Warrior "buff" in 2.1: not what we are expecting?

[Phreak]

I don't have any issue with making it a little better, but a 2-5 second extension means pretty much 100% success and it shouldn't be 100%. Why not just give the WAR Lustrate for that matter.

Right because lustrate requires the SCH to kill a mob for successful use, something that's rarely present in most boss fights.

I agree with this fully. It is just two small of a margin especially with the rest of your party attacking. This would also make it a much more useful and viable cross class skill.

Not to mention we can't see exact HP on enemies, it's just a coin toss every time.

[Phreak]

@ Phreak

Wrong +20% effective healing is as good as -20% damage received.

Both tanks receive a hit of 1000 damage.

PLD takes 800 requires 800 healing.

WAR takes 1000 requires 1000 healing.

800 x 1.25 (25%) = 1000, therefore the warrior requires 25% more healing than the PLD does.

Your math sucks.

[Bfmusashi]

Both tanks receive a hit of 1000 damage.

PLD takes 800 requires 800 healing.

WAR takes 1000 requires 1000 healing.

800 x 1.25 (25%) = 1000, therefore the warrior requires 25% more healing than the PLD does.

Your math sucks.

in your example the Paladin requires a spell that hits for 800hp recovery. The Warrior needs a spell that would normally hit for about 833 (1.20*833=999.6). While your point stands your math did not.

[Judge_Xero]

I agree with what I saw someone suggest for Mercy Stroke - it'd be better if it gave the heal if the mob dies within 2-5 seconds of using it. Trying to get a killing blow as a tank (especially with Defiance damage penalty) is a bit of a tall task. It does mean that currently I get to do a mental fistpump when I do get that killing blow though, haha.

It should just be that if you use it while the Mob has <20% Health, then you get the Heal. The whole "Killing Blow" is kind of strange. At least with that, on bosses where from 20% to 0% is a couple minutes there's some actual utility.

[Exhaltia]

in your example the Paladin requires a spell that hits for 800hp recovery. The Warrior needs a spell that would normally hit for about 833 (1.20*833=999.6). While your point stands your math did not.

That's not accurate. His math was right. The point was to highlight why -20% damage does not equal +20% healing and was assuming the heal would be coming from the same caster, healing for the same amount, not a different amount or different caster. He was pointing out a perceived flaw with the changes, not how the heals would have to be different using the changes.

[TaneshimaPopura]

@ Phreak

Wrong again. Cause if Defiance Healing increase was Pre DMG mitigation 25% would meant that the Warrior would survived with 250HP at the end of the day and removing the 5% more Max HP of 250HP he received, he will be dead on the dot.

As such the event, Warrior ( Max HP : 5000 based 6250 Defiance Heal: 1000+25% Damage: 5000 Base Mitigation : 50% Per hit/heal variance: -1250 )
Turn 1 : 6250 - 1250 = 5000
Turn 2 : 5000 - 1250 = 3750
Turn 3 : 3750 - 1250 = 2500
Turn 4 : 2500 - 2500 +250 (Pre DMG Mitigation Pre Heal) ; 2500 - 2500 (Post DMG mitigation) = 250 ; Dead
Turn 5 : Dead

If heals was 20% (Turn Variance = -1300)
Turn 1 : 4950
Turn 2 : 3650
Turn 3 : 2350
Turn 4 : 50 (2350 - 2500 + 200) (Pre Heal only Healing increase considered as Pre DMG mitigation) ; Dead

Paladin (Max HP = 5000 base all variables fixed, per turn = -1000)
Turn 1 : 4000
Turn 2 : 3000
Turn 3 : 2000
Turn 4 : Dead before heal occurs

So do tell me where did my math went wrong? Hmm?

+20% healing in itself =/= -20% DMG reduction it has to go hand in hand with +20% Max HP to be on equal standing.

For your 800 healing example, well if you see it like that sure Paladin is stronger if your heals are barely keeping you alive. But if there is time for extra heals the Warrior has his reservoir of HP replenish and would survive better than the Paladin. Same example just substitute heal to 800/960

Healing +20% (Variance per turn = -1540)
Turn 1 = 4710
Turn 2 = 3170
Turn 3 = 1630
Turn 4 = -710 HP DEAD (Pre DMG mitigation) ; -810 HP DEAD(Post DMG mitigation)
Turn 5 = -1450 HP DEAD
Turn 6 = -2990 HP DEAD

Paladin (Variance per turn = -1200)
Turn 1 = 3800
Turn 2 = 2600
Turn 3 = 1400
Turn 4 = -600 HP DEAD
Turn 5 = -1000 HP DEAD
Turn 6 = -2200 HP DEAD

Healing +25% (Variance per turn = -1500)
Turn 1 = 4750
Turn 2 = 3250
Turn 3 = 1750
Turn 4 = -550 HP DEAD (Pre DMG mitigation) ; -750HP DEAD (Post DMG mitigation)
Turn 5 = -1250 HP DEAD
Turn 6 = -1750 HP DEAD

Hence it can be said that if your heals can't level out incoming damage Paladin numbers look good. But you are still in a losing battle. However, if your heals gets stronger Warrior has more insurance policy due to Max HP buffer. Therefore the hypothesis is that with struggling heal Paladin reaches critical failure faster than a Warrior just cause they have 5% less Max HP.

