GC gives in, we're on par!!! ^UPDATES^

All things related to the expansion

Moderators: Fridmarr, Worldie, Aergis

Postby Dragonzbane » Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:48 pm

Xequecal wrote:Muru favors Warriors because one of the humanoids is usually sheeped, which means no Consecration, which means you can't hold aggro. You honestly do not have time to reposition them. You also can't tank the giant void walkers because being able to spell reflect Void Blast is mandatory.


Only if you use that specific strategy.

There are other strats which ignore those issues.
Image
Dragonzbane
 
Posts: 1673
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2007 11:58 am
Location: In the Forums, stirring the pot.

Postby Snake-Aes » Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:56 pm

Dragonzbane wrote:
Xequecal wrote:Muru favors Warriors because one of the humanoids is usually sheeped, which means no Consecration, which means you can't hold aggro. You honestly do not have time to reposition them. You also can't tank the giant void walkers because being able to spell reflect Void Blast is mandatory.


Only if you use that specific strategy.

There are other strats which ignore those issues.
Yup! In my guild one of the sides has the hunter(!?) tanking the caster.


Don't ask >.> it works
Image
I am not allowed to seduce the abyssal's lunar mate.
User avatar
Snake-Aes
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 15542
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 3:15 am
Location: Thorns

Postby Ryu » Mon Oct 06, 2008 1:59 pm

Off-topic: I wouldn't say it favours a warrior on the sides or a bear, from personal experience it's quite easy for a paladin, gear for avoidance, and you survive the add's damage pretty easily plus you generate shitloads of threat still.
And if you can't handle a third add, let a hunter pet tank the caster add, like OP said.
Ryu
 
Posts: 177
Joined: Wed Apr 23, 2008 9:07 am

Postby Arcand » Mon Oct 06, 2008 2:25 pm

lusisia wrote:I was thinking the same thing. If we're in a situation where we can get BoSanc AND Kings then we have an additional 3% over the warrior. Of course if the warrior is in the same raid, he has the same opportunity which was the crux of the original confusion, I think.


If this actually happened, even once, it would be quite lovely to not be the tank having to explain 'my deficiencies are so slight that you'll barely notice, honest'.
Arcand
Moderator
 
Posts: 4525
Joined: Fri Mar 02, 2007 11:15 am

Postby knaughty » Mon Oct 06, 2008 5:58 pm

Snake-Aes wrote:
Dragonzbane wrote:
Xequecal wrote:Muru favors Warriors because one of the humanoids is usually sheeped, which means no Consecration, which means you can't hold aggro. You honestly do not have time to reposition them. You also can't tank the giant void walkers because being able to spell reflect Void Blast is mandatory.


Only if you use that specific strategy.

There are other strats which ignore those issues.
Yup! In my guild one of the sides has the hunter(!?) tanking the caster.

Don't ask >.> it works

• Hunters have highest TPS in-game, holding aggro is not an issue.
• Fury mages do mostly spell-damage - tanks mitigate bugger all of that anyway.
• Your rogues are probably stunlocking it
• Meanwhile, Mr Tank is generating as much threat as possible on the two humanoids, who are probably being cleaved by melee as they PWN the mage.

Many strats for humanoids involve just gibbing them ASAP while "highest threat DPS person" takes a nuke or two to the face, mostly mitigated by interrupts from melee. Hunters are very good at generating threat, which makes healing the "nuke or two to face" easier on the healers - 90% of the time, said nukes will hit Barnie McHunter.
This isn't the "Offtankadin" forum. My MoP FAQ: http://tinyurl.com/FAQ-5-0
- Knaughty.
User avatar
knaughty
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 10:06 pm
Location: Sydney, plotting my next diatribe against the forces of ignorance!

