We have detected that cookies are not enabled on your browser. Please enable cookies to ensure the proper experience.
Results 1 to 12 of 12
  1. #1
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,456

    A question to you Wardens out there...

    Wardens use medium armour and are therefor cap:ed at 50% mitigation while Guardians, who use heavy armour, are cap:ed at 70%. This means that Wardens will always take harder hits than their Guardian friends, all other things being equal. So for a 20k hit a Warden would take 10k damage while a Guardian would only take 6k, i.e. 66% more damage. This is compensated by Wardens through stacking more morale/vitality in order to survive the big hits and by using self heals and life-taps. There are other things to consider too, of course, like BPE chance etc but for now I'm only interested in how a Warden handles damage it actually takes.

    Am I right, so far? If not, then feel free to stop reading here and tell me what's wrong with my reasoning

    I was thinking that, instead of forcing Wardens to go stupidly high on morale and rely on life-taps/self-heals to be equally viable as a raid tank (ask any creep what they think about that) why not change the play-ground a bit. I think allowing Wardens to "stagger" 40% of all incoming damage over time would be an equally viable alternative, if not even better. Life-taps and self-heals would primarily heal the "staggered" damage.

    Ok, I'm not explaining this well. Let me give an example: A Warden is hit for 20k by a raid boss. 10k of this is directly mitigated by the armour and the remaining 10k is applied to the character. 40% of this is staggered over 30 seconds, i.e. 667 damage every 5 seconds for 30 seconds. The self-heals and life-taps of the Warden would be spread between the morale and the "staggered" damage (if there is no "staggered" damage it would all go to the morale). The end-result would be that Wardens take the same amount of direct morale damage (in this case 6k) but need to amortize the remaining damage over time through self-heals and life-taps. Heals coming from outside sources (healers, pots, etc) would heal morale damage, not the "staggered" damage.

    Rough explanation but I think you see what I'm aiming at. Would it be a viable mechanic for Wardens? Would it be worse than what you have now? Better? I'm not looking for herp-derp answers along the lines of "Wardens are fine" or "Wardens are OP". Look at the suggestion and discuss without prejudice
    [I]A small cog in a big machine.
    [/I]
    Life has no "Undo" button, only "I'm sorry". Thinking before doing is a good thing.

  2. #2
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    672
    I think you're leaving a vital part of warden defences out of your calculation by ignoring BPE chances. Stacking vitality is not necessary for the warden, at least from my experience. You need to survive the start of the battle to get your defences going (BPE buffs being at least as important as self-heals/life taps in my experience), but once you're into the fight, I find my warden with a moderate amount of morale (roughly 17.5k unbuffed) just as durable if not more so than a lot of guardians with high morale and maxed mitigations. As a healer, on the other hand, I'd rather heal a warden that knows what they're doing (fortunately I tend to run with several of that kind ) than a guardian that gets big hits and needs a lot of healer attention to get their (sometimes insane amounts of) morale restored.

    Personally, I can't see your suggestion fitting in with the current tools warden tanks have. Already, wardens are way more flexible in reacting to different encounters than guardians are, and making it yet easier to survive without going through our whole array of tools would make those wardens that know what they're doing simply imbalanced. We already have quite a few "oh sh.."-tools like Never Surrender and the Defiant Challenge mitigation bonus that make it easier to deal with spike damage in case things go wrong. Allowing us to mitigate damage similar to guardians while keeping the flexibility in buffing whatever part of our defences is most helpful to the content at hand would make us vastly superior to them.

