Defensive Posture and it's morphs.

Jade1986

Minno wrote: »

code65536 wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

Maybe I missed something, but didn't his post say you get more block cost reduction with DB than in TG?

Only under very specific--and frankly, unrealistic--circumstances.



You see all that purple and orange? If you're wearing 5p heavy, the only place where DB comes out ahead (and only barely) is when you are running all block-cost jewelry enchants with almost all points into CP block cost reduction. And even then, only if you're taking just one hit per second.

Of course, you can add Sturdy pieces to balance that out, but for more typical tank builds (not 7H/max-permablock Wrobel builds)--you know, the kind of tank builds that Wrobel's elimination of regen was supposed to encourage--you need something like 3p of Sturdy to make things come out about the same.



But that means recrafting, refarming, re-upgrading gear, sacrificing the bonuses of the traits that we used to have. Just to get back to the same place that we were before. And for what? Some extra red points to give us mitigation that we neither need nor asked for? Plus expensive CP respecs for people who swap roles? Yea, how about "No thanks"?

The irony is that Wrobel's math comes out in favor of the DB changes only if you built your tank to be a permablocker: maxed block cost reduction in everything. The whole point of Wrobel nerfing stam regen was to penalize permablocking: if you want to permablock, then you've got to make sacrifices, and your ability to provide group utility would be hampered somewhat. Well, that's exactly the kind of build that does fine in this latest update. Whereas builds that revolve more skillful play are the ones that are getting shafted by this update.

5 points in Shadow Ward, 1 piece Sturdy, 2 block cost reduction enchants and 5 heavy with defensive posture and passives gets you the same cost as live.

id say this is to punish DPS more than tanks and further drives groups to place importance on having a tank than 4 dps for pledges.

for pvp it equates to more death as a glass cannon build.

Tanks are getting nerfed. Period. We are forced to use sturdy now, we are forced into using champion points ( when we could do the non cp campaigns before hand ) we are forced to use SnB. Our variety has gone from some, to absolutely none. We will be killed 100% more now that we have to switch out impen for sturdy, and that is a death sentence for heavy in PVP.

Heavy armor needed SWEEPING buffs to the already existing passives, instead we are the only armor tree that requires outside influence in order to be viable now. Which is just ridiculous. Armor lines should be viable WITHOUT outside influence, and should be complimented by the trait, and cp system, not be dependent on them.

Liofa

You are missing something OP . I assume you are talking about PvP , most players will put a light or medium attack before their skills so you will still get hit by the spell itself . Defensive Posture will only absorb / reflect the light / medium attack . Against a somewhat good animation canceller , Defensive Posture will only save you from the light/medium attack . This is why players use this skill only for block cost reduction and block mitigation .

What I said will work against staff users only of course but if you think that dual wield casters will be in your face all the time , you won't have enough time to activate reflect . Also dual wield users usually don't use much reflectable spells . Take templars for example , sweeps all the time . Sorcerers will just use a light attack with their resto to make sure you don't reflect their fragments .

What I am saying is , reflect shields are easily noticed and players who know what they are doing will just light attack you to break your shield . You are spending 2k stamina for stopping a light attack most of the time .

I didn't even say anything about it reflecting / absorbing only spell projectiles .

Helluin

According to me it's fine.

I'd even buff Reflective Scales and Defensive Posture but with two conditions:
- gap closers range reduced to 15-18 meters (this is something I would do in general); pulling skills keep 22 meters as range
- the range of the ranged skills slotted in the same bar is reduced by X%

The idea behind this is simple: if you want to turtle or have a bunker play, you are stronger at it but you have ranged capabilities reduced.

AhPook_Is_Here

Liofa wrote: »

You are missing something OP . I assume you are talking about PvP , most players will put a light or medium attack before their skills so you will still get hit by the spell itself . Defensive Posture will only absorb / reflect the light / medium attack . Against a somewhat good animation canceller , Defensive Posture will only save you from the light/medium attack . This is why players use this skill only for block cost reduction and block mitigation .

What I said will work against staff users only of course but if you think that dual wield casters will be in your face all the time , you won't have enough time to activate reflect . Also dual wield users usually don't use much reflectable spells . Take templars for example , sweeps all the time . Sorcerers will just use a light attack with their resto to make sure you don't reflect their fragments .

