Forums » The Dire Lord

Parry? and other thoughts

    • 4 posts
    June 25, 2018 9:20 PM PDT

    I am really liking how the Dire Lord is shaping up.  The only thing I hope changes is they get plate armor...but if not its still OK.

     

    Since the DL cant use a shield I think Parry should be a staple ability.  I see the paladin has a parry increasing skill but none to be found for the Dire Lord.  Am I missing something?  Are there or will there be a heavy reliance on parry for melee mitigation?

     

    In the end I think DL should heavily rely on parry for melee mitigation and magic shielding to round it out.

     

    Other thoughts...

    It seems to me that the DL will be big into bleeds and magic/blood/vampyric disease type playstyle.  I really like this if they do it right...heres a few things id like to see:

    1.  We do more damage to bleeding enemies - this incents us to keep bleed up.

    2.  When enemies are bleeding we can apply disease that can further the effects...like slow...weakness ... take even more damage etc.  Maybe a disease added to the bleed that makes some of our skills hit super hard.  But its hard to build it up to get in the big hits...this would make it fun to see how weak/bleeding/diseased we can make the enemy.

    3.  Add the fear aspect to this as well and some utility...like slow/root/fear etc.

     

    So A Dire lord can stack conditions on the enemy and dealing more damage as the fight goes on wearing the opponent down.  SO burst wont be super high up front but after fear/bleed/disease kicks in that 2 hander will slice like butter.  I love this type of playstyle and hope I am reading it right and this is how it will go.

     

    I am suprised that all of the 3 tanks say the role is tank/utility.  I think warrior should be Tank/CC/buff, Paladin should be Tank/heal/buff, and Dire Lord should be Tank/Damage/CC

     

    I am also hoping the DL epic weapon will be a 2 hand sword.

     

    In this game i am most excited about the DL and Paladin and will have one of each...I want to say DL will be my main...but we shall see which wins out in the end.

     

    oh yeah...and Dark armor...the whole dark thing is awesome.  I hope the DL favorite color is dark purple hehe!


    This post was edited by Strat at June 25, 2018 9:37 PM PDT
    • 1652 posts
    June 25, 2018 11:53 PM PDT

    I do not know yet how block will function, but as it is hinted in the paladin reveal, it does seems working like some sort of avoid roll, just like parry.

     

    In this case, I wouldn't call it mitigation, as it's classified as avoidance by it's sole functionning. But I might be wrong dissociating avoidance and mitigation since armor might work pretty much th same with no "armor to damage reduction calculation", but rather a gaussian repartition still allowing for some rare but existing max melee hits.

     

    Judging from the Lightguard hint in the paladin cover, I would suppose parry and block would be the same thing overall, one beeing done with no shield and the other when a shield is equipped. That would mean a common stat/score, with maybe a few differences in function (rate / damage nullification), but not making a character with no shield having less mitigation/avoidance than a shielded one.

    However, since a shield remove a weapon or the possibility to carry a two handed weapon, there must be some defensive drawback if you hinder your offense by equiping one, to hinder your defense by removing one. But thoses drawback / fighting style may not concern the Dire Lord as he is balanced around two weapons versus two handed weapon.

    Maybe there is some other sort of balance for paladins and warrior arround the weapon setup they choose.

     

    Concerning the dot gameplay, the DL seems quite ramping up with bleeds and provoking phantoms, but also having quite a punch with abyssal strike. My guess is that their gameplay revolves about setting up a situation where they will be rolling with constant damage once done, making them quite bad for short living mobs.

     

    About the epic weapon, we do not know yet if there will be "epic BIS quests" like it used to be in EQ, but I would hope for a warrior-epic-like, fitting both playstyles with a mystical weapon you could split. I do not like players beeing cornered into a playstyle by one irremplacable item. While it can be understandable for casters (whoses have less flexibility in weapons and less use in them) or rogues (piercing main hand), for classes that can choose a wide array of weaponry, I feel fitting not to force them into one evident choice.

     

    I'm not against dark purple but I prefer dark red overall.

    • 4335 posts
    June 26, 2018 3:55 AM PDT

    MauvaisOeil said:

    About the epic weapon, we do not know yet if there will be "epic BIS quests" like it used to be in EQ, but I would hope for a warrior-epic-like, fitting both playstyles with a mystical weapon you could split. I do not like players beeing cornered into a playstyle by one irremplacable item. While it can be understandable for casters (whoses have less flexibility in weapons and less use in them) or rogues (piercing main hand), for classes that can choose a wide array of weaponry, I feel fitting not to force them into one evident choice.