  3. #3
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,456
    Quote Originally Posted by Bramor View Post
    I think you're leaving a vital part of warden defences out of your calculation by ignoring BPE chances. Stacking vitality is not necessary for the warden, at least from my experience. You need to survive the start of the battle to get your defences going (BPE buffs being at least as important as self-heals/life taps in my experience), but once you're into the fight, I find my warden with a moderate amount of morale (roughly 17.5k unbuffed) just as durable if not more so than a lot of guardians with high morale and maxed mitigations.
    Being an oft-times raid healer I know that Wardens are very good tanks, at least in the hands of a skilled player. However, we're still talking about BPE *chance*. If that *chance* fails on two big hits in a row a Warden will be far worse off that a Guardian. Nothing goes splat as fast as a Warden who gets one gambit lagged out... (well... Burglars and Hunters do come to mind). My gut feeling is that Wardens are supreme in fights where the damage spikes are not as big. Recent changes to damage equations may very well negate these fights all together.

    The problem with avoidance tanking is that they cannot be allowed to reach 100% avoidance. Getting to 100% avoidance would make Wardens completely invincible. That means that some kind of cap must be in place. Perhaps allowing partial blocks and parry to mitigate that 66% extra damage Wardens do take is enough. We must also remember that Guardians can also BPE. I don't play either (at least not at level cap) so I cannot tell what BPE and partial BPE rates can be assumed in raid situations.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bramor View Post
    As a healer, on the other hand, I'd rather heal a warden that knows what they're doing (fortunately I tend to run with several of that kind ) than a guardian that gets big hits and needs a lot of healer attention to get their (sometimes insane amounts of) morale restored.
    I remember from back in OD. The one tank that was a breeze to heal on Gortheron was a Warden. A well played Warden is more or less unkillable.

    Quote Originally Posted by Bramor View Post
    Personally, I can't see your suggestion fitting in with the current tools warden tanks have. Already, wardens are way more flexible in reacting to different encounters than guardians are, and making it yet easier to survive without going through our whole array of tools would make those wardens that know what they're doing simply imbalanced. We already have quite a few "oh sh.."-tools like Never Surrender and the Defiant Challenge mitigation bonus that make it easier to deal with spike damage in case things go wrong. Allowing us to mitigate damage similar to guardians while keeping the flexibility in buffing whatever part of our defences is most helpful to the content at hand would make us vastly superior to them.
    It's not so much a matter of adding damage staggering to the current tool-set (that would be extremely OP) but to explore possible alternatives to how the Warden works today. Progress will never occur if we only look at where we are *now*. Even exploring dead ends leads to progress in some way.
    [I]A small cog in a big machine.
    [/I]
    Life has no "Undo" button, only "I'm sorry". Thinking before doing is a good thing.

  4. #4
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    121
    Your idea does sound like a reasonable (from the technical point of view) way to mitigate the major weakness of the Warden - susceptibility to spike damage. I don't see how does it fit into the "Warden theme" though. Let me give you an example to show what I mean: Medium armour allows Wardens to be more mobile and avoid attacks easier (explanation for their emphasis on BPE). When hit, Wardens take more damage because medium armour provides less protection (lower mitigation caps). Wardens have to use lighter shields to keep their mobility (Warden's shields providing less armour than Guardian's).

    I would argue though that such a change is not necessary. All the differences, big or small, make playing a class and playing with a class a unique experience. The adjustments a group has to make when playing with a Guardian or a Warden don't go too far, but they are there nevertheless. Perhaps in BfE T2 a raid will have to be more careful not to trigger the Blood Brothers buff lest their Warden goes splat, but then the same group won't worry as much about Battlecats running loose in Flight T2 thanks to the aggro transfers. In my opinion both classes are in a pretty good place right now in relation to each other.

  5. #5
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    466
    Well, Wardens aren't that sensetive to spike damage anymore. The only way would be two massive non-crits in a row.

    Crit defense changes has made critical one-hits less of a problem, and our crit immunity makes sure we don't take two crits in a row.

