Basic Training 101: The Attack Table

[theckhd]

I'm not 100% sure, but I suspect that it's still the usual 2-roll system for specials, with the crit roll performed if the first roll resulted in a hit or blocked hit.

[jak3676]

Combat Table Coverage vs what's shown on my char sheet?

When trying to gear towards the 102.4% CTC what numbers do you need to adjust when looking at your char sheet? I see that MISS isn't shown at all - so there's 5% more CTC (4.4% against a level 88), right? Compared to the numbers shown on the char sheet, I also need to subtract 0.6% from Dodge, Parry and Block (for level 88 mobs), right? Is there anything else I'm missing?

I know there's some addons that can calculate this for you - I just want to be sure I understand where the basic numbers come from first.

[theckhd]

From your character sheet, you can simply add up your dodge, parry, and block percentages and add 5% miss. Your target is 102.4% for a level 88 boss.

If you'd rather think in terms of reaching 100% CTC, then you'd have to subtract off 0.6% from all four of those values. In practice, I find it far easier to just aim for 102.4% instead of doing the subtractions. There's also an addon called "Visual Combat Table" which will do the math for you if you mouse over a level 88 boss.

[theckhd]

Updated to reflect the change to 5% base dodge. Also slightly updated the descriptions of our abilities and fixed a link.

[Arcand]

I wonder if changing the titles of our guides would make them
more helpful to newbies.

Right now our top post is Basic Training 101. The '101' is
often understood to be the most basic information, the first-term
freshman class; people will be inclined to hit that first, and it
drops them into a slightly mathematical discourse about the
attack table.

Below that is what I consider our real Tanking 101 thread: the
"spec protection, at first just wear mail with stamina and strength
and get yourself a shield" stuff.

On the con side, the FAQ is somewhat famous under its current name
and changing it could be construed as shifting credit away from the
original author. That would be bad.

Would the usability of the guides be improved by changing their order
and renaming them to Tanking 101 (How to Get Started) and Tanking 102
(Introduction to Theory and Gearing), and would the benefits outweigh
the above concern and all the other drawbacks I haven't thought of
(including possibly search engine optimization)?

[theckhd]

The original intent was to have several BT101 articles, all covering different aspects of tank theorycrafting at a beginner level. However, there really isn't a need for them, nor do I have a lot of time to write them. The information in the Basic FAQ pretty much covers everything you'd want to have in a beginner's guide, and I don't think it makes sense to split each post up into its own topic.

Perhaps the simplest solution is to just drop the BT101 name entirely. I could change the name of this thread to "Theorycrafting 101: The Attack Table" or "Beginner Theorycrafting: The Attack Table." That would make it a little clearer that this thread isn't your first stop on the road to tanking.

I'm not opposed to changing the name of the 4.2 FAQ, but "Basic Training 101: 4.2 Protection Paladin FAQ" is a bit long-winded. If we did that, the Attack Table article could be bumped up to BT102. I'm fine with either choice, really.

Name recognition and google rank are something I hadn't thought of, though I'm not sure how important it is. We're actually pretty low in the results for "protection paladin," but anything with "tankadin" tends to put us at the top. Keeping "Protection Paladin" in the thread title is probably wise either way. Something funny is going on with the hyphen as well, google seems to prioritize the first few words. Maybe "4.2 Protection Paladin FAQ - Tankadin Basics" would be better, since it puts "protection paladin" in the front, and we'll already be getting high rankings for "tankadin" already.

[Toradin]

Target Miss % Dodge% Parry% Glancing%
Level Melee Spell
85 5.0 4 5.0 5.0 6

What are the "vanilla" (equal lvl) percentages for crit and hit?

I get how the level modifiers work for the "defense" version of the attack table but what about this version?

I want to set up my own spreadsheets so I can plug in my gear and see what holes need filling.

[Toradin]

Sorry :/

Just realized Glancing on offense is the same as Block on Defense.

Still not sure how the non-standard scaling of the Offensive Version of the Attack Table works for stuff like:

Miss/Melee; Miss/Spell; Parry

Any help/explanation would be appreciated.

[theckhd]

Glancing is only for auto-attacks. Bosses do have a chance to block melee attacks now (ever since 4.0, I think), but I'm not sure I ever updated the article to account for that. It works like glancing though, and you can't remove it from the table.

What exactly are you asking though? The formulas are pretty straightforward:

Code: Select all

melee_miss=5+0.5*(npc_lvl-player_level)+0.5.*lvl_flag
spell_miss=4+(npc_lvl-player_level)+10.*lvl_flag


where level_flag is 1 if ((npc_lvl-player_level)>2) and 0 otherwise.

[Toradin]

Dang, I love this forum/thread.