What I am saying is , reflect shields are easily noticed and players who know what they are doing will just light attack you to break your shield . You are spending 2k stamina for stopping a light attack most of the time .

I didn't even say anything about it reflecting / absorbing only spell projectiles .

I don't disagree with any of that. In fact my sorc is a DW sorc in PVP "usually". In addition to those options I can also just slap on a s/b myself, and use posture before tossing a proc frag to "re-reflect" the projectile as one that can't be reflected again. It's not really about the ability being OP, I don't think it is OP on live now. It is good. My point is that it is a shield, and will be one of the few you can effectively stack in non-panic situations once DB hits. I am saying that if the point of 6 second shields is to lower the use of shield stacking, than oops guys, you missed one important one.

RoyJade

Due to a simple fact, defensive posture can't be considered as a damage shield : with the db dlc, ALL damage shield can absorb a set amount of ALL damage (except irresistible). Defensive posture "absorb" an infinite amount of damage from one attack only and on the top of that, it don't absorb every type of attack, only a few one, magicka-ranged-monotarget one. It's an entirely different mechanism.

Rohamad_Ali

I'd like to add my chart to explain why I don't like this idea .

AhPook_Is_Here

RoyJade wrote: »

Due to a simple fact, defensive posture can't be considered as a damage shield : with the db dlc, ALL damage shield can absorb a set amount of ALL damage (except irresistible). Defensive posture "absorb" an infinite amount of damage from one attack only and on the top of that, it don't absorb every type of attack, only a few one, magicka-ranged-monotarget one. It's an entirely different mechanism.

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/shield

" something that defends or protects someone or something"

You're just parsing. An apple is an apple. Maybe it's a Gala apple, maybe a Granny Smith, maybe a Rome or maybe Jonagold. The fact that it doesn't have a set value has no impact on the fact that it does shield your health pool from damage. Absorb magic pre-DB didn't block every damage type, nor did bone ward, they were still shields then. Reflective Scale, the shortest duration shield in the game is a shield that defends you against 4 projectiles for 4 seconds, whatever comes first, no set value on absorption damage, 100% true it is a damage shield. Starting and argument with a thought stopping cliche is not a damage shield against logic.

CyrusArya

mzapkeneb18_ESO wrote: »

In that case, ward should only absorb one attack each cast^^

Inb4 the forums' sorcerer QQ brigade comes here and insists hardened ward only absorbs one attack anyways.

RoyJade

AhPook_Is_Here wrote: »

http://www.merriam-webster.com/dictionary/shield

" something that defends or protects someone or something"

You're just parsing. An apple is an apple. Maybe it's a Gala apple, maybe a Granny Smith, maybe a Rome or maybe Jonagold. The fact that it doesn't have a set value has no impact on the fact that it does shield your health pool from damage. Absorb magic pre-DB didn't block every damage type, nor did bone ward, they were still shields then. Reflective Scale, the shortest duration shield in the game is a shield that defends you against 4 projectiles for 4 seconds, whatever comes first, no set value on absorption damage, 100% true it is a damage shield. Starting and argument with a thought stopping cliche is not a damage shield against logic.

So, that a "shield" but not a "damage shield" as the game use this term. Eclipse is not a damage shield, cloak is not a damage shield, dodge roll is not a damage shield, block is not a damage shield, mitigation (defense/resistance + flat value) is not a damage shield, and even if they don't block 100% of the damage received in the case of block an mitigation they all protect you from damage. That's just a totally different mechanism.
In this game, all damage shield are a second health bar who protect you against a set amount of damage (sometimes a certain type of damage). In the DB dlc, ZOS want to normalize damage shield : all with a 6 second timer (8 for brawler/empowered ward), who take for them all source of damage. Reflect abilities are totally different, because they don't care about the damage value, but they care about the type of damage they take.

On an other hand, defensive posture is far from being the skill who everyone need in his bar. At least, not since meteor is unreflectable. That's a totally situational skill, when damage shield are nearly a must have for pvp players : protect you from every damage, help to sustain before healing, protect from critical extra damage… defensive posture help you against a few build, when damage shield help you against all build except shield breaker. It really don't need a nerf.

