Time to re-visit avoidance and mitigation [Archive]

threat111

05-24-2010, 07:50 PM

With the new changes to brawlers and their "Strike thru immunity" its time to re-visit base avoidance again. Brawlers now are all ready reaching the mitigation cap and doing this while also reaching 90-95% TRUE avoidance. This is leaving a large gap between tanks. Brawlers have a huge advantage over any other tank from a defensive perspective.Its time to look at either raising the mit cap or removing it all together. The mitagation cap being removed would allow for a much more balanced look at comparing the core defence of each tank. Plate tanks can easily reach the current cap of 75%. Now there are Brawlers reaching those same numbers. Removing this cap would give the plate tanks a chance to compete again for thier raid slots again. After all its your ability to take hits, or avoid them, which makes you a tank in the first place.Avoidance is off the charts right now for brawlers. On raids I see our monk hitting 92%+ avoidance. He hits this insane amount of avoidance while also hovering very close to the mitagation cap. As a brawler they are immune to strike thru so that 92% avoidance is a true reflection of there avoidance. Where as other fighters still have to deal with strike thru chances while having nearly 20% less avoidance.Now that LU56 is on the verge of release maybe we can start this new project for LU57?

BChizzle

05-24-2010, 08:22 PM

<cite>Cesium@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>With the new changes to brawlers and their "Strike thru immunity" its time to re-visit base avoidance again. Brawlers now are all ready reaching the mitigation cap and doing this while also reaching 90-95% TRUE avoidance. This is leaving a large gap between tanks. Brawlers have a huge advantage over any other tank from a defensive perspective.Its time to look at either raising the mit cap or removing it all together. The mitagation cap being removed would allow for a much more balanced look at comparing the core defence of each tank. Plate tanks can easily reach the current cap of 75%. Now there are Brawlers reaching those same numbers. Removing this cap would give the plate tanks a chance to compete again for thier raid slots again. After all its your ability to take hits, or avoid them, which makes you a tank in the first place.Avoidance is off the charts right now for brawlers. On raids I see our monk hitting 92%+ avoidance. He hits this insane amount of avoidance while also hovering very close to the mitagation cap. As a brawler they are immune to strike thru so that 92% avoidance is a true reflection of there avoidance. Where as other fighters still have to deal with strike thru chances while having nearly 20% less avoidance.Now that LU56 is on the verge of release maybe we can start this new project for LU57?</blockquote>The actual difference in avoidance is about 10% which is about the difference of the strikethrough, just because our avoidance displays as higher almost all of that avoidance difference is contested avoidance and therefor useless. Also 75% is the lvl 90 cap it is ok to go higher then the level 90 cap since most raid mobs are 96 and up. The good news is despite your claims there are actually very few brawlers hitting the mit cap, it requires alot of buffs and to gear mit% which is mostly garbage gear that ends up crippling their dps to the point they can't even tank in it anyways. Irregardless, avoid isn't everything you can hardly discount things like the huge amount of heals your SK class can put out, damage reductions etc and you also need to understand that not getting hit as much doesn't proc as many reactives and is disadvantageous to HoT healers.

threat111

05-24-2010, 09:42 PM

reguardless of what you think is happening. ACT avoidance reports have our monk in the 85-90% avoidance. While the plate tank is under 50%. Avoidance needs to be changed. Brawlers need to come down a minimum of 15% and the mit cap needs to be raised to 85+

BChizzle

05-24-2010, 10:34 PM

Eritius

05-24-2010, 11:09 PM

How much DPS are monks taking in comparison to plate? Raw numbers on a stat sheet don't tell the whole story. I know some of the Plate DPS have cooldowns to mitigate more then just the 75% mitigation cap. For example (and I use arbitrary numbers here) raid boss does 10000 damage. Mitigation cap reduces this to 2500 damage but a defensive cooldown may reduce this to 1250.One instance where a Brawler replaces a Guardian as MT isn't enough to call for nerfs to a class, despite the outdated thinking many of you might have. Shoot I'd bet some still think Crusaders shouldn't tank, dunno what role they expect them to fill.

Kota

05-24-2010, 11:17 PM

<cite>Taemien@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote>How much DPS are monks taking in comparison to plate? Raw numbers on a stat sheet don't tell the whole story. I know some of the Plate DPS have cooldowns to mitigate more then just the 75% mitigation cap. For example (and I use arbitrary numbers here) raid boss does 10000 damage. Mitigation cap reduces this to 2500 damage but a defensive cooldown may reduce this to 1250.</blockquote>this is a good question. i'm a mt zerk and i noticed that almost all mobs (i pretty tank ez mode for the most part) are doing more magic than melee damage by a good margin. i already theorized with my guild leader that monks were gonna be the best mt for raids with current mechanics and he lvled one up and is gearing it out now. as far as i can tell the 75% mit is a hard cap. the mit number goes up but the % does not, and i can't see any difference in damage intake when i over shoot it.

Bruener

05-24-2010, 11:22 PM

/gasp. Things are starting to come to light. Wait till next xpac when we are in the same tier to see how things really play out.

BChizzle

05-24-2010, 11:24 PM

<cite>Taemien@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote>How much DPS are monks taking in comparison to plate? Raw numbers on a stat sheet don't tell the whole story. I know some of the Plate DPS have cooldowns to mitigate more then just the 75% mitigation cap. For example (and I use arbitrary numbers here) raid boss does 10000 damage. Mitigation cap reduces this to 2500 damage but a defensive cooldown may reduce this to 1250.One instance where a Brawler replaces a Guardian as MT isn't enough to call for nerfs to a class, despite the outdated thinking many of you might have. Shoot I'd bet some still think Crusaders shouldn't tank, dunno what role they expect them to fill.</blockquote>50 brawlers could replace guardians how again would that be any different then the 50 SK's that replaced them too? A brawler MT is not actually a bad idea until you realize that a brawler MT doesn't have even remotely close to the agro generation of any other tank class then you just bring in the crusader. Anyow I'd love for Cesium to show this avoidance report of a brawler with 85-90% raid avoidance who has capped mit, it won't happen though.

Bruener

05-24-2010, 11:32 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Taemien@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote>How much DPS are monks taking in comparison to plate? Raw numbers on a stat sheet don't tell the whole story. I know some of the Plate DPS have cooldowns to mitigate more then just the 75% mitigation cap. For example (and I use arbitrary numbers here) raid boss does 10000 damage. Mitigation cap reduces this to 2500 damage but a defensive cooldown may reduce this to 1250.One instance where a Brawler replaces a Guardian as MT isn't enough to call for nerfs to a class, despite the outdated thinking many of you might have. Shoot I'd bet some still think Crusaders shouldn't tank, dunno what role they expect them to fill.</blockquote>50 brawlers could replace guardians how again would that be any different then the 50 SK's that replaced them too? A brawler MT is not actually a bad idea until you realize that a brawler MT doesn't have even remotely close to the agro generation of any other tank class then you just bring in the crusader. Anyow I'd love for Cesium to show this avoidance report of a brawler with 85-90% raid avoidance who has capped mit, it won't happen though.</blockquote>Lol. The constant desperation of keeping things pointed at SKs is getting a little pathetic.

BChizzle

05-24-2010, 11:36 PM

<cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Taemien@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote>How much DPS are monks taking in comparison to plate? Raw numbers on a stat sheet don't tell the whole story. I know some of the Plate DPS have cooldowns to mitigate more then just the 75% mitigation cap. For example (and I use arbitrary numbers here) raid boss does 10000 damage. Mitigation cap reduces this to 2500 damage but a defensive cooldown may reduce this to 1250.One instance where a Brawler replaces a Guardian as MT isn't enough to call for nerfs to a class, despite the outdated thinking many of you might have. Shoot I'd bet some still think Crusaders shouldn't tank, dunno what role they expect them to fill.</blockquote>50 brawlers could replace guardians how again would that be any different then the 50 SK's that replaced them too? A brawler MT is not actually a bad idea until you realize that a brawler MT doesn't have even remotely close to the agro generation of any other tank class then you just bring in the crusader. Anyow I'd love for Cesium to show this avoidance report of a brawler with 85-90% raid avoidance who has capped mit, it won't happen though.</blockquote>Lol. The constant desperation of keeping things pointed at SKs is getting a little pathetic.</blockquote>The constant SK pointing at other classes to keep theirs on top is typical.

threat111

05-24-2010, 11:42 PM

Which mob would you like to see? What information do you want? I'd be more then willing to share the info. I dont have any reason to lie. Im not tryn to bolster any ones agenda. I was in SF beta. I was pushing hard for brawlers to get immunity to strike thru. Id just like to see the base avoidance adjusted to make up for this, and or the mit cap removed so that the plate tanks can be back in line on a defensive level.

