all, it's fine" posts came from.

Being negative and reflecting the truth are two things.

As I have said before, 'if the graphs say truth', then I think I have the right to say that my toon is inferior, something should be done.


You have every right to say your toon is inferior because it basically is. Its just that this thread is trying to show mathematical deficiencies rather than opinion. Feel free to post elsewhere we just dont wanna dilute the thread unless its about calculations. ;)
nerf scissors, buff paper, rock is fine!

Image
User avatar
Ubung
 
Posts: 265
Joined: Wed Jul 04, 2007 5:45 am
Location: Sheffield, UK

Postby Sheherezade » Fri Oct 03, 2008 3:36 am

Waiting with anticipation for the DK stuff to get added here! I always loved MTadin's theorycrafting capabilities...
Brainssss... ( <3 Murata Renge!)
Image
User avatar
Sheherezade
 
Posts: 319
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 11:49 pm

Postby Dendrah » Fri Oct 03, 2008 4:27 am

Bobness wrote:Ok i'll rephrase

I'd like to know if there are any non trivial (i.e. not trash ) situations in which we are advantaged.


Damned you can QQ....

As has been stated above we should bring better threat generating then the warrior. What would account for shorter fights in which DPS can do their thing better and healers not getting themselves stretched to much to keep that mana flowing.

Agreed that on the other side the healers will have to work a bit harder and as such spend their mana a bit faster.

More threat = more DPS = shorter fights = bit more stress on the healers over shorter period of time = more time for progressions.

As soon as your healers can handle it and you are equally geared as your warrior buddy you will be the tank of choice.

Ooh and... It is the player handeling the buttons who can make up for far more then the little bit in passive mitigation we are behind. Not only by the skill he puts in his buttons but also the skill he puts in this group.

The warrior I run ZA with is better equipped then me and takes less dmg meaning I run the show and he follows my lead. He tanks what we agree he tanks and I take the rest. He's a very good player but just prfers me to talk on Vent and give the orders. That alone will make me the maintank for my guild in WotLK.
Image
Dendrah
 
Posts: 398
Joined: Wed Jun 25, 2008 11:07 pm

Postby ziggyunderslashone » Fri Oct 03, 2008 4:43 am

Mica wrote:I'd really like to see a graph with paladins at 8% and 10% for righteous fury.

Image
Image

Note: Not done the gear retabulation yet, but it should be roughly consistent.

So yes, a change to RF could bring us up to around warrior levels, with a little juggling (9% is closest, averaging 1% ahead on the scale of raw and pretty much bang on avoiding) it would fit the bill.

Two points however, make me think it's not the change needed.

Firstly, it ignores AD. As I said before, I like it. This, and indeed main tanking are not its situation, but it's too powerful in say, aoe tanking to not have some drawback (About to do a clumsy assed model for future reference)

Secondly, I don't want to be worse, better or even the same as warriors. I want to be different. A flat damage mod is a rather inelegant solution. While thematically it might fit for us to have critical block, I'd rather not due to the difference thing, but something like it. Scaling and unique. Dare I say "11 point talent." That's what I feel we need.
User avatar
ziggyunderslashone
 
Posts: 260
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2008 2:33 am

Postby Bobness » Fri Oct 03, 2008 4:48 am

Dendrah wrote:Damned you can QQ....


Trust me wasn't a QQ more a request to know if any empirical data currently supported encounters where mechanics gave us an advatage.

I'm know that player skill has a bearing on proceeding's, that's not in question tbh :-)
Image
Bobness
 
Posts: 746
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 11:42 pm

Postby Racolus » Fri Oct 03, 2008 4:55 am

Secondly, I don't want to be worse, better or even the same as warriors. I want to be different. A flat damage mod is a rather inelegant solution. While thematically it might fit for us to have critical block, I'd rather not due to the difference thing, but something like it. Scaling and unique. Dare I say "11 point talent." That's what I feel we need


QFFT

To sum up, we can simply ask the devs, or GC: What is a pally's edge on tanking?Avoidance?Health?mitigation?Panic Button?Blocking? or something we don't aware of?

If the answer is sthg like 'it depends on the player's skill' or stuff, that's pretty much said NOTHING.

It is disheartening to see GC said Blocking MAY have a problem but it can be fixed LATER.

