Siphoning Attacks Feedback: In-depth tanking perspective [DB Update]

Hechicera

WolfingHour wrote: »

I have said it before and will say it again the over reliance on shards and/EG is not good balance.

Also, agree. In my case partly from my desire to pug. You need to function at least adequately even in ... those groups.

ninjaguyman

I havent been able to do that much pve testing in pts, so for any nb tanks who have... What have you guys been doing for aggro generation and cc without caltrops? I would think we would take it off our bars since it doesnt proc SA, assuming we are magicka specced, but what should I replace it with?

ThatNeonZebraAgain

ninjaguyman wrote: »

I havent been able to do that much pve testing in pts, so for any nb tanks who have... What have you guys been doing for aggro generation and cc without caltrops? I would think we would take it off our bars since it doesnt proc SA, assuming we are magicka specced, but what should I replace it with?

Sap Essence is probably best bet for AoE aggro and damage+heal. Lotus Fan could be an option as well for its aoe snare.

Hechicera

ThatNeonZebraAgain wrote: »

ninjaguyman wrote: »

I havent been able to do that much pve testing in pts, so for any nb tanks who have... What have you guys been doing for aggro generation and cc without caltrops? I would think we would take it off our bars since it doesnt proc SA, assuming we are magicka specced, but what should I replace it with?

Sap Essence is probably best bet for AoE aggro and damage+heal. Lotus Fan could be an option as well for its aoe snare.

From 2.3.0 notes:

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Nightblade

• Assassination
  • Lotus Fan (Teleport Strike morph):
    • Significantly revised the tooltip of this morph to indicate that only the primary target is snared, and the damage over time is applied to the primary target and all nearby enemies.
    • The damage over time from this morph is no longer considered a bleed, and is now a standard magical damage over time. The damage can now be mitigated by normal means, but has been increased by 15% to account for this.

Not AoE snare now? Also re:Sap Essence, as others point out is fine on large weak trash packs, but without path/caltrops you can't sustain it on some smaller/harder packs or boss+two packs. So large packs, sap. Smaller ones, split pulls or boss+one or two the only thing I could do was use the majicka-based ranged undaunted taunt. Sap Essence when pack was big enough, then swap to melee taunt boss/closest and ranged undaunted taunt rest/far mobs. I was sustaining my majicka fine without using path, but struggling with stam.

Autolycus

Hechicera wrote: »

ThatNeonZebraAgain wrote: »

ninjaguyman wrote: »

I havent been able to do that much pve testing in pts, so for any nb tanks who have... What have you guys been doing for aggro generation and cc without caltrops? I would think we would take it off our bars since it doesnt proc SA, assuming we are magicka specced, but what should I replace it with?

Sap Essence is probably best bet for AoE aggro and damage+heal. Lotus Fan could be an option as well for its aoe snare.

From 2.3.0 notes:

ZOS_GinaBruno wrote: »

Nightblade

• Assassination
  • Lotus Fan (Teleport Strike morph):
    • Significantly revised the tooltip of this morph to indicate that only the primary target is snared, and the damage over time is applied to the primary target and all nearby enemies.
    • The damage over time from this morph is no longer considered a bleed, and is now a standard magical damage over time. The damage can now be mitigated by normal means, but has been increased by 15% to account for this.

Not AoE snare now? Also re:Sap Essence, as others point out is fine on large weak trash packs, but without path/caltrops you can't sustain it on some smaller/harder packs or boss+two packs. So large packs, sap. Smaller ones, split pulls or boss+one or two the only thing I could do was use the majicka-based ranged undaunted taunt. Sap Essence when pack was big enough, then swap to melee taunt boss/closest and ranged undaunted taunt rest/far mobs. I was sustaining my majicka fine without using path, but struggling with stam.

It is unfortunate to lose the snare for Lotus Fan, however the AoE damage component still serves as an aggro utility. The damage increase to Lotus Fan detailed above will boost this slightly. It has it's place, but I don't envision myself using it in PvE.

For your smaller pulls, Deep Slash should do the trick. See #73.

Rockom77

I retired my nb tank on ps4 due to the proposed changes. But i really miss playing him as a tank.

Will these new changes make SA a waste with the current pts 2.3.2? Or is this still a possibility?

I don't want to craft him a completely new vr16 set just because ZOS nerfed him. Not to mention the ridiculous material return on melting down a vr16 set of kagrenac's heavy armor. I think ZOS doesn't understand the frustration of changing your entire build.

lonewolf26

@Wrobel Any hope that you'll look into further buffs to Siphoning Attacks for us sap/siphon tanks before the Thieves Guild updates. What's done is a start, but sadly does not come close to shoring up our resource needs.

Autolycus

Rockom77 wrote: »

I retired my nb tank on ps4 due to the proposed changes. But i really miss playing him as a tank.

Will these new changes make SA a waste with the current pts 2.3.2? Or is this still a possibility?

I don't want to craft him a completely new vr16 set just because ZOS nerfed him. Not to mention the ridiculous material return on melting down a vr16 set of kagrenac's heavy armor. I think ZOS doesn't understand the frustration of changing your entire build.

For what my opinion is worth, I do not believe that SA will ever be a waste for a NB tank. The intended changes in the TG update will make resource management more difficult, but based on what others have mentioned and some testing of my own, I don't see NB tanks falling off the face of Tamriel. I expect that NB tanks will be fewer and farther between, and I expect many will give up NB tanking simply because they enjoy it less with the changes to SA.

code65536

Autolycus wrote: »

they enjoy it less with the changes to SA.

And ZoS wonders why PUGs have such a hard time finding tanks...

Autolycus

code65536 wrote: »

Autolycus wrote: »

they enjoy it less with the changes to SA.

And ZoS wonders why PUGs have such a hard time finding tanks...

