World of Warcraft - English (NA) Forums -> Icewell Radiance is in!

Ghostcrawler

Blizzard Poster

320. Re: Icewell Radiance is in! 29/10/2009 15:20:05 PDT

Q u o t e:
If you truly believe it will not be a problem please explain your logic. As many people have stated, DK threat is already in a weak place. Especially snap threat. So much so that DKs have macro every single ability to Runestrike in order to ensure it's immediate use. Let's just use some rough numbers. If I have 30% raid buffed dodge and that is dropped to 10% with the debuff. That is a 66% less chance to dodge then I had before, causing 66% less rune strikes.

There are a couple of flaws in your argument here. DKs macro Rune Strike not because they suffer for threat, but because more threat is generally better for a tank and there is no real penalty for macroing the ability. Players tend to macro attacks when the macro performs for them, not when they are really, really desperate to use the ability.

Second, you can't assume that less dodge turns into less Rune Strikes in such a simple manner. You have to look at how many white hits you convert to Rune Strike now and then how many you would convert to Rune Strike after losing dodge. If you have enough of a window in between dodges to still get a Rune Strike off, then you would see no effect. I suspect that's not the case, but I also don't think you'll see your threat plummet.

We also don't see too many appropriately geared tank of any class having sustained single-target threat problems in cases where you aren't supposed to have threat problems. Yes your dps classes may sometimes get dangerously close to pulling. That is part of the game. We're a long way from when the warlock would crit on a Molten Destroyer and wipe the raid because he didn't wait for 5 Sunders.

Ghostcrawler
Lead Systems Designer

Ædramelech

< Malleum Majorem >

Lightning's Blade

321. Re: Icewell Radiance is in! 29/10/2009 15:20:19 PDT

So is the Icewell Radiance before or after Diminishing returns? Surely you wouldn't be so cruel?

"I am become death, destroyer of worlds."
- J. Robert Oppenheimer

Tenmou

< The Pallbearers >

Burning Blade

323. Re: Icewell Radiance is in! 29/10/2009 15:22:44 PDT

Is there any concern that this will affect some tank classes more than others? This seems to have a bigger relative effect on druids and DKs than on warriors on paladins, particularly if damage is supposed to be more regular. Classes with block will, particularly paladins, take considerably less damage passively than other classes, particularly the DK, who gets less armor as well as no block. Druids will be affected to a lesser degree on this note (mitigation), but more, perhaps, on the avoidance end (lacking parry, block, etc), and will amount to a pretty considerable loss of survivability for both classes relative to their shield-bearing brethren.

Is there going to be some rebalancing going on to take into account the discrepancies between classes (already evident in many cases), that will be exacerbated by this change?

*edtied kuz ay kant speel

[ Post edited by Tenmou ]

"My days of not taking you seriously are definitely coming to a middle."
-Mal, Firefly

Fridmarr

< Shar Hellven >

Frostmane

325. Re: Icewell Radiance is in! 29/10/2009 15:23:40 PDT

Q u o t e:
So is the Icewell Radiance before or after Diminishing returns? Surely you wouldn't be so cruel?

It's a buff on the mob, it won't affect your character's DR so it will be after.

Tinjai

< Amazingly Awesomely … >

Icecrown

326. Re: Icewell Radiance is in! 29/10/2009 15:23:48 PDT

To all the Tanks QQing about this, no worries, if you are in the correct gear to be in Icecrown and your healers aren't inept... It will be fine.

Pain heals. Chicks dig scars. Glory... lasts forever.

Ghostcrawler

Blizzard Poster

328. Re: Icewell Radiance is in! 29/10/2009 15:24:42 PDT

Q u o t e:
So, will you be helping druid tanks in another way? Since druids really only have four methods of increased survivability (Health, Armor, Dodge and Savage Defense) and the other three tanks all have Parry and two of the three have Block.

I just feel like I'm getting the shaft again, as a druid tank I've seen several nerfs and not very many buffs this expansion pack while other tanks (mostly warriors) have gotten many buffs. I know death knight tanks also have received nerfs, but I don't play a death knight so I'll leave their issues to them, since they know their class better than I do.

