If we look at Deathknights in 3.1 we see a tank that had all the tools for the job. Frequent cooldowns, high avoidance, high health etc. As GC said, a lot of guilds were switching to a dk tank to make things easier. Now, I admit, I did not like he changes. Not saying I don't understand that they were needed, but I think every tank in the game understands the feeling and can sympathize.

However, let's examine one of the big reasons that deathknights excelled at these encounters: Frequent powerful cooldowns. We just had a cooldown for almost any big attack a boss threw at us. But let's flip this from an encounter design perspective: Frequent powerful abilities on predictable cooldowns. In Ulduar these types of abilites where found on numerous encounters such as Mimiron, Iron Council and General. If every other encounter was of this type, why not just have the Deathknight tank the whole thing?

Now let's look a Trial of the Crusader, there are far less of these types of encounters. While the encounters might not be numerically balanced they are more balanced conceptually. I personally do trust the Dev team with the numbers, they have far better tools, queries, and raw data so arguing the numbers is a waste of time. However concepts are easier to argue and more profitable. Actually one of the more conceptually imbalanced fights in ToC is Jaxx, in my opinion. Deathknights and Warriors are better able to interrupt is fireball than Paladins and Druids. This however is something a raid can easily adjust to.

TL;DR: Tank balance has two sides: the player and the boss. If the bosses favor a particular style, then it will show up player side.

How do you fix it? Well one suggestion is more overall raid damage. If healers have to spend more time healing the raid then this will make the tank harder to heal without actually forcing him to take hits for 80% of his health. Another would be that just because a boss has an ability open, doesn't mean he needs to cast it. A boss with less predictable cooldowns would, in my opinion, require more skill and coordination rather than less.

Thoughts?

A thought that probably was needed long ago.

But the truth is, players act a specific way due to encounter mechanics. Encounter mechanics are designed a certain way because of what Blizzard sees that players can do.

Avoidance levels were too high.
Blizzard makes bosses hit for 80% of a tank's hp because they otherwise avoid too much.
Tanks stack stamina.
Blizzard makes Impale and other mechanics to counter stamina stacking.


It's the problem with underlying mechanics, not anything as easily broken down.





I'd like to say that removing "predictable" boss attacks and making large "cooldown" attacks on bosses into a more random, but noticeable mechanic would be better. It would have to have a cooldown, but after the cooldown is done- the boss can use it randomly.
Just make it have like a 3-5sec "charge" so it can be called and reacted to.

But the real problem is that class/gear stats are too inflated, so boss damage gets inflated, so players inflate stamina, so Blizzard inflates other mechanics to compensate.

I really wish Blizzard would just tune down the damage, tune down avoidance, and tune down mana regen all at once and tell the community not to be such big babies and understand it's for game balance.
"People don't like seeing their big numbers reduced." is not a valid excuse.
> Tune down, don't tune up.

---

Q u o t e:
A thought that probably was needed long ago.

But the truth is, players act a specific way due to encounter mechanics. Encounter mechanics are designed a certain way because of what Blizzard sees that players can do.

Avoidance levels were too high.
Blizzard makes bosses hit for 80% of a tank's hp because they otherwise avoid too much.
Tanks stack stamina.
Blizzard makes Impale and other mechanics to counter stamina stacking.


It's the problem with underlying mechanics, not anything as easily broken down.





I'd like to say that removing "predictable" boss attacks and making large "cooldown" attacks on bosses into a more random, but noticeable mechanic would be better. It would have to have a cooldown, but after the cooldown is done- the boss can use it randomly.
Just make it have like a 3-5sec "charge" so it can be called and reacted to.

But the real problem is that class/gear stats are too inflated, so boss damage gets inflated, so players inflate stamina, so Blizzard inflates other mechanics to compensate.

I really wish Blizzard would just tune down the damage, tune down avoidance, and tune down mana regen all at once and tell the community not to be such big babies and understand it's for game balance.
"People don't like seeing their big numbers reduced." is not a valid excuse.
> Tune down, don't tune up.

---

Great post.

---

Q u o t e:
A thought that probably was needed long ago.

But the truth is, players act a specific way due to encounter mechanics. Encounter mechanics are designed a certain way because of what Blizzard sees that players can do.

Avoidance levels were too high.
Blizzard makes bosses hit for 80% of a tank's hp because they otherwise avoid too much.
Tanks stack stamina.
Blizzard makes Impale and other mechanics to counter stamina stacking.


It's the problem with underlying mechanics, not anything as easily broken down.