Well who needs a tank when you can just 4 dps? Lol

*sigh* There isn't a dungeon in this game that can't be done with 4 dps...

#tanklivesmatter

Khaos_Bane

code65536 wrote: »

Autolycus wrote: »

they enjoy it less with the changes to SA.

And ZoS wonders why PUGs have such a hard time finding tanks...

Can you imagine getting this guy in your PUG, LMBO @Sypher

He even PvPs in PvE haha.

Hey you have to respect the guy for posting this in his channel so everyone can see , good stuff @Sypher

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3c9FQLtD0_0

Autolycus

Khaos_Bane wrote: »

code65536 wrote: »

Autolycus wrote: »

they enjoy it less with the changes to SA.

And ZoS wonders why PUGs have such a hard time finding tanks...

Can you imagine getting this guy in your PUG, LMBO @Sypher

He even PvPs in PvE haha.

Hey you have to respect the guy for posting this in his channel so everyone can see , good stuff @Sypher

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=3c9FQLtD0_0

Sypher and I duked it out not too long ago in Cyrodiil, though I doubt he'd remember (since he's pretty much always duking it out with people and I'm in all forms of content, so not in Cyrodiil as much as he is). I was in my NB tank build, and after several minutes of fighting it became apparent that neither of us was getting anywhere, and we ended up both walking away...

I typically don't spend a great deal of time in my tank build in PvP unless I'm zergbusting. It probably would have been a much more interesting fight had I been doing my actual pvp spec. There's a good chance that Sypher got bored in that fight with me, haha.

lonewolf26

True there is content that can be done without tanks, some of it painfully. The point of the problem is for the content where tanks are needed, or wanted in order to be completed comfortably tanks need to remain 1) viable play styles and 2) fun. My experience on the PTS was that the changes incorporated into SA reduced point 1 for most builds. It's not completely broken, but for many of us it's nearly unworkable without a significant respec, or abandoning an entire play style. In my case I wouldn't want to respec from off-tank to full tank on my nb. I like to dps on him, I like to tank on him.

Now for the second point, is tanking fun? Well unfortunately 1 informs 2, at least it does for me. If I don't feel I'm viable, I don't feel like I'm having fun and I'm less inclined to that job or I'll have to abandon my build and do something different - roll a new class or play a new game. I'd worry ZoS is not taking this into account: tanking is under valued and under rewarded in this game and continually gets the shaft. The precedent arguably started in IC with their changes to dodge and block. We worked around it. They reduced the viability of SA-dependent builds - most night blade tanks use this. I don't doubt we'll work around it still. But that's just it, every change to a tank style seems to be in the negative. X is too powerful, Nerf X. Tanks suffer, tanks rework, or tanks drop. I like this game, but with each patch I'm liking tanking less and less. This gives me yet another reason.

It is a very real thing that PuGs and groups are having trouble finding tanks. I tank for my friends, but I also like to challenge myself to tank for the underdogs. The changes to resource regen via SA are just about enough to say that NB tanks need to be paired with a repenting or sharding templar. This is something I though ZoS was actively trying to avoid. They wanted to encourage group diversity - at least so I thought.

Zabus

Should just double the resources you get back from light/heavy attacking at the very least. The 1% increase to leeching strikes that I pretty much predicted a few pages back is absolutely absurd to say the least. It continues to be a useless morph when compared to SA. The 10% buff to SA is also awful.. I don't even know what to say at this point. I'm not surprised though, ZOS just wants to bury NB dps/tanks.

ThatNeonZebraAgain

xsfkxnub19_ESO wrote: »

Should just double the resources you get back from light/heavy attacking at the very least. The 1% increase to leeching strikes that I pretty much predicted a few pages back is absolutely absurd to say the least. It continues to be a useless morph when compared to SA. The 10% buff to SA is also awful.. I don't even know what to say at this point. I'm not surprised though, ZOS just wants to bury NB dps/tanks.

For tanks, it's the light/heavy attacks that are less useful. Getting resources from basic attacks benefits DPS more since they can more easily weave, whereas tanks must prioritize blocking. That's why I suggested certain changes to Leeching Strikes to turn it squarely into a tank morph.

Helluin

ThatNeonZebraAgain wrote: »

xsfkxnub19_ESO wrote: »

Should just double the resources you get back from light/heavy attacking at the very least. The 1% increase to leeching strikes that I pretty much predicted a few pages back is absolutely absurd to say the least. It continues to be a useless morph when compared to SA. The 10% buff to SA is also awful.. I don't even know what to say at this point. I'm not surprised though, ZOS just wants to bury NB dps/tanks.

For tanks, it's the light/heavy attacks that are less useful. Getting resources from basic attacks benefits DPS more since they can more easily weave, whereas tanks must prioritize blocking. That's why I suggested certain changes to Leeching Strikes to turn it squarely into a tank morph.

Between the two options you suggested for LS, I'd prefer the second one (the one with health).

Speaking about the lack of a snare: add a snare to Path would make OP the skill.

What do you think instead about a LS able to grant snare on non-basic attacks?
I'm worried it could be OP but, with the idea to make LS the tank morph, it could be an option.

