Remove Advertisements

GC damage control post #2

All things related to the expansion

Moderators: Fridmarr, Worldie, Aergis

Postby Macha » Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:37 am

Knaughty wrote:
Levantine wrote:
baghead wrote:
Levantine wrote:I fixed it for you.

Even one prot pally is a liability on this fight. So it's not quite 'fixed'.


How do you come to that conclusion?

Ooooh! Oooh! I know!

Baghead is a whiney QQer?!
[/size][/color]


Seems Knaughty is out of actual arguments as usual, and only able to flame when someone attacks his precious Blizzard Devs. Stop being an child butthurt that someone disagrees with you and learn to argue without ad hominem attacks.

So far I'm not aware of a boss fight in the game where a paladin MT struggles. As I said, though, this is something we're working on right now.


Because fear was nerfed across the board. Fear actually used to be a huge issue through most of TBC - after all, Archimonde was an instance endboss, and usually, him fearing the MT was a wipe. And yes, there were heroics as well. Or one of Kael's advisors(who, too, used to be able to wipe the raid if the fear hit the tank).

So, yes, we know that "fear is no issue" in BC was deliberately misleading. It WAS an issue, the only reason horde still progressed was that only warriors were main tanks anyway, and they could deal with it.

Using a Paladin/Druid without fearward (which got patched later too, remember, after horde complained about it a lot) meant a lot more wipes, especially at Archimonde, who sadly feared more often than we could trinket/bubble. ANd at archi one death was a wipe, so...

We want Holy to have better dps than it did in BC, but that's a secondary consideration compared to them being good at healing (which we believe they are). We are also still committed to Protection being able to tank anything that a warrior can. Consider that the boss armor changes hurts warrior threat more than it does paladin threat. The net result should hopefully come out equal.


This is downright pathetic. It's not even a 5% nerf to prot warrior aggro, and they were ahead by more than that already, before this nerf, which puts us a few percent behind from where we were as well.

Awesome. Yes, we can still tank - threat is no issue. However, this means their design goal utterly failed for Paladins (our dps while not tanking is still crap) and that when threat ever gets to be an issue, it will be a huge one for Paladins. It also means that we will only tank when a prot warrior allows us to.

All the while we retain more weaknesses than any other tank while actually losing all our strengths, and do not have mechanics to make up for it anywhere. We're basically equal or worse in every aspect, and better in none...well, except being easier to heal in easy fights, where it doesn't matter anyway.

That is a valid complaint, although the usual hysterical "waah stop qqing qqqqq" whiners will whine about me daring to mention it, I'm sure.


And what I love the most? Ghostcrawler admitted they did no testing whatsoever on Protection threat yet. Awesome doing of their job, there.

There are many straws, many slight flaws, and all together they put quite a lot of weigth on our backs.
Macha
 
Posts: 625
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2008 12:50 pm

Postby baghead » Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:51 am

Macha wrote:All the while we retain more weaknesses than any other tank while actually losing all our strengths, and do not have mechanics to make up for it anywhere. We're basically equal or worse in every aspect, and better in none...well, except being easier to heal in easy fights, where it doesn't matter anyway.

Christ, where the hell is the worldie nerf bat! Every time I suggested saying the above four weeks ago I got slammed for QQ. Great to see people waking up from whatever they were smoking.

Prot pallys are across the board weaker in every single respect than warriors. This is a real problem people. Flat out, any guild would be better off replacing a prot pally with a prot warrior in a 25 man raid. This is the core problem. Unless this changes, people are taking prot pallys out of obligation or friendship - not for their strengths.

I loved my prot pally, but it was easy to see where things were headed 4 weeks ago. It's only got worse since. Don't believe the hype. Prot wars do awesome AoE threat if they gear for it.
baghead
 
Posts: 106
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 4:10 am

Postby baghead » Mon Oct 27, 2008 12:55 am

P.S. GOGO macha! Great to see someone fighting for these issues on the forums! top job mate.
baghead
 
Posts: 106
Joined: Tue Sep 16, 2008 4:10 am

Postby Zibey » Mon Oct 27, 2008 1:09 am

Im with you guys. I dont care if im viable - if warrior is better in every aspect I want to be warrior. Its really shame to play paladin only coz of achievements, as when we talk tanking class is just ugly little brother :(.
Gniev - The Maelstrom EU
User avatar
Zibey
 
Posts: 172
Joined: Sun May 25, 2008 6:04 am

Postby knaughty » Mon Oct 27, 2008 1:29 am

Macha wrote:Seems Knaughty is out of actual arguments as usual, and only able to flame when someone attacks his precious Blizzard Devs. Stop being an child butthurt that someone disagrees with you and learn to argue without ad hominem attacks.