    Well we do know that there will be epic quests and epic weapons, but we don't know how "BiS" they will be. I know VR is trying to emphasize situational gear and prevent there from being items that you wear 100% of the time in all situations. It's also possible that you'd have multiple epic weapons to choose from, depending on your playstyle. So in the case of the DL, you could get an epic 2H sword or two epic 1H swords. But we will see!

    • 1652 posts
    June 26, 2018 4:19 AM PDT

    My bad then : "I didn't know".

     

    I enjoyed some situationnal gear back in eq, ended collecting a lot of proc weapons on my rogue for my secondary weapon (snare, slow, stun, dots, etc...) because I felt so gimped having no cool spell to help my group.

    • 4 posts
    June 26, 2018 4:57 AM PDT

    they could solve the epic weapon issue by making available an epic version of every weapon usable by each class.

    • 1652 posts
    June 26, 2018 5:45 AM PDT

    Strat said:

    they could solve the epic weapon issue by making available an epic version of every weapon usable by each class.

     

    That would diminish the epicness of the weapon too. I'd prefer a flexible weapon by itself, or be forced into a playstyle (even if I don't like it) than the "pick the epic reward of your choice" possibility.

     

    Maybe on completely different quests but that lools a bit like GW2 legendaries then, pick whatever suits you throught numerous superlegendaryitems.

    • 4335 posts
    June 26, 2018 7:27 AM PDT

    MauvaisOeil said:

    Strat said:

    they could solve the epic weapon issue by making available an epic version of every weapon usable by each class.

     

    That would diminish the epicness of the weapon too. I'd prefer a flexible weapon by itself, or be forced into a playstyle (even if I don't like it) than the "pick the epic reward of your choice" possibility.

     

    Maybe on completely different quests but that lools a bit like GW2 legendaries then, pick whatever suits you throught numerous superlegendaryitems.

    Agree. I don't think it'd be a good idea to have any more than 2 epic weapons per class. Part of the allure of epic weapons is their uniqueness, character, and recognizability. It wouldn't make sense to have multiple options for one quest if the quest involves something like "reforging the shards of Anduil," where the quest objectives themselves are tied to the reward. Creating a whole separate quest for each weapon type would be a huge amount of content for the devs to make, and balancing them all would be near impossible.

    • 4 posts
    June 26, 2018 7:38 AM PDT

    Well, there are pros and cons to the epic weapon debate.  If you just have one epic per class then people will be forced to play that style or be less effective than they could be.  For example...what if my favorite way to play my DL is dual wield swords but the epic is a 2 hander?

     

    I build my character/stats/gear to optimize dual wield but now i cant get a group because i dont use the epic 2 hander.  

     

    I also agree that you cant put in 100's of epic quests...so for the example of the 2 hander vs dual wield it seems a good way to do it is have one quest at the end of which you select which epic you want (the one hander or the 2 hander).

    • 271 posts
    June 26, 2018 8:01 AM PDT

    Bazgrim said:

    Creating a whole separate quest for each weapon type would be a huge amount of content for the devs to make, and balancing them all would be near impossible.

    I don't see it.  This doesn't strike me as a particularly daunting amount of content, nor does it seem like an atypical balancing exercise

    • 4 posts
    June 26, 2018 8:03 AM PDT

    Shai said:

    Bazgrim said:

    Creating a whole separate quest for each weapon type would be a huge amount of content for the devs to make, and balancing them all would be near impossible.

    I don't see it.  This doesn't strike me as a particularly daunting amount of content, nor does it seem like an atypical balancing exercise

     

    I can see the quest creation being alot...but item creation and balancing is easy.

    • 4335 posts
    June 26, 2018 10:04 AM PDT

    Shai said:

    Bazgrim said:

    Creating a whole separate quest for each weapon type would be a huge amount of content for the devs to make, and balancing them all would be near impossible.

    I don't see it.  This doesn't strike me as a particularly daunting amount of content, nor does it seem like an atypical balancing exercise

    For DLs it wouldn't be so bad since they can only use 1H Slashing and 2H Slashing. But you'd arguably have to apply the principle to all classes, including the Warrior, which can use 1H Slashing, 2H Slashing, 1H Crushing, 2H Crushing, 1H Piercing, and 2H Piercing, and whatever other types there are in Pantheon. That's at least 6 different epic quests for one class, each with enough content to keep a person busy for days or weeks, ideally in a way that doesn't just involve a lot of spending hours waiting for a mob to spawn. (Bonus points if you include even more epics for the eccentric Warriors that like to specialize in Archery and Thrown Weapons lol)

    And it's not so much about balancing the item as it is balancing the difficulty of the quest. Someone would always argue that one quest is harder or "more epic" than the others because X fight is more difficult or Y item is more rare, etc. This has already been an issue in EQ with classes claiming their epic is more difficult than another class', let alone comparing within a single class. I don't know about you, but I wouldn't want to be in charge of designing all that. VR has already noted a philosophy of "quality over quantity" when it comes to the quests in Pantheon.


