"Fix Warrior" Threads

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Coramac

Say what? Those are posts about 1 roll vs. multi rolls and ordering of combat events. It has nothing to do with WAR mitigation. WAR's are at a huge disadvantage because of the nature of the PLD mitigation. It is permanent and more substantial than the benefits a WAR receives from Defiance. If you look at IB as a CD, which I do and feel is most appropriate, the disparity increases because IB really pales in comparison to the CDs a PLD has.

---

My point was from yours and others findings, even though based around a roll based system, it shows from your data that the mitigation values are within an acceptable range due to how the mechanically differences of the two classes are played.

People have been putting far to much emphasis on static maths with assumed numbers here to determine what the success rate of the Warrior is with out the fundamental understanding that a mutli-roll system was in place, as it is being shown with your findings, that any previous math or analysis that was done with basic math left people scratching thier heads and wondering why it didn't fit until you guys figured out it was a multi-roll systematic algorithuim in place, now that your findings are starting to make sense and proving true, further tests can be done to more successfully figure out where any tweaks can come from that will assist a Warrior staying with the flavour of being a Warrior, and not like a Paladin.

I am still interested in anyone showing us that the DPS difference between a Warrior and Paladin is 6 - 10%.

Everyone one knows in a statisticial analytical world, that when anything that can change or effect the data being used, there is hundreds if not thousands of variables that can skew it, hence why basic static math is not and never will be perfect.

Parses are the only true way to get positive results, anyone doing theory based calculations without understanding the form of chance is present, which in this case is the multi-roll system, is clearly just theorycrafting.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taemek

My point was from yours and others findings, even though based around a roll based system, it shows from your data that the mitigation values are within an acceptable range due to how the mechanically differences of the two classes are played.

---

You've come to the exact opposite conclusion the results should have led you to. No where in the data is there any support for the idea that mitigation values are of negligible difference.

Are you just trolling or are you that oblivious to reality?

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hachiko

Are you just trolling or are you that oblivious to reality?

---

A little of both, judging by his previous posts.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Hachiko

You've come to the exact opposite conclusion the results should have led you to. No where in the data is there any support for the idea that mitigation values are of negligible difference.

Are you just trolling or are you that oblivious to reality?

---

Neither.

In your findings you are mostly compairing the two classes together to determine wether or not it is a multi-roll system, which you have sccuessfully done. In that data, it shows that, for the data you currently have, it is quite negligible, but again, this comes down to where you want to draw the line on an acceptable value of what is negigible.

Is 5% ok? 10%? 15%? What is ok for you guys? And on that same token, is the difference in DPS from Warrior to Paladin comparitive?

This is off topic anyways, at the end of the day, everyones math prior to learning it was a mutli-roll system was moot. Now that you know the correct order that the multi-roll algorithium functions, maybe people can shift stats around to better favour a Warrior to get a better outcome. This will obviously need further testing.

My guess is, SE aren;t going to knee jerk change anything unless the hard numbers weigh up that don;t leave people scratching thier heads on how they came about that value.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taemek

Is 5% ok? 10%? 15%? What is ok for you guys? And on that same token, is the difference in DPS from Warrior to Paladin comparitive?

---

The problem with DPS is that it is relative to the group DPS. Let's say you have two DPS doing 200 DPS each and a WAR doing 150 DPS and a PLD doing 100 DPS. WAR is giving you 10% more DPS. Add another DPS, and it drops to 7.1% and this is also with the WAR doing 50% more DPS than a PLD. I haven't looked at the DPS comparisons between WAR and PLDs. The problem is not the damage reduction the PLD gets, but rather that it is always present and that the bonus healing for the WAR does not result in equivalency with PLD damage reduction. The PLD is always ahead because of this, but, when coupled with the PLD CDs, the PLD just blows the WAR out of the water. PLDs have CDs that are so far beyond anything the WAR has it's just silly.

They need to fix foresight, its quite terrible. As for all this IB shield talk, thats not a good idea, how would that translate to pvp? Wars would be invincible. As fo incoming dmg scaling or even hp scaling on self heals, that alone would fix warrior. But yeah, foresight... I hate you, atleast make it half as good as rampart.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Taemek

Neither.

In your findings you are mostly compairing the two classes together to determine wether or not it is a multi-roll system, which you have sccuessfully done. In that data, it shows that, for the data you currently have, it is quite negligible, but again, this comes down to where you want to draw the line on an acceptable value of what is negigible.

