Powertech - Shield Tech 31 Point Talent is Terrible Anyone Agree?

[MorningMusume]

First, you are assuming that I have 26% Absorb. That's with 0 Absorb on gear, and maybe that's a good starting position for you, but you can't talk for every tank out there.

 

Second, Damage Reduction is not the same as Mitigation. You say 2.6%, well, ok, I mitigate 2.6% extra damage. Perfect, if you were taking 100% of the damage before, but we aren't.

 

Without 10% Shield how many damage reduction you already had? Let's say 60% (I have more than that btw).

 

So without 10%, if the boss hits you for 1000 damage, you only take 400 on average.

 

Then, you gain 10% Shield, and with your values you gain "only" 2.6% Mitigation. So now, i reduce damage by 62.6%.

 

So now, if the boss hits me for 1000 damage, I take 374 dmg on average.

 

Oh, but how much is 374? Is 2.6% less than 400? Nope, is 6.5% less damage.

 

And please, before joking about my calculations would be good if you had the basic ideas of mitigation at least.

 

Btw, with my gear I get hit by 8.46% extra damage if I change builds.

Edited January 25, 2012 by MorningMusume

[tbsly]

i disagree 100% with the op. no it doesn't hit very hard but it is a heat dump and with that being said it allows you do use more abilities without going over 40 heat thus generating more threat.

[tbsly]

The issue I have with it is that with a 21/2/18 build, my rail shot also dumps 8 heat for twice the damage and much more often than once every 15 seconds. Considering that 2% shield per point talent is also pretty bad, I see very, very little reason to go beyond Jet Charge as a shieldtech when you can get mostly the same benefits from Heat Blast out of the pyro tree and deal much more damage on top of that.

 

I think the skill needs drastic improvements to justify having to dump 5 talent points to gain only 3ish% mitigation on only half of the attacks in the game to get to Heat Blast. I'm with the people calling for added threat/taunt, but I'd also add yet another effect onto it. It's already single target with a short range and low damage - it could stand to do something else even with the extra threat/taunt.

 

in reality 21/2/18 is a pvp build. yes, you can tank with it but if you're primary concern is to tank...21/2/18 isn't going to provide you with the best tanking talents for damage reduction. yes, your rail shot dumps 8 heat if the target is burning...however, you have to keep up incendiary missle which cost 25 heat just to get the 8 heat dump from using rail shot...

[Valkenheineken]

First, you are assuming that I have 26% Absorb. That's with 0 Absorb on gear, and maybe that's a good starting position for you, but you can't talk for every tank out there.

 

Re-read the post. I already acknowledged that the numbers go up depending on gear. However, you don't break even with a 1 DR/point talent until your absorption reaches 50%.

 

 

Second, Damage Reduction is not the same as Mitigation. You say 2.6%, well, ok, I mitigate 2.6% extra damage. Perfect, if you were taking 100% of the damage before, but we aren't.

 

Without 10% Shield how many damage reduction you already had? Let's say 60% (I have more than that btw).

 

So without 10%, if the boss hits you for 1000 damage, you only take 400 on average.

 

Then, you gain 10% Shield, and with your values you gain "only" 2.6% Mitigation. So now, i reduce damage by 62.6%.

 

So now, if the boss hits me for 1000 damage, I take 374 dmg on average.

 

Oh, but how much is 374? Is 2.6% less than 400? Nope, is 6.5% less damage.

 

Yes, it's 6.5% less than someone with the 10% shield chance, but it's still 2.6% of the total damage you took (26/1000). When I invest a talent point, I don't care about what % of the damage I mitigate from what the tank next to me takes. I care about how much of the monster's damage I'm actually reducing compared to the benefits I could get from other talents.

 

And please, before joking about my calculations would be good if you had the basic ideas of mitigation at least.

 

I wasn't joking, and I gave your calculations credibility except for the shortcomings I noted until now. This discussion raises further issues.

 

To reiterate, the issue I raised was:

 

Do your mitigation calculations account for the fact that shielding doesn't work on half of the attack types in this game? (this is the reason many people break from this talent, aside from its low numerical returns).

 

 

in reality 21/2/18 is a pvp build. yes, you can tank with it but if you're primary concern is to tank...21/2/18 isn't going to provide you with the best tanking talents for damage reduction. yes, your rail shot dumps 8 heat if the target is burning...however, you have to keep up incendiary missle which cost 25 heat just to get the 8 heat dump from using rail shot...