    This post was edited by Bazgrim at June 26, 2018 10:06 AM PDT
    • 103 posts
    June 26, 2018 10:27 AM PDT

    Parry/block/rispote/dodge is how "avoidance tanks" are created. They are fine for trivial and/or group content, but don't work for end game content when a mob can kill characters in a single combat round. Same thing with "heal tanks" that use health regen/healing to regain health after the damage is dealt. 

    Example:

    3 Tanks with 1000 health against mob that hits for 1500 every round.

    Tank 1 mitigates 50% of damage, so gets hit for 750. This tank lives and is able to MT the encounter.

    Tank 2 dodges 50% of the time, so gets hit for and average of 750 over time. This tank inevitably gets one-shotted at some point.

    Tank 3 gets hit for 1500, then immediately heals itself for 750. This tank is killed before it self heals.

    At some point raid encounters must have mobs that can one-shot everyone but the highest mititgation tank, otherwise there is no point in having a tank and/or the content will be trivial to Tank 1.  

    The best we can hope for is that there are melee based mobs that Warriors MT, magic based mobs that DLs MT, and multiple mobs the Pals AE MT (though these are usually just split up and rendered trivial, so it will be a bit of a new encounter design to force multiple mobs on a single MT). Most liklely, they will either make all tanks have equal mitigation, or there will be 1-2 encounters where the DL or Pal is slightly preferred over the Warrior. As things are currently described, Warriors will be the end game MT due to superior mitigation.


    This post was edited by nscheffel at June 26, 2018 10:30 AM PDT
    • 1652 posts
    June 26, 2018 11:13 AM PDT

    nscheffel said:

    Parry/block/rispote/dodge is how "avoidance tanks" are created. They are fine for trivial and/or group content, but don't work for end game content when a mob can kill characters in a single combat round. Same thing with "heal tanks" that use health regen/healing to regain health after the damage is dealt. 

    Example:

    3 Tanks with 1000 health against mob that hits for 1500 every round.

    Tank 1 mitigates 50% of damage, so gets hit for 750. This tank lives and is able to MT the encounter.

    Tank 2 dodges 50% of the time, so gets hit for and average of 750 over time. This tank inevitably gets one-shotted at some point.

    Tank 3 gets hit for 1500, then immediately heals itself for 750. This tank is killed before it self heals.

    At some point raid encounters must have mobs that can one-shot everyone but the highest mititgation tank, otherwise there is no point in having a tank and/or the content will be trivial to Tank 1.  

    The best we can hope for is that there are melee based mobs that Warriors MT, magic based mobs that DLs MT, and multiple mobs the Pals AE MT (though these are usually just split up and rendered trivial, so it will be a bit of a new encounter design to force multiple mobs on a single MT). Most liklely, they will either make all tanks have equal mitigation, or there will be 1-2 encounters where the DL or Pal is slightly preferred over the Warrior. As things are currently described, Warriors will be the end game MT due to superior mitigation.

     

    I agree with this overall statement, as it was what ultimately made the EQ2 guardian the only desired tank. However, I will remember that while EQ2 aligned on Wow's armor calculation (Armor = flat amount of damage reduction to an ennemy of the same level), it is not how it worked in EQ1 and will not be how it works in Pantheon. Just like armor is useless in late Velious (Mobs like Vulak Aer will hits your for maximum damage whatever armor you stack, making HP the only stat you can use to avoid beeing one shotted in a flurry), only an exceptionnal (or more accurate, outleveling the ennemy) will allow a tank to avoid taking maximum damage on one hit.

    With this design of armor, mitigation isn't really mitigation, it's just odds of beeing hit for damage close or far from the maximum possible. That makes mitigation some sort of soft avoidance, because the result remain unpredictable, but softer as it's not binary like avoidance.

    That could mean, avoidance could compete with mitigation for the overall damage taken in a timeframe, while it has been seen as a nuisance in the last 13 years of MMO's due to spikey and unpredictable damage. Thus making Avoidance tank a viable possibility as long as they don't remain mitigation-less.

    • 2475 posts
    June 26, 2018 1:59 PM PDT

    It's poor design to have mobs that can 1-shot tanks without there being ways around it, such as active abilities that block or reflect all/some incoming damage and/or abilities that interrupt. Way too much emphasis being placed on AC based mitigation here. 

