Detailed Explanation of Block Cost Changes

Justice31st

Wrobel wrote: »

First, thanks to everyone for all your feedback on block. We appreciate the time you've spent testing everything out, and we'd like to take some time to explain some of our most recent changes.

Live vs PTS Block Costs
In general, we feel that if you decide to hold block against all attacks, it should require a significant investment. To help explain this, let’s start with a mathematical peek at how low you can get block costs on Live versus what's currently on the PTS. In this exercise, we're using a fully-optimized character wearing 7 pieces of gold-quality heavy armor, 3 purple jewelry with block cost reduction, and the full 25% block cost reduction through the Champion System. The first 2 examples assume you are getting hit every half second, while the 3rd example is representative of a boss fight where you are getting hit once a second. As bosses usually hit less frequently, this is intended as a worst case scenario.

While reviewing these examples, please keep the following points in mind:

• Fortress, Bracing, and Defensive stance bonuses are additive
• Block cost has a cooldown of 0.5 seconds - No matter how many monsters are attacking, you can block every single attack and will only be charged every half second.
• To calculate Constitution’s stamina return relative to block costs, we need to figure out how much stamina is being returned every half second. Constitution gives 346 stamina every 4 seconds, which equates to 43 every half second. We can then subtract that 43 from the amount each block is charging you since you are being charged that block cost every half second.

Live
Base Block Cost: 2160
25% Champion Cost Reduction: 2160 * .75 = 1620
3x purple block cost enchantments: 1620 – 191x3 = 1620 – 573 = 1047
Fortress, Bracing, and Defensive Stance: 1047 * 0.42 = 440
Constitution: 440 – 43 = 397

PTS
Base Block Cost: 2160
25% Champion Cost Reduction: 2160 * .75 = 1620
3x purple block cost enchantments: 1620 – 191x3 = 1620 – 573 = 1047
Fortress and Defensive Stance: 1047 * .56 = 587
Sturdy x1: 587 * .96 = 563
Constitution: 563 – 163 = 400

PTS – Boss Fight
Base Block Cost: 2160
25% Champion Cost Reduction: 2160 * .75 = 1620
3x purple block cost enchantments: 1620 – 191x3 = 1620 – 573 = 1047
Fortress and Defensive Stance: 1047 * .56 = 587
Constitution 1 second: 587 – 326 = 261

Assuming the worst case scenario where you get hit exactly every half second, you only need 1 piece of Sturdy gear equipped to keep the current block costs. This means you now have the option to wear 8 pieces of Sturdy to get even lower costs. We’re not trying to force Sturdy on tanks, but more to give an option for players who block a lot and need more stamina recovery. Tanks who are getting hit every second on average will actually be able to block more with the upcoming changes in Dark Brotherhood, and that’s without having any Sturdy items equipped. Also note that you’ll have additional magicka with the updated Constitution passive to help you use more utility abilities while tanking:

DB Constitution value = 1305
Live Constitution value = 346
1305 – 346 = 959 / 2 seconds = 480 additional magicka every 2 seconds

Champion System
We recently moved the block cost reduction from the Steed tree to the Shadow tree. This change was made to give more options in customizing your defenses, and help reduce the amount of time spent blocking. When spending Warrior points, you don’t need to invest in block cost; you can now consider increased healing taken, stronger damage shields, or more damage reduction. Let’s dive into how this will affect the stats of a character with 501 Champion Points who is trying to maximize their block time and damage resistance:

Live - Warrior
100 Block Expertise – 25% Block Cost Reduction.
33 Hardy – 11.5% Reduced Poison, Disease, and Physical Damage.
34 Elemental Defender – 11.8% Reduced Flame, Frost, Shock, and Magic Damage.
Unique unlocks the PTS build does not have (Invigorating Bash, Phase, Shield Expert)

Live - Thief
100 Warlord – 16% Cost Reduction Stamina abilities
67 Magician – 12.6% Cost Reduction Magicka abilities
Unique unlocks the PTS build does not have (Mara’s Gift, War Mount)

PTS - Warrior
83 Hardy – 21.9% Reduced Poison, Disease, and Physical Damage reduction.
84 Elemental Defender – 22.1% Reduced Flame, Frost, Shock, and Magic Damage.
Unique unlocks the Live build does not have (Critical Leech, Unchained)

PTS - Thief
100 Block Expertise – 25% Block Cost Reduction.
67 Warlord - 12.6% Cost Reduction Stamina abilities.
Unique unlocks the Live build does not have (Fortune Seeker, Merchant Favored, Treasure Hunter)

The average ability cost is 2700 resources. That’s going to be reduced to 2268 when maxing out the Magician Champion star, or 2365 with lesser investment. If you cast an ability every 2 seconds, you will end up with more magicka after the Dark Brotherhood changes because Constitution is giving more magicka. The difference in only putting 67 points in Magician is 2365 – 2268 = 97 magicka (480 every 2 seconds from Constitution – 97 every 2 seconds nets you 383 magicka every 2 seconds). Even if you put no points in Magician, you still end up with more magicka because of the Constitution buff. Magician gives 2700 – 2268 = 432 magicka (480 every 2 seconds from Constitution – 432 magicka from Magician = 48 magicka every 2 seconds). Overall, you have more magicka and more defense if you choose to put Warrior Champion Points into Hardy and Elemental Defender. Putting 83 points into these stars instead of 34 nets an additional 10% damage reduction.