---

It seems like to you a 20% difference in the required amount of healing received would be "negligible" then. A multi-roll table actually FURTHER puts the paladin ahead in terms of mitigation than the WAR than any assumed single roll table, not the other way around.

And whether or not everything was rendered "moot" by showing that it's a multi-roll table has nothing to do with whether or not the difference between WAR and PLD is negligible in terms of survivability.

I have no idea how you can sit there and say it's a negligible difference. It means you must be 100% oblivious to what the multi-roll table actually means. There is no (not a negligible) difference in the parry rate. But that only has a minor impact on the amount of incoming damage. Parry is going to work out to ~5% damage reduction from incoming attacks. Block also works out between ~4-5% damage reduction from incoming attacks. Already paladin has virtually twice the mitigation as WAR from passive effects alone.

Then when you add in the fact that the PLD will suffer fewer crits, the gap widens even further. Then when you add in the ~5% reduction from RoH it widens even further.

Just counting passive effects after armor you are looking at a WAR taking ~95% of incoming damage, and a WAR taking ~85% incoming damage (.95 * .95 * .95 * .99, assuming the reduction in crits only works out to ~1% reduced incoming damage). (note that even if it were single roll the difference would have been negligible at (1-.05+.05) * .95 = 85.5%)

Do you really think that is a "negligible"?

Then you add in the fact that the WAR required 9% more healing baseline in general. So a WAR suffering 1000 DPS (after armor, before parry), they will need ~950 HPS after parry, and with the Wrath bonus that will be ~826 "raw" hps (assuming you are sitting on Wrath stacks). For a PLD suffering 1000 DPS (also after armor, before parry, Rage of Halone, or block), they will require ~680 heals per second.

How can you call that a "negligible" difference? That's over 21% more healing required! And that's without even comparing Cooldowns which the Paladin wins with hands down.

As a warrior on COil, turn 1, I can say this.

1, any content a paladin can tank, a warrior will be able to do. What that means is, where ever a paladin can go a warrior can go. The are warriors on turn 4 of coil and survive just fine.

2. Warriors WILL unfornately put more stress on a healer. This does NOT matter though until Titan HM and beyond where it becomes painfully obvious. I had a experience as a war tank on titan hm, where I made it to 10-5% of titan hm as a Main tank. What ended up killing me was the healers began wiping because they had to focus more on healing me and less on their own survival. The very same healers one shot Titan hm when a paladin tank came to tank, with me as the off tank. The paladin while he did take loads of damage, his health never did drop below 70%. My health on the other hand always droped to somewhere around 30 and some times 20% and maybe a inner beast would off set that by 10% if that.

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Ehayte

Gotcha - does anyone have a good feel for what the break even point would need to move to to make it worth it? Like I asked in a previous post where I threw out the number 450?

---

It will depend on your build. If you're like Kunkka and have a Relic+1 and 423 strength, you're going to be closer to 450 for break-even with PLD on continuous basis. If you have just a relic and 320 strength, it'll be around 350 assuming full-on IB spam. For a quick sanity check on this ratio, remember that the bulk of mitigation comes from IB, and the first case has better than 30% more damage per swing than the second. The Wrath part scales directly with damage increase, meaning that it actually stays out of the ratio entirely -- 7% is 7% in any case. You effectively multiply out the IB damage increase to estimate new equivalence -- 350*1.3=455. These are not perfect estimates because the exact number will depend on true rotation, obviously. These are numbers also for continuous basis only, meaning you can't even use IB for burst mitigation, and they do not include concerted use of Berserk (assumed continuous) or any use of Bloodbath (would have to calculate PLD benefit as well). I have an old spreadsheet I could use to go for better estimates, but it needs improvement before it's ready for prime-time.

As a quick rule based on some preliminary calculations, you could just calculate damage-per-potency and multiply by 3.7. That definitely could use a bit more rigor, however, and I can imagine that more efficient continuous use of abilities would move it northward. I don't know how valuable such a calculation would be, though, as it would still rob you of your main burst mitigation.

(Either tank can last around 40 seconds without any assistance at 450 incoming DPS.)

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Cessna

1, any content a paladin can tank, a warrior will be able to do. What that means is, where ever a paladin can go a warrior can go. The are warriors on turn 4 of coil and survive just fine.

---

A WAR will never be able to do this: https://i.imgur.com/0dsjoyx.png