Does SOE realise mitigation is superior to avoidance?

[Skha]

I keep asking this question myself every time I see our mitigation nerfed. Under the current system, it would be technically possible to tank any given mob with 1% avoidance and 99% mitigation, sure tank would be stunned most of the time but he would live, his hitpoints dropping steadily, healing would be easy and predictable. Now, with 99% avoidance and 1% mitigation, tanking would be impossible. Even if our avoidance against mobs like Krathuk or Nagalik, would really be 99%, we'd get hit, it would be just a matter of time until one would be looking at revive screen. Right now on live, unbuffed plate tank with 7 fabled armor slots has roughly 60% mitigation. I, with 5 fabled armor slots have 41.2%. So lets say the difference in mitigation between a plate and an avoidance tank is 17% at the moment. We all know what happens when we eat rippost or, god forbid, wrath of fury. If we dont die instantly, we are deep in red, the second option being hardly ever the case tho (at least for me). I don't have a character in on test myself, but judging(spelling?) from what I've seen, full fabled guards can hit the cap, 80% mitigation, selfbuffed. Now posts from Gaige and Rumbite are showing that their mitigation is around 30%. That is with mostly rare crafted armor. So lets be generous and say full fabled brawler would have 35 % mitigation. That is 45% difference between us and plate tanks (and I'm not taking in considertaion that guards can actually self buff over 80%). If mobs are still meant to pose a challange for plate tanks, imagine how hard they have to hit so the tank still takes considerable damage even when raid buffed. Lets say they have to hit for around 1k with normal attack and 3k with specials (considering T6 high end raid mobs, even if it was said that mobs should actually hit for less and more often, I think these numbers arent totally unrealistic considering how much HP will the level 60 fabled out tanks have). Now do the math and see how much will they hit us, avoidance tanks, for. Yes, its not pretty. Therefore I hope that SOE realises, that with every % of mitigation they take away from us, they are making the tanking more and more impossible for us (not harder, impossible). No matter how much avoidance we get in trade, it is NOT making us tank any better (not even talking about the fact that our avoidance doesnt really look that hot on test, as Gaige has comennted with, imho well chosen words, in /gu <span>:smileywink:</span>) I'm wondering if other brawlers feel the same, because we must never forgot that even with Avoidance being our "primary" tanking tool, without mitigation, tanking is not possible. This is a disadvantage compared with plate tanks who can fully rely (spelling?) on their mitigation without being afraid of dying becuase of low avoidance. <div></div>

[Game]

<P>Amen! Couldn't have said it any better.</P> <P> Avoidance being random to pose a challange (according to SOE ) offers absolutely no help in tanking when our mitigation is in the range of low 30%. Sooner or later you will get the unlucky streek of hits and will be dead because multiple hits back to back with 30% mitigation from any serious mob will mean dead brawler. </P> <P>Only way to allow brawler tanking is to either make avoidance not so random (which most likely is not going to ever happen) or set base mitigation on leather armor (at least for brawlers) a lot higher or increase brawlers base HP per staming above other fighters.</P> <P>The only way a brawler can survive as a tank is :</P> <P>1.  higher avoidance + higher HPs  then other fighters  (seems to me serious increase in brawlers HP pool might save the day in current state of the brawler)</P> <P>2. higher avoidance + same HPs as other fighter classes + 3/4 of the mitigation of plate tank (this still makes for a semi gimped tank)</P>

[Nacoa]

Ok, let's take your extreme example.  Assume the mob hits for 1000hps per hit.  And to keep the math simple, let's say the mob hits 1000 times in a single battle.  During the entire battle, your 99% mitigation tank will be hit 990 times for 9900 points of damage total (10 damage each)  During the entire battle, your 99% avoidance tank will be hit 10 times for 9900 points of damage total (990 damage each).  So both tanks will take the same damage during the fight. What you need to consider is not just the tanking, but also the healing.  You do not have to be healed by a cleric's reactives while tanking.  Those would work best for the constant pounding a mitigation tank receives.  After the revamp, the brawler/shaman combo should be quite formidable.  The high avoidance on the tank means the ward is hit less often and thus lasts a lot longer.  And then the few blows that land on the tank could be absorbed by the ward.  It'd be really easy for a shaman to keep up a ward to absorb 990 damage once every 100 hits. Alternatively, a druid's HOTs would have plenty of time to regen you while you're dodging all those attacks....assuming you don't get unlucky too many times in a row.  (I'd go with the shaman) And that brings us to specials.  IIRC, mitigation only matters on physical specials.  The nasty ones are magical, so it's resists that become important, and mitigation and avoidance become irrelevant.  We don't get to dodge fireballs. I think any griping is premature unless someone has gone to test, tried out the changes, AND tried out some new strategies that work WITH the changes.  Our "old" way of fighting is not going to work as well, but that doesn't mean there are not new ways that could work better. <div></div>

[Vorham]

<DIV>There's really nothing they can really do to help the streakiness of avoidance.... and against epics the streaks are deadly.  A brawler takes more healing to get the job done, not because he takes more damage total but because he takes it all at once and the healers have to quickly fill him back up before the next shot kills (if the first one didn't due to his lower HP).</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I pulled aggro other day on Rognog, he's a weenie mob but my HP still dropped to the red in about 1 second... that doesn't happen to mitgation tanks against mobs like Rognog.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Plus it doesn't help that epics hit through avoidance like pros... brawlers are hit harder by this than the mitigation types because mitigation is a second line of defense, where light armor really isn't.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Granted the revamp isn't out yet but I really still don't see how they can change the basic mechanics of random avoidance vs. constant mitigation.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV>

