Permablocking and block cost calculations analysis

Sacredx

Asmael wrote: »

But the problem, as we've seen above, is that this doesn't do anything to actually solve the permablocking problem, in fact, it just made it a lot harder to block for everyone else, except people who were already permablocking!

Not sure where you're getting your "facts". Actually the latest change has largely solved the permablock issue in pvp. I pvp pretty much every night and have noticed a huge drop in permablock builds. I think zos balanced block cost quite well and have mostly achieved what they setout to do, which is remove permablock builds from pvp.

If you make it easier to block, like some that are suggesting in the thread, then you will end up at square one again with perma blockers roaming pvp land and no one wants that.

I don't specialise in blocking and manage just fine, it's all about timing your blocks to mitigate abilities that matter and learning to position yourself, using cc immune skills, potions, using the land to your advantage, line of sight breaking etc. Learn to take advantage of the land and you will be just fine. No need to change any fundamental formulas and "hope" that zos might notice, just adapt and overcome the problem.

Lord_Eomer

paulsimonps wrote: »

Lord_Dexter wrote: »

paulsimonps wrote: »

paulsimonps wrote: »

OK so a lot of things have changed for the sustainability of blocking for a prolonged period.

Now the first big thing we need to address is the obvious one that blocking can now drain stamina or magicka every 0.25s instead of every 0.5s. With that we need to check what is the lowest possible block cost. It used to be 88 or so I thought, according to the patch notes Alteration mastery was always suppose to reduce sprint cost, bash cost and block cost but for some reason it never did. Either way it now does. I check it out to see what the lowest possible cost was and this is what I found.

The calculation is roughly:

BLOCK COST=(Base*((100-CP)/100)*((100-#Sturdy*Strength of Sturdy)/100)*((100-Fortress)/100)*((100-Alteration Mastery)/100)-(#Enchants*Strength of Enchants))*((100-Defensive Posture)/100)

aka

(2160*((100-25)/100)*((100-8*4)/100)*((100-36)/100)*((100-6)/100)-(203*3))*((100-8))/100)=49.4247552

But for some reason the end result is actually that the lowest possible is 48 stamina per 0.25s. I don't know why that is cause the calculations were accurate when using fewer Sturdy pieces but using all 8 plus everything else made it be slightly off. But that goes with all calculations since ZOS doesn't play around with decimals in their calculations so its always slightly off. Anyway, lowest possible cost is 48 per 0.25s.

Now to check if we can perma block in this we need to check how we can regain that stamina. My idea with this is how can we get this stamina back without using outside help, so no Shards or Orbs and no undaunted command.

The heavy armor passive constitution was nerfed from giving 1302 per 4s at 7 heavy down to 757 per 4s at 7 heavy pieces. So lets divide 757 by 16 cause there are 16 quarter seconds in four seconds to see how much it would help with the blocking. 757/16=47 So even at its nerfed form constitution is giving us almost all we need to perma block. Which means that at lowest possible block cost with 7 heavy the only thing a Dragonknight would have to do is use one Igneous Shield every 247th second to perma block. Cause again for most Stamina users and Tanks Helping Hand was nerfed, for magicka users and some tanks it was a buff. It now gives the flat value of 990 stamina per Earthen Heart ability use. And you only need 1 extra stamina per 0.25s to keep up perma block so divide 990 by 4 to get how many seconds of extra block you would get from it when used in combination with 7 heavy constitution.

A warden can do this too with their netch. The netch gives 79 stamina or magicka per 0.5s for 25.5s. I know the tooltip says 25s but it also says it gives us a total of 4029 which when divided by 79 is 51. So that's 51 half seconds aka 25.5s. So 79 per 0.5s is 39.5 every 0.25s. So keeping the netch up with 7 heavy will give you roughly 73 stamina every 0.25s. Not just giving you what you need to perma block but actually increasing your stamina while blocking. This is something we can currently do on live with any class but with the next update it much harder to do.

So yea, not the most well written thread I know but just wanted to share my test results with people. Perma blocking is still a thing

The quote above is from a thread I made during the PTS, its all Live now and should not matter if I post this cause nothing of this was changed from live.