AzuraKin

first of all let me say this, siphoning attacks was never the tanking morph, it is the dps morph. tanking morph is the other morph that I forget name of ability. it regened health as well as resources on weapon hit (tank gonna be standing right next to target) wereas siphoning attacks only does magicka and stamina. that said they should not changed it from a toggle.

the thing people forget is, siphoning attacks is not an ability for a staff user, it is specifically for siphon tree magicka build (nb healer) what it did was allow nb to dual wield while maintaining a source of magicka regen with a non magicka based weapon. the spell/weapon power debuff nerfed the bonus spell power from dw to being in line with staffs. this made dw siphon nb equal in power to a staff user.

numbers a dw magic user with spell power enchants would have about 2700 spell power base (without spell power star stone) wereas a staff user would have about 2200. after siphoning attacks 17% debuff dw would have 2234 spell power. since siphoning attacks procced of better more you hit, with an attack, you were incentivized to be up close and personal with the tank. both in pvp and pve.

this goes along with the single player games class spellsword. description of the spellsword is a warrior (swords, daggers, s/b ect) who used restoration magic to heal themselves and allies (siphon tree). now lets look at restoration magic in elder scrolls, there is restore health (check: strife and both morphs, sap essence morph of drain power) it also dealt with restoration of resources, stamina and magicka (check: siphoning strikes and all morphs).

now I can see why some changes were needed to siphoning attacks, but 1. it should never have been changed from being a toggle. 2. the resource return should only have at max halved (7.5% from 15% instead of flat rate, thus a nb with 42000 magicka would gain 3150magicka back each proc with 10k stamina (ish) about 750 stamina each proc and actually be worth using the skill again. as of now its better to use cost reduction enchants and pray you don't need to spam sap more then 60s as a healer.

AzuraKin

Miwerton wrote: »

hrothbern wrote: »

.

Samphaa wrote: »

Miwerton wrote: »

Well SA was very usefull before IC on a dps, you just had to use it on the aoe bar.
But yeah The flat regain rather than percentage has made it really weak, plus with the removal of regain from dots they should at least have given it buff. Leeching strikes really isnt that good since it mean slitgthly lower spell dam and weap dam, which means weaker swallow soul/ vigor and refreshing path.

Got a cool idea, make summon shadows able to get you regain from SA if active or Leeching strikes, would make shadows viable, and How cool would it be to tank while your shadow minions kept your ressources up.

And Btw Temp tank get regain from repentance, and some bonus from its cost reduction, Dk tank have earthen hearth and ultimates regain, while Nb tanks only have Siphon attacks for regain, and earthen hearth give percentage regain and not flat regain unlike SA.

Shadows are viable anyway dude, reduce boss damage by 15%, but yeah if they could get your resources back aswell it would be super cool.

Cool indeed
But the summon shades's damage is treated like a DOT.

But if the Summon Shades would also taunt the Boss.. we get the savings of not casting the normal taunt anymore and free up a slot

Summon shades arent treated as a dot, tested it with Skoria set, didnt trigger it, they are seen as npcs that uses ligth attacks that cant be attacked, did some testing with it http://forums.elderscrollsonline.com/en/discussion/208831/the-still-useless-summon-shade#latest and havent seen any patch notes stating any fixes to it.

shades are pets (like sorc pets). for proof put on the 5p set (forget name) that gives magicka boost if pet is active, you will gain the boost while shades is up. (if they come out with a v16 version would probably bring back the pet builds that sorcs and nbs did to boost damage in pve/pvp.

Miwerton

One of the more depressing parts is that more and more is focused solely on dps in game mechanics, IP dps have to kill flesh spawn (or was that type called, nevermind) within a short time, else one shot tank, unless 3 pieces eternal Yokeda, in which case 2 shot.

I have tanked on all the classes, found nb to be the most diverse, had to give up on the sorc tank once IC hit, because you have abosuletly no stamina regain, or any uniqe defence buffs, (yay for sorcs the least diverse class, which is also why magicka sorc have been on top in pvp and pve for the longest duration of any class).

But the thing is less and less game mechanics pander to tanks, Most is just turn into kill it as fast as possible to prevent it from using any special abilties, which in turn is fueled by no hardcap, as well as the constant neglect of better tanking gear, as well as new healing gear.

Sure would like some tank mechanics as in AA, but those are useless since they cant be bothered to slightly scale up trials.

code65536

AzuraKin wrote: »

first of all let me say this, siphoning attacks was never the tanking morph

Bah. Maybe that's what they intended when they incompetently (or naively, if you want to be charitable) designed the Leeching morph. But no tank in their right mind would use Leeching, before or after IC. Tanking in this game isn't about health--it's about resources to block. It's inherent in a design where maxed resistance gives only a paltry 50% mitigation so that the only way to survive big hits is to block. If they changed that around--made resistance and armor more important--then we'd care more about other things. But it's all about resources--specifically, the ability to maintain resources while also blocking. Without an ability proc, Leeching is useless. Period.

WolfingHour

code65536 wrote: »

AzuraKin wrote: »

first of all let me say this, siphoning attacks was never the tanking morph

Bah. Maybe that's what they intended when they incompetently (or naively, if you want to be charitable) designed the Leeching morph. But no tank in their right mind would use Leeching, before or after IC. Tanking in this game isn't about health--it's about resources to block. It's inherent in a design where maxed resistance gives only a paltry 50% mitigation so that the only way to survive big hits is to block. If they changed that around--made resistance and armor more important--then we'd care more about other things. But it's all about resources--specifically, the ability to maintain resources while also blocking. Without an ability proc, Leeching is useless. Period.

Not to mention that not so long ago, siphoning attacks functioned much like it did today AND it was a toggle that also decreased damage dealt by 20%.

@wroble was on ESO live saying that the reason for the change away from a toggle with damage reduction was to make the skill more appealing to DDs. (Paraphrasing)

As for leeching, it would be interesting if it caused mangle to the attacker and some tanky buff to the caster, like Protection.

Now that is something that, as a tank, I would consider.