[Game]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nacoa wrote:<BR>Ok, let's take your extreme example.  Assume the mob hits for 1000hps per hit.  And to keep the math simple, let's say the mob hits 1000 times in a single battle.  During the entire battle, your 99% mitigation tank will be hit 990 times for 9900 points of damage total (10 damage each)  During the entire battle, your 99% avoidance tank will be hit 10 times for 9900 points of damage total (990 damage each).  So both tanks will take the same damage during the fight.<BR><BR>What you need to consider is not just the tanking, but also the healing.  You do not have to be healed by a cleric's reactives while tanking.  Those would work best for the constant pounding a mitigation tank receives.  <BR><BR>After the revamp, the brawler/shaman combo should be quite formidable.  The high avoidance on the tank means the ward is hit less often and thus lasts a lot longer.  And then the few blows that land on the tank could be absorbed by the ward.  It'd be really easy for a shaman to keep up a ward to absorb 990 damage once every 100 hits.<BR><BR>Alternatively, a druid's HOTs would have plenty of time to regen you while you're dodging all those attacks....assuming you don't get unlucky too many times in a row.  (I'd go with the shaman)<BR><BR>And that brings us to specials.  IIRC, mitigation only matters on physical specials.  The nasty ones are magical, so it's resists that become important, and mitigation and avoidance become irrelevant.  We don't get to dodge fireballs.<BR><BR>I think any griping is premature unless someone has gone to test, tried out the changes, AND tried out some new strategies that work WITH the changes.  Our "old" way of fighting is not going to work as well, but that doesn't mean there are not new ways that could work better.<BR><BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Unfortunatelly that is not how avoidance works. The 99% avoidance tank would get hit A LOT more thne the 10 times and thus die or require A LOT more really fast heals. Avoidance is to random to alow any tank being a primary line of defense. Even if the avoidance tank was hit only 10 times ( which he wouldnt )  he could be hit 10 times in a row and die.</DIV> <DIV> Either way avoidance the way it is can NOT be used as a primary line of defense for any tank and especially not for a low mitigation tank.</DIV>

[kildarn]

<P>Actually this isn't true.  Under the current, non revamp based functionality of the game many of us, including myself, tank all the time.  Avoidance is my main method of limiting damage and surviving an encounter in which I do tank.  Therefore, avoidance can and is being used effectively to tank with.  The problem is not in using avoidance to tank with, but using the dramatic decrease in effectiveness of avoidance to tank with in relation to the level difference of the mob you are fighting.</P> <P>The real problem is 2 fold.  </P> <P>First, the rapid, unbalanced decrease in effectiveness of avoidance compared to mitigation as a mobs relative level increases.  Thus making it impossible for a lvl 50 brawler to tank a lvl 54 ^^^x4 mob via avoidance.  Because at that disparity in level difference between the tank and the NPC avoidance is practicly useless where as mitigation still holds strong.  This can be changed and scaled differently only if problem number 2 is solved.</P> <P>Problem 2.  The ability for mitigation tanks to gain an avoidance high enough to equal that of a brawler while enjoying the high mitigation % at the same time.  Thus, reducing the number of times he gets hit to equal a bruiser along with absorbing a far greater % of the damage taken when hit.  A big, fat ogre guardian wearing full plate armor should not be very "agile".  Where as a leather armor wearing brawler, student of martial arts, should be nimble and "avoid" things.</P> <P>The concept behind a mitigation tank and an avoidance tank seems to be a bit lost.  In theory, things should scale the same and operate the same between the two.  Avoidance, being more random then mitigation does have its drawbacks and therefore can not completely be as viable an option as a tank.  However, if scaling issues and HP differences were corrected an avoidance tank should and would be able to take on the same mobs as a mitigation tank with slightly different healing strategies inplace.</P> <P>Perhaps, as stated, using shaman and druids as the main healers instead of clerics.  This way the brawlers skills are maximized by utilizing wards and regens rather then direct heals that only get casted AFTER the tank gets hit.  When doing something unconventionally, one must approach it in an unconventional way.  </P> <P> </P>

[Skha]

"Perhaps, as stated, using shaman and druids as the main healers instead of clerics.  This way the brawlers skills are maximized by utilizing wards and regens rather then direct heals that only get casted AFTER the tank gets hit.  When doing something unconventionally, one must approach it in an unconventional way. "   Ok lets take a look at this from healer perspective. Reactive healing : works better with a high mitigation tank, hands down. Wards : currently on live its a waste of power, once they start taking mitigation into account they will work fine for both classes. Direct heals : Since they have to be cause AFTER the target has been hit, they will work better with a plate tank where the HP dropping is more predictable and the danger of taking big spike is not that big. 2 out of 3 healers vote plate tank. <div></div>

[Game]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> kildarner wrote:<BR> <P>Actually this isn't true.  Under the current, non revamp based functionality of the game many of us, including myself, tank all the time.  Avoidance is my main method of limiting damage and surviving an encounter in which I do tank.  Therefore, avoidance can and is being used effectively to tank with.  The problem is not in using avoidance to tank with, but using the dramatic decrease in effectiveness of avoidance to tank with in relation to the level difference of the mob you are fighting.</P> <P>The real problem is 2 fold.  </P> <P>First, the rapid, unbalanced decrease in effectiveness of avoidance compared to mitigation as a mobs relative level increases.  Thus making it impossible for a lvl 50 brawler to tank a lvl 54 ^^^x4 mob via avoidance.  Because at that disparity in level difference between the tank and the NPC avoidance is practicly useless where as mitigation still holds strong.  This can be changed and scaled differently only if problem number 2 is solved.</P> <P>Problem 2.  The ability for mitigation tanks to gain an avoidance high enough to equal that of a brawler while enjoying the high mitigation % at the same time.  Thus, reducing the number of times he gets hit to equal a bruiser along with absorbing a far greater % of the damage taken when hit.  A big, fat ogre guardian wearing full plate armor should not be very "agile".  Where as a leather armor wearing brawler, student of martial arts, should be nimble and "avoid" things.</P> <P>The concept behind a mitigation tank and an avoidance tank seems to be a bit lost.  In theory, things should scale the same and operate the same between the two.  Avoidance, being more random then mitigation does have its drawbacks and therefore can not completely be as viable an option as a tank.  However, if scaling issues and HP differences were corrected an avoidance tank should and would be able to take on the same mobs as a mitigation tank with slightly different healing strategies inplace.</P> <P>Perhaps, as stated, using shaman and druids as the main healers instead of clerics.  This way the brawlers skills are maximized by utilizing wards and regens rather then direct heals that only get casted AFTER the tank gets hit.  When doing something unconventionally, one must approach it in an unconventional way.  </P> <P> </P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>In the end  you state the same thing mitigation >>> avoidance .<BR>

