Remove Advertisements

Vengeance : scaling issues

SPOILERS Discussion about the Cataclysm Beta SPOILERS

Moderators: Fridmarr, Worldie, Aergis, Sabindeus, PsiVen

Re: Vengeance : scaling issues

Postby Kierly » Tue Sep 07, 2010 12:24 pm

Sabindeus wrote:So you started the fight with 4822 Vengeance?


No I just only posted the Last Minute of the fight.
Kierly
 
Posts: 15
Joined: Tue Aug 31, 2010 10:39 am

Re: Vengeance : scaling issues

Postby Chicken » Tue Sep 07, 2010 12:28 pm

Kierly wrote:
Chicken wrote:I'm mostly questioning it's authenticity as I'd never heard someone mention this before and the poster that posted it is newly registered and has but a single post.


That is why I posted what I saw because no one had mentioned the decay. I know I read earlier that the devs were thinking about having it decay at some rate.

<data>
That's interesting to see, thanks, and sorry for doubting you just on your word alone.
Image
User avatar
Chicken
 
Posts: 1597
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Vengeance : scaling issues

Postby Sabindeus » Tue Sep 07, 2010 12:33 pm

Kierly wrote:
Sabindeus wrote:So you started the fight with 4822 Vengeance?


No I just only posted the Last Minute of the fight.


gotcha
Image
Turn In, an NPC interaction automator - http://wow.curse.com/downloads/wow-addo ... rn-in.aspx
User avatar
Sabindeus
Moderator
 
Posts: 10472
Joined: Mon May 14, 2007 9:24 am

Re: Vengeance : scaling issues

Postby Belloc » Tue Sep 07, 2010 2:03 pm

Mutley wrote:Weren't bosses supposed to get more exp and hit in higher tiers? Just like they are getting more avoidance.

Yes.

This is going to be a non-issue. Blizzard isn't stupid -- if our threat and damage is too low, they'll fix it.
User avatar
Belloc
 
Posts: 3195
Joined: Fri Jul 18, 2008 1:56 pm
Location: Silent Earth

Re: Vengeance : scaling issues

Postby Chicken » Wed Sep 08, 2010 2:21 am

This particular mechanic for vengeance also makes avoidance gemming less attractive. Vengeance in general already did so with how we thought it worked, but this mechanic enhances the effect further. Vengeance turns each point of stamina you get into up to one point of attack power, the up to part comes from avoidance. With how we thought it worked, this effect became less noticeable as the fight durations became longer, at least as long as you got hit at least once every 20 seconds. With the decay mechanic however avoidance doesn't just affect the ramp up time of vengeance (Which the decay mechanic also increases), but it also affects how close to the Vengeance cap you'll be on average.

Because of that the decay mechanic strikes me as strange design. I would expect one of the things Blizzard wants is so that for tanks the obvious nearly-all overruling gem choice isn't to ignore avoidance gemming as much as possible, and this design isn't helping any as not only do you lose health and potential attack power for each stamina gem you don't take, each avoidance gem you take also reduces your average time at capped attack power gained from vengeance.

On the other hand it is hard to say whether this will actually matter all that much. It has the potential to lead to weird effects like our threat not improving all that much while in the same tier of content (As you naturally upgrade both your avoidance and your health as your gear improves), but suddenly getting a jump in our threat generation as we enter a new tier of content as the mobs will have been adjusted to have more 'expertise'. That's certainly possible to work with, but this effect would be less noticeable without the slow decay.
Image
User avatar
Chicken
 
Posts: 1597
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Vengeance : scaling issues

Postby Candiru » Wed Sep 08, 2010 3:06 am

Also will encourage stam/mastery stacking.

Mastery lowers your damage intake, but you still take damage from each hit. Why socket pure avoidance, when you will reduce the chance of 2 unblocked hits in a row more with mastery than avoidance? (Assuming sensible item budget costs) while also not nerfing your threat?