    But I do like the idea that we could "convert" damage to damage-over-time, it's a nice idea.
    [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=h8C8nLy2okg[/url] Saruman 6-man
    [url]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=mj4h-CF9log[/url] Warden Survival
    [url]http://tftgb.wordpress.com/[/url]

  6. #6
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,456
    Quote Originally Posted by Hlifhrim View Post
    I don't see how does it fit into the "Warden theme" though. Let me give you an example to show what I mean: Medium armour allows Wardens to be more mobile and avoid attacks easier (explanation for their emphasis on BPE). When hit, Wardens take more damage because medium armour provides less protection (lower mitigation caps). Wardens have to use lighter shields to keep their mobility (Warden's shields providing less armour than Guardian's).
    I can see way to mesh this mechanic into the "Warden theme", e.g. "Wardens' stout nature and hard training allows them to use their armour to the fullest. Wounds that would otherwise kill another medium armour wearer will only lacerate the Warden."

    Quote Originally Posted by Hlifhrim View Post
    I would argue though that such a change is not necessary. All the differences, big or small, make playing a class and playing with a class a unique experience. The adjustments a group has to make when playing with a Guardian or a Warden don't go too far, but they are there nevertheless. Perhaps in BfE T2 a raid will have to be more careful not to trigger the Blood Brothers buff lest their Warden goes splat, but then the same group won't worry as much about Battlecats running loose in Flight T2 thanks to the aggro transfers. In my opinion both classes are in a pretty good place right now in relation to each other.
    To some extent this is also what I'm looking for. What you're saying is that in end-game scenarios there may possibly be a slight weakness in the Warden class that will make Guardians the preferred choice while trying to beat the content the first time. Would damage staggering be a better solution to handling damage, compared to going the BPE/partial BPE and critical hit immunity way? Obviously the current implementation works well or you wouldn't say what you do but would staggering work better?

    Quote Originally Posted by vr00mie View Post
    Well, Wardens aren't that sensetive to spike damage anymore. The only way would be two massive non-crits in a row.

    Crit defense changes has made critical one-hits less of a problem, and our crit immunity makes sure we don't take two crits in a row.

    But I do like the idea that we could "convert" damage to damage-over-time, it's a nice idea.
    Staggering damage would be an alternative way to handle critical hits. Would it be better or worse, that's what I'm hoping to explore?

    Don't get me wrong, Wardens work well and unless a superior alternative is found there is no reason to make massive changes.
    [I]A small cog in a big machine.
    [/I]
    Life has no "Undo" button, only "I'm sorry". Thinking before doing is a good thing.

  7. #7
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Posts
    121
    Quote Originally Posted by Raven-EU View Post
    I can see way to mesh this mechanic into the "Warden theme", e.g. "Wardens' stout nature and hard training allows them to use their armour to the fullest. Wounds that would otherwise kill another medium armour wearer will only lacerate the Warden."
    Good one, I kinda like it. My only quibble is - "staggering damage" as you chose to call it looks like a pretty important and unique mechanics. IMO, it would change (as opposed to 'fall into') the 'Warden theme' from 'avoidance tank' to 'sturdy avoidance tank'. Sturdy has been the domain of guards...

    I'm also wondering, why these lacerations cannot be healed by others?

    Quote Originally Posted by Raven-EU View Post
    What you're saying is ...
    Way to take a part of a sentence out of context and overemphasize it Of course certain classes will be preferred to others in certain situations. RKs are generally better at healing massive damage on a single target, Minstrels do better at AoE heals. Any ranged DPS will be chosen over a Burglar for a Smaug run. And so on and so forth. I do believe that the differences between the Warden and the Guardian are big enough to make for a different experience of playing (with) one, but don't affect the chances of a group to complete the raid.

    Quote Originally Posted by Raven-EU View Post
    Would damage staggering be a better solution to handling damage, compared to going the BPE/partial BPE and critical hit immunity way?
    That's a good question. An alternative to the current mechanics just for Wardens? Most certainly not, it would throw the entire system off balance. A mechanics working alongside BPE and crit immunity? That sound possible. I'm not sure if it would be better or worse, it would simply be different. Could possibly make the class a bit bland if it was to decrease the difficulty of fighting bosses with high spike damage.