[kildarn]

<P>From the healing stand point it's not necessarily true.  A shaman + druid combo of healers would be able to cover a brawler perfectly well.  (this is of course post patch with ward working)  As someone who has a defiler, has grouped with a fury and had a bruiser tanking I can tell you it's very very easy to keep them alive.  Shaman wards, druid regens, tank avoids and all is well.  Very few direct heals are ever needed. </P> <P>In the case of a big time ^^^x4 mob we are not and never ever will be meant to tank these over a guardian.  Hell, SK's, Paly's, and Zerkers aren't meant to tank them over a guardian either.  Why?  Because guardians are raid tanks.  Thats it.  Thats what they do.  They don't do dps at all.  They dont have anything else.  They tank big mobs for big groups of people.  It's their nitch.  We may be able to "fill in" here or there.  We may be able to goof off and pull it off if our raid is really well organized.  But we are not meant to be the one's up front, tanking the big guy.</P> <P>Brawlers currently tank just fine in regular xp groups.  When some healer fixes come out and our tanking is slightly increased we will tank even better in xp groups.  No healer I have ever grouped with has complained about my ability to withstand abuse.  Then again, I don't try to tank that lvl 53^^^x2 mob with 5 friends in a solo xp group of high lvl 40s and myself at 50.  I simply say, "I can't tank that with 1 healer" and walk away.</P> <P>To let you know my standpoint, I love tanking.  I made my bruiser to tank with.  I've focused on agility and stamina so I can tank even better.  I have no dillusions that I am a raid tank though.  That is not my characters role within the game.  When it comes to raiding, I have a few utility things I can do, and other then that I get in the back and punch the mob in the back of the head.</P> <P> </P>

[Skha]

OK <font color="#ff0066">"From the healing stand point it's not necessarily true.  A shaman + druid combo of healers would be able to cover a brawler perfectly well.  (this is of course post patch with ward working)  As someone who has a defiler, has grouped with a fury and had a bruiser tanking I can tell you it's very very easy to keep them alive.  Shaman wards, druid regens, tank avoids and all is well.  Very few direct heals are ever needed." <font color="#ffffff">The point is, they will work just as well with a plate tank, while reactives aren't exactly brawler friendly. So thats an advantage for plate users. </font><font color="#ff0066">"</font></font><font color="#ff0066">In the case of a big time ^^^x4 mob we are not and never ever will be meant to tank these over a guardian.  Hell, SK's, Paly's, and Zerkers aren't meant to tank them over a guardian either.  Why?  Because guardians are raid tanks.  Thats it.  Thats what they do.  They don't do dps at all.  They dont have anything else.  They tank big mobs for big groups of people.  It's their nitch.  We may be able to "fill in" here or there.  We may be able to goof off and pull it off if our raid is really well organized.  But we are not meant to be the one's up front, tanking the big guy." <font color="#ffffff">If we can't tank <i>every</i> encounter in the game, we are not tanks. I won't accept a class that can only tank heroic stuff as a tank, every lame scout can do that. As for guardians doing no DPS, try giving a guard RGF and boost him 200% haste, you'll see yourself what damage he can do. <font color="#ff0066">"</font></font></font><font color="#ff0066">Brawlers currently tank just fine in regular xp groups.  When some healer fixes come out and our tanking is slightly increased we will tank even better in xp groups.  No healer I have ever grouped with has complained about my ability to withstand abuse.  Then again, I don't try to tank that lvl 53^^^x2 mob with 5 friends in a solo xp group of high lvl 40s and myself at 50.  I simply say, "I can't tank that with 1 healer" and walk away." <font color="#ffffff">Yes we are fine against heroic mobs, but then again, who isn't? Besides, that's not what the game is about for me. And I don't try to tank 53^^^x2 either. Oh and I almost forgot, we can't even tank 1 group instances anymore (Icy Dig). <font color="#ff0066">"</font></font></font><font color="#ff0066">To let you know my standpoint, I love tanking.  I made my bruiser to tank with.  I've focused on agility and stamina so I can tank even better.  I have no dillusions that I am a raid tank though.  That is not my characters role within the game.  When it comes to raiding, I have a few utility things I can do, and other then that I get in the back and punch the mob in the back of the head."</font><font color="#ff0066"><font color="#ffffff"> I'm no tanking advocate although I, too, prefer tanking over being just a dumb DPS. However, right now it looks like (at least to me) that not only we are getting our DPS nerfed, which is understandable however unpleasant it is, but we still can't tank for crap. From revamp I'm expecting the following : either I'll do the DPS comparable to scout archetype (and I don't mean troubadours) OR I will be able to tank <i>every </i>encounter in the game. Should none of these be the case, I'm gonna cancel my subscription without looking back (I know its lame to threaten cancelling subscription but I'm personally not gonna keep paying SOE just to play a <i>half-[Removed for Content] tank/dps [Removed for Content] hybrid which nooone gives a [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] about</i>). </font></font><font color="#ff0066"></font><div></div>

[Rumbi]

<P>There is a fairly simple solution, really.  <STRONG>Brawlers need more hit points</STRONG>. </P> <P>Look back at any game that has Monks, I mean almost any game, and you will see that even though they take more damage than other classes, they have more hit points.  This is true from Final Fantasy II all the way up to now.</P> <P>In Everquest 2, this makes just as much sense.  Because the fighting is real time, and because of the way we take damage (avoidance), we often get spikes.  These times come when we happen to fail our avoidance check a few times in a row.  When this happens, we take more damage than others because of our armor.  The best way to combat this is to give Brawlers a hit point bonus.  </P> <P><EM>It only makes sense!</EM>  When it comes down to it, who would have more raw hit points: the Monk who runs around barefoot, kicking things with bare feet and punching things with bare fists.... or the Guardian who's pale, soft skin is covered by metal all day long.  The answer is obvious, and this is why so many games previously took the path of giving Monk-types higher hit points.</P>

[kildarn]

