hello,,

can i tweak my shadow tank more and better than this ? better stats and survivability

my current stats are : (full buffed with exotech stim)

Health : 25192

armor rating : 6141

damage reduction 40.25%

defense chance : 30.47% (534)

shield chance : 65.66% with KW (570)

shield absorption : 60.06% (569)

am using WH defense relic and campaign absorb relic

hello,,

 

can i tweak my shadow tank more and better than this ? better stats and survivability

 

my current stats are : (full buffed with exotech stim)

 

Health : 25192

armor rating : 6141

damage reduction 40.25%

defense chance : 30.47% (534)

shield chance : 65.66% with KW (570)

shield absorption : 60.06% (569)

 

am using WH defense relic and campaign absorb relic

You can drop your Endurance heavy enhancements and mods to squeeze out maybe 2-4% more shield chance. Also, ditch the absorb relic and pick up the WH/ BM Shield relic

You can drop your Endurance heavy enhancements and mods to squeeze out maybe 2-4% more shield chance. Also, ditch the absorb relic and pick up the WH/ BM Shield relic

all my mods r stats heavy not endurance heavy !

so if i need to increase sheild that would be only from a WH relic or lower the other stats

so camp absorb r nit BiS ?

all my mods r stats heavy not endurance heavy !

 

so if i need to increase sheild that would be only from a WH relic or lower the other stats

 

so camp absorb r nit BiS ?

Campaign Absorb relics only have an up-time of 30%, only affect attacks that would already have been absorbed, and at 60% base absorb, it would really only increase your absorption by maybe 6-7% (being generous, it's been a while since I've used mine). Whereas on the other hand you can increase your Shield chance by 3-4% for 100% up-time with the BM/ War Hero Shield relic.

You've gotta remember that Shield and Absorb are 1 to 1 in terms of damage mitigation (meaning that you'll mitigate the same amount of damage with 50% Shield and 25% Absorb as you would with 25% Shield and 50% Absorb), so whichever Relic gives you the greatest overall increase to either of those two percentages will be considered better. +4% at 100% up time is better overall than +8% at 30% up time.

Campaign Absorb relics only have an up-time of 30%, only affect attacks that would already have been absorbed, and at 60% base absorb, it would really only increase your absorption by maybe 6-7% (being generous, it's been a while since I've used mine). Whereas on the other hand you can increase your Shield chance by 3-4% for 100% up-time with the BM/ War Hero Shield relic.

 

You've gotta remember that Shield and Absorb are 1 to 1 in terms of damage mitigation (meaning that you'll mitigate the same amount of damage with 50% Shield and 25% Absorb as you would with 25% Shield and 50% Absorb), so whichever Relic gives you the greatest overall increase to either of those two percentages will be considered better. +4% at 100% up time is better overall than +8% at 30% up time.

I can see why you would opt for a click relic in its place, but you really can't go wrong with an absorb proc, even if you are comparing the flat stat gain from the war hero relics, the absorb proc relic is STILL better overall.

If you prefer not to use the absorb proc, then using a war hero defence relic, with a campaign defence click relic would be much better than using 2 war hero relics.

The heal proc relic is also one to consider.

I can see why you would opt for a click relic in its place, but you really can't go wrong with an absorb proc, even if you are comparing the flat stat gain from the war hero relics, the absorb proc relic is STILL better overall.

Mathematically that's wrong. With 3-5% more Shield 100% of the time you'll take less damage than if you had 6-8% more Absorb 30% of the time.

If you prefer not to use the absorb proc, then using a war hero defence relic, with a campaign defence click relic would be much better than using 2 war hero relics.

 

The heal proc relic is also one to consider.

Not with how high the DR on Defense is after 30% and the, what, 25% up time? Essentially taking the Defense Click relic, for an Assassin/ Shadow is giving you a second, really weak Deflection. Not worth it when it only amounts to an extra ~79 defense throughout the fight.

And I've never really bothered with the Heal Relic...

Edit: Scratch that, the Defense Click relic only has a 20 second duration, making it active for only 16% of the time, and dropping its value accordingly, being an average increase of ~53 extra defense through out an entire fight.

Not with how high the DR on Defense is after 30% and the, what, 25% up time? Essentially taking the Defense Click relic, for an Assassin/ Shadow is giving you a second, really weak Deflection. Not worth it when it only amounts to an extra ~79 defense throughout the fight.

I simply have to facepalm at this statement, because it is completely ignorant of the actual usefulness of the click relics. Yes, they provide mean performance over the course of a fight. That's simple math: their rating contribution divided by their uptime is worse than the passive relics. *However*, that's not the entire story.

