Remove Advertisements

Tanking goals post:

All things related to the expansion

Moderators: Fridmarr, Worldie, Aergis

Postby Garath.Gorefiend » Mon Oct 20, 2008 1:57 pm

Splug wrote:
Garath.Gorefiend wrote:Its funny, I frankly still dont feel that they have totally accomplished their mission.

They certainly gave our AoE tools to the other tanks. But I see no evidence yet of us receiving the other necessary tools.

We still have no real way to deal with casters, silence effects, fears, or mana-burns.

Warriors and druids are not affected by silence/mana-burns while tanking.

Bears have more hp to deal with incoming spell damage and a talent to minimize damage taken while stunned.

Our dps/tps is drastically affected by all of those cc mechanisms.

So, to be totally honest, while I feel we have progressed in base-line mitigation, I still do not feel we have all the necessary tools.
There's a difference between having everything you want and everything you need. The fall-back taunt issue is debatable; I believe the concept is to use hand of protection as a secondary taunt, which while an odd and questionable design, is more reasonable with the giant threat lead tanks have over damage classes now. The horsemen concern only arises from using two paladin tanks, and even then is surmountable if you treat the encounter as an enrage mechanic. Arguably, that's a simpler solution anyway.

Believe it or not, warriors are adversely effected by silences, especially in multi-target scenarios. It's not a complete showstopper, but it does cause a lot of problems. In fact, a pulsed silence such as maiden of virtue's or shahraz's would probably do more harm to a warrior trying to AE tank than a paladin, due to only needing to get off one consecration/holy shield per 8 seconds to get full benefit from either (and continues to provide some source of threat even while silenced), while thunderclap's pulse requires a 6-second refresh, and cannot be used to pick up late arrivals.

To say paladins have not gained anything other than raw mitigation is straight out wrong, to be honest. RD's cooldown was pulled down to match taunt. Shield wall, thunderclap, and shield slam have all been cloned. A tri-target attack resembling cleave is available. Hammer of Justice provides an interrupt, though on a long cooldown. The playstyle in general is much more interactive, and in fact every single target attack in the standard rotation is either new or completely reworked (judgements). The number of warrior skills and abilities that now have paladin counterparts extends far beyond passive abilities. Are there still things other classes have which remain unique? Yes, there are. But if you look at say the druid forums, I recall a post by Snarfsnarf (which I remember because I thought the name was hillarious, not because I know who it is) they're claiming the same thing - paladins took their joerbs. Where warriors gained multi-target abilities, paladins gained single-target abilities. A lot has been standardized, and it's much easier to look at "what other classes got" and ignore what gains have been made locally.

-Splug


So, one or two warrior threat ability is locked down by silence, vs all but one for paladins...that is fair?

Even our new ShotR, which we dont get till lvl 75, is subject to silence.

Paladins take a huge loss in threat generation when silenced and an even bigger one when mana-burned.

And, just like a warrior tank can be rage-starved, we can be mana-starved, only with mana-burn, it can happen on demand.

I dont see a lot of mobs out there with rage burn mechanics.

How would warriors or druids like it like it if blizzard introduced a new spell, lets call it 'Pacification' and it burned your rage and did XXX damage to you, kinda like in RoS P3. So caster's could cast one spell at you and toast your rage-bar and damage you at the same time?

The new dps moves are nice, and I look forward to ShotR, bu it does nothing with relation to our ability to handle incoming magic damage.

I acknowledge that our taunt has been improved, and that we have gotten a shield wall, but really, how often are you taunting?

Frankly, since the patch, with the improvements in threat, the only time I have used taunt has been in 5 man PuGs with crit-happy Ret Pallys and mages.

As far as Hammer interrupt, well, its damn situational...a 1 minute refresh makes it mostly useless, and wasting 3 talent points to make it still 200% worse than a warriors is pointless.

I note you never mentioned or covered any of the other weaknesses I pointed out.

Face it, warriors only had a couple of weaknesses in TBC, a lack of AoE threat tools and rage-starvation.

Both were addressed. Just like all the other tanks, their dps was increased.

