Caydra

Well depends on your healers right ? I usually dont fall below 50% health, especially not with my avoidance gear. Those adds don't deal much damage. Otherwise it's surely helpfull and well there isn't anything useful to spec for this encounter so I can't really see a reason to drop it.

And there certainly is no reason to make a prot paladin the mt over a warrior. My tps in gear with comparable avoidance gear is ridiculous. If I equip more of my spelldamage gear my avoidance will drop of course. Even on demon mobs I usually can't hold aggro against the over tanks. It's a frustrating situation tbh, at least for me. But well at least the other specs are not better off.

 

Anedris

Consistency is a good point.

A lot seems to just come down to encounter design. Against a duel-wielder, the additional holy shield charges should make up for the 4% difference in physical mitigation, since the warrior will take some unblocked hits. Against a duel-wielding demon the paladin should out-threat the warrior (and even more so when Sunwell Radiance is factored in).

But as long as there's a Shahraz and an Archimonde in the progression path you need a well-geared non-paladin to tank them, so you may as well gear up your warrior, who then becomes the MT. I'm not really sure which would be better for Illidan - LS and SW are good for the enrages, but the rest of the fight (duel-wielder plus frequent threat clears... plus I can't remember if the elf-form Illidan counts as a demon) the paladin should be superior.

(Our guild doesn't actually have a MT... we have two warriors, a druid, and a paladin with one warrior and the druid being better geared than the other two at the moment due to being around longer. The paladin is my alt who isn't ever going to catch up to the others in gear so this is all just speculation for me.)

On reflection, I would expect just about every boss tanking role Blizzard creates to be doable with a warrior, since warriors are marketed as the tanking class. So I suspect our situation won't change - able to tank 90% of boss encounters (better at some of those as compared to the other classes, worse at some of those as compared to the other classes), but always second fiddle because the warrior can tank 100% of boss encounters.

 

Denogran

Illidan is easy enough to tank except for Shear, which ignores miss. So while a warrior shrugs and hits their Shield Block, a paladin needs to overgear the encounter enough to where they can throw in some straight up avoidance gear. Which then makes it not that easy to tank (it's been done, just not ideal). So to finish BT, you need a strong warrior tank.

I don't mind letting a warrior be able to tank every single boss in the game. I do mind being critical to one boss, then having to sit out the next boss. Make every boss require 3 tanks, and have them rotate or share main tank spot. Or have us provide some awesome buff to healers such that even when we're in a gimped healing role, we're still desired.

 

• Snowy

Not having Ardent Defender for Felmyst skelly tanking is a colossal oversight.

 

Prinsesa

While the issue of leapfrogging might be a concern (how often does this actually happen?), isn't AD arguably better than Last Stand/Shield Wall because "the AI does the thinking for you"? A Warrior who gets particularly jumpy might pop his LS/SW on a bad spike that was really just a fraction of a second away from being healed (honest!).

In contrast, AD already does the same thing, but without a cooldown, meaning a Paladin will always have it in any situation where he takes enough damage to redline his health. The only other situation where LS/SW would have a distinct advantage would be periods where you KNOW you're going to take a lot of damage, such as a "last 20% Enrage"; even then, a Paladin's lasts as long as it needs to in that situation, whereas the boss may still be alive and enraged long after his Shield Wall has expired.

Really though, I thought EJ was immune to these WoW-General-esque "which tank is better?" type discussions. Can we please simply outline situations where one class does better than another without trying to establish broad generalizations?

Off-topic: I can no longer the thread's title as anything other than "Protection and YOOOOUUUUUUUU!"

"We do want Sanctuary to be the tanking seal"

- Ghostcrawler

 

Ragnor

The leap frogging is a pretty huge drawback of the talent however as total hp increases it diminishes

The universe is run by the complex interweaving of three elements. Energy, matter, and enlightened self-interest.

www.retpaladin.com

 

zanmat0

The prot paladin in my guild points me here where many of the posters agree that it is not useful. What would you say to them?

 

• Snowy

The concept of leapfrogging applies to bosses that hit extremely hard. Say AD kicks in when you have 7k hp. If you are sitting at 7.5k health and a boss hits you for 8k, you're dead.

For small hits, AD is amazing, especially on Felmyst. Maybe your healers are running on a breath phase and your health dips under 8k. All of a sudden those modest skelly hits are being reduced by another 30%, buying your healers extra time.

 

Anedris

To them I would say... do the math?

