beta build 12694 (8, 5 2010)

SPOILERS Discussion about the Cataclysm Beta SPOILERS

Moderators: Fridmarr, Worldie, Aergis, Sabindeus, PsiVen

Re: beta build 12694 (8, 5 2010)

Postby Ryyu » Thu Aug 05, 2010 11:27 pm

so its avoidance vs threat again, if using ShoR on CD would end up as more threat.

Sigh..
User avatar
Ryyu
 
Posts: 102
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 9:49 pm

Re: beta build 12694 (8, 5 2010)

Postby d503 » Thu Aug 05, 2010 11:34 pm

Ryyu wrote:so its avoidance vs threat again, if using ShoR on CD would end up as more threat.

Sigh..


GC seems to at least be answering the right questions. I think in his mind, he's not seeing Inquisition as something that Prot would use (despite its obvious benefit). He makes some good points in his most recent post in saying that there may be situations where you legitimately do not need the mitigation (magic heavy fights, offtanking) and would prefer to sink you HoPo into Inquisition, or a Word of Glory absorb to mitigate some predictable magic damage.

We're just so inclined and used to having Holy Shield up 24/7, that there doesn't seem to be any other option for us.

I'm not sure myself what's better, but I do like the idea that we have options...maybe that'll help separate the good tanks from the bad.
User avatar
d503
 
Posts: 574
Joined: Fri Jul 04, 2008 12:31 pm
Location: Northern California, US

Re: beta build 12694 (8, 5 2010)

Postby Ryyu » Thu Aug 05, 2010 11:54 pm

d503 wrote:GC seems to at least be answering the right questions. I think in his mind, he's not seeing Inquisition as something that Prot would use (despite its obvious benefit). He makes some good points in his most recent post in saying that there may be situations where you legitimately do not need the mitigation (magic heavy fights, offtanking) and would prefer to sink you HoPo into Inquisition, or a Word of Glory absorb to mitigate some predictable magic damage.

We're just so inclined and used to having Holy Shield up 24/7, that there doesn't seem to be any other option for us.

I'm not sure myself what's better, but I do like the idea that we have options...maybe that'll help separate the good tanks from the bad.


No there will be time to use Inq over holy shield, I can see it becoming The holy shield for caster or weak melee mobs/out gearing somewhere. but now block is quite a powerful avoidance mechanic these days, losing 15% of it is weak, My point more of was on the if SotR was Designed to be a Set amount + 30/60/90% attack power then it will always be higher threat to use it as fast as possible (see the current design of heroic strike for prot)but if we HAVE to wait for 3 to get the full block charge, its a waste of threat.

Mind if its just the flat attack power as damage it wont matter. Will just make it boring as hell mind. wold very much like a gap filler to use.
User avatar
Ryyu
 
Posts: 102
Joined: Sat Jan 19, 2008 9:49 pm

Re: beta build 12694 (8, 5 2010)

Postby Arjuna » Fri Aug 06, 2010 2:18 am

Ryyu wrote:so its mitigation vs threat again, if using ShoR on CD would end up as more threat.

Sigh..

fixed
HUZZAH! How many points do I receive? :D
User avatar
Arjuna
 
Posts: 1859
Joined: Tue Aug 14, 2007 3:26 am

Re: beta build 12694 (8, 5 2010)

Postby mclem » Fri Aug 06, 2010 2:37 am

Arjuna wrote:
Ryyu wrote:so its mitigation vs threat again, if using ShoR on CD would end up as more threat.

Sigh..

fixed


I think this is the fundamental problem here. GC is wanting to give us some interesting choices in how to use our abilities; that's fair enough. The problem is that, as tanks, the only factors we really care about *are* mitigation and threat, and given the choice, mitigation always wins. There's some experimentation to get us to choose between *types* of mitigation - WoG vs. SotR - which I think is the better direction for them to go in, but it's difficult to make that choice balanced; certainly, as it stands, WoG seems a *far* weaker option than SotR; significant buffs could alleviate that, but then it's possible that it'll be too powerful for other uses.

Maybe self-cast WoG could *always* be a shield, significantly more powerful than it is now (proportional to HP, perhaps?), but can only absorb magical damage?

It's crossed my mind that the mitigation vs threat choice becomes rather more interesting in ramp-up fights which get more brutal on the tanks/healers as time progresses; I can see it being an interesting choice for Gruul or Saurfang. That's a bit limited, though, but I'm wondering if there's ways they can build the encounters such that it's frequently an interesting decision.
mclem
 
Posts: 447
Joined: Tue Sep 25, 2007 6:12 pm

Re: beta build 12694 (8, 5 2010)

Postby knaughty » Fri Aug 06, 2010 2:48 am

I already pop Wings at the start of many fights on live, and at Saurfang I'd pop Inquision as well (I'd tank 2nd to grab 3 HoPo waiting for first rune) - you have all the mark healers doing bugger all to begin with, so they can cover me going for threat at the beginning.

We'll use Inquisition - we just won't use it often.
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!