<DIV>I see your points skharr.  I donno, I guess we just feel differently about our class and what our capability should be.  The only technical thing i differ on is that ward does work better on a brawler then on a plate tank.  This comes from a 50 bruiser / 40 defiler.  Because of the avoidance the ward actually tends to last it's entire possible duration on a brawler where as a plate tank gets hit to often and chews through the ward.  Post revamp, when ward actually works correctly it will be a huge benefit to the brawler tank as it will absorb an enormous percentage of damage taken by that brawler.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Rumbite does have the right idea though.  If we are meant to be able to tank EVERY encounter then just give us a couple thousand more hps and we'll be capable.</DIV>

[MakhailSamma]

<DIV>Hore HP's would solve most everything I see wrong with us as a tank. Jez! Call SOE and tell them we need more HP's! We know they all listen to you <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></DIV>

[BrainMu]

<DIV>I don't see how wards will be improved much for us after the revamp i still think plate tanks get the better deal.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>curretnly : ward is used before mitigation is checked.</DIV> <DIV>revamp   : ward is used after mitigation is checked.</DIV> <DIV>   </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>1000 point ward being hit for 1000 damage.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>- brawler with 30% mit 80% avoidance</DIV> <DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>currently : 10 attacks, 2 hits go through ward takes 1000 of 2000 damage...... 1000 goes through, 30% is mitigated down to 700 ... so brawler takes 700</DIV></DIV> <DIV>revamp   : 10 attacks, 2 hits go through 30% is mitigated, which leaves 1400 of 2000 ..... ward takes 1000 ... so brawler takes 400</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>- plate tank 80% mit 30% avoidance</DIV> <DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>curretnly : 10 attacks, 7 hits go through ward takes 1000 of 7000 damage ..... 6000 goes through, 80% is mitigated down to 1200 ... so tank takes 1200 </DIV></DIV> <DIV>revamp   : 10 attacks, 7 hits go through 80% is mitigated, which leaves 1400 of 7000 ..... ward takes 1000 ... so tank takes 400</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>so unless i am completely off base on how wards currently do or will work, it looks as though we don't get the sweeter end of that deal.</DIV>

[Rumbi]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> BrainMuck wrote:<BR> <DIV>I don't see how wards will be improved much for us after the revamp i still think plate tanks get the better deal.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>curretnly : ward is used before mitigation is checked.</DIV> <DIV>revamp   : ward is used after mitigation is checked.</DIV> <DIV>   </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>1000 point ward being hit for 1000 damage.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>- brawler with 30% mit 80% avoidance</DIV> <DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>currently : 10 attacks, 2 hits go through ward takes 1000 of 2000 damage...... 1000 goes through, 30% is mitigated down to 700 ... so brawler takes 700</DIV></DIV> <DIV>revamp   : 10 attacks, 2 hits go through 30% is mitigated, which leaves 1400 of 2000 ..... ward takes 1000 ... so brawler takes 400</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>- plate tank 80% mit 30% avoidance</DIV> <DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>curretnly : 10 attacks, 7 hits go through ward takes 1000 of 7000 damage ..... 6000 goes through, 80% is mitigated down to 1200 ... so tank takes 1200 </DIV></DIV> <DIV>revamp   : 10 attacks, 7 hits go through 80% is mitigated, which leaves 1400 of 7000 ..... ward takes 1000 ... so tank takes 400</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>so unless i am completely off base on how wards currently do or will work, it looks as though we don't get the sweeter end of that deal.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>You are right on about how they will (or should) work after the CC.. but you are a little off for the current way they work.</P> <P>While you would expect the unwarded damage that gets through to be mitigated, it currently isn't.  This means that if you have a 80% mitigation and a 100HP ward on you, a 1000 point hit would deal you 900 damage.  Without the ward, your mitigation would bring it down to 800 damage.</P> <P>Think about bigger raid mobs that hit for a lot more.  If you are going to be hit for 4000 damage, an 80% mitigation alone would take that down to 800 damage.  With a 1000 point ward, are taking 3000 points of damage.</P> <P>This is how wards are <EM>really</EM> broken.  Not only do they currently not mitigate the damage that is warded, but allows the rest of the damage to go through unmitigated, as well.<BR></P>

[BrainMu]

I am pretty sure that blow through damage is a myth or if it did exist it has since been fixed .... but if it was true then that would make the ward changes even more beneficial for plate tanks over brawlers than the current set-up <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Edit:</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV><A href="http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=spellart&message.id=57752&query.id=22963#M57752" target=_blank>http://eqiiforums.station.sony.com/eq2/board/message?board.id=spellart&message.id=57752&query.id=22963#M57752</A></DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>about wards.</DIV> <P>Message Edited by BrainMuck on <SPAN class=date_text>08-25-2005</SPAN> <SPAN class=time_text>12:16 PM</SPAN></P><p>Message Edited by BrainMuck on <span class=date_text>08-25-2005</span> <span class=time_text>12:18 PM</span>

[Game]

<DIV>After the combat changes  ward will be aplied after the damage is mitigated by armor  that means wards will work even better on plate tanks just as rective heals already do.</DIV>

[Nacoa]