Postby knaughty » Mon Oct 06, 2008 6:08 pm

Arcand wrote:
lusisia wrote:I was thinking the same thing. If we're in a situation where we can get BoSanc AND Kings then we have an additional 3% over the warrior. Of course if the warrior is in the same raid, he has the same opportunity which was the crux of the original confusion, I think.


If this actually happened, even once, it would be quite lovely to not be the tank having to explain 'my deficiencies are so slight that you'll barely notice, honest'.


I don't think that's actually correct anymore - given the extra 3% pure mitigation we've got, even with both the warrior & paladin having kings/sanc, we're actually at "sometimes warrior takes less, sometime pall does".

We're about 1% behind, before AD. My mods tell me AD is worth about 1%. Thus: Even on overall mitigation, strongly in our favour if hits are small and AD veers towards OP.

Smooth damage where our "uncrushable" counts for a lot will put us ahead. Fights with 1 min "mini-enrage" will put the warrior ahead. Both by small enough amounts that no one will really care who's tanking.

It's worth noting that even spammed on CD, Shield Block is not better than Holy Shield against completely even damage for current T7.25 itemisation. If the boss just swings every 2 secs, we're ahead on damage blocked. Warriors scale better, but GC has already said if the scaling get out of hand, it'll be tuned (read warrior nerf or pally buff).

My main disappointment is how little difference there is between warriors and paladins now. There's nice flavour differences between DK/Bear/protection - they're all competitive, but there's actual differences. There's no real flavour difference between paladins/warriors anymore outside buffs/debuffs.
This isn't the "Offtankadin" forum. My MoP FAQ: http://tinyurl.com/FAQ-5-0
- Knaughty.
User avatar
knaughty
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 10:06 pm
Location: Sydney, plotting my next diatribe against the forces of ignorance!

Postby Snake-Aes » Mon Oct 06, 2008 7:32 pm

My first estimative when the first warrior build was up is kinda true now. Warriors are better for on-demand mitigation, and we overall.
Image
I am not allowed to seduce the abyssal's lunar mate.
User avatar
Snake-Aes
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 15542
Joined: Thu Nov 01, 2007 3:15 am
Location: Thorns

Postby Blutreich » Wed Oct 08, 2008 3:09 pm

ghostcrawler wrote:Okay, here is one change you don't have.
Shield of the Templar now also reduces all damage taken by 1/2/3%.

can anyone prove this, my testing says it is NYI and if that is indeed the case any idea when it is coming?
Image
Going to spend my cab money on more shots and just take the ambulance home
Image
Blutreich
 
Posts: 385
Joined: Thu May 17, 2007 11:51 am

Postby Macha » Wed Oct 08, 2008 3:32 pm

Blutreich wrote:
ghostcrawler wrote:Okay, here is one change you don't have.
Shield of the Templar now also reduces all damage taken by 1/2/3%.

can anyone prove this, my testing says it is NYI and if that is indeed the case any idea when it is coming?


Of course it cannot be proven, because it is not in yet - GC did not claim it was in the part of the beta we have access to.

Oh, by the way: This is not a gathering of prophets. So, well...obviously we don't know when stuff like this comes, either. ;)
Macha
 
Posts: 625
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2008 12:50 pm

Postby Percival » Wed Oct 08, 2008 5:52 pm

If the 2% mitigation difference thats being tossed about is so meaningless, than why not take the advantage away from the warriors and give it to the paladins.
User avatar
Percival
 
Posts: 11
Joined: Tue Mar 25, 2008 11:18 am

Postby knaughty » Wed Oct 08, 2008 6:08 pm

Percival wrote:If the 2% mitigation difference thats being tossed about is so meaningless, than why not take the advantage away from the warriors and give it to the paladins.

Because it doesn't exist.

Paladins and warriors have better mitigation under different circumstances.

• If there's lots of hits that aren't huge, paladins win.
• If damage is constant, with no "mini-enrage" phases, paladins win.
• If there are mini-enrage phases (Stomp, Corrosion, Illidan) warriors win.