BChizzle

05-25-2010, 01:13 AM

<cite>Cesium@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>Which mob would you like to see? What information do you want? I'd be more then willing to share the info. I dont have any reason to lie. Im not tryn to bolster any ones agenda. I was in SF beta. I was pushing hard for brawlers to get immunity to strike thru. Id just like to see the base avoidance adjusted to make up for this, and or the mit cap removed so that the plate tanks can be back in line on a defensive level.</blockquote>Any raid mob is fine provided it isn't a short fight (But shouldn't it be a zonewide I mean you are claiming 85-90% avoids all the time right?) so that the tank just didn't cycle their avoidance temps. I range between 65-72% avoidance MT buffed on raid mobs no way your brawler is getting 85-90%. Even lets say somehow they have their block maxed at 70% and they had on every pre-SF avoidance item (which btw would then make it impossible to max mit) a brawler still won't come even close to that number. Also provide your brawlers mit at the time I seriously doubt it is capped as you claim.And for the record I wasn't for immunity to strikethrough in BETA (except for temps) but if you actually look all they did was make brawlers immune to strikethrough then lowered the amount of strikethrough on raid mobs. My avoidance is right around the same % it was last expansion 10% more then plate tanks.

Couching

05-25-2010, 02:27 AM

<cite>Cesium@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>reguardless of what you think is happening. ACT avoidance reports have our monk in the 85-90% avoidance. While the plate tank is under 50%. Avoidance needs to be changed. Brawlers need to come down a minimum of 15% and the mit cap needs to be raised to 85+</blockquote>Bascially, you have no idea of the game mechanics.The base avoidance means nothing in raid because it is contested. Lowering brawler base avoidance won't change anything in raid. Brawlers didn't get extra uncontested avoidance than plate tanks until they get epic buff.The avoidance difference (uncontested part) between brawler and plate tank comes from two parts: one is the epic effect/buff and another is strikethrough immunity when brawlers are in defensive stance.Brawlers got extra 5% min. block from epic effect/buff and most plate tanks got some sort of dmg reduction from their own epic buff/effect.Guardian got 5% dmg reduction temp buff, zerker got 5% dmg reduction, pal got 10% dmg reduction AND 10% dmg healed back.It's really easy for plate tanks to hit 75% mit vs lv98 mob (about 15k) but it's very hard or impossible for brawlers until the brawler is with most pieces of T3 armor and most jewelries with mitigation. At the moment, there isn't any brawler with full T3 armor.Even with the same mitigation, plate tanks still mitigate dmg more than brawlers because they get extra dmg reduction from their epic effect/buff. At the same time, brawlers avoid more than plate tanks because of our epic effect/buff.Crying of why plate tanks can mitigate more dmg than brawler is silly and crying of why brawlers can avoid more dmg than plate tank is silly as well.

Eritius

05-25-2010, 02:45 AM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Crying of why plate tanks can mitigate more dmg than brawler is silly and crying of why brawlers can avoid more dmg than plate tank is silly as well.</blockquote>I don't think thats what the discussion is about. I believe it is about Brawlers mitigating more then Plate tanks. But I haven't seen any evidence shown of this. It looks possible on paper though. I'm not seeing any self buffs that plate tanks give themselves to reduce damage, only to increase mitigation.That might be part of the problem. In other MMOs including EQ1, tanks were able to mitigate damage by percentages the form of short duration buffs. Perhaps that is what the warrior subclass needs here.Granted the mythicals provide this, I'm speaking of some cooldowns that could be used much earlier then 80s. Something for the lowbies to play around and get used to before endgame pops up.

Couching

05-25-2010, 02:54 AM

<cite>aemien@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>Crying of why plate tanks can mitigate more dmg than brawler is silly and crying of why brawlers can avoid more dmg than plate tank is silly as well.</blockquote>I don't think thats what the discussion is about. I believe it is about Brawlers mitigating more then Plate tanks. But I haven't seen any evidence shown of this. It looks possible on paper though. I'm not seeing any self buffs that plate tanks give themselves to reduce damage, only to increase mitigation.</blockquote>Plate tanks do have dmg reduction effect from their epic buff except SK. Some plate tanks only gear has dmg reduction effect as well. Not to say, plate armor mit >>> leather armor mit.Brawlers didn't mitigate dmg per hit more than equal geared plate tanks, period.

Eritius

05-25-2010, 07:28 AM

Per hit doesn't mean very much because there's outside factors that can cause other issues.What does matter is how much DPS the tanks themselves are taking. We know Brawlers are avoidance tanks, and we know Plate are mitigating tanks. But what matters if they are on par with each other in their ability to reduce damage.In an ideal situation a Brawler will avoid as much damage in a set time (such as an encounter) that a Plate tank will Mitigate. But situations are never the norm, which is why we have 6 different tanks. Sometimes one will be better for a certain fight then another. But they should all pretty much work in every situation (minus the tank swapping fights of course).A guild or raidleader's preference shouldn't be a deciding factor on changes. But if one tank does seem to be pulling ahead more often then others in terms of effectiveness, then some toning will need to be done. Right now that appears to be contested, at least in this thread.Key thing to keep in mind. A tank in the proper level gear (Tier 2 fighting mobs that drop Tier 3) should be adequete enough to do two things: Survive the encounter assuming equally geared healers and hold hate versus an equally geared DPS assuming a proper hate holding rotation is being used. This should be a priority in balancing the tank classes to make sure they can do their jobs.Next you balance the tank classes around each other to make sure they are roughly as effective as one another. But only if and only if they can all perform their jobs. No reason to nerf a tank to being useless because another one is. But thats common sense of course. This is also the part where you adjust their DPS a bit so when they are not tanking that they can help with the encounter.

Couching

05-25-2010, 10:59 AM

<cite>aemien@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote>Per hit doesn't mean very much because there's outside factors that can cause other issues.What does matter is how much DPS the tanks themselves are taking. We know Brawlers are avoidance tanks, and we know Plate are mitigating tanks. But what matters if they are on par with each other in their ability to reduce damage.In an ideal situation a Brawler will avoid as much damage in a set time (such as an encounter) that a Plate tank will Mitigate. But situations are never the norm, which is why we have 6 different tanks. Sometimes one will be better for a certain fight then another. But they should all pretty much work in every situation (minus the tank swapping fights of course).A guild or raidleader's preference shouldn't be a deciding factor on changes. But if one tank does seem to be pulling ahead more often then others in terms of effectiveness, then some toning will need to be done. Right now that appears to be contested, at least in this thread.Key thing to keep in mind. A tank in the proper level gear (Tier 2 fighting mobs that drop Tier 3) should be adequete enough to do two things: Survive the encounter assuming equally geared healers and hold hate versus an equally geared DPS assuming a proper hate holding rotation is being used. This should be a priority in balancing the tank classes to make sure they can do their jobs.Next you balance the tank classes around each other to make sure they are roughly as effective as one another. But only if and only if they can all perform their jobs. No reason to nerf a tank to being useless because another one is. But thats common sense of course. This is also the part where you adjust their DPS a bit so when they are not tanking that they can help with the encounter.</blockquote>Incorrect.Per hit is the key of survivability. On the other hand, average dmg taken means little to nothing of survivability.You can get every hit without dying as long as you have enough mitigation and dmg reduction to absorb dmg and let healers heal you up.But without enough mitigation and dmg reduction, you can avoid most hits but get killed by 2 consecutive hits, it's called spike damage.It is why plate tanks can tank most raid targets, except hard mode, in DW or 2h without using shield; 0 block. With enough mitigation and dmg reduction, they didn't need to avoid any hit and healers can keep them up.Next, just as what you said, tank should be balanced between survivability and dps.Brawlers has the weakest aggro while tanking because we are forced to be in defensive. We lost 30%-40% dps potential (which equals to aggro) for survivability.On the contrary, crusaders/plate tanks dps need a fix because they didn't sacrifice dps potential and aggro for survivability.