That's the math for the best possible scenario, which Felmysts adds are, pretty much - small hits so you'll start seeing the AD benefit right at 35%. So those 5 talent points are giving you 15% additional health. Of course, it's actually better than that since the pseudo-health provided by AD doesn't need to be healed back up. And even more than that, when you drop below 35% health the incoming hits become smaller making the percentage of each hit that is blocked dramatically greater, so the final mitigation below 35% is actually greater than 30%.

Of course, if your healers never let you drop below 35% you don't need it, but if that's the case you probably don't need any of your other talents apart from imp. RD and 1-h weapon spec either.

 

2ndNin

Why is Illidan a better fight for a warrior?

Demon: our threat is better
Fast hitting: our threat is better
Threat Resets: shield, judge, lets go
Crushes: We don't get crushed
Shear: We can pretty much just pop up holy shield and lol at this, warriors need to make sure shield block is up for it (or in truth it can be healed through).

As for overgearing it to hit 111.x% mitigation, oh noes, my block gear set is 115%ish, my MT is 104%, and thats because I sacrificed avoidance for health, I can up it easily to the 108% region and easily push over shear proof if I want to. Its not an issue of over gearing, so much as we have to be geared for it, a warrior pops shield block and relies on their health for the rest, we actually gear correctly for the fight. To be honest a lot of paladin tanking is done badly, its done by people wearing a ramshackle set of gear that is not really designed for the role they are taking, I see too many Paldins now (2.4) wearing T5 as their main tanking set, or avoiding the 2piece T4 if you need threat. Gear choice for a paladin is harder, but it doesn't mean we can't do it.

Illidan was progression tanked by a paladin for various guilds, without 2.4.

Threat wise, at least in T5 / early T6 my paladin still beats every warrior I have met, now Lore and that say I will have problems later on, and willing to accept that, but for now I have no issues, ok thats not data its anecdote, but I ahve seen too many paladin not using the tools they are given, letting consecration drop or buffing devotion rather than righteous in a group with another paladin that could do it with no or a minor loss.

There are fights we suffer in, guess what, they have all been tanked, why use a warrior if it makes the fight slightly easier, but wastes a tank slot on every other thing in the game? SSC, take a paladin and a bunch of bears, paladin solo tanks till bosses, bears come in as extra tanks, TK, same thing, Maggie / Gruul our threat generation is better, shorter fight = win. MH, sub out the warrior, bears and paladin can do it. Warriors are not essential, somethings they make easier some they penalise your raid (improved expose armour for example). Not going to say don't take a warrior, but a paladin can do it, in several guilds I know Archi was progression tanked by a paladin.

In terms of ardent defender, it is win, provided you don't get it skipped, the 0/40/21 build is a threat build designed to let you push harder, faster, on bosses like Brutallus (where AD is likely to get skipped anyway), its something like an equivalent threat increase to 200 spell damage I have been told. Again gear / build is vital to working as a paladin, we don't have the same utility a warrior does when badly geared for the instance.

Least thats my opinion, only tanked Illidan once, but I don't see this all as being so problematic as people make out unless they are defending warriors.

 

◊ Cathela

How are you getting that? It's a 10% difference for magic damage, 4% for physical (which in most cases is the bulk of the damage, especially on fights that put the tank's life in serious jeopardy.)

But anyway, I think the biggest roadblock is that the instance designers seem to always make sure that every fight is tankable by a warrior, whereas they have no qualms about throwing in the occasional fight that can't be handled by a paladin (silences) or a druid (Illidan).

They could improve things quite a bit simply by making Holy Shield physical so it couldn't be locked out by silences.

That's true. The argument on the other side is that besides being stronger when they're active (well, SW at least, LS is arguable I suppose), SW/LS can also be used proactively to deal with known upcoming damage spikes -- the 30% transition on Magtheridon, Brutallus stomps, any kind of enrage, etc.

Some kind of activated oh-shit button (that doesn't drop aggro) is high on my wishlist for WotLK.

My comrades are my weapons, and I am their shield.

 

Tilted

A paladin without Ardent Defender in his spec when pushing for a progression boss that involves AoE tanking is a paladin that has made a massive mistake in judgement. Ardent Defender reduces damage by a LOT more than 30% when it's active, and it's tight moments like that which allow your guild to get a first kill easier rather than wipe it up and start fresh.

Example:

Hyjal ghouls, the bane of durability on my shield, hit for ~1000 a pop on a non-blocked attack. My BV set blocks 628 per block, so the ghouls normally hit for about 372. Now, assume I'm below 35% health. Now a non-blocked attack does 700 damage per hit, but a blocked attack only hits for 72 damage. Even in a worst-case scenario where I'm only blocking half of the attacks that land on me, that's an average of ~61% reduced damage while the talent is active. It's basically the equivalent of a priest popping Pain Suppression on you, without the hit to threat, and the effect lasts as long as you're standing or until you get healed up to safer levels. Couple that with the [Commendation of Kael'thas] trinket... You get the point.

