PvE Tanking Discussion for Dragon Bones

Doctordarkspawn

idk wrote: »

Doctordarkspawn wrote: »

Rohamad_Ali wrote: »

Good . Tanks can cry all they like it was out of control . Good job Wrobel .

Out of control?

For who? PVP? Because if that's the case, these changes could be applied themselves to Cyro and nothing else.

If not...then I question your ability to speak on this.

For PvE we have adapted to the previous changes and do just fine. I expect that'll be the case here but the 3rd day is to early to tell.

I suggest you actually test things on the pts. Try different arrangements and see for yourself.

Considering the point of my post went full on over your head, I question your ability to speak on this.

SirCritical

Woeler wrote: »

Like any other tanking change they have made in the past, this will just be a matter of adjusting. I did the new dungeons on the PTS with the exact setup I run on live, and while I did feel the difference, I had no major problems at all. The real question lies in the matter of enchants, as other enchants are now likely to contribute more to sustain, such as magicka recovery, or even potion speed on Argonians.

I'm just glad this ultra-dumb lightning staff thing is finally over. Thank God. I hated using this. Been using a frost staff on back bar lately anyway, as off-balance uptime with a couple of lightning blockade runners is barely, if at all affected by a tank pulling some stunts.

I don't think people should see this as a nerf necessarily, more as a change. There are other ways to get sustain as a tank, and you can still boost those with different enchants. I don't see a grim future, especially since slowly the ice staff starts finally making sense --that is without the passive that turns your block cost to magicka-- at least.

The problem is if you 'did feel the difference', other tanks might will have 'major problems'.

SirCritical

DKsUnite wrote: »

Im no PvE tank but i do PvP as a permablocking mDK. These block changes do nothing to stop PvP permablocking. Im actually looking forward to these changes going live because it will actually be a buff thanks to small adjustments in my build. So basically this update is screwing over PvE tanks.

The reason I permablock in PvP is because it's extremely effective in regards to avoiding CC as only a handful of skills drop block and also because it reduces damage by so much that the difference between me being in light and heavy perma blocking is minimal and hence why I run light. My solution to this problem is to change the way mitigation works for both armour and blocking.

TL;DR: Shift the power of damage mitigation to armour resistances rather than blocking

Let's say we raise the resistances hardcap to 43030. Knowing that currently 662 = 1% mitigation, this would give us a hardcap of 65% mitigation from resistances instead of the 50% we currently have. At the same time, you reduce the amount of damage mitigated by block from 50% to 25%. Similarly, you reduce the SnB passive that gives 20% damage mitigation to 10% damage mitigation.

Now, a heavy armoured DK PvE tank sitting at hardcapped resistances on live right now (ie. 50% mitigation from armour or 33k resistances) holding block with minor maim on their target and absorb magic is looking at 86% damage mitigation.

A light armoured DK PvP spec (similar to what i run) (with around 30% mitigation from armour or 20k resistances) is holding block and has minor maim on their target is looking at 78.6% mitigation. NOTE: No absorb magic with this spec for obvious reasons.

So the difference the armour makes is very small currently. However, let's look at my proposed changes.

Now, a heavy armoured DK PvE tank sitting at hardcapped resistances in the new system (ie. 65% mitigation from armour or 43k resistances) holding block with minor maim on their target and absorb magic is looking at 83.37% damage mitigation. Notice that the values are very close to what is on live (2.6% difference).

However, the same light armoured PvP DK with around 30% mitigation from armour or 20k resistances is holding block and has minor maim on their target is looking at 63.96% mitigation. That is a difference of 14.68%.

Furthermore, this change would allow PvE tanks to drop their block more often without fear of imploding from regular hits. A hardcapped tank on live with just minor maim on the target would mitigate 57.75% damage without blocking. In my proposed change, a hardcapped tank would mitigate 70.25% with just minor maim and no blocking. That's an extra 12.5% mitigation while not blocking.

Now, in order to get resistances to 43k, a PvE tank would most likely have to wear a resistances set, something like fortified brass, bloodspawn, lord warden etc and possibly get supported by a healer wearing something like meritorious service, idk just making stuff up off the top of my head. Possibly, resistance enchants on jewellery (increase physical/spell resistance by X) could be buffed as they now only provide 1k each. Maybe buff them to 2/2.5k).

Ultimately, this would take away some of the power of permablocking from pvp as you are now taking 15% more damage than before in a light armour build (which is mostly what 1vX permablock mDKs run atm). Further, this means that block cost can be increased from the value on live but maybe only by a small amount. Hopefully this solution appeases the PvE and PvP community at the same time.

Now this is what I call an awesome post.

Doctordarkspawn

DKsUnite wrote: »

Im no PvE tank but i do PvP as a permablocking mDK. These block changes do nothing to stop PvP permablocking. Im actually looking forward to these changes going live because it will actually be a buff thanks to small adjustments in my build. So basically this update is screwing over PvE tanks.

The reason I permablock in PvP is because it's extremely effective in regards to avoiding CC as only a handful of skills drop block and also because it reduces damage by so much that the difference between me being in light and heavy perma blocking is minimal and hence why I run light. My solution to this problem is to change the way mitigation works for both armour and blocking.

TL;DR: Shift the power of damage mitigation to armour resistances rather than blocking

Let's say we raise the resistances hardcap to 43030. Knowing that currently 662 = 1% mitigation, this would give us a hardcap of 65% mitigation from resistances instead of the 50% we currently have. At the same time, you reduce the amount of damage mitigated by block from 50% to 25%. Similarly, you reduce the SnB passive that gives 20% damage mitigation to 10% damage mitigation.

Now, a heavy armoured DK PvE tank sitting at hardcapped resistances on live right now (ie. 50% mitigation from armour or 33k resistances) holding block with minor maim on their target and absorb magic is looking at 86% damage mitigation.

A light armoured DK PvP spec (similar to what i run) (with around 30% mitigation from armour or 20k resistances) is holding block and has minor maim on their target is looking at 78.6% mitigation. NOTE: No absorb magic with this spec for obvious reasons.

So the difference the armour makes is very small currently. However, let's look at my proposed changes.

Now, a heavy armoured DK PvE tank sitting at hardcapped resistances in the new system (ie. 65% mitigation from armour or 43k resistances) holding block with minor maim on their target and absorb magic is looking at 83.37% damage mitigation. Notice that the values are very close to what is on live (2.6% difference).

However, the same light armoured PvP DK with around 30% mitigation from armour or 20k resistances is holding block and has minor maim on their target is looking at 63.96% mitigation. That is a difference of 14.68%.

Furthermore, this change would allow PvE tanks to drop their block more often without fear of imploding from regular hits. A hardcapped tank on live with just minor maim on the target would mitigate 57.75% damage without blocking. In my proposed change, a hardcapped tank would mitigate 70.25% with just minor maim and no blocking. That's an extra 12.5% mitigation while not blocking.

Now, in order to get resistances to 43k, a PvE tank would most likely have to wear a resistances set, something like fortified brass, bloodspawn, lord warden etc and possibly get supported by a healer wearing something like meritorious service, idk just making stuff up off the top of my head. Possibly, resistance enchants on jewellery (increase physical/spell resistance by X) could be buffed as they now only provide 1k each. Maybe buff them to 2/2.5k).

Ultimately, this would take away some of the power of permablocking from pvp as you are now taking 15% more damage than before in a light armour build (which is mostly what 1vX permablock mDKs run atm). Further, this means that block cost can be increased from the value on live but maybe only by a small amount. Hopefully this solution appeases the PvE and PvP community at the same time.

Awsome post.

Impliment this, give tanks a way of buffing they're own healing and you might be able to make healtanks work in the process, not only giving tanks more engaging gameplay, but geting rid of the block problem for PVP.

Woeler

SirCritical wrote: »

Woeler wrote: »

Like any other tanking change they have made in the past, this will just be a matter of adjusting. I did the new dungeons on the PTS with the exact setup I run on live, and while I did feel the difference, I had no major problems at all. The real question lies in the matter of enchants, as other enchants are now likely to contribute more to sustain, such as magicka recovery, or even potion speed on Argonians.

I'm just glad this ultra-dumb lightning staff thing is finally over. Thank God. I hated using this. Been using a frost staff on back bar lately anyway, as off-balance uptime with a couple of lightning blockade runners is barely, if at all affected by a tank pulling some stunts.

I don't think people should see this as a nerf necessarily, more as a change. There are other ways to get sustain as a tank, and you can still boost those with different enchants. I don't see a grim future, especially since slowly the ice staff starts finally making sense --that is without the passive that turns your block cost to magicka-- at least.

The problem is if you 'did feel the difference', other tanks might will have 'major problems'.

You should read more than only the words you want to read. I said I did feel a difference WITHOUT changing anything in my build. Besides, why would I be a special case? Whatever I'm doing is nothing special.

DoonerSeraph

DKsUnite wrote: »

Im no PvE tank but i do PvP as a permablocking mDK. These block changes do nothing to stop PvP permablocking. Im actually looking forward to these changes going live because it will actually be a buff thanks to small adjustments in my build. So basically this update is screwing over PvE tanks.