BChizzle

05-25-2010, 11:39 AM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>aemien@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote>Per hit doesn't mean very much because there's outside factors that can cause other issues.What does matter is how much DPS the tanks themselves are taking. We know Brawlers are avoidance tanks, and we know Plate are mitigating tanks. But what matters if they are on par with each other in their ability to reduce damage.In an ideal situation a Brawler will avoid as much damage in a set time (such as an encounter) that a Plate tank will Mitigate. But situations are never the norm, which is why we have 6 different tanks. Sometimes one will be better for a certain fight then another. But they should all pretty much work in every situation (minus the tank swapping fights of course).A guild or raidleader's preference shouldn't be a deciding factor on changes. But if one tank does seem to be pulling ahead more often then others in terms of effectiveness, then some toning will need to be done. Right now that appears to be contested, at least in this thread.Key thing to keep in mind. A tank in the proper level gear (Tier 2 fighting mobs that drop Tier 3) should be adequete enough to do two things: Survive the encounter assuming equally geared healers and hold hate versus an equally geared DPS assuming a proper hate holding rotation is being used. This should be a priority in balancing the tank classes to make sure they can do their jobs.Next you balance the tank classes around each other to make sure they are roughly as effective as one another. But only if and only if they can all perform their jobs. No reason to nerf a tank to being useless because another one is. But thats common sense of course. This is also the part where you adjust their DPS a bit so when they are not tanking that they can help with the encounter.</blockquote>Incorrect.Per hit is the key of survivability. On the other hand, average dmg taken means little to nothing of survivability.You can get every hit without dying as long as you have enough mitigation and dmg reduction to absorb dmg and let healers heal you up.But without enough mitigation and dmg reduction, you can avoid most hits but get killed by 2 consecutive hits, it's called spike damage.It is why plate tanks can tank most raid targets, except hard mode, in DW or 2h without using shield; 0 block. With enough mitigation and dmg reduction, they didn't need to avoid any hit and healers can keep them up.Next, just as what you said, tank should be balanced between survivability and dps.Brawlers has the weakest aggro while tanking because we are forced to be in defensive. We lost 30%-40% dps potential (which equals to aggro) for survivability.On the contrary, crusaders/plate tanks dps need a fix because they didn't sacrifice dps potential and aggro for survivability.</blockquote>On top of that not getting hit means less procs and reactives go off and very few procs in this game go off on an avoid giving a clear advantage to tanks that get hit and avoid less.

Silzin

05-25-2010, 11:53 AM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>aemien@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote>Per hit doesn't mean very much because there's outside factors that can cause other issues.What does matter is how much DPS the tanks themselves are taking. We know Brawlers are avoidance tanks, and we know Plate are mitigating tanks. But what matters if they are on par with each other in their ability to reduce damage.In an ideal situation a Brawler will avoid as much damage in a set time (such as an encounter) that a Plate tank will Mitigate. But situations are never the norm, which is why we have 6 different tanks. Sometimes one will be better for a certain fight then another. But they should all pretty much work in every situation (minus the tank swapping fights of course).A guild or raidleader's preference shouldn't be a deciding factor on changes. But if one tank does seem to be pulling ahead more often then others in terms of effectiveness, then some toning will need to be done. Right now that appears to be contested, at least in this thread.Key thing to keep in mind. A tank in the proper level gear (Tier 2 fighting mobs that drop Tier 3) should be adequete enough to do two things: Survive the encounter assuming equally geared healers and hold hate versus an equally geared DPS assuming a proper hate holding rotation is being used. This should be a priority in balancing the tank classes to make sure they can do their jobs.Next you balance the tank classes around each other to make sure they are roughly as effective as one another. But only if and only if they can all perform their jobs. No reason to nerf a tank to being useless because another one is. But thats common sense of course. This is also the part where you adjust their DPS a bit so when they are not tanking that they can help with the encounter.</blockquote>Incorrect.Per hit is the key of survivability. On the other hand, average dmg taken means little to nothing of survivability.You can get every hit without dying as long as you have enough mitigation and dmg reduction to absorb dmg and let healers heal you up.But without enough mitigation and dmg reduction, you can avoid most hits but get killed by 2 consecutive hits, it's called spike damage.It is why plate tanks can tank most raid targets, except hard mode, in DW or 2h without using shield; 0 block. With enough mitigation and dmg reduction, they didn't need to avoid any hit and healers can keep them up.Next, just as what you said, tank should be balanced between survivability and dps.Brawlers has the weakest aggro while tanking because we are forced to be in defensive. We lost 30%-40% dps potential (which equals to aggro) for survivability.On the contrary, crusaders/plate tanks dps need a fix because they didn't sacrifice dps potential and aggro for survivability.</blockquote>On top of that not getting hit means less procs and reactives go off and very few procs in this game go off on an avoid giving a clear advantage to tanks that get hit and avoid less.</blockquote>On top of this the only agro proc that i can think of for a tank that procs off of an avoid check is on the warriors....

Darkonx

05-25-2010, 12:31 PM

You can't take the same damage per hit, avoid more, have better snaps, better self-saves to live, and the highest potential DPS. Plate tanks do sacrafice a ton when tanking defensively, vs tanking offensively. Two different sets of gear is just as applicable to plate tanks as it is to leather tanks.

BChizzle

05-25-2010, 12:32 PM

Darkonx

05-25-2010, 12:39 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Darkonx wrote:</cite><blockquote>You can't take the same damage per hit, avoid more, have better snaps, better self-saves to live, and the highest potential DPS. Plate tanks do sacrafice a ton when tanking defensively, vs tanking offensively. Two different sets of gear is just as applicable to plate tanks as it is to leather tanks.</blockquote>LOL? Are you talking about brawlers here or SK's cause it sure looks like you are talking about SK's.</blockquote>Shadowknights have less avoidance, inferior snaps, and less self-saves than a brawler.

BChizzle

05-25-2010, 12:41 PM

<cite>Darkonx wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Darkonx wrote:</cite><blockquote>You can't take the same damage per hit, avoid more, have better snaps, better self-saves to live, and the highest potential DPS. Plate tanks do sacrafice a ton when tanking defensively, vs tanking offensively. Two different sets of gear is just as applicable to plate tanks as it is to leather tanks.</blockquote>LOL? Are you talking about brawlers here or SK's cause it sure looks like you are talking about SK's.</blockquote>Shadowknights have More DPS, Better Agro, More Ultility and More Survivability than a brawler.</blockquote>Fixed it for you. Of course you would want Sk's to have more avoidance then a brawler your class isn't OP enough.

Couching

05-25-2010, 12:47 PM

<cite>Darkonx wrote:</cite><blockquote>You can't take the same damage per hit, avoid more, have better snaps, better self-saves to live, and the highest potential DPS. Plate tanks do sacrafice a ton when tanking defensively, vs tanking offensively. Two different sets of gear is just as applicable to plate tanks as it is to leather tanks.</blockquote>Lol, who has highest dps potential, better self-saves, 4 bloodletters or 1 minute reuse tsunami like life save, and best overall aggro? It's crusaders.Not to say, only scrub plate tanks would be in defensive stance when they can hit mit cap easily in offensive and keep uncontested avoidance with shield on. In the current mechanics, there is no reason for plate tanks in defensive stance in raid.