<div></div><div></div><div></div><span><blockquote><hr>Skharr wrote:OK<font color="#ff0066">"From the healing stand point it's not necessarily true.  A shaman + druid combo of healers would be able to cover a brawler perfectly well.  (this is of course post patch with ward working)  As someone who has a defiler, has grouped with a fury and had a bruiser tanking I can tell you it's very very easy to keep them alive.  Shaman wards, druid regens, tank avoids and all is well.  Very few direct heals are ever needed."<font color="#ffffff">The point is, they will work just as well with a plate tank, while reactives aren't exactly brawler friendly. So thats an advantage for plate users.</font></font><hr></blockquote>Regens work the same for plate tanks.  Wards will work far, far worse.  The constant pounding will mean that the ward is going to have to be re-cast very often and they're rather power-expensive for constant re-casting.  With an avoidance tank, the ward will be hit much less often.Basically, wards should work best with avoidance tanks, and reactives should work best with mitigation tanks.<blockquote><font color="#ff0066"><font color="#ffffff"></font><font color="#ff0066"></font></font><hr><font color="#ff0066"><font color="#ffffff">As for guardians doing no DPS, try giving a guard RGF and boost him 200% haste, you'll see yourself what damage he can do.</font></font><hr></blockquote> Yeah, that guardian will be at almost 10% of a DPS class!  In the group I fight with most often, the <u>warden</u> often out-damages my guardian.  Granted, I almost never use a non-taunt CA, but still.<blockquote><font color="#ff0066"><font color="#ffffff"><font color="#ff0066"></font></font></font><font color="#ff0066"><font color="#ffffff"></font></font><hr><font color="#ff0066"><font color="#ffffff">Should none of these be the case, I'm gonna cancel my subscription without looking back (I know its lame to threaten cancelling subscription but I'm personally not gonna keep paying SOE just to play a <i>half-[Removed for Content] tank/dps [Removed for Content] hybrid which nooone gives a [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot] about</i>).</font></font><font color="#ff0066"></font><div></div><hr></blockquote>Just so you know, Moorguard plays a brawler.  There are people with lots of input who do care about brawlers.And again, I think it's premature to take any sort of 'sky is falling' attitude until not only have you tried out the changes, but also tried out some new tactics to work with them.  If you do that and things are still lousy, feel free to shout 'the sky is falling' constantly.</span><div></div><p>Message Edited by Nacoa on <span class=date_text>08-25-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:27 PM</span>

[Nacoa]

<span><blockquote><hr>BrainMuck wrote:<div>I don't see how wards will be improved much for us after the revamp i still think plate tanks get the better deal.</div> <div> </div><hr></blockquote>Basically, two of the 3 'special' healing types seem to be designed for a specific tank. Reactives work best when the tank is hit very often.  So they work great for a mitigation tank. Wards work best when the tank is not hit often.  So they should work great for an avoidance tank. </span><div></div>

[Nacoa]

<span><blockquote><hr>BrainMuck wrote:<div></div> <div></div>I am pretty sure that blow through damage is a myth or if it did exist it has since been fixed .... but if it was true then that would make the ward changes even more beneficial for plate tanks over brawlers than the current set-up <div> </div><hr></blockquote>No, because if the tank is hit often, it chews through the ward very quickly.  Wards are much more power-intensive than other forms of healing, so re-casting that ward constantly is a bad thing(tm).  (currently-I haven't check the power requirements on test) The best possible scenario from the shaman's point of view is for the ward to last it's full duration.  That's not going to happen at all with a mitigation tank, but could happen with an avoidance tank.</span><div></div>

[BrainMu]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nacoa wrote:<BR><SPAN><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> BrainMuck wrote:<BR> <DIV>I don't see how wards will be improved much for us after the revamp i still think plate tanks get the better deal.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Basically, two of the 3 'special' healing types seem to be designed for a specific tank.<BR><BR>Reactives work best when the tank is hit very often.  So they work great for a mitigation tank.<BR>Wards work best when the tank is not hit often.  So they should work great for an avoidance tank.<BR><BR></SPAN> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>I see what your getting at but the idea of my post is the if the damage is getting mitigated before it is applied to the ward ... the ward can esentially take more hits on a plate tank than an avoidance tank ... working out to basically the same thing.<BR>

[Turb]

Let me guess, Moorguard is a MONK not a bruiser?

[Jezekie]

Let me guess, you play a bruiser?Right, what does it have to do with anything? Right again, nothing.Bashing of the devs is unnessesary and only makes you come across as a [expletive ninja'd by Faarbot], Turbo.<div></div>

[Turb]

[Edited in Hindsight :]Well, you can invoke Faarbot all you like, but I don't see the hit on monks being comparable to the hit on bruisers. Bruisers have lost a lot of colour in the revamp. Obviously dps has to come down, but it's a real shame we've lost variety in our skills and our tactical options.<p>Message Edited by Turb0T on <span class=date_text>08-26-2005</span> <span class=time_text>02:51 PM</span>

[Rumbi]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Turb0T wrote:<BR>Let me guess, Moorguard is a MONK not a bruiser?<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>Not sure what the point of this post was...</P> <P>And no, he plays a Bruiser.</P>

[Turb]

Heh.In which case I'll go find the provisioner recipie for Humble Pie and go get crafting <img src="/smilies/3b63d1616c5dfcf29f8a7a031aaa7cad.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />Hats off to Moorgard then!

[Rumbi]

<P>Maybe I'm just being short-sighted, but I dont see how wards are more useful on either tank type.</P> <P>Lets assume that both tank types are taking the same amount of damage, overall (in some non-existant perfect world).  The Brawler takes the damage in spikes, where as the Warrior takes the damage slowly over time.</P> <P>For the sake of ease, we are going to use easy-to-work-with numbers.  These are also assuming that mitigation is applied to all damage (post-CC).  My purpose here is to compare healing capabilities for tanks, not mitigation/avoidance performance.</P> <P><U>Ward</U>: 1000 HP; 30 second duration</P> <P><U>Reactive</U>: 200 HP per hit; 30 seconds or 10 hits (max 2000 HP)</P> <UL> <LI><STRONG>Brawler:</STRONG> hit 4 times; 500 dmg per hit</LI> <UL> <LI>Ward: prevents 2000 damage total</LI> <UL> <LI><EM><U>no waste</U></EM></LI></UL> <LI>Reactives: heal 800 damage total</LI> <UL> <LI><EM>wastes 12 reactive hits (1200HP worth)</EM></LI> <LI><EM>800 healed - 2000 taken = 1200 below original</EM></LI></UL></UL> <LI><STRONG>Warrior</STRONG> hit 20 times; 100 dmg per hit</LI> <UL> <LI>Ward: prevents 2000 damage</LI> <UL> <LI><EM><U>no waste</U></EM></LI></UL> <LI>Reactives: heals 4000 total</LI> <UL> <LI><EM>no waste</EM></LI> <LI><EM>4000 healed - 2000 taken = 2000 above original</EM></LI></UL></UL></UL> <P>Notice that in all methods, the only wasted healing is when Brawlers are given reactive heals.  We already know that reactives are better for plate tanks, so this doesn't really prove anything.. although I never realized just how much better reactives were for plate tanks.. in the above example, there is a 3200HP difference after 1 minute of reactives.  Considering plate tanks have more HP's to start with, this is very concerning....</P> <P>Whether you take a lot of damage in spikes, or a large amount of low damage hits, the ward still protects the same amount.  Before CC, the ward didn't mitigate damage, so it was beneficial to leather tanks because we have low mitigation to start off with...</P> <P><STRONG>But I still don't understand how wards are better for plate tanks.  Can someone please explain it in a non-ambiguous way?</STRONG> (prove your idea, don't just give a speculation)</P>