I mean, 100% chance of taking 0.7 damage is much better than 40% chance of taking 0 damage and 60% of 1 damage right, even though its worse for damage-over-time, its much more predictable on the healers so they can just spam their "auto-heal" rather than up-ranking to the mana-draining heals.
Image
Candiru
 
Posts: 2479
Joined: Mon May 28, 2007 12:21 pm

Re: Vengeance : scaling issues

Postby Shathus » Wed Sep 08, 2010 10:22 am

Most of the discussion so far has been in relation to avoidance = bad in terms of threat and dps, however the other variable that could make avoidance better is healing. If we truly will be living in a world where healers have to manage their mana, tank taking less damage through not getting hit at all, saves them a heal. Especially on progression content where living those extra few seconds at the end of the fight will likely be more important that extra threat.

Threat issues tend to spring up more on farm content or at least after better gear as been acquired at which point we usually shift more to threat/dps than survival anyways.

It may make no difference in the end, but just something to consider before we determine we'll be stam/mastery stacking for the next 2 years.
Shathus
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 1465
Joined: Sun Apr 06, 2008 5:02 pm

Re: Vengeance : scaling issues

Postby Chicken » Wed Sep 08, 2010 11:44 am

I agree on that we can't know for certain yet, though there's a flip side to that particular coin as well. Part of the reason they introduced Vengeance is to deal with the issue where tank threat doesn't scale as well as the damage DPSers do, and if they nail it well so we scale in TPS about as quick as they do in DPS, that'll allow them to balance threat as a challenging thing to maintain at all levels of gear. Which brings us back to this issue with avoidance.

We of course can't know for sure how much of an issue things will be in general since thing just aren't progressed to a point yet where we can reliably deduce how much of an issue healer mana, threat and other things are. That doesn't change the fact however that they could (mostly) fix the issue with Vengeance scaling negatively with avoidance by not making it decay as it currently does on the beta. There'll still be a slight negative effect to avoidance at that point (As it will still increase the ramp up time, though less so than with the decay system), but it'd rarely be the case than that once it's capped that you'll be under your vengeance cap as long as you're being actively attacked. It'll only drop off entirely without the decay if you manage to avoid all attacks used on you for 20 seconds, and it does so with the decay as well, except the decay introduces the additional downside that your attack is already petering downward while it's getting to that point.
Things can definitely be balanced around the decay though, don't get me wrong.

At any rate, avoidance already has a bit of a stigma associated with it (Which we can see in the fact that a lot of us prefer the ToC-Ret libram for the 200 strength over the ToC/ICC avoidance libram), so giving it an additional disadvantage if they're looking to make it more attractive seems strange to me. That's what I was trying to get at in my previous post in this thread. That's also where further responses about Stam/Mastery remaining the best due to this partly come from; we're used to avoidance being weak, so it'd take it being clearly good in comparison to get us past that view of things, so anything that messes with that perception makes it all the harder for avoidance to become attractive.
Think of early WotLK tanking experiences for a comparison on something similar; I'm not sure how it was for you folks, but I had to convince my guild that all the tank classes were now (basically) equal, the raid leader was still in the old mindset where each tank had a much more clear niche than they do now. This is comparable; a lot of people will still be stuck in the old mindset when it comes to the value of avoidance, so you want to avoid it having a downside such as this.
Image
User avatar
Chicken
 
Posts: 1597
Joined: Fri Jun 26, 2009 2:19 pm

Re: Vengeance : scaling issues

Postby Klaudandus » Wed Sep 08, 2010 12:15 pm

Image

Has anyone mentioned this on the official forums yet? I mean... I remember GC talking about how gemming for avoidance will be valuable, specially because now avoidance is lower across the board, and yet vengeance decay would actually make stam/mastery or stam/other stats more desirable than avoidance.