The reason I permablock in PvP is because it's extremely effective in regards to avoiding CC as only a handful of skills drop block and also because it reduces damage by so much that the difference between me being in light and heavy perma blocking is minimal and hence why I run light. My solution to this problem is to change the way mitigation works for both armour and blocking.

TL;DR: Shift the power of damage mitigation to armour resistances rather than blocking

Let's say we raise the resistances hardcap to 43030. Knowing that currently 662 = 1% mitigation, this would give us a hardcap of 65% mitigation from resistances instead of the 50% we currently have. At the same time, you reduce the amount of damage mitigated by block from 50% to 25%. Similarly, you reduce the SnB passive that gives 20% damage mitigation to 10% damage mitigation.

Now, a heavy armoured DK PvE tank sitting at hardcapped resistances on live right now (ie. 50% mitigation from armour or 33k resistances) holding block with minor maim on their target and absorb magic is looking at 86% damage mitigation.

A light armoured DK PvP spec (similar to what i run) (with around 30% mitigation from armour or 20k resistances) is holding block and has minor maim on their target is looking at 78.6% mitigation. NOTE: No absorb magic with this spec for obvious reasons.

So the difference the armour makes is very small currently. However, let's look at my proposed changes.

Now, a heavy armoured DK PvE tank sitting at hardcapped resistances in the new system (ie. 65% mitigation from armour or 43k resistances) holding block with minor maim on their target and absorb magic is looking at 83.37% damage mitigation. Notice that the values are very close to what is on live (2.6% difference).

However, the same light armoured PvP DK with around 30% mitigation from armour or 20k resistances is holding block and has minor maim on their target is looking at 63.96% mitigation. That is a difference of 14.68%.

Furthermore, this change would allow PvE tanks to drop their block more often without fear of imploding from regular hits. A hardcapped tank on live with just minor maim on the target would mitigate 57.75% damage without blocking. In my proposed change, a hardcapped tank would mitigate 70.25% with just minor maim and no blocking. That's an extra 12.5% mitigation while not blocking.

Now, in order to get resistances to 43k, a PvE tank would most likely have to wear a resistances set, something like fortified brass, bloodspawn, lord warden etc and possibly get supported by a healer wearing something like meritorious service, idk just making stuff up off the top of my head. Possibly, resistance enchants on jewellery (increase physical/spell resistance by X) could be buffed as they now only provide 1k each. Maybe buff them to 2/2.5k).

Ultimately, this would take away some of the power of permablocking from pvp as you are now taking 15% more damage than before in a light armour build (which is mostly what 1vX permablock mDKs run atm). Further, this means that block cost can be increased from the value on live but maybe only by a small amount. Hopefully this solution appeases the PvE and PvP community at the same time.

Awesome idea IMO. Maybe the only thing I would change is increasing the mitigation by resistance ratio (currently 662 to 1%) to avoid having to stretch tanks that far into pushing resistances. But aside from that and the possibility of a new kind of PvP beast (bloodspawn, brass and ravager anyone?), I think your idea would be awesome.

And helping other classes with passive stam recovery would help lots. I feel like an asthmatic playing my templar. I swear if I don a metal plate suit I can last way longer IRL than my templar in combat before gasping for air

SirCritical

Woeler wrote: »

SirCritical wrote: »

Woeler wrote: »

Like any other tanking change they have made in the past, this will just be a matter of adjusting. I did the new dungeons on the PTS with the exact setup I run on live, and while I did feel the difference, I had no major problems at all. The real question lies in the matter of enchants, as other enchants are now likely to contribute more to sustain, such as magicka recovery, or even potion speed on Argonians.

I'm just glad this ultra-dumb lightning staff thing is finally over. Thank God. I hated using this. Been using a frost staff on back bar lately anyway, as off-balance uptime with a couple of lightning blockade runners is barely, if at all affected by a tank pulling some stunts.

I don't think people should see this as a nerf necessarily, more as a change. There are other ways to get sustain as a tank, and you can still boost those with different enchants. I don't see a grim future, especially since slowly the ice staff starts finally making sense --that is without the passive that turns your block cost to magicka-- at least.

The problem is if you 'did feel the difference', other tanks might will have 'major problems'.

You should read more than only the words you want to read. I said I did feel a difference WITHOUT changing anything in my build. Besides, why would I be a special case? Whatever I'm doing is nothing special.

Of course I thought it without changing anything, since the same setups can show the difference.

And hey, you're one of the best and most experienced tanks out there, and I can say if you judge a challenge 'easy', it's at least 'medium' for mediocre tanks.

DoonerSeraph

Woeler wrote: »

SirCritical wrote: »

Woeler wrote: »

Like any other tanking change they have made in the past, this will just be a matter of adjusting. I did the new dungeons on the PTS with the exact setup I run on live, and while I did feel the difference, I had no major problems at all. The real question lies in the matter of enchants, as other enchants are now likely to contribute more to sustain, such as magicka recovery, or even potion speed on Argonians.

I'm just glad this ultra-dumb lightning staff thing is finally over. Thank God. I hated using this. Been using a frost staff on back bar lately anyway, as off-balance uptime with a couple of lightning blockade runners is barely, if at all affected by a tank pulling some stunts.

I don't think people should see this as a nerf necessarily, more as a change. There are other ways to get sustain as a tank, and you can still boost those with different enchants. I don't see a grim future, especially since slowly the ice staff starts finally making sense --that is without the passive that turns your block cost to magicka-- at least.

The problem is if you 'did feel the difference', other tanks might will have 'major problems'.

You should read more than only the words you want to read. I said I did feel a difference WITHOUT changing anything in my build. Besides, why would I be a special case? Whatever I'm doing is nothing special.

I think hes talking about less experienced tanks. You are very experienced and know the mechanics of PvE inside-out. But most tanks are not as experienced as you, nothing guarantees the changes they will made to their build will be as effective as yours. And Im afraid these changes are getting too close to set entry bar too high for new tanks.

ChildOfLight

I don't know if someone has pointed this out already, but something about RACES should be said.

Right now the difference between Argonian and the other suitable tanking races, like Nord, Imperial and Orc, is the same between these ones and High Elf, for instance.

The topic is much more wide than only tanking stuff related, since right now everyone is running argonian from the stamina nightblades to magika DKs in pvp, but in my opinion something is to be done to balance things a bit.

Argonian race is quite disgusting right now with a such versatile kit none can compare with.

Alcast

DKsUnite wrote: »

Im no PvE tank but i do PvP as a permablocking mDK. These block changes do nothing to stop PvP permablocking. Im actually looking forward to these changes going live because it will actually be a buff thanks to small adjustments in my build. So basically this update is screwing over PvE tanks.

The reason I permablock in PvP is because it's extremely effective in regards to avoiding CC as only a handful of skills drop block and also because it reduces damage by so much that the difference between me being in light and heavy perma blocking is minimal and hence why I run light. My solution to this problem is to change the way mitigation works for both armour and blocking.

TL;DR: Shift the power of damage mitigation to armour resistances rather than blocking

Let's say we raise the resistances hardcap to 43030. Knowing that currently 662 = 1% mitigation, this would give us a hardcap of 65% mitigation from resistances instead of the 50% we currently have. At the same time, you reduce the amount of damage mitigated by block from 50% to 25%. Similarly, you reduce the SnB passive that gives 20% damage mitigation to 10% damage mitigation.

Now, a heavy armoured DK PvE tank sitting at hardcapped resistances on live right now (ie. 50% mitigation from armour or 33k resistances) holding block with minor maim on their target and absorb magic is looking at 86% damage mitigation.

A light armoured DK PvP spec (similar to what i run) (with around 30% mitigation from armour or 20k resistances) is holding block and has minor maim on their target is looking at 78.6% mitigation. NOTE: No absorb magic with this spec for obvious reasons.

So the difference the armour makes is very small currently. However, let's look at my proposed changes.

Now, a heavy armoured DK PvE tank sitting at hardcapped resistances in the new system (ie. 65% mitigation from armour or 43k resistances) holding block with minor maim on their target and absorb magic is looking at 83.37% damage mitigation. Notice that the values are very close to what is on live (2.6% difference).

However, the same light armoured PvP DK with around 30% mitigation from armour or 20k resistances is holding block and has minor maim on their target is looking at 63.96% mitigation. That is a difference of 14.68%.

Furthermore, this change would allow PvE tanks to drop their block more often without fear of imploding from regular hits. A hardcapped tank on live with just minor maim on the target would mitigate 57.75% damage without blocking. In my proposed change, a hardcapped tank would mitigate 70.25% with just minor maim and no blocking. That's an extra 12.5% mitigation while not blocking.

Now, in order to get resistances to 43k, a PvE tank would most likely have to wear a resistances set, something like fortified brass, bloodspawn, lord warden etc and possibly get supported by a healer wearing something like meritorious service, idk just making stuff up off the top of my head. Possibly, resistance enchants on jewellery (increase physical/spell resistance by X) could be buffed as they now only provide 1k each. Maybe buff them to 2/2.5k).

