Jump to content


Photo

Cataclysm Tanking/Protection Field Manual :: Updated Feb 9, 2011 (4.0.6)


  • This topic is locked This topic is locked
475 replies to this topic

#461 iNs1d3tRiP

iNs1d3tRiP

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 15 posts

Posted 20 June 2011 - 02:24 PM

The only, and I mean ONLY reason Blizzard has said they want to redesign or nerf prot's mastery is because they want us to always be able to benefit from more mastery. As far as they've said, it has nothing to do with how much damage we do or don't take nor whether we're able to get full Combat Table Coverage.


First, the Holy shield change doesn't affect benefiting from mastery at all. Paladins still want to cap mastery even with the current version of HS. Second, changing block mechanics is a poor way of getting Paladins to benefit from mastery because it will always be a nerf. If we block all of incoming physical damage (that is not parried or dodged) then raising requiring us to benefit more from Mastery would require us not haveing full combat table coverage. You say this isn't about full combat table coverage, but the two are inseparable when it comes to tanking (unless you are going to design mastery to do something other than just block, like every other tanking class)

If you really look at allowing Paladins to always benefit from Mastery, then it is ultimately going to do EXACTLY THE SAME THING as a Buff like Sunwell radiance. The only difference is that if they do not go the Sunwell radiance route, then all the bosses will hit the tank exactly the same. There don't need to be any other reasons why that is stupid other than the bosses should get progressively stronger as everyone moves up in tiers. Therefore, Fireland bosses should require more total avoidance/block than previous bosses for ful combat table coverage.

Changing HS isn't addressing the problem you quoted. Making higher level bosses more likely to hit the tank will.

EDIT:

Unglyphed Divine Protection gives you 44% damage reduction post block (1-(0.7*0.8)) whereas Holy Shield gives you 50% damage reduction.


I realize this is a thread for high level paladins in the highest tier of raiding, but I would just like to point out exactly how much this change really hurts paladin tanking at lower gear levels (pre raid). I know most people aren't concerned about that, but I think it deserves at least a *little* consideration by Blizzard.

At lower gear levels, it probably would be a better idea to macro it than trying to use it as another CD.

#462 Meloree

Meloree

    Bored

  • Members
  • 32 posts

Posted 20 June 2011 - 02:58 PM

I realize this is a thread for high level paladins in the highest tier of raiding, but I would just like to point out exactly how much this change really hurts paladin tanking at lower gear levels (pre raid). I know most people aren't concerned about that, but I think it deserves at least a *little* consideration by Blizzard.

At lower gear levels, it probably would be a better idea to macro it than trying to use it as another CD.


Can you explain this position in a little bit more detail? You've made a couple of assertions, but they don't match up very well with my experiences in tanking. All the high level paladins in the highest tier of raiding were pre-raid at some point in Cataclysm - or were doing raid content at an extremely low gear level.

This change to Holy Shield is a buff even when you can't block cap - because it weights the dice in your favor when it's up. 5-man bosses have mechanics, too, and they're certainly not tuned around block-capped 200khp tanks. Being able to say "this situation is dangerous, I can increase my chance of survival here" in exchange for slightly higher throughput damage is always a Good Thing. Some unblocked hits will get through, and some hits will be blocked, and I think all tanks, regardless of gear level, have the potential to be genuinely better off with an active (unmacroed) Holy Shield. Malthrinn and Liar have already covered that extremely well. If you want to dispute that, I think it will take more than an unsupported assertion to do it.

#463 Fierss

Fierss

    Von Kaiser

  • Members
  • 39 posts

Posted 20 June 2011 - 03:50 PM

Holy Shield only applies the additional block value IF the attack is blocked, and not dodged/parried/missed

20% off of 0 damage is still 0. Neither CD does anything when dodging/parrying/being missed.

I realize this is a thread for high level paladins in the highest tier of raiding, but I would just like to point out exactly how much this change really hurts paladin tanking at lower gear levels (pre raid). I know most people aren't concerned about that, but I think it deserves at least a *little* consideration by Blizzard.

At lower gear levels, it probably would be a better idea to macro it than trying to use it as another CD.

Having weaker gear or being in lower difficulty content is not a reason to dumb down mechanics. If anything, you want people in 5 mans training for their future raids so that it is second nature. Also, if losing the extra block % would hurt people like you say, it would be even more important for them to use the CD properly.

