I'm glad they are buffing wars.
I'm glad wars are getting damage mitigation.
What I'm pissed at is they are keeping their HP boost....
Hey if they were going to get damage mitigation... Why not make it equal a paladins mitigation. Heck- I'm ok with giving them equal mitigation and increased healing received... Heck give them a shield like item for their off hand too- that's cool with me. I can imagine warriors blocking with their massive axes! Heck, I don't care if they even remove the damage penalty defiance adds...
What I'm not happy with is they are keeping their HP buff...
-
11-23-2013, 11:57 PMYunnie
-
11-24-2013, 12:19 AMMaqaqaThis is only true on the forums.Quote:
Originally Posted by Leiron
Most PLDs gear for tanking and tanking only, good WARs know they need two sets of accessories or HQ griph to be ready for everything. -
11-24-2013, 12:37 AMPhreakClueless. If they dropped the WAR's health buff they would have less base eHP than a PLD (by 25%) and even with the changes they will still have LESS eHP OVERALL when their new abilities are put up against PLD CDs and their ability to block.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yunnie
If a WAR can get away with using Gryphonskin to tank then a PLD can do so just as effectively for more DPS. This is a poor argument, the damage gains from 40 STR does not somehow magically make your IBs significantly more potent to justify doing such a trade off of ~350 health. In fact a PLD could gear exactly like a STR oriented WAR and still be a more efficient tank than a WAR doing the same.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maqaqa
PLDs and WARs wear the same gear, have the same stat budgets, and perform the same role. There are no snowflake stat stacking builds in this game you either gear for DPS or you gear for eHP and have 1-2 sets of almost identical gear to work with. -
11-24-2013, 12:56 AMsymbalol, this forum always brings me funnys.Quote:
Originally Posted by Yunnie
-
11-24-2013, 01:00 AMMihael_LongclawI always see your posts everywhere, I explained it to you before, PLDs have MORE eHPQuote:
Originally Posted by Yunnie
I hate having to re-type this but:
5000 damage from enemy
Two tanks at 6000 base HP, WAR and PLD
WAR pops Defiance, PLD pops Shield Oath
War = 7500 HP, PLD = 6000 HP +20% mitigation
The 5000 damage hits the war for 5000
So he's at 2500/7500 HP
The 5000 damage hits the PLD for 4000
So he's at 2000/6000 HP
Say a WHM Cure's for 1000 HP each, (1200 on the war)
The PLD needs 4 cure's to fill back up, the WAR needs 5 to fill back up (technically it's a decimal but you can't cast less than a single Cure)
Please, bring your stupid elsewhere. -
11-24-2013, 01:13 AMPhreakPlease don't say things like this because it's not true. eHP or Effective Health Points refers to the maximum amount of beating a person can take from full to zero with no other outside factors involved once you start bringing in things like Heals per Second/Heals per Cast it's no longer Effective Health Points but Effective Healing.Quote:
Originally Posted by Mihael_Longclaw
At base with full health PLD and WAR have the same eHP, the only thing balanced between them until 2.1. -
11-24-2013, 02:44 AMExstal
Warrior 7500
Paladin 6000
Attack hits for 7500
Warrior is dead (7500-7500 = 0)
Paladin mitigates hit by 20% so hit only hits for 6000
Paladin is also dead (6000-6000 = 0) -
11-24-2013, 02:51 AMKitrueHP != mean mitigation. You're conflating the two. As Phreak said, eHP is your *effective hit points*, or how much damage you can take in a single blow/short series of blows. Mean mitigation is how much less (base) healing you require than normal in order to zero out the damage you're going to be taking (base healing refers to what a healer can throw out rather than what numbers they throw up on you after factoring in your +healing buffs).Quote:
Originally Posted by Mihael_Longclaw
Right now, WAR and PLD have the exact same eHP because 25% +hp is the same as 20% DR where eHP is concerned. WAR and PLD do *not*, however, have the same mean mitigation because WAR *explicitly* requires more healing than a PLD to keep them alive in 8 man content (it's roughly balanced in 4 man). With 2.1, a WAR and a PLD will *still* have the same eHP, effectively (if the WAR leverages IB for burst damage, they have more, but that's the whole "skill tank" benefit), while maintaining the nearly identical mean mitigation in both 4 man and 8 man content (since we're getting less self-healing and more damage reduction/+healing, so that our mitigation actually *scales*).