I'd like to say that removing "predictable" boss attacks and making large "cooldown" attacks on bosses into a more random, but noticeable mechanic would be better. It would have to have a cooldown, but after the cooldown is done- the boss can use it randomly.
Just make it have like a 3-5sec "charge" so it can be called and reacted to.

But the real problem is that class/gear stats are too inflated, so boss damage gets inflated, so players inflate stamina, so Blizzard inflates other mechanics to compensate.

I really wish Blizzard would just tune down the damage, tune down avoidance, and tune down mana regen all at once and tell the community not to be such big babies and understand it's for game balance.
"People don't like seeing their big numbers reduced." is not a valid excuse.
> Tune down, don't tune up.

---

Its too big a change to patch or hotfix. This is what is planned for cataclysm.. Its all ratio based though, so stamina will continue to inflate as will damage but not as much as stamina but healing will not go up as much, thus ratio wise they are doing what you are asking.

---

Q u o t e:
A thought that probably was needed long ago.

But the truth is, players act a specific way due to encounter mechanics. Encounter mechanics are designed a certain way because of what Blizzard sees that players can do.

Avoidance levels were too high.
Blizzard makes bosses hit for 80% of a tank's hp because they otherwise avoid too much.
Tanks stack stamina.
Blizzard makes Impale and other mechanics to counter stamina stacking.


It's the problem with underlying mechanics, not anything as easily broken down.





I'd like to say that removing "predictable" boss attacks and making large "cooldown" attacks on bosses into a more random, but noticeable mechanic would be better. It would have to have a cooldown, but after the cooldown is done- the boss can use it randomly.
Just make it have like a 3-5sec "charge" so it can be called and reacted to.

But the real problem is that class/gear stats are too inflated, so boss damage gets inflated, so players inflate stamina, so Blizzard inflates other mechanics to compensate.

I really wish Blizzard would just tune down the damage, tune down avoidance, and tune down mana regen all at once and tell the community not to be such big babies and understand it's for game balance.
"People don't like seeing their big numbers reduced." is not a valid excuse.
> Tune down, don't tune up.

---

I agree that reducing stat inflation would go a long way, I'm not convinced that this would do much to alleviate Tank imbalances. One is the current DR on avoidance, so if we took a flat across the board cut we'd see greater avoidance disparity among the classes. An extreme example being we cut everyone's ratings in half, one player might lose 5% but another loses 12%, simply because the first is deeper into the DR.

Tuning down in general I think wouldn't fix much, all it would do is take longer for people to wipe to same mechanics they are now. Say boss damage was reduced by 50% and healing reduced by the same amount. TTL for tanks goes up across the board, let's say double for the sake of arguement, but since TTL isn't equal across tanks this effect widens the gap between them, thus making things more imbalanced rather than less.

---

Q u o t e:


This is a good post. However, it is very hard to "tell the community not to be such big babies" (in your words). Players can get worked up over very small nerfs, and dropping tank avoidance by half (which is probably the right number) would not be a small nerf. Some players would understand it. Many would not. Players always *always* respond to nerfs to correct class balance with "Why didn't you buff instead of nerf?" Buffing feels good. Nerfing feels bad.

We will make unpopular changes when we think they are best for the game and more or less unavoidable, but at some point you risk actually hurting your players (to the point where they might leave) if you do things that feel arbitrary or cruel, even if it is for the good of the game in the long run. (Incoming: a dozen posts that cite a specific nerf as arbitrary and cruel with threats to bail if it isn't reverted.)

Changing avoidance numbers in between level 80 and 81 feels very different, and that is exactly what we plan on doing. It will feel cruddy to some players when they see their numbers drop with every new level. But then we'll make up for it when 4.3 feels right again.

---

I, for one, look forward to having to fight to get my avoidance up as long as it means boss fights aren't a "ok this is going ok... cool... keep it up........ WTF WAS THAT" :D

---

Q u o t e:


This is a good post. However, it is very hard to "tell the community not to be such big babies" (in your words). Players can get worked up over very small nerfs, and dropping tank avoidance by half (which is probably the right number) would not be a small nerf. Some players would understand it. Many would not. Players always *always* respond to nerfs to correct class balance with "Why didn't you buff instead of nerf?" Buffing feels good. Nerfing feels bad.

We will make unpopular changes when we think they are best for the game and more or less unavoidable, but at some point you risk actually hurting your players (to the point where they might leave) if you do things that feel arbitrary or cruel, even if it is for the good of the game in the long run. (Incoming: a dozen posts that cite a specific nerf as arbitrary and cruel with threats to bail if it isn't reverted.)

