World of Warcraft - English (NA) Forums -> Any block fix requires a 100% block rate

Teafourtwo

< Carnage >

Ner'zhul

20. Re: Any block fix requires a 100% block rate 05/26/2009 02:40:35 PM PDT

My guilds MT is a warrior.
He never complains. Neither do we.

I would say that he needs a bit of a health boost.

So I don't know if he is just epic at his class. Maybe we have epic healers?
Or a combination of both. But we have yet to have a problem with his performance in the warrior class.

Seems like the only way a class/player will be happy is if they are better than the rest.
You're lying if you don't.

Heltamr

< Blades Of Rage >

Malygos

21. Re: Any block fix requires a 100% block rate 05/26/2009 02:40:39 PM PDT

The DK block mechanic would likely be an unbreakable armor spin off, and have little to do with parry.

He wear no shoeshine
He got toe-jam football
He got monkey finger
He shoot Coca-Cola
He say 'I know you, you know me'

Migol

< Artifice >

Shadowsong

22. Re: Any block fix requires a 100% block rate 05/26/2009 02:40:46 PM PDT

Q u o t e:

Either you parry an attack or you don't.

Semantics matter.

On my rogue the other day I stealthed in Warsong Gulch.

In the middle of the field. On a sunny day. With no cover higher than the grass at my ankles.

Get the concept?

Felhoof

< Fire and Blood >

Quel'dorei

24. Re: Any block fix requires a 100% block rate 05/26/2009 02:43:27 PM PDT

Q u o t e:

In those days though the druid had 15-25% more HP so in effect the druids TTL in a worst case scenario was still about equal to that of a warrior. Warriors are currently the lowest HP tank and they have the worst TTL in a worst case scenario. (physical mitigation at least) So block either needs to be 100% for warriors or they need to have an HP buff.

And that's exactly my point. Saying that you need 100% block rate or it won't work is incorrect. We already have a model to follow that does work, and was good for quite a few fights.

I don't necessarily believe that their armor would need to increase for this to work; remember, we're talking about high baseline mitigation vs lower baseline but higher overall. You can do that with high armor but crushing vs med armor and no crushing, or you can do that with med armor, no block vs. lower armor and block. You would likely need to have warriors and paladins have the highest overall HP to compensate for dealing with spikes, but it need not be tremendous; it would just need to be higher than what druids and especially DKs have now.

Of course paladins and warriors would be balanced differently given that paladins already can block all non-avoided attacks. That could also be changed.

"druids of different spec should be able to combine their powers to form a giant voltronesque owlcattreebear siege weapon piloted by small woodland creatures" -sadfacegnome

Vexione

< Scalebane >

Eredar

25. Re: Any block fix requires a 100% block rate 05/26/2009 02:43:32 PM PDT

Q u o t e:
The DK block mechanic would likely be an unbreakable armor spin off, and have little to do with parry.

No no no, I'm not talking some gimmick DK ability, I'm talking overhaul the whole idea of parry in the game.

DPS and healing are evolving, why shouldn't tanking?

Q u o t e:
You can stretch your imagination with that, but changing the definition of a word bothers me.

So you're going to say parrying an attack doesn't require a massive amount of strength and stamina to do over and over again? and that your body avoids ALL the damage when you deflect a blow with your weapon?

Listen, I didn't invent the word, but I want to see tanking become easier for all 4 classes that can do so.

[ Post edited by Vexione ]

Q u o t e:
God I hope you fall into a pit of venomous snakes.
That are on fire.
With guns.

Resta, Malorne

Marthe

< Afterlife >

Cenarius

26. Re: Any block fix requires a 100% block rate 05/26/2009 02:54:55 PM PDT

Q u o t e:

And that's exactly my point. Saying that you need 100% block rate or it won't work is incorrect. We already have a model to follow that does work, and was good for quite a few fights.

I don't necessarily believe that their armor would need to increase for this to work; remember, we're talking about high baseline mitigation vs lower baseline but higher overall. You can do that with high armor but crushing vs med armor and no crushing, or you can do that with med armor, no block vs. lower armor and block. You would likely need to have warriors and paladins have the highest overall HP to compensate for dealing with spikes, but it need not be tremendous; it would just need to be higher than what druids and especially DKs have now.

Of course paladins and warriors would be balanced differently given that paladins already can block all non-avoided attacks. That could also be changed.