........

Now, I know this isn't the best example because ghouls in Hyjal are lolezmode. But it illustrates my point that Ardent Defender is a lot better than it looks on the surface. I first discovered this when my guild was going through the pains of learning Tidewalker, and not once was a wipe caused due to me dying prematurely. The simple fact is that when the shit hit the fan and I dropped below 35%, I became near-invincible because my block value neutered the murlocs' damage output. This gave healers the buffer they needed to keep me alive while ensuring the MT stays topped off as well. Since then, I've never even considered a prot spec without all 5 points in Ardent Defender.

And to the paladins who claim they never drop below 35%, I say congrats. You officially outgear the encounter you're working on.

 

• frmorrison

Regarding Deathfrost it is great for times when you don't have TC around on a single boss tanking, however not something you use for your everyday job.

I think having Deathfrost on an extra SD weapon is a good idea, especially for Demon phase Kalecgos as well as the second Flame of Azzinoth, and perhaps for boss tanking in ZA. The 20 TPS loss isn't huge for those encounters and the gain of a melee and spell cast slowdown is immense (it affects bosses).

 

kalbear

Sorry; that's what I meant to say. Still, 4% all damage (before any other reductions like armor) is a very big difference in overall damage taken when it comes down to it. Not being hit by nearly as many crushes tends to balance this out to a certain extent, but not entirely.

As to the spike damage - while AD is just as useful in the best case, it tends to not be as useful in specific cases. THere are just too many times when AD will not trigger or will trigger on the wrong thing. Taking an 8k hit that reduces you to 4k and then taking a 6k hit is a good example here; AD isn't leapfrogged, but it can't do anything about that situation. LS can. Shield wall is far better than AD in general and isn't really a fair comparison; taking 75% less damage whenever you need is not comparable to taking 30% less damage some times. My experience has been that tanks don't tend to hover at 35% or less for very long when tanking a single mob; either they die or they get healed up, which makes AD not as useful. It does save wipes, and it is absolutely worth it, but it is not as good as LS/SW is in the general sense.

AD is absolutely wonderful when dealing with multiple mobs, as indicated by Tilted. Last stand is not nearly as good. AD is so good in this respect that many times a paladin can simply stay at 35% or less indefinitely, and wants to do so so that no damage is taken. AD is very complementary to tanking multiple mobs and to a paladin's strengths of dealing with fast, smaller hits. But it is not an answer to emergency buttons.

I apologize if this conversation is not germane to EJ; I had thought that being specific about the quantitative differences that a paladin has compared to other tanks would be reasonably on-topic.

 

Gerilith

If I can keep up a reasonable survivability by gear and do not have access to a retribution paladin for threat, 0/40/21 is way superior. There is no way you can get this much threat in combination with gear that provides very good survivability. I would say AD still is a nice to have, even in multi target tanking. Yes, if you are not healed at all it is superior in multi target tanking. But with the gear you can wear without loosing too much threat if you tend to 40/21, you will not even fall to 35 or 30% that often. You will, but it is not a problem. And it is very unlikely to be killed if your healers do not suck.

It's not like you are able to keep up the same gear choices with 46/15 as with 40/21 as long as you have no rets in your group. Threat is still important.

Edit: The situations where AD gets strong are where healers are not available or silenced/feared/.. like at Kalecgos with only one healer at the deamon or Azgalor or others.

 

◊ Cathela

Is it actually possible to build enough threat after taunting Sathrovaar to hold it againt human-Kalec's big threat burst? I always assumed there was no point and your only chance to not lose it was for Kalec to miss, but I've been kind of wondering about that recently. It seems like I lose aggro less often when I really push my threat after taunting, but I don't have any hard evidence.

And never have to move, and never lag. How many fights are there where your healers can stand still and spam-heal you without interruption?

I'm not really sure I see the point, anyway. Going from 0/48/13 or whatever to 0/41/20 gets you more threat from talents, which means you can wear less threat on gear, which means you can gear more for survivability, which you'll have to do to make up the survivability loss from AD and Spell Warding. I don't really see how you're coming out with a better overall situation.

And when maximum suvivability is important and threat isn't (e.g., Kalecgos) then an 0/48/13-type build can put on heavy mitigation gear and be much sturdier than an 0/41/20.

My comrades are my weapons, and I am their shield.