Changing avoidance numbers in between level 80 and 81 feels very different, and that is exactly what we plan on doing. It will feel cruddy to some players when they see their numbers drop with every new level. But then we'll make up for it when 4.3 feels right again.

---

Stacking block wins at heroic Anub. DKs don't have block. Discuss.

---

Q u o t e:


Stacking block wins at heroic Anub. DKs don't have block. Discuss.

---

Random question.


Are the adds (any of them) freezable by Hungering Cold? JW

---

Q u o t e:
Changing avoidance numbers in between level 80 and 81 feels very different, and that is exactly what we plan on doing. It will feel cruddy to some players when they see their numbers drop with every new level. But then we'll make up for it when 4.3 feels right again.

---

Have you gotten to the point where you know where you're going with avoidance for cataclysm?

I, for one, am in the camp that favors the idea of very low avoidance, perhaps in the 10-20% range all combined. After all, we're heavy tanks, we shouldn't be that light on our feet. Not even Ali could float like a butterfly in full platemail (and presumably not as a grizzly bear, if he had the power to turn himself into a bear)

---

Q u o t e:
Changing avoidance numbers in between level 80 and 81 feels very different, and that is exactly what we plan on doing.

---

If you had done it between 70 and 71 Wrath would have been a much more fun expansion. You knew it was a problem (sunwell radiance) and you didn't deal with it.

So instead we have overpowered DPS to deal with overpowered healers to deal with overpowered bosses to deal with overpowered avoidance all woven together in a nice package of frustration for the players. And we'll get to go on like this until Cataclysm because the big number changes that need to happen will piss of ignorant people. Huzzah!

I still like WoW, a lot, but I get so frustrated with it so much faster, if you aren't going to make changes until cata, at least buff resilience, or change the BG rez timer to 5 seconds, or give everyone mortal strike until cata so the game can kinda sorta feel slightly balanced? Pretty please? =P

---

Q u o t e:

How do you fix it? Well one suggestion is more overall raid damage. If healers have to spend more time healing the raid then this will make the tank harder to heal without actually forcing him to take hits for 80% of his health. Another would be that just because a boss has an ability open, doesn't mean he needs to cast it. A boss with less predictable cooldowns would, in my opinion, require more skill and coordination rather than less.

---

There's good ideas in the thread, including this one, but it too is problematic before 4.0:

Class health varies significantly, and only melee actually get significant abilities to reduce their damage taken. On the high raid damage fights like Algalon, for example, we had our moonkin respec to feral because not only did his DPS go up, but his survivability skyrocketed.

Especially now that so much raid damage happens outside of melee range too, the current design of "melee get high HP, damage reduction, and damage avoidance tools, casters just move away from it" isn't holding up well.

So I agree with you, but in the current design those kinds of fights result in sitting of lower HP, lower tools classes (even some melee don't have nearly the tools of say, a rogue, DK, or feral druid) in order to reduce the healing burden.


Hopefully the stamina adjustments in 4.0 will make it more reasonable, and they'll also reconsider the current design of "some melee get tons of tools, casters and the other melee have few" and perhaps include some talentable abilities in every tree that can be taken for "survivability fights".

For example, you can complain about Feint's energy loss all you want, but the fact remains that it's a very powerful tool that allows tradeoffs and choices to make on the part of a player. Not every class can choose to give up DPS for survivability, they just have to take it to the face (or get sat for a class who can do the same or more dps and take less damage.)

Choices/tradeoffs make for more interesting classes and fights.

---

Q u o t e:
Players can get worked up over very small nerfs, and dropping tank avoidance by half (which is probably the right number) would not be a small nerf. Some players would understand it. Many would not. Players always *always* respond to nerfs to correct class balance with "Why didn't you buff instead of nerf?" Buffing feels good. Nerfing feels bad.

---

Actually, I wouldn't care having 25% total avoidane if the boss wouldn't hit for 40k. Let me get hit more often for a reasonnable ammount of damage, no problem with that... but don't let me get one or two-shotted in 1 sec.

I think the biggest problem with nerfing is mostly just because of the connotation of the word itself. People will feel bad for any nerf, no matter what you do, even if they know that it's justified. I guarantee that some of the DKs on here were going "ugh, lame" when they were nerfed in the past, despite knowing it needed to be done (specifically the Frost Presence 80% -> 60% nerf). There's very little you can do about that.

If it's not going to be changed until Cataclysm, perhaps you can work some temporary bandages in for Icecrown much akin to Sunwell Radiance. Like, for Arthas and Sindragosa I could understand them hitting like freight trains on steroids, but for some of the lesser bosses maybe have an ability they do reduce the amount of avoidance you have for a period, maybe 30 sec.

