Tanking goals post:

[Håvard]

Protection is pretty damn tough in PvP now, but that is beyond the roles of a tank in PvE content so let's stay on subject.

What role are you talking about in particular? I normally solo in BG's, so I just try to defend nodes by being generally hard to kill... especially since people never seem to play defense anyway. Is this the kind of thing you're referring to?

[Splug]

I'm going to MT Felmyst and the warrior is going to tank skellies. All just for "fun & challenge".

Ironically, we did that last week. Hrm... suppose I mostly just bounced around and yelled at people to move out of encapsulate, since I actually didn't do much different in p2 beyond hitting shockwave right before we had to run.

Anyway - I didn't notice your comment about not replying to every concern you'd listed. Right now I'm between conference calls, and my time to write the same replies I've already posted in similar threads is limited. It's an opinionative discussion, and ultimately there is no single correct answer.

-Splug

[Fridmarr]

I was refering to as a fallback for straight resists, not for mechanical failures. Race conditions on target switches should not be a balancing point for a spell - bugs should get fixed, not compensated for. That's just my take on the ideology of it; the fact that the implementation is poor is another issue entirely - I feel that needs to be addressed, but it should be addressed by fixing Righteous Defense, not by compensating for it with a second ability.

I can't see RD being fixed without basically starting over or adding a single target taunt component if the target is hostile type of solution.

Let's assume for a minute that it's even possible to fix the timing issue, there's still the problem with precision. There's still an issue with two pallys tanking pretty much anything. There's still a problem that if there's more than 3 mobs on a target, I can't be sure which mobs I'm going to get. I realize these cases aren't common, and the argument to it is that it's infrequent enough, or in situations like trash that don't matter. I'd counter that though, with the fact that the number of times that I've taunted with the intent of picking up more than one mob, is equally as infrequent and equally as insignificant.

[Splug]

Theoretically, if the case where it's advantaged is about as equally uncommon as the case where it's at a disadvantage, it's fair relative to a single target taunt. The lack of a fallback, or maybe the fact that hand of protection seems intended to be "the fallback," is still a problem.

I guess the best way to phrase it is that the concept of only having multi-target taunts is sound and can be balanced, but the current implementation is awkward. If the race condition issue on RD were resolved, that would fix a large portion of the problems with it. To an extent, the fallback taunt situation is alleviated by the glyph, and would be removed if not for the potential to fail due to targe swaps even at 100% accuracy. I'd rather see them fix things like that than resort to balancing around the bug.

-Splug

[Zironic]

Theoretically, if the case where it's advantaged is about as equally uncommon as the case where it's at a disadvantage, it's fair relative to a single target taunt. The lack of a fallback, or maybe the fact that hand of protection seems intended to be "the fallback," is still a problem.

I guess the best way to phrase it is that the concept of only having multi-target taunts is sound and can be balanced, but the current implementation is awkward. If the race condition issue on RD were resolved, that would fix a large portion of the problems with it. To an extent, the fallback taunt situation is alleviated by the glyph, and would be removed if not for the potential to fail due to targe swaps even at 100% accuracy. I'd rather see them fix things like that than resort to balancing around the bug.

-Splug

I'm quite certain they'll never fix the race condition, the programming to make that work reliably would be complex, laggy and probably hurt server performance.

The best solution is what people have kept suggesting:
Target enemy = taunt enemy
Target friend = current RD effect

[Ragingsoul]

just so people know, HoR IS usable while silenced.
I did they quel danas dailies in 25 min today, full prot gear.
I didn't have the problem I had while killing the mobs that mana drainand silence. I was oom at a moment, and back 1/2 mana 4 sec after with sanctuary.

saying warriors are superior with a single target taunt is a bit stupid. I think many people won't realize how the 3 mobs taunting ability is extremely useful, when a dps pulls another group for example. Sure, we all had the problems when a mobs goes loose and I taunt right after the warrior (in MH for example) and taking his target too. Biut the multi taunt ability saved my group a lot of times, and I wouldn't trade it for a single target one.

[Zironic]

I think many people won't realize how the 3 mobs taunting ability is extremely useful, when a dps pulls another group for example.