    • 103 posts
    June 28, 2018 2:18 PM PDT

    Iksar said:

    It's poor design to have mobs that can 1-shot tanks without there being ways around it, such as active abilities that block or reflect all/some incoming damage and/or abilities that interrupt. Way too much emphasis being placed on AC based mitigation here. 

    Tanks getting one-shotted is inevitable, even if all mitigation techniques are used. Any serious raider understands this very simple fact.

    The RNG will be part of the encounter, and winning will involve decreasing the risk of the tank getting one-shotted, as well as creating strategies to deal with MT death.

    Have you ever MTed an end game raid encounter in a game that isn't face-roll like GW2? All your comments lead me to believe you've never been on the cutting edge of raid content in a challenging MMO.


    This post was edited by nscheffel at June 28, 2018 2:19 PM PDT
    • 103 posts
    June 28, 2018 2:31 PM PDT

    MauvaisOeil said:

    I agree with this overall statement, as it was what ultimately made the EQ2 guardian the only desired tank. However, I will remember that while EQ2 aligned on Wow's armor calculation (Armor = flat amount of damage reduction to an ennemy of the same level), it is not how it worked in EQ1 and will not be how it works in Pantheon. Just like armor is useless in late Velious (Mobs like Vulak Aer will hits your for maximum damage whatever armor you stack, making HP the only stat you can use to avoid beeing one shotted in a flurry), only an exceptionnal (or more accurate, outleveling the ennemy) will allow a tank to avoid taking maximum damage on one hit.

    With this design of armor, mitigation isn't really mitigation, it's just odds of beeing hit for damage close or far from the maximum possible. That makes mitigation some sort of soft avoidance, because the result remain unpredictable, but softer as it's not binary like avoidance.

    That could mean, avoidance could compete with mitigation for the overall damage taken in a timeframe, while it has been seen as a nuisance in the last 13 years of MMO's due to spikey and unpredictable damage. Thus making Avoidance tank a viable possibility as long as they don't remain mitigation-less.

    Correct. The goal is to lower the chances of getting one-shotted as much as possible. All tanks (SK/Pal/War) could get to similar HP values, and yet Warriors were used as MTs due to one skill: Defensive Discipline...a purely mitigation skill. It was literally the only reason the Warrior class existed. As soon as Dunric (a Paladin in the guild Triton on the Povar server) was geared well enough not to be one-shotted by raid targets, he was the MT due to the superior agro generation of stun spells.

    That's all MTs do...hold agro and mitigate damage, and with a CH chain hitting him after every combat round, surviving a single combat round was all that mattered.

    It's clear the devs have some sort of "shared MTing" in mind with skills that share damage with other tanks. It means there will be a Warrior MT that is being shielded by DLs and other Warriors. No doubt the DL will be expected to absorb some damage from the Warrior, and then heal it back up part of the way himself. That's fine. That's a valid gameplay mechanic that allows tanks to stack in raids, which is a requirement for modern MMOs.

    But Warrior will still be the MT. Anyone arguing otherwise is simply being a willingly ignorant fanboi. 


    This post was edited by nscheffel at June 28, 2018 2:33 PM PDT
    • 1652 posts
    June 28, 2018 2:51 PM PDT

    You've managed to quote me and to completely ignore the part about mitigation calculation, and as we know yet, defensive does not exist as a benefit of Pantheon's warrior over any other class.

    Getting a point with classes from another game, is irrelevant, as much as your whole opinion on this subject, at least.

    • 589 posts
    June 29, 2018 12:08 AM PDT

    It really depends on how raid mobs are designed. If a majority of raid mobs deal just physical damage, then the warrior will have the advantage. If there's a good mix of raid mobs however, including undead and magic damage dealing ones, then there won't be an obvious class for MT. Instead raids will use the class that is best for each encounter, and that will differ from fight to fight.

    • 69 posts
    July 3, 2018 2:45 AM PDT

    nscheffel said:

    Parry/block/rispote/dodge is how "avoidance tanks" are created. They are fine for trivial and/or group content, but don't work for end game content when a mob can kill characters in a single combat round. Same thing with "heal tanks" that use health regen/healing to regain health after the damage is dealt. 

    Example:

    3 Tanks with 1000 health against mob that hits for 1500 every round.

    Tank 1 mitigates 50% of damage, so gets hit for 750. This tank lives and is able to MT the encounter.

    Tank 2 dodges 50% of the time, so gets hit for and average of 750 over time. This tank inevitably gets one-shotted at some point.

    Tank 3 gets hit for 1500, then immediately heals itself for 750. This tank is killed before it self heals.

    At some point raid encounters must have mobs that can one-shot everyone but the highest mititgation tank, otherwise there is no point in having a tank and/or the content will be trivial to Tank 1.  