Just throwing ideas out here, but as much as Sunwell Radiance sucked, we're probably going to need something like it for Icecrown or we're going to have tanks with 30+% dodge, 20-25% parry, and 5-8% miss on top of it. Not quite the 80% avoidance of Sunwell era, but still way too high. Just make at least some of the Icecrown fights more of attrition than spamspamspamspamspam.

---

Q u o t e:


This is a good post. However, it is very hard to "tell the community not to be such big babies" (in your words). Players can get worked up over very small nerfs, and dropping tank avoidance by half (which is probably the right number) would not be a small nerf. Some players would understand it. Many would not. Players always *always* respond to nerfs to correct class balance with "Why didn't you buff instead of nerf?" Buffing feels good. Nerfing feels bad.

We will make unpopular changes when we think they are best for the game and more or less unavoidable, but at some point you risk actually hurting your players (to the point where they might leave) if you do things that feel arbitrary or cruel, even if it is for the good of the game in the long run. (Incoming: a dozen posts that cite a specific nerf as arbitrary and cruel with threats to bail if it isn't reverted.)

Changing avoidance numbers in between level 80 and 81 feels very different, and that is exactly what we plan on doing. It will feel cruddy to some players when they see their numbers drop with every new level. But then we'll make up for it when 4.3 feels right again.

---

Please go ahead and do it GC. I was talking to my healers last night while we wiped on Northrend beasts. I died on half the attempts to Gormakk. It was the worst tanking experience I've ever had. There is no skill involved and it was upsetting the healers. I can post the worldofwar logs if you want me to. I would literally die in ~.75 seconds. That included deaths with VB and trinkets popped for a full 65k health. You talk about the gearing issue. I can upgrade about 4 or 5 slots. That's it. I know that gear wouldn't have saved me. That sort of thing is insanely frustrating.

It would be an interesting experiment to cut tank avoidance in half and cut boss avoidable damage in half and see what happens. Would the encounters end up too easy to heal? The damage over the course of a long fight should technically be the same.

EDIT: Another interesting way to play it might be something akin to the effect DKs get when channeling Army of the Dead. I could imagine a "Siege Mode" for tanks: Root them in place, zero avoidance, but damage reduction equal to dodge+parry. Tanks would have to turn it off to move... it could lead to more interesting tactics.

---

Q u o t e:

I, for one, look forward to having to fight to get my avoidance up as long as it means boss fights aren't a "ok this is going ok... cool... keep it up........ WTF WAS THAT" :D

---

Honestly, I do too. In my major avoidance gear and before the dodge nerf/agility nerf/parry buff, I could hit 70% avoidance on the paper doll. That's from miss, dodge, and parry. ~40% dodge, ~22% parry and ~8% miss. That is just so incredibly high that it's understandable that bosses need to hit like Mack trucks.

I am looking forward to gaining levels and seeing my avoidance drop. I wish we could do it now but mid expansion probably isn't the best time to make such a major overhaul. WoW:Cat is the perfect time however.

Bring it on.

---

Q u o t e:

It would be an interesting experiment to cut tank avoidance in half and cut boss avoidable damage in half and see what happens. Would the encounters end up too easy to heal? The damage over the course of a long fight should technically be the same.

---

It goes beyond that. Mana regen would need to be cut in half (picking a number) because now healing isn't quite as "OMG WTF IS THAT" intense. It's still busy, but not heart attack material.

So there are other things to factor in.

---

Q u o t e:
It goes beyond that. Mana regen would need to be cut in half (picking a number) because now healing isn't quite as "OMG WTF IS THAT" intense. It's still busy, but not heart attack material.

So there are other things to factor in.

---

Certainly, but I'm still not convinced that mana regen is the issue. I believe it's that the amount healed per cast is too high.

---

Q u o t e:
Certainly, but I'm still not convinced that mana regen is the issue. I believe it's that the amount healed per cast is too high.

---

Everything is tied together.

You NEED to be able to top off a tank within 1-2 GCDs because bosses hit so very hard
Bosses NEED to be able to drop a tank within 1-2 GCDs because very high avoidance rates would mean they'd be unable to kill a tank otherwise.

---

Q u o t e:


Everything is tied together.

You NEED to be able to top off a tank within 1-2 GCDs because bosses hit so very hard
Bosses NEED to be able to drop a tank within 1-2 GCDs because very high avoidance rates would mean they'd be unable to kill a tank otherwise.

---

Give every boss a MS debuff applied on every attack.