New players - pick a knight if you aren't a boxer

Discussion in 'Tanks' started by Time Burner 2, Feb 18, 2016.

Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.
  1. Xanathol Augur

    I don't disagree with your assessment regarding shields and how we got here, but rather was simply stating what led us down this path.

    S+B with just autoattack on today for a highend Warrior is ~15-17k... exactly what a 2her is for a knight. I still need to level my warrior and get him some gear but I was under the impression that Warrior DW dps was about the same (which was certainly true in parses I had before knights received the 2her proficiency). So unless things have changed, no, DW isn't a middle ground at all - please correct me with parses of each stance if you see otherwise.

    My input on this has nothing to do with SK dps - anything a Warrior gets I think an SK should be matched against - this is simply a design question. It is not 'sabotaging Warrior balance' to say that with the stances, there should be a discernible difference in tanking advantages and dps advantages; it's just common sense.
  2. Warpeace Augur

    Can we just scrap all the current discs and each class get 3 new ones tailored for their class next expansion. Then they can set mitigation levels maybe....
  3. Dre. Altoholic

    Somewhat apples vs oranges - you're missing War 2H and DW to complete that picture.

    I'm certainly not putting up those numbers but if all things are equal, a Warrior putting up 16k with a 1H is likely doing 20'ish with DW and closer to 30k with a 2H.

    Admittedly that's an off-the-cuff estimate extrapolated. I do have some parses with bazaar weapons at lvl 100.

    Late edit: I dug around my post history but didn't find them - likely they were only in beta forums or TSW. Before the 11/14 changes, DW@30% was doing less DPS than 1H.
  4. Triconix Augur

    Multiply the total damage absorbed by Repel that I said which was 27. That gives a total of 961065 damage absorbed. I added that to the total damage hit took to get the damage before Repel. I divided his actual damage taken to the damage taken before Repel and got .93 That means Repel accounts for roughly 7% mitigation.

    I'm not talking about length of time. If a warrior's LS is down, what then? A knight will arguably be a better option. Let's get this MT business out the window. Warriors are going to be the MTs no matter. At the very least we are just going to revert back to LS rotations. But if the last tank in the order dies and the first warrior's LS isn't back up, who is a better tank?

    Based on a parse from last night, the knight would be. He was able to take in roughly the same amount of damage per hit for a period 2+ minutes longer (6.75 minutes compared to 4). Based on my parse, the knight tanked 94% as well as the warrior, but for a period extending 2+ minutes longer. The warrior tanked 4 minutes. 4 minutes is our bread and butter time period. We will be at full strength for 3 minutes and very good for that next minute. Based on the arguments by you knights, the knights should tail off a lot by the 4-5 minute mark which would be around 30% of the fight. I would expect the average hit to be much greater than a 6% difference. At least that's what my logic tells me.

    Granted this is just one single parse so I can't put all my eggs into this one basket, but this isn't the first time I've seen damage intake this close between war and knights with both having DP.
  5. Brohg Augur

    I don't suppose we're acknowledging that there is very little besides autoattack to warrior dps? No? Okay, whatever.
  6. sojero One hit wonder

  7. Xanathol Augur

    Check back on my post - I do have parses re: DW before knights got 2her prof and it was exactly the same dps. In fact, if you go back to the SK thread and sift through the trolls & misdirection, you'll see that there were parses mentioned for warriors DW & 2her that were both in the ~16k range - some were provided by warriors in the thread. As I mentioned above, I don't know if anything has changed since then, but at that time warrior dps DW appeared virtually identical to 2her dps and current S+B dps. By all means, please correct this if it is wrong with parses, but right now, that's what the available parses show.

    Re: your beta parse, that's supports my point - right now, DW is not better than S+B and it comes down to ISS being too good. Again, given the state of dps for all tanks, it would probably be best served by increasing dps for DW & 2her profs accordingly.
  8. resullus New Member

    How close are the knight and warrior in gear? Magelos?
  9. Dre. Altoholic

    Except, it is... beta DW was a 30% mod. Today it's 80%. Though that's only half the story (it was originally lower than base mitigation too) and we're a far cry from it being proper.
    You certainly like to repeat yourself.

    Current: 1H < DW << 2H
    Ideal: 1H < 2H < DW
    Your suggestion: 1H <<<<< DW < 2H? No thanks.
  10. Xanathol Augur

    Considering per your own words you have parsed nothing recently and are only going off pure conjecture, I suggest you get some real data first instead of speaking out of the wrong end. As for my suggestion, to put numbers to it, without ISS I'd have S+B @ ~8k, DW @ ~12k , and 2her @ ~16k. From real parses much more current than what you are quoting / guessing, they are all basically all ~16k right now (would love someone to verify this). So if they were to scale it up off current war s+b, it would be 16 / 24 / 32.
  11. Triconix Augur

    Magelos? Ha, maybe if they were up-to-date. I know the warrior is full TBM raid gear. The knight is either the same or slightly inferior.
  12. Dre. Altoholic

    I run parse overlay 24x7. Haven't noticed a substantial change in mechanics since late 2014 when DW got bumped.
    Not far from the current proportions I'm seeing (though you list DW higher than I see in-game) Certainly nowhere near what I'd consider ideal though. Again, speaking from the perspective of proportions...