Two of the most influential passives for tanks are Shield Expert and Unchained. The resource cost reduction from Unchained is great if you miss blocking a stun attack, or if you get feared/disoriented. The Champion passive Shield Expert gives about 1290 armor and spell resistance all the time. However, this is a great passive that is currently in a tree that is PvP and medium armor focused. To help remedy this, we’re looking into swapping Shield Expert with Resilient so the passive to reduce critical hit damage and the unlock to heal on critical hits are together. This also makes a key tanking unlock more accessible for players with lower Champion Points, requiring 30 Champion Points instead of 75.

Wrap Up
As with all pieces of the ESO balance puzzle, changes to tanking affect players of different types of content, ability loadouts, item sets, and armor weights. With Dark Brotherhood, we’re offering more ways to customize your Tanky character by allowing lower block costs than ever before and providing more flexibility when customizing your defenses. If you don’t want to take advantage of these options, your block cost should remain similar to what it was before the changes. If you still have concerns with tanking after trying out the changes, please leave a detailed reply about your character and the type of content you’re playing.

We'll also be making the following changes before Dark Brotherhood goes live:

• Fixing an issue where Sturdy is rounding fractions down
• Fixing an issue where Sturdy is multiplicative with itself instead of additive
• A more accessible Shield Expert Champion unlock

Good news for PvE players, but how about PvP players not wanting to sacrifice impen for sturdy trait?...

Roymachine

Armitas wrote: »

Live in 5 heavy.
20% block cost + impen.

Pts in 5 heavy
Block cost reduction or impen.

Except Fortress now gives more, and the CPs can be moved around to allow for more tankiness without having to dump all your warrior points into block cost reduction. You can't just weigh the pros and cons of the thief trees with stam and mag cost reduction/recovery vs block cost reduction, you have to take into account the extra passive mitigation you are getting from the warrior trees now as well. If the block expert swaps with Resilient then you don't have to put any points into The Steed at all. If, however, you did want to you could put points into Resistant for more crit damage resistance to make up for the loss in impen.

KhaN_BE

I am really happy you took the time to explain the reasoning behind this and supply us with the formulas. I have done some theory crafting of my own based on the supplied formulas. I have found a combination that nets me a lower block cost than I currently have on live. Note that I still run 5 piece v14 footman's (sabatons, greaves and jewelry).

On live (based on formula):

• 5H/1L/1M
• 66 CP in Block Cost reduction (18.7% reduction)
• 2 epic (purple) v14 block cost reduction enchantments (186 reduction each)
• = 550 net block cost

On PTS (based on formula):

• 5H/1L/1M
• 18 CP in Shadow Ward
• 3 legendary (gold) v14 block cost reduction enchantments (198 reduction each)
• 4 pieces Sturdy
• = 544 net block cost

Currently on live I have about 450 CP. By the time DB goes live I should have over 461. With the 40 CP we get at DB launch this brings me at 501 CP. Assuming this, I will be able to distribute my Thief CP as before and invest the newly earned/gotten Thief CP in Shadow Ward. Overall with the added CP I should be able to maintain or even improve most of my stats.

On PTS I spend 75CP in Spell Shield to get Shield Expert. This is a waste as it brings me buffed with Major Ward on 35432 spell resistance which is way over the cap. Moving the Shield Expert in The Lady and making it cost only 30 CP to unlock is an excellent idea. This would allow me to remove some CP from Spell Shield and invest it somewhere else in the Red constellations.

Can't wait to put this revised build into action over the weekend. I still wonder how the increased ability cost will influence my playstyle. I hope the new buffed Constitution passive really makes up for it.

Aoshy

So.... no heavy armor in PvP? Burst all the way (like always)?

Nefas

Thank you for the explanation @Wrobel

Sk000tch

@Wrobel Again, I think we all appreciate you taking the time to explain your reasoning. @Asayre and others have attempted to explain the flaws in your math, which I do hope that you give adequate thought.

Unfortunately, this thread is following the same trend of every other dev thread. Some insight, even more QQ, some LTP, and a whole lot of posts that demonstrate a total lack of understanding of the issues.

@Asayre has done an exceptional job clarifying block cost difference on PTS vs Live. He also pointed out the error in your average ability cost calculation.

I've also tried to highlight the actual building implications, including the opportunity cost of having to use sturdy, and how for a more typical build the numbers look far worse.

Wrobel wrote: »

As with all pieces of the ESO balance puzzle, changes to tanking affect players of different types of content, ability loadouts, item sets, and armor weights. With Dark Brotherhood, we’re offering more ways to customize your Tanky character by allowing lower block costs than ever before and providing more flexibility when customizing your defenses. If you don’t want to take advantage of these options, your block cost should remain similar to what it was before the changes.

Again, this is not an accurate statement, block cost is not similar.

You have explained that your design goal is for permablocking to carry significant sacrifices. You have also explained that you want Heavy Armor to be on par with LA and MA, balanced to provide more damage mitigation but still able to do good damage (though less than LA, MA). While some of the changes are good, the removal of bracing and CP change are counterproductive to these goals.