Your idea could work, but the reason that Blizzard removed crushing blows in the first place was because they didn't like the amount of randomness it added to incoming damage. What you are proposing is simply re-implementing crushing blows, but making warriors/paladins the only ones to take them.

You would also need to drastically increase the amount of HP that warriors/paladins have. You would probably be looking at 65-70k tanks in the current tier of content.

Vlorg

< Rocket Science >

Arthas

27. Re: Any block fix requires a 100% block rate 05/26/2009 03:01:20 PM PDT

Warrior and paladin already need a raw stamina and avoidance buff to match the dmg intake (that isn't nearly covered by block mechanism, hence the fix) difference between them and DKs

Felhoof

< Fire and Blood >

Quel'dorei

28. Re: Any block fix requires a 100% block rate 05/26/2009 03:01:47 PM PDT

Q u o t e:

Your idea could work, but the reason that Blizzard removed crushing blows in the first place was because they didn't like the amount of randomness it added to incoming damage. What you are proposing is simply re-implementing crushing blows, but making warriors/paladins the only ones to take them.

You would also need to drastically increase the amount of HP that warriors/paladins have. You would probably be looking at 65-70k tanks in the current tier of content.

It really depends on how big these 'crushes' really are. If we're talking on the order of 15% more damage instead of 50% more damage, the actual needed HP is fairly low. And while Blizzard doesn't like randomization, they don't like static values either - and this would be much better than the current static values where paladins and warriors simply take more damage in the normal case.

It's possible that blizzard wouldn't like this sort of thing and I'm willing to believe that. I'm also willing to believe that they'd accept the tradeoff of having a tank with more HP but more spiky damage intake compared to a tank with steadier damage intake but taking more overall damage and having less HP as a reasonable choice to make. Again, some times the steady damage is going to be better. Some times more HP will be. Both are reasonable. As long as the differences are not TOO huge, I think it's not a bad deal at all.

"druids of different spec should be able to combine their powers to form a giant voltronesque owlcattreebear siege weapon piloted by small woodland creatures" -sadfacegnome

Migol

< Artifice >

Shadowsong

29. Re: Any block fix requires a 100% block rate 05/26/2009 03:13:15 PM PDT

Q u o t e:
It really depends on how big these 'crushes' really are. If we're talking on the order of 15% more damage instead of 50% more damage, the actual needed HP is fairly low. And while Blizzard doesn't like randomization, they don't like static values either - and this would be much better than the current static values where paladins and warriors simply take more damage in the normal case.

It's possible that blizzard wouldn't like this sort of thing and I'm willing to believe that. I'm also willing to believe that they'd accept the tradeoff of having a tank with more HP but more spiky damage intake compared to a tank with steadier damage intake but taking more overall damage and having less HP as a reasonable choice to make. Again, some times the steady damage is going to be better. Some times more HP will be. Both are reasonable. As long as the differences are not TOO huge, I think it's not a bad deal at all.

Well, remember the Druid concerns about being "Mana Sponges" at the start of Wrath? This was before we realized mana regen was a joke at the time...now that Blizzard is clamping down on mana levels and regen again, the sort of scenario you're getting at would create the same problem. Also you'd have a similiar problem as existed with Sartharion; higher HP tank=better magic tank. In this case DKs would probably still be fine if AMS and IBF remain in their current form, but then (ironically) Druids would be at a disadvantage on a hard magic boss.

Felhoof

< Fire and Blood >

Quel'dorei

30. Re: Any block fix requires a 100% block rate 05/26/2009 03:17:50 PM PDT

Q u o t e:

Well, remember the Druid concerns about being "Mana Sponges" at the start of Wrath? This was before we realized mana regen was a joke at the time...now that Blizzard is clamping down on mana levels and regen again, the sort of scenario you're getting at would create the same problem. Also you'd have a similiar problem as existed with Sartharion; higher HP tank=better magic tank. In this case DKs would probably still be fine if AMS and IBF remain in their current form, but then (ironically) Druids would be at a disadvantage on a hard magic boss.

Druids had an advantage on Sarth because of good cooldowns + ridiculous health levels. Anything that gives a 20-25% health advantage will be broken regardless of other mechanics. I'm talking less than that.

But even then, I'd be okay with that as long as DKs/druids had some advantages in physical heavy fights and as long as both could reasonably tank either without serious raid ramifications.

