Shadow Tanking Daily

[Hloki]

Due to the increasing amount of threads posting napkin math and anecdotal opinions, for my own sake and many other's I wish to get some things quite straight here. For instance a decent tanking rotation, a stat prioritising chart to dictate when one should stop on shield chance and mod for defense/absorb.

 

I only hit 50 myself 5 days ago and dont have nearly enough time to get in depth with learning the class as much as I'd like, however I am not new to tanking in general (Warrior tank BC-Cata) so all proof of point is not wasted.

 

Thank you all,

Hloki Entropy, Chaos Ensues...

[Hloki]

Another point of interest is the Kinetic Combat tier 6 Harnessed Shadow, all skill calcs note that only project procs a stack of Harnessed Shadows, however my talent description states that, "Project and Slow Time have a 100% chance to grant Harnessed Shadows." I haven't checked future bug fixes on the matter but I would like to know if they intend to stay true and allow slow time to proc a stack of Harnessed Shadow or if they intend to remove that in the in-game talent description. Edited January 25, 2012 by Hloki

[Dukibritches]

Another point of interest is the Kinetic Combat tier 6 Harnessed Shadow, all skill calcs note that only project procs a stack of Harnessed Shadows, however my talent description states that, "Porject and Slow Time have a 100% chance to grant Harnessed Shadows." I haven't checked future bug fixes on the matter but I would like to know if they intend to stay true and allow slow time to proc a stack of Harnessed Shadow or if they intend to remove that in the in-game talent description.

 

I believe the tooltip is incorrect. The only time it was effected by Wither/Slow Time was on the PTR, and I think they reverted it back to just shock/project before making the patch live, but forgot to correct the tooltip back to normal.

[Hloki]

That is unfortunate, I would very much so love the extra Harnessed Shadow stack.

 

Thanks for that man appreciate it. Damn incorrect tooltip! haha

[Faytte]

They should probably reconsider it. Shadows/Assassins could use the help in AoE situations and are already about 10% behind other tanks in their ability to mitigate..

[Dukibritches]

They should probably reconsider it. Shadows/Assassins could use the help in AoE situations and are already about 10% behind other tanks in their ability to mitigate..

 

I completely disagree, while there maybe a few percent mitigation discrepancy for Sins vs other tank classes, but when played correctly our AOE threat is great. And the mitigation discrepancy is not even close to 10%, on top of that it is offset by the fact that wither/slow time debuff the targets for -5% dmg.

[Kitru]

And the mitigation discrepancy is not even close to 10%, on top of that it is offset by the fact that wither/slow time debuff the targets for -5% dmg.

 

First off, Shad/Sins *do* take roughly 10% more damage than VGs and Guards in AoE situations (due to the fact that Kinetic Ward vanishes almost immediately). This does not mean that their mitigation is 40% while the other tanks have 50% mitigation; it means that, using VGs or Guards as a 100% baseline, Shadows would take 110% or 107%, respectively, of the damage taken by the other tanks.

 

Secondly, the math that has been done to determine the 10% and 7% discrepancy was already factored in to the given math. If it wasn't, Shadows would look even worse. I assure you; I was the one that did the math. Also, you should probably keep in mind that the damage debuff and the accuracy debuff that Shadows have are not exclusive the them: VGs have a 4% damage debuff they apply with both their ST and AoE strings (while also having better mitigation) and Guards have a 5% acc debuff applied with their substantially more powerful and cheaper AoE. Nor are non-mitigation survivability benefits (re: self healing) exclusive to Shadows: Guards have a Blade Storm damage shield they have active often (and, honestly, in almost every discussion of them, gets overlooked or ignored). Acting as if those mechanisms *are* is simply ignorant; Shads/Sins *aren't* unique so you can't simply act as if any comparison is somehow fundamentally flawed because there isn't any way to legitimately compare Shadows with another class.

[Lord_Galadrind]

Kitru have you been able to verify if the AC bonus from Stasis / Eye of the Storm is multiplicative or additive ?

[Kitru]

Kitru have you been able to verify if the AC bonus from Stasis / Eye of the Storm is multiplicative or additive ?

 

It's additive. I checked my armor in game with and without CT and with and without my boots. The only way the numbers added up was if Stasis was additive rather than multiplicative.

[Dukibritches]

First off, Shad/Sins *do* take roughly 10% more damage than VGs and Guards in AoE situations (due to the fact that Kinetic Ward vanishes almost immediately). This does not mean that their mitigation is 40% while the other tanks have 50% mitigation; it means that, using VGs or Guards as a 100% baseline, Shadows would take 110% or 107%, respectively, of the damage taken by the other tanks.