I personally agree with these design decision, particularly in PvP. Blocking should be reactionary, and provide limited duration damage mitigation (like dodge roll and 6-second shields). It should also be synergistic with heavy armor, as dodge roll is to medium, and magicka based shields are to light.

Unfortunately, the current PTS changes do not accomplish this.

Using the current costs of block and abilities on PTS, as applied to a reasonable HA 1H/S pvp type build:

[*] Fortress and Defensive Stance provide 44% block cost mitigation on PTS but Neither require heavy armor to access.
[*] Ability costs are up 10-12% increase across the board on PTS.
[*] Block cost glyphs on jewelry is not a viable choice for anyone but pure PvE tanks (you can’t block someone to death in pvp), so not used.
[*] Constitution calculations should be based on 5 Heavy. Besides undaunted passive, due to increased ability cost on PTS, cost reduction passives are increasingly important.
[*] On live, for pvp builds 48 resistant and 27 block expertise is the norm to obtain shield expert (resulting in 10% block cost reduction). If anything, the point allocation to Shadow Ward is likely less on average compared to shield expert currently given the garbage unlocks in Shadow and the massive importance of primary stat ability cost reduction and passive regen. Break free cost reduction is also important.

Given those new parameters, being generous, a more accurate comparison of block costs is:

PTS: 2160 base cost * .90 Shadow Ward * .56 fortress/defensive stance = 1088 stamina per block tick
Live: 2160 base cost * .90 Shadow Ward * .35 fortress/bracing/defensive stance = 680 stamina per block tick

Assume a 4s period during which the player is under constant pressure:

PTS: 1088 stamina per .5 second tick, for 8704 stamina, offset by ~930 stamina restored from constitution, for net stamina loss of 7774.
Live: 680 stamina per .5 second tick, for 5440 total, offset by ~245 stamina restored from constitution, for net stamina loss of 5195.

If bracing were simply reduced to 10%, and left CP alone, then this would have been fine. You would have retained some synergy between HA and 1H/S, and the relative resource costs would have remained closer.

The design issue is that HA provides no advantage to 1H/S that other armor types do not provide. Whereas, for both LA and MA, their passives contribute significantly to their primary mitigation type. The CP change makes this much worse.

Even at 5/1/1, LA builds get 15% ability cost reduction and 20% primary pool regen. Because their primary defense scales of max magicka, thief points can be almost entirely put into regen/reduction, achieving an additional 14% cost reduction and 21% regen assuming an even distribution. Bastion is in red tree, allows flat 25% increase in shield size with no hit to sustain (or defense at all, really). Can neglect resistant due to shields, freeing up additional damage type specific mitigation in the rare event their shields drop. Crazy good…

At 7 MA, passives grant 21% ability cost reduction and 28% primary pool regen. Shuffle is like a flat 20% reduction to damage taken. Other passives are awesome, but do have to share thief points w/ tumbling, but points in tumbling benefit both mitigation (dodge roll) and help with sustain by reducing break free costs.

HA enjoys no such benefit. Max health and healing received are great and all, but HA provides no passive regen or cost reduction bonuses. Constitution buff is much appreciated, and I acknowledge that it benefits two attributes, but it doesn’t compare to the passive regen and ability cost passives in terms of resource management. Now, by moving block cost reduction into thief, HA builds have to sacrifice CP based ability cost reduction and regen to compensate for the increased cost. Its takes almost 80 points in in shadow ward to achieve the 20% reduction that bracing provided, which doesn’t address the base cost increase or that CP previously added another 10-25% cost reduction which is now lost. Which if the remaining points are split between cost reduction and regen, instead of 14% ability cost reduction you get 9%, and you lose about 8.5% in passive regen.

That’s a big loss and a tough choice. Keep resource regen/cost reduction the same and lose 45% in block cost reduction, or keep the block cost reduction loss at 20% and decimate your resource sustain. Alternatively, run 4 sturdy and reduce your crit resist by 1000...That’s a rough deal (btw this was the problem with shields, not duration).

Fwiw… its this kind of stuff that prevents you from being able to balance the game. CP provides massively disparate benefits depending on build, and this change makes it worse

Armitas

Roymachine wrote: »

Armitas wrote: »

Live in 5 heavy.
20% block cost + impen.

Pts in 5 heavy
Block cost reduction or impen.

Except Fortress now gives more, and the CPs can be moved around to allow for more tankiness without having to dump all your warrior points into block cost reduction. You can't just weigh the pros and cons of the thief trees with stam and mag cost reduction/recovery vs block cost reduction, you have to take into account the extra passive mitigation you are getting from the warrior trees now as well. If the block expert swaps with Resilient then you don't have to put any points into The Steed at all. If, however, you did want to you could put points into Resistant for more crit damage resistance to make up for the loss in impen.

There are all these mitigating factors, but they are only factors if they are included and they are not necessarily included. On live both of those are just there, on PTS they may or may not be there depending on how you are set up. For example Fortress is only there if you have a shield equipped. That is my only point in viewing this strictly from heavy armor.