Saturn

Minno wrote: »

code65536 wrote: »

@Saturn

Uh, did you look at Asayre's graphs? Because they don't support Wrobel's rosy outlook and instead show that in more typical situations--not extreme 7H + max-reduction scenarios--there is a greater tradeoff. This is what we would expect since cost reductions have diminishing returns, so on the extreme end of the scale, the marginal loss is less, which makes Wrobel's math look favorable. But in more typical builds, the marginal difference is greater and thus the changes are not favorable.

Second, the CP changes are horrible for people who swap between tanking and DPS. Yes, it gives us more red points to be tankier. Yippee? The amount of mitigation that we currently have is already enough. Why do I want more mitigation if I'm already surviving? When I die, it's not because I have too little mitigation. It's when I run out of stam to block or to roll out of Vashai's negate. When I fail as a tank, it's when I run out of resources. Why in bloody blazes do I want more mitigation when I already have enough and when the bottleneck to tanking is resources? Yes, Constitution's buff is nice, but what is the point of having that buff when all of it is expended to compensate for all the resource nerfs elsewhere (and in some important scenarios, it's not even enough to compensate).

At best, tanking is going to stay around the same place, after some expensive and annoying adjustments. At worst, it's getting nerfed. So tell me again, why shouldn't our bitterness at this change be warranted?

Maybe I missed something, but didn't his post say you get more block cost reduction with DB than in TG?

Edit:

This is my updated understanding:

- wrobels and asayre's equations required additional parameters to paint a full picture for tanks (due to 3 parameters rounding it out.)
- it was determined that you cant go full 7 piece armor due to 10.8% increased cost of magicka/stam abilities. Therefore 5 heavy is more realistic due to need for players to slot light/med in the other 2 slots.
- Worst case scenario, at 2 attacks per second, with 0 in Shadow Ward, 0 sturdy traits and 0 in cost reduc enchants, youll lose 200 stamina more in PTS than on live server.
- Best Case scenario, at 2 attacks per second, 100 in shadow ward, 0 sturdy pieces, 3 purple cost reduction enchants nets 50 less stamina on pts than live.

BUT the same equation was tested using sturdy traits:

- worst case scenario, at 2 attacks per second, with 0 in shadow ward, 0 cost reduc enchants you need 5 pieces of sturdy to match live stam cost for block on PTS.
- medium case scenario, at 2 attacks per second, with 100 in shadow ward, 3 purple cost reduc enchants, you need 0 sturdy AND have better stam return than on live with the pts equation.
- best case scenario, at 2 attacks per second, with 1-5pts in shadow ward, 2 purple cost reduc enchants, 1 pc sturdy trait.

Conclusion:
Therefore, sturdy plays a role in finding a balance between blocking and utilizing other roles in 5 pc heavy. requires theorycrafting for DB patch. Not doom and gloom but not rosey either.
@Asayre please correct me if im wrong with this assessment.

@Minno

This was my understanding of it as well. The changes mean that traditional PvE tanks are getting buffed, and from the dungeon runs I have done on the PTS it definitely feels like resource management is way easier on boss fights (my stamina never went below 90% even if I never let go of block), and only slightly harder on big groups (though this was without any sturdy pieces). It is true, as some people have pointed out, that tank builds will be harder to pull off in PvP, but I'm of the impression that it's a good thing. Perma-blockers in PvP have always been something I disliked anyway.

As for PvE tanking, I can't wait for these changes. It will definitely make my tank build even better, and the resource return from Constitution will be incredible.

Daveheart

While one morph of the ability is technically a damage shield, the value of said damage shield is negated after absorbing any single attack. While it'll completely negate a big hit from overload, one weak light attack from a resto staff on a weird hybrid build will also remove the shield. A true damage shield will absorb the full value before it drops. At best your argument for reducing the duration would apply to the Absorb Magic morph which is to my knowledge the only "shield" that only applies to one type of damage after the update.

AhPook_Is_Here

RoyJade wrote: »

So, that a "shield" but not a "damage shield" as the game use this term. Eclipse is not a damage shield, cloak is not a damage shield, dodge roll is not a damage shield, block is not a damage shield, mitigation (defense/resistance + flat value) is not a damage shield, and even if they don't block 100% of the damage received in the case of block an mitigation they all protect you from damage. That's just a totally different mechanism.
In this game, all damage shield are a second health bar who protect you against a set amount of damage (sometimes a certain type of damage). In the DB dlc, ZOS want to normalize damage shield : all with a 6 second timer (8 for brawler/empowered ward), who take for them all source of damage. Reflect abilities are totally different, because they don't care about the damage value, but they care about the type of damage they take.

