Remove Advertisements

[4.0.1] TPS Concern

Warning: Theorycraft inside.

Moderators: Fridmarr, Worldie, Aergis, theckhd

Re: [4.0.1] TPS Concern

Postby tlitp » Thu Oct 14, 2010 11:54 am

theckhd wrote:This just in, Vengeance is a really stupid mechanic. Not that we didn't see this coming months ago or anything.

I would not be surprised at all if the Vengeance decay rate was significantly reduced (...) and it's refresh damage reduced (...). If it took 30-60 seconds to start decaying or was kept refreshed by incidental damage it would be far less of an issue.

But yeah, right now it's just a huge swing in DPS output to lose Vengeance. It really shouldn't be that large of an effect, it would be a lot more fun to have most of that damage baseline and have Vengeance bring our DPS up by 20-30% or less.

No. Fuck no. Flying fucks all around, no. Feasible, good potential.
User avatar
tlitp
 
Posts: 556
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 3:25 pm

Re: [4.0.1] TPS Concern

Postby theckhd » Thu Oct 14, 2010 12:20 pm

tlitp wrote:No. Fuck no. Flying fucks all around, no. Feasible, good potential.


I don't think that our DPS fluctuating by as much as 50% based on whether we're tanking or off-tanking is a good mechanic. It might have potential, but it needs a lot of numbers tweaking. I think it brings more bad than good to the table as far as PvE is concerned.

Again, if it were more consistent it would be less annoying. As it stands, we're balanced for raiding with Vengeance fully or mostly active, which makes our damage output terrible when we're doing anything other than tanking a boss. That includes soloing old content (arguably irrelevant), but also leveling and solo-questing (which is arguably relevant given the expansion).

It's simply not fun to watch your DPS drop to half because the boss stopped attacking you. I'd rather have that damage baseline, either by repeating the Wrath model (threat is easy early on, but use a weaker version of Vengeance scaling to prevent the ICC threat catastrophe) or through a different mechanic.

They wanted avoidance to matter, right? "Vengeance: You get 3% of your max health as attack power, and an additional 3% for 10 (5?) seconds after parrying or dodging an attack" 3% Passive gives you a baseline ~2k AP, and you get an additional 2k while actively tanking. Avoidance now matters, the DPS swing between tanking and not tanking isn't as large, it still scales with our gear, and our DPS while soloing isn't crap.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of Grehn|Skipjack.
MATLAB 5.x, Simcraft 6.x, Call to Arms 6.0, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 5.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
User avatar
theckhd
Moderator
 
Posts: 7759
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
Location: Harrisburg, PA

Re: [4.0.1] TPS Concern

Postby tlitp » Thu Oct 14, 2010 1:20 pm

If "it might have potential, but it needs a lot of numbers tweaking" == "cut its relevance in _number here_ and then apply a global modifier across the board", the answer is still "flying fucks all around, no". Do you really want a clone of the despicable RF ?
Elseif == "cut its relevance in _number here_ and then tune the ability toolbox accordingly", it becomes a feasible solution. However, do keep in mind that they would have to redesign four specs at once. In terms of developer time/effort... unlikely. Maybe later on into the expansion, but quite hard to squeeze in seven weeks or so.

As for the avoidance-based Vengeance that you've suggested, still no. Tanks should achieve a balance between offensive/defensive stats, not stack the hell out of one category alone.
Put it this way : the rest of the group has to balance output and "commodities" (in no particular order, +movement speed/CC/resistance/+healing taken/(raid) cooldowns). Being "easy on the tanks" is not reasonable, in the grand scheme of things.
User avatar
tlitp
 
Posts: 556
Joined: Mon Jul 27, 2009 3:25 pm

Re: [4.0.1] TPS Concern

Postby theckhd » Thu Oct 14, 2010 3:54 pm

But this has nothing to do with finding a balance between offensive and defensive stats. We don't choose expertise over more avoidance because of Vengeance AP, nor would we in the avoidance version I proposed. I don't see how that's "going easy on the tanks," it's just making a crappy mechanic less crappy.

<edit> To put it in perspective, I'm in the Knaughty camp of "tanks should be doing 50-75% of the DPS that a pure DPS class does. Blizzard seems to be in that camp too, because that's about where we sit with Vengeance fully stacked.