I really feel that there should be a dictionary of terms for people discussing all of this because so many people are guilty of egregious misuse of them:
Mitigation = any reduction in damage taken or required healing (evasion/dodge, parry, block, self-healing, absorb shields, damage reduction, +healing)
RNG based mitigation = any mitigation mechanism that does not have a 100% chance of success (dodge/evasion, parry, block)
Static mitigation = any mitigation mechanism that has a constant 100% chance of working (damage reduction, +healing)
Reactive mitigation = any mitigation mechanism that can only be applied after damage has been received (+healing, self-heals)
Proactive mitigation = any form of non-static mitigation that needs to be applied before damage is taken in order for it to be effective (absorb shields)
CDs = cooldowns = any form of survivability provided that does not have 100% uptime and, generally, has an uptime of no greater than 33%
Mean Mitigation = the total percent of base incoming healing required, over time, based off of a standard point of comparison (factors in evasion, block, parry, damage reduction, self healing, absorb shields, and +healing; also factors in the average contribution of CDs)
eHP = effective hit points = the amount of damage that can be taken before requiring any healing without factoring in any reactive or RNG based mitigation mechanisms (factors in +hp, damage reduction, and sometimes absorb shields, if they are expected to be up at nearly all times)
CD survivability = the total eHP generated over a short period of time while certain short duration abilities are active (factors in eHP and CDs with mechanisms that contribute to eHP) averaged over the mean contribution over time *of* those short duration abilities
That covers pretty much everything in game at the moment. There are a few others not in game that could be added (blink mechanisms, which are charged based mechanisms that allow you to ignore a certain number of attacks or special attacks based upon the number of charges, which is what Utsesumi from FFXI was), but they're not in game so they're not relevant to the discussion. CD survivability is a somewhat fuzzy definition, but that is, in my experience, the most common definition. The rest of them are explicit definitions of terms used pretty much everywhere.
The primary performance of tanks is directly measured on three axes, such that one axis is directly measured against the same axis of the comparative (or standard) tank: eHP, which measures the ability of a tank to survive burst damage without CDs active; mean mitigation, which represents how efficient the tank is to heal over time; and burst mitigation, which measures the ability of a tank to survive intense bursts damage using the abilities in their CD suite. To be balanced, a tank must have performance similar but not necessarily identical to all other tanking options (generally means performance within 5% of the other tanks, though increased performance in one area should be balanced by a similar amount of decreased performance in one or more of the other areas). If eHP is too low, the tank will not be able to survive burst damage mechanics designed for other tanks. If mean mitigation is too low, the tank will require too much healing over time and prevent the tank from being effective in long duration fights. If burst mitigation is too low, the tank will die to unexpected emergency situations (e.g. dead/dc'd healer, not at full health for a large burst, debuffed to take especially large amounts of damage, enrage timer, etc.) and require perfect or near perfect play on the part of all players involved in order to be effective.
For the purposes of other factors, such as damage, utility, and enmity, there still needs to be roughly equivalent performance but the requirements are not nearly as strict as the performance in the primary areas (generally within 10% as opposed to 5%) and are judged on an asymmetrical basis so that higher damage can be balanced out against a superior suite of utility capabilities even though the two are not even remotely comparable.
On all of these bases, PLD and WAR will *not* be unbalanced; WAR and PLD already have the same eHP, WAR is getting buffed so that it has equivalent mean mitigation and CD survivability of the PLD, PLD and WAR *still* generate virtually identical enmity, and WAR will have *slightly* better damage while PLD maintains a significantly better suite of utility capabilities (universal applicability of damage is balanced by the specific/situational applicability of the utility capabilities). That's damned good balance and nothing that PLD should be afraid of. -
11-24-2013, 03:36 AMLeironYou are confounding your argument.Quote:
Originally Posted by Maqaqa
Of course a WAR who wears DPS accessories will do more damage than a PLD who doesn't use DPS accessories.
It does not at all refute my statement at all, just makes you look silly and desperate, especially since a PLD can equal Gryphonskin as well.
Nice wasting millions of gil btw. -
11-24-2013, 03:54 AMMaqaqaI got friends crafting for me, you know you can *gasp* gather the mats? Not your business anyway the way i "waste" my gil ;)Quote:
Originally Posted by Leiron
As i already said, of course PLDs can wear DD gear, the argument is: how many of them do in reality? Log in Revenant's Toll/Wineport and do a quick check.
Silly? Sure! Desperate? Not really, im about to get buffed :D