I pointed out the areas that paladins were weak in that still have not been addressed.

Right now, warriors are about the only tank that can deal with all situations relatively well, they do buffs and debuffs, they deal appropriately with magic damage, fears, silences, etc.

And now deal fairly well in AoE situations.

In other words, they have tools for ALL situations now. Paladins still don't.
Garath.Gorefiend
 
Posts: 406
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 2:07 pm

Postby majiben » Mon Oct 20, 2008 2:02 pm

Garath.Gorefiend wrote:Right now, warriors are about the only tank that can deal with all situations relatively well, they do buffs and debuffs, they deal appropriately with magic damage, fears, silences, etc.
I think this may be the heart of the problem. Once again warriors are the base tanks that can function at high capacity alone while the other tanks have more depenencies or weaknesses than warriors.
Amirya wrote:some bizarre lovechild of Hawking, Einstein, and Theck
User avatar
majiben
Moderator
 
Posts: 6999
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 4:37 pm
Location: Retired

Postby Vanifae » Mon Oct 20, 2008 2:04 pm

Sabindeus wrote:
Vanifae wrote:How many guilds will be running with just two paladin tanks? In reference to Four Horsemen.


How many will be running with just two warrior tanks? Or two druids? Or two Death Knights?

The answer: Doesn't matter because they said you should be able to do that.

Just an honest question in my own guild we have a variety of tanks available to us, and I really don't think it will be a show stopper either way, I am just curious. Sure you can do whatever you want but is the reality is that every guild is only going to have two of any one type of tank or a variety of options available to them? I would like to think that we get the job done and thus far and from what I have seen this is the case.

If every group with two paladin tanks fail on Four Horsemen by a wide margin then yes that should be fixed.

Also seriously Blizzard needs to do new stuff with their encounters anyway, Silence, fear, and loss of control effects are sort of annoying and old by now.

Maybe we should be clamoring for different and better encounter design and not so much focusing on past design failures.
This is why I'm a humorless feminist. Because rape jokes killed my sense of humor.
Minnerva wrote:if you act like a jerk then we push you away unless when born the girl got slapped around by her father.
User avatar
Vanifae
 
Posts: 7123
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 12:36 am

Postby Obrimos » Mon Oct 20, 2008 2:11 pm

Vanifae wrote:
Sabindeus wrote:
Vanifae wrote:How many guilds will be running with just two paladin tanks? In reference to Four Horsemen.


How many will be running with just two warrior tanks? Or two druids? Or two Death Knights?

The answer: Doesn't matter because they said you should be able to do that.

Just an honest question in my own guild we have a variety of tanks available to us, and I really don't think it will be a show stopper either way, I am just curious. Sure you can do whatever you want but is the reality is that every guild is only going to have two of any one type of tank or a variety of options available to them? I would like to think that we get the job done and thus far and from what I have seen this is the case.

If every group with two paladin tanks fail on Four Horsemen by a wide margin then yes that should be fixed.

Also seriously Blizzard needs to do new stuff with their encounters anyway, Silence, fear, and loss of control effects are sort of annoying and old by now.

Maybe we should be clamoring for different and better encounter design and not so much focusing on past design failures.


What we should be doing first is asking "What is the tanking kit".

We say we need a silence resistence (some of us, anyway, me among them).

We say we need mana-burn resistence.

We say we need a fear-break.

Well, we should find out if we do or not. We need to ask them "What is it that makes a tank a tank?"
Image
Obrimos
 
Posts: 707
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2008 3:43 pm
Location: SoCal

Postby Sabindeus » Mon Oct 20, 2008 2:12 pm

Vanifae wrote:
Sabindeus wrote:
Vanifae wrote:How many guilds will be running with just two paladin tanks? In reference to Four Horsemen.


How many will be running with just two warrior tanks? Or two druids? Or two Death Knights?

The answer: Doesn't matter because they said you should be able to do that.

Just n honest question in my own guild we have a variety of tanks available to us, and I really don't think it will be a show stopper either way just curious. Sure you can do whatever you want but is the reality is that every guild is only going to have two of any one type of tank or a variety of options available to them? I would like to think that we get the job done and thus far from what I have seen this is the case.