We only need an edge, or a field in the tanking stat, which we can proud of, why it can't be done?
Racolus
 
Posts: 91
Joined: Sat May 31, 2008 5:09 pm

Postby Holyfuri » Fri Oct 03, 2008 5:27 am

Has anyone posted this in the beta forums yet? I know there is a discussion going on about blizzard's testing which GC has responded to, it might be interesting to hear her response (if there is one) to this data. I think, even though only one testing measure, it says alot.

Time to see a change to this is running very, very short as of late.
Image
Image
User avatar
Holyfuri
 
Posts: 280
Joined: Tue Nov 27, 2007 8:07 am

Postby Macha » Fri Oct 03, 2008 6:08 am

Ubung wrote:Thats where the "oh, we're close after all, it's fine" posts came from.


They happened a lot after the corrected graphs, too. That baffled me.

As has been stated above we should bring better threat generating then the warrior. What would account for shorter fights in which DPS can do their thing better and healers not getting themselves stretched to much to keep that mana flowing.


Did you actually play the beta? Threat does not matter. This is a design choice: Tanks do far too much threat now.
Also, Paladins do not do more threat. This is a myth. We used to, now warriors are ahead. You're behind by a few patches.

I'd like to know if there are any non trivial (i.e. not trash ) situations in which we are advantaged.


No such situation exists at the moment. We are disadvantaged in every situation except trash hitting for lower than 2500 or so.
Macha
 
Posts: 625
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2008 12:50 pm

Postby Zironic » Fri Oct 03, 2008 6:16 am

Firstly, it ignores AD. As I said before, I like it. This, and indeed main tanking are not its situation, but it's too powerful in say, aoe tanking to not have some drawback (About to do a clumsy assed model for future reference)


I don't have mathlab yet installed on this computer so I can't model it yet but here is a really simplistic manual simulation:

Hit for 10% of total hp, without AD you're dead in 10 hits, with AD you're dead in 12 = 20% more EH.

Hit for 20% of total hp, without AD you're dead in 5 hits, with AD you're dead in 6, = 20% more EH.

Hit for 30% of total hp, without AD you're dead in 4 hits, with AD you're dead in 4 hits, AD gives no benefit(leapfrogged)

Hit for 35% of total hp, without AD you're dead in 3 hits, with AD you're dead in 4, = 25% more EH(This is kinda cheating since it hits 30% exactly).

Anyhow, in general AD should raise your ETA until death by 20% unless it gets leapfrogged and thus you should prefer a fast hitting boss over a slow hitting one. I could write an advanced simulator for it at some point if there is interest.
Zironic
 
Posts: 2133
Joined: Fri Oct 03, 2008 6:07 am

Postby ziggyunderslashone » Fri Oct 03, 2008 6:23 am

Holyfuri wrote:Has anyone posted this in the beta forums yet? I know there is a discussion going on about blizzard's testing which GC has responded to, it might be interesting to hear her response (if there is one) to this data. I think, even though only one testing measure, it says alot.

Time to see a change to this is running very, very short as of late.

I've asked for drood and DK base stats over on the beta forums.

I'll give them a day or two to respond, as I feel focusing purely on our difference to warriors is a mistake. Warriors will be the baseline for most comparisons, simply as we're all of that mindset after 3 years of warrior MTs, but we ideally want to be different but equal as opposed to simply equal, so presentation of pre-existing ideal cases (DKs) will strenghten the case.

I can't make that case without the bases, but if I can't find it soon, I'll post what we have.

In the meantime, other than a clearer gear listing (I might not get time this afternoon), is there anything else we feel the data needs?
User avatar
ziggyunderslashone
 
Posts: 260
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2008 2:33 am

Postby ziggyunderslashone » Fri Oct 03, 2008 6:29 am

Zironic wrote:I don't have mathlab yet installed on this computer so I can't model it yet but here is a really simplistic manual simulation:

Hit for 10% of total hp, without AD you're dead in 10 hits, with AD you're dead in 12 = 20% more EH.

Hit for 20% of total hp, without AD you're dead in 5 hits, with AD you're dead in 6, = 20% more EH.

Hit for 30% of total hp, without AD you're dead in 4 hits, with AD you're dead in 4 hits, AD gives no benefit(leapfrogged)

Hit for 35% of total hp, without AD you're dead in 3 hits, with AD you're dead in 4, = 25% more EH(This is kinda cheating since it hits 30% exactly).