 

People have already reported success in tanking HMs with 21/2/18. Further, by MM's own calculations (even with a suboptimal rotation), the net heat generated by 21/2/18 is less than the ST with heat blast, even accounting for incendiary missile. You're forgetting: 1) incendiary missile only needs to be cast every 18 seconds, and only using it when PA procs keeps your time >40 heat to a minimum; and 2) thermal sensor override significantly reduces that heat burden over both long and short fights.

 

Further, you're confusing pure damage reduction with overall tank effectiveness. Sure, to reduce the most damage, you take as many damage reduction talents as possible. But consider a tank who reduces 1% more damage vs a tank who deals 100% more damage. The second tank is obviously better - the 1% reduction isn't worth dealing half damage. Obviously those aren't the numbers we're dealing with, but the whole discussion is about where the cutoff is.

Edited January 25, 2012 by Valkenheineken

[MorningMusume]

Valkenheineken, please re-read my first post here. I never said a build was better or worst, I said you get hit by a x% extra, and you do y% extra dmg. I never lied. I compared the builds, just that.

 

Then you said wasn't that x, but less. As I was comparing both builds, I was right and you weren't. You maybe refer to something else, but I expressed correctly in my original post: with 21/2/18 you get hit by 6.5% extra damage on average. The mitigation increase is not 6.5%, but I'll tell you something, mitigation without context doesn't mean anything. If I lose a dollar, I'm rich or poor? If I have 50$ and I lose one, is not the same as if I have 2$ and lose one. Same happens with mitigation.

 

Note you said 3% mitigation on half the attacks, if you have said 2.6% mitigation overall I wouldn't had the need to correct you.

 

Harder is to make you believe in the DPS increase. But my simulations for those builds will be done by tomorrow and we'll see if my averages on the spreadsheet were a good approximation or not.

Edited January 25, 2012 by MorningMusume

[je-s-ter]

The 21/2/18 is obviously a PvP spec, debating its usefulness in PvE tanking is stupid. Just because you are able to tank HM FPs with it doesnt mean a thing. In PvE, as a tank you are supposed to eat hits and take as little damage as possible from them. 21/2/18 does not support that. If you say you can hold aggro better with that spec, that is obviously true, but if you dont suck monkey balls, you should have no problem whatsoever holding aggro in full tank spec. Also, that dmg increase you get from it won't do a whole lot against bosses that have 2+ million HP.

 

Heat Blast is a great ability that I underestimated at the beggining. Venting 8 heat every 15s is awesome. Yes you have a chance on venting heat with shield proc, but that is RNG and it happened to me that I didnt vent heat from my shield proc for a long time in a fight. The possibility of regulating my heat by other means that just Heat Vent and shield procs is great.

[Militum]

Being able to vent heat to win a 1v1 where you both have a sliver of life can make the difference - mob or player.

[ShockDevil]

21/2/18 is a better tanking build than 31 max build end of story.

 

As one of the posters before very correctly pointed out, a 10% extra shield chance will not improve your overall defense by very much at all. In the world of tanks the one that can generate a higher amount of threat while staying alive is king.

 

The parakeet will give you significantly more DPS and that is plainly obivious even without a combat log. Rail shot is the most damaging attack we have on single targets followed closely by rocket punch with the parakeet you get off more than double the number of rail shots over the course of a fight sometimes you can fire off 5 or 6 in a row if you get insta resets on FB or RP. I just recently hit 50 so my gear is not great and my rail shot was criting bosses in Black Talon HM for over 2k repeatedly which generated huges amounts of hate for me, I almost never need to use taunts on single targets.

 

I also completed BT hardmode without any problems with less than 13k hp. Nobody else in my group had more than 12k.

[Valkenheineken]

Valkenheineken, please re-read my first post here. I never said a build was better or worst, I said you get hit by a x% extra, and you do y% extra dmg. I never lied. I compared the builds, just that.

 

Again, read the point I'm trying to get across. I'm not saying you lied. I'm saying that your calculations are missing certain factors, namely that shield % doesn't apply to every attack and flame shield isn't at all accounted for in the 21/2/18, which is a core synergy that the build is founded on. That makes the comparison inaccurate.