The difference is that I don't think that we should be doing 35% the damage of a DPS class when we're in an instance or soloing and 75% in a raid and getting pounded. Having half of your DPS tied up in Vengeance is absurd mainly for that reason. If we did 60% the damage of a DPS class baseline, and 75% with Vengeance, that would be reasonable, and it could still address the scaling issue that Vengeance is supposed to address. I suspect the main reason that Venegance is such an absurdly large amount is to prevent PvP balance problems, which just means that the mechanic is poorly designed. There are a myriad of ways to design it such that it's functionally irrelevant in PvP, I'd prefer they choose one that doesn't make us anemic when doing anything other than tanking a raid boss.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of Grehn|Skipjack.
MATLAB 5.x, Simcraft 6.x, Call to Arms 6.0, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 5.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
User avatar
theckhd
Moderator
 
Posts: 7759
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
Location: Harrisburg, PA

Re: [4.0.1] TPS Concern

Postby heuvarius » Thu Oct 14, 2010 5:21 pm

There is actually 2 different problems with Vengeance people are talking about.

The first is the ramp up and decay time. If we aren't tanking for a long enough period of time, our damage drops. Personally, I believe in this is how it should be, and the vengeance mechanic is serving this purpose rather well. It adds an element of cooperation between the tanks as well on tank swap fights. Tank will be more conscious of when a taunt is coming and prepare himself to back off and not pull aggro the new tank. As long as there is a bit of buffer between the tank and the top threat dps, there won't be any problems.

The other problem is a bit more complicated. Ever since the beginning, Blizzard has the idea that "The harder a tank gets hit, the harder it hits back". And so inevitably, this leads to the current problems. When we are geared to survive the next level of damage intake, we find that we aren't taking enough damage from previous tier to fuel our damage and threat if we go back to it. This is not a new problem, simply a rehash of the rage starve/oom issue tanks had previously. Vengeance has just magnified the problem several fold by contributing more of our dps to it.

It does appear that Blizzard is trying to move away from this model for Cata from the reworkd Prot mana model and the Rage normalization being done to bears and warriors. So it quite out of place this aspect of vengeance seems to be working against all the other changes implemented. Perhaps the easiest way for this to be fixed is for vengeances to be a stacking buff. Everytime you take damage you gain x% of your hp as AP, stacking up to y times, you lose 1 stack every z seconds unless refreshed. This way you will always gain a consistent amount of damage increase from tanking but still gives Blizzard ways to fix the effectiveness, ramp up and decay time of the buff for balance.
Image
Best looking Femtaur-din in the game.
heuvarius
 
Posts: 69
Joined: Tue Oct 21, 2008 5:15 am

Re: [4.0.1] TPS Concern

Postby Kihra » Fri Oct 15, 2010 1:20 am

Vengeance doesn't work well with old content, but I don't really see that as an issue. We can just put on DPS gear to do old content. Now that we're crit immune from talents, there's no need to be at 540 defense. You can reforge less attractive stats on DPS gear like Haste into Mastery and do crazy DPS now. It's really fun actually. :)
Kihra
 
Posts: 554
Joined: Mon Dec 31, 2007 12:01 pm

Re: [4.0.1] TPS Concern

Postby theckhd » Fri Oct 15, 2010 8:19 am

Where it really hurts is heroics 5-mans. I don't take near enough damage, even in ret gear, for Vengeance to stack effectively. So that means that I'm tuned properly (possibly even overtuned) for ICC bosses, but I'm running at closer to 50% capacity in a heroic. That just seems out of whack.

Again, it's not a hard thing to fix. Vengeance stacking by 2% (up to 5 stacks) every time you take damage would be fine, as would stacking 2% (again, up to 5) every time you parry/dodge. The only problem I can see with that is PvP (and possibly not even there given how hard some classes can nuke now), which can be fixed several ways (only applies when you take damage from a non-player source, dispellable, etc.).

And to repeat my earlier statement, I'd rather see it be something like 1.33% and stack up to 3 so that it was a ~4% increase, and have our baseline damage increased through CS and HotR to compensate. But that requires balancing 3 other tanks, like tlitp pointed out, so it's unlikely to happen.
"Theck, Bringer of Numbers and Pounding Headaches," courtesy of Grehn|Skipjack.
MATLAB 5.x, Simcraft 6.x, Call to Arms 6.0, Talent Spec & Glyph Guide 5.x, Blog: Sacred Duty
User avatar
theckhd
Moderator
 
Posts: 7759
Joined: Thu Jul 31, 2008 3:06 pm
Location: Harrisburg, PA

Re: [4.0.1] TPS Concern

Postby sculder » Fri Oct 15, 2010 9:00 am

Ran an icc25 last night, and despite being locked in the first wing for an hour and a half because the door wouldn't open, a GM turning off our 30% buff, and projected textures bugging out, it was still a somewhat positive experience. My thoughts on tps:

Paladin tanks have a whole new threat generation style. The old rotation (3.3) had a ~6sec ramp up time to reach "full" tps potential (this changed depending on weapon speed, etc). However, with two tricks and one misdirect, I never had any issues with initial or long term aggro, even with cooldowns and lust being used right at the start.