    The best we can hope for is that there are melee based mobs that Warriors MT, magic based mobs that DLs MT, and multiple mobs the Pals AE MT (though these are usually just split up and rendered trivial, so it will be a bit of a new encounter design to force multiple mobs on a single MT). Most liklely, they will either make all tanks have equal mitigation, or there will be 1-2 encounters where the DL or Pal is slightly preferred over the Warrior. As things are currently described, Warriors will be the end game MT due to superior mitigation.

     

    To be fair, most raids have an hp/mit threshold which a tank needs to get to avoid one shotting.  That can usually be reached (even vanilla Paladins in WoW were able to tank every boss in vanilla despite gear limitations). 

    As for the three tank examples,

    Tank 1 is brute force that just needs a steady stream of healing.  As long as nothing disrupts the healing flow it is no problem - though mana intensive (constant casts, no time to med) but then again, a consistent and well mitigated damage flow means more efficient healing can be done to make up for it.  Wards/Bubbles can of course be used, but due to constant damage they pop about as fast as they are put on.

    Tank 2 is avoidance who requires wards/bubble rather than direct heal.  Disruption in heals is less of a disaster because his high avoidance means he will likely no get hit while healers reposition.  Due to avoidance his Ward/Bubble should last a decent while - most importantly keeping them up should be no issue so when the big hit lands it softens the blow and avoids a killshot.  Healers have the opportunity to med while bubble is up.  Healing is intensive in small bursts - when a hit lands he needs the big heal and bubble asap.

    Tank 3 depends on design,  if we are talking instant reactive heal the class has (Return X% of damage back as health or something) then the simplest way to make this work is in the programming of stack priority.  Usually this ability is poor due to exactly what you mentioned - great for group content, no good for big hitting mobs.  But all they need to do is decide the order in hich things are resolved:

    1) Killshot damage

    2) Health check (target alive or dead)

    3) Reactive Heal

    Is what games tend to do, resulting in 3) not happening.  But if there is a nano second delay/swap to the priority system then it can work:

    1) Killshot damage

    2) Reactive Heal

    3) Health Check (target alive or dead)

    This means 1500 damage is done, target drops to 0 (or -250 if the game has negative numbers like EQ1 & 2 did) reactive heal gives back 500, tank remains alive.  Whereas if he was killed when low health, the reactive heal woul not be enough to bring him to positive so he is dead.

    (If talking about self heals as in actual cast heals, well there is no saving grace there - that kind of healing cannot make up for mitigation).

     

    End result:

    Tank 1 is all round tank - doesn't matter what healers you have, doesn't matter what mob you are facing - he will always be a solid, reliable choice for any encounter though long fights may strain mana reserves of team.

    Tank 2 is best against slow, heavy hitting mobs with a Ward/Bubble healer to support him - avoiding many of the slow blows makes it easy on the heals and mana, the Ward prevents the death shot when a blow does hit, the heal team can easily get him max health and bubbled before the next big hit in case he takes two batterings in a row.  He is not a good choice for fast hitting mobs as he will be hit hard due to low mit and the attacks are so frequent you won't notice the benefit of avoidance.

    Tank 3 is best against fast hitting/flurrying mobs where the individual hits are less heavy damage due to reactive heals 'mitigating' each hit instantly (this assumes the tank has decent mitigation yet lower than Tank 1 so the overall effect of mit + reactive heal results in less damage overall).  He can tank heavy hitting mobs too but is less desirable than tank 1 because the reactive heal won't be enough to keep him alive if he is not near max health when the hit lands.  Ward/Bubble heals are not much use to this tank because they take away from the reactive heal amount.

     

    As it currently stands, Tank 1 is the safe bet, the Warrior will be the default for new content in most cases - assuming when all skills are taken into account the War has notably superior mit.

    • 1652 posts
    July 3, 2018 11:08 AM PDT

    asteldian said:

    nscheffel said:

    Parry/block/rispote/dodge is how "avoidance tanks" are created. They are fine for trivial and/or group content, but don't work for end game content when a mob can kill characters in a single combat round. Same thing with "heal tanks" that use health regen/healing to regain health after the damage is dealt. 

    Example:

    3 Tanks with 1000 health against mob that hits for 1500 every round.

    Tank 1 mitigates 50% of damage, so gets hit for 750. This tank lives and is able to MT the encounter.

    Tank 2 dodges 50% of the time, so gets hit for and average of 750 over time. This tank inevitably gets one-shotted at some point.

    Tank 3 gets hit for 1500, then immediately heals itself for 750. This tank is killed before it self heals.