Well that's well and good for your guild. As a counter example, my priest's guild has two tanks: they are both warriors. We consistantly had trouble doing the Eagle trash gauntlet in ZA while timed with a lot of mage/lock/healer deaths pre-3.0. Not every guild has free access to all kinds of tank, and fights that favor one or the other cause a lot of angst.

If every group with two paladin fails on Four Horsemen by a wide margin then yes that should be fixed.

Also seriously Blizzard needs to do new stuff with their encounters anyway, Silence, fear, and loss of control effects are sort of annoying and old by now.

Maybe we should be clamoring for different an better encounter design and not so much on past design failures.


No disagreement here. Though I would like to point out that the one time I did Four Horsement with 2 Paladin tanks, we did it without switching targets and simply out-gearing the encounter.
Last edited by Sabindeus on Mon Oct 20, 2008 2:14 pm, edited 1 time in total.
Image
Turn In, an NPC interaction automator - http://wow.curse.com/downloads/wow-addo ... rn-in.aspx
User avatar
Sabindeus
Moderator
 
Posts: 10470
Joined: Mon May 14, 2007 9:24 am

Postby Vanifae » Mon Oct 20, 2008 2:13 pm

I don't think we need those, I think Blizzard needs to come up with better ways to challenge the raid then assaulting our resources especially the tank and hopefully they will do that.

This will hopefully be a different era of raid content then one before, but we really won't know for sure till Ulduar and company are released. Are thre any barriers to the other tanks, besides warriors, on Sartharion and Malygos?
This is why I'm a humorless feminist. Because rape jokes killed my sense of humor.
Minnerva wrote:if you act like a jerk then we push you away unless when born the girl got slapped around by her father.
User avatar
Vanifae
 
Posts: 7123
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 12:36 am

Postby Obrimos » Mon Oct 20, 2008 2:16 pm

Vanifae wrote:I don't think we need those, I think Blizzard needs to come up with better ways to challenge the raid then assaulting our resources especially the tank and hopefully they will do that.

This will hopefully be a different era of raid content then one before, but we really won't know for sure till Ulduar and company are released. Are thre any barriers to the other tanks, besides warriors, on Sartharion and Malygos?


That's what I'm curious about. Blizzard is adament about us having the same "kit", the same load-out as another tank. We all have x, y, and z.

I'm really, really curious what x, y, and z are and how Blizzard is going to avoid seriously gimping us by not stepping beyond that. GC already has said, "Then we won't be able to do those things to the tank" in reference to things like Silence at melee range. While I would like to be able to be continuously tanking, I'm still very, very curious what their floor limit is. What is it that makes a tank a tank.
Image
Obrimos
 
Posts: 707
Joined: Sat Mar 01, 2008 3:43 pm
Location: SoCal

Postby Vanifae » Mon Oct 20, 2008 2:17 pm

Well admittedly warriors pre-3.0 didn't have strong AE abilities either; so yeah in that happenstance it sucked, but I am not sure if we can use an argument like that to support the new status quo.

I have to agree with Splug things are much more closer now then ever, I don't really know who wins in my eyes and that to me is a good thing.

Edit: I don't have a strong answer to what our core tools should be but I do have my thoughts on what tank capabilities should be.
This is why I'm a humorless feminist. Because rape jokes killed my sense of humor.
Minnerva wrote:if you act like a jerk then we push you away unless when born the girl got slapped around by her father.
User avatar
Vanifae
 
Posts: 7123
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 12:36 am

Postby Garath.Gorefiend » Mon Oct 20, 2008 2:23 pm

Obrimos wrote:
Vanifae wrote:I don't think we need those, I think Blizzard needs to come up with better ways to challenge the raid then assaulting our resources especially the tank and hopefully they will do that.

This will hopefully be a different era of raid content then one before, but we really won't know for sure till Ulduar and company are released. Are thre any barriers to the other tanks, besides warriors, on Sartharion and Malygos?