 

Then you said wasn't that x, but less. As I was comparing both builds, I was right and you weren't. You maybe refer to something else, but I expressed correctly in my original post: with 21/2/18 you get hit by 6.5% extra damage on average.

 

See, this is where the problem is. You came to 6.5% by this formula: (damage taken by tank A - damage taken by tank B)/damage taken by tank A. This value does NOT represent the mitigation provided by empowered tech. It represents only the % of the mitigation that empowered tech provides compared to the tank's overall mitigation, which doesn't affect the opportunity cost of investing the talent in the slightest, and it doesn't affect how much damage prevention the talent provides.

 

The mitigation increase is not 6.5%, but I'll tell you something, mitigation without context doesn't mean anything. If I lose a dollar, I'm rich or poor? If I have 50$ and I lose one, is not the same as if I have 2$ and lose one. Same happens with mitigation.

 

Note you said 3% mitigation on half the attacks, if you have said 2.6% mitigation overall I wouldn't had the need to correct you.

 

Harder is to make you believe in the DPS increase. But my simulations for those builds will be done by tomorrow and we'll see if my averages on the spreadsheet were a good approximation or not.

 

It usually matters because usually there are diminishing returns to worry about. In this analysis, that's not the case. It's only dependent on absorption %.

 

 

Nothing changes the fact that empowered tech provides .1*absorb%/5 DR per talent on average ONLY on shieldable attacks. The value of the % contribution of that talent to overall mitigation (which actually, by your calculations is quite low) has no bearing on this issue, and I'm not sure why you even brought it up.

 

 

Again, to reiterate the core issues I have with your comparison between pure ST and 21/2/18: shield chance doesn't apply to all attacks, and flame shield is not accounted for. Until both of those issues are accounted for, the comparison is simply incomplete.

 

 

The 21/2/18 is obviously a PvP spec, debating its usefulness in PvE tanking is stupid. Just because you are able to tank HM FPs with it doesnt mean a thing. In PvE, as a tank you are supposed to eat hits and take as little damage as possible from them. 21/2/18 does not support that. If you say you can hold aggro better with that spec, that is obviously true, but if you dont suck monkey balls, you should have no problem whatsoever holding aggro in full tank spec. Also, that dmg increase you get from it won't do a whole lot against bosses that have 2+ million HP.

 

You're being overly narrow in defining what a good tank is. Mitigation is not the only variable for tanks. Tanks need to also contribute some amount of DPS. Again, the question is where the tradeoff become appropriate.

 

In my experience, which is corroborated by many others, the 21/2/18 sacrifices very, very little survivability in exchange for a very noticeable increase in DPS.

 

Also, if you have absolutely no issue holding aggro in any situation on a HM flashpoint then congrats, because you're the only one I've seen claim that so far.

 

And yes, extra DPS is worthwhile for a boss with lots of HP because you contribute more to ending the fight faster.

Edited January 25, 2012 by Valkenheineken

[MorningMusume]

Again, to reiterate the core issues I have with your comparison between pure ST and 21/2/18: shield chance doesn't apply to all attacks, and flame shield is not accounted for. Until both of those issues are accounted for, the comparison is simply incomplete.

 

Flame Shield is accounted for in all my estimations in the spreadsheet, I already told you so many times I'm bored. I specifically did a external program on Visual Basic that simulates multiple hour long fights and tells me the repercusion of Flame Shield on the rotation.

 

Also I know Shield Chance doesn't apply to all attacks, but so does the 2% defense you have on 21/2/18, and Power Armor applys to everything, so if you take that in account, 21/2/18 is even worst mitigation wise than 31/8/2.

Edited January 25, 2012 by MorningMusume

[Valkenheineken]

Flame Shield is accounted for in all my estimations in the spreadsheet, I already told you so many times I'm bored. I specifically did a external program on Visual Basic that simulates multiple hour long fights and tells me the repercusion of Flame Shield on the rotation.

 

That's funny, because last time I brought it up you said no, and then said it won't proc very often. I and others have found that not to be the case.

 

Also I know Shield Chance doesn't apply to all attacks, but so does the 2% defense you have on 21/2/18, and Power Armor applys to everything, so if you take that in account, 21/2/18 is even worst mitigation wise than 31/8/2.