ThatNeonZebraAgain

AzuraKin wrote: »

first of all let me say this, siphoning attacks was never the tanking morph, it is the dps morph. tanking morph is the other morph that I forget name of ability. it regened health as well as resources on weapon hit (tank gonna be standing right next to target) wereas siphoning attacks only does magicka and stamina. that said they should not changed it from a toggle.

the thing people forget is, siphoning attacks is not an ability for a staff user, it is specifically for siphon tree magicka build (nb healer) what it did was allow nb to dual wield while maintaining a source of magicka regen with a non magicka based weapon. the spell/weapon power debuff nerfed the bonus spell power from dw to being in line with staffs. this made dw siphon nb equal in power to a staff user.

numbers a dw magic user with spell power enchants would have about 2700 spell power base (without spell power star stone) wereas a staff user would have about 2200. after siphoning attacks 17% debuff dw would have 2234 spell power. since siphoning attacks procced of better more you hit, with an attack, you were incentivized to be up close and personal with the tank. both in pvp and pve.

this goes along with the single player games class spellsword. description of the spellsword is a warrior (swords, daggers, s/b ect) who used restoration magic to heal themselves and allies (siphon tree). now lets look at restoration magic in elder scrolls, there is restore health (check: strife and both morphs, sap essence morph of drain power) it also dealt with restoration of resources, stamina and magicka (check: siphoning strikes and all morphs).

now I can see why some changes were needed to siphoning attacks, but 1. it should never have been changed from being a toggle. 2. the resource return should only have at max halved (7.5% from 15% instead of flat rate, thus a nb with 42000 magicka would gain 3150magicka back each proc with 10k stamina (ish) about 750 stamina each proc and actually be worth using the skill again. as of now its better to use cost reduction enchants and pray you don't need to spam sap more then 60s as a healer.

You make an interesting point. Like @code65536 said, it reveals how vastly different ZOS thinks about what tanks 'need' vs the reality of what tanks actually need in game. It also speaks to the original design of combat where health=heavy armor=tanking, magicka=light armor=class ability and staff-based DPS and healing, and stamina=medium armor=melee weapon DPS. However, as we all know, Health does not bring nearly the same utility as either Mag or Stam: no other stats or bonuses are connected to it, and no abilities scale off of it except an underpowered damage shield (Bone Shield). No to mention the basic fact that all roles need Mag/Stam sustain, and there are tons of better ways to get health back than return a paltry 3% returned on basic attacks. Tanks need sustain they can get while blocking, DPS/healing needs sustain that they can get through attacking/healing/weaving.

I both like and dislike aspects of both the toggle and timed buff. I could go either way on it, but I mainly wish the current timer was doubled, which would make it the same length as our Mirage/Double Take ability and provide more time to regain abilities before having to recast. Also, tanks don't get 42k of any resource since they have to be more diversified. 30k is probably a better number to make estimations off of, whether that is health or stam/mag. 7.5% stat return could be enough if the proc chance is higher than 10%. On PTS, I'm having a hell of a time sustaining resources with the current stat return value+proc chance.

code65536 wrote: »

Bah. Maybe that's what they intended when they incompetently (or naively, if you want to be charitable) designed the Leeching morph. But no tank in their right mind would use Leeching, before or after IC. Tanking in this game isn't about health--it's about resources to block. It's inherent in a design where maxed resistance gives only a paltry 50% mitigation so that the only way to survive big hits is to block. If they changed that around--made resistance and armor more important--then we'd care more about other things. But it's all about resources--specifically, the ability to maintain resources while also blocking. Without an ability proc, Leeching is useless. Period.

Agreed. There are lots of things that can be done to make health and mitigation more effective, such as raising the mitigation cap, having Health passively boost cost reduction or resistances the same way that Mag/Stam boosts your Spell/Weapon damage, and probably many other things other people have already discussed in relation to Heavy Armor and tanking in general. Leeching Strikes is a symptom of this imbalance that favors stacking either Mag or Stam and DPS.

WolfingHour wrote: »

Not to mention that not so long ago, siphoning attacks functioned much like it did today AND it was a toggle that also decreased damage dealt by 20%.

@wroble was on ESO live saying that the reason for the change away from a toggle with damage reduction was to make the skill more appealing to DDs. (Paraphrasing)

As for leeching, it would be interesting if it caused mangle to the attacker and some tanky buff to the caster, like Protection.

Now that is something that, as a tank, I would consider.

A snare or Protection buff on light attack for Leeching Strikes instead of stat return would be interesting, especially since NBs don't have any root/snare cc (Fear isn't helpful for stacking and burning mobs, and Lotus Fan is expensive for snaring multiple enemies). Templars and DKs also have class passives that boost mitigation, so a Protection buff wouldn't be far off from that. I still think it would need a 15-17% damage reduction though to keep it a non-DPS ability.

Autolycus

AzuraKin wrote: »

first of all let me say this, siphoning attacks was never the tanking morph, it is the dps morph. tanking morph is the other morph that I forget name of ability. it regened health as well as resources on weapon hit (tank gonna be standing right next to target) wereas siphoning attacks only does magicka and stamina. that said they should not changed it from a toggle.

This is rather inaccurate. At the release of IC, ZOS forced a distinction between the two morphs, making Siphoning Attacks clearly the intended dps option, and Leeching Strikes the intended tanking option. Prior to this change, NB tanks were using both morphs viably and very few DPS builds ever even considered it. I won't over-generalize by saying that nobody used it, but it was very uncommon for a DPS to make room for it on their bar. As a due to those who made it work, there were actually both stam and magicka NB dps builds that utilized this skill, even with the damage reduction, and pulled some of the highest numbers in HRC and AA back then. I emphasize "intended" because the IC update is, at least in part, what forced us as NB tanks to utilize Siphoning Attacks instead of Leeching Strikes, exactly opposite of what they had hoped.

I get that you are trying to say that SA was not supposed to be the tank morph, but due to poor design, it was forced into the primary morph regardless of role. The removal of the toggle, in combination with the removal of Haste (see below) and the proc chance on AoEs made this morph a far superior option to LS. Even with the current intended nerf, it is still the far superior option for tanking.