  8. #8
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,456
    Quote Originally Posted by Hlifhrim View Post
    Good one, I kinda like it. My only quibble is - "staggering damage" as you chose to call it looks like a pretty important and unique mechanics. IMO, it would change (as opposed to 'fall into') the 'Warden theme' from 'avoidance tank' to 'sturdy avoidance tank'. Sturdy has been the domain of guards...
    There would be differences. Without self-healing you'd still require 66% more healing, i.e. less sturdy, to be "comparable" to Guardians. A well played Warden would need to manage their lacerations (easier to type than "staggered damage") or it would build up over time and kill them. Do you use your next Gambit to manage your laceration, your threat, or your BPE? My main thought behind this was that everything I've seen of Warden mechanics seems to walk around the fact that they take 66% more damage than Guardians. We add critical immunity because we don't want Wardens to get two-shot. We add more BPE to avoid them taking damage. It's all about side-stepping those 66% rather than offer Wardens a way to manage them.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hlifhrim View Post
    I'm also wondering, why these lacerations cannot be healed by others?
    Well. From a technical point of view it's probably better to keep the lacerations as a Warden only feature. If healers cannot heal them then they don't need to know about them. We have four classes that can heal (MIN, RK, LM, CAP) and to this we add conjunctions, pots, and food. Keeping lacerations as a Warden thing should also make it easier to balance.

    From a game-play point of view: Lacerations is a Warden mechanic that Wardens need to handle. If we remove the need to focus on BPE then we should add back some form of game-play to manage lacerations instead. Wardens have lots of self-heals and life-taps in order to mitigate some of the fact that they take more damage (when they do take damage) and to me it was natural that these would be turned to manage the staggered damage. I could see adding mechanics that would allow a "Defeat Event" that clear some of the lacerations.

    Quote Originally Posted by Hlifhrim View Post
    Way to take a part of a sentence out of context and overemphasize it
    Touché. Word fencing is never constructive and I'm bad at it as well

    Quote Originally Posted by Hlifhrim View Post
    That's a good question. An alternative to the current mechanics just for Wardens? Most certainly not, it would throw the entire system off balance. A mechanics working alongside BPE and crit immunity? That sound possible. I'm not sure if it would be better or worse, it would simply be different. Could possibly make the class a bit bland if it was to decrease the difficulty of fighting bosses with high spike damage.
    Since these are all hypothetical questions we may as well theorize freely. Choosing between the two could be incorporated into Gambit rotations, e.g. you either build staggering buffs or you build BPE buffs. Building one would immediately cancel the other (staggered damage would remain until cleared). Another option would be to make it into a stance. Warden game-play would then also include choosing the right tanking "mode": do you soak the damage or avoid it?

    Would it make Warden game-play bland? Perhaps but that depends on how much game-play that is added around the lacerations. It's not so much about decreasing the difficulty as it's about removing a bit of the randomness. Random is never good. What if your self-heals got converted into something that has a "chance to proc" from your shield gambit?
    [I]A small cog in a big machine.
    [/I]
    Life has no "Undo" button, only "I'm sorry". Thinking before doing is a good thing.

  9. #9

    Post

    I think I like your suggestion overall, but making it a passive ability could create problems. First off, if everything that hit us got made into a bleed, we'd be completely unkillable initially, and later on a relatively simple situation could rapidly become untenable. The other problem is dying after combat. If you keep all the lacerations until they expire, you'll die out of combat, but if they're removed as soon as you're out of combat, this could become easily abused, or even worse, fall victim to the still-in-combat bug. I think my idea would solve the first problem, but I've got nothing on the second one.