 

Secondly, the math that has been done to determine the 10% and 7% discrepancy was already factored in to the given math. If it wasn't, Shadows would look even worse. I assure you; I was the one that did the math. Also, you should probably keep in mind that the damage debuff and the accuracy debuff that Shadows have are not exclusive the them: VGs have a 4% damage debuff they apply with both their ST and AoE strings (while also having better mitigation) and Guards have a 5% acc debuff applied with their substantially more powerful and cheaper AoE. Nor are non-mitigation survivability benefits (re: self healing) exclusive to Shadows: Guards have a Blade Storm damage shield they have active often (and, honestly, in almost every discussion of them, gets overlooked or ignored). Acting as if those mechanisms *are* is simply ignorant; Shads/Sins *aren't* unique so you can't simply act as if any comparison is somehow fundamentally flawed because there isn't any way to legitimately compare Shadows with another class.

 

Well I am no mathematician so I will leave the number crunching to you, but if each of the other tank classes has only 1 of the debuffs, and sins bring both to the table I would think that would make up for some of the mitigation that we are missing out on. Also it is my understanding that SI/SW tanks have a substantial amount more pure avoidance than BH tanks. So again, I would think that this factors into the equation and the pure avoidance/mitgation #'s across the board for all tanks are within 3%, not 10%. Beyond the mitigation/avoidance argument its also my understanding that sins bring more pure DPS to the group than BH/SW tanks. While this is negligible because obviously it is not our primary role, having more dmg speeds fights along so its certainly not useless.

Edited January 26, 2012 by Dukibritches

[Kitru]

So again, I would think that this factors into the equation and the pure avoidance/mitgation #'s across the board for all tanks are within 3%, not 10%.

 

As I said before, I got the 7% and 10% numbers *after* factoring in the relevant debuffs. I did not forget to factor them in on *any* of the tanks so bringing them up as if they would do *even more* is completely pointless. Let me reiterate: they've already been factored in to the 7% and 10% numbers so it's pointless to continue to bring them up.

 

Beyond the mitigation/avoidance argument its also my understanding that sins bring more pure DPS to the group than BH/SW tanks. While this is negligible because obviously it is not our primary role, having more dmg speeds fights along so its certainly not useless.

 

I've yet to see any conclusive math that shows that Shad/Sins do more damage than either of the other tanks. The fact that a Shad/Sin isn't able to pull threat off of a similarly geared, similarly played tank outside of using a taunt is relatively indicative of this. It's pure supposition and has yet to be tested appreciably. If anything, I would place a bet on VGs actually having better DPS thanks to them being able to maintain ST threat perfectly fine without a *single* high threat ability; Shadows have 15% additional threat from Project and 50% additional threat from Slow Time bolstering their threat numbers. Making the decent assumption that they can maintain roughly the same amount of threat (within a 10% margin of error since that's what is afforded by the aggro swapping numbers), a VG would be throwing out more damage (especially since Project is almost a third of a Shadow's entire threat).

[Dukibritches]

Where can I find these so called numbers because I call ******** on your numbers.... please post me a link to wherever you have posted your math. I've seen you make some great posts with some great points, but now I just have to see the math to understand it. Edited January 27, 2012 by Dukibritches

[Kitru]

Where can I find these so called numbers because I call ******** on your numbers.... please post me a link to wherever you have posted your math. I've seen you make some great posts with some great points, but now I just have to see the math to understand it.

 

This thread. My posts have all of the relevant math. You'll notice the damage and acc debuffs factored in there directly.

[Lord_Galadrind]

It's additive. I checked my armor in game with and without CT and with and without my boots. The only way the numbers added up was if Stasis was additive rather than multiplicative.

 

OoO Ooooooooo dear.... in the original theorycrafting threads both here & in Assassin forums wasn't it thought at the time to be multiplicative ?

 

Trying to find where I read it , Gankstah's thread maybe or infact I think it may have been you mentioned somewhere in another thread that if the talent was additive that would place shadow / sin alot further behind in the AC dept. ~10%'ish . Rather than the theorycrafted 3-4% behind a similiarly geared Jugg if it was multiplicative.

 

I don't mind 3-4% between tanks on threat/mitigation/avoidance....but 10% on AC is quite significant surely ?

Sure Shad/Sin have a slight advantage with internal etc...but that certainly isn't where the majority of the damage comes from .

 

Are yourself & Gankstah happy with your AC numbers between the 3 tanks now you are certain the talent is additive , cos this concerns me tbh ?

