twing1_ wrote: »

Firstmep wrote: »

twing1_ wrote: »

Jabbs_Giggity wrote: »

twing1_ wrote: »

HatchetHaro wrote: »

Jabbs_Giggity wrote: »

HatchetHaro wrote: »

SonOfAsura wrote: »

MSattrtand wrote: »

Simple math model:

WPD on live = x * y, where x is your flat WPD, and y is the % modifier
WPD on PTS = (x + 500) * (y - 0.06).

Let's find the breakpoint where WPD on PTS would be higher:

x * y < (x + 500) * (y - 0.06)

x * y < x * y + 500y - 0.06x - 30

0.06x < 500y - 30

6x < 50000y - 3000

x < 8333y - 500

Let's imagine that 6% from the Balanced Warrior was our only source of WPD % modifier. Then:

x < 8333 * 1.06 - 500

x < 8333

So, if your WPD without any % modifiers was lower than 8333, and your only source of WPD % modifier is the Balanced Warrior, your damage would be higher with PTS changes.

Now with more realistic modifiers in trial: 6% from Balanced Warrior, 6% from Calculated Defence, 3% from Slayer for slotting Barbed Trap, 20% from Major Brutality, 10% from Minor Brutality, 12% from 6 medium armour pieces. So y = 1.57.

Let's find the breakpoint now:

x < 8333 * 1.57 - 500

x < 12583

You will not get to 8k WPD without modifiers in content without really weird shenanigans. Not to mention 12k. So this would be a buff once again.

But what if we're not reaching 500 WPD from the passive because we're lacking armour? With 6M/1L, 6% armour from passive, 3k armour from passive and Fortified, we'll get ~300 WPD - this is a realistic scenario for pug groups where you may miss Minor and Major Resolve. I'll skip boring math and write the formula:

x < 5000y - 300

Let's calculate the WPD % modifier in dungeons, since we're assuming an unoptimised scenario. 6% from Balanced Warrior, 20% from Major Brutality, 2% from Medium Armour, 3% from Slayer. We were unlucky and have no DK in group, so no Minor Brutality, and we have to wear light armour to not underpen. y = 1.31. Then:

x < 5000 * 1.31 - 300

x < 6250

So even in this unoptimised scenario, if you're staying below 6250 WPD without WPD % modifiers, that's a buff. And going over 6250 WPD in an unoptimised scenario isn't a trivial task - I tried parsing on 6 mil dummy and got 5k WPD without % modifiers - you need Major Courage, Minor Courage, PA, Spaulder... to reach 6250 WPD. And in this case, your group is probably optimised well enough so you'll have more armour, so more WPD from it.

In conclusion: if my math is correct (I can't be sure about that), this change should be a buff in the vast majority of PvE situations. NB: I'm not talking about PvP at all.

Its nerf when you get over 9.5k wd in optimised raid group

Let's assume an optimized raid build from the top Templar parse on Bahsei right now.


Let's use Infused Jewellery instead of Bloodthirsty: BT actually applies after any % buffs, and so that value wouldn't be boosted by the old 6% on Balanced Warrior, so Infused would be the best-case scenario in favour of the old Balanced Warrior passive.

As you can see, at the maximum value of the new Balanced Warrior passive, the resulting WD is actually 4.50% over the old passive.

Sure, it might be hard to hit that value of Armour on a DPS setup, so let's see what the actual cutoff point is.

The cutoff point is at 232 WD from the passive, which is 11,600 Physical and Spell Resistance. A character with zero attributes, zero skills, and zero CP reaches 10,597 Resistances with just 6/1 Med/Light armour. Adding the Fortified CP punches that up to 12,328 Resistances, past that threshold. And we haven't even factored in Major and Minor Resolve.

Oh, silly me, that's not the 9.5k WD you mentioned! I mean, hey, I might be missing some raid buffs, so let's just bump up that pre-% WD by 1035 in the best-case scenario for the old passive, just to bring up the final pre-Balanced-Warrior WD to a nice round 10,000.