Re: beta build 12694 (8, 5 2010)

Postby RedAces » Fri Aug 06, 2010 3:11 am

hey,

Ryyu wrote:so its mitigation vs threat again, if using ShoR on CD would end up as more threat.

Sigh..


I think that's absolutly fantastic! You'll have 2 "rotations", a threat and a mitigation rotation and you can switch between and do whatever the encounter allows you ! Saurfang until 50% ? gogo threat rotation with inquisition up, Saurfang with 80+ blood and <30% ? gogo mitigation rotation with holy shield! Offtanking adds at Deathwhisper (P1 & P2) ? gogo threat, ... I fail to see the problem here!

Bye, RedAces.
Image
User avatar
RedAces
 
Posts: 500
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 9:39 am
Location: Germany

Re: beta build 12694 (8, 5 2010)

Postby hoho » Fri Aug 06, 2010 3:30 am

RedAces wrote:I fail to see the problem here!
Are other tanks, especially warrior's threat balanced around pala in threat mode and mitigation vs pala in mitigation mode? If it's somewhere between then wouldn't it mean endless QQ about "paladins have sooooo much higher threat, DPS doesn't have to wait!" and "paladins have soooo much better mitigation, healers go OOM on other tanks!".

Similar QQ will be heard if paladin get equal threat to others while in threat mode and equal mitigation when in mitigation mode but can't get both at same time while others can.
Leap of Faith:
Good news, everyone! We can now heal stupidity!
User avatar
hoho
 
Posts: 2445
Joined: Sun Sep 07, 2008 12:02 pm
Location: Estonia

Re: beta build 12694 (8, 5 2010)

Postby RedAces » Fri Aug 06, 2010 3:46 am

hey,

hoho wrote:
RedAces wrote:I fail to see the problem here!
Are other tanks, especially warrior's threat balanced around pala in threat mode and mitigation vs pala in mitigation mode? If it's somewhere between then wouldn't it mean endless QQ about "paladins have sooooo much higher threat, DPS doesn't have to wait!" and "paladins have soooo much better mitigation, healers go OOM on other tanks!".

Similar QQ will be heard if paladin get equal threat to others while in threat mode and equal mitigation when in mitigation mode but can't get both at same time while others can.


But maybe thats our niche? We are dynamic tanks like druids preWotLK... if there was a phase where no 2nd tank was needed, druids could go cat and dps whereas other tanks just could do autohit and hope to not be replaced by druids.
And warriors now have a similar option, they can go all out and ignore things like shield block or they can weave it in (even more, they could either talent full survivability or full threat, never both...), and it worked for the whole expansion! (Thats just something I noticed with my alt prot warrior, if I'm wrong please correct me ;) ).

Bye, RedAces.
Image
User avatar
RedAces
 
Posts: 500
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 9:39 am
Location: Germany

Re: beta build 12694 (8, 5 2010)

Postby Bobness » Fri Aug 06, 2010 3:47 am

It most certainly is a potential problem....

It all depends on the balance between mitigation & threat

If we use Holy Power to elevate mitigation does keeping Holy Shield at 15% makes us take on average less damage than other Tanks. If this were the case & threat isn't an issue the Paladin is the go to Tank, if threat is an issue then your Paladin is less than optimal.

Likewise if we use Holy Power to generate Threat, do we outdistance other tanks in this regard ? is that enough to balance our reduction in mitigation.

It's a potential minefield which will be picked over and assessed by Min/Max guilds the outcomes of which will filter down to the general playing population.

It's good to have a choice but at this stage will we be the only Tanks having to make this choice... I don't know & at present I don't think blizzard do either.


It's much like our situation with free global cooldowns. GC suggests we'll be needing to throw out utility & situational abilities, this is all fine & well if Dungeon design demands utilities be used, however if there's a workaround where Tank A mashes DPS/Threat buttons ad infinitum where does that leave us ?


So far the theory is sound but the outcome looks questionable.


p.s

i'm not sure what you mean by this ?

But maybe thats our niche?


being average when maximising our rotation, or being better ? Tbh neither of these is particularly acceptable.
Image
Bobness
 
Posts: 746
Joined: Thu Apr 19, 2007 11:42 pm

Re: beta build 12694 (8, 5 2010)

Postby jere » Fri Aug 06, 2010 4:02 am

Ryyu wrote:so its avoidance vs threat again, if using ShoR on CD would end up as more threat.

Sigh..


Maybe I am missing something, but I can't make that math work out. If ShoR does 30%/60%/90% per HP, then doing 1 ShoR at 3 is the same as doing 3 at 1 each. The dmg/threat should be the same (actually a 3 stack would be better during the Vengeance ramp up period). It seems you would always want to wait for 3 stacks in order to get the block since the damage would be the same.

I might be missing something simple though. It is early.
Image
User avatar
jere
 
Posts: 2981
Joined: Fri May 11, 2007 5:12 pm

Re: beta build 12694 (8, 5 2010)

Postby RedAces » Fri Aug 06, 2010 4:13 am

jere wrote:
Ryyu wrote:so its avoidance vs threat again, if using ShoR on CD would end up as more threat.