 

 

Edit: Found it (im useless at forum searching)

 

Kitru: 'Secondly, I'm also going to state that I *assume* Stasis (tier 5 Kinetic Combat talent 20% armor buff) is *multiplicative* rather than additive (I haven't received confirmation about this from any source) simply because, if it's not, Shadows are going to have substantially worse armor ratings than either PTs or Juggs (using the Rakata raid gear, the totals would be ~770 armor from the "big" armor pieces with additive and ~855 with multiplicative; heavy armor pieces with the 60% armor buff for tanking stances get ~860 armor). If they *aren't* multiplicative, it's definitely a problem since Shadows are going to be getting damage reduction contributions from armor that are vastly sub-par to the other tanks. Stasis would need to get bumped up to a 50% armor buff if they are additive.'

 

(If Stasis *isn't* multiplicative and is instead additive, damage reduction would go down by about ~10%, from 30% to ~27%, changing those damage taken numbers to 41.1% and 44%, making Shadows the outright *worst* tanks since they would only be *on-par* with Juggernauts, *at best*, and substantially worse than both at worst (taking 10% more damage than PTs and 7% more damage than Juggs in AoE situations, which isn't within the realm of gear optimization equivalence))

 

Still, all of this fits in line with the conclusions of the first analysis pairing; the only *new* conclusions that can be drawn are that, if Armor buffs really are additive and not multiplicative, Assassins/Shadows are pretty much hosed for mitigation purposes and Kinetic Ward/Dark Ward needs some tweaking to not be useless in mutli-target situations unless the devs *specifically* want Sins/Shads to be sub-par AoE tanks. "

Edited January 28, 2012 by Lord_Galadrind

[Kitru]

Trying to find where I read it , Gankstah's thread maybe or infact I think it may have been you mentioned somewhere in another thread that if the talent was additive that would place shadow / sin alot further behind in the AC dept. ~10%'ish . Rather than the theorycrafted 3-4% behind a similiarly geared Jugg if it was multiplicative.

 

It was me in the PT v. Jugg comparison thread.

 

Are yourself & Gankstah happy with your AC numbers between the 3 tanks now you are certain the talent is additive , cos this concerns me tbh ?

 

Personally, I'm not happy with it. I think that Guards and Juggs are close enough that it's a moot point (Guards have lower percentage mitigation but they also have the benefit of the the Blade Storm shield to balance it out), as are Shadows for single target (wherein all 3 classes are roughly similar in performance).

 

The problem occurs for AoE incoming damage, wherein Shadows are at a *distinct* and severe disadvantage, and that's what I'm not happy with. There are a number of recommendations that would solve it to some extent (increasing Stasis to 50%, making Kinetic Ward a passive buff with a charge based benefit on top of it, etc.) and any number of them could work (with the proper math behind them). My hope is that the devs will actually consider them such that Shadows aren't simply jokes where AoE tanking is concerned.

[Lord_Galadrind]

you beat me of the bat I was still in process of editing quoting... haha

 

Thanks for the reply

 

maybe like you said Stasis / EoS > 50%... I tend to really hate talents that are just a flat out bolster like this though.

 

" Here take this talent that adds zero flavor just so you can have comparible AC to other tank classes." I mean why even bother having a generic talent like this in the first place, things like this should be baked in to start with, not a damn talent you have to take just to be equal...

 

I would much rather DC (ins Shad equivalent) just get adjusted >150% to offset this & have Stasis / EoS do something entirely different....pasively

 

I 'was' really hot on the idea of energized shocks (ins shadow equivalent) , adding a charge back to DW (ins shadow eqv). But now I'm not so sure... shocks play such a large part in the rotation / threat that having your survibility also hinge around this is dangerous ground in my mind.

 

Certainly sky not falling...... but ya know equality & all I think the issue is really going to show in full Rakata gear between classes its quite significant at that level AC differences

 

Hmmm a lower AC tank , that relies on a applied bone shield *cough cough buff charge & slightly self heals was a massive failure & an entire Xpac before it got addressed by Devs in that 'other' game..... Lessons learnt anyone . Having one class be entirely passive & another reactive in their survivability will never balance out

Edited January 28, 2012 by Lord_Galadrind
Interwebz worst speeler

[Pijinz]

Single target figure still seems pretty solid, and you haven't included the healing from Dark Charge (I presume you did this before the buff).

 

You can get something like 80 health per second from DC. If you're taking say 4000 damage per second (which seems like a lot; this would be after all other mitigation), then that's still 2% mitigation multiplicatively. That'd put you on 41.1*0.98 = 40.3%. Not quite as good as a PT still, but better than a Jug, and close enough that it probably doesn't matter.

 

So other than that critical change to Dark Ward, we're probably about where we should be. The only other buff we might need is some sort of scaling for Dark Charge healing. Right now it scales adversely with damage received, so harder content = less mitigation.

