4.05 - Tank DPS comparison

[Reynhart]

This strikes me as a discussion very similar to what I remember some DRG's saying back when FnC and WT came out. The argument against using FnC and WT was that, well, Full Thrust has like, 300 potency! It hits harder than FnC and WT do! So just restart the FT combo!

People basically forget that, in order to use your uber-super-powerful-combo-finisher, you have to use your weak-as-hell-combo-opener.

DA is a flat 140 potency increase so a DA buffed GCD is 373 potency which in isolation is lower than the 400 potency from TBN+DS for the same MP cost.

No, because to use DA, you have to start a combo. So it's either +140 or +280 pot over 3 GCD.

[DWolfwood]

It's true in what amounts to a laboratory environment, but as far as real world application goes, it's like all other theorycraft; fun to read, but ultimately not a solid reflection of reality.

Yeah, I mean if you wanna refute factual math and say it's not a "solid reflection of reality", by all means, go on living whatever "reality" you wish.

For the rest of us, it's nice knowing what the changes brought. As the proof showed, TBN can most certainly be converted into terms of DPS. If you're interpreting it as "raid-wide" DPS, then just stop, because I made no comment whatsoever on that matter, and most people already know that there are benefits that will outweigh the penalty.

In no way, shape, or form did I say TBN is useless on another tank, nor did I say it's not worth using. Nor did I say that DPS was in any way the primary function of this ability. It will always be a personal DPS loss while not in Grit, whether you choose to believe it or not.

That being said, being in Grit will change the matter considering that the potency is different, and it's most likely going to exceed the additional opportunity cost of Syphon Strike's 2400MP.

[Quor]

Math Smath and veiled insults

Again, theory. On paper. You have yet to address the primary issue I brought up, which is that the entirety of this math is based around a constantly rolling GCD that has no downtime against a giant wall of HP with no mechanics that just sits there and let's you beat on it. The ultimate Target Dummy in other words.

But more than that, I feel like we're talking about two different things, as you reference TBN then talk about how it will always be a personal DPS loss in Grit, then go on to say that being in Grit will change the matter considering the potency is different? That's quite confusing.

Overall, what I've gleaned from this thread is that some DRK's are making the argument that using TBN in place of DA (since the MP cost is identical) is, somehow, a DPS loss, even assuming that TBN breaks and provides the blood bonus. Now, no argument that it's a loss if it doesn't break, but it's a clear gain if it breaks at least once out of every two uses, since a single DA is 140 potency and a single BS is 400 potency, and one TBN breaking out of every two is a net gain of 200 potency.

Is that incorrect?

[Kabooa]

Is that incorrect?

The argument here is you have to measure the potency against the other GCDs you'd use, which in this case is one of the Soul Stealer combos (Since any use of Bloodspiller is used in place of them.)

So while Bloodspiller is 400 potency, it's measured against 150, 250, or 300, depending where you would use it, or 150, 390, or 440 with DA applied. 700 / 3 or 840 / 3 (If we assume one DA since TBN is one DA), so 400 - 233.3 or 400 - 280, bringing the gain for the GCD between 120 and 166.7

There's another arguing that this comparison is flawed because no matter what, you're going to use Bloodspiller, and there's a point where you cannot use Soulstealer, even DA'd, because then you waste the Gauge it generates.

Even in the dummy perfect scenarios though, at the very worst you lost 20 potency for the hit. Which is gained back on every Soulstealer so...but then you 'push' back that +20'd soulstealer, but it's okay because Bloodspiller had +20 added to it's Non-Grit version in a prior patch, but then...

[Quor]

Useful info

Thank you for the explanation, I appreciate it. However, I'm still not seeing this "measure against" stuff in the same light. You're not measuring it against anything. It's a single GCD that adds more potency in a single GCD than any other GCD move that DRK has. As I said before (and as you said as well I think) you can make an argument for holding onto BS until you're at full gauge, but once you get there you would want to blow it, because no matter what you do it will always be a gain in potency over anything else DRK can use. It's not correct to "weigh" it against anything, because, ideally, you'd still want to end every fight having used as many BS as you can possibly get.