That's what I'm curious about. Blizzard is adament about us having the same "kit", the same load-out as another tank. We all have x, y, and z.

I'm really, really curious what x, y, and z are and how Blizzard is going to avoid seriously gimping us by not stepping beyond that. GC already has said, "Then we won't be able to do those things to the tank" in reference to things like Silence at melee range. While I would like to be able to be continuously tanking, I'm still very, very curious what their floor limit is. What is it that makes a tank a tank.


Even if Blizzard no longer uses silences, fears, and mana-burns, players still have them.

If you live on a PvP server, in prot spec, you are weaker in all ways than the equivalent warrior.

I do agree, that Dual-spec will help us out on this a bit

Right now, nothing is worse than gathering for a raid and running into a raid of ganker/griefers when you are fully prot specced in full PvE gear.
Garath.Gorefiend
 
Posts: 406
Joined: Mon Aug 25, 2008 2:07 pm

Postby Vanifae » Mon Oct 20, 2008 2:28 pm

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.
This is why I'm a humorless feminist. Because rape jokes killed my sense of humor.
Minnerva wrote:if you act like a jerk then we push you away unless when born the girl got slapped around by her father.
User avatar
Vanifae
 
Posts: 7123
Joined: Mon Apr 23, 2007 12:36 am

Postby Ascendant » Mon Oct 20, 2008 3:33 pm

Garath.Gorefiend wrote:Bears have more hp to deal with incoming spell damage and a talent to minimize damage taken while stunned.


we have 5% more spell damage reduction, resistance auras, and a 30% stun reduction talent.

the fact that you overlooked these things (or ignored them) tells me that you're comparison is pretty biased against paladins.
Ascendant
 
Posts: 107
Joined: Mon Apr 14, 2008 11:27 am

Postby majiben » Mon Oct 20, 2008 3:42 pm

Ascendant wrote:
Garath.Gorefiend wrote:Bears have more hp to deal with incoming spell damage and a talent to minimize damage taken while stunned.


we have 5% more spell damage reduction, resistance auras, and a 30% stun reduction talent.

the fact that you overlooked these things (or ignored them) tells me that you're comparison is pretty biased against paladins.
Auras are raidwide and can be supplied by any paladin and even other classes. A reduction in Stun time will always be inferior to reducing damage while stunned for pve due to stuns causing burst rather than outstripping HPS.
Amirya wrote:some bizarre lovechild of Hawking, Einstein, and Theck
User avatar
majiben
Moderator
 
Posts: 6999
Joined: Fri Aug 22, 2008 4:37 pm
Location: Retired

Postby knaughty » Mon Oct 20, 2008 4:04 pm

Sabindeus wrote:
Vanifae wrote:How many guilds will be running with just two paladin tanks? In reference to Four Horsemen.


How many will be running with just two warrior tanks? Or two druids? Or two Death Knights?

The answer: Doesn't matter because they said you should be able to do that.

No, I don't think they ever said that your three tanks can be all the same class and have it work.

Mixed-class tanking teams are much stronger than 2 or 3 of a single class. I grant you that "3 warriors" is probably the strongest "single class" tanking team - but that's just because warriors are the most versatile tank.

Most versatile is NOT the same as best.

EG: Holy Priests are the most versatile healer - does this make them the "best" healer? They're very flexible, but a shaman provides more buffs, and is better at healing clumped up random people. A Holy paladin (or disc priest) is a better MT healer. Druid HoTs.

A tanking team of Druid / DK / Paladin with no warrior is better than a triple-warrior team (IMO).

"All paladin" is probably the worst single-class tanking team, though "All DK" is pretty crap as well. But Paladin is probably the strongest "first one in" class. IE: Adding the first paladin to the tanking team helps more than the first DK/War/Bear. So every min-maxxed tanking team has a pally. Not true of the other 3 classes. War or DK can both tank casters "optimally". DK or Bear can DPS while tank specced. Only tankadins have the unique snowflake that is Sanc.
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 Splug » Mon Oct 20, 2008 4:10 pm

Fridmarr wrote:
Splug wrote:There's a difference between having everything you want and everything you need. The fall-back taunt issue is debatable; I believe the concept is to use hand of protection as a secondary taunt, which while an odd and questionable design, is more reasonable with the giant threat lead tanks have over damage classes now.