"druids of different spec should be able to combine their powers to form a giant voltronesque owlcattreebear siege weapon piloted by small woodland creatures" -sadfacegnome

Meggan

< Bacchanalia >

Durotan

31. Re: Any block fix requires a 100% block rate 05/26/2009 03:19:11 PM PDT

I think a system where parry gave a static amount of mitigation (like the current block system) and blocking reduced damage by a percentage would actually have the potential to fix a lot of the issues with the current system. Every tank would have avoidance (miss+dodge), every tank would have a chance to reduce the damage by a fixed amount (good against small hits, like from heroics, or fasthitting bosses), and every tank would have a strong percentage mitigation to use against hits that don't fall into either of those categories (block for shield tanks, extra armor for twohand tanks).

Obviously there would be a number of little changes that would need to be made to make that work, but it would open up the possibility that

A) on dodge/miss, no one takes damage,

B) on parry/SD, the Twohand tank takes less damage (makes sense to me, twohanders would be better for defense than onehanders)

C) on block/normal hit, the block tank takes less damage (again makes sense to me, a shield would be better protection than being a bear, or bein kind of a cold fish)

So if I parry and a DK parries, he takes noticably less damage than me. If he's hit and I block, I take noticably less damage than him. I think that has a lot more potential than me always taking more damage than him if I don't avoid the attack, with us having more or less the same avoidance.

Ghostcrawler

Blizzard Poster

32. Re: Any block fix requires a 100% block rate 05/26/2009 03:36:48 PM PDT

Think about it this way.

Avoidance is good because it removes a lot of damage. Avoidance is bad because it is unpredictable. If you stack too much avoidance, you are likely to give your healers coronaries.

Mitigation (armor and straight damage reduction) is good because it's consistent. As you all point out, you can start to learn how much a blow will actually do to you. Mitigation is bad, from a player's perspective, because it can't save you. If you have 10 health and dodge, you might live. If you have 10 health and hope your armor will save you... well, it won't. You become the dreaded mana sponge because you are never avoiding damage completely.

Mitigation also has a risk from a design-perspective that when fights get too predictable they become too easy and unexciting. Imagine a tank with 75% damage reduction and no avoidance. You could calculate from the moment of the first attack whether you will survive the encounter. Heck, you might be able to not even heal the tank and know you'll survive depending on the specific abilities used by the boss.

Block as a mechanic is somewhere between avoidance and mitigation. Ideally it removes a fair amount of damage (vs. all damage) reasonably often (vs. rarely). If block is up 100% of the time it just becomes armor that you improve through a different stat. We have let block chances creep up frankly because the amount blocked is pretty trivial when bosses are hitting for 40% of your health pool every swing. If this still strikes you as too RNG, imagine abilities like Shield Block and Holy Shield that could guarantee 100% chance to block for a short period of time.

We don't think block is cutting it as a mechanic, but the direction we are likely to take it is probably more of a change than you are considering.

We also don't think it's necessary that every tank rely on avoidance, block and mitigation in equal amounts. They can't get too far apart or someone will come to dominate for certain encounters, but we don't think the tanks need to be completely homogenized to get what we want either.

If (to make up numbers) the DK and druid get hit for 20K every swing that hits, but the warrior and paladin get hit for 24K half the time and 16K half the time, then that seems like it would work. When the boss emoted that his big hit was coming, you could make sure you had your cooldown ready to guarantee a block.

Ghostcrawler
Lead Systems Designer

Mortrialus

Black Dragonflight

33. Re: Any block fix requires a 100% block rate 05/26/2009 03:39:57 PM PDT

Q u o t e:
Think about it this way.

Avoidance is good because it removes a lot of damage. Avoidance is bad because it is unpredictable. If you stack too much avoidance, you are likely to give your healers coronaries.

Mitigation (armor and straight damage reduction) is good because it's consistent. As you all point out, you can start to learn how much a blow will actually do to you. Mitigation is bad, from a player's perspective, because it can't save you. If you have 10 health and dodge, you might live. If you have 10 health and hope your armor will save you... well, it won't. You become the dreaded mana sponge because you are never avoiding damage completely.

Mitigation also has a risk from a design-perspective that when fights get too predictable they become too easy and unexciting. Imagine a tank with 75% damage reduction and no avoidance. You could calculate from the moment of the first attack whether you will survive the encounter. Heck, you might be able to not even heal the tank and know you'll survive depending on the specific abilities used by the boss.