Ah, in this case, the new Balanced Warrior passive is still 3.21% better than the old one.

But of course! Still kinda hard to reach 25k resists on a DPS. Let's find the cutoff point again.

274 WD. That's 13,700 Physical and Spell Resistance. For reference, a character with 6/1 Med/Light armour (10,597) plus Fortified (1,731) plus Minor Resolve from Combat Prayer (2,974) reaches 15,302 Resistances.

It's okay to be confident, but at least make sure your claims are actually accurate.

So, in PVP what do we gain/lose when hit by Major/Minor Breach for -10k resists, then add on unique debuffs like Crimson Oath, Alkosh and Crusher enchantment.

I was responding to an "optimized raid group" premise, and while I am very familiar with trial comps, I'm not that familiar with Templar PvP. If you can give me a build and the WD and Armour buffs and debuffs you'd expect to be getting from PvP, I can calculate all that for you.

After running some PvP numbers and comparing only old/new balanced warrior while ignoring the loss of minor sorcery, even with Major/Minor breach on my player, it basically boils down to this change being a substantial buff for heavy armor (gained ~400 spell/weapon damage on my heavy armor build + more resistances), marginal offensive nerf but defensive buff for medium armor (lost ~140 spell/weapon damage after modifiers but gained 2974 resistances), and a lateral change out of offense and towards defense for light armor.

Even accounting for the loss of minor sorcery, my heavy armor templar build lost ~150 weapon/spell damage after modifiers but gained a full 2-4 pc item set bonus in resistances. So this is a very marginal buff in stat density, but primarily a lateral move out of offensive power and into defense.

This change definitely favors tankier playstyles, which seems in line with their intended vision of the class.

That being said, I would agree with some of the previous suggestions to either raise the cap to 750 or increase the scaling to 1.5% of resistances in order to mitigate some of the losses to offensive power that non-heavy armor builds are losing. I think increasing the scaling to 1.5% of resistances would have the largest impact in mitigating the lost offensive power of medium/light armor builds, while raising the cap is more geared toward fully restoring the offensive power templar builds had before the loss of minor sorcery but really pigeonholes templar players into heavy armor or high resistance builds.

How is sustain on heavy armor build? If Templars are to invest in Heavy, there aren't any great tools to justify the DPS loss and Sustain loss is there?
It's always a trade off with Templar.

If we're comparing the future of the clas to the DK refresh, DK gets butt loads of damage multipliers while getting armor from passives, Sustain and healing while not having to invest in any stat other than damage.
Couple that with the high burst tooltip of whip and delayed burst from other skills.
NB has damage miltiplers with incap and burst with CW and Merciless.
Sorc has shields and burst with frag and delayed burst with curse.
Warden has huge burst with shalks on top of major and minor breach.

The list goes on. Templar is always getting the shaft with a trade off playstyle and a very predictable burst window and clunky rotation that is mostly buffing and rebuffing

I wear full heavy, but one of my sets is wretched vitality so sustain is not an issue for me.

You bring up all of these trade offs that, you are right, Templar has to make.

Ironically, part of the reason why I see this change as a good one is because it is helping to reduce the number of these tradeoffs that Templar players have to make.

Under this new change, I am able to invest in a heavy armor sustain set without sacrificing my offensive power, where previously it would have hurt my offensive capabilities a lot harder. The new balanced warrior adds a flat bonus to weapon/spell damage that can be modified by things like major brutality, fighters guild and armor passives, where the old one acted as a modifier and required a larger weapon damage base to get the most mileage out of. This key difference, in addition to the fact that the weapon/spell damage granted by this change scales off of resistances, allows the new balanced warrior to synergize extremely well with tankier builds, and serves as a legitimate source of offensive power to Templars when a 5 pc set bonuses must be dedicated to other things, like sustain.