Couching

05-25-2010, 12:49 PM

<cite>Darkonx wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Darkonx wrote:</cite><blockquote>You can't take the same damage per hit, avoid more, have better snaps, better self-saves to live, and the highest potential DPS. Plate tanks do sacrafice a ton when tanking defensively, vs tanking offensively. Two different sets of gear is just as applicable to plate tanks as it is to leather tanks.</blockquote>LOL? Are you talking about brawlers here or SK's cause it sure looks like you are talking about SK's.</blockquote>Shadowknights have less avoidance, inferior snaps, and less self-saves than a brawler.</blockquote>Please stop posting jokes. 4 bloodletters, magic reflection and 30k self ward is a lot better than any life save in this game.Not to say, sk has a lot better overall aggro than brawlers.

Bruener

05-25-2010, 01:17 PM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Darkonx wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Darkonx wrote:</cite><blockquote>You can't take the same damage per hit, avoid more, have better snaps, better self-saves to live, and the highest potential DPS. Plate tanks do sacrafice a ton when tanking defensively, vs tanking offensively. Two different sets of gear is just as applicable to plate tanks as it is to leather tanks.</blockquote>LOL? Are you talking about brawlers here or SK's cause it sure looks like you are talking about SK's.</blockquote>Shadowknights have less avoidance, inferior snaps, and less self-saves than a brawler.</blockquote>Please stop posting jokes. 4 bloodletters, magic reflection and 30k self ward is a lot better than any life save in this game.Not to say, sk has a lot better overall aggro than brawlers.</blockquote>Just correcting some mis-information here. It is 3 BL triggers not 4. And in order for BL to tic it has to steal from group members, doesn't work if everybody in the group dies in other words, and is not castable in combat. Magic reflection is 40% less magic damage so definitely not absolute, but yeah it is nice, on a longer recast though. 30k self ward is actually health stolen from group and not nearly as good of an ability as people make it out to be...I hardly ever use it, and less people alive in the group means less ward...no people mean no ward.Oh and about the Tsunami-like ability.....the SK version is 3x the reuse time...Pallies get one on the short reuse.But this isn't about SKs...no matter how much Blanka wants to make everything about SKs. Its about how avoidance tanking doesn't work and come next xpac it is going to really show. Leather wearers can reach mit cap already and it is only half way through this tiers first xpac, at the same time they have much higher avoid, more importantly immunity to strike-thru. Quite probably with the new gear coming out, especially next xpac, brawlers will get hit a lot less and because of mit caps will take the same amount of damage. IMO this is fine for me because they do have to give up a lot to do that, DPS+agro. As long as it is a big difference to go offensive to defensive to acheive this I don't see a problem with it.Where there will be a problem is if people get their way about having the same DPS/Agro as other tanks while being able to achieve that much higher survivability....or even worse push other tanks into having to make the same sacrifices but not allowing them to have the same survivability will completely unbalance things.But yeah, I predicted Brawlers would be OP'd next xpac anyway just looking at the trend of xpacs and how they started out this xpac with the mit levels they can reach.

Couching

05-25-2010, 01:30 PM

<cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Darkonx wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Darkonx wrote:</cite><blockquote>You can't take the same damage per hit, avoid more, have better snaps, better self-saves to live, and the highest potential DPS. Plate tanks do sacrafice a ton when tanking defensively, vs tanking offensively. Two different sets of gear is just as applicable to plate tanks as it is to leather tanks.</blockquote>LOL? Are you talking about brawlers here or SK's cause it sure looks like you are talking about SK's.</blockquote>Shadowknights have less avoidance, inferior snaps, and less self-saves than a brawler.</blockquote>Please stop posting jokes. 4 bloodletters, magic reflection and 30k self ward is a lot better than any life save in this game.Not to say, sk has a lot better overall aggro than brawlers.</blockquote>Just correcting some mis-information here. It is 3 BL triggers not 4. And in order for BL to tic it has to steal from group members, doesn't work if everybody in the group dies in other words, and is not castable in combat. Magic reflection is 40% less magic damage so definitely not absolute, but yeah it is nice, on a longer recast though. 30k self ward is actually health stolen from group and not nearly as good of an ability as people make it out to be...I hardly ever use it, and less people alive in the group means less ward...no people mean no ward.Oh and about the Tsunami-like ability.....the SK version is 3x the reuse time...Pallies get one on the short reuse.But this isn't about SKs...no matter how much Blanka wants to make everything about SKs. Its about how avoidance tanking doesn't work and come next xpac it is going to really show. Leather wearers can reach mit cap already and it is only half way through this tiers first xpac, at the same time they have much higher avoid, more importantly immunity to strike-thru. Quite probably with the new gear coming out, especially next xpac, brawlers will get hit a lot less and because of mit caps will take the same amount of damage. IMO this is fine for me because they do have to give up a lot to do that, DPS+agro. As long as it is a big difference to go offensive to defensive to acheive this I don't see a problem with it.Where there will be a problem is if people get their way about having the same DPS/Agro as other tanks while being able to achieve that much higher survivability....or even worse push other tanks into having to make the same sacrifices but not allowing them to have the same survivability will completely unbalance things.But yeah, I predicted Brawlers would be OP'd next xpac anyway just looking at the trend of xpacs and how they started out this xpac with the mit levels they can reach.</blockquote>Again, you miss the point that plate tanks still mitigate dmg better than brawlers even both hit mit cap because plate tanks have dmg reduction from their epic buff and plate tank only gear.Not to say, 99% brawlers won't have a chance to hit mit cap. Even for 1% brawlers, equal geared plate tanks still mitigate dmg better because the reason I listed above. More important, every fighter should sacrifce dps potential for survivability, vice versa. However, it is not the case of crusaders and warrior. It needs to be fixed.

Exordus

05-25-2010, 01:45 PM

Amen Brother!

Eritius

05-25-2010, 02:20 PM

I don't see why this is devolving into who has better stuff.Per hit doesn't mean very much because of terms on how many times a mob can attack in a given time. If you can survive one hit, thats great, but if you don't survive the next one because it happened before you were topped off then it just wasn't enough. But thats speaking on the short term.Long term your health bar means little, in fact replace it with your healer's power bar. If your DTPS (Damage taken per second) is too high in this case, your healers run out of power and we all know what happens then. This is assuming your healers are doing their job as well as the DPS (all tanking arguments should assume this).I'm going to repost my second point again since all it seems you read was the first line and took it out of context.Key thing to keep in mind. A tank in the proper level gear (Tier 2 fighting mobs that drop Tier 3) should be adequete enough to do two things: Survive the encounter assuming equally geared healers and hold hate versus an equally geared DPS assuming a proper hate holding rotation is being used. This should be a priority in balancing the tank classes to make sure they can do their jobs.Next you balance the tank classes around each other to make sure they are roughly as effective as one another. But only if and only if they can all perform their jobs. No reason to nerf a tank to being useless because another one is. But thats common sense of course. This is also the part where you adjust their DPS a bit so when they are not tanking that they can help with the encounter.

Couching

05-25-2010, 04:00 PM

And I will repost what I did that you clearly missed.Brawlers have the weakest aggro while tanking because we are forced to be in defensive. We lost 30%-40% dps potential (which equals to aggro) for survivability.On the contrary, crusaders/plate tanks dps need a fix because they didn't sacrifice dps potential and aggro for survivability.Every fighter should sacrifce dps potential for survivability, vice versa. However, it is not the case of crusaders and warrior. It needs to be fixed.

BChizzle

05-25-2010, 04:04 PM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>And I will repost what I did that you clearly missed.Brawlers has the weakest aggro while tanking because we are forced to be in defensive. We lost 30%-40% dps potential (which equals to aggro) for survivability.On the contrary, crusaders/plate tanks dps need a fix because they didn't sacrifice dps potential and aggro for survivability.Every fighter should sacrifce dps potential for survivability, vice versa. However, it is not the case of crusaders and warrior. It needs to be fixed.</blockquote>Don't even waste your time its typical SK fodder where they try and divert attention for their class being so overpowered, the OP doesn't even have a grasp of game mechanics and doesn't know what he's talking about. Fact is I am still waiting on this 90% avoidance parse.