I mean, GC always talks about how it shouldn't be about avoidance vs mitigation, yet ICC was all about mitigation, and yet... well, here we go again.
The Element of Forum Hyperbole
Image
---
Flüttershy - Draenei Protection Paladin, Aerie Peak
Klaudandus - BE Protection Paladin, Feathermoon (Semi-retired)
User avatar
Klaudandus
 
Posts: 11092
Joined: Thu Apr 02, 2009 7:08 am
Location: Texas' Armpit

Re: Vengeance : scaling issues

Postby tlitp » Thu Sep 09, 2010 2:59 pm

Giving credit where credit is due, I'll state right from the beginning that Kierly's tests were instrumental in figuring the exact mechanics of Vengeance. I'll post here a log that I've received in a PM, it's much easier to parse and understand :
Code: Select all
tick,   time,   AP,   dmg,  gain,  loss,  buffer
   1,  46:13,   51,  1030,    51,     0,     51
   2,  46:15,  155,  2135,   106,     2,    155
   3,  46:17,  201,  1063,    53,     7,    201
   4,  46:19,  241,  1020,    51,    10,    241
   5,  46:21,  285,  1120,    56,    12,    285
-------------------------------------------------
   6,  46:23,  321,   989,    49,    14,    321
   7,  46:25,  356,  1028,    51,    16,    356
   8,  46:27,  389,  1017,    50,    17,    389
   9,  46:29,  424,  1089,    54,    19,    424
  10,  46:30,  457,  1094,    54,    21,    457
-------------------------------------------------
  11,  46:32,  486,  1030,    51,    22,    486
  12,  46:35,  517,  1104,    55,    24,    517
  13,  46:36,  544,  1067,    53,    25,    544
  14,  46:38,  567,   997,    49,    27,    567
  15,  46:41,  589,  1014,    50,    28,    589
-------------------------------------------------
  16,  46:43,  530,     0,     0,    59,    589
  17,  46:45,  471,     0,     0,    59,    589
  18,  46:47,  412,     0,     0,    59,    589
  19,  46:48,  353,     0,     0,    59,    589
  20,  46:51,  294,     0,     0,    59,    589
-------------------------------------------------
  21,  46:53,  333,  1068,    53,    14,    589
  22,  46:54,  367,  1008,    50,    16,    589
  23,  46:56,  401,  1057,    52,    18,    589
  24,  46:59,  436,  1090,    54,    20,    589
  25,  47:01,  467,  1056,    52,    21,    589
-------------------------------------------------
  26,  47:03,  494,  1017,    50,    23,    589
  27,  47:05,  435,     0,     0,    59,    589
  28,  47:07,  376,     0,     0,    59,    589
  29,  47:09,  317,     0,     0,    59,    589
  30,  47:11,  258,     0,     0,    59,    589
-------------------------------------------------
  31,  47:13,  199,     0,     0,    59,    589
  32,  47:15,  140,     0,     0,    59,    589
  33,  47:17,   81,     0,     0,    59,    589
  34,  47:19,   22,     0,     0,    59,    589
  35,  47:21,    0,     0,     0,    59,    589

Breakdown of the items :
  1. ap_cap
    ap_cap=floor( 0.1*max_health )
  2. tick - resets if the combat flag is 0
  3. gain
    gain(n)=floor( 0.05*dmg(n) )
  4. loss
    if tick(n)=1
    loss(n)=0
    else
    if gain(n)>0
    loss(n)=floor( 0.05*ap(n-1) )
    else
    loss(n)=round( 0.1*buffer(n-1) )
    end
    end
  5. ap
    if tick(n)=1
    ap(n)=gain(n)
    else
    ap(n)=min[ max[ ( ap(n-1)+gain(n)-loss(n) );0 ];ap_cap ]
    end
  6. buffer
    if tick(n)=1
    buffer(n)=ap(n)
    else
    buffer(n)=min[ max[ ap(n-1);ap(n) ];ap_cap ]
    end
It's somewhat similar to Deep Wounds - but more complex. Computing the expected value analytically is a royal pain the arse, so we'll probably sim it out.