AzuraKin wrote: »

the thing people forget is, siphoning attacks is not an ability for a staff user, it is specifically for siphon tree magicka build (nb healer) what it did was allow nb to dual wield while maintaining a source of magicka regen with a non magicka based weapon. the spell/weapon power debuff nerfed the bonus spell power from dw to being in line with staffs. this made dw siphon nb equal in power to a staff user.

I'm not sure what you are trying to say by this. Siphoning Attacks is equally viable for a staff user as compared to any other weapon choice. Your statement is inherently flawed here, as NB healers have to be staff users. Sap Essence and Funnel Health only go so far in terms of healing, and no NB healer is going to be viable in trials or top-tier veteran dungeons without the use of Resto Staff abilities. Additionally, I cannot think of a time in ESO's history where a destro staff user would not (or could not) make good use of Siphoning Attacks. I will agree that it has always been the most beneficial for the NB healer role, but it has never been an invalid skill choice for staff users in general. I can say from a great deal of personal experience, both currently and pre-IC, that Siphoning Attacks has been quite useful for a destro user.

AzuraKin wrote: »

numbers a dw magic user with spell power enchants would have about 2700 spell power base (without spell power star stone) wereas a staff user would have about 2200. after siphoning attacks 17% debuff dw would have 2234 spell power. since siphoning attacks procced of better more you hit, with an attack, you were incentivized to be up close and personal with the tank. both in pvp and pve.

I'm not sure where you are pulling your numbers from, but with the numbers aside, you are confusing Leeching Strikes with Siphoning Attacks, which currently does not impose a damage reduction.

The unfortunate aspect of Leeching Strikes is that it actually used to be very good for tanking, and now it's not. This is due to a multitude of reasons, but the primary ones are: 1. Reduced benefits of stacking health. 2. Resource and health regain are a flat value now, rather than % of stats. 3. ZOS continually forces a high level of importance on damage - even on tanks - which means that taking a damage reduction for resources is not anywhere near an ideal tradeoff.

Back before we had Merciless Resolve, we had a beautiful skill called Haste, which was a fantastic buff to pair with Leeching Strikes. Increased attack speed, tons of light attack weaving, plenty of self-healing. But then ZOS took that skill away too, in favor of yet another DPS utility. Don't get me wrong, I love Merciless Resolve for my DPS spec, but it's important to understand where the skill came from: cannibalizing tank skills.

Jovaras

Been playing tank since release. DK's have superior mitigation, NB's HAD superior resource management. Second nerf for NB tanks. Now NB tanks don't have anything. GG.

Samphaa

lonewolf26 wrote: »

@Wrobel please give us some insight into your proposed changes to siphoning attacks. As it stands on the PTS, this cripples nightblade tanking builds significantly.

I have a feeling that when thinking about these changes they completely forgot that nightblades can tank

Autolycus wrote: »

code65536 wrote: »

Autolycus wrote: »

they enjoy it less with the changes to SA.

And ZoS wonders why PUGs have such a hard time finding tanks...

Well who needs a tank when you can just 4 dps? Lol

*sigh* There isn't a dungeon in this game that can't be done with 4 dps...

#tanklivesmatter

3 dps and a healer is viable for a lot of the dungeons as they're quite a breeze apart from CoA, vICP and vWGT. Was actually messing around with friends the other night, I played magic nightblade, friend played magic sorc and another friend played stam nb, we did vet banished cells, wayrest and spindleclutch with just us 3. But you need tanks for gold keys.

Autolycus

I'd like to encourage many of you on this thread to consider adding your own thoughts to the Official Tanking Feedback Thread.

It is clear from most of the posts in this thread that there is a great deal of valuable insight and experience among those that frequent this topic. I want to ensure that those perspectives are not lost on the development teams. While I am fairly confident that what we are speaking for in this thread, and others, is being monitored by ZOS employees and is being taken into account, the more exposure to the current issues/drawbacks for tanking in general that we can bring to ZOS, the more likely we will see the improvements we want and need.

Autolycus

Hey folks, I did a little testing last night on Live and wanted to share my results, in the hopes that it will help all of you with resource management once the TG hits Live. Before going into the results specifically, I'd like to outline my assumptions. For the purpose of this testing, all gear, buffs, and skills remain constant except I have traded Caltrops for Deep Slash (the morph of Low Slash that hits 2 additional targets).

The Scenario

The base stam cost of Caltrops is about 7.1k, and the base stam cost for Deep Slash is roughly 2.6k per cast. In practice, these costs should be reduced by a notable amount due to CP, passives, and enchants. Deep Slash is going to hit at most 3 targets, whereas Caltrops has the potential to hit an unlimited numberof targets, although each target beyond the 6th takes less damage, due to AoE cap limitations. For the purpose of this analysis, damage will be ignored, as this is purely oriented towards a resource management and sustainability perspective.

I ran this test in vWGT against trash mobs. After finishing off the Adjudicator and entering the next room, my group pulled every trash mob from the start of that hallway, all the way to the next doorway to progress to the next floor of the tower. This is common practice for my group, as we've run vWGT so many times that we typically skip the trash to save time. Ordinarily, our tank (in this case me) will aggro everything (which is roughly 30 enemies) that was pulled in the preceding rooms & hallways, and hold that aggro until the other three in group can stealth, at which time the tank dies intentionally, allowing the trash to reset and the group to proceed without more than a single death.

Typically this method of skipping trash is very easy for NB tanks due to the SA + caltrops pairing, which when managed properly can result in virtually bottomless resources. Between Caltrops and Sap Essence, most of the trash can be aggro'd with little effort, since the healer and dps are intentionally trying not to pull aggro, therefore are not dealing damage or healing. It is common for a couple of mobs to chase the group anyway, so individual taunting is still necessary.