Bruener

05-25-2010, 04:12 PM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>And I will repost what I did that you clearly missed.Brawlers has the weakest aggro while tanking because we are forced to be in defensive. We lost 30%-40% dps potential (which equals to aggro) for survivability.On the contrary, crusaders/plate tanks dps need a fix because they didn't sacrifice dps potential and aggro for survivability.Every fighter should sacrifce dps potential for survivability, vice versa. However, it is not the case of crusaders and warrior. It needs to be fixed.</blockquote>Odd because to hit cap on mit I give up a lot of DPS....I mean I have to put on my +mit gear which is not as much DPS, I have to go into defensive stance which drops my hit rate a lot. And I can't touch the avoidance level of Brawlers no matter how defensive I go.As a SK I do not have the damage reduction that the other "tanks" enjoy. And my survivability tools are on a lot longer recast and I have less of them.Wow, maybe things aren't nearly as out of whack as what some people like to make others believe.

BChizzle

05-25-2010, 04:27 PM

<cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>And I will repost what I did that you clearly missed.Brawlers has the weakest aggro while tanking because we are forced to be in defensive. We lost 30%-40% dps potential (which equals to aggro) for survivability.On the contrary, crusaders/plate tanks dps need a fix because they didn't sacrifice dps potential and aggro for survivability.Every fighter should sacrifce dps potential for survivability, vice versa. However, it is not the case of crusaders and warrior. It needs to be fixed.</blockquote>Odd because to hit cap on mit I give up a lot of DPS....I mean I have to put on my +mit gear which is not as much DPS, I have to go into defensive stance which drops my hit rate a lot. And I can't touch the avoidance level of Brawlers no matter how defensive I go.As a SK I do not have the damage reduction that the other "tanks" enjoy. And my survivability tools are on a lot longer recast and I have less of them.Wow, maybe things aren't nearly as out of whack as what some people like to make others believe.</blockquote>ROFL.

Couching

05-25-2010, 04:59 PM

Bruener

05-25-2010, 05:47 PM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>And I will repost what I did that you clearly missed.Brawlers has the weakest aggro while tanking because we are forced to be in defensive. We lost 30%-40% dps potential (which equals to aggro) for survivability.On the contrary, crusaders/plate tanks dps need a fix because they didn't sacrifice dps potential and aggro for survivability.Every fighter should sacrifce dps potential for survivability, vice versa. However, it is not the case of crusaders and warrior. It needs to be fixed.</blockquote>Odd because to hit cap on mit I give up a lot of DPS....I mean I have to put on my +mit gear which is not as much DPS, I have to go into defensive stance which drops my hit rate a lot. And I can't touch the avoidance level of Brawlers no matter how defensive I go.As a SK I do not have the damage reduction that the other "tanks" enjoy. And my survivability tools are on a lot longer recast and I have less of them.Wow, maybe things aren't nearly as out of whack as what some people like to make others believe.</blockquote>It's a simple math.Plate armor is about 70% more than leather armor.If you had hard time to hit mit cap, how could a brawler be able to hit mit cap as you claimed in other posts?</blockquote>SOE has added abilities for leather wearers to hit that cap. Abilities that give them much more +mit. Are you denying that you can hit mit cap?The real question is why is it so easy for all tanks to hit mit cap already but not so easy to hit an avoidance cap?

BChizzle

05-25-2010, 06:00 PM

<cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>And I will repost what I did that you clearly missed.Brawlers has the weakest aggro while tanking because we are forced to be in defensive. We lost 30%-40% dps potential (which equals to aggro) for survivability.On the contrary, crusaders/plate tanks dps need a fix because they didn't sacrifice dps potential and aggro for survivability.Every fighter should sacrifce dps potential for survivability, vice versa. However, it is not the case of crusaders and warrior. It needs to be fixed.</blockquote>Odd because to hit cap on mit I give up a lot of DPS....I mean I have to put on my +mit gear which is not as much DPS, I have to go into defensive stance which drops my hit rate a lot. And I can't touch the avoidance level of Brawlers no matter how defensive I go.As a SK I do not have the damage reduction that the other "tanks" enjoy. And my survivability tools are on a lot longer recast and I have less of them.Wow, maybe things aren't nearly as out of whack as what some people like to make others believe.</blockquote>It's a simple math.Plate armor is about 70% more than leather armor.If you had hard time to hit mit cap, how could a brawler be able to hit mit cap as you claimed in other posts?</blockquote>SOE has added abilities for leather wearers to hit that cap. Abilities that give them much more +mit. Are you denying that you can hit mit cap?The real question is why is it so easy for all tanks to hit mit cap already but not so easy to hit an avoidance cap?</blockquote>Any plate tank can also hit the block cap with all the block chance gear that is out there. The only aviodance advantage brawlers have is immunity to strikethrough. You are delusional.

Rasttan

05-25-2010, 06:13 PM

CESIUM SHOW THE PARSES OR DELETE YOUR POST Time to show these avoidance parses you ran your mouth about. And no they cant be laden with non block numbers that shows a snap when specials are up bs report.Becuase I do raid tank all this crap and your brawler is a crapload better than my parses even when I do stack tank gear all over me and kill my dps.

BChizzle

05-25-2010, 06:30 PM

<cite>Rasttan@Unrest wrote:</cite><blockquote>CESIUM SHOW THE PARSES OR DELETE YOUR POST Time to show these avoidance parses you ran your mouth about. And no they cant be laden with non block numbers that shows a snap when specials are up bs report.Becuase I do raid tank all this crap and your brawler is a crapload better than my parses even when I do stack tank gear all over me and kill my dps.</blockquote>It is just typical behavior for this group of players. In the end since they don't want to take a rational approach to their class when it gets overnerffed they will only have themselves to blame.For kicks I just threw on every item on block gear/defensive gear I have, my uncontested block was 54.5% and my mit while wearing it was 9511. Here is the best part my ability mod is 296 and crit bonus 26.5 and potency 22.5 with 39% double attack.Then I threw on the gear I tank in, hmm lets see my uncontested block is actually 43.3% mit is 10119 ability mod 479 crit bonus 30.9, potency 26.2 and 32.6% DA.None of those are remotely near any cap whatsoever as a matter of fact reaching 43.3% uncontested block and 10119 mit is actually very easy for any plate tank class and they can do so while in offensive stance.So again SK tell me why you guys aren't OP? Oh and Cesium lets see this parse.

Couching

05-25-2010, 06:44 PM

<cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>And I will repost what I did that you clearly missed.Brawlers has the weakest aggro while tanking because we are forced to be in defensive. We lost 30%-40% dps potential (which equals to aggro) for survivability.On the contrary, crusaders/plate tanks dps need a fix because they didn't sacrifice dps potential and aggro for survivability.Every fighter should sacrifce dps potential for survivability, vice versa. However, it is not the case of crusaders and warrior. It needs to be fixed.</blockquote>Odd because to hit cap on mit I give up a lot of DPS....I mean I have to put on my +mit gear which is not as much DPS, I have to go into defensive stance which drops my hit rate a lot. And I can't touch the avoidance level of Brawlers no matter how defensive I go.As a SK I do not have the damage reduction that the other "tanks" enjoy. And my survivability tools are on a lot longer recast and I have less of them.Wow, maybe things aren't nearly as out of whack as what some people like to make others believe.</blockquote>It's a simple math.Plate armor is about 70% more than leather armor.If you had hard time to hit mit cap, how could a brawler be able to hit mit cap as you claimed in other posts?</blockquote>SOE has added abilities for leather wearers to hit that cap. Abilities that give them much more +mit. Are you denying that you can hit mit cap?The real question is why is it so easy for all tanks to hit mit cap already but not so easy to hit an avoidance cap?</blockquote>Not just brawlers, most plate tanks have aa abilities to increase mit, it makes plate tanks even easier to hit mit cap.Are you denying that you can hit mit cap easily? If you had hard time to hit mit cap, how could a brawler be able to hit mit cap as you claimed in other posts?