Why would I stop the ad hominem attacks when people actually address the issues or my points?

At least the attacks amuse me.

Blizzard said fear would be a reduced issue in TBC compared to Classic. They never said it would be removed, tankadins just wished it would, and heard "reduced" as "removed" and then complained when "reduced" meant... reduced.

I ignore Heroics, because during the period fear was actually dangerous, you only had to do them a couple of times to key yourself for raids, or to grind rep, and you could mostly skip the ones with fear if you didn't want to do them.

So... was fear reduced in TBC?

YES. It was a far smaller issue than classic - far fewer bosses feared. Nightbane, one add at KT, Archi. Any others? QQ about fearing trash in heroics? Puhleeze.

Blizzard has admitted that for the original TBC design, tankadin and bear being "viable tanks" meant "OT, which might occasionally MT something but are probably second rate". I'd rate that as seriously misleading on their part, and they've gone "Mea culpa, we're being more open this time" and they are being more open.

Over the course of TBC, tankadins were buffed multiple time after Blizzard realised that "viable" was read as "competitive" by the community.

There are a small number of outstanding issues for prot, all of which the devs have said they will address.

I don't love the devs. The TBC design team shat me to tears as a raid leader, I sent them mental hate mail at the start of every Sunwell raid, and every second boss as well when we rebuilt the raid to suit the boss, or I hearthed and respecced for the fourth time that night. Enough that I actually told my GM I was quitting 25s in Wrath because I was sick of dealing with raid-balance and raid-stacking issue, leading and organising raids was no longer fun once we hit Sunwell, and thus - quitting for 10s, where I can just go with a small group of buds.

Then they said: "We're fixing raid balance / stacking". And we get the new buff/debuff system, which is fucking awesome. I have some minor niggles re Blessings still existing as "unique snowflakes", but I'll cope. If each pally could put up two, problem would vanish.

Then we have massive tank mitigation issues, where there's substantial differences in tank survivability. They say "we're fixing it". We end up with paladins and warriors almost indistinguishable, and bears / DKs totally viable, but with different strengths.

Ret was OP. Even my ret pallies were saying so on our guild forum. It got nerfed, hard, deservedly. They fiddle-faddled around too long, Sheath should have been re-written rather than moved, and tweaking round the edges was never going to fix it. I've explained why ret nerfs hits prot and holy as well, why you have to do ret first, and why getting ret right is more urgent. No one has countered any of the arguments. Yes, this roots Holy who certainly don't need DPS nerfs, they need massive buffs. It hurts prot as well.

But DPS is not the primary focus of Holy or Prot. Healing is the focus of Holy. Mitigation is the focus of Prot.

Both needs DPS, Prot even use DPS in raid, but there's no point tuning DPS for the non DPS specs until you get ret DPS correct first!

The Wrath devs have (so far) kept every promise they've made, and the design outcomes match the design goals very well. They given huge amounts of concrete information about their goals, then come close to matching them.

They say:
• Tankadins will be competitive - sometimes better, sometimes worse, always capable.

Why disbelieve them? Even the TBC devs didn't lie, so much as conceal aspects of the truth: Prot-pally will be viable OFF / Speciality tanks! This time it "competitive / equivalent MTs, and yes, we mean it the way you want us to mean it"

So wait for them to finish tuning Ret, give them some freaking time, then see if prot and holy get DPS boosts or not. QQ after they say "nah, sucks to be you".
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 Bobness » Mon Oct 27, 2008 1:37 am

cap_x wrote:After reading both GC posts on the issue and the reaction around the place there is no doubt in the mind that prot will be buffed once the changes are tested. We all knew ret was beyond OP, the changes that blizz put in were a band-aid to say the least. We all knew that the nerf was coming and that we were going to be hit hard. I mean yeah it sure does suck the way holy and prot got hit but when announcing the nerf CG said that they realise that the changes to seals/judgments us class wide and it will be compensated for.

If that is not enough the fact still remains that Bliz needs all 4 tanking classes to be viable as tanks or else the reitemization to gear and efforts they have made to get people tanking are for nothing.