[Kitru]

Single target figure still seems pretty solid, and you haven't included the healing from Dark Charge (I presume you did this before the buff).

 

Yes. It was done before the DC/CT buff.

 

You can get something like 80 health per second from DC. If you're taking say 4000 damage per second (which seems like a lot; this would be after all other mitigation), then that's still 2% mitigation multiplicatively. That'd put you on 41.1*0.98 = 40.3%. Not quite as good as a PT still, but better than a Jug, and close enough that it probably doesn't matter.

 

First things first, you're forgetting about the Jugg/Guard's self shielding from Scream/Blade Storm. That actually adds a bit more than most people are willing to admit. Since it scales with Bonus Healing, it scales with gear and, additionally, it provides about a 10% of max hp shield (1161.94 + 3.27 * Bonus Healing; 20k hp would require 256 Bonus Healing) every 12 seconds, which provides about as much as the entirety of our self healing on its own and isn't able to be wasted on overhealing.

 

Secondly, to give some math to CT's contributions: it takes 1.54 attacks (as determined by the sum of .65^n) to get a proc. With an easy/easy paradigm, FB is a 9.1% activation, Slow Time is 11.1%, DS is 30%, Project is 15%, TK Throw is 10%, and Saber Strike is the remaining 24.8%. Multiplying through by the number of attacks per GCD and summing them together, we get an average of 1.96 attacks per GCD. So, we can generally assume that we'll get the CT proc on the first GCD after the ICD runs up: 4.5 + 1.5 = 6 seconds. So, with a 425 heal every 60 seconds, we get the listed 70 hp/sec (Battle Readiness pulls this up to 94 hp/sec for the duration of the buff).

 

So other than that critical change to Dark Ward, we're probably about where we should be. The only other buff we might need is some sort of scaling for Dark Charge healing. Right now it scales adversely with damage received, so harder content = less mitigation.

 

Agreed, where ST is concerned. Half of our self healing (HS on a 33 sec use paradigm provides about 70 hp/sec at 19k max hp) doesn't scale with gear or incoming damage. I'm pretty upset with the devs didn't make the DC/CT self heal scale with Bonus Healing like they did with the Jugg/Guard shield, which would be the best solution, honestly. To keep it at roughly the same level with some decent scaling, the heal should be about 200-225 + Bonus Healing at 50.

 

Shadows really need some attention where AoE is concerned since that's where we fall behind *very* quickly. The Slow Time damage buff gave us better AoE threat gen (we still use more resources and animation time to maintain the *same* threat as a Guard), but the devs haven't seen fit to change any of our mechanics to make us better at AoE mitigation. There are any number of different possible solutions (the idea that is most piquing my interest is Projects/Shocks or Project/Shock crits generating KW/DW additional charges; the simplest solution would be to restrict the number of charges lost to 1 per second or 1 per GCD), but the fact of the matter is that we need *some* kind of attention.

[Pijinz]

Secondly, to give some math to CT's contributions: it takes 1.54 attacks (as determined by the sum of .65^n) to get a proc. With an easy/easy paradigm, FB is a 9.1% activation, Slow Time is 11.1%, DS is 30%, Project is 15%, TK Throw is 10%, and Saber Strike is the remaining 24.8%. Multiplying through by the number of attacks per GCD and summing them together, we get an average of 1.96 attacks per GCD. So, we can generally assume that we'll get the CT proc on the first GCD after the ICD runs up: 4.5 + 1.5 = 6 seconds. So, with a 425 heal every 60 seconds, we get the listed 70 hp/sec (Battle Readiness pulls this up to 94 hp/sec for the duration of the buff).

 

Dunno what you've done there. I agree with the 1.538 (just comes from 1/p, where p = 0.65 in this case). If you were to pretend every attack was single-hit, single-target (so that the actual rate would be even faster), then that's one proc per 5.3 seconds average (3 + 0.538 GCDs). Then I used 425/5.3 to get the 80 figure. 6 seconds would be expected without Swelling Shadows, as you'd have 1/0.5 = 2 expected trials before success, so 4.5 + 1.5 with the ICD included (if anyone is interested, that means Swelling Shadows is worth about 9-10 hps; that's actually slightly better than it was before the change).

 

Again, this is ignoring multi-hit attacks, so the actual rate would be higher. I wouldn't want to guess at anything more than that; it'd be more suited for a simulator. Although you can quite accurately estimate the number of total attacks over time, it's very hard to say when these will occur; you can have a higher proportion of multi-hit attacks happening during the ICD for instance. Also, correct me if I'm wrong, this is just an in game observation: I believe Saber Strike is considered a single hit attack. If you look at a mobs health when you use it you should notice it only decreases on the first hit. This leads me to believe the damage is all applied instantly, and the subsequent animations and floating numbers are just for show.