Gungo

05-25-2010, 08:47 PM

<cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Cesium@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>reguardless of what you think is happening. ACT avoidance reports have our monk in the 85-90% avoidance. While the plate tank is under 50%. Avoidance needs to be changed. Brawlers need to come down a minimum of 15% and the mit cap needs to be raised to 85+</blockquote>LOL 85-90%? Let's see these so called avoidance reports.</blockquote>Bchizzle is correct.It s alreayd a well known fact that contested avoidance does absolutely nothing. Tons of parses showing raids mobs completely ignore all contested avodiance.So lets assume a brawler can get 75% block which requires myth/defensive stance and ~170% block chance at lvl 90.In order to get 85-90% actual avoidance the brawler would need an additional ~40-60% uncontested base avoidance.(This does not even include the LEVEL adjustment which lowers it further.)What gear does your brawler have that gives him that much uncontested avoidance?Now if you are including shield ally and another fighters(preferably brawler) avoid buff on your brawler. Then your under 50% is complete bull.I would love to see this brawlers avoidance report on any actual raid npc. If your brawler is tanking heroic adds in raids thats not a raid npc.Here is a helpful hint of the day for you. Did you know that plate tanks actually have MORE base uncontested block then brawlers. You see brawlers are limited to 27% minimum block via AA's, defensive stance, and mythical buff. Today went live the personae change were we can actually see this. With one of the best raid shields in game a plate tank will have more uncontested block then brawlers.And regardless of what bruener said plate tank can hit the avoidance cap. Of course certain classes such as brawlers and oddly paladins will hit it easier then others due to extra block chance via AA's.

Dorieon

05-26-2010, 02:30 AM

Lol, this entire thread is ridiculous. There is absolutely no way ANY brawler can post a ZW avoidance report of 90% or higher (iI doubt any can post an 80% either). I doubt any could post one of a single named encounter. As has already been said very short fights with temp buffs up the entire time won't count. One fight won't mean anything as far as what the OP has claimed of brawlers taking over the mt role. If he can post a ZW with those numbers (and i want a screenshot of the mit too) then he has a basis for a complaint. A persona display of 92% avoidance means nothing, post a ZW avoidance report or close the thread.

Dechau

05-26-2010, 05:25 AM

Its just so typical..Brawlers in generel have been screwed for how long time now ?? And when we are finally getting closer to where we should be the other tanks start complaining because we can actually take a spot in a raid now !!I would also like to see a ZW report that shows 80+% avoid. I can tank a single mob and get a 80 % avoid rapport, but that's like looking at dps, sometimes you peak, and sometimes you have cooldowns..ZW is all that can show the right pic, so show us one from a SF raid instance and we might believe you <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />

Eritius

05-26-2010, 06:10 AM

I don't understand why this needs to be a "They can do this so I need buffs" or "I can't do that so they need nerfs" discussion.If Brawlers need to sacrifice DPS just to survive to do their job and causes them to lose threat then they cannot perform their job. I said earlier that assuming there is no issues with DPS or Healers, and the tanking rotation is proper to the class then all that needs to happen is for the tank to survive the encounter AND hold hate from the DPS. If they cannot accomplish both tasks then they need to be fixed so that they can. This doesn't mean nerf the shadowknights (or any other tank) to their level of uselessness.I'm not suggesting Brawlers are in bad shape and need a fix. I can't make that distinction as I don't have a Brawler. But anyone with half a brain knows a tank does two main things. Keep Agro, and Stay Alive. Once all 6 tanks can do this, Then you start tweaking them to be on par with one another. An OP SK is not the reason your monk or bruiser is getting wiped by a raid boss, or vice versa. And nerfing the other class isn't going to help yours.There's envy on both sides of the argument and I have no idea why. Go whine and moan at your raid leader if you got replaced, don't take it out on players of the other class.

Rotate

05-26-2010, 09:47 AM

lol i think he started this thread cuz i started the one about nerfing sk's dps =p..lols me and cesium in same guild.. ya zone wide i avrage 20% higher avoid rate then him.. zone wide i am usualy 71-76% avoid rate while he is usualy at 50%. And yes some named fights that go down fast and dont tank long.. i do get 85+ avoidance rate on.. just temps mainly =p.. in raid no temps.. my mit is between 11600 and 12500 depend what healers i have in group.. some buff mit better.. but once there procs start going off from gear.. i usualy cap the lvl 90 mit of 75%. and about 60% uncontested avoidance. from procs that add + block chance.we did some named in new underfoot lastnight tanked rathgar and got 87% avoidance rate on him.. but that was like a under 3 min fight.. and i only tanked him for about 1 min 30 of it. probly.We just get temp avoidance buffs that make our avoid rates look good =p. but ya plate tanks can get high uncontested too if they stack block chance.going all tank gear.. makes our parse's blow =/.if anything we need a bump in dps.. to keep agro better while we are full defensive.. conjys and rangers tend to steal my mobs sometimes and i have to yell at them.. for not using deagros.

Wasuna

05-26-2010, 11:29 AM

You all are going to really upset Breuner. If another fighter class starts coming here saying they have to sacrafice their ability to maintain agro for their ability to be a viable tank then the crusaders are gonna be looked at even more.The only fighter sub-group that doesn't have to make the agro/survibaility choice is basically crusaders. As a Guardian, with the tools I have now, I could run full offensive and maybe maintain agro in a decent group 90% of the time. If I have some transfer, and a dirge or coercer then make that 95% of the time that I hold agro. Spell double attacks and spikes will still get me. If I run full offensive then I might as well ask the Wizard to tank and I just put my avoidance buffs on them.What I'm reading here is that a brawler is a viable tank choice for specific situations just like the rest of us and that we are all still overshadowed by the Crusaders in the game. To be honest, Paladins are just as powerful as Shadowknights but you never hear crap from the Paladins. I wonder what that has to say about personaility types that choose different classes?

Eritius

05-26-2010, 03:11 PM

<cite>Rotate@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>lol i think he started this thread cuz i started the one about nerfing sk's dps =p..lols me and cesium in same guild.. ya zone wide i avrage 20% higher avoid rate then him.. zone wide i am usualy 71-76% avoid rate while he is usualy at 50%. And yes some named fights that go down fast and dont tank long.. i do get 85+ avoidance rate on.. just temps mainly =p.. in raid no temps.. my mit is between 11600 and 12500 depend what healers i have in group.. some buff mit better.. but once there procs start going off from gear.. i usualy cap the lvl 90 mit of 75%. and about 60% uncontested avoidance. from procs that add + block chance.we did some named in new underfoot lastnight tanked rathgar and got 87% avoidance rate on him.. but that was like a under 3 min fight.. and i only tanked him for about 1 min 30 of it. probly.We just get temp avoidance buffs that make our avoid rates look good =p. but ya plate tanks can get high uncontested too if they stack block chance.going all tank gear.. makes our parse's blow =/.if anything we need a bump in dps.. to keep agro better while we are full defensive.. conjys and rangers tend to steal my mobs sometimes and i have to yell at them.. for not using deagros.</blockquote>An easy fix to Brawlers there would be to up their taunt amounts. That is if they don't want to bother mucking around with their DPS. If you up their tanking DPS, usually their regular DPS is increased by a bit more due to stances and other buffs they usually don't see. That might not be a problem if its low enough though.But if holding threat is a problem across the board with Brawlers, then they could use a boost in that department. It doesn't sound (by just going off whats in the thread, so take it with a grain of salt) that they have issues surviving.I wouldn't mind seeing tanks across the board doing the damage that crusaders currently do. It would make fights quicker, and it would make tanking more fun. If you know all you're really doing is standing there and taking damage, it gets old. But if you know that you're a bastion of defense that also putting the hurt on, it gives a boost of confidence and is a heck of alot of fun to play.