Ultimately, this would take away some of the power of permablocking from pvp as you are now taking 15% more damage than before in a light armour build (which is mostly what 1vX permablock mDKs run atm). Further, this means that block cost can be increased from the value on live but maybe only by a small amount. Hopefully this solution appeases the PvE and PvP community at the same time.

Sounds like an interesting idea. Also, with the people I played with on PTS in the new PvE dungeons, they barely feel any difference at all, they can still easily more or less permablock. And if this is not going to change anything in PvP (which was the main reason to change it again) then why even implement it. But ye, block mitigates way too much damage.

@ZOS_RichLambert @ZOS_Wrobel

actosh

Zos just needs to realize that the permblockissue is related to the massive amounts of resources pll can recover (class passives etc).
Yes block mitigates too much dmg.

Will be sad to see that it won't change anything in pvp and not so much in pvp.

Qbiken

actosh wrote: »

Zos just needs to realize that the permblockissue is related to the massive amounts of resources pll can recover (class passives etc).
Yes block mitigates too much dmg.

Will be sad to see that it won't change anything in pvp and not so much in pvp.

Permablocking is a mitigation problem not a resource problem. If it was a resource problem PvE tanks would´ve struggles as well, which they doesn´t seem to do. If you want to fix the "un-killable permablockers" you should look at mitigation and healing, not how much stamina/magicka blocking cost. Just search and read paulsimonps thread about how damage-mitigation works and you´ll realise how easy it is to reduce the damage you take (even without utilizing blocking)

And besides, battleroar + helping hands (resource returns) should be buffed, not nerfed.

Doctordarkspawn

Qbiken wrote: »

actosh wrote: »

Zos just needs to realize that the permblockissue is related to the massive amounts of resources pll can recover (class passives etc).
Yes block mitigates too much dmg.

Will be sad to see that it won't change anything in pvp and not so much in pvp.

Permablocking is a mitigation problem not a resource problem. If it was a resource problem PvE tanks would´ve struggles as well, which they doesn´t seem to do. If you want to fix the "un-killable permablockers" you should look at mitigation and healing, not how much stamina/magicka blocking cost. Just search and read paulsimonps thread about how damage-mitigation works and you´ll realise how easy it is to reduce the damage you take (even without utilizing blocking)

And besides, battleroar + helping hands (resource returns) should be buffed, not nerfed.

Simple solution:

Add a mitigation halving to battle spirit, shift mitigation away from blocking. Give PVE more ways to up they're own healing and then you'll see the two seperate audiences slowly quiet down.

But if they dont do it this patch I doubt they're going to.

Bevik

I don't think permablocking should be a thing in PVE anyway. That's a very passive blocking. Tanks resists should be buffed somehow. So you can mitigate more damage without blocking and only block when it's really necessary or use a 'Oh crap' skill.

DKsUnite

Bevik wrote: »

I don't think permablocking should be a thing in PVE anyway. That's a very passive blocking. Tanks resists should be buffed somehow. So you can mitigate more damage without blocking and only block when it's really necessary or use a 'Oh crap' skill.

See my suggestion on the previous page

Bevik

DKsUnite wrote: »

Bevik wrote: »

I don't think permablocking should be a thing in PVE anyway. That's a very passive blocking. Tanks resists should be buffed somehow. So you can mitigate more damage without blocking and only block when it's really necessary or use a 'Oh crap' skill.

See my suggestion on the previous page

Yeah I forgot to write as others mentioned before.

Asardes

dirtykdx wrote: »

ZeroXFF wrote: »

Asardes wrote: »

Selene has a very long telegraph for the bear and that's oneshot anyway even to a blocking tank.

That attack barely tickles when I'm blocking. Though I am running with 33k armor and the vampire cloak set on my templar. Still, I can't imagine it 1-shooting anyone with over 20k armor and health when they are blocking. And if they have less than that, they shouldn't queue as tanks, because they aren't.

It used to be unblockable and a one shot...before they nerfed it, I want to say it went easy mode at HotR update? Maybe Morrowind

Well I didn't know that. I just remembered the 1st time I did the dungeon after One Tamriel, doing a perfect run up to that point, then trying to block the bear charge and seeing a 70K hit on my death recap (blocking, 30K+ resistance); got the achievement right after that just dodging the hit. So ever since I always direct the boss away from the group and roll dodge forward when the telegraph starts so I'm directly behind the boss when the bear hits.

Icy_Waffles

If anything i ser my tank changing jewelry enchants from the shield block/ bash to mag and stam recovery.

I use 5 torugs, 5 dragonguard, or ebon for trials, and 2 monster pieces for mag recovery. Argonian dk. I still have yet to have an issue with sustain. Half the time i run trash mag pots and regularly heavy attack and am fine.

Is this a nerf to tanks? Yes. Is it a role killer? No. I play a very active tank and probably do not block as much as i should, but do not see these issues as end of the world for tanking.

Asardes

I did the maths and jewelry enchants are still the most effective way to mitigate block cost, just slightly less so than before. Even replacing one with a magicka recovery will increase my block cost from 450 to something like 520. I can achieve upwards of 2K magicka recovery without such an enchant, even without any divines: I'm in the process of transmuting that to sturdy. In practice you don't need more than that. I do have both high base recovery by using Atronach mundus and Whichmother's Potent Brew (or even Ghastly Eye Bowl), as well as high recovery multiplier from various passives such as: Light Armor: Evocation 2% & recovery 4% (I wear 1p light armor also for the Undaunted Mettle passive), Support: Magicka Aid 10% (I have Replenishing Barrier on front bar and sometimes Efficient Purge on backbar), I put CP in Arcanist 64 for 13%. Some players may top that even more going vampire, and taking advantage of Supernatural Recovery that adds another 10%. You will also recover both magicka and stamina trough Heavy Armor: Constitution, but that passive has been nerfed hard, also due to PvP. Last but not least you recover 46 health for each point an ultimate costs when you cast it so Aggressive Warhorn will give you 11.5K magicka and stamina back. I like having high magicka recovery since it allows me a great deal of utility. I don't particularly like the balance skill because it leaves you helpless for a few seconds. For example if one of the healers gets down or can't react fast enough I can't fully pump myself up with GDB & Vigor. So I do like to have full resources at all times and no debuff on me so I can spam those if I'm left to fend on my own - it does happen in trials, for example I've died a few times to the Warrior in vHRC because the healers weren't paying attention.

dirtykdx

Doctordarkspawn wrote: »

Qbiken wrote: »

actosh wrote: »

Zos just needs to realize that the permblockissue is related to the massive amounts of resources pll can recover (class passives etc).
Yes block mitigates too much dmg.

Will be sad to see that it won't change anything in pvp and not so much in pvp.

Permablocking is a mitigation problem not a resource problem. If it was a resource problem PvE tanks would´ve struggles as well, which they doesn´t seem to do. If you want to fix the "un-killable permablockers" you should look at mitigation and healing, not how much stamina/magicka blocking cost. Just search and read paulsimonps thread about how damage-mitigation works and you´ll realise how easy it is to reduce the damage you take (even without utilizing blocking)

And besides, battleroar + helping hands (resource returns) should be buffed, not nerfed.

Simple solution:

Add a mitigation halving to battle spirit, shift mitigation away from blocking. Give PVE more ways to up they're own healing and then you'll see the two seperate audiences slowly quiet down.

But if they dont do it this patch I doubt they're going to.

Not such an easy solution. You can halve everyones' resistances, but then you have to account for shields, yes their values are halved, but a shield doesn't care if you have zero resists or cap. In a land of halved resists shield builds become unkillable as they melt all the squishy HA users without shields to spam.


The heaviest hitters in PVE are Olms' infamous oops we forgot to telegraph that 40k through block hit, the warrior's channeled swipes, ra'kotu's spin (which they probably don't want us to be stationary and eat anyway), and the general's upper cut. If someone grabs tank buff on Rakkhat, he puts out some serious damage as well -- but the mechanic plays to the tank having that buff. So, I'd say instead of tearing apart mitigation across the game, instead its handled at the fight level, either adjusting bosses, or adding in new mechanic based buffs for the tanks. There are options.

And yeah, in my testing on PTS, you can feel it. It can be adapted to. I don't want to put new tanks through that steeper learning curve, but for the easier content it will be fine. By the time you get to vet trials you should be able to adapt. And yes I say this knowing full well, that tanking isn't popular, most of the tanks I've trained were already vet level dps and trying to fill for the lack of tanks, so are trying to do the hardest tier content in gain with very little actual tanking experience. Maybe the solution is to beef up normal trials as far as tanking goes? Maybe extend to a normal, vet, and a true hardmode that is an entire raid buffed similar to how the last boss only is, all bosses stronger, more mechanical, all trash stronger, harder? That leaves the mid level runs as the training ground that won't bore the more experienced DPS. And then the next step up for the top 30 or so raid guilds to really be challenged by.

Nolic1

dirtykdx wrote: »

Doctordarkspawn wrote: »

Qbiken wrote: »

actosh wrote: »

Zos just needs to realize that the permblockissue is related to the massive amounts of resources pll can recover (class passives etc).
Yes block mitigates too much dmg.