[BrainMu]

<DIV>Wards aren't better for either class.  The change in wards will simply improve the performance of a plate tank compared to an avoidance tank post revamp vs live.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>ie. currently wards will block a couple of big hit then dissapear, an avoidance tank will only get hit a couple times in a period of time .. where as a plate tank will get hit more often.  so currently the ward on the plate tank won't last as long as it does on an avoidance tank.   post revamp the wards will check mitigation before being hit  ... so they will last alot longer on a plate tank and only slightly longer on an avoidance tank than they currently do.  While the end result is that they work equaly well on both tanks ... plate tanks see a much larger improvement from the current state of wards on live .. hence making the gap between the avoidance tanks and plate tanks wider.</DIV>

[Game]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> BrainMuck wrote:<BR> <DIV>Wards aren't better for either class.  The change in wards will simply improve the performance of a plate tank compared to an avoidance tank post revamp vs live.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>ie. currently wards will block a couple of big hit then dissapear, an avoidance tank will only get hit a couple times in a period of time .. where as a plate tank will get hit more often.  so currently the ward on the plate tank won't last as long as it does on an avoidance tank.   post revamp the wards will check mitigation before being hit  ... so they will last alot longer on a plate tank and only slightly longer on an avoidance tank than they currently do.  While the end result is that they work equaly well on both tanks ... plate tanks see a much larger improvement from the current state of wards on live .. hence making the gap between the avoidance tanks and plate tanks wider.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>Tanking a mob that cons red ward will be gone within seconds. Avoidance vs red con mobs is VERY weak. In other words red con vs avoidance poof goes the ward, red con vs mitigation = ward will last a lot longer. </P> <P>Everyone compares usualy 4 hits that a brawler would take vs 10 hits a plate tank would , yet that is not at all the case vs red or even orange cons. Brawler recive far more damage then we would like to believe and thats because you cant avoid high con mobs that well.</P> <P>So vs anything orange or higher mitigation is significantly better for wards then avoidance and thats especialy true after combat changes.<BR></P>

[Nacoa]

<span><blockquote><hr>BrainMuck wrote: <blockquote> <hr> Nacoa wrote:<span> <blockquote> <hr> BrainMuck wrote: <div>I don't see how wards will be improved much for us after the revamp i still think plate tanks get the better deal.</div> <div> </div> <hr> </blockquote>Basically, two of the 3 'special' healing types seem to be designed for a specific tank.Reactives work best when the tank is hit very often.  So they work great for a mitigation tank.Wards work best when the tank is not hit often.  So they should work great for an avoidance tank.</span> <div></div> <hr> </blockquote>I see what your getting at but the idea of my post is the if the damage is getting mitigated before it is applied to the ward ... the ward can esentially take more hits on a plate tank than an avoidance tank ... working out to basically the same thing. <div></div><hr></blockquote>Let's say that the ward can only take 500 hps.  Let's say the plate tank is hit for 50 mitigated damage per second.  The ward only lasts 10 seconds against the mitigation tank. Let's say a brawler is hit for 100 mitigated damage every 5 seconds, because of the Yoda-like superball style dodging.  The ward on the brawler lasts 25 seconds.  Most wards time-out after 30 seconds, so this situation is about as ideal as possible in terms of healing.</span><div></div>

[Raidi Sovin'faile]

<P>In most RPG games that I've played that had a Martial Artist (not a mystical monk, but a unarmed specialist fighter), they always had very little armor, and loads more hitpoints. Usually in the 25% more range.</P> <P>Now, our ability to self heal helps with that... although now it's power dependant, and doesn't help the big hits (or flurry of damage) anyways.</P> <P> </P> <P>Quite frankly, I'm not sure why the high mitigation tanks would have more hitpoints anyways. In the logical sense, they aren't as used to being beaten on as those without armor (thus knowing how to cushion the blow after everything else), and in the game balance sense, they have mitigation to inflate their health levels, while we have none.</P> <P> </P> <P>I'd be fine with both tanks styles having a similar "final score" in avoidance, us gaining it innately and plate tanks requiring a tower shield... and our differences in mitigation being offset by our differences in Hitpoint totals.</P> <P>It's far easier to balance Mitigation VS stable Hitpoints, rather than Mitigation VS the streaky nature of random chance Avoidance.</P> <P>And obviously they are having a tough time keeping the plate wearers from reaching the avoidance cap... so might as well be done with it.</P> <P> </P> <P>I'm keeping my martial arts feel by not using a shield, and wearing leather armor. The steel clad warriors can "avoid" (read: block) just as much as me by basically being a moving wall of steel. Give us some more hitpoints to go with our low mitigation, and I'll be happy!</P> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>*Edit*</DIV> <DIV>There's also precedent for Mitigation:Hitpoint comparisons... our Bruising Spirit line. We specifically give up hitpoints for higher mitigation. Why not just make that built into the Brawler's base stats to begin with, instead of trying to fiddle around with avoidance.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Maybe it's my oldschool D&D point of view.. but hitpoints have always meant to me the ability to turn a blow that would normally be fatal into merely a scratch. Hence why we fight at 100% even though we have only 1% hitpoints. The lower our hitpoints, the lower our chances at turning that blow...</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Sure it's not a perfect line of thought (what if you are surprised, etc)... but it works for a game like EQ, and it makes sense that a Brawler would be better at that than the armor dependant Warrior.</DIV><p>Message Edited by Raidi Sovin'faile on <span class=date_text>08-26-2005</span> <span class=time_text>08:56 PM</span>

[Gaige]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Turb0T wrote:<BR>Let me guess, Moorguard is a MONK not a bruiser?<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>Moorgard plays a bruiser, he was a monk in beta.</DIV>