This is perhaps the most extreme example I can think of in which Caltrops + SA might be considered overkill. It is also the most prominent example of the counter-intuitive concept that the more mobs a NB tank faces, the less worrisome resources become. Normally, a tank (regardless of class) who is faced with a seemingly overwhelming number of enemies should, by logic, be unable to keep up. However, in practice, properly managing cost reduction for blocking, stacking mitigation, and self-healing can offset the amount of damage received, even from 30+ mobs. It's clear that ZOS recognizes this potential and believe it is too powerful, which is why we are faced with the nerf to SA.

The real question I pose here is, can I accomplish the same thing without Caltrops? Will I be able to keep all aggro, self-heal, and maintain the magicka and stamina necessary to protect the group long enough for them to sneak away? The answer is yes, I can.

The Method

Without the use of Caltrops to snare enemies and help generate aggro, I was forced to rely more exclusively on Sap Essence to grab aggro. Since there are a lot of enemies in this pull, using Sap to regain resources was just fine. If I didn't get a proc from SA after a couple of Saps, then I would use Deep Slash. I would alternate between the two abilities, healing and regenerating resources from Sap, and reducing damage from up to three targets at once and regenerating resources with Deep Slash. It is crucial to apply Maim to as many different targets as possible; hitting the same three targets with Maim is a waste of resources.

What I found as I was testing this pull was that the most challenging part was actually immediately after the pull, where it is more likely that I'm going to dump resources in an attempt to get ahold of everything, while simultaneously keeping myself buffed. Once I had applied Minor Maim to a large portion of the group, my incoming damage (and therefore, my need to mitigate it, and the stamina cost associated with it) was drastically reduced.

As the fight progressed on, my resources began to diminish significantly, and it did appear that I was going to be in trouble. However, with proper timing of Sap and Slash (along with Leeching procs), I was able to maintain a consistent level of mitigation and self-healing to keep myself afloat, and I actually managed to restore my resources to full, even after an extended period of time in this pull. I ended up holding the aggro on all ~30 enemies for over a minute, at which point I willingly dropped block and let them finish me off.

I ran this test on multiple pulls throughout vWGT that are just like this, with the sole purpose of the run for me being to decide if I could manage without Caltrops. Ultimately my verdict is that, with proper timing and efficient use of both Sap and Slash, I could sustain a semi-permablock status on any number of enemies indefinitely without Caltrops (note: semi-permablock takes into account the fact that I weave light attacks constantly, even in AoE pulls). I also tested this theory on smaller pulls, as one of our primary concerns addressed in this thread is the viability of NB tanks in smaller pulls where Sap is less efficient (and less likely to proc), and I actually found my resource management to be far better on smaller pulls. Normally I would waste a fair amount of stamina simply to have Caltrops active, but wouldn't return as much since there are fewer enemies to proc SA.

As some of you already know, I used to use Deep Slash back prior to 1.6, before the initial changes to SA. I've found this to still be a viable alternative for Caltrops. Not only does it cost significantly less (and therefor is more useful on a pull-to-pull basis) but it also reduces the amount of damage we need to mitigate, and by extension reduces the amount of stamina we use to mitigate it. With a ~30% chance to proc for each cast, I found Deep Slash did actually restore my resources on a fairly regular basis. I even used this on Molag Kena, and found her to be much easier to tank as well, as her reduced damage made for light attack weaving (dropping block) less threatening.

The Recommendation

As my official recommendation, I would advocate Deep Slash for both single-target and large AoE pulls for NB tanks. It remains more beneficial for all other classes to use Heroic slash (a topic for another thread). I would recommend the use of Deep Slash over Shades due to it's multi-target potential, and as such recommend using a different Shadow skill for access to Major Ward and Resolve, as well as the increase to max health.

Furthermore, for those NB tanks who currently use Twisting Path but are looking for a new alternative, I find Deep Slash to be a valid option for you as well. As long as you can afford the stam cost, as opposed to using magicka, you may want to look into it. I believe it pays for itself in most scenarios, if not through a SA proc, then through the Minor Maim debuff. To my knowledge, there are no other major changes that effect SA, Low Slash (and its morphs), or Caltrops (and it's morphs) that would make this analysis invalid when TG hits live.

On a final note, despite my own personal success with Deep Slash in my testing, I find it does face certain limitations. I am aware of the fact that my build is somewhat unique with respect to other NB builds. I believe I have higher reduced cost of blocking and rely more on mitigation through sets (e.g. footman) over hard capping resistances. As such, my costs of using Sap and Slash may be much lower than what other NB tanks face, making this potentially inefficient for those individuals. I also find that Deep Slash could benefit a great deal from hitting 3 additional targets, rather than 2, which would benefit tanks of all classes. I personally will be able to live without that additional target, but I believe this is something relatively unique to my setup, and as such I face limitations in areas that other NBs do not.

As always, thanks for taking the time to read this incredibly long post. I hope you found it insightful, and I sincerely hope it helps you all to accommodate the SA changes that are hitting Live in a couple of weeks. Feel free to elaborate, question, or criticize (constructively please).

ThatNeonZebraAgain

Autolycus wrote: »

Hey folks, I did a little testing last night on Live and wanted to share my results, in the hopes that it will help all of you with resource management once the TG hits Live. Before going into the results specifically, I'd like to outline my assumptions. For the purpose of this testing, all gear, buffs, and skills remain constant except I have traded Caltrops for Deep Slash (the morph of Low Slash that hits 2 additional targets).

The Scenario

The base stam cost of Caltrops is about 7.1k, and the base stam cost for Deep Slash is roughly 2.6k per cast. In practice, these costs should be reduced by a notable amount due to CP, passives, and enchants. Deep Slash is going to hit at most 3 targets, whereas Caltrops has the potential to hit an unlimited numberof targets, although each target beyond the 6th takes less damage, due to AoE cap limitations. For the purpose of this analysis, damage will be ignored, as this is purely oriented towards a resource management and sustainability perspective.

