Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

Exploring Tank Spikiness

STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > Classes
Exploring Tank Spikiness

WheresMyWhisky's Avatar


WheresMyWhisky
06.14.2013 , 05:42 AM | #11
Nice work guys, your certainly better at maths than me

Only question I have though is operations chief on hard mode does he not hit harder than that? approx. 32.5K on shadow if not shielded etc and 22.5k on the other two (basically 50k ish pre mitigation). I only mention it as it makes your work even more compelling if that is the case.

Anyway I really hope they do take notice as I am fed up dying to RnG and again really nice work
If you think you can ever have too much Whisky you are wrong

SomeJagoff's Avatar


SomeJagoff
06.14.2013 , 02:16 PM | #12
Quote: Originally Posted by KeyboardNinja View Post
Here's the bottom line for me: shadow/assassin tanks are disproportionately hard to heal. They're very, very close to being RNG tanks at this point, which is not a good place to be. There is very little reason to bring a shadow/assassin rather than a guardian or a vanguard, and there is a very, very strong reason to not bring a shadow/assassin. Slightly higher healing efficiency over time doesn't compensate for extremely high probability of death relative to the other tanks, and the utility that a shadow tank brings, while welcome, doesn't mean anything if they're floor tanking more often than the other classes.
=/ and lol@ "Floor Tanks"


Quote: Originally Posted by KeyboardNinja View Post
Nibbon (GM of Carnage Gaming) has provided extensive anecdotal evidence from the perspective of a top-tier raiding guild, and earsrgood has given combat logs which demonstrate the problems.
Did bioware delete those threads already? Getting missing page message when I click them.

In any case, very good post KeyboardNinja, I recall you making several lengthy posts in the pts forums right after the 20% armor nerf and suggested they increase the charges to dark ward. They ended up increasing the charges shortly after your postings, so hopefully they'll act as quickly to make some needed changes again this time rather than sit silent, wait a year, and then nerf the class further.

Question, would that 20% armor talent make a difference at this point to balance the assassin tank relative to the other two or would you consider this to be a deeper problem with the class/spec?
Free Character Transfer & Other Goodies: http://www.swtor.com/r/bgpK6G

KeyboardNinja's Avatar


KeyboardNinja
06.14.2013 , 03:18 PM | #13
Quote: Originally Posted by SomeJagoff View Post
Question, would that 20% armor talent make a difference at this point to balance the assassin tank relative to the other two or would you consider this to be a deeper problem with the class/spec?
It would definitely help, but not by as much as you would think. The 20% armor talent was really only worth 2-3% DR, which isn't actually that much. Pushing the talent up to 35% would make a more significant difference, but then we would need to make other adjustments to avoid pushing the mean mitigation up even higher.

Shadows have always been (and should remain!) spikier than the other two tanks. This has been the tradeoff for having better mean mitigation (and thus requiring less healing). The problem now is three-fold. First, the armor nerf exacerbated shadow spikiness by a significant degree without buffing our mean mitigation. Second, guardians got a significant mitigation buff which simultaneously reduced their spikiness and increased their mean mitigation, giving them spikiness on par with vanguards and mean mitigation on par with shadows (i.e. there's no tradeoff anymore; you roll a guardian, full stop). Third, boss abilities in the new content were designed extremely poorly, without the split damage trick that has previously been used to mitigation RNG effects while still pressuring healers with spike damage.

So basically, shadows have gotten worse in the spikiness department, guardians are now face-stomping anything with the word "tank" in its description, and the content is severely biased towards vanguard and guardian mitigation profiles. The tanks aren't balanced anymore. Mean mitigation is close, but utility, cooldowns, mitigation profile and threat generation all favor guardians, whereas there used to be a fairly even give and take (with the exception of threat, where guardians needed a serious buff).
Computer Programmer. Theory Crafter. Dilettante on The Ebon Hawk.
Tam (shadow tank) Tov-ren (commando healer) Aveo (retired sentinel) Nimri (ruffian scoundrel)
Averith (marksman sniper) Alish (lightning sorcerer) Aresham (vengeance jugg) Effek (pyro pt)

SomeJagoff's Avatar


SomeJagoff
06.14.2013 , 03:39 PM | #14
Ah k, thank you for clarifying that. I felt pretty strongly during the 2.0 pts testing that the armor nerf would be a problem later on, especially since a dev jumped in my post with a response almost immediately...then never again 30 some pages later. Although the devs will likely never acknowledge that the armor nerf(s) was pvp oriented, I find it hard to believe that their "internal metrics" showed that shadow tanks would be in an ideal spot for pve content moving forward with significantly less armor (especially since they buffed guardians).

Yikes, the situation sounds pretty bad though, especially that ~90% diff you mentioned in your original post. I'm hoping that Bioware will make the appropriate adjustments, but to be honest, not going to hold my breath. I guess I'm glad I have a guardian tank alt, though still prefer playstyle of the shadow.

I'm assuming they can tweak the new ops (though I've seen posts and talk in general chat already that the new op is fine and needs no tweaking) and that should help shadow tanks a bit, but definitely concerned moving forward, especially if new content continues to be seemingly rushed out.