    I think a better implementation would be to make it a gambit, 21321, or 23123 ("extended" shield mastery or shield tactics, respectively), that applies a 20-25 second buff. While the buff is active, the first hit you receive that, after mitigations are applied, would deal more than half your maximum health, will instead damage you for 15% of that attacks damage every 3 seconds for 30 seconds (or 10% of max health, not sure), and cancel the buff afterwards. Having an attack defended against in this way deal 150% (or even more) of it's normal damage may sound harsh, but it's purely a spike damage prevention tool, and it should have a certain cost to using it. It also wouldn't really matter if you have a good healer.

  10. #10
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Sweden
    Posts
    1,456
    Quote Originally Posted by wannabe_falconer View Post
    I think I like your suggestion overall, but making it a passive ability could create problems. First off, if everything that hit us got made into a bleed, we'd be completely unkillable initially, and later on a relatively simple situation could rapidly become untenable. The other problem is dying after combat. If you keep all the lacerations until they expire, you'll die out of combat, but if they're removed as soon as you're out of combat, this could become easily abused, or even worse, fall victim to the still-in-combat bug. I think my idea would solve the first problem, but I've got nothing on the second one.
    Only 40% of the incoming damage would get converted into a bleed; the remaining 60% will still hurt you directly. The idea I had was that Wardens would manage their lacerations through self-heals and life-taps. Self-healing would reduce the magnitude of the laceration. For example, let's say you took a 10k hit (after mits). You would immediately drop 6k in morale (60% of the hit) and get a 30 second bleed of 571/4s for 28 seconds (I think the self-heal tick is 4s). Your self-heals and life-taps would then be split into two parts, say 75%/25%, with the first half directly reducing the laceration. Example: You build and execute a self-heal that would tick for 400/4s for 4 pulses and your laceration have 5 remaining pulses left. After the split 300 x 4 = 1200 would be used to directly heal your laceration and 100 / 4s for 4 pulses would heal up your morale. After executing the self-heal your laceration would tick for 331/4s for the remaining 5 pulses (331 = 571-1200/5).

    Lacerations would also stack so if you take a 10k hit at T=0s and another 10k at T=6s you'd end up with a laceration that ticks for 1061/4s for 28s. In the old system your morale would be at -20k at T=6s (discounting any healing/self-healing of course) but with staggered damage your morale would be -12.6k (again, discounting any healing/self-healing) with the remaining 7.4k damage doled out over 28 seconds.

    Dying after combat is a problem that already exists. Go to Roots of Fangorn and get stung by those green pesky spiders. If the healer stops healing you the second the chest is spawned it's not unlikely that you'll die. I was considering a "cooldown" skill (3 or 5 minute CD) that completely clears your laceration but prevents you from staggering damage for the next 20 seconds maybe that would need to be added to prevent after-combat death.

    Quote Originally Posted by wannabe_falconer View Post
    I think a better implementation would be to make it a gambit, 21321, or 23123 ("extended" shield mastery or shield tactics, respectively), that applies a 20-25 second buff. While the buff is active, the first hit you receive that, after mitigations are applied, would deal more than half your maximum health, will instead damage you for 15% of that attacks damage every 3 seconds for 30 seconds (or 10% of max health, not sure), and cancel the buff afterwards. Having an attack defended against in this way deal 150% (or even more) of it's normal damage may sound harsh, but it's purely a spike damage prevention tool, and it should have a certain cost to using it. It also wouldn't really matter if you have a good healer.
    Yes, a buff from a gambit would allow it to be integrated as "another tool" in the Warden toolbox. I think it may be too harsh to increase the damage taken from any hit. Remember, you're already taking 66% more damage than a heavy armour class and making it +150% would make that number go to +150% damage taken compared to a Guardian. However, I would rather see staggered damage replace the clutch mechanics in place (crit immunity and reliance on BPE RNG). Yes, they are clutch mechanics to work around the issue that Wardens do take more damage. I *like* that Wardens use avoidance tanking to make them different from Guardians but there are still times when the RNG or encounter mechanic will give you the proverbial finger. The "Distributed" hit in BfE is a good example of an extreme (intended) non-critical hit that is difficult to handle.