    Consider we boost the DPS of all tanks (one thing we can all agree on)

    Boosting activated DPS significantly but leaving current autoattack levels fairly unchanged would serve to dilute the proportional difference between autoattack when comparing one stance to another.

    So where you see 1.0, 1.5, 2.0, add activated DPS to get 2.0, 2.5, 3.0

    But Warriors need to be tiered differently, e.g. 1H=2.0, 2H=2.5, DW=3.0 and this is where we show the autoattack boosts remaining DW only. As Knights lack DW, the gains are higher in activated DPS which brings your stances closer.

    This might look like 1H=3.0, 2H=3.5. Again, talking strictly in internal proportions, not where one class compares to the other (totally different discussion)
  13. Nightops Augur

    This might be a little off considering for a time > 2 mins the paladin would have been using Mantle and Devout lines which do not stack with repel from my understanding. I would think the total damaged you added back in would still be the same, but considering some of that damage would actually have been absorbed under a disc / vie, the number difference would actually have been less making the mitigation % a bit lower. How much.. no idea.

    I don't think repel will make a knight the better option after LS /mantle+guardian are all down if they would change knight DP to 20%.

    Also.. if DP stays the same... why do some warriors fear they lost the best tanking role/title if all they need to do is revert back to a LS rotation to maintain this spot at the top? I hope some of these other warriors read what you said. That is the other point I said a long time ago... The warriors will just need to change when they are using and how they are using their abilities to maintain the best mitigating tank title.

    Again, right now, there won't be much of a tail off for knights because of the same base mitigations between knights and warriors within the DP, Vie, and innate areas. Yes, knights have repel.. but wars have some clickies and dicho. But change the knight DP down to 20% and that will take off 10% (based on description and not actual) and it will affect all but 2 mins of that 6 min fight.

    I'm not sure what the actuals would end up being, but when I tried to put some equations to it, I got a ~6% actual redux in mitigation when I took DP down to 20% (by description). Before that gets taken the wrong way... that would be on a actual base on ~53% actual mitigation... so its about a total of 12% difference between the classes (not 12% mitigation difference) when both are using their BEST disc mitigations and then moving down to 24% difference (on a 53% actual mitigation basis) between the classes sitting at nothing except their innates, vie, and DP. Granted, i didnt factor in repel, nor did I add in anything else which warriors use.. I only did it based off LS and the 3 knight discs.
  14. Mistatk Augur

    So. In a group with druid aura, ench aura, bard proc songs, what you think happens when knights throw out a couple fast cast spam nukes. Oh, lets say their running hedgewizard brew also, just cuz why wouldn't they be.
    Remember that knights get AA's to amplify any nuke or heal they cast too, or proc.

    What you think bard fierce eye and ench illusions of grandeur can do, chromatic haze.

    Warrior can not cast any spells period.

    So all the diff procs stuff can stack now, who you think that helps more warrior or knights?

    What you think the warrior can cast? And we have to try to do a LS "rotation" despite what raid event mechanics are in play, just to tank as well as knights do at all times?

    You guys nuts. But, I know, you already said its completely broken and needs fixing, just never sounds like it when i read this forum.
  15. p2aa Augur

    Against TBM raid bosses, I can last well for like 5 min 30, if healers aren't doing stupid things and are on the ball : 3 min defensive disc, 1 min Dichotomic Shielding, 45 sec Gardian's Bravery, 30 sec Warlord's Bravery (I checked a few times and it last 30 sec for me, not 45 sec, I use it alone without stacking anything else at the time, bar of course Stout Defense and Field Protector always running), 15 sec Warrior's Bulwark.
    Then I use Warlord Tenacity, my death chance has increased though compared to the former 5 min 30.
    2 min later, so at the 7 min 30 mark, the rest of the abilities I have that I can use, Third Spire, Hold the Line, Resplendant Glory, Imperator's Command, Warlord Resurgence, Blade Guardian are really marginal on my survival output.

    If we take Knights, they start with :
    Mantle stacked with DP, last 1 min
    Holy / Unholy Guardian last 2 min
    Carapace stacked with DP, how long it last versus raid bosses ? the threesold dmg is half the mantle one, but it's 20 % mitigation instead of 35 %, so does it last finally around the same 1 min ?
    SK can add then Reaver's Bargain, it's last 2 min around
    So Paladins have 4 min, SK have 6 min.
    Then they have all the time around Repel to spam, giving them 7 % mitigation nearly all the time ?