    At some point raid encounters must have mobs that can one-shot everyone but the highest mititgation tank, otherwise there is no point in having a tank and/or the content will be trivial to Tank 1.  

    The best we can hope for is that there are melee based mobs that Warriors MT, magic based mobs that DLs MT, and multiple mobs the Pals AE MT (though these are usually just split up and rendered trivial, so it will be a bit of a new encounter design to force multiple mobs on a single MT). Most liklely, they will either make all tanks have equal mitigation, or there will be 1-2 encounters where the DL or Pal is slightly preferred over the Warrior. As things are currently described, Warriors will be the end game MT due to superior mitigation.

     

    To be fair, most raids have an hp/mit threshold which a tank needs to get to avoid one shotting.  That can usually be reached (even vanilla Paladins in WoW were able to tank every boss in vanilla despite gear limitations). 

    As for the three tank examples,

    Tank 1 is brute force that just needs a steady stream of healing.  As long as nothing disrupts the healing flow it is no problem - though mana intensive (constant casts, no time to med) but then again, a consistent and well mitigated damage flow means more efficient healing can be done to make up for it.  Wards/Bubbles can of course be used, but due to constant damage they pop about as fast as they are put on.

    Tank 2 is avoidance who requires wards/bubble rather than direct heal.  Disruption in heals is less of a disaster because his high avoidance means he will likely no get hit while healers reposition.  Due to avoidance his Ward/Bubble should last a decent while - most importantly keeping them up should be no issue so when the big hit lands it softens the blow and avoids a killshot.  Healers have the opportunity to med while bubble is up.  Healing is intensive in small bursts - when a hit lands he needs the big heal and bubble asap.

    Tank 3 depends on design,  if we are talking instant reactive heal the class has (Return X% of damage back as health or something) then the simplest way to make this work is in the programming of stack priority.  Usually this ability is poor due to exactly what you mentioned - great for group content, no good for big hitting mobs.  But all they need to do is decide the order in hich things are resolved:

    1) Killshot damage

    2) Health check (target alive or dead)

    3) Reactive Heal

    Is what games tend to do, resulting in 3) not happening.  But if there is a nano second delay/swap to the priority system then it can work:

    1) Killshot damage

    2) Reactive Heal

    3) Health Check (target alive or dead)

    This means 1500 damage is done, target drops to 0 (or -250 if the game has negative numbers like EQ1 & 2 did) reactive heal gives back 500, tank remains alive.  Whereas if he was killed when low health, the reactive heal woul not be enough to bring him to positive so he is dead.

    (If talking about self heals as in actual cast heals, well there is no saving grace there - that kind of healing cannot make up for mitigation).

     

    End result:

    Tank 1 is all round tank - doesn't matter what healers you have, doesn't matter what mob you are facing - he will always be a solid, reliable choice for any encounter though long fights may strain mana reserves of team.

    Tank 2 is best against slow, heavy hitting mobs with a Ward/Bubble healer to support him - avoiding many of the slow blows makes it easy on the heals and mana, the Ward prevents the death shot when a blow does hit, the heal team can easily get him max health and bubbled before the next big hit in case he takes two batterings in a row.  He is not a good choice for fast hitting mobs as he will be hit hard due to low mit and the attacks are so frequent you won't notice the benefit of avoidance.

    Tank 3 is best against fast hitting/flurrying mobs where the individual hits are less heavy damage due to reactive heals 'mitigating' each hit instantly (this assumes the tank has decent mitigation yet lower than Tank 1 so the overall effect of mit + reactive heal results in less damage overall).  He can tank heavy hitting mobs too but is less desirable than tank 1 because the reactive heal won't be enough to keep him alive if he is not near max health when the hit lands.  Ward/Bubble heals are not much use to this tank because they take away from the reactive heal amount.

     

    As it currently stands, Tank 1 is the safe bet, the Warrior will be the default for new content in most cases - assuming when all skills are taken into account the War has notably superior mit.

     

    While I appreciate your post and analysis, I must intervene to correct one misinterpretation about avoidance tanks, IE : Tank 2.

    Avoidance is unreliable for the sole reason the result is binary : Hit or miss, while mitigation (in EQ2/Wow/most mmo's) is a reliable static amount of raw damage reduction. For this sole reason, a dangerous situation for an avoidance tank is not a quick succession of medium hits, but slow and hard hitting mobs, where your healer cannot catch up if you don't avoid two or three hits in a row.

     

    I'll make a numeric example here :

     

    Tank 1 : Mitigation tank, 50% mitigation and 10% avoidance.

    Tank 2 : Avoidance tank; 10% mitigation and 50% avoidance.

    Both have 1000 HP.

     

    Boss a hits for 800 damage per swing, and swing every 2 seconds.