Will be sad to see that it won't change anything in pvp and not so much in pvp.

Permablocking is a mitigation problem not a resource problem. If it was a resource problem PvE tanks would´ve struggles as well, which they doesn´t seem to do. If you want to fix the "un-killable permablockers" you should look at mitigation and healing, not how much stamina/magicka blocking cost. Just search and read paulsimonps thread about how damage-mitigation works and you´ll realise how easy it is to reduce the damage you take (even without utilizing blocking)

And besides, battleroar + helping hands (resource returns) should be buffed, not nerfed.

Simple solution:

Add a mitigation halving to battle spirit, shift mitigation away from blocking. Give PVE more ways to up they're own healing and then you'll see the two seperate audiences slowly quiet down.

But if they dont do it this patch I doubt they're going to.

Not such an easy solution. You can halve everyones' resistances, but then you have to account for shields, yes their values are halved, but a shield doesn't care if you have zero resists or cap. In a land of halved resists shield builds become unkillable as they melt all the squishy HA users without shields to spam.


The heaviest hitters in PVE are Olms' infamous oops we forgot to telegraph that 40k through block hit, the warrior's channeled swipes, ra'kotu's spin (which they probably don't want us to be stationary and eat anyway), and the general's upper cut. If someone grabs tank buff on Rakkhat, he puts out some serious damage as well -- but the mechanic plays to the tank having that buff. So, I'd say instead of tearing apart mitigation across the game, instead its handled at the fight level, either adjusting bosses, or adding in new mechanic based buffs for the tanks. There are options.

And yeah, in my testing on PTS, you can feel it. It can be adapted to. I don't want to put new tanks through that steeper learning curve, but for the easier content it will be fine. By the time you get to vet trials you should be able to adapt. And yes I say this knowing full well, that tanking isn't popular, most of the tanks I've trained were already vet level dps and trying to fill for the lack of tanks, so are trying to do the hardest tier content in gain with very little actual tanking experience. Maybe the solution is to beef up normal trials as far as tanking goes? Maybe extend to a normal, vet, and a true hardmode that is an entire raid buffed similar to how the last boss only is, all bosses stronger, more mechanical, all trash stronger, harder? That leaves the mid level runs as the training ground that won't bore the more experienced DPS. And then the next step up for the top 30 or so raid guilds to really be challenged by.

I think the ideas highlighted might be good but what I think is this normal is the training mode and should be just that the place to train to learn the mechanics I feel vet is in a good place except for some things. As for people leanring to tank its the mechanics that is hard to learn the role of tank is just a matter of adjusting to playing it and that can be why we are seeing a lack of tanks at the end game is cause the only options being shared is that of the meta not that its bad but with only one way to tank it leaves very little options and its not just the class option its the whole idea of the game saying you can play how you want many get into the game find out the meta is the only option out there and then switch to the role with more options which is DPS. The same can be said for healers.

See this is why I keep asking has anyone tried other tactics like killing the Axes avoiding these hits that do so much damage and or trying to take the fight in a different way or group set up. The idea of 2 handed tanking is that it can not work there is only guides for it dating back to when Craglorn opened up the second part and the meta did not happen till monster sets came in and we could run 5/5/2 set ups on tanks but before that people tanked with 2 handed and sword and shield to bring more damage not to dps just to help with damage to kill things faster just like many see how ice staff with a crusher enchant can keep up time of it better and allows some of the stress the tank has at keeping these up times a little easier. See back then before the 5/5/2 option was in the game they tanked the 3 only trials with that because it was better then maybe trying other tactics might help the group over all.

What about the main tank runs sword and shield both bars and the other tanks runs sword and shield and two handed to help with damage when not tanking this way he can bring some damage to help with the groups over all dps and can still tank when needed. I have a few ideas for this and can help to give some options for it like 5 ebon or plague doctors with ether kavatchs gladiator and a one piece monster set or you could run the above with the master or malestrom sword and shield with a two handed master sword for resources and greater damage numbers this option would and could work with alot of classes opening the door to more group dynamics but to be effective they have to run the build differently then the main tank like say one weapon damage glyph and 2 recovery glyphs ether magicka or stam but there is alot of options for this and with each class having some better options in these builds for this kinda of play.

Also what about having a few DPS run crusher this could take some of the stress again off the tank yeah it lowers there DPS a little but it could help by letting the tank run hardening for a 4kshield and with infused it would have almost a 100% uptime allowing them more leeway to do a few more heavy attacks and along with there own damage shield popping at between 9k to 12k depending on there health thats 13k to 16k extra damage midigation and this could help the group manage some of these harder encounters. See there is alot of other ways to lesson the issues alot of the end game block tanks say they are having trouble with. Also a tank running a ice staff charged could keep chilled applied larger groups of enemies giving them minor maim more effectively making their damage hit for less and it works for bosses as well this way it also helps in large packs on adds or trash making those encounters a little easier and if you have one of the healers run a lightning staff infused or one of the dps run a charged of with wall of elements the healer could keep up an up time of the reduced weapon and spell damage enchant like the tank can crusher or the dps with charged keeping up time of off balance easier this way the other dps can run nirn staffs and other for greater dps.

Doctordarkspawn

dirtykdx wrote: »

Doctordarkspawn wrote: »

Qbiken wrote: »

actosh wrote: »

Zos just needs to realize that the permblockissue is related to the massive amounts of resources pll can recover (class passives etc).
Yes block mitigates too much dmg.

Will be sad to see that it won't change anything in pvp and not so much in pvp.

Permablocking is a mitigation problem not a resource problem. If it was a resource problem PvE tanks would´ve struggles as well, which they doesn´t seem to do. If you want to fix the "un-killable permablockers" you should look at mitigation and healing, not how much stamina/magicka blocking cost. Just search and read paulsimonps thread about how damage-mitigation works and you´ll realise how easy it is to reduce the damage you take (even without utilizing blocking)

And besides, battleroar + helping hands (resource returns) should be buffed, not nerfed.

Simple solution:

Add a mitigation halving to battle spirit, shift mitigation away from blocking. Give PVE more ways to up they're own healing and then you'll see the two seperate audiences slowly quiet down.

But if they dont do it this patch I doubt they're going to.

Not such an easy solution. You can halve everyones' resistances, but then you have to account for shields, yes their values are halved, but a shield doesn't care if you have zero resists or cap. In a land of halved resists shield builds become unkillable as they melt all the squishy HA users without shields to spam.


The heaviest hitters in PVE are Olms' infamous oops we forgot to telegraph that 40k through block hit, the warrior's channeled swipes, ra'kotu's spin (which they probably don't want us to be stationary and eat anyway), and the general's upper cut. If someone grabs tank buff on Rakkhat, he puts out some serious damage as well -- but the mechanic plays to the tank having that buff. So, I'd say instead of tearing apart mitigation across the game, instead its handled at the fight level, either adjusting bosses, or adding in new mechanic based buffs for the tanks. There are options.

And yeah, in my testing on PTS, you can feel it. It can be adapted to. I don't want to put new tanks through that steeper learning curve, but for the easier content it will be fine. By the time you get to vet trials you should be able to adapt. And yes I say this knowing full well, that tanking isn't popular, most of the tanks I've trained were already vet level dps and trying to fill for the lack of tanks, so are trying to do the hardest tier content in gain with very little actual tanking experience. Maybe the solution is to beef up normal trials as far as tanking goes? Maybe extend to a normal, vet, and a true hardmode that is an entire raid buffed similar to how the last boss only is, all bosses stronger, more mechanical, all trash stronger, harder? That leaves the mid level runs as the training ground that won't bore the more experienced DPS. And then the next step up for the top 30 or so raid guilds to really be challenged by.

Yeah, you'd have to re-design most of the trial fights, but lets be brutally honest. At the rate they keep nerfing tanks, eventually they will anyway, because what they're doing isn't sustainable.

As for adaption...Eh.

Yeah, it's adaptable, but quite frankly it'll just be frustraiting. And when something is frustraiting, it cant be fun. Hence why most newer tanks just dont bother. The problem isn't the roll. It's how ZOS keeps making the roll not fun. And no matter how many people like Woeler or anyone else goes 'just adapt' having long since re-wired they're brains to make it fun, it just wont be for people who are not invested enough in ESO to want to, and who have other options.

Hell. If I wasn't as entrenched as I am, I'd be on secret world legends right now.

rustic_potato

Doctordarkspawn wrote: »

dirtykdx wrote: »

Doctordarkspawn wrote: »

Qbiken wrote: »

actosh wrote: »

Zos just needs to realize that the permblockissue is related to the massive amounts of resources pll can recover (class passives etc).
Yes block mitigates too much dmg.

Will be sad to see that it won't change anything in pvp and not so much in pvp.

Permablocking is a mitigation problem not a resource problem. If it was a resource problem PvE tanks would´ve struggles as well, which they doesn´t seem to do. If you want to fix the "un-killable permablockers" you should look at mitigation and healing, not how much stamina/magicka blocking cost. Just search and read paulsimonps thread about how damage-mitigation works and you´ll realise how easy it is to reduce the damage you take (even without utilizing blocking)

And besides, battleroar + helping hands (resource returns) should be buffed, not nerfed.