I ran this test in vWGT against trash mobs. After finishing off the Adjudicator and entering the next room, my group pulled every trash mob from the start of that hallway, all the way to the next doorway to progress to the next floor of the tower. This is common practice for my group, as we've run vWGT so many times that we typically skip the trash to save time. Ordinarily, our tank (in this case me) will aggro everything (which is roughly 30 enemies) that was pulled in the preceding rooms & hallways, and hold that aggro until the other three in group can stealth, at which time the tank dies intentionally, allowing the trash to reset and the group to proceed without more than a single death.

Typically this method of skipping trash is very easy for NB tanks due to the SA + caltrops pairing, which when managed properly can result in virtually bottomless resources. Between Caltrops and Sap Essence, most of the trash can be aggro'd with little effort, since the healer and dps are intentionally trying not to pull aggro, therefore are not dealing damage or healing. It is common for a couple of mobs to chase the group anyway, so individual taunting is still necessary.

This is perhaps the most extreme example I can think of in which Caltrops + SA might be considered overkill. It is also the most prominent example of the counter-intuitive concept that the more mobs a NB tank faces, the less worrisome resources become. Normally, a tank (regardless of class) who is faced with a seemingly overwhelming number of enemies should, by logic, be unable to keep up. However, in practice, properly managing cost reduction for blocking, stacking mitigation, and self-healing can offset the amount of damage received, even from 30+ mobs. It's clear that ZOS recognizes this potential and believe it is too powerful, which is why we are faced with the nerf to SA.

The real question I pose here is, can I accomplish the same thing without Caltrops? Will I be able to keep all aggro, self-heal, and maintain the magicka and stamina necessary to protect the group long enough for them to sneak away? The answer is yes, I can.

The Method

Without the use of Caltrops to snare enemies and help generate aggro, I was forced to rely more exclusively on Sap Essence to grab aggro. Since there are a lot of enemies in this pull, using Sap to regain resources was just fine. If I didn't get a proc from SA after a couple of Saps, then I would use Deep Slash. I would alternate between the two abilities, healing and regenerating resources from Sap, and reducing damage from up to three targets at once and regenerating resources with Deep Slash. It is crucial to apply Maim to as many different targets as possible; hitting the same three targets with Maim is a waste of resources.

What I found as I was testing this pull was that the most challenging part was actually immediately after the pull, where it is more likely that I'm going to dump resources in an attempt to get ahold of everything, while simultaneously keeping myself buffed. Once I had applied Minor Maim to a large portion of the group, my incoming damage (and therefore, my need to mitigate it, and the stamina cost associated with it) was drastically reduced.

As the fight progressed on, my resources began to diminish significantly, and it did appear that I was going to be in trouble. However, with proper timing of Sap and Slash (along with Leeching procs), I was able to maintain a consistent level of mitigation and self-healing to keep myself afloat, and I actually managed to restore my resources to full, even after an extended period of time in this pull. I ended up holding the aggro on all ~30 enemies for over a minute, at which point I willingly dropped block and let them finish me off.

I ran this test on multiple pulls throughout vWGT that are just like this, with the sole purpose of the run for me being to decide if I could manage without Caltrops. Ultimately my verdict is that, with proper timing and efficient use of both Sap and Slash, I could sustain a semi-permablock status on any number of enemies indefinitely without Caltrops (note: semi-permablock takes into account the fact that I weave light attacks constantly, even in AoE pulls). I also tested this theory on smaller pulls, as one of our primary concerns addressed in this thread is the viability of NB tanks in smaller pulls where Sap is less efficient (and less likely to proc), and I actually found my resource management to be far better on smaller pulls. Normally I would waste a fair amount of stamina simply to have Caltrops active, but wouldn't return as much since there are fewer enemies to proc SA.

As some of you already know, I used to use Deep Slash back prior to 1.6, before the initial changes to SA. I've found this to still be a viable alternative for Caltrops. Not only does it cost significantly less (and therefor is more useful on a pull-to-pull basis) but it also reduces the amount of damage we need to mitigate, and by extension reduces the amount of stamina we use to mitigate it. With a ~30% chance to proc for each cast, I found Deep Slash did actually restore my resources on a fairly regular basis. I even used this on Molag Kena, and found her to be much easier to tank as well, as her reduced damage made for light attack weaving (dropping block) less threatening.

The Recommendation

As my official recommendation, I would advocate Deep Slash for both single-target and large AoE pulls for NB tanks. It remains more beneficial for all other classes to use Heroic slash (a topic for another thread). I would recommend the use of Deep Slash over Shades due to it's multi-target potential, and as such recommend using a different Shadow skill for access to Major Ward and Resolve, as well as the increase to max health.

Furthermore, for those NB tanks who currently use Twisting Path but are looking for a new alternative, I find Deep Slash to be a valid option for you as well. As long as you can afford the stam cost, as opposed to using magicka, you may want to look into it. I believe it pays for itself in most scenarios, if not through a SA proc, then through the Minor Maim debuff. To my knowledge, there are no other major changes that effect SA, Low Slash (and its morphs), or Caltrops (and it's morphs) that would make this analysis invalid when TG hits live.

On a final note, despite my own personal success with Deep Slash in my testing, I find it does face certain limitations. I am aware of the fact that my build is somewhat unique with respect to other NB builds. I believe I have higher reduced cost of blocking and rely more on mitigation through sets (e.g. footman) over hard capping resistances. As such, my costs of using Sap and Slash may be much lower than what other NB tanks face, making this potentially inefficient for those individuals. I also find that Deep Slash could benefit a great deal from hitting 3 additional targets, rather than 2, which would benefit tanks of all classes. I personally will be able to live without that additional target, but I believe this is something relatively unique to my setup, and as such I face limitations in areas that other NBs do not.