One of the main things I said in this Quote is that its only possible to permablock in CP PvP not in No CP PvP which is what a majority of campaigns now are and what Battlegrounds are. I myself think that blocking is really well balanced right now. You have to put so much into it for it to be worth it and your are nerfing yourself in everything else to gain this. And a permablocker can in most situations, when pressed NOT fight back, cause if they use even 1 stamina ability or too many magicka attacks then they lose their sustain and die. What people are most afraid of are the people that seem to block all the time but really aren't, they heavy attack and drop block when its needed, for defensive and offensive purposes.

In CP PvP there is enough ways too boost attack and sustain that you can bring down the permablockers anyway if you try, they are not unkillable, and some might seem like perma blockers but they have a limit. In no CP PvP they don't exist, they are not an issue. And what else that needs to be considered is PvE, you can't mess with blocking too much or you will make it harder or a lot of tanks, and the new trial is more lenient towards dropping block the other trials are not always so, see Axes and the Warrior for examples. I would vote for it to stay as is.

Lord_Dexter wrote: »

Asmael wrote: »

• Reduced the cooldown for being charged Stamina or Magicka to block an attack to 0.25 seconds from 0.5 seconds.

Developer Comments:

Due to how powerful Block is, being able to near-permanently block numerous attacks was posing significant balance issues. In PvP situations, this change will provide more counterplay against targets trying to block all of your attacks – you can rapidly attack them in order to drain their Stamina faster. In PvE encounters, this will encourage tanks to use Block more tactically for the larger, more deadly hits.

We wanted to nerf permablock, but mostly ended up nerfing everything else is how you should read the above change, so let's see why that's the case.

The math behind permablocking

To first understand what enables permablocking or not, we must take a look at the formula itself, which can be found on Woeler's website if you're interested. You can also find the full video in the spoiler below:

https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=8f6N6AsJGDk

What we'll be looking at are a few reference values which affect block cost reduction:

Block cost formula
( 2160 ( 1 - Shadow Ward ) ( 1 - Sturdy ) ( 1 - passives ) - enchants ) ( 1 - abilities )

Passives
Fortress passive (s/b): 36%

Skills
Defensive Posture + Morphs (s/b): 8%

Sturdy
[...]
Sturdy (gold quality): 4%

Enchants
Shieldplay enchant (CP160 gold): Reduce block cost by 203 (per enchant)

First note to be taken is the base cost of blocking: 2160.

We'll work on 3 different examples for this thread, all considered in a CP environment:

• A build who doesn't invest in blocking outside a few CPs in Shadow Ward, since the front loading make it pretty accessible: 10%. That's usually what's going to look like for any build that doesn't use a frost staff or SnB.
• A Sword n' board (SnB) build, without a particular investment in blocking, he doesn't have Defensive posture slotted, but a tad more in Shadow Ward and no Block cost reduction glyph. 16% from Shadow Ward
• A build aiming at permablocking, with 20% in Shadow Ward, but also 7 gold armor pieces with Sturdy (for a total of 8 * 4% = 32%, since there also is the shield) and 3 gold block cost reduction glyphs. We will not slot Defensive Posture, you will see why later in this thread.

Taking those scenarios into account, we'll get the following block cost values for each (same order as above):

• 1944
• 1161
• 143

Wow, 143 for the permablocking build? No wonder it's so easy to permablock! In fact, the resource return from Heavy armor, even after the nerf, largely covers it. To a larger extent, just about anything that returns flat resources without asking you to drop block will be enough - which is easily doable with Battle roar and Helping hands, hence why most permablock builds are DKs (Dark Deal requires you to drop block, just like heavy attacks. A netch for the Warden can do, it was also possible for a nightblade before the changes to Siphoning / Leeching strikes, since it now requires light attacks.

In fact, in this last case, adding Defensive Posture would only drop our block cost to 131, asking us to slot an ability only to save 12 stamina per block, which is why it's not needed.

Now let's get back to our change:

• Reduced the cooldown for being charged Stamina or Magicka to block an attack to 0.25 seconds from 0.5 seconds.

Previously, that would mean that you would have to pay, in the order:

• 1944 * 2 = 3888 stamina to block per second
• 1161 * 2 = 2322 stamina to block per second
• 143 * 2 = 286 stamina to block per second

With the changes, it now costs:

• 1944 * 4 = 7776 stamina to block per second
• 1161 * 4 = 4644 stamina to block per second
• 143 * 4 = 572 stamina to block per second

Using potions and the Constitution passive from the heavy armor skill line is enough to make this last build block literally all attacks, without outside help required. Adding in abilities and passives make it even easier - overkill even, it has become a lot harder for the two other specs. Blocking for only 1 second without a specialized block build will burn your entire stamina pool.

