World of Warcraft®

I noticed that you used a 1.02 armor modifier for the ASD meta. I'm curious to know if there is a reason you chose ASD over ESD (+5% block value). By playing around in your spreadsheet, I attempted to model a switch in metas. Specifically, I modified:

At the time of publication, the ESD was bugged and only provided 1% block value. I believe this is still true, but have not tested due to astronomical meta gem prices.

*I'm not sure if 70% instead of 65% is legit. Does anybody know for certain?

I believe so. At least, that's the intent. The 1% SBV meta gem gave 62% reduction when I tested.

Also, making this change to gearing still doesn't bring warriors into parity with paladins, but it does narrow the gap a bit. Druids and dks, meanwhile, move from slightly better to slightly worse than warriors in this model.

Do the changes I have described above accurately shift the model from ASD to ESD? If so, this could affect choices for meta gems as well as the desirability of mastery as a mitigation stat.

Yes, from looking at it quickly, it moves warriors and paladins ahead, but warriors benefit more than paladins (due to crit block).

Kithalt and Zarko, thank you for your responses.

Following your feedback, I changed the numbers to 31% and 62% and reran the calculations. We still see improvement by moving from ASD to ESD, but the magnitude is smaller than we saw at the 35/70% level. Damage is reduced from 1,817,223 to 1,804,569 while net healing declines from 1,647,187 to 1,634,990. Both of these are reductions of less than 1%.

Hopefully either the tooltip or the effect of the gem will be fixed soon.

Zarko:

Which version of Shield Block are you using?
I'm using the implementation described here: http://us.battle.net/wow/en/forum/topic/1196140528 I'm doing it because it describes what's going on in the game, and because it seems to me to be the most likely implementation.

Blizzard:

Warriors
A bug has been fixed where the Shield Block ability granted 25% more critical block chance than was intended for Protection warriors with very high total chance to avoid attacks.

Does this fix invalidate Zarko's assumption?
Is it a significant enough change to be worth revising this thread?

01/22/2011 3:32 AMPosted by Skirataado

Does this fix invalidate Zarko's assumption?
Is it a significant enough change to be worth revising this thread?

First of all: Thank you for reading the thread carefully enough to notice which version of SB I used.

I can revise the OP if you like. I update the spreadsheet for "current" theorycrafting.

https://spreadsheets.google.com/ccc?key=taOlTUl1g9aM_kMcTYYtnmg&hl=en&authkey=CJSy044F#gid=0

I don't generally bother with updating the OP because it's somewhat time consuming and the SS is easier to keep up to date. The change is a straight nerf to the skill Shield Block, but generally doesn't really impact things all that much. SS also includes updated assumptions on Savage Defense, including it being affected by bear form's AP boost and the updated vengeance assumptions.

Updated

02/25/2011 6:11 AMPosted by Previa

Seal of Insight.. and WoG every 9s, very realistic.

Necroing a thread that was created on 12/2/2010 and last updated prior to the lastest PTR notes. Then acting like somehow the entire thread is invalidated because they made a change.

Very honest.

Because people used seal of insight back then right.

yea ok

Yes. Yes we did.

People still will, too. When the fight lasts for 4 minutes and you have a fine threat cushion after 60 seconds ... why not switch?

1. Damage is valuable.

2. Yes you can switch, but you won't have anywhere near 100% uptime on insight hell not even 60% , nor will you be able to WoG every cooldown, even back then, maybe if your DPS afk's a lot heh.

1. Saving your healers mana is MORE valuable.

2. The "math" was done assuming a 1min threat buildup, then using self healing. If after one minute+full vengeance, you don't have a threat lead big enough to worry about that ... well, sorry.


It is based on a theoretical fight. It doesn't exist in the real game.

This analysis has zero real world value. We do not exist in a vacuum, we do not have one style / type of Boss that we attack, we do not all have the same Raid composition at every boss, we do not all get the exact same RNG and we are not able to use the exact perfect rotation each and every time to obtain maximum results due to encounter mechanics.

You can make an analysis about anything in a vacuum that will demonstrate the validity of any particular argument, but that does not make it correct.

Each tanking class is working as intended and as designed. You knew what you were getting when you signed up for whatever class you selected to play (or you should have done your homework more thoroughly). Learn to love them for what they offer and how they play, or re-roll a different class.

Spending hours on made up stats to augment the argument for nerfs to any class is a waste of time for everyone involved.


TL:DR Don't feed the trolls.

Don't nerf me bro!

LoL...down to your last resort I see.

In what part of your baseless, whining, emotional appeal did you feel you made some sort of point?

02/25/2011 7:41 AMPosted by Ferita

The fact that it does not occur in real world situations invalidates that data set.

Oh, it doesn't occur in real situations? Now how did you arrive at that with zero supporting evidence? Saying you can manipulate numbers to show what you want proves nothing. You need to show that he manipulated the numbers to prove something, which you haven't, because you can't.

The fact that it does not occur in real world situations invalidates that data set.

Tanks do, in fact, get attacked by bosses.

Simulators work by simulating a real situation AS CLOSELY AS IS REASONABLE. There is no such thing as a perfect simulator, so you're basically saying that hundreds of theorycrafters and sim makers over the world are completely invalidated.

What do we have here? We've got some numbers that show that when tanks are being hit, they're not taking around the same amount of damage. No one is saying "WHELP HERE'S HOW IT IS, NERF PLZ".

The only reason you're attacking these numbers here and now is because you don't want to be nerfed.