Why don't people like to pick/use Tenacity over Determination?

[Kabooa]

First of, as different damage buffs and stats work multiplicative (i.e. (20% + 20% = 44%, not 40%), so does mitigation. But the catch with mitigation unlike damage is that instead of getting greater results by stacking multiple damage multipliers, mitigation is victim to diminishing returns..

You get the same amount of benefit. There is no diminishing return.

20% Mitigation = 125% EHP.
36% Mitigation = 156.25% EHP (A 25% gain from the previous)
51.2% Mitigation = 195.3% EHP (a 25% gain from the previous)

[Reinhardt_Azureheim]

You get the same amount of benefit. There is no diminishing return.

20% Mitigation = 125% EHP.
36% Mitigation = 156.25% EHP (A 25% gain from the previous)
51.2% Mitigation = 195.3% EHP (a 25% gain from the previous)

While your theory is correct and relative to each previous step it is a steady increase of +25% eHP (and relative to the original it grows exponentially), the reason we call it "diminishing returns" has nothing to do with eHP; the core of the explanation was "you can't reach -100% damage taken stacking %-based cooldowns because of the calculation being multiplicative, not additive", i.e. 20% + 20% =/= 40% but 36%.

Apart from that, you mistyped the 3rd mitigation. That should be 48.8% mitigation (51.2% remaining) to give 195.31% effective HP; 51.2% mitigation would be 200%+ eHP.

[Kabooa]

While your theory is correct and relative to each previous step it is a steady increase of +25% eHP (and relative to the original it grows exponentially), the reason we call it "diminishing returns" has nothing to do with eHP; the core of the explanation was "you can't reach -100% damage taken stacking %-based cooldowns because of the calculation being multiplicative, not additive", i.e. 20% + 20% =/= 40% but 36%.

Apart from that, you mistyped the 3rd mitigation. That should be 48.8% mitigation (51.2% remaining) to give 195.31% effective HP; 51.2% mitigation would be 200%+ eHP.

Yeah, I mixed one up.

But that's also not what diminishing returns means. It means your effective gain is less. The effective gain is the same.

If it wasn't a geometric ratio, then you'd have increasing returns.

Right now it's neutral. Each gain is the proportional same as the prior - not diminishing.

For example

Stacking Direct Hit is diminishing return, even if no soft cap is applied.

1% DH is .25% average damage increase. At 10% DH you have a 2.5% increase of damage.

Our current baseline is [0], but we'll use [5] instead because it plays nice. 0 to anything is an infinite increase.

Every additional % of DH from the previous is 'less effective'.

5% -> 10%: "100% more chance"
10% -> 15%: "50% more chance"
15% -> 20%: "33% more chance"

Linear scaling improvement such as DH, Offensive Tenacity, and Determination have diminishing returns. That's before a softcap is applied.

[Makeda]

Most people have no clue how the stats work and just follow the meta. The meta stems from the balance discord which pushes max DPS above all. People keep repeating it and using the best in slot gearsets without understanding them. The reason the balance promotes DPS is because a lot of them rush the content and spend more time optimizing and less time progressing. So they talk about progression less. People mistake this for progression being less important.

The problem there is that in progression the two things that seem to cause the most wipes are, and in order:

1. Learning the mechanics. Stand here, stack there, move to there and face that way...
2. Beating the enrage timer.

You spend about 5/6ths of progression just learning where to stand when... and then the final 6th is getting past the wipes that keep happening when the boss is at 1% or less...

That is why even progression starts to hyper focus on DPS...


If tenacity was to mean more...

Incoming damage would need to outpace all possible healing even outside of tankbusters. A boss auto-attack hitting a non-tank would need to be a death, 2-3 hits from a 'trash mob' likewise (and raids here don't even have trash mobs... so that's basically a moot point)...

And tanks would only be able to survive by stacking a lot of mitigation...

Then you would have to reduce their DPS contribution, and likewise that of healers... so that it was rarely useful for them to focus on DPSing... and do this without making them unplayable when solo leveling...

Basically you'd need a game design similar to WoW of about 10-years ago (but not modern WoW)...

And it's not really a sure thing that's a good idea... no actively-updated game has that kind of design anymore.

[Argyle_Darkheart]

You get the same amount of benefit. There is no diminishing return.

20% Mitigation = 125% EHP.
36% Mitigation = 156.25% EHP (A 25% gain from the previous)
51.2% Mitigation = 195.3% EHP (a 25% gain from the previous)

The point is that stacking mitigation will mitigate less damage than if you were to use them separately, whereas the opposite is true for damage buffs. Effective HP is a separate matter; it is not equivalent to mitigation.

Linear scaling improvement such as DH, Offensive Tenacity, and Determination have diminishing returns.

This statement contradicts itself. Linear scaling is, by definition, not subject to diminishing returns.

The damage you would gain from increasing your direct hit rate from 5% to 10% is the same as the damage you would gain from increasing your direct hit rate from 10% to 15%. The relative increase in direct hit rate is entirely irrelevant with regards to actual output (damage).

[Kabooa]

Stuff.

I feel like we're tackling the same thing from different sides.

I say DR doesn't apply to mitigation because EHP increases at a proportional amount, while you say it is because the raw damage itself is decreased for each additional instance.

I say DR applies to things like DHit because the relative increase is smaller for the same budget, while you're saying it's not because the raw increase is the same.

[BluexBird]

I remember reading a post once where someone actually went ahead and did the math. They legit went out of their way to get the maximum tenacity a tank could possibly get, and worked out the damage reduction. And the result you get from sacrificing all that extra potential critical hit damage is... about 11% less damage received.

So yeah, if you feel like 150k HP and a bunch of cooldowns isn't enough for you, then I guess you can try for tenacity.

It just bothers me to no end that I once heard one of the staff say something along the lines of: "Tenacity will appear useless at first, but it will be extremely useful the more you get of it." Instead, what we get is a useless stat that offers practically nothing compared to the other stats.

[Derio]

Tenacity's damage mitigation is not good enough to warrant investing into.

My gripe with tenacity is that its a wasted stat IMO and it should just be built in and not a meldable option.

[Nedkel]

Maybe if they doubled the damage reduction from this stat then it would be picked, but right now its really meh.

[Liam_Harper]

To be fair, if you're not doing Savage meld as you like. Ten will occasionally make a fatal hit a close-call, which can happen more in Normal content where groups aren't as predictable and the dps stats will give you +1-2% dps. There are very few enrage timers or real dps checks on Normal, so the chance your dps melds saved a wipe are probably the same as the chance your Ten melds kept you hanging in there on 1k health to recover a messy run and save a wipe. Pick your preference.

On Savage and above, enrage timers and dps checks are very real and mechanics (done correctly) are designed to be survivable and easily healed even with 0 Ten (done incorrectly you die regardless), so the dps melds are absolutely superior.

People ranting about too much Tenacity on Normal Eden are just spouting things they read on a guide without a real understanding of it.