 

Denogran

Sure, it's not even hard really in my experience. When I was first learning the fight, I just sorta went in with my general tanking stuff (now I go max mitigation as I'm always the third tank), and I could reliably hold aggro for the whole duration. The only tough part is that when you get Corrupter's Strike, the Human form keeps dishing out threat so you have to stay ahead of threat.

But really, why would you want to? I find that losing him once every 15 seconds or so isn't really a big deal as I just taunt right back and he's not very squishy at all.

 

Lunkhedd

I went through the trouble of computing this for one case once in a, er, friendly discussion on another forum.

If the hits you're taking are between 15% and 35% of your maximum health (with an equal chance for any value in that range), Ardent Defender will let you survive at least one additional hit about 70.5% of the time a hit takes you below 35% health. I can post the math if anyone's interested.

 

PsiVen

I'm not sure I understand the argument that we have better threat on Illidan. Okay, sure... It's a 25-minute enrage. The entire fight is execution; unlike virtually every other boss in TBC you don't have to worry about killing him fast as long as you're stable. Paladins typically have to sacrifice significant stamina to get the avoidance needed to MT Illidan for progression, resulting in far lower effective health. That's really the only important factor.

I tend to scorn the 0/40/21 spec for the same reason. When our weakest point is survivability, it just doesn't make sense to sacrifice it for threat which is usually the last thing on my mind. No boss I have fought has ever made me think "I should swap in survivability for more threat" without first thinking "I wonder if I can hold Void Reaver for the entire fight".

By the way if this sounds funny coming from someone using a spell damage shield in Sunwell, I hate you.

 

◊ Cathela

Yeah, but if he does his aggro move, say, 6 seconds after you first taunt him then he gets beat on for 9 more seconds before you can get it back. This isn't a big deal once the fight is solidly on farm status, but we're still at the stage (3rd kill this week) where it tends to come down to the wire in one way or another.

My comrades are my weapons, and I am their shield.

 

Anedris

Threat on Illidan matters somewhat, because your DPS reduces the number of enrages you have to survive. Balance that against the fact that a warrior has a get-out-jail-free card for the first two enrages however.

Mostly though, what hurts paladins on Illidan is the same thing that makes tanking Sacrolash hard (when she should be absolutely ideal - a duel-wielding crushing demon in a threat-sensitive fight). It's the the fact that with our avoidance chopped away (we lose 25% in Sunwell and we lose all our miss against Shear) we need a lot more uncrushability on our gear to regain our uncrushable (or unshearable) status.

Fortunately, with the crushing mechanic being by most indicators eliminated, this is one thing that is very likely not to trouble us in Wrath.

 

Hugrim

If the crushing hits are removed from the game, druid tanks will be far superior with their high armor and healthpool. I dont think, that Blizzard will change the druids tank strengths, so why would anyone use a warrior or a paladin over a druid tank? Best example is maybe Illidan, if he hasn't his shear ability, a bear tank would be best. If Archimonde hasn't his fear, would anyone use a warrior or a paladin? I dont think so.

I never had problems to reach uncrushable beyond T5-Items, and that was long before the ZA & 2.3 batches, which make it much, much easier.
Also uncrushable for Sacrolash wasn't a big problem for me, thanks to the blockrating on the new T6 items. Just switch in [Libram of Repentance] and I'm done. If Felmyst dropped her shield, I could have switch to my normal librams, take a [Elixir of Major Agility]and I'm still uncrushable.

 

◊ Cathela

Come on. The change isn't going to happen in a vacuum; the devs have all the freedom they want to tune other factors, like the relative armor levels of plate tanks versus bears to name one trivial example.

My comrades are my weapons, and I am their shield.

 

Anedris

The rumour (which I have nothing at all to substantiate so take it as pure speculation, but it makes sense) is that druids will no longer see bonus armour on leather. This will have the dual effects of reducing their mitigation to the level of the plate wearing tanks and allowing them greater gear sharing with rogues. (Not to say complete homogenization - obviously a bear tank wants way more stamina than a rogue does - but a lot of the stats can cross over.)

 

• Snowy

Going back to the Righteous Defense issue with Nalorakk -- I've definitely had this issue in the last few weeks. I'd say it's a 50/50 chance at best it'll even work. You don't need to use a macro anymore for RD, right? Using RD directly on the mob should be enough, I mean, I've just moused over a mob running away and cast RD on it and it snaps back to me. Why would Nalorakk be any different? But then I've tried casting it on the other tank, and it's 50/50 that it works either.

The thing is, I get no message. No resist, no nothing. It just uses the cooldown, and splat. I've tried using this before the transition change, and a few seconds after the transition change, with the same results. I'm becoming increasingly convinced there's a bug with RD here somewhere.