This change hits the Templar players that dedicate higher levels of investment into offensive power the hardest (as the new weapon/spell bonus doesn't synergize well with already high offensive stats), but rewards Templars that invest into defense and sustain with a nice chunk of offensive power.

Overall, it allows Templars to build more defensively, which appears to be ZOS's intended direction for the class, without sacrificing their offensive capabilities.

It does put a limit on the offensive ceiling of the class, but allows Templars the flexibility to build more heavily into sustain or defense without losing as much offensive potential as the other classes.

Its similar to how the DK toolkit addresses the sustain issue which frees them up to build more freely into offense, though I do think DKs are still overtuned while Templars are more working their way back toward viability.

IMO it is a move in the right direction.

I prefer medium and run some protective pieces over heavy. Then again my plar is nord, so I have no issues reaching 33k armor even on live.

You are likely in one of the best situations then for this change, as you are near max resistances in medium armor so the flat bonus to weapon/spell damage that the new balanced warrior offers can be modified by the medium armor passives as well.

Have you logged into the PTS yet?

I would not be surprised if your spell/weapon damage is actually buffed by this change.

Update: just ran some test numbers with 5 pc medium, 2 pc heavy. Stamplar, Nord. 2x protective traits. Wretched vitality, and aetheric lancer sets (aetheric lancer is not procced). Live Wd/Sd = 7227, PTS numbers bring it up to 7115. This takes into account the loss of minor sorcery, so even AFTER you lose minor sorcery you are still within ~100 w/sd of pre-patch. This might be the way for templars to build now, max out resistances on a medium armor build.

madmufffin wrote: »

twing1_ wrote: »

Firstmep wrote: »

twing1_ wrote: »

Jabbs_Giggity wrote: »

twing1_ wrote: »

HatchetHaro wrote: »

Jabbs_Giggity wrote: »

HatchetHaro wrote: »

SonOfAsura wrote: »

MSattrtand wrote: »

Simple math model:

WPD on live = x * y, where x is your flat WPD, and y is the % modifier
WPD on PTS = (x + 500) * (y - 0.06).

Let's find the breakpoint where WPD on PTS would be higher:

x * y < (x + 500) * (y - 0.06)

x * y < x * y + 500y - 0.06x - 30

0.06x < 500y - 30

6x < 50000y - 3000

x < 8333y - 500

Let's imagine that 6% from the Balanced Warrior was our only source of WPD % modifier. Then:

x < 8333 * 1.06 - 500

x < 8333

So, if your WPD without any % modifiers was lower than 8333, and your only source of WPD % modifier is the Balanced Warrior, your damage would be higher with PTS changes.

Now with more realistic modifiers in trial: 6% from Balanced Warrior, 6% from Calculated Defence, 3% from Slayer for slotting Barbed Trap, 20% from Major Brutality, 10% from Minor Brutality, 12% from 6 medium armour pieces. So y = 1.57.

Let's find the breakpoint now:

x < 8333 * 1.57 - 500

x < 12583

You will not get to 8k WPD without modifiers in content without really weird shenanigans. Not to mention 12k. So this would be a buff once again.

But what if we're not reaching 500 WPD from the passive because we're lacking armour? With 6M/1L, 6% armour from passive, 3k armour from passive and Fortified, we'll get ~300 WPD - this is a realistic scenario for pug groups where you may miss Minor and Major Resolve. I'll skip boring math and write the formula:

x < 5000y - 300

Let's calculate the WPD % modifier in dungeons, since we're assuming an unoptimised scenario. 6% from Balanced Warrior, 20% from Major Brutality, 2% from Medium Armour, 3% from Slayer. We were unlucky and have no DK in group, so no Minor Brutality, and we have to wear light armour to not underpen. y = 1.31. Then:

x < 5000 * 1.31 - 300

x < 6250

So even in this unoptimised scenario, if you're staying below 6250 WPD without WPD % modifiers, that's a buff. And going over 6250 WPD in an unoptimised scenario isn't a trivial task - I tried parsing on 6 mil dummy and got 5k WPD without % modifiers - you need Major Courage, Minor Courage, PA, Spaulder... to reach 6250 WPD. And in this case, your group is probably optimised well enough so you'll have more armour, so more WPD from it.