Block as a mechanic is somewhere between avoidance and mitigation. Ideally it removes a fair amount of damage (vs. all damage) reasonably often (vs. rarely). If block is up 100% of the time it just becomes armor that you improve through a different stat. We have let block chances creep up frankly because the amount blocked is pretty trivial when bosses are hitting for 40% of your health pool every swing. If this still strikes you as too RNG, imagine abilities like Shield Block and Holy Shield that could guarantee 100% chance to block for a short period of time.

We don't think block is cutting it as a mechanic, but the direction we are likely to take it is probably more of a change than you are considering.

We also don't think it's necessary that every tank rely on avoidance, block and mitigation in equal amounts. They can't get too far apart or someone will come to dominate for certain encounters, but we don't think the tanks need to be completely homogenized to get what we want either.

If (to make up numbers) the DK and druid get hit for 20K every swing that hits, but the warrior and paladin get hit for 24K half the time and 16K half the time, then that seems like it would work. When the boss emoted that his big hit was coming, you could make sure you had your cooldown ready to guarantee a block.

Any hints you might have about what this block change could be? : 3

A virgin a day keeps the volcano away!

Communism

The Underbog

34. Re: Any block fix requires a 100% block rate 05/26/2009 03:44:54 PM PDT

Q u o t e:

If (to make up numbers) the DK and druid get hit for 20K every swing that hits, but the warrior and paladin get hit for 24K half the time and 16K half the time, then that seems like it would work. When the boss emoted that his big hit was coming, you could make sure you had your cooldown ready to guarantee a block.

But this means that the DK and Druid only need to stack 40001 health to live through two attacks (or 60,001 for thee), and can then pump points into avoidance. The warrior and paladin have to plan for 48001 health (or 72,001) before they can focus on avoidance. On top of that, DKs and Druids have higher health, so they can hit that easier. This then creates a very large avoidance gap.

I'm just making sure we're on the same page in regards to TTL, or Time To Live.

80 Death Knight, Paladin, Rogue, Priest , and Druid
http://www.wowarmory.com/character-sheet.xml?r=Boulderfist&n=Communism
http://i23.photobucket.com/albums/b375/owndotexe/communism.jpg

Migol

< Artifice >

Shadowsong

35. Re: Any block fix requires a 100% block rate 05/26/2009 03:45:42 PM PDT

Q u o t e:

Block as a mechanic is somewhere between avoidance and mitigation. Ideally it removes a fair amount of damage (vs. all damage) reasonably often (vs. rarely). If block is up 100% of the time it just becomes armor that you improve through a different stat. We have let block chances creep up frankly because the amount blocked is pretty trivial when bosses are hitting for 40% of your health pool every swing. If this still strikes you as too RNG, imagine abilities like Shield Block and Holy Shield that could guarantee 100% chance to block for a short period of time.

We don't think block is cutting it as a mechanic, but the direction we are likely to take it is probably more of a change than you are considering.

We also don't think it's necessary that every tank rely on avoidance, block and mitigation in equal amounts. They can't get too far apart or someone will come to dominate for certain encounters, but we don't think the tanks need to be completely homogenized to get what we want either.

If (to make up numbers) the DK and druid get hit for 20K every swing that hits, but the warrior and paladin get hit for 24K half the time and 16K half the time, then that seems like it would work. When the boss emoted that his big hit was coming, you could make sure you had your cooldown ready to guarantee a block.

You seem to imply then that our "Shield Block" buttons would become emergency cooldowns? That seems...strange, considering just how much of an issue cooldowns have become lately.

Also, why should it work if a DK+Druid are getting hit for 20k each swing, while the paladin and warrior have an 8k variance? A more realistic numberset too would be a 30k hit which the warriors+pallies vary on between 26k and 35k or so...20k hits mean nothing these days. That aside, Healers would pick the DK+Druid every time, unless the cooldowns as I just said came to favor the other two. Neither scenario seems optimal.

[ Post edited by Migol ]

Furystrike

< Mine >

Greymane

36. Re: Any block fix requires a 100% block rate 05/26/2009 03:45:52 PM PDT

Q u o t e:
Think about it this way.