Simple solution:

Add a mitigation halving to battle spirit, shift mitigation away from blocking. Give PVE more ways to up they're own healing and then you'll see the two seperate audiences slowly quiet down.

But if they dont do it this patch I doubt they're going to.

Not such an easy solution. You can halve everyones' resistances, but then you have to account for shields, yes their values are halved, but a shield doesn't care if you have zero resists or cap. In a land of halved resists shield builds become unkillable as they melt all the squishy HA users without shields to spam.


The heaviest hitters in PVE are Olms' infamous oops we forgot to telegraph that 40k through block hit, the warrior's channeled swipes, ra'kotu's spin (which they probably don't want us to be stationary and eat anyway), and the general's upper cut. If someone grabs tank buff on Rakkhat, he puts out some serious damage as well -- but the mechanic plays to the tank having that buff. So, I'd say instead of tearing apart mitigation across the game, instead its handled at the fight level, either adjusting bosses, or adding in new mechanic based buffs for the tanks. There are options.

And yeah, in my testing on PTS, you can feel it. It can be adapted to. I don't want to put new tanks through that steeper learning curve, but for the easier content it will be fine. By the time you get to vet trials you should be able to adapt. And yes I say this knowing full well, that tanking isn't popular, most of the tanks I've trained were already vet level dps and trying to fill for the lack of tanks, so are trying to do the hardest tier content in gain with very little actual tanking experience. Maybe the solution is to beef up normal trials as far as tanking goes? Maybe extend to a normal, vet, and a true hardmode that is an entire raid buffed similar to how the last boss only is, all bosses stronger, more mechanical, all trash stronger, harder? That leaves the mid level runs as the training ground that won't bore the more experienced DPS. And then the next step up for the top 30 or so raid guilds to really be challenged by.

Yeah, you'd have to re-design most of the trial fights, but lets be brutally honest. At the rate they keep nerfing tanks, eventually they will anyway, because what they're doing isn't sustainable.

As for adaption...Eh.

Yeah, it's adaptable, but quite frankly it'll just be frustraiting. And when something is frustraiting, it cant be fun. Hence why most newer tanks just dont bother. The problem isn't the roll. It's how ZOS keeps making the roll not fun. And no matter how many people like Woeler or anyone else goes 'just adapt' having long since re-wired they're brains to make it fun, it just wont be for people who are not invested enough in ESO to want to, and who have other options.

Hell. If I wasn't as entrenched as I am, I'd be on secret world legends right now.

Nerf to balance is ZOS's style of game balancing. Its nothing new. People who are dedicated enough will adapt and change. Others will rage and quit. New players will take their positions. Honestly this has been going on for years. The most prominent examples include Update 6: CP introduction and Update 14: Morrowind.

Almost all the members in my raiding guild started playing the game after Morrowind. For them the current Heavy Attack usage for DPS and support roles are the norm. When I explain that in Homestead during my vMoL HM runs not a single heavy attack was used, half think I'm lying and the other half thing that the Morrowind nerf is justified.

I personally started playing right after CP was introduced. (No cap 1500+ CP glory days) I never knew how much of a nerf the players who played before me took.

paulsimonps

DKsUnite wrote: »

Im no PvE tank but i do PvP as a permablocking mDK. These block changes do nothing to stop PvP permablocking. Im actually looking forward to these changes going live because it will actually be a buff thanks to small adjustments in my build. So basically this update is screwing over PvE tanks.

The reason I permablock in PvP is because it's extremely effective in regards to avoiding CC as only a handful of skills drop block and also because it reduces damage by so much that the difference between me being in light and heavy perma blocking is minimal and hence why I run light. My solution to this problem is to change the way mitigation works for both armour and blocking.

TL;DR: Shift the power of damage mitigation to armour resistances rather than blocking

Let's say we raise the resistances hardcap to 43030. Knowing that currently 662 = 1% mitigation, this would give us a hardcap of 65% mitigation from resistances instead of the 50% we currently have. At the same time, you reduce the amount of damage mitigated by block from 50% to 25%. Similarly, you reduce the SnB passive that gives 20% damage mitigation to 10% damage mitigation.

Now, a heavy armoured DK PvE tank sitting at hardcapped resistances on live right now (ie. 50% mitigation from armour or 33k resistances) holding block with minor maim on their target and absorb magic is looking at 86% damage mitigation.

A light armoured DK PvP spec (similar to what i run) (with around 30% mitigation from armour or 20k resistances) is holding block and has minor maim on their target is looking at 78.6% mitigation. NOTE: No absorb magic with this spec for obvious reasons.

So the difference the armour makes is very small currently. However, let's look at my proposed changes.

Now, a heavy armoured DK PvE tank sitting at hardcapped resistances in the new system (ie. 65% mitigation from armour or 43k resistances) holding block with minor maim on their target and absorb magic is looking at 83.37% damage mitigation. Notice that the values are very close to what is on live (2.6% difference).

However, the same light armoured PvP DK with around 30% mitigation from armour or 20k resistances is holding block and has minor maim on their target is looking at 63.96% mitigation. That is a difference of 14.68%.

Furthermore, this change would allow PvE tanks to drop their block more often without fear of imploding from regular hits. A hardcapped tank on live with just minor maim on the target would mitigate 57.75% damage without blocking. In my proposed change, a hardcapped tank would mitigate 70.25% with just minor maim and no blocking. That's an extra 12.5% mitigation while not blocking.

Now, in order to get resistances to 43k, a PvE tank would most likely have to wear a resistances set, something like fortified brass, bloodspawn, lord warden etc and possibly get supported by a healer wearing something like meritorious service, idk just making stuff up off the top of my head. Possibly, resistance enchants on jewellery (increase physical/spell resistance by X) could be buffed as they now only provide 1k each. Maybe buff them to 2/2.5k).

Ultimately, this would take away some of the power of permablocking from pvp as you are now taking 15% more damage than before in a light armour build (which is mostly what 1vX permablock mDKs run atm). Further, this means that block cost can be increased from the value on live but maybe only by a small amount. Hopefully this solution appeases the PvE and PvP community at the same time.

My current Mitigation for a standard Melee attack on my Tank:

100-100*0.92*0.85*0.81*0.89*0.8*0.9*0.5*0.61=87.62%

This includes the following sources: Blocking, Sword and Board Passive, Minor Maim, Absorb Magic, Iron Skin DK Passive, 11% into Hardy, 19% into Iron Clad and 25933 resistance.

Same set up with the block mitigation nerf would be
100-100*0.92*0.85*0.81*0.89*0.9*0.9*0.75*0.61=79.10%

On a lot of the big fights in Trials this would mean death, Olms, Warrior and other. You would force me to specifically put effort into getting resistance. Previously almost no Tank in end game would actively spend into Resistance, now we would have to and with the current block cost changes that would most likely mean using a set bonus to add resistance or other sources of mitigation. This would effectively remove our way of supporting with set bonuses in tough fights, since those fights normally require a lot more HP, many swap to Plague in such fights as well to adjust. Changes like this would force us to run a resistance or mitigation set on top of our HP set to be able to survive tanking bosses like that. Making us just meat shields when it comes to our gear, and our support roles would be limited a lot more.

However lowering the amount of resistance needed for the cap could bring it back into line, but it would make Heavy Armor in PvP even more valuable than it already is, though obviously this would make penetration a more valuable thing in PvP as well to counteract it. Actually even without changing the amount of resistance needed it would make resistance very powerful in PvP.

100-100*0.85*0.81*0.89*0.35=78.55%

That is 78.55% Mitigation with just CP, Hard Capped resistance as per your suggestion and Minor Maim. I would never have to block in PvP, just use some CC immunity potions or abilities and I would have really good mitigation with 1 good set up and some good traits on my armor, no need for Sturdy or Impen with non block mitigation like that.

Problem with making it easier to survive without blocking is that in PvE as well as PvP it will then make Blocking irrelevant. I have a build right now on my Templar that has around 85+% mitigation without blocking by mixing sets and other sources, buff this and I would be damn near unkillable, all without blocking. Not really ok with that.

I am on the fence when it comes to the block cost changes, I want blocking to be more reactive and fun but sadly that is not how the game is programmed nor animated, its gonna be a mess if they nerf us even more. And being an unsupportive meat shield that only builds for self survival and sustain enough to taunt such is gonna be a lot less fun than what we currently have. Tanking has always been known as the role with the most flexibility, this is getting to be less and less of a thing it seems.

I am not really worried about next update, won't really change anything for me but a few more heavy attacks, something I am doing more of anyway, but I am very curious and worried about the ZOS vision for Tanking.

DKsUnite

paulsimonps wrote: »

DKsUnite wrote: »

Im no PvE tank but i do PvP as a permablocking mDK. These block changes do nothing to stop PvP permablocking. Im actually looking forward to these changes going live because it will actually be a buff thanks to small adjustments in my build. So basically this update is screwing over PvE tanks.