When you think of light armor or medium armor it's a complete thought, it's self entailed within the armor. You don't have to use any imagination, or understand anything complex to get the full function of the set. However when you think of the new heavy armor it isn't a complete thought. It's a gestalt thought that must now include s/b and CP to complete the function of heavy armor. It's being propped up by all these external variables now rather than propped up by its own internal features, it's now a construct of several things rather than a single thing. Heavy armor is now only fulfilled when you add all the parts together, while being nearly barren without them.

Everything seems correct on the chalkboard, it just doesn't seem right in the world. It all seems like a maneuver to get from A to B rather than to complete heavy armor. It's very different than what I expected.

All that said I am using s/b in my HA build so I fall under the mitigating factors you mention, and it won't be that different for me, which just leaves me with this incomplete way of viewing an armor class now. In addition to that the external variables like fortress now make it even easier to circumvent heavy armor entirely for tanking, such as LA Armor Master. So what is heavy armor even for, constitution? It all just seems so murky now, or maybe I'm just too old school.

Personofsecrets

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Liofa wrote: »

So ... No change in base block cost ? Because there is a line in the Patch Notes 2.4.0 :

''Core mechanics (sprint, dodge, block, CC break) will now be slightly more expensive.''

Can you clearify this as well ?

We double checked the block cost and it should actually be the same. We'll remove "block" from that line in the patch notes as this was simply an error, sorry about that.

Thank you @ZOS_GinaBruno for that clarification. Not only is it good to hear that the patch note was a mistake, but because it is a mistake the changes going on will be easier to judge.

Personofsecrets

@ZOS_GinaBruno , can you please clarify what @Wrobel means when writing the following?

"Fixing an issue where Sturdy is multiplicative with itself instead of additive"

Thank you.

Personofsecrets

@Wrobel , can wrath instead have an effect dependent on the weapon type of the user? This would be like twin blad and blunt for example.

Xsorus

laced wrote: »

So someone can dodge roll and dodge 99999999999999 attacks with only one base cost, and we have to consistently invest more into block reduction in order to block ONE attack? That makes sense.

The removal of bracing is just nonsense. You are forcing people to get rid of ALL of their impen traits on their armor ( which is CRUCIAL for pvp considering the amount of crits flying around there ) and forcing us to use sturdy on EVERY single piece.

It is clear that you will not listen to the community at all though when it comes to heavy armor or blocking though, so I don't know what I really expect at this point.

Actually, since there seems to be a cooldown on cost (0.5) seconds, Block technically works similar to Dodge. they should just probably move the cooldown up to 1.0 seconds.

Minno

Asayre wrote: »

Thank you @Wrobel for the detailed explanation. I've a few comments

Typo

Wrobel wrote: »

Constitution gives 247 stamina every 4 seconds, which equates to 43 every half second.

I think you meant

Constitution gives 346 stamina every 4 seconds, which equates to 43 every half second.

And this is with 7 pieces of Heavy Armour.

Block Cost Formula
You suggest that the block cost formula on the PTS is

I would instead suggest

I compared both models to the block cost on the PTS and found my proposed formula to be slightly more accurate. I’ve included video evidence showing the block cost on the PTS for 0, 1 and 7 pieces of Sturdy (https://sendvid.com/o29cfk6c). There is some rounding to 3 significant figures going on with the base cost of 2160, the Sturdy part and Shadow Ward so I have to figure out a more accurate formula.


Stamina Loss on Block
Using your method of comparing stamina loss on block on Live and on PTS, I’ve extended to include a wider span of parameters. I used the following equations to draw the plots below. I used the following to determine the stamina loss on block and plotted the difference for a range of parameters.



In the image above, I'm showing slices corresponding to 0, 1, 2 and 3 purple block cost enchantments when wearing 7 pieces of Heavy Armour. The colour scale used changes at around 0 to accentuate the changeover. With 7 pieces of Heavy Armour, I find that unless a lot of block cost mitigation is used or with a low rate of attacks per second the stamina loss on the PTS is greater than on Live. This is even more true when considering 5 pieces of Heavy Armour, where the stamina loss on PTS is almost always greater than on Live. Due to the altered ability cost formula, 5 pieces of Heavy Armour is more strongly preferred as cost reduction from Light and Medium Armour are more valuable (https://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/262631/impact-of-change-in-ability-cost-formula-on-pts-gameplay). So I would argue that 5 pieces of Heavy Armour should be considered instead of 7. It also leads me to the conclusion that my block cost will be higher on the PTS than on Live, if I keep using the same gear.

But I do like the changes to the Sturdy trait as it will now be a reasonable idea to use Sturdy on small pieces instead of Infused as I'll be trading 81 Health or 70 Magicka/Stamina for somewhere between 30-50 stamina block cost reduction.

Clarification on average ability cost

Wrobel wrote: »

The average ability cost is 2700 resources.

Could you provide more explanation for this number? I created a histogram of the cost of all magicka based abilities with a non-trivial cost and came up with the following

The mean magicka cost is 3259 and the median is 3166. This is from Live. On the PTS, my testing suggest that the base cost of all abilities has increased by 10.8% meaning that mean is 3610 and the median is 3508. If I were to just consider some iconic tanking abilities the cost on Live and PTS are:


Increased ability cost
It seems that the base ability cost has increased by 10.8% on the PTS. It is not clear whether this is factored in when you discussed the Champion system.