Also, I do hope that you don't leave the bosses hitting so hard that they can still 2 shot a tank... if that's the case then all you'll have managed to accomplish is increase the number of occurrences that a tank is 2 shot, increasing player frustration and drama.

You "feel like you are getting the shaft" by just assuming this must be a nerf without really taking the time to understand if it is or how. This change does not change the relationship between dodge and parry. If it has been a nerf to parry, then it would have been a bigger problem.

Ghostcrawler
Lead Systems Designer

Vallya

< Retribution >

Khaz Modan

329. Re: Icewell Radiance is in! 29/10/2009 15:26:25 PDT

Q u o t e:

There are a couple of flaws in your argument here. DKs macro Rune Strike not because they suffer for threat, but because more threat is generally better for a tank and there is no real penalty for macroing the ability. Players tend to macro attacks when the macro performs for them, not when they are really, really desperate to use the ability.

Second, you can't assume that less dodge turns into less Rune Strikes in such a simple manner. You have to look at how many white hits you convert to Rune Strike now and then how many you would convert to Rune Strike after losing dodge. If you have enough of a window in between dodges to still get a Rune Strike off, then you would see no effect. I suspect that's not the case, but I also don't think you'll see your threat plummet.

We also don't see too many appropriately geared tank of any class having sustained single-target threat problems in cases where you aren't supposed to have threat problems. Yes your dps classes may sometimes get dangerously close to pulling. That is part of the game. We're a long way from when the warlock would crit on a Molten Destroyer and wipe the raid because he didn't wait for 5 Sunders.

Okay then, how about this:

Its simply unfair to nerf DK threat simply because you are trying to reduce tank avoidance across the board.

Chaley

< Reverent >

Illidan

330. Re: Icewell Radiance is in! 29/10/2009 15:26:36 PDT

Q u o t e:
I suspect that's not the case, but I also don't think you'll see your threat plummet.

This is the word that scares me. Think. You "think" that this won't happen. Have you done any internal testing to prove this? Because if you are theorycrafting with us, then that scares me a little bit that you would theorycraft a change rather than internally testing the change for you to know that it won't have an undesirable effect.

I mean come on, this isn't rocket surgery.

Sinnek

Cho'gall

331. Re: Icewell Radiance is in! 29/10/2009 15:27:17 PDT

If a paladin has 30% dodge with 4pc tier 9 and hits divine plea, is his 12% dodge going to be nulified by icewell?

Fridmarr

< Shar Hellven >

Frostmane

332. Re: Icewell Radiance is in! 29/10/2009 15:27:23 PDT

Q u o t e:
Is there any concern that this will affect some tank classes more than others? This seems to have a bigger relative effect on druids and DKs than on warriors on paladins, particularly if damage is supposed to be more regular. Classes with block will, particularly paladins, take considerably less damage passively than other classes, particularly the DK, who gets less armor as well as no block. Druids will be affected to a lesser degree on this note (mitigation), but more, perhaps, on the avoidance end (lacking parry, block, etc), and will amount to a pretty considerable loss of survivability for both classes relative to their shield-bearing brethren.

Is there going to be some rebalancing going on to take into account the discrepancies between classes (already evident in many cases), that will be exacerbated by this change?

*edtied kuz ay kant speel

As has been pointed out, because of the escalating value of avoidance, this hurts the non druid tanks slightly more than druids. Also, pallys most likely will no longer block every hit, which they have been doing since early naxx, so that is another relative reduction. It probably balances things better to be honest. High avoidance values makes balance much more difficult.

Ghostcrawler

Blizzard Poster

333. Re: Icewell Radiance is in! 29/10/2009 15:28:17 PDT

Q u o t e:
Wasn't there just a post by GC about how Avoidance is still important and EH isn't the be-all, end-all stat the community makes it out to be?

And now they're lopping 20% off of everyone's dodge.. So.. won't Stam-stacking (and as a byproduct, EH) be even more important now?