The reason I permablock in PvP is because it's extremely effective in regards to avoiding CC as only a handful of skills drop block and also because it reduces damage by so much that the difference between me being in light and heavy perma blocking is minimal and hence why I run light. My solution to this problem is to change the way mitigation works for both armour and blocking.

TL;DR: Shift the power of damage mitigation to armour resistances rather than blocking

Let's say we raise the resistances hardcap to 43030. Knowing that currently 662 = 1% mitigation, this would give us a hardcap of 65% mitigation from resistances instead of the 50% we currently have. At the same time, you reduce the amount of damage mitigated by block from 50% to 25%. Similarly, you reduce the SnB passive that gives 20% damage mitigation to 10% damage mitigation.

Now, a heavy armoured DK PvE tank sitting at hardcapped resistances on live right now (ie. 50% mitigation from armour or 33k resistances) holding block with minor maim on their target and absorb magic is looking at 86% damage mitigation.

A light armoured DK PvP spec (similar to what i run) (with around 30% mitigation from armour or 20k resistances) is holding block and has minor maim on their target is looking at 78.6% mitigation. NOTE: No absorb magic with this spec for obvious reasons.

So the difference the armour makes is very small currently. However, let's look at my proposed changes.

Now, a heavy armoured DK PvE tank sitting at hardcapped resistances in the new system (ie. 65% mitigation from armour or 43k resistances) holding block with minor maim on their target and absorb magic is looking at 83.37% damage mitigation. Notice that the values are very close to what is on live (2.6% difference).

However, the same light armoured PvP DK with around 30% mitigation from armour or 20k resistances is holding block and has minor maim on their target is looking at 63.96% mitigation. That is a difference of 14.68%.

Furthermore, this change would allow PvE tanks to drop their block more often without fear of imploding from regular hits. A hardcapped tank on live with just minor maim on the target would mitigate 57.75% damage without blocking. In my proposed change, a hardcapped tank would mitigate 70.25% with just minor maim and no blocking. That's an extra 12.5% mitigation while not blocking.

Now, in order to get resistances to 43k, a PvE tank would most likely have to wear a resistances set, something like fortified brass, bloodspawn, lord warden etc and possibly get supported by a healer wearing something like meritorious service, idk just making stuff up off the top of my head. Possibly, resistance enchants on jewellery (increase physical/spell resistance by X) could be buffed as they now only provide 1k each. Maybe buff them to 2/2.5k).

Ultimately, this would take away some of the power of permablocking from pvp as you are now taking 15% more damage than before in a light armour build (which is mostly what 1vX permablock mDKs run atm). Further, this means that block cost can be increased from the value on live but maybe only by a small amount. Hopefully this solution appeases the PvE and PvP community at the same time.

My current Mitigation for a standard Melee attack on my Tank:

100-100*0.92*0.85*0.81*0.89*0.8*0.9*0.5*0.61=87.62%

This includes the following sources: Blocking, Sword and Board Passive, Minor Maim, Absorb Magic, Iron Skin DK Passive, 11% into Hardy, 19% into Iron Clad and 25933 resistance.

Same set up with the block mitigation nerf would be
100-100*0.92*0.85*0.81*0.89*0.9*0.9*0.75*0.61=79.10%

On a lot of the big fights in Trials this would mean death, Olms, Warrior and other. You would force me to specifically put effort into getting resistance. Previously almost no Tank in end game would actively spend into Resistance, now we would have to and with the current block cost changes that would most likely mean using a set bonus to add resistance or other sources of mitigation. This would effectively remove our way of supporting with set bonuses in tough fights, since those fights normally require a lot more HP, many swap to Plague in such fights as well to adjust. Changes like this would force us to run a resistance or mitigation set on top of our HP set to be able to survive tanking bosses like that. Making us just meat shields when it comes to our gear, and our support roles would be limited a lot more.

However lowering the amount of resistance needed for the cap could bring it back into line, but it would make Heavy Armor in PvP even more valuable than it already is, though obviously this would make penetration a more valuable thing in PvP as well to counteract it. Actually even without changing the amount of resistance needed it would make resistance very powerful in PvP.

100-100*0.85*0.81*0.89*0.35=78.55%

That is 78.55% Mitigation with just CP, Hard Capped resistance as per your suggestion and Minor Maim. I would never have to block in PvP, just use some CC immunity potions or abilities and I would have really good mitigation with 1 good set up and some good traits on my armor, no need for Sturdy or Impen with non block mitigation like that.

Problem with making it easier to survive without blocking is that in PvE as well as PvP it will then make Blocking irrelevant. I have a build right now on my Templar that has around 85+% mitigation without blocking by mixing sets and other sources, buff this and I would be damn near unkillable, all without blocking. Not really ok with that.

I am on the fence when it comes to the block cost changes, I want blocking to be more reactive and fun but sadly that is not how the game is programmed nor animated, its gonna be a mess if they nerf us even more. And being an unsupportive meat shield that only builds for self survival and sustain enough to taunt such is gonna be a lot less fun than what we currently have. Tanking has always been known as the role with the most flexibility, this is getting to be less and less of a thing it seems.

I am not really worried about next update, won't really change anything for me but a few more heavy attacks, something I am doing more of anyway, but I am very curious and worried about the ZOS vision for Tanking.

All valid concerns and the last thing i want is a huge mitigation non blocking templar or something but until power is taken away from blocking in terms of damage mitigation, permablocking will always be a go to spec in pvp. And raising block cost even more doesn't really seem like a viable option atm judging from what the community has stated.

paulsimonps

DKsUnite wrote: »

paulsimonps wrote: »

DKsUnite wrote: »

Im no PvE tank but i do PvP as a permablocking mDK. These block changes do nothing to stop PvP permablocking. Im actually looking forward to these changes going live because it will actually be a buff thanks to small adjustments in my build. So basically this update is screwing over PvE tanks.

The reason I permablock in PvP is because it's extremely effective in regards to avoiding CC as only a handful of skills drop block and also because it reduces damage by so much that the difference between me being in light and heavy perma blocking is minimal and hence why I run light. My solution to this problem is to change the way mitigation works for both armour and blocking.

TL;DR: Shift the power of damage mitigation to armour resistances rather than blocking

Let's say we raise the resistances hardcap to 43030. Knowing that currently 662 = 1% mitigation, this would give us a hardcap of 65% mitigation from resistances instead of the 50% we currently have. At the same time, you reduce the amount of damage mitigated by block from 50% to 25%. Similarly, you reduce the SnB passive that gives 20% damage mitigation to 10% damage mitigation.

Now, a heavy armoured DK PvE tank sitting at hardcapped resistances on live right now (ie. 50% mitigation from armour or 33k resistances) holding block with minor maim on their target and absorb magic is looking at 86% damage mitigation.

A light armoured DK PvP spec (similar to what i run) (with around 30% mitigation from armour or 20k resistances) is holding block and has minor maim on their target is looking at 78.6% mitigation. NOTE: No absorb magic with this spec for obvious reasons.

So the difference the armour makes is very small currently. However, let's look at my proposed changes.

Now, a heavy armoured DK PvE tank sitting at hardcapped resistances in the new system (ie. 65% mitigation from armour or 43k resistances) holding block with minor maim on their target and absorb magic is looking at 83.37% damage mitigation. Notice that the values are very close to what is on live (2.6% difference).

However, the same light armoured PvP DK with around 30% mitigation from armour or 20k resistances is holding block and has minor maim on their target is looking at 63.96% mitigation. That is a difference of 14.68%.

Furthermore, this change would allow PvE tanks to drop their block more often without fear of imploding from regular hits. A hardcapped tank on live with just minor maim on the target would mitigate 57.75% damage without blocking. In my proposed change, a hardcapped tank would mitigate 70.25% with just minor maim and no blocking. That's an extra 12.5% mitigation while not blocking.

Now, in order to get resistances to 43k, a PvE tank would most likely have to wear a resistances set, something like fortified brass, bloodspawn, lord warden etc and possibly get supported by a healer wearing something like meritorious service, idk just making stuff up off the top of my head. Possibly, resistance enchants on jewellery (increase physical/spell resistance by X) could be buffed as they now only provide 1k each. Maybe buff them to 2/2.5k).

Ultimately, this would take away some of the power of permablocking from pvp as you are now taking 15% more damage than before in a light armour build (which is mostly what 1vX permablock mDKs run atm). Further, this means that block cost can be increased from the value on live but maybe only by a small amount. Hopefully this solution appeases the PvE and PvP community at the same time.

My current Mitigation for a standard Melee attack on my Tank:

100-100*0.92*0.85*0.81*0.89*0.8*0.9*0.5*0.61=87.62%

This includes the following sources: Blocking, Sword and Board Passive, Minor Maim, Absorb Magic, Iron Skin DK Passive, 11% into Hardy, 19% into Iron Clad and 25933 resistance.