[Vorham]

<P>was doin a 12 man rognog run earlier -- MT fighters died somehow(!?)... and here are the results of me tryin to keep rognog off the healers a couple times while it turned into a zergfest...the 8k hit was the last death w/o a few pieces of armor, hadn't repaired in a while =p, but since all the other quick strikes were pretty nearly insta-death it doesn't really matter. And notice the 2 back-to-back hits, go go avoidance. Didnt have a chance to mend, didnt have a chance to get healed...good times. At least Intimidate worked )</P> <P><IMG src="http://i15.photobucket.com/albums/a395/btriex/SPLAT.jpg"></P> <P>it was hilarious in a sad sad way =p</P> <P> </P> <P> </P>

[VettsVey]

<P>Honestly they need to revamp thier calcuations on avoidance, or give it a huge boost.  Not 50% 100% more like 500% and test it out on the server.  Cause whatever thier calcualtions are, they are pathetic.  Secondly, provide alternative armor that migates higher than chain with the same benefits of leather avoidance, only for Brawler classes.  Or provide higher crush/slash/pierce mitigation to the leather armor.  Or provide an innate bonus to the brawler class ( like the innate buckler, which honestly.... what the heck does 3% do anyways... give us like tower shield % innate, test that see if we survive better &nbsp<img src="/smilies/8a80c6485cd926be453217d59a84a888.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" />   providing mitigation to crushing/slashing/pierceing.  We have forged ourselves into weapons of war, how come we cannot forge our own resiliance as well?  The introduction of avoidance was a neat and great idea, but flawed in thier narrow imagination and how they conducted it.  </P> <P> </P> <P>Yes I know bout the added bonus to deflection.  But its not really a bonus, it was something striped away from parry and given to deflection.  Which we had parry before, so nothing new or great.</P> <P>I dont know.  Lots of changes, lots of nerfherding, lots of new abilities... still remains to be seen, but mitigation is what we need direly to be a tank class ( oh please dont turn this into a DPS vs. Tank issue, ya darn hijackers we are both, to some extent, so deal with it )  and a greater cushion on health pool.</P> <P>While we are at it, fix the group lotto, maybe then you can use the same formula for avoidance, since they seem to be the same right now!!!!  Freaks!</P> <P><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </P> <P><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </P><p>Message Edited by VettsVey on <span class=date_text>08-28-2005</span> <span class=time_text>08:59 PM</span>

[kildarn]

<P>I'm not a parser so I don't have solid backup numbers to show you guys.  I'm also not on the beta so I don't know exactly how it will work but from the descriptions, it's pretty easy to understand.  All I can say is that in theory, the numbers posted of say 10 swings, they land 3 bla bla makes sense.  Only because of the math involved.  However, as we all know avoidance is streaky in nature and things don't always play out the way some random number crunching would show.</P> <P>Currently, my defiler's ward sucks but is great for a brawler.  Post revamp, it seems to me the problem I have with ward will be fixed.  It will become a viable method of keeping a plate tank alive while at the same time working even better for the brawler.  Keep in mind a few things.  First, ward is going to generate hate towards the shaman.  The less times it gets hit, the less hate it will generate.  Second, the less times it gets hit the longer it will last reducing power costs.  Brawlers may only absorb 2-3 hits per ward from normal ^^ mobs but thats usually going to take a good 20 seconds or so for a mob to land.  I can see how it doesn't sound right but from playing both the shaman and the bruiser I can truthfully say it will be better for brawlers.  Shaman casts 2 wards on a brawler per mob due to longevity of the ward.  Shaman casts 3-4 wards on a plate tank due to it constantly getting beaten off.</P> <P>Sometimes it's not exactly about how well a bruiser mitigates damage.  Sometimes the background of agro generated and power consumed for the healer is the telling factor.</P>

[Rumbi]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nacoa wrote:<BR><SPAN><BR>Let's say that the ward can only take 500 hps.  <BR><BR>Let's say the plate tank is hit for 50 mitigated damage per second.  The ward only lasts 10 seconds against the mitigation tank.<BR><BR>Let's say a brawler is hit for 100 mitigated damage every 5 seconds, because of the Yoda-like superball style dodging.  The ward on the brawler lasts 25 seconds.  Most wards time-out after 30 seconds, so this situation is about as ideal as possible in terms of healing.<BR></SPAN> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>This situation is flawed.</P> <P>Of course the ward is going to last longer on the Brawler.. he is taking 20 damage per second, while the plate tank is taking 50 damage per second.<BR></P>

[Nacoa]

<span><blockquote><hr>Rumbite wrote: <blockquote> <hr> Nacoa wrote:<span>Let's say that the ward can only take 500 hps.  Let's say the plate tank is hit for 50 mitigated damage per second.  The ward only lasts 10 seconds against the mitigation tank.Let's say a brawler is hit for 100 mitigated damage every 5 seconds, because of the Yoda-like superball style dodging.  The ward on the brawler lasts 25 seconds.  Most wards time-out after 30 seconds, so this situation is about as ideal as possible in terms of healing.</span> <div></div> <hr> </blockquote> <p>This situation is flawed.</p> <p>Of course the ward is going to last longer on the Brawler.. he is taking 20 damage per second, while the plate tank is taking 50 damage per second.</p> <div></div><hr></blockquote>The numbers were made up simply to illustrate the point.  I made no attempt to make the two battles 'equal'.</span><div></div>

[Rumbi]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nacoa wrote:<BR><SPAN><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Rumbite wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nacoa wrote:<BR><SPAN><BR>Let's say that the ward can only take 500 hps. <BR><BR>Let's say the plate tank is hit for 50 mitigated damage per second.  The ward only lasts 10 seconds against the mitigation tank.<BR><BR>Let's say a brawler is hit for 100 mitigated damage every 5 seconds, because of the Yoda-like superball style dodging.  The ward on the brawler lasts 25 seconds.  Most wards time-out after 30 seconds, so this situation is about as ideal as possible in terms of healing.<BR></SPAN> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>This situation is flawed.</P> <P>Of course the ward is going to last longer on the Brawler.. he is taking 20 damage per second, while the plate tank is taking 50 damage per second.<BR></P> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>The numbers were made up simply to illustrate the point.  I made no attempt to make the two battles 'equal'.<BR></SPAN> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>I understand what you were doing, but you can't just make up an example and say that it proves a point. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I can make up an example that a Brawler takes less damage than a Guardian while tanking Lord Nagalik, but that doesn't really show us anything, nor is it factual.</DIV>