[Kitru]

Dunno what you've done there.

 

You're forgetting that our attacks generally occur in discreet 1.5 second intervals, so you have to mathematically apply them as such. With an average of 1.96 attacks per GCD (as determined by the animation consumption stuff I provided), this means that we have an 87.2% chance of getting the proc per GCD (at the 4.5-6 second interval rather than the 3.0-4.5 seconds). With the 4.5 sec ICD and discrete GCD attack use, you can't reliably use a partial GCD as an accurate measure of proc rate. In essence, it takes 1.14 GCDs to get a proc, which means the actual proc rate is best interpreted as 6.71 seconds (4.5 seconds + 1.5 * 1.14 GCDs). It actually brings the number closer to 63 HP/sec, but the fact that most attacks occur mid GCD would bring the number up a bit higher, which is why I used the 70 hp/sec.

 

Also, correct me if I'm wrong, this is just an in game observation: I believe Saber Strike is considered a single hit attack. If you look at a mobs health when you use it you should notice it only decreases on the first hit. This leads me to believe the damage is all applied instantly, and the subsequent animations and floating numbers are just for show.

 

Each individual attack is considered a separate entity. You'll actually notice a higher proc rate per use as well as the procs occuring at different times if you pay attention. You need to remember that the same damage combining effect occurs with Double Strike (and any other attack that has a static number of hits rather than a variable number of attacks, such as with channeled spells that can lose ticks).

Edited January 29, 2012 by Kitru

[Gankstah]

Each individual attack is considered a separate entity.

To my knowledge this is correct.

 

You can test this yourself easily enough by spamming the default attack for any class really. One GCD but 3 seperate attacks. Each attack has a chance to proc/crit. You can watch as one attack in the series will crit while the other attacks will not or any variation thereof.

Edited January 29, 2012 by Gankstah

[Masturomenos]

That is unfortunate, I would very much so love the extra Harnessed Shadow stack.

 

Thanks for that man appreciate it. Damn incorrect tooltip! haha

 

That be too fast of stacks building when u ad in 50% chance almost to stck on shock with the chain shock talent. If wither kept it up it never fall off with the chance to proc 2x on shock.

 

And dont say not everyone takes it. Every viable pve and pvp spec thats decent has to have chain shock in it. Too many HD procs and all well do is cast lighting.

Edited January 29, 2012 by Masturomenos

[Pijinz]

You can test this yourself easily enough by spamming the default attack for any class really. One GCD but 3 seperate attacks. Each attack has a chance to proc/crit. You can watch as one attack in the series will crit while the other attacks will not or any variation thereof.

 

Hmmm, I'll have to look out for this. It was just an observation that for instance Thrash (Double Strike) takes two distinct chunks out of your targets health bar, while for Saber Strike the damage seems to be applied all at the first hit (in other words there's only ever one visible reduction in the targets health, which is on the first connection).

 

To be honest, most of my time in combat is spent scanning the two little bars above me and my target, so while I've not noticed the second or third attack in a Saber Strike combo proc a Dark Charge effect, it could well be possible. This is why we need combat logs!

[Kitru]

That be too fast of stacks building when u ad in 50% chance almost to stck on shock with the chain shock talent. If wither kept it up it never fall off with the chance to proc 2x on shock.

 

There isn't a chance for a second HS stack from Upheaval procs. You generate the HS stack at the moment of activation, not at the moment of connection so you can only get a single HS stack per Project/Shock activation. Adding Slow Time/Wither to the HS/HD stack generation would only more than double the benefit.

 

Also, it's not a question of "the buff falling off" since the stacks are consumed upon the use of TK Throw/Force Lightning. The stacks of the buff do nothing if they are not consumed by the use of the power in question so uptime is largely pointless.

[Hloki]

I have a new question that I'd appreciate resolved by experienced and reliable shadows currently tanking. Currently my defensive stats are:

DR - 42.17%

DC - 24.01%

SC - 35.77%(55.77% w/ KW and 2-set bonus)

SA - 40.99%

HP - 20,484(Unbuffed)

 

I haven't calculated my mean mitigation, but I'd like some advice on what to do and how to play with my stats. If anyone knows of a good link to a stat table, I'd be much appreciative. Also, the reason I'm asking is it seemed like I was taking quite a bit of damage for my gear level(I'm situationally aware, it was raw damage taken from boss, no unnecessary damage).

 

Thanks for your time guys!