That's just what I was looking for.

It was the level flag that I couldn't come up with from just looking at the sequence of numbers.

I think the Melee modifier must be 1.5? If it is 0.5, then the result at 3 lvl difference is 7 not 8.

So, am I correct in assuming Parry's level flag modifier is 7.5 (understanding it only comes into effect on Melee attacks).

Also, does an Elite get the same "melee crit" and "glancing blow" modifiers as a Boss?

Are these formulas readily available somewhere so I don't have to pester you quite so much?

[theckhd]

Oops. I made an error in transcribing the MATLAB code, which still uses the old "defense/weapon skill" system. The code was:

Code: Select all

npc.phmiss=5+npc.skillgap.*(0.1+0.1.*skillflag);


Translated to level, this should be :

Code: Select all

melee_miss = 5 + 5*lvl_diff*(0.1+0.1*lvl_flag)
           = 5 + 0.5*lvl_diff + 0.5*lvl_diff*lvl_flag

I missed distributing the level difference into the second term. So for a level+3 boss or mob, it would be 5+0.5*3+0.5*3*1 = 5+1.5+1.5 = 8.

It doesn't matter whether a mob is normal, elite, or boss type - all that matters is the level difference. A level+3 mob will still give you an 8% miss chance, even if they're not a boss (i.e. a level 80 character attacking a level 83 mob in Deepholm or Uldum). Similarly for crit suppression and glances.

If you can read matlab code, everything is in the cataclysm branch of the matlabadin project. We're currently working on the MoP mechanics, which are slightly different from what's on live. Of course, you'll have to figure out where to look to find the information you want, which is non-trivial.

Once MoP goes live I'm sure I'll be revising this article to reflect the new mechanics; when I do, I'll include the formulas explicitly.

[tlitp]

Glancing is only for auto-attacks. Bosses do have a chance to block melee attacks now (ever since 4.0, I think), but I'm not sure I ever updated the article to account for that. It works like glancing though, and you can't remove it from the table.

The emphasized parts are inaccurate.

Common to both 4.x and 5.x :
1. All NPCs have a chance to block physical attacks (it can reach 0%, but it's there).
2. The damage reduction of blocked hits is level-independent, at 30%. The damage reduction of glancing blows is level-dependent, in contrast.
3. Autoattacks that are glancing blows cannot be blocked (nota bene : that's true even in 5.x). The same should be true for crushing blows in 5.x.
4. Ranged attacks can also be blocked. The same should be true in 5.x too.
5. Blocks cannot be removed from two-roll tables (i.e. "yellow" attacks).

4.x :
1. Blocks can be removed from one-roll tables (i.e. autoattacks), because "miss" events and glancing bows are rolled for first.
2. The chance to block an attack is level-independent.

5.x :
1. Blocks cannot be removed from autoattacks (i.e. the former one-roll tables).
2. The chance to block a physical attack seems to be level-dependent. Additional testing required.
3. Autoattacks are rolled for two times (not one, as in 4.x) : one for miss/GB/crit/CB/hit (in this order), and hits/crits roll once again for blocks.
4. "Yellow" attacks are rolled for three times (not two, as in 4.x) : one for hit/miss, one for critical strikes, one for blocks.

[Toradin]

Took a look at MatLab. Nicely done and it does make sense (well commented) but I'm having trouble reconciling the section on avoidance.

When I plug data into the MatLab Avoidance formula I get the following results:

13 pts Gear Avoidance Stat => 0.076858794% increased Avoidance
179 pts Gear Avoidance Stat => 1.04269442% increased Avoidance
358 pts Gear Avoidance Stat => 2.052776144% increased Avoidance

Yet, in the Wowhead gear database I find Stoneform Shoulders with a Dodge Rating of 13 that offers a 1.53% increase at level 40 and a Archaic Defender with a Dodge Rating of 13 that offers a 2.46% increase at level 31.

Is there a level modifier required?

[tlitp]

We're lazy bastards, matlabadin's cnv.dodge_dodge (and the parry equivalent) is level-invariant. That's because we're assuming a level-capped character.

[theckhd]

Glancing is only for auto-attacks. Bosses do have a chance to block melee attacks now (ever since 4.0, I think), but I'm not sure I ever updated the article to account for that. It works like glancing though, and you can't remove it from the table.

The emphasized parts are inaccurate.

To be fair, I was being brief, not rigorous. We don't have any ranged attacks in our arsenal, everything is coded as a spell or a melee attack with the dodge/parry flag disabled, so the only things of relevance are auto-attacks and melee abilities. And there's no stat you can stack to remove blocks from the table. Certainly it can be pushed off by misses/glancing, but I haven't heard of anyone stacking melee miss.