In 4.0.1, the ramp up time to full tps potential is immense due to the slow stacking of vengeance as well as the time required to stack 3 hopo for a SoR. I tried many different opening rotations, and eventually had minimal issues on threat, especially once vengeance got going. The biggest thing I noticed is when i told our priests (we have 3) to not bubble me right away, my initial threat was much better due to that first stack of vengeance. Initial threat was almost a non-issue, and I usually ended up going AS > Judge > CS > HW > CS, at which point I would throw out a 2 hopo SoR if sacred duty procced, otherwise I'd get up to 3. The first 2 seconds were the worst, wherein if I didn't crit my aggro would be marginal at best. This usually never happened, especially with the new tricks - it essentially buys us some time to get up to 3 hopo and not have to waste a 1 hopo SoR early on. (I know that having HS up is important, but I never had issues with hp at the start.

After the first 10 seconds or so, I was more than fine on threat. In fact, i was completely set, usually pulling well over 20k sustained tps, and an average of about 10-11k dps. There were several instances where I had to stop attacking or disable RF to not pull off the other tank(s), a dk and a paladin.


Overall I'm perfectly happy with our threat situation, though I think vengeance could be tweaked a little bit to support a faster ramp up. I'm not happy with our AOE tanking situation, but that is a different story...
User avatar
sculder
 
Posts: 171
Joined: Sun Jul 25, 2010 9:34 am
Location: Massachusetts

Re: [4.0.1] TPS Concern

Postby Blarry » Fri Oct 15, 2010 10:34 am

I do think Vengeance is a good mechanic. It just isn't worked out well.

The worst part of tanking is right after the pull, maybe the first 20 seconds, when dps throw in all their cooldowns and trinket procs. This is where Vengeance is useless, as there's not much of it stacked already. ToT and MD helps only but a few seconds.

But later on, as Vengeance stacks up to its maximum, it becomes horrifyingly powerful. To be honest, the only serious encounter I faced since wednesday was an hour of Algalon 10man this afternoon (as ICC 25man heroic was scheduled for wednesday when half of my raid still had their patches downloading), and threat just exploded after a while. In fact, at around the first Big Bang it wasn't even necessary to ShoR at all, I then used 3HP-WoG instead if ShoR to support our healers, who had quite a tough time.
Really curious now to see how it works in serious ICC conditions.

It seems that tanking is now about somehow managing the first 10-20 seconds of dps burst, working on Vengeance to stack high.


To those of you who already tanked Saurfang: How is threat doing there? I imagine the time you are currently tanking to be not long enough to stack comfortable amounts of Vengeance, yet it diminishes quickly after you get Rune-of-Blood'ed.
Blarry
 
Posts: 4
Joined: Wed Jun 16, 2010 4:16 am

Re: [4.0.1] TPS Concern

Postby Protigy » Fri Oct 15, 2010 1:01 pm

Blarry wrote:I do think Vengeance is a good mechanic. It just isn't worked out well.

The worst part of tanking is right after the pull, maybe the first 20 seconds, when dps throw in all their cooldowns and trinket procs. This is where Vengeance is useless, as there's not much of it stacked already. ToT and MD helps only but a few seconds.

^ This. I think the new TotT mechanic is useful as long as your DPS know how it works now and that +threat doesn't stick anymore after expiration. As long as they are aware of that fact and keep in mind if they are above ~85% threat within the first ~10 seconds of a pull they need to slow down, everything should be fine. It's always good to have your DPS on the heels of your tank(s), because that means they know what they're doing and are pushing very high TPS and in turn high DPS.

Personally, I would much rather have to fight to keep aggro for the first 20-30 seconds than see myself already 500k threat above the top DPS and can just coast the rest of the way. It keeps tanking challenging and will separate the mediocre tanks from the elite (I'm all for helping people learn how to tank and improve their gameplay, but progression raiding typically isn't the stage for it). After all, if Blizzard wants to put less emphasis on gear stat selection, we might as well put our energy into something else, no? Albeit if you have bad DPS, you can have a mediocre tank with mediocre TPS, but if we're talking about progression raiding you don't want a tank who can't put out very high TPS after the first ~30 seconds.

Blarry wrote:It seems that tanking is now about somehow managing the first 10-20 seconds of dps burst, working on Vengeance to stack high.

This is my take on it as well and again, it's not tuned for level 80 properly and probably shouldn't be unless they want to hotfix it back when Cata is released - it would be nice/convenient until 7 Dec, but highly unlikely. As long as TotT/MD and Salvs are thrown out appropriately (if melee DPS was an issue, maybe some BoPs) and at the right time (e.g., Salvs when Mages pop their CDs and have Mirrors out), threat shouldn't be an issue after the initial ramp-up time. For example, on Heroic LK25, threat was only a serious issue when Mage's Mirror threat was added, otherwise the only close contenders were a Boomkin and Warlocks - the main reason for Mages being so difficult to keep off the boss was they were pushing 40-50k DPS in phase 1, so their TPS was more than insane and we had Salv assignments just for them. This was on Wednesday, before the Mage/Boomkin hotfix nerf.