    I know I'm tossing ideas around here but what if we pull out the crit immunity and just plain replace it with staggered damage? As far as I understand it (I parked my Warden at level 62 when RoI hit and with all the issues the class had back then I never got to restarting it) crit immunity is a passive trait that requires no game-play so there would be no "loss". We could also limit the amount of damage being staggered to be equal to your OCMR. That way you cannot die out of combat from your laceration. Putting a lower limit (say 30% of your maximum morale) on when this mechanics kick in could also be appropriate.
    [I]A small cog in a big machine.
    [/I]
    Life has no "Undo" button, only "I'm sorry". Thinking before doing is a good thing.

  11. #11
    Join Date
    Jun 2011
    Location
    Europe
    Posts
    672
    Quote Originally Posted by Hlifhrim View Post
    Perhaps in BfE T2 a raid will have to be more careful not to trigger the Blood Brothers buff lest their Warden goes splat
    Funnily, we had this situation just a few days ago with dps going wild and ignoring the Blood Brothers buff (don't ask me why, they just went wild all of a sudden). Interestingly, it was the (experienced and well equipped) guardian that went splat first, and quickly. My (moderately equipped alt) warden even survived a while with both trolls on her before eventually going down.

    This is just one story out of many I have experienced ... yes, in theory wardens do take considerably more damage than guardians, and the nature of the warden class still is that a small difference in the individual warden's abilities will make the drawbacks of the class pretty obvious, where a guardian's individual abilities, while still noticable, don't make quite such a big difference in their performance. Still, a well-played warden is, on average, equal to a well-played guardian, and you will find the weaknesses of one as much of an issue as the weaknesses of the other.

    Quote Originally Posted by Raven-EU View Post
    Well. From a technical point of view it's probably better to keep the lacerations as a Warden only feature.
    The more I read about your ideas, the more I think this is the point that doesn't sit well with me. A fellowship, and even more a raid, can only function at the top of their abilities if all members are playing with each other and complement each other's actions. A group of twelve solo players will never be able to achieve as much as a group of 12 players adding their abilities to a grand total. A warden-only feature that the individual warden has to take care off will by necessity take (at least part of) that warden's attention away from the group and the whole picture and make it necessary for them to deal with these lacerations no matter what content and what would be going on around them, and thus make it impossible for them to give their whole attention to the group effort.

    Right now, the warden's toolbox is full of all kinds of different abilities, and one of the strengths of the class is the fact that for every encounter and every fellowship/raid composition you can (and have to, for optimal performance) use a slightly different set of abilities (gambits) to put up the best mix of offence, defence and threat generation for the situation at hand. With your idea, we would have to drop that and always reserve part of our skill usage for self-heals, because no matter what people we are grouped with, there would always be a part of the incoming damage that you would have to heal away yourself, thus taking away the choice of going all-out threat generation or avoidance only or whatever toolset seems best suited.

  12. #12
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    3,874
    This idea should replace the crit defence mechanic. It's brilliant.

    They should make it a tanking passive called Sturdy Shield or something.
    I.e. Through the wardens mastery of the shield, any hits that exceeds over 50% of the wardens health will be 'staggered' by 40%.

    The staggered damage will be applied to the warden in proportional segments(e.g.1.75%) every .75seconds until staggered damage is accounted for.
    Or
    The staggered damage will be applied to the warden in proportional amounts every 3 seconds for 12 seconds.


    We weren't using active mitigation tools I.e. gambits to close the raw mit gap to guards during moria/mirk. We had a proportional mit gap of 10% back then.
    Well, it's 20% now and we haven't been given anything other than crit defence to make up for it. This would be perfect in closing the passive gap without giving burgs and hunters tanking potential again.
    Last edited by Untg99; Sep 03 2013 at 06:24 AM.

 

 

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •  

This form's session has expired. You need to reload the page.

Reload