This site makes extensive use of JavaScript.
Please enable JavaScript in your browser.
Live
PTR
10.2.7
PTR
10.2.6
Beta
WoTLK: Tanking Mechanic
Post Reply
Return to board index
Post by
Blightman
Any idea what this means?
One change we made recently is baking in the old bonus from Blessing of Salvation into tanking forms. Up until now you were pretty much just doing without the old Salv because there was no way to replace it, and many raiding guilds will tell you that buff is (was) mandatory. Now you get it for free.
http://blue.mmo-champion.com/18/8537883754-death-knight-tanking-impressions.html
It's about death knights but the phrasing indicates it will be something for all tanks.
Post by
176331
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
195007
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
106896
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Blightman
Ok, check my math
Salv system:
Tankadin does 100pts holy damage, generates 100*1.9(RF) threat = 190 threat
melee DPS will need to do more than 190*1.1/0.7 damage = 299 damage
ranged DPS will need to do more than 190*1.3/.7 damage = 353 damage
Base Threat System:
Tankadin does 100pts holy damage, generates 100*1.9(RF)*1.3(new base threat) = 247 threat
melee DPS will need to do more than 247*1.1 damage = 272 damage
ranged DPS will need to do more than 247*1.3 damage = 322 damage
It looks like a slight drop in threat ceiling. With all the new threat tools it should not be a problem. Plus you can still lend a HoS if they get too fiesty.
I'm more looking to see if anyone else has heard more about this than anything else.
Post by
195007
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post by
Blightman
1.3(new base threat)
?
It is the 30% extra threat that they are possibly adding to all tanks. It's the easy way to get the value:
Look (100 *.3) + 100 = 130 =100 * 1.3 or (200*.3) + 200 = 260 = 200 * 1.3
Post by
blademeld
Since none of you seem to be using actual mathematics...
if you build in threat increase for lack of salvation then it's an inverse relationship, therefore threat increase is not 100% + 30%, which would be a direct relationship, it would be 100%/(100%-30%) or a 143% increase in threat production.
I hope you'll all stop confusing each other now >.>
Post by
Blightman
Since none of you seem to be using actual mathematics...
if you build in threat increase for lack of salvation then it's an inverse relationship, therefore threat increase is not 100% + 30%, which would be a direct relationship, it would be 100%/(100%-30%) or a 143% increase in threat production.
I hope you'll all stop confusing each other now >.>
So do you KNOW the actual formula they are going to use? Or are you just assuming? Because I didn't see anything in the blue's post that gave out HOW they would be implementing this.
Oh and if you are assuming they will do the logical thing, well here is a qoute I saw the other day:
characters in Warcraft can learn to ride an animal, but not until level 30. Starting characters might be able to conjure fireballs or summon a demon, but put them in front of a horse and it's like integral calculus to a sleepy stoat. "Horse, huh. How does this work? You ... I go on top of it? Like above it? And it moves? I'm not ... screw it, I'll walk."
Post by
blademeld
If you build in the lack of salvation, that is the only mathematically acceptable solution, therefore, by going with what I'm given, this is the most correct answer.
As for the mount vs spells quote, I personally find riding a horse harder than integral calculus, no joke.
Post by
Blightman
If you build in the lack of salvation, that is the only mathematically acceptable solution, therefore, by going with what I'm given, this is the most correct answer.
As for the mount vs spells quote, I personally find riding a horse harder than integral calculus, no joke.
But is integral calculus harder than flinging fireballs, teleporting, or transmuting someone into a sheep? Personally I've never managed to do any of those things except for the horse riding and integral calculus.
Basically just because something makes sense to you doesn't mean it will make sense to the developers. Or some other formula may lead to better game play.
Post by
blademeld
not sure about turning people into sheeps, but making fireballs aren't that difficult actually, we just use technology instead of magic.
And my math makes so much more sense than your 1.3 coefficient :P
Post by
106896
This post was from a user who has deleted their account.
Post Reply
You are not logged in. Please
log in
to post a reply or
register
if you don't already have an account.