As for TBN, the way I see it as a WAR....TBN is basically Infuriate-levels of resource generation on a 15s cooldown. Bloodspiller is, for all intents and purposes, the DRK version of Fell Cleave, with equal gauge cost, and either 20% less power or ~8% more power, depending on DA or no. Now, TBN is not as simple as Infuriate obviously, but even if you could only get one to pop every 30s, that's still really great. Sure, you won't get it every 15, or even every 30, but the comparison makes me think it's not as bad as it's being made out to be.

[Kabooa]

TBN

The consensus is TBN is one of the strongest abilities in Dark Knight's kit, but Dark Knights suffer elsewhere because of it. As a dual-ability (Both offensive and defensive), it is remarkably good in both respects, given that other similar mixed abilities have been reduced.

However, it is -not- as good as an ability focusing on one aspect. As a tanking ability , the timing is very precise, meaning it is only very reliable in packs of enemies or on Tankbusters to get the full effect while also not quite serving as a median ability during the high auto attack portions, and as purely a Damage standpoint, it is not as strong as simply using DA on part of the Soul Stealer combo.

If you consider an ability budgeted on a '100 point' basis, then TBN is a solid '140', but split between the two aspects: Attack and Defense. Many of the arguments regarding it focus primarily on using it for DPS (because of course), and in that regard, it does falter.

[DWolfwood]

Again, theory. On paper. You have yet to address the primary issue I brought up, which is that the entirety of this math is based around a constantly rolling GCD that has no downtime against a giant wall of HP with no mechanics that just sits there and let's you beat on it. The ultimate Target Dummy in other words.

But more than that, I feel like we're talking about two different things, as you reference TBN then talk about how it will always be a personal DPS loss in Grit, then go on to say that being in Grit will change the matter considering the potency is different? That's quite confusing.

Sorry, not trying to be rude, but you're not reading correctly. It's always a personal DPS loss when not in Grit, and I'm sorry but don't blame the math. It's not just true on paper. I'm sorry you're not comprehending it, but that's just how it is. I've done my best by both explaining and providing a clear mathematical proof.

it's a clear gain if it breaks at least once out of every two uses, since a single DA is 140 potency and a single BS is 400 potency, and one TBN breaking out of every two is a net gain of 200 potency.

Is that incorrect?

That is completely incorrect. I don't really know what to tell you other than that you need to recognize that MP is directly convertible into potency since (outside of Grit and on all single targets) every action that uses Dark Arts provides the same 140 potency. There are only two things you can spend MP on in this case, DPS and Defense/Utility(Dark Mind/Blackest Night), therefore, to determine the value of one, we set it equal to the other and evaluate from there.

You're also completely ignoring what you're denying is true, which is that Bloodspiller interrupts your normal rotation by being on GCD. This has a cost, so finding the average GCD potency tells you this cost when combined with the MP->potency conversion and recognizing that you're losing out on Bloodgauge as well. Now you COULD look at an individual fight in order to determine EXACTLY which GCDs were lost by using Bloodspiller, BUT in a large enough sample it will eventually be exactly equal to the average and it will not change any more, no matter how much you increase the sample size. We're interested in what happens if we were to use an infinitely large sample size because as we increase our size of evaluation more and more, we get closer and closer to the exact values, plain and simple.

It makes no sense to say, "well I crit on that Bloodspiller, therefore it was a DPS increase to use TBN". That kind of belief belongs outside of job balancing and falls in the realm of make believe. (Or Chaos theory perhaps, but we won't get into that.)

[Quor]

Sorry, not trying to be rude, but you're not reading correctly. It's always a personal DPS loss when not in Grit, and I'm sorry but don't blame the math. It's not just true on paper. I'm sorry you're not comprehending it, but that's just how it is. I've done my best by both explaining and providing a clear mathematical proof.