On an other hand, defensive posture is far from being the skill who everyone need in his bar. At least, not since meteor is unreflectable. That's a totally situational skill, when damage shield are nearly a must have for pvp players : protect you from every damage, help to sustain before healing, protect from critical extra damage… defensive posture help you against a few build, when damage shield help you against all build except shield breaker. It really don't need a nerf.

Defensive posture shields you from the full damage of one magical projectile attack for 30 seconds. You may not see a bar over your bar, but there is a bar there equal to the value of the next magical projectile attack. Your definition of "damage shield" while inclusive of the traits you mentioned, is not exclusive to the nature of damage shields. There isn't much point in semantics beyond this.

All of the other abilities you mentioned except for eclipse, which is in my mind a de-buff since it can be purged, are active defensive abilities you use to react to offensive abilities. Defensive Posture should be the same, reactive and an active choice instead of some fire and forget under-shield.

Minno

Saturn wrote: »

Minno wrote: »

code65536 wrote: »

@Saturn

Uh, did you look at Asayre's graphs? Because they don't support Wrobel's rosy outlook and instead show that in more typical situations--not extreme 7H + max-reduction scenarios--there is a greater tradeoff. This is what we would expect since cost reductions have diminishing returns, so on the extreme end of the scale, the marginal loss is less, which makes Wrobel's math look favorable. But in more typical builds, the marginal difference is greater and thus the changes are not favorable.

Second, the CP changes are horrible for people who swap between tanking and DPS. Yes, it gives us more red points to be tankier. Yippee? The amount of mitigation that we currently have is already enough. Why do I want more mitigation if I'm already surviving? When I die, it's not because I have too little mitigation. It's when I run out of stam to block or to roll out of Vashai's negate. When I fail as a tank, it's when I run out of resources. Why in bloody blazes do I want more mitigation when I already have enough and when the bottleneck to tanking is resources? Yes, Constitution's buff is nice, but what is the point of having that buff when all of it is expended to compensate for all the resource nerfs elsewhere (and in some important scenarios, it's not even enough to compensate).

At best, tanking is going to stay around the same place, after some expensive and annoying adjustments. At worst, it's getting nerfed. So tell me again, why shouldn't our bitterness at this change be warranted?

Maybe I missed something, but didn't his post say you get more block cost reduction with DB than in TG?

Edit:

This is my updated understanding:

- wrobels and asayre's equations required additional parameters to paint a full picture for tanks (due to 3 parameters rounding it out.)
- it was determined that you cant go full 7 piece armor due to 10.8% increased cost of magicka/stam abilities. Therefore 5 heavy is more realistic due to need for players to slot light/med in the other 2 slots.
- Worst case scenario, at 2 attacks per second, with 0 in Shadow Ward, 0 sturdy traits and 0 in cost reduc enchants, youll lose 200 stamina more in PTS than on live server.
- Best Case scenario, at 2 attacks per second, 100 in shadow ward, 0 sturdy pieces, 3 purple cost reduction enchants nets 50 less stamina on pts than live.

BUT the same equation was tested using sturdy traits:

- worst case scenario, at 2 attacks per second, with 0 in shadow ward, 0 cost reduc enchants you need 5 pieces of sturdy to match live stam cost for block on PTS.
- medium case scenario, at 2 attacks per second, with 100 in shadow ward, 3 purple cost reduc enchants, you need 0 sturdy AND have better stam return than on live with the pts equation.
- best case scenario, at 2 attacks per second, with 1-5pts in shadow ward, 2 purple cost reduc enchants, 1 pc sturdy trait.

Conclusion:
Therefore, sturdy plays a role in finding a balance between blocking and utilizing other roles in 5 pc heavy. requires theorycrafting for DB patch. Not doom and gloom but not rosey either.
@Asayre please correct me if im wrong with this assessment.

@Minno

This was my understanding of it as well. The changes mean that traditional PvE tanks are getting buffed, and from the dungeon runs I have done on the PTS it definitely feels like resource management is way easier on boss fights (my stamina never went below 90% even if I never let go of block), and only slightly harder on big groups (though this was without any sturdy pieces). It is true, as some people have pointed out, that tank builds will be harder to pull off in PvP, but I'm of the impression that it's a good thing. Perma-blockers in PvP have always been something I disliked anyway.