• If there's both small hits and mini-enrage (Illidan) then who wins depends on a ton of stuff. A Moroe's lucky pocket watch makes a far bigger difference than what class is tanking. If one tank has, and other tank doesn't, tank with the watch is strictly better.

All the above assumes your warrior and paladin are in same gear, same skill.

And the warrior/paladin advantages/disadvantages are miniscule compared to druid/DK differences to the prot classes.

A DK tank would make Kael'Thas P4/5 trivial compared to a warrior/paladin/bear. A Bear tank is a huge advantage is there are raid-wide silences - their time-to-live is huge in comparison to us.

Short Version: Our passive mitigation is better in most circumstances. A warrior's "Oh Shit" buttons are better than ours. Which is better overall? Neither.
This isn't the "Offtankadin" forum. My MoP FAQ: http://tinyurl.com/FAQ-5-0
- Knaughty.
User avatar
knaughty
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 3558
Joined: Mon Dec 17, 2007 10:06 pm
Location: Sydney, plotting my next diatribe against the forces of ignorance!

Postby PsiVen » Wed Oct 08, 2008 6:28 pm

Dragonzbane wrote:
Xequecal wrote:Muru favors Warriors because one of the humanoids is usually sheeped, which means no Consecration, which means you can't hold aggro. You honestly do not have time to reposition them. You also can't tank the giant void walkers because being able to spell reflect Void Blast is mandatory.


Only if you use that specific strategy.

There are other strats which ignore those issues.


Specifically, the ones that use paladins don't use sheeps :P
Gladiator Psiven, Retired Tankadin
WoW-sober since March 2014
Longtime addict of Space - Glory Through Conquest
User avatar
PsiVen
Moderator
 
Posts: 4364
Joined: Fri Jun 01, 2007 5:28 pm
Location: On a Boat

Postby Jensaarai » Wed Oct 08, 2008 6:46 pm

PsiVen wrote:
Dragonzbane wrote:
Xequecal wrote:Muru favors Warriors because one of the humanoids is usually sheeped, which means no Consecration, which means you can't hold aggro. You honestly do not have time to reposition them. You also can't tank the giant void walkers because being able to spell reflect Void Blast is mandatory.


Only if you use that specific strategy.

There are other strats which ignore those issues.


Specifically, the ones that use paladins don't use sheeps :P


The guild I'm in alternates between myself and a feral druid, with a feral druid having done it before me, and they have hunters intimidate tank the adds and nuke it while I tank the berzerkers. Neither side sheeps.

:P
Jensaarai - 85 Prot Paladin (Lost Isles - US)
Endüre - 85 Prot Warrior (Lost Isles - US)
User avatar
Jensaarai
 
Posts: 760
Joined: Tue Mar 13, 2007 2:44 pm
Location: Yorba Linda, CA

Postby moduspwnens » Wed Oct 08, 2008 6:47 pm

It's true, people cite that 2%. It was a hypothetical 2%, but the language implied that it was the case that Paladins took more damage than Warriors. Then we got our 3% buff. Now we're OK.
I rule.
moduspwnens
Moderator
 
Posts: 6211
Joined: Tue Nov 06, 2007 12:28 pm
Location: Shattered Hand

Postby Bobness » Thu Oct 09, 2008 12:27 am

moduspwnens wrote:It's true, people cite that 2%. It was a hypothetical 2%, but the language implied that it was the case that Paladins took more damage than Warriors. Then we got our 3% buff. Now we're OK.


I'd hazard a guess that it wasn't hypothetical otherwise Ghostcrawler wouldn't have come out with the "Joker" card of an extra approximately 3%.

I'd say the miraculous existance of an extra 3% mitigation in a far away build was as a direct result of all the theorycrafting done here & elsewhere.

Which is Kudos to this site & all the hard work people put in getting the figures together.
Image
Bobness
 
Posts: 746
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 11:42 pm

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