I say give it 72 hours and GC will announce the changes to get us where we need to be.



The real Problem for balancing Ret is in fact all about mana.....

Removing some of the burst was obviously necessary, the up side was still that Ret could off Heal in pvp & 5's/10's... That has gone now.

Ret was always great in a BG for about 20 Seconds... then it was autoattack & wait to die...

There was a good chance that Ret would have PVP utility, I think that has gone as well.

Nerfing Seals & Judgements across the board is real knee jerk reaction stuff... there were plenty of elegant solutions to this..

Aggressively "fixing" ret whilst promising potential fixes to Holy/Prot at sometime in the future is discouraging... I never noticed my DPS rocking the house, unless I was in an undead instance.
Image
Bobness
 
Posts: 746
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 11:42 pm

Postby Joanadark » Mon Oct 27, 2008 2:47 am

All tanks are disadvantaged compared to DKs at 4-h, because DKs have a taunt that yanks the horseman 30 yards, reducing the time tanks spend close to each other to switch the horsemen


1) Death Grip is not a Taunt. DK Taunt is a separate ability.

2) 4HM cannot be Deathgripped

3) The encounter has been changed from 60 in that the horsemen stay in their corners which they go to automatically, which simplifies the pull, which was the hardest part of the encounter to get right at 60. Their aggro range has also been reduced so that the rear corner players can sneak behind them an already be in position.

4) If you attempt to pull them out of their corners, they cast a massive nuke of death on the whole raid.

If anyone has an advantage on 4Hm, its warriors and ferals, because they can charge their new target from the cross-over point. The transition are not hard though.
Arkham's Razor: a theory which states the simplest explaination tends to lead to Cthulu.
Joanadark
 
Posts: 3087
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 7:09 pm

Postby elfjorc » Mon Oct 27, 2008 2:47 am

Or one of Kael's advisors(who, too, used to be able to wipe the raid if the fear hit the tank).


This would possibly be a big deal if they didn't give you a shield that made you immune to fear when you clicked it. And phase 1 was and still is a joke.
Last edited by elfjorc on Mon Oct 27, 2008 2:49 am, edited 2 times in total.
Image
User avatar
elfjorc
 
Posts: 370
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 9:20 am
Location: Auckland

Postby Macha » Mon Oct 27, 2008 2:49 am

The Wrath devs have (so far) kept every promise they've made,


No, they didn't. Case in point: Two deep interesting new prot talents. Case in point: Tank viability(fear silence dispel taunting manaburn interrupt). We do not have all tools. Every other tank does(in the case of druids with the exception of the interrupt). The tools we do have are either equal or straight out worse(longer cooldown, exclusive with other abilities, only equal in certain HP ranges).

Other tanks got "boring" mechanics addressed, we did not. The promise for a viable role while not tanking? Not kept so far.

They have yet to actually live up to their promises.

That does not mean they have no chance whatsoever to manage, but their track record so far is bad. It took until the very end of the beta until we actually got better at mitigation than in TBC (before that, we were worse than in TBC, where, according to GC, we weren't even designed to be MTs). Aknowledging that is not evil, but healthy. Quite simple, until we raised a fuss that mitigation for us was bad, it wasn't even a concern for Blizzard, we saw that. Chances are that they never even noticed.

Rose-tinted glasses help nobody, nor does accepting every broken bone we get thrown. If we do not communicate to the devs that things are missing, they simply won't know we miss them. Protection Paladins are few, and our concerns, if not voiced, are of trivial concern, naturally.
We are few. Blizzard gains little from focussing much on us - and thus they didn't, and most likely won't, until we do speak up and actually show them what we want, since they seem unwilling to look for it on their own. As simple as that.

It has a reason why until the very recent beta build, all we got in prot was aggro - still less aggro than other tanks, though.


Notice that some people in this forum, including high profile people like Worldi and Invisiura have already spoken up. Silencing that with whining about QQ is not useful. It's just a different kind of whining that serves equally little purpose than "Blizzard hates us". Both are dumb.



Yes, of course, Ret has to be balanced. The problem is that they started far, far too late. All of rets problems were known for months. That "Ret was OP" a bit was known for these months as well. Nothing was done until in life people cried in droves.
However, it was a classical overnerf. Ret DPS dropped by almost a quarter(exorcism and HoW gone, consecration restrained, seals nerfed to the ground), straight into non-viable land. Again, aknowledging that isn't evil. It's useful. Pretending this isn't the case is the useless thing.