As for PvE tanking, I can't wait for these changes. It will definitely make my tank build even better, and the resource return from Constitution will be incredible.

We did ask for a way to make tanking viable and put gear on greater emphasis on build diversity, as a general community. I know the tanking community has concerns and I won't pretend to know so much as to challenge their knowledge.

Judging the changes as a DPS Templar turned troll pvp tank, the changes favor full flavor tanks than hybrid. It also forces extra difficulty on pure DPS in pvp in that you will lose stamina if you try to block all the time without the proper specs,gear, and traits.

It's a nerf to those that don't want to recraft their gear.

Xsorus

Personofsecrets wrote: »

AhPook_Is_Here wrote: »

As a DK tank you can refresh as many as 3 skills on 20 second timers, of course you don't need to for most of the content in this game, but if you were running optimally for survival and nothing else you would keep those 3 buffs up always, excluding defensive posture. That leaves you about 15 seconds per rotation to use taunts, posture, weave attacks, interrupts, synergies and so on.

I'm not a huge fan of chasing buffs either but I really think posture should be a reactive skill the same way scale is. Of course scale is better in some ways, and was really OP when you could tie its reflections to the stun from posture, it lasts 4 seconds, compared to posture which should be 6 seconds, and has no stun.

I don't think it's really a nerf so much as a style change, it doesn't seem right to me that someone can toss this up and run around for 30 seconds not even thinking about it.

There is a set that benefits quite a bit from how defensive stance currently works. I don't want to say as I have gotten stuff nerfed in the past.

For the most part, yea, changing defensive wouldn't be a big deal. That being said, even if this change would only be a minor issue or a mere inconvenience, I've never been for nerfs, no matter how small, that affect me.

On a different note, there is so much insane stuff going on in Cyrodiil at this moment and that causes me not to see how the current Defensive Stance is out of balance. Even the times that I have dueled against defensive users, and that was when meteor could be reflected, I got way more butt mad about invisibility or sorc shields than defensive reflect.

Permafrost

Dyride

AhPook_Is_Here wrote: »

Liofa wrote: »

You are missing something OP . I assume you are talking about PvP , most players will put a light or medium attack before their skills so you will still get hit by the spell itself . Defensive Posture will only absorb / reflect the light / medium attack . Against a somewhat good animation canceller , Defensive Posture will only save you from the light/medium attack . This is why players use this skill only for block cost reduction and block mitigation .

What I said will work against staff users only of course but if you think that dual wield casters will be in your face all the time , you won't have enough time to activate reflect . Also dual wield users usually don't use much reflectable spells . Take templars for example , sweeps all the time . Sorcerers will just use a light attack with their resto to make sure you don't reflect their fragments .

What I am saying is , reflect shields are easily noticed and players who know what they are doing will just light attack you to break your shield . You are spending 2k stamina for stopping a light attack most of the time .

I didn't even say anything about it reflecting / absorbing only spell projectiles .

... I can also just slap on a s/b myself, and use posture before tossing a proc frag to "re-reflect" the projectile as one that can't be reflected again.

You can only reflect things 1 time now. There are no double reflects.

Justice31st

This guy cannot be serious still? This must be a troll post...Out of all the skills that should be nerfed, you chose to create a topic about nerfing the skill Defense Posture? Really? LOL...

You really think Defense Posture last longer than 6 seconds while fighting Magic builds in PvP, or tanking mobs in PvE dungeons? LOL.

Lynx7386

I'm all for making defensive posture only last 6 seconds.

On the condition that it can reflect up to 6 projectiles or spells.

AhPook_Is_Here

Lynx7386 wrote: »

I'm all for making defensive posture only last 6 seconds.

On the condition that it can reflect up to 6 projectiles or spells.

Sure, why not, I really don't think the skill is too strong, just that it needs to be used in reaction, as a counter, like other shields. DK's would love it, since most will be stamina, I know mine will be, and that will make it far more spamable than scale. But it should be 6 seconds.

Rohamad_Ali

AhPook_Is_Here wrote: »

Lynx7386 wrote: »

I'm all for making defensive posture only last 6 seconds.