No offense taken, I'm just having a hard time reconciling the "math" that says the 400 potency attack is somehow worse than the 300 potency attack (or the 540 is worse than the 440).

That is completely incorrect. I don't really know what to tell you other than that you need to recognize that MP is directly convertible into potency since (outside of Grit and on all single targets) every action that uses Dark Arts provides the same 140 potency. There are only two things you can spend MP on in this case, DPS and Defense/Utility(Dark Mind/Blackest Night), therefore, to determine the value of one, we set it equal to the other and evaluate from there.

No, I understand the "DA = 140 potency" part of it. What I'm having trouble reconciling is that Bloodspiller is 400 potency, and TBN is equal in cost to DA. Thus, if you get 50 blood from TBN, this translates into an additional 400 potency via BS. 400 beats out the 140 gained by a single DA use. By that logic, it would seem that any time you know you can get TBN to pop, you would want to use TBN over DA.

The caveat to this, and maybe the part that's missing from this equation, is if BS interrupts the flow of combos. I'm working under the assumption that BS functions like FC/IB etc. in that it doesn't interrupt the link of your combo. If it does not function like FC/IB does, then it should.

You're also completely ignoring what you're denying is true, which is that Bloodspiller interrupts your normal rotation by being on GCD. This has a cost, so finding the average GCD potency tells you this cost. Now you COULD look at an individual fight in order to determine EXACTLY which GCDs were lost by using Bloodspiller, BUT in a large enough sample it will eventually be exactly equal to the average and it will not change any more, no matter how much you increase the sample size. We're interested in what happens if we were to use an infinitely large sample size because as we increase our size of evaluation more and more, we get closer and closer to the exact values, plain and simple.

It makes no sense to say, "well I crit on that Bloodspiller, therefore it was a DPS increase to use TBN". That kind of belief belongs outside of job balancing and falls in the realm of make believe. (Or Chaos theory perhaps, but we won't get into that.)

See my above comment about interrupting the GCD combo. If it does interrupt, then that's a problem, and it should be changed to function like Fell Cleave/Inner Beast. If it doesn't, then the part I'm stuck on is how even two DA's, with a net gain of 280 potency, can somehow be greater than a single GCD that does 400 potency, or 540 with it's own DA.

[SyzzleSpark]

No offense taken, I'm just having a hard time reconciling the "math"

Bloodspillers gained naturally over the course of your DPS rotation through Blood Weapon, Salted Earth, and Souleater are absolutely a huge DPS gain. In fact they largely fill the hole that Scourge left in our kit, given that Scourge was 500 potency every 30 seconds and Bloodspiller is 400 potency roughly 3 times per minute.

You're struggling to understand off-GCD potency funneled through mana expenditure vs. potency that rides on the GCD.

Lets say you use an unbuffed Souleater combo. That's 3 GCDs.

Hard (150) - Syphon (250+70 mana potency) - Souleater (300)
You just gained an effective 770 potency.

Now lets say you use the same combo, but weave TBN in between Hard and Syphon, it pops, and instead of Souleater you use Bloodspiller.

Hard (150) - [TBN -2400 mana, 140 potency loss] Syphon (250+70 mana potency) - Bloodspiller (400)
You gained an effective 730 potency, and lost 40 potency over the course of the same number of GCDs, in comparison to what you would have done had you not used TBN or Bloodspiller

However, if you didn't need to use TBN for that Bloodspiller, the -140 potency goes out the window, and you just did 870 potency. This is why natural Bloodspillers are always good.

The problem is that when you use TBN you spend 2400 MP so that 400 potency drops by 140 (to 260) in terms of effective PPGCD. For all intents and purposes this only breaks even with our existing PPGCD when you factor in the effective potency gained through Syphon Strike. So basically you dig yourself a hole 2400 mana deep, and then fill it back up with 50 blood, and are no better off for it unless you're tanking in Grit. Out of Grit, and cast on your co-tank for instance, the shield doesn't even match the eHP gains of a cure 1. So arguing healer DPS is a flimsy point to make as well.