I'll be interested to see of any issues shadow tanks run into with the new nightmare S&V on the pts.
Free Character Transfer & Other Goodies: http://www.swtor.com/r/bgpK6G

Kitru's Avatar


Kitru
06.14.2013 , 05:05 PM | #15
Quote: Originally Posted by SomeJagoff View Post
Ah k, thank you for clarifying that. I felt pretty strongly during the 2.0 pts testing that the armor nerf would be a problem later on, especially since a dev jumped in my post with a response almost immediately.
I feel this needs to be explained since a lot of people are conflating the discussion that took place on the PTS forums before 2.0 hit live with the discussion currently taking place.

On the PTS, the primary argument was one of *mean mitigation*. The supposition was that the reduction in armor was going to *decrease* mean mitigation when, in fact, Shadows got an *increase* to mean mitigation thanks to the 2% increased healing received and ~6% average increased Absorb from Kinetic Bulwark. *This* was what was consistently brought up on the PTS. It was not a question of spikiness; it was a question of mean mitigation.

*This* discussion specifically referenced spikiness as a newly quantified and quantitatively analyzed value, not mean mitigation. We're not referencing mean mitigation *except* as the far as the requirement applied to ourselves when attempting to determine viable solutions insofar as reducing spikiness while either preserving or reducing mean mitigation to preserve balance. This discussion about spikiness revolves *exclusively* around the variation in incoming damage between the resolved attack types and how that variation impacts success/failure.

As such, it's *not* related to the PTS discussion, except tangentially insofar as the loss of 20% armor made spikiness *slightly* worse, when, in fact, the problem lies more heavily in the shift in Guardian spikiness (such taht it matches that of VGs) coupled with content design that features *much* heavier spike damage (and the fact that the developers didn't use Shadows for any of their internal testing, which, as everyone keeps telling the, is an *awesome* idea). Even if we *still* had the 20% armor, we'd still have major spikiness problems. To really address the issue, our ratio of RNG to static mitigation and the quantity of our mitigation derived from self healing need to be reexamined.
Walls of Text? I *love* Walls of Text!
My New Class Idea
Shadow Class Rep - Suggest/Review Questions Here
Quote: Originally Posted by Fende View Post
Listen to Kitru. Kitru knows all.

SomeJagoff's Avatar


SomeJagoff
06.14.2013 , 05:46 PM | #16
Quote: Originally Posted by Kitru View Post
Even if we *still* had the 20% armor, we'd still have major spikiness problems. To really address the issue, our ratio of RNG to static mitigation and the quantity of our mitigation derived from self healing need to be reexamined.
I still have to wonder if the original nerfs from 1.3 hadn't gone through and shadow tanks were what they were like at launch, I imagine they would still be spikey, but would it be as bad as it is now with the current content?

Or if, say, they had nerfed the self-healing mechanism to the ground, but left the armor rating at pre 1.3, would the differences compared to the other 2 tanks be less drastic?

Would you be able to run those numbers from old data from those 2 scenarios (launch sins & launch sins w/75% less self healing)?

Quote: Originally Posted by Kitru View Post
and the fact that the developers didn't use Shadows for any of their internal testing, which, as everyone keeps telling the, is an *awesome* idea
lol really?
Free Character Transfer & Other Goodies: http://www.swtor.com/r/bgpK6G

Kitru's Avatar


Kitru
06.14.2013 , 06:03 PM | #17
Quote: Originally Posted by SomeJagoff View Post
I still have to wonder if the original nerfs from 1.3 hadn't gone through and shadow tanks were what they were like at launch, I imagine they would still be spikey, but would it be as bad as it is now with the current content?
At release, Shadows *really* needed to get that nerf. Their mitigation before factoring in self healing was better than Guardians or VGs got, so it was well and truly disgusting. Shadows *really* needed to have their mitigation brought down.

Quote:
Or if, say, they had nerfed the self-healing mechanism to the ground, but left the armor rating at pre 1.3, would the differences compared to the other 2 tanks be less drastic?
Improving the CT armor buff to 250% while reducing self healing by roughly half (HSx3 TkT providing 1-1.5% per tick and completely removing the self heal from CT) would reducing spikiness to the acceptable level (we did math the in this thread to figure out the amount needed to maintain mean mitigation while reducing spikiness to an acceptable level) while maintaining mean mitigation where it currently is. Honestly, this is what I consider to be the absolute *best* solution since it reduces our reliance on reactive mitigation to an acceptable level (rather than the 25% of total mitigation we're dealing with now), keeps mean mitigation the same, and reduces spikiness to an acceptable level, addressing *all* of the concerns facing Shadow tanks (beyond bugs like the Resilience bug).

Quote:
lol really?
Yes, really. Jesse Sky told me that they didn't use a Shadow tank for *any* of their in house testing for S&V. I was largely dumbstruck when I learned that.
Walls of Text? I *love* Walls of Text!
My New Class Idea
Shadow Class Rep - Suggest/Review Questions Here
Quote: Originally Posted by Fende View Post
Listen to Kitru. Kitru knows all.