On the condition that it can reflect up to 6 projectiles or spells.

Sure, why not, I really don't think the skill is too strong, just that it needs to be used in reaction, as a counter, like other shields. DK's would love it, since most will be stamina, I know mine will be, and that will make it far more spamable than scale. But it should be 6 seconds.

Well it already kind of is used as a reaction because 1 reflect and poof it's gone . The rest of time the persons just walking around looking like they're wrapped in saranwrap .

AhPook_Is_Here

Roehamad_Ali wrote: »

AhPook_Is_Here wrote: »

Lynx7386 wrote: »

I'm all for making defensive posture only last 6 seconds.

On the condition that it can reflect up to 6 projectiles or spells.

Sure, why not, I really don't think the skill is too strong, just that it needs to be used in reaction, as a counter, like other shields. DK's would love it, since most will be stamina, I know mine will be, and that will make it far more spamable than scale. But it should be 6 seconds.

Well it already kind of is used as a reaction because 1 reflect and poof it's gone . The rest of time the persons just walking around looking like they're wrapped in saranwrap .

I agree the graphic isn't attractive but aesthetics aside, only the 2nd use is reactive, the first use is a 30 second under-buff that will be up most of the time keeping your pelt shiny and glossy. All our tanking buffs, regardless of class last ~20 seconds, NB's 8 seconds, granted a side effect of standard rotations for NBs so not a matter of concern to them.

I'm just saying take the easy mode stack off and you can even make the skill better.

Rohamad_Ali

AhPook_Is_Here wrote: »

Roehamad_Ali wrote: »

AhPook_Is_Here wrote: »

Lynx7386 wrote: »

I'm all for making defensive posture only last 6 seconds.

On the condition that it can reflect up to 6 projectiles or spells.

Sure, why not, I really don't think the skill is too strong, just that it needs to be used in reaction, as a counter, like other shields. DK's would love it, since most will be stamina, I know mine will be, and that will make it far more spamable than scale. But it should be 6 seconds.

Well it already kind of is used as a reaction because 1 reflect and poof it's gone . The rest of time the persons just walking around looking like they're wrapped in saranwrap .

I agree the graphic isn't attractive but aesthetics aside, only the 2nd use is reactive, the first use is a 30 second under-buff that will be up most of the time keeping your pelt shiny and glossy. All our tanking buffs, regardless of class last ~20 seconds, NB's 8 seconds, granted a side effect of standard rotations for NBs so not a matter of concern to them.

I'm just saying take the easy mode stack off and you can even make the skill better.

I understand what you're asking for . My concern is a Dev will take a look at the cars Transmition we're pointing at and replace the entire engine . Metaphorically speaking . Careful what you ask for here , you know that . Is it really that "broke" to call for a Nerf and ask for a team to change it ?

Jade1986

Roehamad_Ali wrote: »

AhPook_Is_Here wrote: »

Roehamad_Ali wrote: »

AhPook_Is_Here wrote: »

Lynx7386 wrote: »

I'm all for making defensive posture only last 6 seconds.

On the condition that it can reflect up to 6 projectiles or spells.

Sure, why not, I really don't think the skill is too strong, just that it needs to be used in reaction, as a counter, like other shields. DK's would love it, since most will be stamina, I know mine will be, and that will make it far more spamable than scale. But it should be 6 seconds.

Well it already kind of is used as a reaction because 1 reflect and poof it's gone . The rest of time the persons just walking around looking like they're wrapped in saranwrap .

I agree the graphic isn't attractive but aesthetics aside, only the 2nd use is reactive, the first use is a 30 second under-buff that will be up most of the time keeping your pelt shiny and glossy. All our tanking buffs, regardless of class last ~20 seconds, NB's 8 seconds, granted a side effect of standard rotations for NBs so not a matter of concern to them.

I'm just saying take the easy mode stack off and you can even make the skill better.

I understand what you're asking for . My concern is a Dev will take a look at the cars Transmition we're pointing at and replace the entire engine . Metaphorically speaking . Careful what you ask for here , you know that . Is it really that "broke" to call for a Nerf and ask for a team to change it ?

Honestly there should be a restraining order placed for the devs so they dont touch block , heavy armor and SnB ANY MORE! They just keep keep smurfing it more and more up.