Back to the original intent of the devs:

Due to how powerful Block is, being able to near-permanently block numerous attacks was posing significant balance issues. In PvP situations, this change will provide more counterplay against targets trying to block all of your attacks – you can rapidly attack them in order to drain their Stamina faster.

But the problem, as we've seen above, is that this doesn't do anything to actually solve the permablocking problem, in fact, it just made it a lot harder to block for everyone else, except people who were already permablocking!

The issue doesn't lie with how many times block is charged, but how block cost is calculated, back to it:

( 2160 ( 1 - Shadow Ward ) ( 1 - Sturdy ) ( 1 - passives ) - enchants ) ( 1 - abilities )

The issue here is that the enchants will reduce the values after the % multipliers have been taken into account, which means the value you get from the enchants exponentially increases as you stack more and more % based block cost reduction. Let's keep the multipliers and remove the enchants on this last permablocking build, we then get a block of 663 stamina.

This means that, after applying the other block reduction sources, the 3 glyphs are equivalent to about 90% block cost reduction.

What solutions?

The problem comes from the formula, as such, I would instead suggest to change it so that enchants are taken into account at the beginning: flat values are substracted from the base cost, and the rest is then reduced by the different multipliers, we would then get the following formula:

( 2160 - enchants) ( 1 - Shadow Ward ) ( 1 - Sturdy ) ( 1 - passives ) ( 1 - abilities )

if we consider the same builds as before, we obtain the following block costs:

• ( 2160 - 0 ) ( 1 - 0.1 ) ( 1 - 0 ) ( 1 - 0 ) ( 1 - 0 ) = 1944 (previously 1944)
• ( 2160 - 0 ) ( 1 - 0.16 ) ( 1 - 0 ) ( 1 - 0.36 ) ( 1 - 0 ) = 1161 (previously 1161)
• ( 2160 - 609 ) ( 1 - 0.20 ) ( 1 - 0.4 ) ( 1 - 0.36 ) ( 1 - 0 ) = 476 (previously 143)

As such, stacking both flat values adds a natural soft cap to block cost reduction, which slowly diminishes the benefits from using flat values for each added multiplier, leaving non-extreme builds untouched while actually solving the block problem.

Since the original change also drastically changed blocking for any non-permablock build, we'd be better off reverting it as well, so, let's add the 2 following changes:

• Block cost is charged every 0.5 second.
• Block cost is now calculated as follows: block cost = ( 2160 - enchants) ( 1 - Shadow Ward ) ( 1 - Sturdy ) ( 1 - passives ) ( 1 - abilities )

In an actual scenario where you have to block for 1 second straight, it would cost:

• 1944 * 2 = 3888 stamina to block per second
• 1161 * 2 = 2322 stamina to block per second
• 476 * 2 = 953 stamina to block per second (120 stamina before Morrowind, 240 after Morrowind)

There goes. If you want to reward reactive play, you can even do the following:

• Base cost of blocking is reduced to 1080 (2160 previously)
• Block cost is charged every 0.25 second.
• Block cost reduction enchants now reduce the cost of block by 102 per enchant (previously 203).
• Block cost is now calculated as follows: block cost = ( 2160 - enchants) ( 1 - Shadow Ward ) ( 1 - Sturdy ) ( 1 - passives ) ( 1 - abilities )

Now, depending on what you're looking for, you can adjust the flat value of glyphs or the base cost to modify the final value for either tanks or non-block builds. Modifying the value of glyphs will affect block builds more, while changing the base cost will affect everyone.

EDIT: slight miscalculation, corrected

Good post.

If tanking a.k.a permablock in PVP is an issue then why not ( @ZOS_GinaBruno ) put something under battlespirit and leave PVE with block cost charging every 0.5 as was previously.

I suggest no change to cost reduction glyph as it will be useless in PVE too.

I've said it before and I will say it again, the devs have made it perfectly clear they want as little as possible in the battlespirit buff/debuff, stop using it as a suggestion for how to balance both PvP and PvE. The devs don't want that so if you want to make suggestions make something that does not involve that, but instead take both PvP and PvE into consideration, and that such a suggestion would include the same thing for both.

