Please upgrade your browser for the best possible experience.

Chrome Firefox Internet Explorer
×

Optimal Sin tank rotation for 2.0

STAR WARS: The Old Republic > English > Classes
Optimal Sin tank rotation for 2.0

Grumpftard's Avatar


Grumpftard
04.03.2013 , 05:34 PM | #1
It might be just me, but it looks as if the PTS forums have been stripped out since the close. If they are still there, then I can't see them. Either way.....

KBN...you posted your work in the PTS forums for producing the optimal tank rotation in 2.0.
Could you please RE-POST the data so that we can continue to build and expand upon it?
It would be greatly appreciated.
TORVA NEX! (The Site) (The Video)
"You don't have to say more than that!!"
Grumpf =Tankasin / G'rumpf =Mara / Gru'mpf =Jugg / Grum'pf =P-Tech
Grump'f =Shadow / G'rump'f =Scoundrel / Gr'umpf =Operative / Jei'Dahl =Merc

GeckoOBac's Avatar


GeckoOBac
04.03.2013 , 05:42 PM | #2
Very roughly should be project on cooldown, tk on 3 stacks, slow time on cd, force breach to keep the debuff up (not on cooldown, unless you're tanking a group) double strike when everything else aside from FB is on cooldown, shadow strike when the proc is up, replacing a double strike.

This should be it.

(ofc keep kinetic ward up, though don't refresh it like mad, as there is an advantage at keeping it up till it expires).

[Edit: I've used the shadow names, replace force lightning for TK, shock for project, thrash for double strike, maul for shadow strike, discharge for force breach and dark ward for kinetic ward]
Light Knights: Gecko - Syed - Vor'sann - Joya
Nightmare's Legion: Anhess - Avilus - Wittard - Schroedinger

Grumpftard's Avatar


Grumpftard
04.03.2013 , 06:50 PM | #3
Yeah, the rotation is pretty basic, but what I'm looking for is the math that KBN did.
He had a nice little formula (actually...little is probably the wrong word) and post that compared different rotations to find optimization.

Honestly what I would *LIKE* to see is that consolidated with the Ideal Tank Stat Distribution in 2.0 thread, and get BW to sticky it for everyone's reference. You could call it "The Math Junkies Guide to Tanking"
TORVA NEX! (The Site) (The Video)
"You don't have to say more than that!!"
Grumpf =Tankasin / G'rumpf =Mara / Gru'mpf =Jugg / Grum'pf =P-Tech
Grump'f =Shadow / G'rump'f =Scoundrel / Gr'umpf =Operative / Jei'Dahl =Merc

Kitru's Avatar


Kitru
04.03.2013 , 07:18 PM | #4
Quote: Originally Posted by Grumpftard View Post
Yeah, the rotation is pretty basic, but what I'm looking for is the math that KBN did.
He had a nice little formula and post that compared different rotations to find optimization.
The two priorities he compared were without and with Shadow Strike. In their basic form, they're largely identical to the existing priorities; the only reason they're different is because Shadow tanks will finally have the Force to actually use DS (without crippling their ability to use everything else).

The math he did compared the difference between the self healing and damage and found that there isn't really an appreciable difference between them (the pure DS string managed *slightly* better average speed on the TkT cycle but it was something like .1 seconds faster) whereas the damage when using Shadow Strike was noticeably better (something like 5% total, iirc).

The optimal priority is...

1. Force Breach (for debuff)
2. TkT (w/ 3 stacks of HS)
3. Slow Time (on CD)
4. Project (on CD)
5. Shadow Strike (w/ Shadow Wrap)
6. Double Strike (Force > 30)
7. Saber Strike
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.

Grumpftard's Avatar


Grumpftard
04.03.2013 , 07:28 PM | #5
I remember the difference between the two was very marginal, time wise. The main reason for bringing it up was to be able to see the math. I am still encountering a lot of nay-sayers (including a few guildees) that are fighting the idea of using Maul. it just frustrates me that I didn't make a copy of that one post.
I'm really begining to think they only do it to A) irritate the hell out of me and B) they know I will hunt down the info which means their lazy arses don't have to.
TORVA NEX! (The Site) (The Video)
"You don't have to say more than that!!"
Grumpf =Tankasin / G'rumpf =Mara / Gru'mpf =Jugg / Grum'pf =P-Tech
Grump'f =Shadow / G'rump'f =Scoundrel / Gr'umpf =Operative / Jei'Dahl =Merc

GeckoOBac's Avatar


GeckoOBac
04.03.2013 , 09:16 PM | #6
That was the mitigation priority, I still haven't heard if he tested what the threat gen difference would be with using FB on cooldown.
Light Knights: Gecko - Syed - Vor'sann - Joya
Nightmare's Legion: Anhess - Avilus - Wittard - Schroedinger

Kitru's Avatar


Kitru
04.03.2013 , 10:09 PM | #7
Quote: Originally Posted by GeckoOBac View Post
That was the mitigation priority, I still haven't heard if he tested what the threat gen difference would be with using FB on cooldown.
Considering that it does roughly similar threat and lower damage than the rest of the abilities (since it's the only one that explicitly *doesn't* improve TkT use rate to some extent; remember, TkT is *the* most effective and efficient threat generator/damage dealer), I can pretty much guarantee you without actually looking at any math that FB spam is not going to be the best way to generate threat in an ST situation. In AoE situations, on the other hand, FB spam is pretty much your best option.
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.