     

    Tank 1 is hit for 400 damage per swing, and will then survive two swings before dieing, that means the healer have the freedom to cast a heal during one or two of the boss of the swing or he will die. Meaning an interval of 2 to 4 seconds. Of course in this particular scenario, you will want some chain casting to beging casting before the hit is landed.

    For this tank, the mitigation is preventing 400 damage every 2 seconds, which means 200 per second. Avoidance, overall, will prevent 20 damage per second on an overall basis (40/2), even if it will probably end wasted often due to precasts.

     

    Tank two is his for 720 per swing, and will die if he takes two swings in a succession. The means the healer must be sure he is topped every two seconds or he might die from a bad streak of luck. Is this scenario, cancel casting is really hard as the healer will be in stress of loosing his tank everytime he cancel a cast.

     

    For this tank, mitigation is preventing 80 damage every 2 seconds, which means 40 per second, and avoidance will prevent 180 damage per second on an overall basis.

     

    Both tank will mitigate+avoid an average of 220 damage per second here, on an infinite number of strikes. However tank 1 has more chances to survive while tank 2 is at hard risk every other swing because he is more prone to burst damage, and binary stats (Avoidance) work on an unpredictable basis.

     

    If the boss was hitting every second for half the damage, the chances for tank B to survive more than four seconds would be much higher, and even more if the boss hit for a quarter of his damage every half a second, simply because the more you roll, the more you will spread your values and come closer to the "infinite numbers" that would tend his avoidance close to 50%.

     

     

    For this reason, Avoidance tanks work better against fast hitting ennemies or multiple oponents where they can  soften the bad luck throught more numerous attacks against them for a reduced amount of damage. And that's why monks/bruisers where out of Meta in EQ2 untill they added armor / damage reduction on their epics, which made them high avoidance with medium to high mitigation afterward.

     

     

     

    That was a big parenthesis, but since pantheon's AC should be more like EQ's AC (hints in some cohh streams about weapon damage, attack and ennemy's AC), the gap shouldn't be that high and mitigation might not end beeing the bread and butter of tanks.

     

     

    • 69 posts
    July 5, 2018 6:42 AM PDT

    A fair point, but that tends to be from traditional healing.  The Warding type heals by design help mitigate the unlucky Dodger - usually a ward is quick to cast so easily applied and reapplied to help ensure a badluck run doesn't smash the tank in.  The bad luck streak should be able to be weathered via an intense burst of mana for heals/wards, followed by time to med. 

    Also, as mentioned before - there tends to be a baseline mit requirement for the big stuff, as a result an avoidance tank should still be reaching a certain lvl of mit (and more importantly, should be capable of doing so). An alternative to that is for avoidance tanks to have a large hp buffer, but I am not a fan of that style.

     

    The reason faster hits can be less preferable is because assuming these come in the form of rapid attacks/flurries/double attacks etc. (I was actually thinking more in the form of multiple mobs originally) at least with slow big hits it tends to be 'ward there, ward gone' it is easy to stay on top of things.  With faster hits it is harder to gauge when the ward is nearly depleted, so it gets low, then an unlucky streak happens and the health drops very low very quickly and because of the speed (and unpredictability of attacks if multiple mob encounter) of attacks there is less time to recover and you are relying on that lucky streak to come soon.

     

    When Wards are removed from the equation, I feel the avoidance tank becomes far to RNG reliant.  Me personally, in either case, with or without wards, I prefer the reliable and predictable style of mitigation - but I am old fashioned that way, give me a Knight, not a ninja :)

     

    • 1652 posts
    July 5, 2018 1:19 PM PDT

    asteldian said:

    A fair point, but that tends to be from traditional healing.  The Warding type heals by design help mitigate the unlucky Dodger - usually a ward is quick to cast so easily applied and reapplied to help ensure a badluck run doesn't smash the tank in.  The bad luck streak should be able to be weathered via an intense burst of mana for heals/wards, followed by time to med. 

    Also, as mentioned before - there tends to be a baseline mit requirement for the big stuff, as a result an avoidance tank should still be reaching a certain lvl of mit (and more importantly, should be capable of doing so). An alternative to that is for avoidance tanks to have a large hp buffer, but I am not a fan of that style.

     

    The reason faster hits can be less preferable is because assuming these come in the form of rapid attacks/flurries/double attacks etc. (I was actually thinking more in the form of multiple mobs originally) at least with slow big hits it tends to be 'ward there, ward gone' it is easy to stay on top of things.  With faster hits it is harder to gauge when the ward is nearly depleted, so it gets low, then an unlucky streak happens and the health drops very low very quickly and because of the speed (and unpredictability of attacks if multiple mob encounter) of attacks there is less time to recover and you are relying on that lucky streak to come soon.