For those who are bad at numbers the verdict is...
If your healer can keep up with the damage Warrior will always be the safe choice. If they can't Paladin will most likely die first though in a boss scenario both are likely to die at the same time. If heals are more than the DMG intake, it does nothing for the Paladin whereas it replenishes Warriors HP reservoir.

[Phreak]

in your example the Paladin requires a spell that hits for 800hp recovery. The Warrior needs a spell that would normally hit for about 833 (1.20*833=999.6). While your point stands your math did not.

My math is perfectly fine, I was not including the warrior healing received bonus at all. I was showing that there was a 25% base healing tax that WARs have to make up to be on par with PLDs as far as healing efficiency goes. Showing that in order for the stances to be EQUAL, the point that was challenged in the original post I responded to, the bonus on defiance would have to be 25% NOT 20%.

In order for WAR to recover at the same cost as the PLD the bonus would need to be 25%, what is so hard for you people to understand about this? It was talked about months ago.

@ Phreak

I honestly don't even know what the hell you're saying anymore. It doesn't take some long drawn out bullshit scenario to show that to equal a 20% damage reduction in terms of healing efficiency/healing required to recover, a bonus of 25% healing received is needed. I am not talking about eHP at all, nor did I ever mention it you seem to be mixing them all together for some reason.

[TaneshimaPopura]

Giving +25% Healing Received +25% Max HP is going to put Defiance above Shield Oath not in line. You wouldn't want to make more Paladins cry wouldn't you? Sides the reason why they don't seem to want to give that extra 5% cause in putting in new IB assuming 439 Heal per 15 seconds and 1 turn equates to 1 GCD which is 2.5s its 73.167 HP extra heals per turn. So your 800 base heal +20% would be 1033.167 HP per turn 1073.167 HP per turn if it was 25%.

In case you were wondering Infuriate if considered a passive will generate 1 Wrath per 12 seconds that is how you get 1 IB per 15 seconds on the longest case with the shortest case being at 12.5s (No Skill Speed).

Say even if you wouldn't want to consider IB, new Storm Path (264 Hit assuming tank rotation will be BB > SP Combo Based on my +0 Warrior with Gryphonskin iLvl 80 AvG) would also net 132 HP heal per 15 seconds that is 22 HP per GCD turn on average. I suppose getting to 180 wouldn't be impossible if I'm at full iLvl 90 with Gryphonskin Accessories.

[Leiron]

Giving +25% Healing Received +25% Max HP is going to put Defiance above Sword Oath not in line.

Why are you comparing Defiance, the tank stance, to sword oath, which is a DPS stance for Paladin?
Let alone it absolutely IS equivalent to shield oath.

Mitigation of 20% = 25% more eHP.
Its BASIC math.
1/.8 = 1.25 = 25% more eHP

Will post more, i need to dig through your posts because I am unsure what numbers you are utilizing to achieve your conclusion so one sec.

Incoming edits.

snip

Pardon but...what was this example trying to prove exactly?
All it did was illustrate that they would both die at the same time, but this was only due to the extreme amount of damage being taken.
If you alter the amount of damage taken, you'll find that a 20% damage mitigation will win out over the 25% more health and 20% extra healing provided.

Furthermore, let us do a final comparison of the situation BEFORE the final killing blow.

Paladin: 2000/5000
Warrior: 2350/6250

Now here is the thing, the incoming damage is 2500 correct?
Now because the damage is so extreme; half the HP pool of a Paladin; your time line is so short that it doesn't show how much better a 20% DR is.

If the healing was higher where death would still come, but later on, the HP lead a Paladin would possess over a Warrior would show itself.

Furthermore, a comparison of the maximum HP is actually appropriate simply because 20% DR function has having 25% MORE hp. Simply because the damage being taken is being reduced to roughly 75% of its original potency.

Due to this, it takes 25% LONGER to kill a Paladin.
You can easily do a comparison using a 20% HP buff vs 20% damage mitigation with no healing, and the Paladin will ALWAYS survive longer than the War provided the damage isn't so extreme as to not matter.