GeckoOBac's Avatar


GeckoOBac
04.04.2013 , 04:41 AM | #8
Quote: Originally Posted by Kitru View Post
Considering that it does roughly similar threat and lower damage than the rest of the abilities (since it's the only one that explicitly *doesn't* improve TkT use rate to some extent; remember, TkT is *the* most effective and efficient threat generator/damage dealer), I can pretty much guarantee you without actually looking at any math that FB spam is not going to be the best way to generate threat in an ST situation. In AoE situations, on the other hand, FB spam is pretty much your best option.
They may be wrong but my parses say that project outweighs TK in threat gen, and that was before it got improved with an additional +15% threat (That is in real combat situations, not dummy fights, so TK is prone to get interrupted). That said, FB threat per hit wasn't that far behind other skills and has now less than half the CD it had before.

I'm not expecting it to be neither optimal nor necessary (even if it were), but I'd be curious to see the difference.
Light Knights: Gecko - Syed - Vor'sann - Joya
Nightmare's Legion: Anhess - Avilus - Wittard - Schroedinger

Omophorus's Avatar


Omophorus
04.04.2013 , 08:26 AM | #9
Quote: Originally Posted by GeckoOBac View Post
They may be wrong but my parses say that project outweighs TK in threat gen, and that was before it got improved with an additional +15% threat (That is in real combat situations, not dummy fights, so TK is prone to get interrupted). That said, FB threat per hit wasn't that far behind other skills and has now less than half the CD it had before.

I'm not expecting it to be neither optimal nor necessary (even if it were), but I'd be curious to see the difference.
There are some fights where Shock/Project does do more overall damage and threat than FL/TkT (usually when there is more movement, more knockbacks, or fewer opportunities to cast), but on a per-use basis, it's not even close.

FL/TkT has significantly better DPF, TPF, DPGCD, and TPGCD than Shock/Project at 3 stacks of HD/HS, but any given fight has fewer opportunities to use a 3-stack FL/TkT than opportunities to use Shock/Project, so what a parser says versus what an optimal priority says (from a DPS/TPS standpoint, not HPS) don't exactly stack up.

Most of my parses say that it's a fairly close race between Shock and FL, and if Shock wins, it's not by a 1.5x margin of victory (and you should be using 1.5 Shocks per FL, so...).
Srs'bsns, GM of <Proper Villains> of The Ebon Hawk
5/5 Nightmare Power DF & DP
"This is why we don't bring Assassin tanks"

GeckoOBac's Avatar


GeckoOBac
04.04.2013 , 10:07 AM | #10
Quote: Originally Posted by Omophorus View Post
FL/TkT has significantly better DPF, TPF, DPGCD, and TPGCD than Shock/Project at 3 stacks of HD/HS, but any given fight has fewer opportunities to use a 3-stack FL/TkT than opportunities to use Shock/Project, so what a parser says versus what an optimal priority says (from a DPS/TPS standpoint, not HPS) don't exactly stack up.
Relevant part highlighted.

Now, I rely heavily on theorycrafting, but you do realize that when proven reality and theory don't coincide it's the theory that's wrong, right?

What I mean is: in optimal situation, ofc tk is going to be better for threat (and ofc you're going to use it regardless due to it being tied to mitigation as well). But the reality of an actual boss fight is that your tk WILL be interrupted quite often (or it can't be used as soon as soon available), while project, force slow and force breach will be almost always available for use.

Just in EC and TFB, bosses where a shadow will be able to use tk completely almost on time are perhaps 3: the writhing horror, the TFB (kinda, but the phases are long enough to approximate) and vorgath. All other bosses require the tank to move very often (or do KBs or other forms of interrupts, even indirect like red circles).
So I'd say that the difference is going to be quite relevant most of the time.

In the end, the optimal rotation is a simplification of reality: what is called a "model" in mathematics, physics, engineering and so on. You should strive to make reality and the model coincide when possible but it often won't be.
Light Knights: Gecko - Syed - Vor'sann - Joya
Nightmare's Legion: Anhess - Avilus - Wittard - Schroedinger