Anyhow, in general AD should raise your ETA until death by 20% unless it gets leapfrogged and thus you should prefer a fast hitting boss over a slow hitting one. I could write an advanced simulator for it at some point if there is interest.

I could build a simple simulation (and you're right there, it needs to be simulated rather than modelled) based on a "exact hits till death, no healing" scenario (which would illustrate some issues, such as hits till death going down at certain points as gear goes up), but its main issue is the sheer amount of information you'd need to be accurate in an over-time sim. Not just the amount of healing available, but the exact timing and size of those heals, to discover how many, how often, and how large an effect AD would have over time.

That said, I'd be hugely interested to see any simulations going, as my theorycraft doesn't currently extend beyond excel.
User avatar
ziggyunderslashone
 
Posts: 260
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2008 2:33 am

Postby unboundarea52 » Fri Oct 03, 2008 6:39 am

Ok. I'm not sure I follow everythign that's being tabulated, but I do understand that pally's ARE behind a touch when it comes to survival through mitigation. My question, while not in line with this thread, does sort of belong here.

I' not sure what cooldowns were using in these tabulations (if any) but isn't it worht mentioning that Pally's will be getting a 5 min cooldown on Divine Protection, absrobing 50% damage? Also worth mentioning that we will have a 20 min cooldown on LoH, which means we SHOULD be able to use it each and every boss fight. I know it's not an answer to mitigation, but last I checked warriors shield wall is useable once per fight, where a Pally's should, depending on fight length be useable 2x. While LoH may not be a mitigation cooldown, it has the potential to heal in excess of 25k in one shot, outside of what the healers are doing. Seems to me this is a HUGE boon. Even in live it has saved wipes more than enough times for me to ignore it as an "impact" ability.

I'm certainly not arguing to drop the "Bring us up to snuff" chant. We should be up to snuff, but is snuff derived from JUST mitigation abilities, or is it derived from a combination of all factors in the fight? I don't know.

At any rate, this is a great thread, while a work in progress, it's beginning to show where exactly our deficencies lie when it comes to mitigation.
Unbound - Area 52
Prot Pally
unboundarea52
 
Posts: 64
Joined: Tue Sep 23, 2008 6:35 am

Postby Snake-Aes » Fri Oct 03, 2008 6:44 am

Shield wall's CD is very short, 5 or 6 minutes if I recall correctly. Last Stand has the edge of preemptiveness, and the shortcoming that it doesn't give you time if the heal is not there. But it buys you that extra second, that's basically why it's good.
LoH compares to LS whenever you can react in time, otherwise it doesn't.
Image
I am not allowed to seduce the abyssal's lunar mate.
User avatar
Snake-Aes
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 15539
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 3:15 am
Location: Thorns

Postby ziggyunderslashone » Fri Oct 03, 2008 6:51 am

Its mainly usage.

As we're presenting a straight up tank'n'spank without extra damage, there's really no reason not to start with shield wall etc up and use it again whenever it pops, but thats not how they're generally used.

You save big cooldowns for transitions, or end of the fight confidence or similar.

Shield Block, unless theres something encounter specific (illidan enrage style), people will hit it as much as possible, keeping it running 25% of the time. Similarly, and probably due to its seat of the pants nature, Death Knights are going to hammer cooldowns as much as they can. Barkskin has been raised, and I suspect this is treated more like wall, but largely due to the rather obsurd current power of bear tanking. With little downside, I see no reason to not treat it as a 12/60*0.8 damage reduction.
User avatar
ziggyunderslashone
 
Posts: 260
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2008 2:33 am

Postby ziggyunderslashone » Fri Oct 03, 2008 7:07 am

snowwight wrote:Naked dwarf warrior:
9561 hp
176 str
109 agi
162 sta
35 int
58 spirit

Naked human paladin:
8154 hp
151 str
90 agi
143 sta
98 int
108 spirit

Orc Death Knight
Strenght: 178
Agility: 109
Stamina: 162
Intellect: 32
Spirit: 62
Base HP: 9591

I just recieved this from the beta forum, I was under the impression dks would have lower base health than warriors. Most curious.
User avatar
ziggyunderslashone
 
Posts: 260
Joined: Thu Oct 02, 2008 2:33 am

PreviousNext

Return to WotLK

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

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