It arguably makes stam less important (though it will always be important for tanks). Many players are probably telling you right now that only stamina and armor are important because if you ever fail to avoid two boss hits in a row that you're going to die. Under that environment, avoidance loses a lot of value.

If bosses hit for less in IC (which they will, since they will hit more often) then the value of avoidance for purposes of survival increases.

I still expect many tanks will die in two hits until they get geared up a little. But they will, and then the ability to survive two hits in a row won't be as big an issue.

Ghostcrawler
Lead Systems Designer

Fridmarr

< Shar Hellven >

Frostmane

334. Re: Icewell Radiance is in! 29/10/2009 15:28:26 PDT

Q u o t e:
If a paladin has 30% dodge with 4pc tier 9 and hits divine plea, is his 12% dodge going to be nulified by icewell?

No, he will end up with 10% avoidance in the eye's of the mob, and when he pops Divine Plea that will go up to 22%.

Fridmarr

< Shar Hellven >

Frostmane

336. Re: Icewell Radiance is in! 29/10/2009 15:30:49 PDT

Q u o t e:

It arguably makes stam less important (though it will always be important for tanks). Many players are probably telling you right now that only stamina and armor are important because if you ever fail to avoid two boss hits in a row that you're going to die. Under that environment, avoidance loses a lot of value.

If bosses hit for less in IC (which they will, since they will hit more often) then the value of avoidance for purposes of survival increases.

I still expect many tanks will die in two hits until they get geared up a little. But they will, and then the ability to survive two hits in a row won't be as big an issue.

Well if they are still hitting for more than 50% of our healthpools, like you just suggested, that's not much of a reduction on their power. Avoidance won't really see the returns you are talking about until you can implement the full system you mentioned earlier, with a reduction on both healing and damage intake relative to health.

Aantha

Hellscream

338. Re: Icewell Radiance is in! 29/10/2009 15:31:09 PDT

Q u o t e:
There are a couple of flaws in your argument here. DKs macro Rune Strike not because they suffer for threat, but because more threat is generally better for a tank and there is no real penalty for macroing the ability. Players tend to macro attacks when the macro performs for them, not when they are really, really desperate to use the ability.

You're making a sweeping generalization here that isn't true. When you have warlocks chasing you in threat because they burned their soulshatter a tad too early, or you're in a DPS sensitive fight with buffs for the DPS and not the tank, you do pray for every Rune Strike proc and curse the Paladin that sits there pounding out a 69696 rotation.

Q u o t e:
Second, you can't assume that less dodge turns into less Rune Strikes in such a simple manner. You have to look at how many white hits you convert to Rune Strike now and then how many you would convert to Rune Strike after losing dodge. If you have enough of a window in between dodges to still get a Rune Strike off, then you would see no effect. I suspect that's not the case, but I also don't think you'll see your threat plummet.

You have a point here, but the problem is that DKs are starting to lag behind other tanks in terms of threat and any threat nerf just makes it worse.

Q u o t e:
We also don't see too many appropriately geared tank of any class having sustained single-target threat problems in cases where you aren't supposed to have threat problems. Yes your dps classes may sometimes get dangerously close to pulling. That is part of the game. We're a long way from when the warlock would crit on a Molten Destroyer and wipe the raid because he didn't wait for 5 Sunders.

DPS getting dangerously close to pulling off the tank is part of the game? Wasn't the philosophy when 3.0 was introduced and all tank threat got stupid high that the game wasn't supposed to constantly be about that concern?

Ratholorn

< Molotov >

Saurfang

339. Re: Icewell Radiance is in! 29/10/2009 15:32:11 PDT

So if you're essentially removing 20% dodge from us all does it alter the Diminishing Returns relationship between parry and dodge at all?
i.e. Is a dodge rating of 30% going to have the DR applied to it as though it were 30% or 10%? Is it now a case of Parry is king period?

I'd also like to second the notion that you don't do something stupid like put in a boss such as Brutallus that can 2-shot a tank at the same time as you nerf our avoidance.

Ginger beards ... don't pretend it doesn't turn you on.

Forum > CLASS ROLES > TANKING