[quote]
This would possibly be a big deal if they didn't give you a shield that made you immune to fear when you clicked it. And even before the 30% hp nerf with one fear ward it hardly mattered in phase 1.[/quote9

Except that before the HP nerf, the shield was usually up in p3 and was only now being killed. Did you even do the first Kael? Remember, he was nerfed repeatedly. The kerl before the 30% Hp nerf was already a severly nerfed kael.
Macha
 
Posts: 625
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2008 12:50 pm

Postby Fogie » Mon Oct 27, 2008 2:50 am

In regards to the issue of whether 2 Paladins having problems tanking the 4H should be an issue...

When Blizzard states that they will not have any fight where it heavily favors against using a tank type, they are trying to instill trust in us for their new system.

By creating this fight where our taunt mechanic is severely flawed and requires a 3rd class to taunt off and cause a much higher chance of failure, it sets a dangerous precedent for them. It is glaring inconsistency with their supposed argument for the balance of tanks. This glaring inconsistency will then reflect on all of their arguments for supposed class balance, and that is where the imposed precedent becomes dangerous.

If we have a current example of a fight that heavily favors against a tank-type, than how can we trust them for future encounters not to repeat the same mistake?

THIS is the issue Knaughty. When you have a glaring inconsistency in your argument, it is expected to be called out. Ignoring it helps no one, and Blizzard should be made aware of it to our fullest ability.
Fogie
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Fri Oct 19, 2007 6:54 pm

Postby elfjorc » Mon Oct 27, 2008 2:54 am

Except that before the HP nerf, the shield was usually up in p3 and was only now being killed. Did you even do the first Kael? Remember, he was nerfed repeatedly. The kerl before the 30% Hp nerf was already a severly nerfed kael.


Yep. It took all of one Fear Ward when he spawned and it wasn't an issue. You then have 30 seconds to kill the shield and trade it to the tank, which we did every single time because we realised that would be a smart thing to do. Would you like me to trot out my Hand of A'dal Shadow priest to prove that I've killed him before 3.0?
Image
User avatar
elfjorc
 
Posts: 370
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 9:20 am
Location: Auckland

Postby Macha » Mon Oct 27, 2008 3:01 am

elfjorc wrote:
Except that before the HP nerf, the shield was usually up in p3 and was only now being killed. Did you even do the first Kael? Remember, he was nerfed repeatedly. The kerl before the 30% Hp nerf was already a severly nerfed kael.


Yep. It took all of one Fear Ward


Yes, and how many fear wards did horde have again?

Oh. Oops. None. That got patched later.
Macha
 
Posts: 625
Joined: Sat Jul 26, 2008 12:50 pm

Postby elfjorc » Mon Oct 27, 2008 3:07 am

Macha wrote:
elfjorc wrote:
Except that before the HP nerf, the shield was usually up in p3 and was only now being killed. Did you even do the first Kael? Remember, he was nerfed repeatedly. The kerl before the 30% Hp nerf was already a severly nerfed kael.


Yep. It took all of one Fear Ward


Yes, and how many fear wards did horde have again?

Oh. Oops. None. That got patched later.


Tremor worked just as well. Oh wait we used tremor too before Shadow Priests got patched to not have to shift out of shadowform to use it, not to mention multiple times when the person (a Holy Priest) who was supposed to FW forgot. Awesome, no wipes happened and we still killed him.

Blizzard have done a pretty good job so far, there's other things that are small concerns, but they're mostly just that, small.
Image
User avatar
elfjorc
 
Posts: 370
Joined: Sun Jul 20, 2008 9:20 am
Location: Auckland

Postby ScribeShanky » Mon Oct 27, 2008 3:19 am

Knaughty: your logic, facts and general optimism mean nothing in the face of our inability to tank some guys on horses.
I just love it when a good keikaku comes together.
User avatar
ScribeShanky
 
Posts: 89
Joined: Mon Dec 03, 2007 12:54 am

Postby knaughty » Mon Oct 27, 2008 3:31 am

ScribeShanky wrote:Knaughty: your logic, facts and general optimism mean nothing in the face of our inability to tank some guys on horses.


Image

PS: Thanks
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!

PreviousNext

Return to WotLK

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