Unless a boss's damage is *entirely* flat the entire time, not varying appreciably based upon tank swap scenarios or different phases, calculating mean mitigation as if the click relic were passive provides an inaccurate account of its usefulness. For fights where you're not simply taking the same amount of mitigatable damage the entire time (re: pretty much every Ops boss there is), you're going to get more out of the click relic than simply the averaged calculation. Even factoring in "wasted" time while the CD is up by you're not using it, on fights where there is a large amount of off time for a tank (off time defined as "not getting attacked by M/R attacks"), you'll get more out of the click relic than the passive relic.

Why is this so? Here's some math to consider: let's look at the first boss of TfB. It's a pretty simple tank swap fight that has 2 tanks alternating between having aggro on the boss (getting attacked with M/R attacks) and waiting for an add to spawn (which takes like 10 seconds to kill with 90 seconds between each). Tanks have an uptime of roughly 55.6% each (90 seconds on boss, 10 seconds on add, 180 second cycle between tanks; 100/180 = ~55.6%). As such, you're only getting, normalized for uptime, 62.83 defense rating out of that passive relic (113 * .556). Now, let's assume you use your click relic every 135 seconds (average 15 second wait time between uses). That's 14.8% uptime for the Campaign/Dread Guard Imperiling Serenity relics or 22.2% for every other use relic out there (including the Rakata Imperiling Serenity relic, which is why I opt to use it instead of the Campaign variant). Since we're already factoring in downtime by dint of the CD, we just multiply this value by the given ratings (315 for Camp Imp, 290 for Rak Imp, and 380 for Camp Shroud) and we get 46.6, 64.4, and 84.4 ratings, respectively (I always kinda laugh when I see that the Rak Imp relic provides more than the "upgrade").

On fights where there is more downtime, the weaker the passive relics get and the stronger the click relics get. Unless you're tanking an M/R damage boss *constantly*, you're never going to get the full value that you think you're getting out of the passive relic compared to the use relics.

It's for this reason (different ratios of tanking uptime and different ratios of M/R to F/T attacks with different damage/risk weights), that it is simply stupid to say that there is a single best type of relic loadout to use. Every fight has a different optimal relic loadout. For some fights, it's going to be double passive relic (or a passive and a proc, depending on whether you like the proc or not). For others, comically enough, it could possibly be double click relic (using one only puts the other on CD for 60 seconds so you can use both without impeding the other if the on/off time is 30 seconds each). For Shadows, it gets even more convoluted because the healing relics provide some degree of functionality (the only times they're really useful are those fights with a large amount of F/T attacks and/or exceptionally low damage that brings mitigatable DtpS below a certain threshold).

Overall, unless you're bringing in and switching out every single relic you've got for each boss fight depending on the relevant mechanics, you're never going to always have the best loadout. As such, it's up to the tank to determine what they think the most important loadout is. Are they willing to sacrifice some mean mitigation for increased specialized mitigation (whether burst or F/T)? Do they prefer the passive to the proc? It's all about preference. As long as you're not bringing in DPS relics, you're going to get *something* out of each, and they're similar enough in average effect that it's not going to make a massive difference across an entire raid.

Also, when calculating DR and the relevant contributions, it's important to consider losses to your other mitigation stats. Yes, Defense has the smoothest DR curve, but the higher your Defense gets, the lower the value of all of your other mitigation gets. With a 30/65/60 spread with 40% DR (74.38% average mitigation), 2% Defense additional defense (~100 additional at ~500 rating) is going to have you end up with 75.11% average mitigation whereas 4% absorb (~100 additional at ~500 rating) is going to have you end up with 75.47% average mitigation. You end up with better mitigation with Absorb as opposed to Defense because, unlike Defense, Absorb doesn't degrade your other mitigation stats and, even though it gets hit harder by DR, it still provides more on a percentage gain per rating point scale. Until DR hits Absorb so hard that it provides only roughly 1/(current shield chance) percentage gain per rating point compared to Defense at its current level, Absorb will still be better than Defense.

I simply have to facepalm at this statement, because it is completely ignorant of the actual usefulness of the click relics. Yes, they provide mean performance over the course of a fight. That's simple math: their rating contribution divided by their uptime is worse than the passive relics. *However*, that's not the entire story.