     

    When Wards are removed from the equation, I feel the avoidance tank becomes far to RNG reliant.  Me personally, in either case, with or without wards, I prefer the reliable and predictable style of mitigation - but I am old fashioned that way, give me a Knight, not a ninja :)

     

     

    That's true : Wards can make the avoidance tank less of a risk, but not better than the mitigation tank (traditionnaly speaking). That means you rely on one type of healer to overcome a base design that is flawed by nature. Because traditionnal healing will make you more prone to burst, reactive healing will be extremely bad, and hots will be average but less steady than a mitigation tank.

    In no scenario would you be better but in a lot of them would you be worse. That was the case in EQ2 where mitig tank were about 50% mitig, 25% avoid at best and dodge tanks were 25% and 50% if I remember, and monks/ bruiser were completely unconsidered as tanks due to that high RNG and heavy reliance on mystics/defilers for wards.

    For that sole reason, monk epic gave something like 15% armor bonus and bruiser gave something like 15% damage reduction, not sure of the right order or numbers, but the idea was : To make them viable tanks they had to design their epic to fill the gap of steady damage reduction instead of buffing the class somehow, and allow them to get the good part of shamans and priest's special heals : HoTs and reactive healings.

     

    I agree that, to narrow the gap, tanks shouldn't be so different in mitigation and avoidance, but let's face it : If one tank is 35% mitigation and 30% avoidance and the other is 30% mitigation and 35% avoidance, you can hardly speak of "mitigation / avoidance tanks" they are pretty much the same then.

     

    To make avoidance valuable, tanking shouldn't be a matter of beeing hit for more than 10% of your life per hit, to allow the avoidance to kick in over the healthbar, and heals shouldn't give much more health back, that way you could appreciate the efficiency of avoidance equal to mitigation in the sense of mana conservation.  As we saw in the Fion Iridia fight, big fights tend to revolve around spikey damage more than steady checks of your team's endurance, but that's just an alpha for now, so...

     

    As stated, mitigation will be unlikely to work like a raw damage reduction like it is in Wow/Eq and pretty much every other title. An EQ1's mitigation should make avoidance a bit more valuable, as long as mobs don't hit as hard as they did in velious, where armor or avoidance ended beeing completely useless in favor of big health pools with defensive stance (raw damage reduction, for once ! ).

    • 691 posts
    July 8, 2018 7:12 PM PDT

    Unless PRotF somehow makes parry/dodge actually a factor of mitigation instead of dmg avoidance and give the lower mitigation "tanks" a way to force/increase dodge or parry on timers to give actual mitigation through the use of skills, the warrior (player with highest mitigation) will rule.  (Like an ability that gives 100% parry chance for x seconds, and then 100% dodge chance for x seconds and dodge/parry actually just mitigate a % of dmg).  Then there's block too though... will that be mitigation or avoidance?  Either way, the DL won't have that either haha.  

    • 1652 posts
    July 8, 2018 11:20 PM PDT

    Darch said:

    Unless PRotF somehow makes parry/dodge actually a factor of mitigation instead of dmg avoidance and give the lower mitigation "tanks" a way to force/increase dodge or parry on timers to give actual mitigation through the use of skills, the warrior (player with highest mitigation) will rule.  (Like an ability that gives 100% parry chance for x seconds, and then 100% dodge chance for x seconds and dodge/parry actually just mitigate a % of dmg).  Then there's block too though... will that be mitigation or avoidance?  Either way, the DL won't have that either haha.  

     

    Well, I know my demonstration was confusing because I used a raw mitigation instead of an EQ-like mitigation calc, but please consider that AC is Pantheon will work close to what AC was in EQ : Whatever AC you have, you still risk max melee hits and nothing guarantee you a true and raw percent of damage reduction.

    In this scenario, what would make the Warrior more desirable if his bonus AC only returns a long term mana efficiency and not an absolute burst protection ? Which is pretty much close to what avoidance factor ?

    • 130 posts
    July 13, 2018 5:50 PM PDT
    The perry block dodge.. we may get more but dont forget we also get our life taps to proc when u take a crit hit and we get to heal from doing crits and as we get lower in hp the regeneration increases regen my be a big deal.

    And as for the dl epic it can be like the basted swords from dnd if used 2 handed the did more dam and slower if used one handed with where like a long sword and u could duel wield or us a shield. And dont for get to with cirts we get tondonthem more often 1 handed and 2 handed a crit will do more damage. The dl is a dps based tank of we are not dps we can not tank unless its a caster mob with dl starting with the highest magic resistance