(offtopic : does Blizzard really think that the concept will be within the grasp of the masses ? To me it seems doomed to be parryhaste v2.0)
User avatar
tlitp
 
Posts: 556
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 3:25 pm

Re: Vengeance : scaling issues

Postby Sabindeus » Thu Sep 09, 2010 3:05 pm

tlitp wrote:(offtopic : does Blizzard really think that the concept will be within the grasp of the masses ? To me it seems doomed to be parryhaste v2.0)


The masses will understand it just fine as long as people like you and theck don't do any analysis on it. As soon as people start publishing findings and TL;DR summaries, the masses will promptly misinterpret them and generate the same litany of ridiculous misconceptions and misunderstandings that parry haste did.

:P
Image
Turn In, an NPC interaction automator - http://wow.curse.com/downloads/wow-addo ... rn-in.aspx
User avatar
Sabindeus
Moderator
 
Posts: 10472
Joined: Mon May 14, 2007 9:24 am

Re: Vengeance : scaling issues

Postby Rasmfrackn » Thu Sep 09, 2010 3:28 pm

"I get attack power when I take damage." :)

I read some people hinting that we won't scale as well with vengeance as other tanks... is that because we're balanced around having str->SP conversion and thus have lower AP coefficients? I think that's a reasonable scaling issue that could use some number crunching and presentation to Blizzard for consideration.

Honestly, I think the Stam = good vs. avoidance = bad scaling issues with Vengeance, while almost undoubtedly true, are probably not a huge issue. It's not really any different from what we have now, where we trade more obvious avoidance/tank stats for threat stats (DMC:G, slow dps weapon, etc) if we want more threat instead of avoidance. Survival vs. threat is always going to be our gear tradeoff.

Not to say I don't appreciate the analysis. It's good to be informed as to the how of things, but I'm not sure I see a convincing case as to why anything needs changing.
Rasmfrackn
Dwarf Paladin
Icecrown Server
Eng/Scribe/Masochist
User avatar
Rasmfrackn
 
Posts: 1014
Joined: Fri Aug 17, 2007 12:11 pm

Re: Vengeance : scaling issues

Postby Huon » Thu Sep 09, 2010 7:24 pm

I feel like you will cap out your AP and then it will just bounce up and down a couple hundred AP every few seconds, it doesn't decay THAT fast on beta realms.
Image
Huon
 
Posts: 250
Joined: Sun Dec 02, 2007 11:12 pm

Re: Vengeance : scaling issues

Postby hoho » Thu Sep 09, 2010 7:33 pm

I did a very quick search over this forum but am I correct to say any kind of damage prevention on tank will be lowering the speed of vengeance stacking? That includes damage cooldowns and absorbtion shields. If my napkin math was right disc throwing a bubble on tank pre-pull cuts off initial 500-ish AP. It's not much but it could make discs and to lesser degree palas a bit unwanted 5-man healers.
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: Vengeance : scaling issues

Postby Bastien » Fri Sep 10, 2010 10:12 am

hoho wrote:I did a very quick search over this forum but am I correct to say any kind of damage prevention on tank will be lowering the speed of vengeance stacking? That includes damage cooldowns and absorbtion shields. If my napkin math was right disc throwing a bubble on tank pre-pull cuts off initial 500-ish AP. It's not much but it could make discs and to lesser degree palas a bit unwanted 5-man healers.


I believe you would have to be repeatedly bubbled - back to back to back - for it to be an issue. (I think) in an earlier post in this thread, someone mentioned you would have to be bubbled for longer than 2 seconds for it to negatively influence Vengeance.
ImageImage
Image
User avatar
Bastien
 
Posts: 154
Joined: Thu Dec 18, 2008 10:05 am

PreviousNext

Return to Cataclysm

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 { ?