The solution you have proposed will lost importance of cost reduction glpyh and no one will bother!

Another possible option could be having new sets or buff existing set specifically target PVE/dungeon/trials to boost stamina generation or reduce cost while blocking!

Um I never proposed a solution......... So not sure what you are referring to, I just showed my testing results for how things are, I never said how to change them since I don't think they need changing.

Thought you have posted this thread! Was referring to thread 1st post,

Just checked its not you, cheers!

Stannum

You can equip 1h&b on one bar frost destro on enother, equip smth like Shacklebreaker set and still permablock switching bars.
Permablocking has its cons and pros and i see no reason why they should get rid of that tactic breaking all things around.

leepalmer95

Full perma blocking builds are useless in pvp though?

They have no heals because of lack of stats, they have no damage, they can't even afford to waste magicka for utility most of the time.

Best way to kill a perma tank is too cc on cooldown, hit every tick of the block cost, cost poisons them because they still have to heal. Also oblivion enchants go through block.

So ignore them until you kill their team then wipe them easy.

Dubhliam

@paulsimonps
I am curious how did you calculate the Alteration passive?

Also, did you test this 48 stam block cost out on the server, or is it just a formula result?

paulsimonps

Dubhliam wrote: »

@paulsimonps
I am curious how did you calculate the Alteration passive?

Also, did you test this 48 stam block cost out on the server, or is it just a formula result?

I put it on and tested it with different combinations of everything else to see where it would fit in the calculations, then I tried putting it all on, which is why I could see that the actual results where slightly of from the theory crafted one, which is not uncommon given how things are calculated in ESO.

Dubhliam

paulsimonps wrote: »

Dubhliam wrote: »

@paulsimonps
I am curious how did you calculate the Alteration passive?

Also, did you test this 48 stam block cost out on the server, or is it just a formula result?

I put it on and tested it with different combinations of everything else to see where it would fit in the calculations, then I tried putting it all on, which is why I could see that the actual results where slightly of from the theory crafted one, which is not uncommon given how things are calculated in ESO.

Oh, so tested.
Nice to hear.

I put 6% more into passives in Woeler's calculator for a total of 42%, and whoa, it made the theoretical minimum 27 block cost.

Obviously not the case.

paulsimonps

Dubhliam wrote: »

paulsimonps wrote: »

Dubhliam wrote: »

@paulsimonps
I am curious how did you calculate the Alteration passive?

Also, did you test this 48 stam block cost out on the server, or is it just a formula result?

I put it on and tested it with different combinations of everything else to see where it would fit in the calculations, then I tried putting it all on, which is why I could see that the actual results where slightly of from the theory crafted one, which is not uncommon given how things are calculated in ESO.

Oh, so tested.
Nice to hear.

I put 6% more into passives in Woeler's calculator for a total of 42%, and whoa, it made the theoretical minimum 27 block cost.

Obviously not the case.

His calculators have no restrictions in how much you can put in there, you could put 99% or even 100% into the passives, which of course is not possible in the actual game. My test was done on the Morrowind PTS but the values still hold true on live, 48 stamina is the lowest possible block cost currently. Magicka's lowest possible is of course higher.

Thogard

paulsimonps wrote: »

Dubhliam wrote: »

paulsimonps wrote: »

Dubhliam wrote: »

@paulsimonps
I am curious how did you calculate the Alteration passive?

Also, did you test this 48 stam block cost out on the server, or is it just a formula result?

I put it on and tested it with different combinations of everything else to see where it would fit in the calculations, then I tried putting it all on, which is why I could see that the actual results where slightly of from the theory crafted one, which is not uncommon given how things are calculated in ESO.

Oh, so tested.
Nice to hear.

I put 6% more into passives in Woeler's calculator for a total of 42%, and whoa, it made the theoretical minimum 27 block cost.

Obviously not the case.

His calculators have no restrictions in how much you can put in there, you could put 99% or even 100% into the passives, which of course is not possible in the actual game. My test was done on the Morrowind PTS but the values still hold true on live, 48 stamina is the lowest possible block cost currently. Magicka's lowest possible is of course higher.

Why is magicka higher? Do the passives not carry over?

Xsorus

Nothing wrong with Perma Blocking builds...Look at the bloody investment you have to make just to get to it.

You're telling me builds that invest three jewelry enchants into reducing block cost are giving you trouble in PvP?