#464 Kinmaul

Kinmaul

    Piston Honda

  • Members
  • 101 posts

Posted 20 June 2011 - 05:15 PM

Sir, in my opinion and experience... Inquisition should NEVER be used as a protection paladin. Based off of all the current raiding content we have there's no reason to justify it other then toying with some DPS #'s, and even then it might not be efficient. The only possible challenging AoE trash faced that I see most tanks and even other paladins fail on, but not the case for me (I know... =P ), is the aoe trash during the Throne of the Four Winds encounter. Here are the tools you have to make your job a cakewalk that often I see many paladins neglect...

1. Avenging Wrath (+20% dmg)
2. Holy Wrath (Instant dude! +double against undead!(this is flat out wrong, it does not deal double damage vs undead) + stun capability w/ glyphs) (Buffed by Inq)
3. Hammer of the Righteous (Again, Instant dude!) (AoE component buffed by Inq)
4. Consecrate (Enough said.) (Buffed by Inq)
5. Avengers Shield (Situation based). (Buffed by Inq)
6. Warstop (Tauren Racial, and if you're horde).

Paladins hands down are still the KINGS of AoE tanking, and there is no reason to use Inquisition at all. By the time you go through using all the listed abilities, you'll have CD's available again. Sure you got other factors too such as: making sure all your dps doesn't go instant dps haywire on aoe adds... You got hunter misdirects, and rogues ToT on top of that. Cheers.


Why would you make the claim that "many paladins" do not use the abilities you listed? The entire AoE rotation recieves a 30% damage bonus from using Inq. Since you don't spend holy power on Inq what do you spend it on?

From personal experience (Whelp tanking on heroic Halfus and Black phase add tank on heroic Maloriak; we don't AoE adds on Heroic Conclave instead a DK kites them) Inq helps me generate significantly more AoE threat which allows our dps to get on the adds sooner and without worry of pulling aggro. I agree that we are are excellent AoE tanks, but not using Inq is a mistake that you should fix asap.

#465 Roameo

Roameo

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 2 posts

Posted 20 June 2011 - 06:22 PM

My mistake on the Holy Wrath component error.

Instead of Inquisition, I use SoTr and rotate in between each add, and obviously WoG if its needed.

So with that said. Some #'s Wiz, should check out the overal dmg (high/low) with using SoTr vs. doing Inq as a whole.

*Edit*
I am not a number cruncher, and it bothered me enough to look at the general abilities & numbers in more detail... Inq only buffs the holy component, and with that in mind I believe doing SoTr (grant it, it being single target), will compete #'s sake.

#466 Meloree

Meloree

    Bored

  • Members
  • 32 posts

Posted 20 June 2011 - 07:29 PM

Instead of Inquisition, I use SoTr and rotate in between each add, and obviously WoG if its needed.

So with that said. Some #'s Wiz, should check out the overal dmg (high/low) with using SoTr vs. doing Inq as a whole.

*Edit*
I am not a number cruncher, and it bothered me enough to look at the general abilities & numbers in more detail... Inq only buffs the holy component, and with that in mind I believe doing SoTr (grant it, it being single target), will compete #'s sake.


Seal of Truth is also Holy damage, and not exclusive with Inquisition. There is no reason not to use Inq during AoE, and many reasons to use it.

Are you confusing Seal of Insight with Inquisition? Nobody is really advocating the use of Seal of Insight during AoE.

#467 iNs1d3tRiP

iNs1d3tRiP

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 15 posts

Posted 20 June 2011 - 07:37 PM

This change to Holy Shield is a buff even when you can't block cap - because it weights the dice in your favor when it's up.


I think you are taking my post out of context. The context to which I was posting was a response to showing how the "new" HS is superior to DP as far as physical damage reduction goes. However, when block chances are lower then, probably close to around 85%, then HS will not reduce as much physical damage reduction.

Some unblocked hits will get through, and some hits will be blocked, and I think all tanks, regardless of gear level, have the potential to be genuinely better off with an active (unmacroed) Holy Shield. Malthrinn and Liar have already covered that extremely well. If you want to dispute that, I think it will take more than an unsupported assertion to do it.


I also agree, but the only disagreement is that I was not clear enough about what I was talking about, and you took my post out of context because of my obscurity.

But for the sake of argument, and on a slightly more practical note, tanking in 5 mans is much different from tanking in raids as far as trash is concerned. Sometimes a lower geared tank in a heroic may not have players who can cc as well as they should. In this case it can put stress on the healer, not because of burst damage, just because of overall damage taken. It is possible fore lower tier healers to run out of mana because the lower tier tanks were taking too much damage. True, CC is an option, but in some cases a flat 10% is better than 20% when damage is steady and overwhelming instead of spike and overwhelming.