 

Yes, it's worse. That's never been an issue - of course it has worse mitigation. The question is how much worse, and is that offset by the extra DPS? Your analysis doesn't provide an accurate answer to these questions.

[MorningMusume]

That's funny, because last time I brought it up you said no, and then said it won't proc very often. I and others have found that not to be the case.

 

 

Because you were asking in the dps thread, where YOU DONT TANK STUFF!!!

 

I don't know how in the world will you shield attacks when doing dps with a dps generator in the offhand.

 

I also told you to go to my tank thread, what you probably never did.

Edited January 25, 2012 by MorningMusume

[je-s-ter]

The only way you should have problem holding aggro in HM flashpoints is if your group is unorganized and dont know anything about focus fire and cc.

If you have problems holding aggro during boss fights, you just need more practise. Troubles with aggro only occurs to me when the boss is heavy on knockbacks/stuns and I'm facing the floor more often than standing on my feet. Even then, you have 2 taunts as PT, should be more than enough.

 

Also, if you believe your dps as tank has any meaningful impact on the fight, you're deluding yourself. You need just enough dps to hold aggro, nothing more. If you have fail dps in your party, you will fail (IE hit enrage) no matter your damage output as a tank.

You can keep believing that your DPS tank is better than fully specced tank, but trust me that any proper raiding guild wont choose the 21/2/18 over 31/8/2 for their PT tank.

 

So basically, trading ANY amount of mitigation for ANY amount of dps is worthless on a tank, unless you need the dps to reliably hold aggro. Which you dont.

[Valkenheineken]

Flame Shield is accounted for in all my estimations in the spreadsheet, I already told you so many times I'm bored. I specifically did a external program on Visual Basic that simulates multiple hour long fights and tells me the repercusion of Flame Shield on the rotation.

 

Also I know Shield Chance doesn't apply to all attacks, but so does the 2% defense you have on 21/2/18, and Power Armor applys to everything, so if you take that in account, 21/2/18 is even worst mitigation wise than 31/8/2.

 

After which I asked if you made comparisons with tank gear on to which you said no. You then proceeded to explain why it is hard to generate a number for Flame Shield procs, which I agree with. That doesn't mean you accounted for them.

 

Even if you did, you're still ignoring the other half - shield chance only occurs on 50% of the types of attacks in this game. That's exactly why people leave the top of ST unfilled - even if the mitigation-per-talent point was decent, it still only works on half of the attacks in the game, meaning that calculations that account for shield% in full are inaccurate. Your calculations, I assume (since you haven't said no), do that. Thus, they're inaccurate.

Edited January 25, 2012 by Valkenheineken

[ducksmyth]

Why are you pressing so hard for mitigation?

 

As things stand all 3 specs of healer have effectively infinite mana mechanics so maybe stressing building threat, or upping DPS to avoid enrage timers is the way to go?

[MorningMusume]

The funny thing is the simulations show that 21/2/18 isn't better dps, I'm trying to find a mistake, but I can't. Seems that in reality that build has lower sustained dps than 31/8/2. In real scenarios the procs are not that good on average.

 

Tomorrow (EU) I'll post the first simulations with my impressions.

[Moonlightthorn]

Then again assassin is light armour and we are heavy.. plus we have a whole lot of other great skills that they dont... skill trees cant be iden´tical =/

[Kyryck]

The funny thing is the simulations show that 21/2/18 isn't better dps, I'm trying to find a mistake, but I can't. Seems that in reality that build has lower sustained dps than 31/8/2. In real scenarios the procs are not that good on average.

 

Tomorrow (EU) I'll post the first simulations with my impressions.

 

Thanks Musame. Not worth the bother if you're posting the numbers simply to refute the idiots who believe that the stupid 21/2/18 build is better tanking (and better dps?) than 31 shieldtech. You've spent the past two pages posting and explaining how the numbers work and the one guy, especially, seems to just not comprehend what you're posting and keeps insisting (no matter how many times you post otherwise) that you haven't taken into account the shield variance on attacks affected.

 

Reality and numbers don't lie. The 21/2/18 special snowflake build is awful compared to 31 shieldtech in terms of tanking. Apparently, according to this recent post, it might even be worse sustained dps. That's beyond hilarious. So the build will essentially be worse at everything that matters to a tank in PvE if that's the case.