Really?

leepalmer95

Xsorus wrote: »

Nothing wrong with Perma Blocking builds...Look at the bloody investment you have to make just to get to it.

You're telling me builds that invest three jewelry enchants into reducing block cost are giving you trouble in PvP?

Really?

E.g. Full useless builds...

And they still can't perma block because they still take damage and healing is hard this patch.

Cost poisons.
Oblivion enchants, which go through block.
CC's like fear/ fossilize.

Eat perma blockers.

paulsimonps

Thogard wrote: »

paulsimonps wrote: »

Dubhliam wrote: »

paulsimonps wrote: »

Dubhliam wrote: »

@paulsimonps
I am curious how did you calculate the Alteration passive?

Also, did you test this 48 stam block cost out on the server, or is it just a formula result?

I put it on and tested it with different combinations of everything else to see where it would fit in the calculations, then I tried putting it all on, which is why I could see that the actual results where slightly of from the theory crafted one, which is not uncommon given how things are calculated in ESO.

Oh, so tested.
Nice to hear.

I put 6% more into passives in Woeler's calculator for a total of 42%, and whoa, it made the theoretical minimum 27 block cost.

Obviously not the case.

His calculators have no restrictions in how much you can put in there, you could put 99% or even 100% into the passives, which of course is not possible in the actual game. My test was done on the Morrowind PTS but the values still hold true on live, 48 stamina is the lowest possible block cost currently. Magicka's lowest possible is of course higher.

Why is magicka higher? Do the passives not carry over?

Ice staffs passive is not as strong and they dont have absorb magick

Koolio

Thanks for this post. It really helped with a new build I was having issues with.

Sheey

I can still permanently block on my dk.

23% Shadowward
6x 4%Sturdy
1xCostblockreduction

Dubhliam

Sheey wrote: »

I can still permanently block on my dk.

23% Shadowward
6x 4%Sturdy
1xCostblockreduction

3x block cost reduction or go home.

Your block cost is 557 stamina.
With two more block cost reduction glyphs you can reduce that to 183 stamina.

With 557 block cost, you will never be able to tank harder content, such as Axes in veteran Aetherian Archive.

Sheey

Talking about pvp

raasdal

Sheey wrote: »

I can still permanently block on my dk.

23% Shadowward
6x 4%Sturdy
1xCostblockreduction

Hey Shey,

With 557 block cost, you will be charged 2228 Stamina every second, if you are being hit by either one guy spamming Flurry or Jabs or something like that - or just multiple people doing their regular thing with skills and procs.

How do you sustain that Stamina? With 16k Stam, you will be dry in app. 8 seconds. I don't see how Constitution and Helping Hands is enough to recover that for true permablocking?

paulsimonps

raasdal wrote: »

Sheey wrote: »

I can still permanently block on my dk.

23% Shadowward
6x 4%Sturdy
1xCostblockreduction

Hey Shey,

With 557 block cost, you will be charged 2228 Stamina every second, if you are being hit by either one guy spamming Flurry or Jabs or something like that - or just multiple people doing their regular thing with skills and procs.

How do you sustain that Stamina? With 16k Stam, you will be dry in app. 8 seconds. I don't see how Constitution and Helping Hands is enough to recover that for true permablocking?

It won't. Unless he can get helping hand every half second he will not last long.

Sheey

Jabs you usually shall not block. Against mutiple people you won't last any chance nowadays.

paulsimonps

Sheey wrote: »

Jabs you usually shall not block. Against mutiple people you won't last any chance nowadays.

Even if someone just light attacked you, you would not be able to hold block for very long at all. Someone weaving multiple abilities in with light attacks will drain your stamina really fast, and with 2 people, you got no chance in hell to perma block. Not with that high of a block cost.

leepalmer95

So this is why when i block a meteor (then block dots on me or such) for that 1 second i'm blocking i'm getting 4 block costs/


So if i'm not using a s&b its gonna cost me like 6-8k stamina.

Gj zos.

paulsimonps

leepalmer95 wrote: »

So this is why when i block a meteor (then block dots on me or such) for that 1 second i'm blocking i'm getting 4 block costs/


So if i'm not using a s&b its gonna cost me like 6-8k stamina.

Gj zos.

Can't block DoTs. You can block channels, but not DoTs like poisons and bleeds.