As always, thanks for taking the time to read this incredibly long post. I hope you found it insightful, and I sincerely hope it helps you all to accommodate the SA changes that are hitting Live in a couple of weeks. Feel free to elaborate, question, or criticize (constructively please).

Very interesting testing and findings, great work. That seems quite encouraging. I'm curious, how big are your stam and magicka pools? Just wondering, as a magicka-focused NB (~30k magicka and 17k stamina) if I would have to go more hybrid and bring up my stam in order to block and use Deep Slash. Either way, it looks like cost reduction (and probably Infused traits with Prismatic enchants) is going to become more important for NB tanks.

The real bummer about Twisting Path is that it activates the 2 most important tanking passives in the Shadow line AND could proc SA, while also doing ok damage. We still need to proc those passives (will probably switch to Refreshing Path now for that) though, but now Twisting Path lost a chunk of its utility because it will no longer help with resource management. Since I use Caltrops on my Resto Staff off-bar alongside with other buffs and heals, I can't just swap Caltrops for Deep Slash unfortunately. This means sacrificing a different ability (in my case, Swallow Soul and its HoT and bonus to healing received) just to gain back some of the lost resource management utility that has to fit onto my main bar. As you suggest, Deep Slash is a good replacement, but for a magicka-focused tank it seems like a potentially risky stamina dump (could cut into stam needed for blocking) that also doesn't do as much damage as the ability it replaces. The maim debuff also isn't really necessary for trash pulls, and there are conflicting reports about if it works on bosses (I thought the last word was that it didn't).

Still trying to figure out a way to take advantage of the new mitigation buff on Dark Cloak, but not sure if it's possible. (that doesn't have anything to do with resource management, but it seems like it could be cool).

Autolycus

ThatNeonZebraAgain wrote: »

Very interesting testing and findings, great work. That seems quite encouraging. I'm curious, how big are your stam and magicka pools? Just wondering, as a magicka-focused NB (~30k magicka and 17k stamina) if I would have to go more hybrid and bring up my stam in order to block and use Deep Slash. Either way, it looks like cost reduction (and probably Infused traits with Prismatic enchants) is going to become more important for NB tanks.

With tri-stat vr15 food I have roughly 22k magicka and 16k stamina. I think that some of these changes in the TG update are ZOS's way of trying to incentivize the use of Orzorga's legendary food and Prismatic glyphs, though I obviously can't make that direct connection based on patch notes. I could also argue against that concept based on the current intended changes, so this is purely a hunch. I also agree that it appears cost reduction will be more important for us in TG.

ThatNeonZebraAgain wrote: »

The real bummer about Twisting Path is that it activates the 2 most important tanking passives in the Shadow line AND could proc SA, while also doing ok damage. We still need to proc those passives (will probably switch to Refreshing Path now for that) though, but now Twisting Path lost a chunk of its utility because it will no longer help with resource management. Since I use Caltrops on my Resto Staff off-bar alongside with other buffs and heals, I can't just swap Caltrops for Deep Slash unfortunately. This means sacrificing a different ability (in my case, Swallow Soul and its HoT and bonus to healing received) just to gain back some of the lost resource management utility that has to fit onto my main bar. As you suggest, Deep Slash is a good replacement, but for a magicka-focused tank it seems like a potentially risky stamina dump (could cut into stam needed for blocking) that also doesn't do as much damage as the ability it replaces. The maim debuff also isn't really necessary for trash pulls, and there are conflicting reports about if it works on bosses (I thought the last word was that it didn't).

Still trying to figure out a way to take advantage of the new mitigation buff on Dark Cloak, but not sure if it's possible. (that doesn't have anything to do with resource management, but it seems like it could be cool).

In my experience Maim has always worked on bosses... so this is news to me. I've used it on many bosses a number of times throughout the last few updates, both through Slash and Shades. If this is not working on specific bosses, I'd be interested to see that. And despite my confidence in it's usefulness, I'm going to have to go back and test it again now, haha. I didn't write down the specific damage values from Kena when I was testing it last night, since I was looking primarily into non-boss encounters. I currently don't use caltrops or path on bosses anyway, so for me that wasn't a factor worth testing. Now I have an incentive to test it again!

It is rather unfortunate, but I'm not all that surprised that Deep Slash isn't as easily interchangeable for you as it is for me. We both knew already that our builds vary quite a bit. If it doesn't end up being a good alternative for you, I'd like to know what you do to accommodate the changes.

I think that Refreshing Path is probably a good alternative to Twisting Path still, especially for builds that stack healing done and healing received. If we look at Refreshing Path on its own, rather than comparing it to what Twisting Path could do prior to TG, we see a multi-beneficial skill: reasonable cost (not too expensive, but clearly part of the buff timer mini-game), access to Major Ward and Resolve, increased max health, AoE damage + healing. These are really strong benefits that I think we could make into a solid case that supports using it over something like Deep Slash. Also, with your much higher magicka pool, it makes more sense for you to use more magicka-based skills like Path. I get a great deal of healing and damage out of Leeching; Refreshing Path is, in effect, your Leeching ability, but trades some damage and healing for max health and Ward/Resolve.

Helluin

According to me the root of the problems with Leeching Strikes is that it was giving once the chance to be used with Haste (previous skill instead of Grim Focus) so with a faster attack speed.
This attack speed in combo with the old Agility of medium armor or Ancient Knowledge of destruction staff (that is still the same) were making basic attacks a good source to manage resources, even if SA was already superior.
Without all that attack speed, nowadays the situation is different and both morphs lost that synergy.
Especially as tank, basic attacks are not the best option and SA is still more appealing for every role, despite the changements in this PTS.

To make LS a valid alternative it should become or something really "Leeching" so removing those resources from the opponent so both an offensive tool and a resource management one or something more based on healing (for dd in general, solo play and PvP) or a tank specific morph with something that is beneficial for this role and in this topic there are many interesting suggestions about it.