Edit:
Bonus graphs, how many pieces of Sturdy do you need to have roughly the same stamina loss on block as on Live

Negative 1 here means you're already better off in DB than on Live and no Sturdy is required.

Tbh I skimmed every comment looking for an @Asayre post.

Is there a quick summary for those that can't follow the math/equations?

ClockworkArc

Okay @Armitas and @Personofsecrets, its time.

This is a big idea and the inspiration partially came out of looking at @Asayre incredibly informative calculations. As has been pointed out by numerous parties in these threads, nobody runs with a build which absolutely maximizes block cost reduction as it becomes inefficient after a certain point. The idea here is to find what you consider the OPTIMAL BLOCK COST for your build.

I'd say a relatively average live endgame build's Block Cost would probably look like this:

• 75 Block Cost Reduction CP
• Bracing
• Fortress
• Absorb/Reflect Magic

This gives you an effective block cost of:
(2160 * 0.814 (18.6% Block Cost) * 0.42 (Bracing + Fortress + Absorb Magic)) - 43 (Constitution refund at max hits per second) = 695 Block Cost

On PTS, because Fortress and Absorb Magic are additive with each other, they are your greatest factor for minimizing block cost. Now we have the new tool of Sturdy which is a means to an end. If we looked at achieving a similar OPTIMAL BLOCK COST for our PvE build we can achieve this same cost with less CP.

• Fotress + Absorc Magic
• 8 Sturdy Traits

This gives you an effective block cost of:
(2160 * 0.54 (Fortress + Absorb Magic) * 0.72 (8 Sturdy)) - 163 (PTS Constitution refund at max this per second) = 676 Block Cost

Please note, I am not recommending everyone should take all Sturdy traits, but just that you need to figure out the easiest way to get to an acceptable block cost for your build using a mix of CP, Traits, and Enchants. Also, to note, a Magicka-based tank will likely want more block cost reduction than a stamina based one.

Because of the way the calculation goes, Sturdy is MORE valuable in obtaining an optimal block cost, THE LESS CP and Enchants you use. In this way, the question should not be Is Sturdy more valuable than other traits (because economically it ISNT). The question should be When are other traits (Infused, Divines, Impen) more valuable than up to 75 Green CP and/or a jewelry enchant.

This blows the conversation WAY UP. The questions you have to ask have to be specific to your build. If your PVP build @Armitas just used Fortress and Bracing and no CP for its block cost on live, giving you an effective block cost of 1037. Is trading 1 Jewlery Enchant for Block Cost (given that Wrath has already made up the difference of SPD Enchant) for an effective block cost of 1080 worth 7 Impen?

or @Personofsecrets, when is taking 7 Divines on your Atronach or Serpent mundus (110 Regen) more valuable than 75 points into Magician or Warlord? I know you probably don't build that way...and that that isn't a direct conversion, but the question being asked is whether or not a trait is more valuable than another trait and traits can't give you Magicka/Stamina Cost Reduction. Also remember, the new constitution has already buffed your effective magicka regen by 400 ish. If you want to post how you run, maybe I can help figure out what a high level tank's build would look like and if it could be a buff or a nerf in that scenario.

If you don't ask, why should I take Sturdy, but rather why should I take (Divines, Impen, Infused) as a tank, the question starts to lean further towards taking Sturdy to make room for other stats because the suite of changes already accounts for a large amount of the possibilities that were lost and because CP and Jewelry enchants are generally more valuable than armor traits.

Also, sturdy's value diminishes substantially as you take more block cost enchants or block cost CP. We have more paths to reach the same goal. The question is not determining what the maximum block cost is, but what an acceptable block cost standard is for your build. As has been stated several times. NOBODY absolutely maximizes block cost reduction because it does not provide positive stats that promote active play.

Woeler

GeertKarel wrote: »

I haven't done the calculations yet just read it and Eric a well job done.

Hope you took a lot of different things in consideration and I very well hope the spear synergy will be more reliable in the PTS. if it is it'll be a lot better for our tanks to have better stamina resource management.

Can already tell you that for you an me, nothing significant is going to change apart from the CP trees.

code65536

First of all, @Asayre,

@Wrobel Thank you for detailing the changes and your reasoning behind them. While I did not (and still do not) agree with your changes, I do appreciate the transparency and communication.

Block Cost

When you made your original post (the one about DB combat changes in general), you reasoned that Constitution would outweigh the loss of Bracing, to which I and others argued that it would not due to poor scaling in multi-target fights. Your math worked out well for the scenario that you envisioned. But it did not extend to other scenarios.

We have a similar problem here: Your calculations are based on a character who has maxed out block cost reduction. The fundamental reason your calculations are problematic because all cost reductions in this game have diminishing returns. Because of these diminishing returns, at the extreme end of the scale, losing some cost reduction will have a relatively muted effect. This means that, in your imagined scenario, we see a relatively small difference in cost between Live and PTS--small enough to be papered over by the buff to Constitution. If you take away cost reduction at a more reasonable point in the spectrum, the difference from that loss will be much greater.

I do not run with 3x block cost enchantments, nor do I run with 100 points in Block Expertise. And, from an informal poll of some tanks I asked, none of them run with this sort of maxed block cost reduction. And as Asayre's math shows, at more realistic levels of block cost reductions, the math does show a loss in block sustainability.