I've found that AS can do that just as well as the taunt does, even better since the new group tends to quickly aggro the healer from healing aggro.

[Ruex]

huh? What? sorry I can't hear you over all the fun I am having? You'll have to speak louder! There are all these mobs dieing all over me, and its a bit hard to hear your negativity.

[ARogers]

saying warriors are superior with a single target taunt is a bit stupid. I think many people won't realize how the 3 mobs taunting ability is extremely useful, when a dps pulls another group for example. Sure, we all had the problems when a mobs goes loose and I taunt right after the warrior (in MH for example) and taking his target too. Biut the multi taunt ability saved my group a lot of times, and I wouldn't trade it for a single target one.

Agree completely. We can't have our cake and eat it too. I even think they gave other classes (Including us) too much. I'd hate to see 25-mans roll with all pally or all warrior tanks. It's not hard to adapt to. If there are 2 mobs that need tanked away like the robots before curator, the pally should pull and warrior use his single-target taunt. Personally, I HATE the multi-target taunt.

[2ndNin]

saying warriors are superior with a single target taunt is a bit stupid. I think many people won't realize how the 3 mobs taunting ability is extremely useful, when a dps pulls another group for example. Sure, we all had the problems when a mobs goes loose and I taunt right after the warrior (in MH for example) and taking his target too. Biut the multi taunt ability saved my group a lot of times, and I wouldn't trade it for a single target one.

Agree completely. We can't have our cake and eat it too. I even think they gave other classes (Including us) too much. I'd hate to see 25-mans roll with all pally or all warrior tanks. It's not hard to adapt to. If there are 2 mobs that need tanked away like the robots before curator, the pally should pull and warrior use his single-target taunt. Personally, I HATE the multi-target taunt.

Its not really superior in the sense of being better so much as having the choice to do do the minimum you need to, the control factor. If a Warrior needs to get the attention of a whole pack s/he has the option to:

Challenging Shout - Short fixate
Thunderclap (consecration is less mobile)
Mocking Blow + taunt, Mocking blow as a taunt
damage abilities etc.

A Warrior has the option to pickup multiple targets as needed.

A paladin has:

Righteous Defense (gets 0-3)
Consecration (only if the targets move through it while ticking)
Hammer (hits 0-3)
Judgement (1)
Avenger's shield (0-3)
etc.

Looking at it, I would say we have potentially more pickup options for non-taunt scenarios, however our direct control with threat established is far worse. The level of control offered by a single target taunt is what we need, and it doesn't have to be on an 8s cooldown, a 30s one provided the miss rate was low (ie: could be reasonable reduced to 0%) would / could be functional in every case for a single target taunt I have seen so far, the other option is to have targets with taunt phases reset aggro instead such that the pickup is DTPS based, ie: 4 Horsemen, at the 3rd mark the Horsemen drop aggro completely, and your tanks need to restablish their threat.

[Obrimos]

saying warriors are superior with a single target taunt is a bit stupid. I think many people won't realize how the 3 mobs taunting ability is extremely useful, when a dps pulls another group for example. Sure, we all had the problems when a mobs goes loose and I taunt right after the warrior (in MH for example) and taking his target too. Biut the multi taunt ability saved my group a lot of times, and I wouldn't trade it for a single target one.

Agree completely. We can't have our cake and eat it too. I even think they gave other classes (Including us) too much. I'd hate to see 25-mans roll with all pally or all warrior tanks. It's not hard to adapt to. If there are 2 mobs that need tanked away like the robots before curator, the pally should pull and warrior use his single-target taunt. Personally, I HATE the multi-target taunt.

All tanks are supposed to be completely interchangable.

So it's irrelevant how you feel about all Pally teams or all Warrior teams. They should be just as viable as a completely mixed team. At all times.

It won't act the same, but it should be completely viable. If this requires that Paladins be given a single target taunt, than they should get it.

It comes back to the fantastical tanking kit that Blizzard is intending tanks have, that no one seems to be commenting on my curiousity about. We don't know what Blizzard acknowledges as part of the tanking kit. Ie, these things that all tanks require in order to be tanks.

There is a floor limit, and we have no idea what it is yet.