It doesn't FEEL good. I feels like garbage. It rewards optimization for pennies on the dollar, and single-digit potency increases (sometimes losses) on the GCD.

[DWolfwood]

No offense taken, I'm just having a hard time reconciling the "math" that says the 400 potency attack is somehow worse than the 300 potency attack (or the 540 is worse than the 440)....

Well, we're not comparing Souleater vs Bloodspiller. Bloodspiller is always a DPS increase over Souleater because it's a higher potency. What we're comparing is, does 2400MP result in higher DPS if you spend it on TBN to get *another* Bloodspiller, or does it give more DPS if you spent it on a Dark Arts. The answer is that spending it on a Dark Arts results in about 7.77 more potency.


Keep in mind that the 140 potency on Dark Arts is applied on top of a GCD, you're not changing anything in your rotation to get it. If Dark Arts were its own GCD, it would be a horrible loss. If you spend that MP on TBN to get a Bloodspiller however, you're essentially squeezing in that Bloodspiller into your rotation, thus pushing something out.

Here's an example:

Let's say you started out with 2400MP and 30 Bloodgauge to speed up what I'm trying to illustrate without having to go through 5+ combos.

Here's your rotation without using TBN:

1. Hard Slash (150 pot)
2. Syphon Strike (+1200MP) (250 pot)
3. Souleater (+10 Bloodgauge) (300 pot)
4. Hard Slash (150 pot)
5. Syphon Strike (+1200MP) (250 pot)
6. Dark Arts + Souleater (+10 Bloodgauge) (440 pot)
7. Dark Arts + Bloodspiller (540 pot)

Remaining MP: 0
Remaining Bloodgauge: 0
Total Potency: 2080

We're now at 0MP and 0 Bloodgauge because we use it all. Note, that we did this in 7 GCDs because that's important and fundamentally how we get "DPS" to begin with.

Now lets look at if we use that 2400MP on TBN:

1. Hard Slash (150 pot)
2. TBN (-2400MP + 50 Bloodgauge) + Syphon Strike (+1200MP) (250 pot)
3. Souleater (+10 Bloodgauge) (300 pot)
4. Hard Slash (150 pot)
5. Syphon Strike (+1200MP) (250 pot)
6. Dark Arts + Bloodspiller (475 pot)
7. Bloodspiller (400 pot)

Remaining MP: 0
Remaining Bloodgauge: 40
Total Potency: 1975

See the difference? Now you might be thinking, "what if we just continued after that?", well the thing is, this is going to keep repeating. The reason why we lost a great deal here is because the GCD we lost was Souleater in this case. However, we have 3 moves in our combo, so there are 3 different cases. In the first case, we only lose Hard Slash. In the second case, we lose Syphon Strike, and in the third case we lose Souleater.

Over time and throughout every fight though, these will be more or less evenly distributed. The only thing that changes is for each time there's DPS downtime, you will end on a different part of your combo. What the math is showing is, when we look at the average of these 3 cases, we end up with a result of 7.77 potency difference.

... If it does interrupt, then that's a problem, and it should be changed to function like Fell Cleave/Inner Beast.

I think you're talking about literally it breaking your combo the way certain abilities like Unmend (iirc), old Sword/Shield Oath, etc., which is something else entirely.

That said, it's actually the same thing for Fell Cleave. Every time a Warrior uses Fell Cleave, they're losing out on Beast Gauge accumulation. Furthermore, we can apply the same math and actually find that the real potency increase of Fell Cleave is around half (approx. 250ish, this isn't the thread for that though). When you know this, Onslaught is actually a great skill in that it's roughly the same potency per Beast Gauge meter as Fell Cleave since Onslaught is not a GCD.