Champion Tree

My main complaint here is that this means players who gear-swap between tank and DPS will be burdened by 3K CP reallocation costs each time. My nightblade ran vICP twice today, once as a tank and once as a DPS, and I run vMA as a DPS. And I switch back and forth in a matter of seconds by swapping gear and eating food. And I do so very frequently.

And it's not just about me. Tanking is a uniquely group role. It makes no sense to be a tank outside of group play, and that's just the way tanking inherently is. As such, many tanks do swap between DPS and tank, and making us shoulder this extra cost is a major quality-of-life issue that will make tanking less attractive than it already is.

But in addition to that, I also take issue with some of your assumptions. I will be brief here, as others have already gone into more detail in earlier posts. You assume that an ability is cast only once every two seconds, but there were quite a few pulls in vICP today where I was casting on every 1s cooldown. Your median ability cost also does not take into account that many abilities that a tank casts are quite a bit more expensive than your median. Chains, range-taunts, talons, and some breaths for AoE interrupts. My 26K magicka would deplete very quickly at the start of a pull. Your calculations of Constitution also assume that we wear 7p heavy, which few tanks do.

But more importantly, tanking is a resource game, not a mitigation game. If you were to poll tanks if they'd rather have more resources (green points) or more mitigation (red points), I will bet that they will answer with resources. We would much rather keep the bonus sustain from Constitution instead of expending it to cover our losses elsewhere and getting more red tree mitigation. What is the point of Constitution and other buffs if all they do is make us break even or do slightly better in some extreme scenarios (and come out short in others)? At this point, we're looking at expensive CP respecs and expensive regearing--all for what? So we could hopefully stay at around the same point as before while gaining extra mitigation that we neither needed nor asked for?

Final Thoughts

The decisions that your team has made and the assumptions made in these calculations make me wonder if your team actually understands tanking. Your team initially didn't think of the (many) tanking scenarios where tanks are hit much more frequently than once every two seconds. Your team assumes that tanks run with maxed block cost reduction. Your team assumes that tanks wear 7p of heavy armor. Your team, which I understand is also in charge of itemization, has come up with set after useless tanking set: the vMA tank sword (it's so bad that, even though I have two vMA tank swords in perfect Defending traits, I would still not replace my DSA tank swords with them), Glorious Defender, Tormenter, Jolting Arms, Permafrost, etc. This leaves me with the impression that your team is out of touch with the reality of how the game is actually played. And that's fine and understandable--you guys are probably busy with code. But please do engage the community more and be more receptive to our feedback because that's our way of trying to ground you to the realities of this game.

Dromede

Thank you for clarifications, but I still have a weird taste in my mouth.

So, you can have in DB what we had on Live, you only need to turn your build upside down. Calculations are great, and communication is greatly appreciated, but there's still no explanation why you felt like the change was necessary (permblock is not an issue since block regen removal) and what part-time tanks, especially the stam DPs/tank hybrid can do to make it viable in terms of Cp. Respeccing CP every day is not an option, I hope you understand.

And I guess, there better be a Templar with shards in every dungeon group. Makes repentance and shards a must at this point.

Armitas

Rugz_Maulgoth wrote: »

This blows the conversation WAY UP. The questions you have to ask have to be specific to your build. If your PVP build @Armitas just used Fortress and Bracing and no CP for its block cost on live, giving you an effective block cost of 1037. Is trading 1 Jewlery Enchant for Block Cost (given that Wrath has already made up the difference of SPD Enchant) for an effective block cost of 1080 worth 7 Impen?

My Jewelry enchant will be magicka cost reduction. Even with seducer heavy and drinks taking one of those off puts an end to sustain because I have no sustain coming from my race or class (dk). If constitution is actually a buff and not just a re balance around the new cast costs then that could make it an even trade for that enchant. I'll have to see where my sustain lands on live but at least I know that I am only 1 enchant away if I need it. Thanks for doing that.

Ishammael

Armitas wrote: »

Rugz_Maulgoth wrote: »

This blows the conversation WAY UP. The questions you have to ask have to be specific to your build. If your PVP build @Armitas just used Fortress and Bracing and no CP for its block cost on live, giving you an effective block cost of 1037. Is trading 1 Jewlery Enchant for Block Cost (given that Wrath has already made up the difference of SPD Enchant) for an effective block cost of 1080 worth 7 Impen?

My Jewelry enchant will be magicka cost reduction. Even with seducer heavy and drinks taking one of those off puts an end to sustain because I have no sustain coming from my race or class (dk). If constitution is actually a buff and not just a re balance around the new cast costs then that could make it an even trade for that enchant. I'll have to see where my sustain lands on live but at least I know that I am only 1 enchant away if I need it. Thanks for doing that.

PvP:
You dont need the cost redux enchants. Run full damage.

In 5H seducer plus atro plus a modest investment in increased regen you can maintain a magicka DK. With the changes to Constitution I am actually thinking of dropping atro for a damage mundus.

Armitas

Ishammael wrote: »

Armitas wrote: »

Rugz_Maulgoth wrote: »

This blows the conversation WAY UP. The questions you have to ask have to be specific to your build. If your PVP build @Armitas just used Fortress and Bracing and no CP for its block cost on live, giving you an effective block cost of 1037. Is trading 1 Jewlery Enchant for Block Cost (given that Wrath has already made up the difference of SPD Enchant) for an effective block cost of 1080 worth 7 Impen?