In conclusion: if my math is correct (I can't be sure about that), this change should be a buff in the vast majority of PvE situations. NB: I'm not talking about PvP at all.

Its nerf when you get over 9.5k wd in optimised raid group

Let's assume an optimized raid build from the top Templar parse on Bahsei right now.


Let's use Infused Jewellery instead of Bloodthirsty: BT actually applies after any % buffs, and so that value wouldn't be boosted by the old 6% on Balanced Warrior, so Infused would be the best-case scenario in favour of the old Balanced Warrior passive.

As you can see, at the maximum value of the new Balanced Warrior passive, the resulting WD is actually 4.50% over the old passive.

Sure, it might be hard to hit that value of Armour on a DPS setup, so let's see what the actual cutoff point is.

The cutoff point is at 232 WD from the passive, which is 11,600 Physical and Spell Resistance. A character with zero attributes, zero skills, and zero CP reaches 10,597 Resistances with just 6/1 Med/Light armour. Adding the Fortified CP punches that up to 12,328 Resistances, past that threshold. And we haven't even factored in Major and Minor Resolve.

Oh, silly me, that's not the 9.5k WD you mentioned! I mean, hey, I might be missing some raid buffs, so let's just bump up that pre-% WD by 1035 in the best-case scenario for the old passive, just to bring up the final pre-Balanced-Warrior WD to a nice round 10,000.

Ah, in this case, the new Balanced Warrior passive is still 3.21% better than the old one.

But of course! Still kinda hard to reach 25k resists on a DPS. Let's find the cutoff point again.

274 WD. That's 13,700 Physical and Spell Resistance. For reference, a character with 6/1 Med/Light armour (10,597) plus Fortified (1,731) plus Minor Resolve from Combat Prayer (2,974) reaches 15,302 Resistances.

It's okay to be confident, but at least make sure your claims are actually accurate.

So, in PVP what do we gain/lose when hit by Major/Minor Breach for -10k resists, then add on unique debuffs like Crimson Oath, Alkosh and Crusher enchantment.

I was responding to an "optimized raid group" premise, and while I am very familiar with trial comps, I'm not that familiar with Templar PvP. If you can give me a build and the WD and Armour buffs and debuffs you'd expect to be getting from PvP, I can calculate all that for you.

After running some PvP numbers and comparing only old/new balanced warrior while ignoring the loss of minor sorcery, even with Major/Minor breach on my player, it basically boils down to this change being a substantial buff for heavy armor (gained ~400 spell/weapon damage on my heavy armor build + more resistances), marginal offensive nerf but defensive buff for medium armor (lost ~140 spell/weapon damage after modifiers but gained 2974 resistances), and a lateral change out of offense and towards defense for light armor.

Even accounting for the loss of minor sorcery, my heavy armor templar build lost ~150 weapon/spell damage after modifiers but gained a full 2-4 pc item set bonus in resistances. So this is a very marginal buff in stat density, but primarily a lateral move out of offensive power and into defense.

This change definitely favors tankier playstyles, which seems in line with their intended vision of the class.

That being said, I would agree with some of the previous suggestions to either raise the cap to 750 or increase the scaling to 1.5% of resistances in order to mitigate some of the losses to offensive power that non-heavy armor builds are losing. I think increasing the scaling to 1.5% of resistances would have the largest impact in mitigating the lost offensive power of medium/light armor builds, while raising the cap is more geared toward fully restoring the offensive power templar builds had before the loss of minor sorcery but really pigeonholes templar players into heavy armor or high resistance builds.

How is sustain on heavy armor build? If Templars are to invest in Heavy, there aren't any great tools to justify the DPS loss and Sustain loss is there?
It's always a trade off with Templar.