BChizzle

05-26-2010, 04:34 PM

<cite>Taemien@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Rotate@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>lol i think he started this thread cuz i started the one about nerfing sk's dps =p..lols me and cesium in same guild.. ya zone wide i avrage 20% higher avoid rate then him.. zone wide i am usualy 71-76% avoid rate while he is usualy at 50%. And yes some named fights that go down fast and dont tank long.. i do get 85+ avoidance rate on.. just temps mainly =p.. in raid no temps.. my mit is between 11600 and 12500 depend what healers i have in group.. some buff mit better.. but once there procs start going off from gear.. i usualy cap the lvl 90 mit of 75%. and about 60% uncontested avoidance. from procs that add + block chance.we did some named in new underfoot lastnight tanked rathgar and got 87% avoidance rate on him.. but that was like a under 3 min fight.. and i only tanked him for about 1 min 30 of it. probly.We just get temp avoidance buffs that make our avoid rates look good =p. but ya plate tanks can get high uncontested too if they stack block chance.going all tank gear.. makes our parse's blow =/.if anything we need a bump in dps.. to keep agro better while we are full defensive.. conjys and rangers tend to steal my mobs sometimes and i have to yell at them.. for not using deagros.</blockquote>An easy fix to Brawlers there would be to up their taunt amounts. That is if they don't want to bother mucking around with their DPS. If you up their tanking DPS, usually their regular DPS is increased by a bit more due to stances and other buffs they usually don't see. That might not be a problem if its low enough though.But if holding threat is a problem across the board with Brawlers, then they could use a boost in that department. It doesn't sound (by just going off whats in the thread, so take it with a grain of salt) that they have issues surviving.I wouldn't mind seeing tanks across the board doing the damage that crusaders currently do. It would make fights quicker, and it would make tanking more fun. If you know all you're really doing is standing there and taking damage, it gets old. But if you know that you're a bastion of defense that also putting the hurt on, it gives a boost of confidence and is a heck of alot of fun to play.</blockquote>I'd like to see an increase in dps for brawlers just for the fact that plate tanks are parsing more then us which really doesn't seem fair but w/e. Taunts should also be increased, we are so far behind plates in agroboth our taunts and dps could be risen significantly and we would still be behind.

Prothos

06-04-2010, 04:11 PM

<cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>BChizzle wrote:</cite><blockquote><cite>Taemien@Lucan DLere wrote:</cite><blockquote>How much DPS are monks taking in comparison to plate? Raw numbers on a stat sheet don't tell the whole story. I know some of the Plate DPS have cooldowns to mitigate more then just the 75% mitigation cap. For example (and I use arbitrary numbers here) raid boss does 10000 damage. Mitigation cap reduces this to 2500 damage but a defensive cooldown may reduce this to 1250.One instance where a Brawler replaces a Guardian as MT isn't enough to call for nerfs to a class, despite the outdated thinking many of you might have. Shoot I'd bet some still think Crusaders shouldn't tank, dunno what role they expect them to fill.</blockquote>50 brawlers could replace guardians how again would that be any different then the 50 SK's that replaced them too? A brawler MT is not actually a bad idea until you realize that a brawler MT doesn't have even remotely close to the agro generation of any other tank class then you just bring in the crusader. Anyow I'd love for Cesium to show this avoidance report of a brawler with 85-90% raid avoidance who has capped mit, it won't happen though.</blockquote>Lol. The constant desperation of keeping things pointed at SKs is getting a little pathetic.</blockquote>I got to about here and then I decided to stop reading because people know nothing about brawlers this xpac. I have way more hate control than a guardian/zerker/sk/etc but the guardian takes hits better. As it should be.

Bruener

06-04-2010, 06:20 PM

The cap needs to be raised for mitigation because it is not even halfway thru this xpac, meaning only a 1/4 of the way thru this tier, and tanks are easily hitting cap already.

Nulgara

06-04-2010, 08:12 PM

how do you get that we are only 1/4 through the expansion? time wise maybe.. content wise theres a whole 3 mobs that havent been killed yet. 2 of them are from a zone added last week. i dont get your point on that one.and how on earth woudl raising the mit cap do anything but trivialize even more content?

Bruener

06-04-2010, 09:59 PM

<cite>Nulgara@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>how do you get that we are only 1/4 through the expansion? time wise maybe.. content wise theres a whole 3 mobs that havent been killed yet. 2 of them are from a zone added last week. i dont get your point on that one.and how on earth woudl raising the mit cap do anything but trivialize even more content?</blockquote>Maybe you should reread what I typed. I said we are only half way thru this x-pac and since the pattern is to keep the level cap thru 2 xpacs that means we are going to be at a whole new xpac staying at level 90. 1 out of 2 xpacs at a tier is 1/2. 1/2 of 1/2 = 1/4 thru this tier.Well the point is to actually keep mitigation useful and would allow for SOE to easily make harder hitting mobs coming up so tanks would be more likely to up their mitigation to tank them.Raising the cap means that instead of next xpac all tanks laughing and taking cloth pieces for DPS since mitigation is a joke they could actually make tank gear useful. It also would mean that certain tanks that have +mit buffs (Warriors) woudl see a lot more use from their abilities.Does that make sense?

circusgirl

06-07-2010, 06:45 PM

Regarding the mit cap: What you see in the persona window is your mitigation vs. a level 90 opponent. Mitigation (like all other resists) is less effective vs. higher level mobs. NEITHER plate tanks nor brawlers are actually capping mitigation yet, so this whole thread is kind of pointless.

BChizzle

06-07-2010, 07:01 PM

<cite>Vinka@Antonia Bayle wrote:</cite><blockquote>Regarding the mit cap: What you see in the persona window is your mitigation vs. a level 90 opponent. Mitigation (like all other resists) is less effective vs. higher level mobs. NEITHER plate tanks nor brawlers are actually capping mitigation yet, so this whole thread is kind of pointless.</blockquote>That just isn't true it is very easy for plate tanks to cap mit.

Ambrin

06-08-2010, 10:35 AM

I believe the formula for calculating mitigation is similar for resists, ie against a L98 opponent you would need ( 150*98 ) 14700 mitigation to be at the cap. You will need more mitigation if some of your armour is below L90. A plate tank is capable of hitting this level of mitigation in only T1 armour (just like my guild's current MT, although he does have some T2 here and there) meanwhile in similar gear I typically have a full ~3500 less mitigation (giving up even more offense to equip +mitigation jewelry). I don't even have a significantly higher block or avoidance rate, most of my advantage comes from being immune to strikethrough.Basically, a properly geared and specced brawler can (in my opinion) achieve the same level of survivability as a plate tank with the correct gear, the downside being that said brawler will have completely gimped his DPS / agro generating capabilities in order to do so (much, much more than a plate tank has to). A brawler can't effectively tank (anything but easy) encounters without being set up in a gear set that increases their survivability, and once we equip this gear our agro generation goes down the toilet.Basically brawlers still need some improvements, largely when it comes to agro generation. Some quick suggestions of mine to help fix this include:* Make Dragon Rage and the bruiser equivalent proc on every combat or spell attack. The procs should also be encounter procs. The threat value generated by this procs may also need to be increased.* Give brawler's the capability of easily getting their base minimum block to 35%. This would allow brawlers a real advantage when it comes to avoidance. It would also mean brawlers would have to focus less on defensive gear for our survivability so we could focus on DPS / agro gear instead. This could be achieved by giving us a base 25% minimum block (not attached to any stance), than we would have 5% on our mythical buff and 5% through a TSO AA that enhances our defensive and combination stance (it's 6% at the moment, but could be lowered to 5%).* Separate strikethrough immunity from our defensive stance. It could be placed on something like our class stat buff instead.* Make sure brawlers have access to (high end) "tanking" weapons such as the Living Stone Cestus or the Supple Dogwood Staff. We need weapons that have high levels of block on them (equivalent to a shield) as well as possibly +mitigation increases, ward procs, perhaps even protection values or straight up % based damage reductions. Basically these weapons would do as much for us as equipping a shield would for a plate tank. These weapons could have lower damage rating to allow for more defensive stats to be added on (perhaps the damage ratings could be similar to what is found on priest or mage weapons). An example of this would be a brawler only weapon dropping of something like Toxxulia or something hardmode in palace with a 100DR, 25% block chance, +5 mitigation, Stonewill 3, plus some green stats.* Rework the monk "Awareness" AA line so it does more for our agro. Mongoose Stance, Enhance: Tranquil Vision, and Evade Check should do something to increase the monks threat, not lower it. Mongoose Stance could be changed so to increase the monks threat to the target whenever the monk avoidance an attack (like the warrior Reversal AA). Enhance: Tranquil Vision could be changed to a threat proc for the target instead of a hate transfer (ie +threat to fighters including the casting monk, -threat to anyone else). Finally, Evade Check could lower the threat position of the most hated non-fighter to the target encounter by 1 position.