 

Unless a boss's damage is *entirely* flat the entire time, not varying appreciably based upon tank swap scenarios or different phases, calculating mean mitigation as if the click relic were passive provides an inaccurate account of its usefulness. For fights where you're not simply taking the same amount of mitigatable damage the entire time (re: pretty much every Ops boss there is), you're going to get more out of the click relic than simply the averaged calculation. Even factoring in "wasted" time while the CD is up by you're not using it, on fights where there is a large amount of off time for a tank (off time defined as "not getting attacked by M/R attacks"), you'll get more out of the click relic than the passive relic.

 

Why is this so? Here's some math to consider: let's look at the first boss of TfB. It's a pretty simple tank swap fight that has 2 tanks alternating between having aggro on the boss (getting attacked with M/R attacks) and waiting for an add to spawn (which takes like 10 seconds to kill with 90 seconds between each). Tanks have an uptime of roughly 55.6% each (90 seconds on boss, 10 seconds on add, 180 second cycle between tanks; 100/180 = ~55.6%). As such, you're only getting, normalized for uptime, 62.83 defense rating out of that passive relic (113 * .556). Now, let's assume you use your click relic every 135 seconds (average 15 second wait time between uses). That's 14.8% uptime for the Campaign/Dread Guard Imperiling Serenity relics or 22.2% for every other use relic out there (including the Rakata Imperiling Serenity relic, which is why I opt to use it instead of the Campaign variant). Since we're already factoring in downtime by dint of the CD, we just multiply this value by the given ratings (315 for Camp Imp, 290 for Rak Imp, and 380 for Camp Shroud) and we get 46.6, 64.4, and 84.4 ratings, respectively (I always kinda laugh when I see that the Rak Imp relic provides more than the "upgrade").

 

On fights where there is more downtime, the weaker the passive relics get and the stronger the click relics get. Unless you're tanking an M/R damage boss *constantly*, you're never going to get the full value that you think you're getting out of the passive relic compared to the use relics.

 

It's for this reason (different ratios of tanking uptime and different ratios of M/R to F/T attacks with different damage/risk weights), that it is simply stupid to say that there is a single best type of relic loadout to use. Every fight has a different optimal relic loadout. For some fights, it's going to be double passive relic (or a passive and a proc, depending on whether you like the proc or not). For others, comically enough, it could possibly be double click relic (using one only puts the other on CD for 60 seconds so you can use both without impeding the other if the on/off time is 30 seconds each). For Shadows, it gets even more convoluted because the healing relics provide some degree of functionality (the only times they're really useful are those fights with a large amount of F/T attacks and/or exceptionally low damage that brings mitigatable DtpS below a certain threshold).

 

Overall, unless you're bringing in and switching out every single relic you've got for each boss fight depending on the relevant mechanics, you're never going to always have the best loadout. As such, it's up to the tank to determine what they think the most important loadout is. Are they willing to sacrifice some mean mitigation for increased specialized mitigation (whether burst or F/T)? Do they prefer the passive to the proc? It's all about preference. As long as you're not bringing in DPS relics, you're going to get *something* out of each, and they're similar enough in average effect that it's not going to make a massive difference across an entire raid.

 

Also, when calculating DR and the relevant contributions, it's important to consider losses to your other mitigation stats. Yes, Defense has the smoothest DR curve, but the higher your Defense gets, the lower the value of all of your other mitigation gets. With a 30/65/60 spread with 40% DR (74.38% average mitigation), 2% Defense additional defense (~100 additional at ~500 rating) is going to have you end up with 75.11% average mitigation whereas 4% absorb (~100 additional at ~500 rating) is going to have you end up with 75.47% average mitigation. You end up with better mitigation with Absorb as opposed to Defense because, unlike Defense, Absorb doesn't degrade your other mitigation stats and, even though it gets hit harder by DR, it still provides more on a percentage gain per rating point scale. Until DR hits Absorb so hard that it provides only roughly 1/(current shield chance) percentage gain per rating point compared to Defense at its current level, Absorb will still be better than Defense.

Great info thx !

Kitru what do u think about my current stats then ? Should i lose some little amount of stats for more endurance or for more abs/def/shield (lowering when of them and increasing the other ) ?

Kitru what do u think about my current stats then ? Should i lose some little amount of stats for more endurance or for more abs/def/shield (lowering when of them and increasing the other ) ?

You're pretty much where I'm at with my Shadow tank. I've got lower Defense than you, but I use a click relic (Shield/Absorb rather than Def) in the place of that War Hero Relic.

Yes, Defense has the smoothest DR curve, but the higher your Defense gets, the lower the value of all of your other mitigation gets.

