Remove Advertisements

4.0 (Pre-cata) Stam or avoidance trinkets?

Get help with your character's gear

Moderators: Fridmarr, Worldie, Aergis, Sabindeus, majiben, lythac, Digren

4.0 (Pre-cata) Stam or avoidance trinkets?

Postby Arnock » Fri Oct 08, 2010 8:24 am

So I transfered Arnock over to the PTR to get a feeling for the new rotation as well as the reforging system, and I went through and reforged the highest stat between dodge and parry on each of my items to mastery rating.

When I reforged my two avoidance trinkets, I realized that, with them, I was only .8% shy of block cap (~20% dodge/parry and ~47% block) Although it costs me close to 5k HP to do this.

My gut feeling is that the consistant 30% less damage from block cap would outweigh the 5k HP, but I was wondering if there had been any more advanced theorycrafting on the subject than my "gut feeling."
Courage not of this earth in your eyes
Faith from far beyond lies deep inside
User avatar
Posts: 3664
Joined: Tue Apr 08, 2008 6:36 pm
Location: Everywhere and nowhere

Re: 4.0 (Pre-cata) Stam or avoidance trinkets?

Postby d503 » Fri Oct 08, 2010 10:07 am

It all depends on what the boss is hitting for, and what part of the hit receives the 30% mitigation. I'll let the big brains handle the real math, but presuming that your block is reducing 30% of your post-armor/passive bonus-mitigated damage, a hit of ~10k post-block would be required to make up 5k health difference had you not blocked.

I'm pretty that's fairly low on the scale of hits we'll be seeing in Cataclysm.
User avatar
Posts: 574
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2008 12:31 pm
Location: Northern California, US

Return to Gear Discussions and Advice

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
?php } else { ?