Same set up with the block mitigation nerf would be
100-100*0.92*0.85*0.81*0.89*0.9*0.9*0.75*0.61=79.10%

On a lot of the big fights in Trials this would mean death, Olms, Warrior and other. You would force me to specifically put effort into getting resistance. Previously almost no Tank in end game would actively spend into Resistance, now we would have to and with the current block cost changes that would most likely mean using a set bonus to add resistance or other sources of mitigation. This would effectively remove our way of supporting with set bonuses in tough fights, since those fights normally require a lot more HP, many swap to Plague in such fights as well to adjust. Changes like this would force us to run a resistance or mitigation set on top of our HP set to be able to survive tanking bosses like that. Making us just meat shields when it comes to our gear, and our support roles would be limited a lot more.

However lowering the amount of resistance needed for the cap could bring it back into line, but it would make Heavy Armor in PvP even more valuable than it already is, though obviously this would make penetration a more valuable thing in PvP as well to counteract it. Actually even without changing the amount of resistance needed it would make resistance very powerful in PvP.

100-100*0.85*0.81*0.89*0.35=78.55%

That is 78.55% Mitigation with just CP, Hard Capped resistance as per your suggestion and Minor Maim. I would never have to block in PvP, just use some CC immunity potions or abilities and I would have really good mitigation with 1 good set up and some good traits on my armor, no need for Sturdy or Impen with non block mitigation like that.

Problem with making it easier to survive without blocking is that in PvE as well as PvP it will then make Blocking irrelevant. I have a build right now on my Templar that has around 85+% mitigation without blocking by mixing sets and other sources, buff this and I would be damn near unkillable, all without blocking. Not really ok with that.

I am on the fence when it comes to the block cost changes, I want blocking to be more reactive and fun but sadly that is not how the game is programmed nor animated, its gonna be a mess if they nerf us even more. And being an unsupportive meat shield that only builds for self survival and sustain enough to taunt such is gonna be a lot less fun than what we currently have. Tanking has always been known as the role with the most flexibility, this is getting to be less and less of a thing it seems.

I am not really worried about next update, won't really change anything for me but a few more heavy attacks, something I am doing more of anyway, but I am very curious and worried about the ZOS vision for Tanking.

All valid concerns and the last thing i want is a huge mitigation non blocking templar or something but until power is taken away from blocking in terms of damage mitigation, permablocking will always be a go to spec in pvp. And raising block cost even more doesn't really seem like a viable option atm judging from what the community has stated.

Well no cause the problems is not permablocking in PvP, it never was, its people that block a lot and know when to drop it to go on the offensive. Those people, are getting buffed, lowering the base cost will be better for them, not worse. This is only a nerf for PvE Tanks, which there is really no reason to nerf unless you want to change how we play PvE Tanks.

"The changes to Block’s costs are meant to reduce the extreme differences between builds that specialize in blocking and ones that do not. We’ve lowered the base cost of Block to ensure that all builds can have an easier time blocking attacks without being completely drained of Stamina."

The people that uses block cost jewelry was never an issue.... So the reason why people are saying that the block cost change was not really a good option is that it, again, does not nerf the people that were actually really strong in PvP, it does the opposite. The people that die to actual perma blockers are potatoes, a few unblockable CC's later and the permablockers are dead and or out of resources. You know what will prevent permablocking and high up time blocking offensive builds? No-CP PvP. People complained A LOT about the Tanking Meta in Battlegrounds when it swapped to having CP, ZOS response? Remove the CP again!

With the Live version of the block cost formula the average cost of blocking on builds similar to what people hate would be like this:

2160*((100-4*4)/100)*((100-36)/100)*((100-8)/100)=1068

This is with 4 pieces of Sturdy, the Fortress Passive and Absorb Magic. Now if you want you can attempt a perma blocking set up with current Live Formula, it would be like this:

(2160*((100-8*4)/100)*((100-36)/100)-(3*203))*((100-8)/100)=304

Now you could perma block with that in NO-CP PvP but the resources required to do that and heal your self would make it so that you would be unable to attack, that or you would lose all of your resources and die. In otherwords they were not a problem. In CP PvP their block cost could have been as low as 88, giving them lots of resources to still attack with, all be it in a very low damage way unless aided by proc sets or similar.

Basically in NO-CP you could not put in half effort into block cost and except to block for very long, but in CP PvP you can. With the changes made the people that block a lot but not permanently will have their block cost look like this instead:

1730*((100-25)/100)*((100-4*4)/100)*((100-36)/100)*((100-8)/100)=641

as opposed to the current version of:

2160*((100-25)/100)*((100-4*4)/100)*((100-36)/100)*((100-8)/100)=801.23904

160 stamina every quarter of a second is quite a lot. Though obviously set ups like these are different and some used one or two shield enchantments as well. But at a cost of loss of magicka sustain or damage dealt. There is a lot more to this but its late for me and this would be a long conversation so just gonna end that bit even if it might be sudden.

So again, rather they changed something like that, which they are but in addition to it doing another bad thing, instead of changing too much for PvE side. Low CP players in PvE that wants to tank will have it rougher to learn the ropes and not really sure what ZOS are wanting us Tanks to become. As said, not too worried about next update, but not liking the direction its going in.

Azarai

So, definitely not a vet trials Tank or anything, but I am currently making my way through the Vet Dungeon achievements, a bit slowly. But my central concern with this is, ZOS is changing the block cost, for... what, exactly? If tanking was too easy with PvE, then why is there such a shortage of tanks doing the content? My normal queues rarely are more than a second, often instant, and even Vet queues are quick for randoms. So, they are making changes for the sake of change? It seems odd to nerf a role that is already underrepresented, but moving on to the actual point:

A lot of newer tanks going into the harder difficulty use perma blocking as a crutch, helping to get used to mechanics and abilities in hard activities. Taking away the ability to lean on it is not the end of the word, people can adjust. But even many supporters do not seem overly happy at the changes, only that it is not the end of the world, which is completely true. But does anyone see this as actually increasing the number of tanks, or making it more accessible or cause people to pick it up? I would be happy if they change perma blocking, but I feel like there would need to be simultaneous changes in other regards to tanking to keep it fun and enjoyable. The increasing Resistances, mentioned above, could be a good way to help out, making it so that one or two missed blocks would not be so detrimental to newer tanks.

So, on the whole, not completely opposed to the changes, but I feel like there needs to be changes in other ways (Increased resistances, new abilities/sets) to keep it interesting, or the number of tanks will dwindle even more.

Nolic1

Azarai wrote: »

So, definitely not a vet trials Tank or anything, but I am currently making my way through the Vet Dungeon achievements, a bit slowly. But my central concern with this is, ZOS is changing the block cost, for... what, exactly? If tanking was too easy with PvE, then why is there such a shortage of tanks doing the content? My normal queues rarely are more than a second, often instant, and even Vet queues are quick for randoms. So, they are making changes for the sake of change? It seems odd to nerf a role that is already underrepresented, but moving on to the actual point:

A lot of newer tanks going into the harder difficulty use perma blocking as a crutch, helping to get used to mechanics and abilities in hard activities. Taking away the ability to lean on it is not the end of the word, people can adjust. But even many supporters do not seem overly happy at the changes, only that it is not the end of the world, which is completely true. But does anyone see this as actually increasing the number of tanks, or making it more accessible or cause people to pick it up? I would be happy if they change perma blocking, but I feel like there would need to be simultaneous changes in other regards to tanking to keep it fun and enjoyable. The increasing Resistances, mentioned above, could be a good way to help out, making it so that one or two missed blocks would not be so detrimental to newer tanks.

So, on the whole, not completely opposed to the changes, but I feel like there needs to be changes in other ways (Increased resistances, new abilities/sets) to keep it interesting, or the number of tanks will dwindle even more.

See I agree with some of what you say but really need to happen is the idea of more options for end game tanking not just one or 2 but every class having an options as well as off tank option this would expand the amount of choices in the end game making for a better end game not only in dungeons but also the trials as well.

code65536

I don't think moving mitigation from block to armor is a good idea.

If the complaint is that people are unkillable in PvP, shifting defense from active to passive would seem like the opposite solution.

Block mitigates a lot of damage. And that's a good thing. It's clear from ZOS's repeated nerfs to block cost that their vision is for blocking is an active defense, and as such, it should be rewarding. Or as @ZOS_Wrobel might say, blocking should "feel awesome". If you pared back what block can do and make it so that people can defend passively, then what would be purpose of blocking be? The effectiveness and high mitigation of blocking is appropriate and necessary for an active, reactionary defense.

The problem is that people don't use blocking reactively. It often gets used almost like a passive defense, and then the effectiveness of block seems out of whack.

And let's be honest here: holding down the RMB isn't particularly interesting.

Anyway, ZOS's solution to this has been repeated nerfs. And honestly, the nerfs are fine. Even necessary (come on, sub-100 block cost was pretty ridiculous). The problem--and why PvE tanks complain loudly about the nerfs--is that they are not matched by adjustments in the content.

I've tanked every vet trial, every vet dungeon. And I hold down the RMB a lot. Why do I do this? It's not because I think holding down RMB is oh-so-much-fun. It's because we often need to.