Given the following expression of mean mitigation against m/r k/e damage:

1 - (1 - <dr>)(1 - <defense>)(1 - <shield><absorb>)

How does defense degrade the value of the other stats? Most people point to the two-roll system here, but if you think about it, defense *has* to be rolled first to avoid introducing conditional probabilities into the above expression, since it is the only damage reduction that is 100%.

I agree with the rest of your post, I'm just not sure how the math supports this particular assertion.

I agree with the rest of your post, I'm just not sure how the math supports this particular assertion.

It is because of the 2 roll system. The reason is because Shield and Absorb are only useful when Defense has failed. By increasing your Defense, you're decreasing this chance. By decreasing this chance, you're lowering the comparative mitigation value of your Shield and Absorb. Imagine an arbitrary mitigation setup of 0/50/50. With the given setup, you're going to have 25% mitigation (ignoring DR) all of which comes from Shield/Abs. Now let's add 50% Defense chance to that (for 50/50/50). You'll end up with 62.5% mitigation (50% from Defense and 25% of the remaining 50% mitigated by Shield). The increase in defense has reduced the comparative benefits of your Shield/Absorb from 25% to 12.5%.

I don't calculate using the flat formula you provide. I make it hard on myself and calculate the individual chances of each different type of attack event occurring (Dodge/Block/Hit) and normalize the relevant total mitigation values for the mitigation values for each. As such, increasing Defense chance decreases the chance of Blocking, which diminishes the value of Shield/Absorb. It's because of this reason that 2% additional Defense doesn't actually increase your mean mitigation by 2% and instead increases it by only .73%: your Defense chance goes up by 2%, but the drop in Shield/Absorb and armor contribution counteract a majority of it bringing it down. Increasing Shield/Absorb chance simply decreases the mean contribution of your passive DR (so it has a closer to normal effect). Mathematically, it's a semantic point, but, within the confines of stat increases, it's an applicable concern that allows you to create a decent rule of thumb for which stats are the best to take at any arbitrary point.

This might sound like a stupid question... but do these things you've talked about... do they go for all tanks or just shadows/assassins?

cause I've been wondering... my current stats on my Juggernaut tank look like this:

Damage reduction: 48.23%

Defence chance: 32.82%

Shield Chance: 45.67%

Absorb Chance: 39.83%

my wonder is this... what stat should I increase to make it better for myself? Also, what stat may I then sacrifice to get it?

I'm told I should have 1 absorb for every 2 shield rating, is that correct? and my Defense should be 50%? The thing with black hole mods is that they are very absorb stat heavy and have a total lack of defense, hence my numbers. I'm currently geared like: 4 rakata pieces with BH mods in every slot (to get the set bonus), my saber has Campaign hilt and BH rest of it. my generator is rakata, along with my bracer and belt, will switch these out for legacy gear when I have the mods to pop in.

I have 2 war hero relics of imperiling Serenity, as I was told these were the best relics for juggernaut tanks in both PvP and PvE, this was of course before dreadguard came out.

This might sound like a stupid question... but do these things you've talked about... do they go for all tanks or just shadows/assassins?

The general points apply to all tanks. The specific points, not so much. As a Guardian, you should be aiming for 30/50/50 Def/Shield/Abs. Beyond that, my expertise with how to optimally gear Guardians is relatively shallow compared to what I know concerning the other 2 ACs.

I have 2 war hero relics of imperiling Serenity, as I was told these were the best relics for juggernaut tanks in both PvP and PvE, this was of course before dreadguard came out.

What we've been saying concerning the relics (all of them except for the healing relics, because that's only useful for Shadows) is appropriate for Guardians as well. There are different optimal loadouts for every fight. Make an informed decision based upon what you prefer to have.

It is because of the 2 roll system. The reason is because Shield and Absorb are only useful when Defense has failed. By increasing your Defense, you're decreasing this chance. By decreasing this chance, you're lowering the comparative mitigation value of your Shield and Absorb. Imagine an arbitrary mitigation setup of 0/50/50. With the given setup, you're going to have 25% mitigation (ignoring DR) all of which comes from Shield/Abs. Now let's add 50% Defense chance to that (for 50/50/50). You'll end up with 62.5% mitigation (50% from Defense and 25% of the remaining 50% mitigated by Shield). The increase in defense has reduced the comparative benefits of your Shield/Absorb from 25% to 12.5%.

1 - (1 - 0.5)(1 - 0.25) = 0.625

Which is to say, exactly what you said. :-)

I don't calculate using the flat formula you provide. I make it hard on myself and calculate the individual chances of each different type of attack event occurring (Dodge/Block/Hit) and normalize the relevant total mitigation values for the mitigation values for each.