Morrolan V

06-10-2010, 06:46 PM

I believe we have a winner - I agree with everything Ambrin said.QFE in particular:<table cellspacing="0" cellpadding="0" width="100%"><tbody><tr><td width="100%"><img src="http://forums.station.sony.com/eq2/styles/EQ2/eq2_default/images/common/icon_minipost.gif" border="0" width="12" height="9" /> 06/08/2010 06:35:37 Subject: Re:Time to re-visit avoidance and mitigation </td></tr><tr><td colspan="2"><hr /></td></tr><tr><td colspan="2">Basically, a properly geared and specced brawler can (in my opinion) achieve the same level of survivability as a plate tank with the correct gear, the downside being that said brawler will have completely gimped his DPS / agro generating capabilities in order to do so (much, much more than a plate tank has to).</td></tr></tbody></table>

Couching

06-10-2010, 07:32 PM

The problem of avoidance is that contested avoidance is ignored too much by yellow and orange con mobs in this game. It makes brawler's innate contested avoidance useless.For example, my avoidance report in Cella is only 38% and considering 15%-18% comes from tsunami and bob and weave. In other word, my real avoidance on yellow con mobs is 20%-23% and my persona shows 60%+. (I am in offensive.)It's even worse on orange con mobs and not to say raid targets. Brawlers have no choice but focus on gear with mitigation increase AND we have to be in defensive stance to get uncontested avoidance.It's really ridiculous that the innate avoidance of a so called avoidance tank is useless for most part of this game.On the contrary, extra mitiation, 60% more than leather armor, on plate armor is the innate advantage of plate tanks and this innate advantage works on all of the game content.

Gungo

06-10-2010, 07:33 PM

<cite>Bruener wrote:</cite><blockquote>The cap needs to be raised for mitigation because it is not even halfway thru this xpac, meaning only a 1/4 of the way thru this tier, and tanks are easily hitting cap already.</blockquote>This would trivilize a large portion of the game.Instead SOE can do what it already does with spell resists and make certain NPCs have special atks that are HARDER to MITIGATE. Basically meaning NPCS they want can hit harderthus even if you are at the 75% cap for a lvl 98 NPC you would still need MORE mitigation to mitigate those 'harder to mitigate" special atks. It will also make it more intuitive for tanks with short term mitigation buffs to time those buffs for when they are going to be hit by these specials.Spell resists on most of the hard mode encounters already work this way. People were to stupid to realize that when they brought back high resists on all tier 9 gear they made most AOE harder to mitigate and thus you still needed more resists. Except now when viewing your persona window and seeing your resists state 75% reduction they actually dont mean anything since not only are they effected by npc level they actually are reduced further by these new effects.

Couching

06-11-2010, 11:55 AM

I failed to see any reason to raise mit cap in this game.Plate tanks already hit mit cap, 75%, at lv98 and there are several damage reduction gear in this game.With class ability/buff, plate tanks already mitigate damage too much and nearily impossible to be killed.For example, pal can hit 75% mit at lv98, two damage reduction gear, 10% damage reduction and 10% damage heals back from their epic buff.As long as pal is not killed, he only takes about 17%-18% of incoming physcial damage. If you count on the damage reduction from healer's spells and gear proc, the damage taken by the pal is less than 15%.Any reason to raise mit cap so that plate tank can be even more OP in this game comparing with other classes in this game?

steelbadger

06-11-2010, 12:15 PM

<cite>Couching@Crushbone wrote:</cite><blockquote>I failed to see any reason to raise mit cap in this game.Plate tanks already hit mit cap, 75%, at lv98 and there are several damage reduction gear in this game.With class ability/buff, plate tanks already mitigate damage too much and nearily impossible to be killed.For example, pal can hit 75% mit at lv98, two damage reduction gear, 10% damage reduction and 10% damage heals back from their epic buff.As long as pal is not killed, he only takes about 17%-18% of incoming physcial damage. If you count on the damage reduction from healer's spells and gear proc, the damage taken by the pal is less than 15%.Any reason to raise mit cap so that plate tank can be even more OP in this game comparing with other classes in this game?</blockquote>Problem is that Warriors (Guards specifically) are supposed to have some kind of mitigation advantage. They don't because, as you pointed out, anyone with access to plate can get well over 75%. Thanks to this Pallies passively take far less damage than even Guardians.It's a somewhat misguided attempt to differentiate the plate tanks again, but watered down by the simpering "Asking for nerfs is bad" mentality. The real solution is to decrease mit across the board and make bonuses to it meaningful again.

kuchi

08-25-2010, 01:08 AM

<cite>Cesium@Nagafen wrote:</cite><blockquote>With the new changes to brawlers and their "Strike thru immunity" its time to re-visit base avoidance again. Brawlers now are all ready reaching the mitigation cap and doing this while also reaching 90-95% TRUE avoidance. This is leaving a large gap between tanks. Brawlers have a huge advantage over any other tank from a defensive perspective.Its time to look at either raising the mit cap or removing it all together. The mitagation cap being removed would allow for a much more balanced look at comparing the core defence of each tank. Plate tanks can easily reach the current cap of 75%. Now there are Brawlers reaching those same numbers. Removing this cap would give the plate tanks a chance to compete again for thier raid slots again. After all its your ability to take hits, or avoid them, which makes you a tank in the first place.Avoidance is off the charts right now for brawlers. On raids I see our monk hitting 92%+ avoidance. He hits this insane amount of avoidance while also hovering very close to the mitagation cap. As a brawler they are immune to strike thru so that 92% avoidance is a true reflection of there avoidance. Where as other fighters still have to deal with strike thru chances while having nearly 20% less avoidance.Now that LU56 is on the verge of release maybe we can start this new project for LU57?LOLZ...sorry..this is as far into this thread that I made it....oh you poor neglected plate tanks....my heart bleeds for you...oh and fyi...that 90% avoidance...when tanking raid mobs...usually turns out in the 60% range...plus or minus a few.</blockquote>

circusgirl

08-25-2010, 10:57 AM

I've found that in actuality I can have either high mit or high avoidance. My mitigation has increased significantly as I've moved into T3 gear, but its really just because the T3 stuff has +mit increase on it instead of +block chance. The actual base avoidance of a plate tank in a decent shield isn't far behind brawlers (along the lines of 26.3% from a nice shield instead of 27% for a brawler) so as we sacrifice block chance for mit increase we end up pretty comparable in terms of avoidance. Brawlers can have either high mit OR high avoidance, but not really both. And either one will cripple our dps to below plate tank levels.

Bleveitornot

08-25-2010, 12:27 PM

Wow, Quite a thread and very good information on both sides.My only question would be;Are Brawlers being used to Tank Hard Mode Name Mobs currently and if so do they stay up longer then a plate tank?Any raid Brawler can tank any group zone even with out all the buffs etc. IMOAnd at the end of the day, from all these pages of replies, we are all talking about raid mobs I think?

circusgirl

08-25-2010, 01:35 PM

<cite>Bleveitornot wrote:</cite><blockquote>Wow, Quite a thread and very good information on both sides.My only question would be;Are Brawlers being used to Tank Hard Mode Name Mobs currently and if so do they stay up longer then a plate tank?Any raid Brawler can tank any group zone even with out all the buffs etc. IMOAnd at the end of the day, from all these pages of replies, we are all talking about raid mobs I think?</blockquote>Brawlers can tank hard mode raid mobs (and survive), but we are definitely not the first choice to do so. None of the top guilds are using brawler MTs, while there are top guilds out there that use each of the plate tanks.