[Nacoa]

<span><blockquote><hr>Rumbite wrote:<div></div> <blockquote> <hr> Nacoa wrote:<span>The numbers were made up simply to illustrate the point.  I made no attempt to make the two battles 'equal'.</span> <div></div> <hr> </blockquote> <div>I understand what you were doing, but you can't just make up an example and say that it proves a point. </div> <div> </div> <div>I can make up an example that a Brawler takes less damage than a Guardian while tanking Lord Nagalik, but that doesn't really show us anything, nor is it factual.</div><hr></blockquote>There was also no attempt to "prove" anything. The poster I was responding to did not see that wards could be better for brawlers than mitigation tanks.  What they were missing is how a ward could last longer with an avoidance tank.  Instead, they were only considering the moment-to-moment damage the tank receives. My example was an attempt to illustrate the broader picture, that all the dodging means the ward can last longer with an avoidance tank, because it does not receive a constant pounding.  And it still doesn't "prove" anything.  The only way to prove that this is actually the case would be to do some parsing on beta.</span><div></div>

[Sasaki Koji]

<DIV>one of the problems is Avoidance scales down way too low for each lvl the mob has against you. I think they have a bad formula for calculating the avoidance or something. We all have combat skill and Defense, correct?</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> Well lets say The Bruiser, wit his defensive stance on at master I (about 12defense), a guardian with 2 of his defensive buffs for the group (about 13 more defense) and a priest giving him a slight defense buff (like 5 or so). So he now has 280 Defense.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> Now lets take the mob. Its Rognog, lvl54 Epic X4. If it acually uses combat skills like us, it would have 270 crushing that it pounds us with. Now, we also have people that can debuff Combat skills. 2 Priests take it down by 7 each, so now it has 256 Crushing. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> Wouldnt you say that the Bruisers Avoidance would once again scale above the mob? or are they just going by level? Im sure there isnt any spells or skills that Debuff level so... there would need to be a change in the system to combat the stupidly reduced avoidance of our fighters.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>just my opinion</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Kojiro 50th SK of Lucan D'Lere</DIV>

[Gungo]

<DIV>I remeber a time when scouts use to tank epics becuase their avoidance was so high and they had far less mitigation then tanks. So no mitigation is not superior only the current implementation of mitigation is superior. a low avoidance mitigation tank will see spikes in health as well if scaled correctly.</DIV>

[Nacoa]

<span><blockquote><hr>Sasaki Kojiro wrote: <div> Wouldnt you say that the Bruisers Avoidance would once again scale above the mob? or are they just going by level? Im sure there isnt any spells or skills that Debuff level so... there would need to be a change in the system to combat the stupidly reduced avoidance of our fighters.</div> <div> </div> <hr></blockquote>One thing to keep in mind is that the NPCs cheat, and have to cheat.  I suspect the 'crushing' and other skills of NPCs are far, far higher than players in order to make up for their lack of intelligence  (Such as NPCs can be forced to ignore the wizzie they can one-shot who is raining fire upon them, where as players explicitly target casters).</span><div></div>

[Rumbi]

<DIV><BR></DIV> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nacoa wrote:<BR><SPAN><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Rumbite wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Nacoa wrote:<BR><SPAN>The numbers were made up simply to illustrate the point.  I made no attempt to make the two battles 'equal'.<BR></SPAN> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>I understand what you were doing, but you can't just make up an example and say that it proves a point. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>There was also no attempt to "prove" anything.<BR><BR>The poster I was responding to did not see that wards could be better for brawlers than mitigation tanks.  What they were missing is how a ward could last longer with an avoidance tank.  Instead, they were only considering the moment-to-moment damage the tank receives.<BR><BR>My example was an attempt to illustrate the broader picture, that all the dodging means the ward can last longer with an avoidance tank, because it does not receive a constant pounding.  And it still doesn't "prove" anything.  The only way to prove that this is actually the case would be to do some parsing on beta.<BR></SPAN> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV>Ok, I'm sorry, bad wording on my part... you weren't trying to "prove" anything, you were just trying to "make a point."</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>No matter how you word it, your statement doesn't make any more of a point than me saying:  what if a Guardian takes 10 damage over 30 seconds, and a Bruiser takes 1000 damage over 30 seconds; so the ward lasts longer on the Guardian, making it better for Guardians.  It just makes no sense at all, and proves nothing.  The only point it makes is that you can come up with situations in favor of both class, but when the situations are <EM>equal,</EM> neither class has an advantage.</DIV>

[Nacoa]

<div></div><span><blockquote><hr>Rumbite wrote:<div> No matter how you word it, your statement doesn't make any more of a point than me saying:  what if a Guardian takes 10 damage over 30 seconds, and a Bruiser takes 1000 damage over 30 seconds; so the ward lasts longer on the Guardian, making it better for Guardians.  It just makes no sense at all, and proves nothing.  The only point it makes is that you can come up with situations in favor of both class, but when the situations are <em>equal,</em> neither class has an advantage.</div><hr></blockquote>Except your hypothetical is rather impossible, given the mitigation and avoidance numbers I've seen coming from test.  Mine was at least possible.  Not with 50+ Epic x2+ mobs, but definately with white heroics. My point is avoidance makes wards last longer.  I know this is the case because I currently play a defiler with a bruiser or a shadowknight on live.  The ward on live lasts several times longer on the bruiser than the SK when fighting white heroics.  Adding the SK's mitigation before the ward will extend the ward's duration, but even if mitigation doubles how long the ward lasts it still won't last as long as with the bruiser.  The ward will continue to timeout with the bruiser, and will end before timeout with the SK. If you'd like to prove that mitigation will work better with wards, get on test and post some parses. </span><div></div><p>Message Edited by Nacoa on <span class=date_text>08-31-2005</span> <span class=time_text>03:23 PM</span>