You can take that last paragraph with a grain of salt. I'm not willing to defend it anymore than I already have, as what I said earlier was talking about HS vs DP and not HS as a nerf by itself.

Moving on....

Having weaker gear or being in lower difficulty content is not a reason to dumb down mechanics. If anything, you want people in 5 mans training for their future raids so that it is second nature. Also, if losing the extra block % would hurt people like you say, it would be even more important for them to use the CD properly.


I'm not for dumbing down mechanics, but I do think the best criticism of the new HS is that it's just another button to press. There are already tons of abilities in WoW, adding another ability doesn't make the game anymore "smart". Yes, it further distinguishes the good from the bad players, but honestly how many buttons do we need to show who's skilled? Is being skilled only about teaching your fingers muscle memory for keybindings in certain situations? I think the "passive" aspects of tanking (and dpsing and healing as well) can sometimes be more "skillful" than the "active" if only because the passive aspects require much more subtlety and keen observation of circumstances. As Malthrinn said,

But that doesn't actually help the legions of people who (again, going from the Holy Shield discussion) are running out of either keybinds or mental attention to optimally handle every aspect of tanking. Those people would be better served if they knew which corners to cut.



#468 Grigorim

Grigorim

    Piston Honda

  • Members
  • 112 posts

Posted 20 June 2011 - 07:58 PM

Seal of Truth is also Holy damage, and not exclusive with Inquisition. There is no reason not to use Inq during AoE, and many reasons to use it.


He's referring to Shield of the Righteous by a non-standard acronym, most likely, not Seal of Truth.

As for the request for numbers in #465, you have a link in #458 that is, granted, out of date, but the resident numbers guru in #459 is saying that Inq instead of SotR is even better than that currently for AoE. You say that Inq "only buffs the holy component", which is an odd thing to say when it buffs *all* of your damage except white and your primary HotR target. There's no "only holy damage" when it comes to prot damage, holy is the vast majority of the damage in an AoE situation.

#469 Theck

Theck

    Don Flamenco

  • Members
  • 300 posts

Posted 20 June 2011 - 08:00 PM

Instead of Inquisition, I use SoTr and rotate in between each add, and obviously WoG if its needed.

So with that said. Some #'s Wiz, should check out the overal dmg (high/low) with using SoTr vs. doing Inq as a whole.

*Edit*
I am not a number cruncher, and it bothered me enough to look at the general abilities & numbers in more detail... Inq only buffs the holy component, and with that in mind I believe doing SoTr (grant it, it being single target), will compete #'s sake.


I can guarantee that on more than one target Inq is more damage per cast time than SotR. It was true in 4.0 at level 80, and while I haven't updated the AoE simulations yet, the single-target simulations already show that Inq is higher damage per cast than an unmodified SotR (in other words, one that is not buffed by either Inq or Sacred Duty). Once you factor in the massive amount of HotR damage that you'll be buffing on 3+ targets, Inq will the hands-down winner.

The only thing that might eclipse it is an alternating Inq/SotR sequence that gets some Inq-buffed SotRs off without sacrificing too much Inq uptime, but it's unlikely to be a large increase except on 2-3 targets. 4+ should still favor Inq.

#470 Charybdis

Charybdis

    Don Flamenco

  • Members
  • 291 posts

Posted 20 June 2011 - 08:42 PM

I can guarantee that on more than one target Inq is more damage per cast time than SotR. It was true in 4.0 at level 80, and while I haven't updated the AoE simulations yet, the single-target simulations already show that Inq is higher damage per cast than an unmodified SotR (in other words, one that is not buffed by either Inq or Sacred Duty). Once you factor in the massive amount of HotR damage that you'll be buffing on 3+ targets, Inq will the hands-down winner.

The only thing that might eclipse it is an alternating Inq/SotR sequence that gets some Inq-buffed SotRs off without sacrificing too much Inq uptime, but it's unlikely to be a large increase except on 2-3 targets. 4+ should still favor Inq.


I believe he was talking about Seal of Truth (since he did SoTr and not SotR) alternating between targets, which is what we'd be doing anyway on stuff that lasts long enough to get stacks up. Even then though, Inq is going to significantly increase the damage of doing that.

iNs1d3tRiP: I can guarantee Blizzard isn't going to just nerf the block conversion of Mastery and call it good. They specifically say they want us benefiting from any amount of Mastery, which means they'll be totally redesigning the way it works for us, not just nerfing it from patch to patch.