    The HP advantage is in fact nearly the same, Knights can keep on themselves a 17 k HP boost all the time. Warrior will have a temporary advantage for 3 min when Dicho Shield and Warlord tenacity are up. Yes, if warriors have Growth cast on them 24/24 they will have more than knights, but it depends of an external source.

    A good question is how much the 1300 AC advantage of Stout Defense from warriors compare to the 7 % mitigation of Repel ?

    Anyway, it shows that atm give or take Warriors and Knights mitigation is around the same versus raid bosses, and this is what I consider not "right" as Warriors should have an edge on Knights.

    A question for SK.
    Isn't Impudent Influence better to use than Carapace ? The threesold is 50 k less dmg, but the bonus coming with it aren't better to compensate ? Both are 20 % mitigation.
    Also, what is the power of Dichotomic Bite ? it returns from what I read around 55 k HP every 6 sec you can use it ? Not sure if it's working on raid bosses and how much good it can be there.

    Also, I think you can still recognize good warriors versus bad warriors in the mitigation power. Both type will be the same under Defensive Disc 3 min, but this is after that you can have some difference. Both will be under DP OK, but the bad warriors will use nothing else, while good ones will use accordingly their secondary mitigation tools under DP, and chaining them so that they can stay the longest time until Defensive Disc is back.
  16. Warpeace Augur

    Here we go merrily hopping from thing to thing to continue the attacks on Knights.

    Warriors can't Nuke? Wait that's outside your class description move along you will get no Knight sympathy here. Warriors didn't want Utility or a spell book so why should anyone care if Warriors cant cast spells and get use from them in the first place....
  17. sojero One hit wonder


    I find Impudent better in the group game or if there is ramp because it gives the pet more dps. I find Vizat carapace better on raid mobs because it seems to last a bit longer than impudent, not much, 10-20 seconds but that is a good amount of time vs a raid boss. Vizat's usually lasts between 1 min 30 sec and 2 minutes for me.

    The 17k hp is nice, but can be a real pita to recast while getting beat on, and it has a higher decay than the shm/druid, so they are about equal when you consider the avg hp over the time of the spell. SS has a long cast time and a significant recast time.

    Yes the 1300 AC is just as good or better because it makes the di usually hit for less, not always but most of the time, while repel is great and absorbs a lot of damage, it also doesn't stack with vie's, thus out of that 7% what part would the vie that a knight has on absorb anyway? SB, protective, carapace/mantle, all make that 7% less. Just as we had the discussion before that repel is always worth casting while a vie is on, it does make the second hit usually higher (lower total damage out of the 2 hits) but that reduces the impact that it has (though it is still better) these are factors that are not easily seem or calculated for. Also I usually last the full 1 min from mantle, so it does nothing to extend its up time. On vizat/Impudent it is usually the proc cast that wares it off not the time limit, and I haven't pulled out the logs to see how much total damage during it to see if it was the max damage that took it off.
  18. sojero One hit wonder


    He neglected to mention all the stuff that can boost warrior stuff more than knight stuff, bard songs, shm epic, bst, etc.

    Makes me wonder if DW is better when you add in all the ADPS, anyone tested?
  19. Kamea Augur


    I haven't tested it in a clean/controlled matter, but I've parsed DW's sustained DPS tanking in groups with aDPS, it wasn't an abnormally higher DPS gain vs S&B or 2H. Granted, warrior DPS when using DW over a sustained group period is actually respectable (~44k DPS for me.)

    I don't see any situation where it'd be worth using DW over 2H for a burn, especially with shaman epic. 2H benefits more from crit damage.

    From my controlled testing (-not- with aDPS), DW is very close to 2H without discing, but 2H is quite ahead when discing. This is because 2H benefits a lot from our burn of Brutal + Mighty. If anything, I'd hypothesize that aDPS boosting these discs would tilt aDPS in 2H's favor. On the other hand, DW likes "Increase Hit Damage" mods, mods we supply ourselves.

    Keep in mind: We need to use 2H + 2H stance for at least 1 round of our burn, to use Heroic Blade and Rampage (This is why Dre wants 2H's damage mod added to our DW stance), and to a lesser extent Shield Topples and Calc Strikes
  20. sojero One hit wonder


    Makes me almost wonder (pure speculation) if they wanted DW to be the higher sustained group tanking setup, SB to be raid tanking, and 2h for burn. Would make sense to me. Thanks for the info, and I would agree that some 2h mod needs to be added to dw, but would have to be regulated to not destroy the reason for 2h.
Thread Status:
Not open for further replies.