[Valkenheineken]

Thanks Musame. Not worth the bother if you're posting the numbers simply to refute the idiots who believe that the stupid 21/2/18 build is better tanking (and better dps?) than 31 shieldtech.

 

No one claims that. The claim is that 21/2/18 sacrifices minimal mitigation for a good increase in DPS. Reading comp fail on your part.

 

You've spent the past two pages posting and explaining how the numbers work

 

The only "numbers" discussed here were Empowered Tech's low overall mitigation per talent point invested. MM spat out a number that corresponds to Empowered Tech's damage reduction / damage not reduced without Empowered Tech, which is a weird variable that doesn't tell us anything. He tried to pass it off as Empowered Tech's contribution to damage reduction, but he admitted that not to be the case:

 

The mitigation increase is not 6.5%, but I'll tell you something, mitigation without context doesn't mean anything.

 

The latter half of that sentence was an obvious attempt to save face, and he offered no math in support.

 

and the one guy, especially, seems to just not comprehend what you're posting and keeps insisting (no matter how many times you post otherwise) that you haven't taken into account the shield variance on attacks affected.

 

Despite me asking the same question in nearly every post I make directed to him, he still hasn't commented on that issue. There's absolutely no indication that he accounted for the fact that only half of the attacks in the game are shieldable.

 

Reality and numbers don't lie.

 

People use false statistics constantly to try to trick people into believing things. Day 1 of college statistics - statistics can be used to say anything you want them to say. You need to pay close attention to what the numbers actually represent.

 

 

The 21/2/18 special snowflake build is awful compared to 31 shieldtech in terms of tanking.

 

This "special snowflake" build is by far the most popular build on the PT forums. I haven't seen a single report of it being underclassed by a full ST build, yet you get plenty of reports to the contrary.

 

Apparently, according to this recent post, it might even be worse sustained dps. That's beyond hilarious. So the build will essentially be worse at everything that matters to a tank in PvE if that's the case.

 

Probably not, since MM's credibility is in the tank right now, and many WZ reports indicate that 21/2/18 greatly outperforms full ST for damage (and more importantly, there hasn't been any report to the contrary). Clearly, this trend isn't due to any increased survivability (which is, by everyone's admission, slightly less than a full ST's survivability), so the discrepency must necessarily be from higher DPS.

[je-s-ter]

MM very clearly stated that the sustained dps might be better for full shield tech. Damage in WZs do not represent sustained dmg at all. PvP is all about the the first 10-15s, after that you either won or lost. That's why you would see Operatives/Scoundrels being at the top of the dmg in WZs, yet their sustained dmg in raids is subpar (with the same build, that they top dmg in WZs).

 

There is a difference between dps in 10s fight and several minutes long fight. You are basing your opinions about PvE usefullnes on a data gathered from PvP. That itself proves that you dont know what you are talking about. Until you actually take both those specs into raid and fight a boss (and record all the abilites used and damage done), or simulate it, everything you say about PvE dps is invalid.

 

Also, you still didnt answer me, why on earth would you want to increase your dps as a tank and sacrifice mitigation? Tanks are already doing pitiful damage compared to DPS classes, just because you up it up by 30% (just a random number), we will still do pitiful damage. But now having less mitigation which means more pressure on our healers.

That's like skipping top tiers damage talents on your DPS class and getting defensive talents instead from other tree. Makes sense? For PvP, sure. PvE? Hell no. You want dps to have as much damage as they can. You want tanks to have as much mitigation as they can.

[Valkenheineken]

MM very clearly stated that the sustained dps might be better for full shield tech. Damage in WZs do not represent sustained dmg at all. PvP is all about the the first 10-15s, after that you either won or lost. That's why you would see Operatives/Scoundrels being at the top of the dmg in WZs, yet their sustained dmg in raids is subpar (with the same build, that they top dmg in WZs).

 

There is a difference between dps in 10s fight and several minutes long fight. You are basing your opinions about PvE usefullnes on a data gathered from PvP. That itself proves that you dont know what you are talking about. Until you actually take both those specs into raid and fight a boss (and record all the abilites used and damage done), or simulate it, everything you say about PvE dps is invalid.

 

It's not exactly the same, but it's an indicator for sure, and the rotations for PvP and PvE aren't hugely different. Further, now that I know MM's math is questionable, the credibility of the simulation is in question.