The HS change, admittedly, was probably to raise our overall damage taken. It also gives more control over our survival than just stats though, so in the end for the good players it's really a buff.

#471 Fallenangel

Fallenangel

    Don Flamenco

  • Members
  • 485 posts

Posted 22 June 2011 - 03:06 PM

There seems to a rather large discrepancy between the statements made here and reality. A person reading this thread would surmise that reaching the block cap is a trivial act and that mastery capping is a serious problem. However, when you look at armory links, even of characters that are extremely well geared, none of them is block capped or close to that. Most are hovering at roughly 90% for dodge+parry+block+miss.
In any case, I don't see mastery capping (now or in future tiers) as a serious problem. Mastery can be reforged off, and warriors have a soft cap on it has well. Consider the parallels: beyond a certain threshold, paladins and warriors both gain less from mastery - warriors by only benefiting from critblock and paladins by reforging to avoidance.

#472 ZeroEdge

ZeroEdge

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 21 posts

Posted 22 June 2011 - 03:36 PM

There seems to a rather large discrepancy between the statements made here and reality. A person reading this thread would surmise that reaching the block cap is a trivial act and that mastery capping is a serious problem. However, when you look at armory links, even of characters that are extremely well geared, none of them is block capped or close to that. Most are hovering at roughly 90% for dodge+parry+block+miss.
In any case, I don't see mastery capping (now or in future tiers) as a serious problem. Mastery can be reforged off, and warriors have a soft cap on it has well. Consider the parallels: beyond a certain threshold, paladins and warriors both gain less from mastery - warriors by only benefiting from critblock and paladins by reforging to avoidance.


I'm at avg ilevel of 358 (still got 2 blues on as it is, no Heroic raid gear).

Just my base stats on the Armory have me at 90.41% combined Dodge (10.97%)/Parry (12.78%)/Block (61.66%)/Miss (5%).

That is also buff-less. Add in Horn of Winter/Strength of Earth, Kings/MotW, Food, Elixir. Last time I bothered to look in a raid, I was a whole lost closer to 102.4%.

CTC (and by extension Mastery capping) is doable once you get raid-buffs rolling currently. In 4.2's content, it will be that much easier, likely to reach it with no raid buffs involved.

I agree that Mastery should not have a "cap" to it, like Hit/Expertise do, cause it was not supposed to be designed to (see the 28 other specs that have no legitimate cap, where it goes from useful to 0), so maybe they do need to break it into 2 components. The problem there lies in the fact that, blocking only has really 2 components: Block more often and Block more damage. Warriors already have the Block more damage one. We got the Block more often. But evidently, we now block too much.

I realize this would again be very passive, but maybe if they lowered (not to the level of Warrior block, but closer) our Block Chance from Mastery, but made it so on successful blocks, we were healed for say 1% of the damage taken, per Mastery? Or even say 0.5%, just to make capping the heal beyond impossible (I don't think reaching 100 Mastery will even be doable in Cata, let alone 200. Probably more likely to reach 50-60 tops by Deathwing tier). This wouldn't jeopardize our survivability, while making Mastery more useful for us once again beyond just CTC coverage, since this would imply it takes a little more to get there, too. I do realize this is slightly akin to our old Blessing of Sanctuary, just for health instead, but hey... it works, right? Then again, this might make us a little too OP for things like add tanking (I picture Maloriak right now).

#473 MBar

MBar

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 15 posts

Posted 22 June 2011 - 03:47 PM

RE: Fallenangel

Armory does not include raid buffs, consumables and procs like Windwalk. Add all or even some of these together and you go from ~85% CTC to capped.

87% Base CTC + 12.1% Symbotic Worm proc + 3.4% Windwalk proc = 102.5% CTC, and that's without using Mastery elixirs etc., and my gear most certainly isn't Heroic.

But of course I've reforged everything to Mastery and have Mastery Jewelcrafting epic gems etc. Next tier, it'll just be an issue of being aware of what CTC% you'll actually have mid-fight and reforging around it to increase the chance of dodge and parry while remaining CTC capped.

On another note, it only just struck me that the new raid tier of tank trinkets makes CTC calculcations considerably easier for us (while reducing the chance of CTC capping also technically). Scales of Life, Spidersilk Spindle and Stay of Execution all do not have mastery/dodge/parry procs/uses, so the only CTC variance mid-fight soon could be Windwalk.