That's one that sounds good on paper, but it actually just reinforces the problem.

BoP suffers from every single problem that RD suffers from and then some. If they acknowledge that the issues with RD makes it fail too often, then BoP, by definition, can not be considered a backup for it. If that's the design concept, it truly lacks in common sense.
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. It's still dodgy and situational, don't get me wrong, but I'm pretty sure that's what ye olde developers have in mind as "the backup taunt."

Easy to say when you have it. Please remove all your single target taunts from all hotkeys/bars/bindings and tell us how it went.
Well enough that I was debating switching mains to my paladin at the end of BT. It's ret currently, but wasn't always. I've been there, and no, I don't feel it's necesary; the only reason I stuck with the warrior was the lack of interaction required to tank got boring - I like mashing buttons. A single target taunt would be nice, but I'd rather see the flaky RD mechanics resolved. As an aside, I've also tried running with no multi-target taunt. That makes mid-fight patrol adds all sorts of fun.

How would warriors or druids like it like it if blizzard introduced a new spell, lets call it 'Pacification' and it burned your rage and did XXX damage to you, kinda like in RoS P3. So caster's could cast one spell at you and toast your rage-bar and damage you at the same time
So, like tranquilizing poison without the sleep effect if it's not removed? It's not a horribly common effect, but neither is mana burn.

So, one or two warrior threat ability is locked down by silence, vs all but one for paladins...that is fair?
Look what happens when you replace "silence" with "disarm." In a world where crushing blows meant near-certain death, removing parry from the combat table was not an option for boss mechanics. That's no longer the case.

-Splug
Active raid character: http://www.wowarmory.com/character-shee ... an&n=Spyte
255 characters is not enough to fit my alts' armories in.
User avatar
Splug
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 2381
Joined: Tue Oct 23, 2007 10:16 am

Postby knaughty » Mon Oct 20, 2008 4:21 pm

Garath.Gorefiend wrote:<QQ about silence and mana burn>

GC has said that they won't silence or mana-burn tanks in Wrath - though they will be silencing the healers, for excitement. Personally, I'd let a bear tank when healers are being silenced, at which point it's moot if the tank is being silenced or not.

Data point: In 2.4, I tanked Mother Shahraz once then said "never again" due to the silence. This week, I tried tanking Mother again to see what it was like. I had no SR gear on at all. I got silenced just as much as before, but it was a far smaller issue.
• SoV; buffed HS; buffed Ret aura; buffed white damage - a much higher proportion of my TPS continues even silenced than in 2.4
• No crushes when HS is down

Thus, we still do a lot more of our TPS when silenced, and don't get our face torn off. We're much better at tanking stuff that silences than we were, if one does slip through.
Garath.Gorefiend wrote:I acknowledge that our taunt has been improved, and that we have gotten a shield wall, but really, how often are you taunting?

Five out of six boss fights in Sunwell. That enough for you?
Garath.Gorefiend wrote:As far as Hammer interrupt, well, its damn situational...a 1 minute refresh makes it mostly useless, and wasting 3 talent points to make it still 200% worse than a warriors is pointless.

Having an interrupt is nice, having it on a 1 min CD sucks, and Imp HoJ is balls for PvE. So mostly agree.
Garath.Gorefiend wrote:Right now, warriors are about the only tank that can deal with all situations relatively well, they do buffs and debuffs, they deal appropriately with magic damage, fears, silences, etc.

And now deal fairly well in AoE situations.

In other words, they have tools for ALL situations now. Paladins still don't.

Warriors are the most flexible tank. Most flexible doesn't equal "best".

I like my Holy Priest example, but I won't repeat it (yet).

My tanking team is loving the changes. Next week the bear is going to tank Illidan, I'm going to MT Felmyst and the warrior is going to tank skellies. All just for "fun & challenge".
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