Sigh..


Maybe I am missing something, but I can't make that math work out. If ShoR does 30%/60%/90% per HP, then doing 1 ShoR at 3 is the same as doing 3 at 1 each. The dmg/threat should be the same (actually a 3 stack would be better during the Vengeance ramp up period). It seems you would always want to wait for 3 stacks in order to get the block since the damage would be the same.

I might be missing something simple though. It is early.


I thought that it has a static amount and a scaling amount of damage... so maybe 300 damage static plus x * 30% AP damage extra per HPower consumed. So if you cast 3 ShoR with 1 HPower you'll have 900 + 90% AP damage done while only casting one ShoR with 3 HPower you'll have 300 + 90% damage done. If the ability has no static component, then the only choice you have is between inquisition and holy shield (which again, is fine for me).

Bye, RedAces.
Image
User avatar
RedAces
 
Posts: 500
Joined: Tue Dec 01, 2009 9:39 am
Location: Germany

Re: beta build 12694 (8, 5 2010)

Postby Lumidar » Fri Aug 06, 2010 4:18 am

Marblehead wrote:Your 1st rotation is based on CS>J>ShoR , i.e CS J ShoR CS x x (repeat) (6 GCDs)
Your 2nd rotation is based on CS>ShoR>J , i.e CS ShoR J CS x ShoR CS x J CS ShoR x CS x ShoR CS J x CS ShoR x CS J ShoR CS x x (repeat) (27 GCDs)

So, at 54 GCDs, the 1st rotation fits 9 times and the 2nd 2 times. That equals:
1st rotation: 18xCS, 9xJ, 9xShoR
2nd rotation: 18xCS, 8xJ, 12xShoR

The 2nd rotation provides more TPS, obviously. One less Judgement shouldn't be a problem, since it lasts 20 seconds and JotJ won't be falling off. That means that ShoR>J is a better choice than J>ShoR. At the moment, our most efficient rotation seems to be based on CS>ShoR>AS>J>HW>Cons , most probably.


that's wrong. just cus more ShoR have been casted means NOTHING because the amount of HoPo that has been created/consumed during that time is the same amount as the first rotation. the total amount of ShoR damage in BOTH rotations is EXACTLY the same at 390% AP worth of Damage after the 1minute rotation.

on a side note to the person saying it'S the same as doing Shor every 1 HoPo, it's actually not because of the fact that CS is 4sec CD and ShoR is 6sec CD. if you use ShoR every time it's up with 1 HoPo every time within a 1minute cooldown you lose 4 CS uses, 2 Judgements and do 60% AP less in damage from ShoR compared to the sustained 2 HoPo ShoR rotation i posted before. so trying to force ShoR at 1 stack eventually makes you lose damage.
Lumidar
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:06 pm

Re: beta build 12694 (8, 5 2010)

Postby Chicken » Fri Aug 06, 2010 4:33 am

You're assuming there that ShoR retains it's cooldown even when it becomes a Holy Power [HP] using ability though. That's anything but guaranteed however, as it's requirement for HP to use in and of itself gives a cooldown. Edit: Definitely no cooldown. http://forums.worldofwarcraft.com/thread.html?topicId=26399150496&sid=1&pageNo=5#88

I am kind of surprised they didn't go for a 20/50/90% scaling since that's comparable to Templar's Verdict, but I guess they figured that the fact that you have more free GCDs in general if you wait until 3 HP before using ShoR, as well as the fact that you only get 15% extra block if you use ShoR with 3 HP would be enough incentive to wait until 3 HP before using ShoR.

There's been no clarification either way yet whether the static damage remains either.

---

At any rate, this implementation is looking better when it comes to my personal theories on things. We still retain the mitigation/threat choice, but the mitigation choice isn't nearly as much as a threat loss as it used to be with the proposed ShoR implementation. I'm pretty certain Inquisition still remains better threat overall, even with Crusader Strike becoming a more important ability and Righteous Fury affecting all our threat; a large part of our damage is still Holy damage, and a 30% increase to that is still a large increase to our overall damage and threat. This keeps things closer however, which is good because as pointed out by Blizzard themselves, 15% block actually doesn't come down to all that much mitigation, which was making Inquisition a lot better than Holy Shield was.

Random stuff I'd be interested in knowing once a new beta build goes up with their previewed ShoR: If you hit ShoR while Inquisition is up, will it's damage still benefit from Inquisition? Sounds like they're still going for the extra block buff removing Inquisition, but ShoR itself is used when Inquisition is up, so might benefit from the damage boost.
Image
User avatar
Chicken
 
Posts: 1597
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: beta build 12694 (8, 5 2010)

Postby Lumidar » Fri Aug 06, 2010 5:08 am

ah.. the beta talent trees showed it at 6sec. didn't know they were planning on taking out the CD.
Lumidar
 
Posts: 8
Joined: Thu Sep 03, 2009 9:06 pm

PreviousNext

Return to Cataclysm

Who is online

Users browsing this forum: No registered users and 1 guest

cron

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