Of course, if after pushing max TPS and Salving you are still having DPS pull off of you, Rogues/Hunters may have to start using TotT/MD on CD on the tank for maybe the first minute to build up a bit of a lead. There are many options to solving threat issues, including DPS actually feathering off of their keyboard facerolling (if it comes to that). It's all a matter of who you play with and if they're willing to put e-peens aside if even for just a few seconds. Boss death > pDPS, imo. Parse hunt when things are on farm and when the game isn't "broken."

Blarry wrote:To those of you who already tanked Saurfang: How is threat doing there? I imagine the time you are currently tanking to be not long enough to stack comfortable amounts of Vengeance, yet it diminishes quickly after you get Rune-of-Blood'ed.

Threat was a non-issue after the 2nd taunt swap. This was on Wednesday, again before the Mage/Boomkin hotfix, so threat shouldn't be an issue at all after 2 swaps from now on. Our Mages ended up pulling just under 30k dps with beast swapping, so I'm failrly certain that in 25-mans, Vengeance is intended to provide that huge spike in threat, especially in Cata when stats will be much more inflated.
User avatar
Protigy
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 49
Joined: Thu Sep 02, 2010 12:18 pm
Location: Houston, Texas

Re: [4.0.1] TPS Concern

Postby Gaffer » Fri Oct 15, 2010 6:16 pm

Vengeance is probably the worst thing that has happened to tanking...ever.

I paid more attention to my Vengeance stack the second night I had a chance to tank and the numbers are ALL over the place. It takes anywhere between 10 seconds and 3 minutes for me to acquire a full stack of Vengeance. Randomly throughout the fight I'll find myself at 20% of max Vengeance. This randomness is pretty extreme when dealing with DPS in a raid environment. Trying to get them to slow because my tps is 60-70% of what it also could be at that point has been incredibly frustrating.
Gaffer
 
Posts: 139
Joined: Tue Oct 14, 2008 2:39 am

Re: [4.0.1] TPS Concern

Postby Meloree » Fri Oct 15, 2010 6:37 pm

Gaffer wrote:Vengeance is probably the worst thing that has happened to tanking...ever.

I paid more attention to my Vengeance stack the second night I had a chance to tank and the numbers are ALL over the place. It takes anywhere between 10 seconds and 3 minutes for me to acquire a full stack of Vengeance. Randomly throughout the fight I'll find myself at 20% of max Vengeance. This randomness is pretty extreme when dealing with DPS in a raid environment. Trying to get them to slow because my tps is 60-70% of what it also could be at that point has been incredibly frustrating.


I'm trying to figure out how to articulate just how much I agree with this sentiment without using phrases like "/signed" or "this".
Meloree
Maintankadonor
 
Posts: 1420
Joined: Wed Mar 12, 2008 10:15 am

Re: [4.0.1] TPS Concern

Postby Dantriges » Fri Oct 15, 2010 6:47 pm

That buff is somehow dissapearing in the buff summary for me, it seems.
Dantriges
 
Posts: 1252
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 12:39 am

Re: [4.0.1] TPS Concern

Postby Sparan » Fri Oct 15, 2010 7:58 pm

Yeah... Vengeance is definitely in a bad place right now. I've been reverting to some of my old warrior habits and intentionally placing myself in the way of unnecessary damage at times just to ensure myself the opportunity to taunt with a reasonable amount stacked on me. Fortunately, despite this, I'm finding that with a little work on tightening up the rotation I'm having absolutely no difficulties with threat under any circumstances, though.

As for ways to fix the situation, I think just changing the way the decay works would go a long way towards remedying the problem. Have it stack in just the same way, but have the buff duration refreshed on melee hit.

(As an aside, and only because people are mentioning PvP balance and vengeance: I also think Blizzard needs to make the decision they should've made about 4 years ago and just decide from on high which skills/buffs/talents are going to be active in Arena/BGs so that we don't have to hear yet again how a decent PvE idea is getting squelched due to PvP balance considerations.)
Sparan
 
Posts: 13
Joined: Sat Aug 01, 2009 9:37 am

Re: [4.0.1] TPS Concern

Postby Dantriges » Fri Oct 15, 2010 8:05 pm

Yeah the druid cotank was complaining a lot about rage issues. I was pretty fine , butseems I joined the fun after the first hotfixes went in.
Dantriges
 
Posts: 1252
Joined: Wed Jan 30, 2008 12:39 am

PreviousNext

Return to Advanced Theorycraft and Calculations

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 { ?