My Jewelry enchant will be magicka cost reduction. Even with seducer heavy and drinks taking one of those off puts an end to sustain because I have no sustain coming from my race or class (dk). If constitution is actually a buff and not just a re balance around the new cast costs then that could make it an even trade for that enchant. I'll have to see where my sustain lands on live but at least I know that I am only 1 enchant away if I need it. Thanks for doing that.

PvP:
You dont need the cost redux enchants. Run full damage.

In 5H seducer plus atro plus a modest investment in increased regen you can maintain a magicka DK. With the changes to Constitution I am actually thinking of dropping atro for a damage mundus.

I have tried swapping it out but I pay for it immediately. So much of our noodle damage goes into shields, dodge rolls, and misses that I run empty. I do intend to try and retune to more damage at the cost of sustain after the Constitution buff once I see where things sit. Though with the introduction of these poisons magicka reduction might become a necessity.

Are you getting any additional sustain from race or monster? I have 0 from anything other than what I wear, cp, or drink. The joys of being a human Nord dk.

Reorx_Holybeard

I was doing some testing on Live (I don't have PTS installed on my laptop) and noticed two issues:

1. Constitution doesn't always fire every 4 seconds. For example, I was tanking 8 mobs and it didn't fire for 20 seconds.
2. You are sometimes charged for block more than once within 0.5 seconds. Most of the time it seems to respect the 0.5 sec CD but occasionally there are 2 or 3 block charges within 0.5 sec.

Can someone do similar tests on PTS to see if this is merely a Live issue or not. I was using a custom add-on that monitors the EVENT_POWER_UPDATE event for changes in Stamina (assuming that event is accurate of course).

Teridaxus

Well...finished reading wrobels post and the comments. I only have one question:
How exalty do all those changes promote people to use heavy or going tank role then dd or healer?

There are builds which will be stronger, some which will remain mostly the same and then some which will be nerfed or even destroyed.I thought DB was going to be flat buffs for us tanks in general, but instead we got major redesigns again.
Even after 3 weeks of pts, we all still have to figure out the full scale of the changes, but what about the average player? If already experienced tanks and players can't decide how this will affect us all, why would the average player try deal with this mess?

Right now i don't believe the situation where we got 1 tank per 100 dd will change at all.

Hadan_of_Rift

Wrobel wrote: »

Wrap Up
As with all pieces of the ESO balance puzzle, changes to tanking affect players of different types of content, ability loadouts, item sets, and armor weights. With Dark Brotherhood, we’re offering more ways to customize your Tanky character by allowing lower block costs than ever before and providing more flexibility when customizing your defenses. If you don’t want to take advantage of these options, your block cost should remain similar to what it was before the changes. If you still have concerns with tanking after trying out the changes, please leave a detailed reply about your character and the type of content you’re playing.

We'll also be making the following changes before Dark Brotherhood goes live:

• Fixing an issue where Sturdy is rounding fractions down
• Fixing an issue where Sturdy is multiplicative with itself instead of additive
• A more accessible Shield Expert Champion unlock

@Wrobel Ok who the *** asked for these changes? You are offering something that no one wants or wanted. But in your explanation you are requiring use to use STURDY to get close to where we are now. That is not a CHOICE that is forcing us to change our gear to fix what you are breaking.

But more importantly you obviously don't realize that certain boss fights it really helps that the tank can go DPS which these changes completely *** over because of not being able to sustain.

The whole CP tree change is one of, if not the stupidest changes you have ever made. In the current tree it's a trade-off do I want to be able to block more or just resist more damage overall. With the PTS change you are actually taking away that choice, not giving more choices. I would never give up sustain over blocking more because I am never blocking 100% of the time.

The only way this change is even remotely viable is if you added CP profiles where we can have 2 or more CP set ups that with the click of a button we can change to or you remove the cost of CP respecing.

Asayre

@Reorx_Holybeard

I tested both things on the PTS. For (1) I went to Alik'r and got 10 zombies to hit me and I always got Constitution to proc every 4-5 seconds. I was getting hit between 1-2 times per second. Here is an example of CLS showing Constitution gains every 4-5 seconds.


The zombies weren't always hitting for more than twice per second so for the (2) I went to Stormhaven and got a couple of Dreugh. I started with 26488 stamina and blocked 70 attacks over 25 seconds. I got 6 Constitution procs for a Stamina gain of 7812 (1302*6). At the end of 25 seconds my stamina was 1612. So I consumed 32688 stamina to block 70 attacks making my average stamina drain 1308. My block cost is 908. So I was unable to find evidence that I was being charged more than double my block cost.

ClockworkArc

Reorx_Holybeard wrote: »

I was doing some testing on Live (I don't have PTS installed on my laptop) and noticed two issues:

1. Constitution doesn't always fire every 4 seconds. For example, I was tanking 8 mobs and it didn't fire for 20 seconds.
2. You are sometimes charged for block more than once within 0.5 seconds. Most of the time it seems to respect the 0.5 sec CD but occasionally there are 2 or 3 block charges within 0.5 sec.