#474 iNs1d3tRiP

iNs1d3tRiP

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 15 posts

Posted 22 June 2011 - 10:17 PM

I realize this would again be very passive,




I think this is the problem with WoW currently. For some reason absolutely nothing can be "passive" without it being poor design. I realize we don't want everything to be passive because then classes don't have any different feel or change when going from one to another, but I almost feel like we are going too active. I think passive things that allow you to focus on raid position and such is very valuable for a tank, and I think we (or at least Blizzard) is forgetting this. I don't understand why spamming buttons all the time is "good design".

Of course, I think there should be a distinction between active in a heroic, and active in normal, and it is a very difficult and delicate thing to balance, but we need to get out of the mode of thinking that everything that is passive is bad design. It may be necessary.

Armory does not include raid buffs, consumables and procs like Windwalk. Add all or even some of these together and you go from ~85% CTC to capped.



Consumables and raid buffs should be included when reaching block cap, but it really isn't block capping unless you have 100% up time. I'm not saying to get rid of those trinkets, but even if you have procs to increase your mastery to cap you, you still want mastery on your gear until you have 100% uptime if you're goal is really to "smooth" out burst damage. This doesn't mean that "capping" mastery isn't a problem, I'm just saying that including procs is a little exaggeration in calling yourself "capped".

#475 Theck

Theck

    Don Flamenco

  • Members
  • 300 posts

Posted 23 June 2011 - 12:13 PM

I think this is the problem with WoW currently. For some reason absolutely nothing can be "passive" without it being poor design. I realize we don't want everything to be passive because then classes don't have any different feel or change when going from one to another, but I almost feel like we are going too active. I think passive things that allow you to focus on raid position and such is very valuable for a tank, and I think we (or at least Blizzard) is forgetting this. I don't understand why spamming buttons all the time is "good design".

Of course, I think there should be a distinction between active in a heroic, and active in normal, and it is a very difficult and delicate thing to balance, but we need to get out of the mode of thinking that everything that is passive is bad design. It may be necessary.


Certainly I agree that "passive" does not necessarily mean bad, and there needs to be some passive element to our gameplay (base mitigation, seals, etc.). But Holy Shield is a pretty iconic talent, and it deserved better than to be a passive element of our mitigation, in my opinion.

The question of "how passive and how active should the class be" is going to be a very subjective line though. And judging from the response to the HS change, we're probably approaching the boundary line. I and many other tanks think this is a great step, because we want more active mitigation; a lot of other tanks don't, because they feel it's too active or will make their passive mitigation too weak. I think there's a valid conversation to be had on that topic, and Blizzard is probably going to be paying close attention to how this change is regarded once it goes live and people get to play with it.

That said, I think that the new HS will actually make it easier for me to pay attention to other things. I frequently get into a situation where I want to use a cooldown, but have to quickly run through my options and remind myself what I'm "allowed" to use and what's reserved for boss mechanics later in the fight. Now I'll have to do that less often, because I'll be able to mash Holy Shield without thinking too hard.

#476 iNs1d3tRiP

iNs1d3tRiP

    Glass Joe

  • Members
  • 15 posts

Posted 24 June 2011 - 01:39 AM

That said, I think that the new HS will actually make it easier for me to pay attention to other things. I frequently get into a situation where I want to use a cooldown, but have to quickly run through my options and remind myself what I'm "allowed" to use and what's reserved for boss mechanics later in the fight. Now I'll have to do that less often, because I'll be able to mash Holy Shield without thinking too hard.


I really agree with this. I think the HS shield change isn't necessarily bad, but we cannot kid ourselves into thinking this is making our mastery more active, nor is it about "fixing" Divine Bulwark's cap. Yes, HS benefits from mastery (and as far as blocking goes it is just another CD like DP or AD) but as many people have pointed out, it changes nothing about how much we value mastery or removing a cap to mastery.

The HS shield change, in my opinion and has been stated earlier, is to increase overall damage and make tanking more "active". Also, I'd be careful to say that the line is subjective, I think "fuzzy" is a better term in that in some fights a more active tanking style will be more acceptable than in other fights. The point is that if Blizz is serious about changing mastery (so that we can benefit from it past a cap) to an "active" component, then that change may easily push that "line" to over active.

I think a lot of this comes down to semantics, but I truly worry about problems of tanking becoming too active. I think a short CD like HS is good for the reasons that I quoted you for, but if they keep adding more "active" abilities...




1 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 1 guests, 0 anonymous users