 

Also, you still didnt answer me, why on earth would you want to increase your dps as a tank and sacrifice mitigation? Tanks are already doing pitiful damage compared to DPS classes, just because you up it up by 30% (just a random number), we will still do pitiful damage. But now having less mitigation which means more pressure on our healers.

That's like skipping top tiers damage talents on your DPS class and getting defensive talents instead from other tree. Makes sense? For PvP, sure. PvE? Hell no. You want dps to have as much damage as they can. You want tanks to have as much mitigation as they can.

 

Well, considering your approach is 'do just enough damage that you maintain aggro,' of course you think damage is pitiful. But I already answered your question - there IS some point where a trade-off between damage and mitigation is worthwhile if the ratio of damage gained:mitigation lost is high enough. All else equal, it doesn't necessarily matter where DPS is coming from so long as it's high enough.

 

Hell, by your logic, every single tank build should put 3/3 in the +1% endurance talent. Why don't they? Because it doesn't provide ENOUGH mitigation for the potential investment elsewhere, even if that talent isn't invested in any mitigation talent.

Edited January 26, 2012 by Valkenheineken

[je-s-ter]

Well, considering your approach is 'do just enough damage that you maintain aggro,' of course you think damage is pitiful. But I already answered your question - there IS some point where a trade-off between damage and mitigation is worthwhile if the ratio of damage gained:mitigation lost is high enough. All else equal, it doesn't necessarily matter where DPS is coming from so long as it's high enough.

 

Hell, by your logic, every single tank build should put 3/3 in the +1% endurance talent. Why don't they? Because it doesn't provide ENOUGH mitigation for the potential investment elsewhere, even if that talent isn't invested in any mitigation talent.

 

I dont think the damage is pitiful. I know it. I play fully specced tank. I can see the numbers I do on bosses in HM operations. Even if I increase them by 30% they would still be pitiful. And I dont believe the 21/2/18 build comes anywhere close to that number if you wear the same gear for both specs.

The only thing that increases your dmg in tank gear is Aim. And all the tank gear prefers End over Aim, for obvious reason. So your Aim isnt all that high. Which means your damage is not high either.

 

Also, End obviously scales a bit differently than the other defensive stats, and as far as I know, endurance is in no shape or form part of the calculation for total mitigation, as Endurance itself doesn't mitigate anything at all. I'm pretty sure that if instead of End the talent increased Shield Chance or Defense, it would be a solid part of tanking build.

Edited January 26, 2012 by je-s-ter

[MorningMusume]

I hate myself, I forgot to send to this PC a few logs and I can't finish the 31/8/2 vs 21/2/18 comparison, I'll post it in 5-6 hours.

 

But with simulation both builds are pretty similar on DPS, and 31/8/2 is a tiny bit better.

 

Reasons:

 

-Rocket Punch and Rail Shots number were overestimated on the spreadsheet versus reality. You can't make the most of every proc on a real scenario. Real Rail Shots per minute with 21/2/18 are like 20% lower than the spreadsheet estimates.

-31/8/2 hits harder than 21/2/18 with the rest of the skills (has +2% fire damage, +6% fire crit, +33% IGC damage, etc).

-The uptime of IGC (shock) was greatly overestimated for the 21/2/18, when you don't have Supercharged Ion Gas, and only 1 point in Ion Overload.

-Incendiary Missile is worst than Flame Thrower, so is only a way to make the target burn for procs, but doesn't help with real DPS. If you use both IM and FT, the number of Rail Shots get lower, as you can't Flame Burst that much.

Edited January 26, 2012 by MorningMusume

[CrazyHippo]

i always hoped that it would be a PBAOE ability, very short range high threat generating. also maybe have the combust damage reduction on it as well.

 

its not a useless ability, i just weave it into my rotation to drop some heat, but its not a great ability

[Spurgo]

The funny thing is the simulations show that 21/2/18 isn't better dps, I'm trying to find a mistake, but I can't. Seems that in reality that build has lower sustained dps than 31/8/2. In real scenarios the procs are not that good on average.

 

Tomorrow (EU) I'll post the first simulations with my impressions.

 

And to confirm this i have to say that in the fullshield spec i offen result doing the same damage i was doing with the hybrid 21/2/18. Around 250k in a good game.