Can someone do similar tests on PTS to see if this is merely a Live issue or not. I was using a custom add-on that monitors the EVENT_POWER_UPDATE event for changes in Stamina (assuming that event is accurate of course).

Can you send me the addon that you used? Combat Cloud and LUI failed on my PTS clients for me...and that's the only addons I know of that track resource gain loss.

EDIT: Nevermind, @Asayre was on it. :P

Reorx_Holybeard

Asayre wrote: »

@Reorx_Holybeard

I tested both things on the PTS. For (1) I went to Alik'r and got 10 zombies to hit me and I always got Constitution to proc every 4-5 seconds. I was getting hit between 1-2 times per second. Here is an example of CLS showing Constitution gains every 4-5 seconds.


The zombies weren't always hitting for more than twice per second so for the (2) I went to Stormhaven and got a couple of Dreugh. I started with 26488 stamina and blocked 70 attacks over 25 seconds. I got 6 Constitution procs for a Stamina gain of 7812 (1302*6). At the end of 25 seconds my stamina was 1612. So I consumed 32688 stamina to block 70 attacks making my average stamina drain 1308. My block cost is 908. So I was unable to find evidence that I was being charged more than double my block cost.

Thanks...after a little more testing it looks like the EVENT_POWER_UPDATE event isn't 100% accurate in that it "misses" some updates for whatever reason. Switching to the EVENT_COMBAT_EVENT event, which is what it looks like CLS uses, and I didn't find any issues with the blocking or Constitution costs on Live.

Jade1986

Roymachine wrote: »

laced wrote: »

Lets also not forget that you guys implemented non CP campaigns into PVP, which just so happen to be the most popular ones in the EU, and this whole focusing on CP in order to block is just hurting the campaign that YOU implemented.

I'm failing to see the problem here. You also lose 25% damage, 25% recovery, %s of damage reduction and cost reduction among other things. It's part of the campaign.

I will still be able to do the same amount of damage, actually more with the changes coming in heavy armor, in the DB update, but I will be spending a TON more on blocking because of the loss of bracing and because of them making the champion system part of their equation here.

Jade1986

Armitas wrote: »

Roymachine wrote: »

Armitas wrote: »

Live in 5 heavy.
20% block cost + impen.

Pts in 5 heavy
Block cost reduction or impen.

Except Fortress now gives more, and the CPs can be moved around to allow for more tankiness without having to dump all your warrior points into block cost reduction. You can't just weigh the pros and cons of the thief trees with stam and mag cost reduction/recovery vs block cost reduction, you have to take into account the extra passive mitigation you are getting from the warrior trees now as well. If the block expert swaps with Resilient then you don't have to put any points into The Steed at all. If, however, you did want to you could put points into Resistant for more crit damage resistance to make up for the loss in impen.

There are all these mitigating factors, but they are only factors if they are included and they are not necessarily included. On live both of those are just there, on PTS they may or may not be there depending on how you are set up. For example Fortress is only there if you have a shield equipped. That is my only point in viewing this strictly from heavy armor.

When you think of light armor or medium armor it's a complete thought, it's self entailed within the armor. You don't have to use any imagination, or understand anything complex to get the full function of the set. However when you think of the new heavy armor it isn't a complete thought. It's a gestalt thought that must now include s/b and CP to complete the function of heavy armor. It's being propped up by all these external variables now rather than propped up by its own internal features, it's now a construct of several things rather than a single thing. Heavy armor is now only fulfilled when you add all the parts together, while being nearly barren without them.

Everything seems correct on the chalkboard, it just doesn't seem right in the world. It all seems like a maneuver to get from A to B rather than to complete heavy armor. It's very different than what I expected.

All that said I am using s/b in my HA build so I fall under the mitigating factors you mention, and it won't be that different for me, which just leaves me with this incomplete way of viewing an armor class now. In addition to that the external variables like fortress now make it even easier to circumvent heavy armor entirely for tanking, such as LA Armor Master. So what is heavy armor even for, constitution? It all just seems so murky now, or maybe I'm just too old school.

This 100 %

Aoshy

I'm sorry @Wrobel but ts just silly, Heavy Armor should gives us a lot more mitigation, thats all. Dont need all of that.

Jade1986

Aoshy wrote: »

I'm sorry @Wrobel but ts just silly, Heavy Armor should gives us a lot more mitigation, thats all. Dont need all of that.

Exactly. The other armors are clear cut and function on their own without any outside influences. Heavy armor requires champion points, certain enchantments and certain weapons now. Its just ridiculous.

Ajaxduo

Dagoth_Rac wrote: »

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Reorx_Holybeard wrote: »

Do your cost analysis include the global +10% increase in abilities? If I lose 67 points in Magician my magicka abilities are 25% more expensive (for example, Igneous goes from ~3200 on live to ~4100 on PTS).

The change didn't have anything to do specifically with block cost, so it wasn't included in the examples given. That change affects all builds in the game, not just tanks (and we wanted to keep the examples specific to tanks).

Is that global increase to skill costs intended? An entire 100 points into Warlord or Magician is 16% cost decrease. 10% increase negates well more than half of those stars. Patch notes said skill costs should end up "about the same" after VR removal. They are not about the same. They were literally decimated!

Agreed, any increase to costs without a CP cap increase is just plain wrong.