• Content that require perma-blocking: The axes in vAA is a classic example. The more axes there are, the fewer opportunities there are to drop block. With enough axes up, there simply won't be any meaningful windows of opportunity to drop block. Also, with enough axes up, the amount of normal damage you take gets pretty high, too.
• Poor telegraphs, cues, and warnings: The best example of this would be the Warrior. I remember my first few times tanking this boss. All of his attacks look similar. There is no prior warning to the start of his Channeled Swipes. Even for people who have tanked this boss often, it's still a good idea to just keep block up almost all the time.
• Lag and responsiveness: On the Warrior fight, when the boss does the shield throw, the DPS can either move out or block it. The telegraph is pretty clear, and there is a good amount of warning. Should be a simple matter of jamming down the RMB when you see that rectangle on the ground, right? Most of the time, that works just fine. But now and then, I'll jam down the RMB, the shield throw would happen, and I'll get one-shot with the death recap showing that I took an unblocked hit. How many times have you heard someone say, "But I was blocking that!" It's the nature of an online game. Whether its due to client sluggishness, latency in the network, or the server being overwhelmed and slow to process, sometimes your actions don't register in a timely manner. If a DPS goes down, that's usually not a big deal. But it is when a tank goes down. But if the tank just holds down the RMB the whole time, they won't have to worry about this being a problem.
• CCs: Block is more than just damage mitigation. It also stops many harmful effects like CCs. If you're doing vAA HM and get hit by a meteor without block, it'll stun you. As a tank, that's pretty much a guaranteed death. So it's pretty punishing, and then add in the lag/responsiveness problem (as a DPS, I've had too many situations where I ate an unblocked meteor hit even though my finger was firmly pressed on the RMB), and most tanks will agree that it would be folly to not permablock vAA HM. Another egregious example is the Flesh Abomination boss in Imperial City Prison. Most of this boss's attacks will knock down and CC a non-blocking player, and these attacks happen very, very frequently. I've tried to not permablock this boss (usually when I'm off-tanking as a DPS and I can only afford to tactically block), and it just doesn't work.
• When the *** hits the fan: There are some fights that are just so busy that it's unreasonable for a tank to keep track of everything that's going on. A good example is the final boss of Falkreath, towards the end. It's really, really hard to see the main boss's heavy attack telegraph when you have oversized adds blocking your view and a million visual effects going on. Final boss of Mazzatun HM is similar, though not quite as bad.

On the bright side, though, it seems that newer content is better-designed. vHoF, for example, is almost perfectly designed for tactical blocking.

• There are sufficient windows between must-block attacks to allow me to drop block for meaningful amounts of time.
• The attacks that must be blocked are well-telegraphed.
• The attacks that must be blocked have long enough of warnings that lag/responsiveness is not an issue for me.
• The one area that still encourages permablocking in vHoF are the CCs. But at least they removed the health drain from Power Leech, which helped a bit.

On the whole, vHoF is pretty well-designed to support the vision of active blocking. And indeed, I block a lot less in vHoF than I do in other trials.

I've always said that block nerfs need to be accompanied by content adjustments. I'm not talking about toning down the damage of the content, but rather making sure that must-block attacks are well-spaced, well-telegraphed, and well-timed with latency/responsiveness taken into account. It's not enough to make sure that newer content supports the combat team's vision--older content needs to be adapted, too. Encounters like ICP's Flesh Abomination and vAA's axes could use some adjustment, for example.

Anyway, I think that blocking should be a strong, active defense. It's just that there is a lot of content that doesn't support that model of gameplay. And I'm also under no delusion that content adjustments will be forthcoming, which is why I'm wary of these nerfs. I agree with them in principle, but not in practice.

Azarai

code65536 wrote: »

I don't think moving mitigation from block to armor is a good idea.

If the complaint is that people are unkillable in PvP, shifting defense from active to passive would seem like the opposite solution.

Block mitigates a lot of damage. And that's a good thing. It's clear from ZOS's repeated nerfs to block cost that their vision is for blocking is an active defense, and as such, it should be rewarding. Or as @ZOS_Wrobel might say, blocking should "feel awesome". If you pared back what block can do and make it so that people can defend passively, then what would be purpose of blocking be? The effectiveness and high mitigation of blocking is appropriate and necessary for an active, reactionary defense.

The problem is that people don't use blocking reactively. It often gets used almost like a passive defense, and then the effectiveness of block seems out of whack.

And let's be honest here: holding down the RMB isn't particularly interesting.

Anyway, ZOS's solution to this has been repeated nerfs. And honestly, the nerfs are fine. Even necessary (come on, sub-100 block cost was pretty ridiculous). The problem--and why PvE tanks complain loudly about the nerfs--is that they are not matched by adjustments in the content.

I've tanked every vet trial, every vet dungeon. And I hold down the RMB a lot. Why do I do this? It's not because I think holding down RMB is oh-so-much-fun. It's because we often need to.

• Content that require perma-blocking: The axes in vAA is a classic example. The more axes there are, the fewer opportunities there are to drop block. With enough axes up, there simply won't be any meaningful windows of opportunity to drop block. Also, with enough axes up, the amount of normal damage you take gets pretty high, too.
• Poor telegraphs, cues, and warnings: The best example of this would be the Warrior. I remember my first few times tanking this boss. All of his attacks look similar. There is no prior warning to the start of his Channeled Swipes. Even for people who have tanked this boss often, it's still a good idea to just keep block up almost all the time.
• Lag and responsiveness: On the Warrior fight, when the boss does the shield throw, the DPS can either move out or block it. The telegraph is pretty clear, and there is a good amount of warning. Should be a simple matter of jamming down the RMB when you see that rectangle on the ground, right? Most of the time, that works just fine. But now and then, I'll jam down the RMB, the shield throw would happen, and I'll get one-shot with the death recap showing that I took an unblocked hit. How many times have you heard someone say, "But I was blocking that!" It's the nature of an online game. Whether its due to client sluggishness, latency in the network, or the server being overwhelmed and slow to process, sometimes your actions don't register in a timely manner. If a DPS goes down, that's usually not a big deal. But it is when a tank goes down. But if the tank just holds down the RMB the whole time, they won't have to worry about this being a problem.
• CCs: Block is more than just damage mitigation. It also stops many harmful effects like CCs. If you're doing vAA HM and get hit by a meteor without block, it'll stun you. As a tank, that's pretty much a guaranteed death. So it's pretty punishing, and then add in the lag/responsiveness problem (as a DPS, I've had too many situations where I ate an unblocked meteor hit even though my finger was firmly pressed on the RMB), and most tanks will agree that it would be folly to not permablock vAA HM. Another egregious example is the Flesh Abomination boss in Imperial City Prison. Most of this boss's attacks will knock down and CC a non-blocking player, and these attacks happen very, very frequently. I've tried to not permablock this boss (usually when I'm off-tanking as a DPS and I can only afford to tactically block), and it just doesn't work.
• When the *** hits the fan: There are some fights that are just so busy that it's unreasonable for a tank to keep track of everything that's going on. A good example is the final boss of Falkreath, towards the end. It's really, really hard to see the main boss's heavy attack telegraph when you have oversized adds blocking your view and a million visual effects going on. Final boss of Mazzatun HM is similar, though not quite as bad.

On the bright side, though, it seems that newer content is better-designed. vHoF, for example, is almost perfectly designed for tactical blocking.

• There are sufficient windows between must-block attacks to allow me to drop block for meaningful amounts of time.
• The attacks that must be blocked are well-telegraphed.
• The attacks that must be blocked have long enough of warnings that lag/responsiveness is not an issue for me.
• The one area that still encourages permablocking in vHoF are the CCs. But at least they removed the health drain from Power Leech, which helped a bit.

On the whole, vHoF is pretty well-designed to support the vision of active blocking. And indeed, I block a lot less in vHoF than I do in other trials.

I've always said that block nerfs need to be accompanied by content adjustments. I'm not talking about toning down the damage of the content, but rather making sure that must-block attacks are well-spaced, well-telegraphed, and well-timed with latency/responsiveness taken into account. It's not enough to make sure that newer content supports the combat team's vision--older content needs to be adapted, too. Encounters like ICP's Flesh Abomination and vAA's axes could use some adjustment, for example.

Anyway, I think that blocking should be a strong, active defense. It's just that there is a lot of content that doesn't support that model of gameplay. And I'm also under no delusion that content adjustments will be forthcoming, which is why I'm wary of these nerfs. I agree with them in principle, but not in practice.

I can mostly see your point of view, but in a lot of Vet modes, especially DLC, tanks can get so heavily punished for missing one block that I am kind of nervous to not Permablock. For instance, just did a random Vet dungeon and got Falkreath. Through 33.9k Physical resist, 8.3% from Hardy, and with blocking, the Minotaur heavy still drops me to 60% health. Now, if I am tanking two or three and miss a single block, one shot. I understand DLC dungeons are supposed to be harder, but having mobs able to one shot a full tank if they are not blocking is kind of silly. And with such a heavy penalty for not blocking, most likely a wipe, I guess I just see Permablocking as essential, as long as content can hurt that much, at least for newer players.

P.S., not saying nerf Falkreath, just explaining why changing block cost can be potentially harmful.