SomeJagoff's Avatar


SomeJagoff
06.14.2013 , 06:51 PM | #18
Quote: Originally Posted by Kitru View Post
At release, Shadows *really* needed to get that nerf. Their mitigation before factoring in self healing was better than Guardians or VGs got, so it was well and truly disgusting. Shadows *really* needed to have their mitigation brought down.
Sorry if I was unclear, I meant to say if you could compare launch shadow armor rating/self heals to Current VG/Guardian tanks (not launch VG/Guardians), where would they stand? Overpowered still? Underpowered? About the same?

Quote: Originally Posted by Kitru View Post
Improving the CT armor buff to 250% while reducing self healing by roughly half (HSx3 TkT providing 1-1.5% per tick and completely removing the self heal from CT) would reducing spikiness to the acceptable level (we did math the in this thread to figure out the amount needed to maintain mean mitigation while reducing spikiness to an acceptable level) while maintaining mean mitigation where it currently is. Honestly, this is what I consider to be the absolute *best* solution since it reduces our reliance on reactive mitigation to an acceptable level (rather than the 25% of total mitigation we're dealing with now), keeps mean mitigation the same, and reduces spikiness to an acceptable level, addressing *all* of the concerns facing Shadow tanks (beyond bugs like the Resilience bug).
hmm, 250% sounds pretty high, especially since the original launch rating was 150%, though sins did have less armor than the other 2 then as well. At 250%, would that be the the same armor rating as juggs/pts now, including their skill tree 15/16% armor buffs (~10k range)?

Those sound like good ideas though, especially since it would lower the reliance on self heals and obviously most importantly, reduce spikiness.

If those changes were to go through, what would you do with the shadow shelter/battle readiness, in terms of their healing aspects?


Quote: Originally Posted by Kitru View Post
Yes, really. Jesse Sky told me that they didn't use a Shadow tank for *any* of their in house testing for S&V. I was largely dumbstruck when I learned that.
wow, that really blows me away, I guess I naively assumed that they tested with every class, then if they happened to get screwed by RNG, but happened to survive through an encounter, they just figured, "meh, we survived, test passed, shadows are fine!" Although I am seeing some posters saying that they're able to clear Nightmare TFB with shadow tanks, I'm seeing a lot more saying they're unable to. It seems like a pretty bad QA failure there if they're not testing a class -At All- when designing content. Just wow. =/

Edit: Still frustrated by the resilience bug, have submitted several tickets on it, posted about it on the forums, as have many, sitll no acknowledgement that it's a bug....working as intended?
Free Character Transfer & Other Goodies: http://www.swtor.com/r/bgpK6G

Kitru's Avatar


Kitru
06.14.2013 , 07:03 PM | #19
Quote: Originally Posted by SomeJagoff View Post
hmm, 250% sounds pretty high, especially since the original launch rating was 150%, though sins did have less armor than the other 2 then as well. At 250%, would that be the the same armor rating as juggs/pts now, including their skill tree 15/16% armor buffs (~10k range)?
I actually meant 250% *total* armor, not 250% from CT (I think I typod it).

Quote:
If those changes were to go through, what would you do with the shadow shelter/battle readiness, in terms of their healing aspects?
Battle Readiness is still useful as a self heal and a DR increase so it's still useful. You're just not getting a largely worthless increase in self heal from it (because, seriously? 100% proc chance on CT for 15 seconds rather than 65%? big whoop)

Quote:
Edit: Still frustrated by the resilience bug, have submitted several tickets on it, posted about it on the forums, as have many, sitll no acknowledgement that it's a bug....working as intended?
They've acknowledged it. The problem with the Resilience bug is that it's almost impossible to reliable reproduce. Because of that, it's hard to figure out what the hell causes it. If someone can come up with a *reliable* reason why it bugs as such, it might be able to be fixed but, until then, it'll stay a known bug that can't be fixed.
Walls of Text? I *love* Walls of Text!
My New Class Idea
Shadow Class Rep - Suggest/Review Questions Here
Quote: Originally Posted by Fende View Post
Listen to Kitru. Kitru knows all.

Hxxr's Avatar


Hxxr
06.15.2013 , 09:17 PM | #20
Quote: Originally Posted by KeyboardNinja View Post
[...] threat generation all favor guardians [...]
Are you sure?

Anyway, nothing new here even though it's nice you made the effort to actually run the numbers ... outside of devaluing Force Cloak which can have a quite significant impact on spikiness on quite a few fights you illustrate the issues with Assassin tanks nicely.
However there is also more than enough proof that Orbital Strike is entirely out of line and my prediction is that neither will be fixed in the near future.

Especially with NiM ops being released this is not good at all ... the current Dread Guards encounter however has so many highly predictable Force abilities that our Assassin actually takes less damage than the Powertech - spiky and otherwise.
Quote: Originally Posted by Rtwozero View Post
Just remember that combat logs only state mathamatical facts. They are not rude or arrogant.