Jump to content


[Prot] 5.0 - I'm Sexy and I Know it

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

#201 Wrathblood


    Don Flamenco

  • • Former Guide Author/Contributor
  • 369 posts

Posted 01 March 2013 - 03:00 PM

I've edited my post to add more of the build-specific details (though I left out the Avoidance-Mastery and Mastery-Avoidance builds. Not sure if they're worth detailing or not) but an important point to make is spike management varies a good bit depending on the *size* of the spike. As Theck notes in his post, a tank taking 90% potential damage over 5 seconds is a dangerous situation and what we'd traditionally think of as a "spike", but a tank taking 60-70% of potential damage over a 10-second period of time, while less "spiky" is also still a dangerous situation. So the question comes up as to what sorts of situations you want to work on reducing the most.

Control-Haste is fantastic at cutting out the 90% spikes, but absolutely terrible against 60-70% spikes unless the tank is really clever about using ShoR at just the right times. Avoidance, on the other hand, is middle of the road to weak against 90% spikes, but has less than half as many 60-70% spikes as Control-Haste. Control-Mastery is probably the winner here because its pretty good against everything.

#202 Theck


    Don Flamenco

  • • Former Guide Author/Contributor
  • 304 posts

Posted 01 March 2013 - 04:51 PM

Absolutely love your summary. If slashdot has taught me anything, it's that everything is better with a car analogy.

I'm torn between C/Ha and C/Ma myself. Mel's argument about timing has a lot of weight, and the DPS contribution of haste is non-trivial. That said, you can also pull the time-shifting trick with C/Ma, you just don't have as much total SotR uptime to work with. Since my simulation is stochastic, it doesn't model that sort of thing, so it's basically conjecture at this point which is better. Does the extra 10% absolute SotR uptime (i.e. 50% uptime rather than 40%) mean you can apply most of that extra 10% to the high-danger periods? Half of it? Or is the vast majority of it just extra coverage during safe times? It's hard to say with any degree of certainty.

My guess is that C/Ha and C/Ma are both going to be more than sufficient for survivability, and it will simply come down to the encounter. A fight like Sha has mechanics that obviously lean towards C/Ma (or even pure Ma, many tanks didn't even hit/exp-cap for it). A fight with a very tight enrage timer and high Vengeance uptime might slant you towards C/Ma. And as you noted in the comment on my blog, an add fight may even slant you towards C/Av (sims forthcoming...soon?).

By now we're used to keeping multiple gear sets around, so the game of rock/paper/scissors we're dealing with here isn't new to experienced tanks. I think the neat part is that, unlike before, there really isn't one "default" gear set that's best most of the time. That means beginner and intermediate tanks, who might have just built up one set of gear and stuck with it all tier, may now have to start thinking about their gear a little more carefully. I don't think that's necessarily a bad thing.

#203 Wrathblood


    Don Flamenco

  • • Former Guide Author/Contributor
  • 369 posts

Posted 01 March 2013 - 07:44 PM

Thanks, Theck.

One thing that jumps out at me is the step forward the Avoidance strategy makes compared to the Control/Avoidance in terms of spike reduction. It was rather surprising to me and I attributed it to finally having enough itemization in Avoidance to hit a critical mass.

This is just sheer speculation on my part, but if my interpretation is correct, I wonder if next tier (Siege of Orgrimmar! Looks like we're getting 3 tiers this expansion) the increase in itemization available will allow Avoidance to take another step forward. Diminishing Returns might start eating Avoidance for breakfast at that point, but I also wouldn't be shocked to see Control-Avoidance establish itself as an actual equal to Control-Mastery (perhaps explaining why they didn't end up having us go with 0/30 on, GC, could make Avoidance too good down the road). Would allow some really exciting gearing options.

0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users