So in reality, when you take this into account this is how their health pools actually look when you factor the effect of Shield oath.

Paladin 2500/6250
vs
WAR 2350/6250

Mind blown.

This shows that Shield Oath is stronger than Defiance? No. Cause if Defiance Healing increase was Pre DMG mitigation (aka Healed for the extra 20% -200HP before he took the damage) he would have survived with 50 HP left. Hence Defiance has a lead so long as you don't die due to max HP. People are doing the Defiance math wrong all the time.

Bad logic.
You are trying to suggest that if the 20% extra healing was turned into mitigation, that the Warrior would have had an advantage.
Well of course, you just tacked on an additional 25% more HP to the WAR.
Having 20% more healing is NOT the same as having 20% damage mitigation, your very post illustrates this.

But as a tank you would ask me which one would I prefer? I'd say Shield Oath cause it gives healers less heart attacks, and if such above scenario occur where a little less DMG taken could have saved the Paladin and not the Warrior. I'm talking small damage like 2 point worth of damage would meant -148 HP on Warrior and 1 HP remaining on Paladin.

Let us assume a Warrior has a 20% HP buff instead of 25%

PLD with 1k health
WAR with 1.2k health
Both take 200 damage each

PLD mitigates that 200 damage by 20%, so its 160 every time you are hit.
WAR doesn't mitigate anything. Just has more HP.

After 6 hits
PLD= 40 HP left
WAR= Dead.


Edit: Ruminate did it so much more nicely.

[Ruminate]

snip

Your examples treat healing as if it occurs simultaneously with taking damage, which is all kinds of wrong.

This is a better model of TTL(time to live):

Enemy X deals 1250 damage.
Player Y heals for 500.

PLD: 5000 HP, 20% damage reduction, enemy deals 1000, heals give 500
1st hit from Enemy X leaves the PLD with 4000 HP left
1st heal from Player Y leaves the PLD with 4500 HP left
2nd hit from Enemy X leaves the PLD with 3500 HP left
2nd heal from Player Y leaves the PLD with 4000 HP left
3rd hit from Enemy X leaves the PLD with 3000 HP left
3rd heal from Player Y leaves the PLD with 3500 HP left
4th hit from Enemy X leaves the PLD with 2500 HP left
4th heal from Player Y leaves the PLD with 3000 HP left
5th hit from Enemy X leaves the PLD with 2000 HP left
5th heal from Player Y leaves the PLD with 2500 HP left
6th hit from Enemy X leaves the PLD with 1500 HP left
6th heal from Player Y leaves the PLD with 2000 HP left
7th hit from Enemy X leaves the PLD with 1000 HP left
7th heal from Player Y leaves the PLD with 1500 HP left
8th hit from Enemy X leaves the PLD with 500 HP left
8th heal from Player Y leaves the PLD with 1000 HP left
At this point, the PLD will die if the next attack deals 20% or more of the PLD's max health in damage.

WAR: 6250 HP, +20% heals, enemy deals 1250, heals give 600
1st hit from Enemy X leaves the WAR with 5000 HP left
1st heal from Player Y leaves the WAR with 5600 HP left
2nd hit from Enemy X leaves the WAR with 4350 HP left
2nd heal from Player Y leaves the WAR with 4950 HP left
3rd hit from Enemy X leaves the WAR with 3700 HP left
3rd heal from Player Y leaves the WAR with 4300 HP left
4th hit from Enemy X leaves the WAR with 3050 HP left
4th heal from Player Y leaves the WAR with 3650 HP left
5th hit from Enemy X leaves the WAR with 2400 HP left
5th heal from Player Y leaves the WAR with 3000 HP left
6th hit from Enemy X leaves the WAR with 1750 HP left
6th heal from Player Y leaves the WAR with 2350 HP left
7th hit from Enemy X leaves the WAR with 1100 HP left
7th heal from Player Y leaves the WAR with 1700 HP left
8th hit from Enemy X leaves the WAR with 450 HP left
8th heal from Player Y leaves the WAR with 1050 HP left
At this point, the WAR will die if the next attacks deals 16.8% or more of the WAR's max health in damage

Of course, you don't need to model it to understand why 20% heals is weaker than 20% damage reduction. You just need to know how percentages operate in TTL, like so:

1k of 5k is 20%, so each hit removes 20% of the PLD's max health.
1250 of 6250 is 20%, so each hit removes 20% of the WAR's max health.
500 of 5k is 10%, so each heal gives 10% of the PLD's max health.
600 of 6250 is 9.6%, so each heal gives 9.6% of the WAR's max health.