This will yield (when simplified algebraically), exactly the formula I provided originally. (well, depending on whether or not you bake in assumptions about boss crit or accuracy)

I do now see what you mean by each stat reducing mitigation contribution. It goes both ways though (since multiplication commutes). Thus, increasing absorb reduces the value of defense, just as increasing defense reduces the value of absorb.

Thus, increasing absorb reduces the value of defense, just as increasing defense reduces the value of absorb.

Well, increasing Absorb/Shield doesn't explicitly decrease the end chance of Defense occurring while increasing Defense decreases the end chance of Shielding. The only thing that increasing Absorb/Shield decreases is the comparative mitigation contribution of your passive DR. It's a mathematically semantic point based upon interpretation of the 2 roll system that you can use as a quick rule of thumb: Absorb is better than Defense unless the percent gains from Defense are higher than the percent gains from Absorb divided by your Shield chance.

Also, I realize that there is multiplicative commutivity and that it can be reduced to a single equation (which would make my life easier), but I'm just used to calculating the chances individually. As I am crotchety and set in my ways, I refuse to do things in new ways (honestly, I had the formula at one point but lost it when my HD failed a few months back and didn't feel like doing the algebra again).

Also, I realize that there is multiplicative commutivity and that it can be reduced to a single equation (which would make my life easier), but I'm just used to calculating the chances individually. As I am crotchety and set in my ways, I refuse to do things in new ways (honestly, I had the formula at one point but lost it when my HD failed a few months back and didn't feel like doing the algebra again).

Nothing wrong with that. :-) In truth, the formula I use for actual theory crafting is vastly more complex than the one that I pasted, since it takes into account all four attack/damage types, relics and the self-heal. I tried popping that formula on a forum entry once, but it took too long to explain. Most people seem happier with the simplified version.

The general points apply to all tanks. The specific points, not so much. As a Guardian, you should be aiming for 30/50/50 Def/Shield/Abs. Beyond that, my expertise with how to optimally gear Guardians is relatively shallow compared to what I know concerning the other 2 ACs.

So dump a little defense (2'ish %) for shield or/and absorb then, got ya

What we've been saying concerning the relics (all of them except for the healing relics, because that's only useful for Shadows) is appropriate for Guardians as well. There are different optimal loadouts for every fight. Make an informed decision based upon what you prefer to have.

I see, I prefer to press as little buttons as possible, so the passive ones are more my style when tanking. This is why I prefer procs over "on use". As dps, I prefer on use, cause I don't have to think as much as when tanking

Damn you people and your maths.

My logic behind how I gear and how I often suggest that other people gear comes more from practice and the idea that I should focus my energy (gear) on being great for nearly every situation. So yes, while there is down time on certain fights (and certain phases, such as Writhing Horror and the third phase of Dread Guards), I still feel that having the highest static avoidance and mitigation is great for nearly all situations. Certain relics might be better for certain fights, but really, who caries around 2-4 extra relics to hot swap in between fights? I'd understand that if you're shooting for a Server/ Region/ World first, but for standard progression, it's completely unnecessary. Especially since content in this game doesn't require each player in the Ops to be completely min-maxed to complete it.

If you want to take that path of logic, you don't even need augments, or best in slot mods and enhancements in your campaign gear to full clear TFB hardmode. You don't even need relics.

Actually, this is very true. Current content does not push tanks very hard in the way of DtPS. It's really all mechanical. You could walk into EC HM in non-augmented Columi gear (as a tank) and do just fine. Can't say the same for healers or DPS, but for tanks, yes.

To OP, Your stats seem right in line with mine. I'm missing a few 61 armoring's 2 to be exact and my main hand is rakata offhand in black hole. My stat values sit at. 27.8 Defense chance 43.89/63.89 shield chance(w/o and w/ DW up) and a 62.98 absorb i also have 24.9k hp. I also use the Defense Relic and Proc absorb relic. Which when active puts my absorb just about 71%. All my gear is augmented with D and absorb relics. I have cleared the first 2 bosses in TFB HM with this with fairly easily(switched to my PT which was saved to a few bosses) I was also told by the healers i was with i was much easier to heal than another Assassin that was running with us at that time didnt ask his stats but hes full campaign and seems to have dropped almost all of his Defense in favor of shield an absorb. His defense was only 17 so i can only imagine the ungodly shield and absorb he had.

Anyway my advice would to be slightly drop your D and add absorb. It's only a very small difference but maybe it turns that attack hitting ur Sin from 4.2k to 3.9.