Avoidance is good because it removes a lot of damage. Avoidance is bad because it is unpredictable. If you stack too much avoidance, you are likely to give your healers coronaries.

Mitigation (armor and straight damage reduction) is good because it's consistent. As you all point out, you can start to learn how much a blow will actually do to you. Mitigation is bad, from a player's perspective, because it can't save you. If you have 10 health and dodge, you might live. If you have 10 health and hope your armor will save you... well, it won't. You become the dreaded mana sponge because you are never avoiding damage completely.

Mitigation also has a risk from a design-perspective that when fights get too predictable they become too easy and unexciting. Imagine a tank with 75% damage reduction and no avoidance. You could calculate from the moment of the first attack whether you will survive the encounter. Heck, you might be able to not even heal the tank and know you'll survive depending on the specific abilities used by the boss.

Block as a mechanic is somewhere between avoidance and mitigation. Ideally it removes a fair amount of damage (vs. all damage) reasonably often (vs. rarely). If block is up 100% of the time it just becomes armor that you improve through a different stat. We have let block chances creep up frankly because the amount blocked is pretty trivial when bosses are hitting for 40% of your health pool every swing. If this still strikes you as too RNG, imagine abilities like Shield Block and Holy Shield that could guarantee 100% chance to block for a short period of time.

We don't think block is cutting it as a mechanic, but the direction we are likely to take it is probably more of a change than you are considering.

We also don't think it's necessary that every tank rely on avoidance, block and mitigation in equal amounts. They can't get too far apart or someone will come to dominate for certain encounters, but we don't think the tanks need to be completely homogenized to get what we want either.

If (to make up numbers) the DK and druid get hit for 20K every swing that hits, but the warrior and paladin get hit for 24K half the time and 16K half the time, then that seems like it would work. When the boss emoted that his big hit was coming, you could make sure you had your cooldown ready to guarantee a block.

So basically....you'll make block a %?

Celegol

< Mortifer Nox noctis >

Uther

37. Re: Any block fix requires a 100% block rate 05/26/2009 03:47:45 PM PDT

Q u o t e:

You seem to imply then that our "Shield Block" buttons would become emergency cooldowns? That seems...strange, considering just how much of an issue cooldowns have become lately.

Also, why should it work if a DK+Druid are getting hit for 20k each swing, while the paladin and warrior have an 8k variance? Also, a more realistic numberset too would be a 30k hit which the warriors+pallies vary on between 26k and 35k or so...20k hits mean nothing these days. That aside, Healers would pick the DK+Druid every time, unless the cooldowns as I just said came to favor the other two. Neither scenario seems optimal.

Why would that be strange? Bump holy shield up to a 45 second cooldown, and you now have 3 of the 4 tanks with an emergency absorption button (AMS). Especially since GC specifically said block should mitigate "all damage".

EDIT: If the change to SD for druids goes through and it can stack up to 3 charges, give them a 45 second cooldown that immediately applies 3 charges of SD, boom, all 4 tanks have a very short cooldown that's not overly powerful. More cooldowns is fun, if implemented in a non-game breaking way :)

[ Post edited by Celegol ]

Karilyn

< Nox Natus Iterim >

The Venture Co

38. Re: Any block fix requires a 100% block rate 05/26/2009 03:49:45 PM PDT

Q u o t e:
Heck, maybe we fall in love with the 4 piece warrior bonus and decide to make that a core part of the ability.

I wouldn't mind not having a 100% block rate if they do that.

I think having a capacity to block magic damage, would be far more valuable than 100% block chance.

Maturity is knowing you were an idiot in the past.
Wisdom is knowing you will be an idiot in the future.
Common Sense is knowing that you should try not to be an idiot now.

Migol

< Artifice >

Shadowsong

39. Re: Any block fix requires a 100% block rate 05/26/2009 03:50:01 PM PDT

Q u o t e:

Why would that be strange? Bump holy shield up to a 45 second cooldown, and you now have 3 of the 4 tanks with an emergency absorption button (AMS). Especially since GC specifically said block should mitigate "all damage".

Because GC's implication in this one is that the Shield Block/Holy Shield buffs would be a counter to the new Spiky damage intake. Unless they were overpowered, it wouldn't help, spiky damage + decent cooldowns still makes for scary healer fights. If they were overpowered, then it wouldn't be fair to DKs+Druids.

Forum > CLASS ROLES > TANKING