If we're comparing the future of the clas to the DK refresh, DK gets butt loads of damage multipliers while getting armor from passives, Sustain and healing while not having to invest in any stat other than damage.
Couple that with the high burst tooltip of whip and delayed burst from other skills.
NB has damage miltiplers with incap and burst with CW and Merciless.
Sorc has shields and burst with frag and delayed burst with curse.
Warden has huge burst with shalks on top of major and minor breach.

The list goes on. Templar is always getting the shaft with a trade off playstyle and a very predictable burst window and clunky rotation that is mostly buffing and rebuffing

I wear full heavy, but one of my sets is wretched vitality so sustain is not an issue for me.

You bring up all of these trade offs that, you are right, Templar has to make.

Ironically, part of the reason why I see this change as a good one is because it is helping to reduce the number of these tradeoffs that Templar players have to make.

Under this new change, I am able to invest in a heavy armor sustain set without sacrificing my offensive power, where previously it would have hurt my offensive capabilities a lot harder. The new balanced warrior adds a flat bonus to weapon/spell damage that can be modified by things like major brutality, fighters guild and armor passives, where the old one acted as a modifier and required a larger weapon damage base to get the most mileage out of. This key difference, in addition to the fact that the weapon/spell damage granted by this change scales off of resistances, allows the new balanced warrior to synergize extremely well with tankier builds, and serves as a legitimate source of offensive power to Templars when a 5 pc set bonuses must be dedicated to other things, like sustain.

This change hits the Templar players that dedicate higher levels of investment into offensive power the hardest (as the new weapon/spell bonus doesn't synergize well with already high offensive stats), but rewards Templars that invest into defense and sustain with a nice chunk of offensive power.

Overall, it allows Templars to build more defensively, which appears to be ZOS's intended direction for the class, without sacrificing their offensive capabilities.

It does put a limit on the offensive ceiling of the class, but allows Templars the flexibility to build more heavily into sustain or defense without losing as much offensive potential as the other classes.

Its similar to how the DK toolkit addresses the sustain issue which frees them up to build more freely into offense, though I do think DKs are still overtuned while Templars are more working their way back toward viability.

IMO it is a move in the right direction.

I prefer medium and run some protective pieces over heavy. Then again my plar is nord, so I have no issues reaching 33k armor even on live.

You are likely in one of the best situations then for this change, as you are near max resistances in medium armor so the flat bonus to weapon/spell damage that the new balanced warrior offers can be modified by the medium armor passives as well.

Have you logged into the PTS yet?

I would not be surprised if your spell/weapon damage is actually buffed by this change.

Update: just ran some test numbers with 5 pc medium, 2 pc heavy. Stamplar, Nord. 2x protective traits. Wretched vitality, and aetheric lancer sets (aetheric lancer is not procced). Live Wd/Sd = 7227, PTS numbers bring it up to 7115. This takes into account the loss of minor sorcery, so even AFTER you lose minor sorcery you are still within ~100 w/sd of pre-patch. This might be the way for templars to build now, max out resistances on a medium armor build.

In amongst all of this I forgot they lost minor sorc So you're basically a lateral change with Balanced Warrior updates and then lose 10% weapon damage for a little bit of armor... wonderful

Jabbs_Giggity wrote: »

twing1_ wrote: »

On a max resist medium armor build, it's a lateral move after losing minor sorcery. Also on heavy armor builds. On my heavy Templar, I lost about ~150 spell damage after also losing minor sorcery.

In each of these cases, a full 2-4 pc set bonus to resistance was gained, so overall stat density was buffed, even without minor sorcery.

It's only low resistance builds that are actually losing stat density with this change.

And the point people are trying to make is that Templar didn't really need any more defense. It needs damage output and eventually skill reworks to line up burst damage more efficiently.

We need to get out of this tank meta. Based on the calculations done it's a net loss/nerf to damage, even without the loss of sorcery being calculated...

So in sum, loss of 10% damage and loss of 50-150 damage on the lateral change to Balanced Warrior.