16 réponses à ce sujet

[tranj84cl]

So I've started a ton of different characters, from 2H-warrior, rogue archer, DW-rogue, and mage on hard.  They were fun, but mostly helped me learn the dynamics of combat.  I then started a SS-warrior on nightmare, and surprisingly, it did very well.  The problem with the in-game tanks (I'm looking at you Alistair) is that it's implied that you should boost constitution.  I think this is wrong.  Dexterity is the way to go. 

This tank was pretty easy-mode throughout the game.  Even at points when I had to solo (out of potions and taunt recharge kinda sucks when the fights go long), I plowed through mobs.

My specializations are Templar/Champion (more on this in a sec)

My stats are:

Strength - 35 base.  After the Fade, you get 39 strength, with which you can wear Knight Commander Armor.
Dex - Everything else

Templar is just to wear the armor mentioned above.  With KC armor + Spellward you are nearly invincible.  High defense means you dodge a ton of attacks, and your armor is high enough (around 35ish) hits that do get through or even grabs aren't really overly damaging.  Spell resistance is just hax.  You can add more through runes or other equipment.  If you keep Threaten and Taunt, enemy mages tend to try to chain lightning you.  If you resist that, your teammates don't get hit either.

Champion is used to abuse rally-stack.  Combine that with Sten/Oghren/Alistair all specced to Champion, then you can get +40 defense and attack.  I take all the aggro, and Sten and Oghren plow through the crowds.  Even the mighty Gaxkang did almost nothing to this party.  I drank maybe 5-6 potions for the double strikes that got through.

Downside is, you have to be level 14+ to abuse rally, but up until then, you're still a beast, just not god-mode yet.

All in all, I found this character probably the most fun to play since I really like watching 10 mobs swinging at you and maybe seeing a few red 1's go over my head.  No need for Force Field here. 

[noobiedude]

Dex and defense stacking is the way to go. By end game I get alistair to 190 defense after buffs.

[Varenus Luckmann]

I have no idea how people play without boosting WP. I end up sinking so very, very much of my Stamina into sustainables. D:

[tranj84cl]

noobiedude wrote...

Dex and defense stacking is the way to go. By end game I get alistair to 190 defense after buffs.

Yeah, right now I have 160 defense @ level 16 and it's almost not even fair.

Varenus Luckmann wrote...

I have no idea how people play
without boosting WP. I end up sinking so very, very much of my Stamina
into sustainables. D:

Well, a lot of (if not all) sustainable abilities, don't require activation.  I keep Shield Wall and Threaten on all the time because I'm lazy and shield wall's cooldown is ridiculous.  Rally can be used after your stamina drops below 50% if you really want to spam abilities first.  I only used shield bash on the occasion where I needed a knock-down ASAP.  

For the other characters, once they unload their abilities for top-loaded damage, they activate rally and we just auto-attack the remnants. 

[Atmosfear3]

Fairly certain that you cannot rally stack. You can have two active at once but that just increases the area of effect.

[Onlyasandwich]

Rally and other group buffs like song of courage do appear to stack in a weird buggy fashion. The second party member to cast the buff does not get the second buff, but the first to activate gets both. Someone in another post claimed to be able to run out of the radius and back in to get the second member to receive both bonuses as well, but this doesn't seem to work for me.



This is on the PC version. The behavior is even more odd at times. In trying to get the second rally caster to receive both buffs by running out of the radius, I ended up not being able to receive either buff on that character for a while, even while said character's skill was active. In either case, if you want a single really buffed character and don't care much about the other guy getting rally buff, this works fine. If you want both to receive both buffs, I find it too much trouble to bother, even if it is possible in some way.

[Javanaut]

Avoidance is ALWAYS greater than mitigation. Mitigation is there to suck it up when you don't avoid. They go hand in hand when you're talking about tanking. But it's always better to avoid damage, rather than take damage and reduce it.



Zero damage is better than 50 damage minus 25 absorbed from armor

[asaiasai]

I have to agree with the OP in most parts, when i build a tank as my PC i also go for lots of dex, combined with shield wall makes melee damage no matter the numbers attacking you an annoyance. The macig damage is the real problem so i save the shield attacks to put the mages down asap. Assault, overpower, shield pummel and if necessary a shield bash is almost always enough to kill the caster yellow named or lower. After that it is just pick one and focus fire on it and they start to go away.



My biggest issue is that the NPC tanks no matter how well you set up thier tactics still require micromanagement, as not a single one can really command the battlefield like a PC tank can. If i play any other clas such as a mage, i still spend considerable time playing as my tank to set the battle up, and have to from time to time pop into the tank to regain some control over the battlefield. Knowing when to taunt to collect the crowd so that your killers behind you can work with out interference is not something i think that can be programmed, but if for the most part i set up Allister and Sten as i would set up my PC to tank they do an acceptable job.



My last tank at level 20 was 45 strength with 5 points from gear, dex was 38 with 8 points from gear, con was 30 with no additional points from gear, and there was not much i feared. Propper match ups are also something to consider as when it come time to kill the high dragon in Haven even though i was the tank i let shale tank the dragon. The bonus of shale tanking is that the dragon can not make shale a chew toy, even though shale spent a good 60% of the fight on her back it was not even a stressful encounter as i brought Morrigan and Wynne set to heal shale only while i used potions, occasionally grabbing a healer when i was stunned a few times.



I am thinking that for my next mage run through i will set up shale to be my tank, and using the respec mod i will set up Sten and Allister to 2h warrior spec.



Asai

[Onlyasandwich]

Shale is an amazing substitute. If you do use Shale, I would recommend trying to leverage the immobilize in his ranged line. No friendly fire, large aoe, some targetable range, long duration, mobs can't do jack. Pop that and do your thing, then go back to stoneheart when they get all wiggly again.

[tranj84cl]

I'd say if you stack physical resistance after you're done with spell resistance, you'll find that you stay on your feet more often as a tank. I'm around 70-80 and bashes, pummels, and ogre rams don't really do anything. To deal with grab, set up your NPC tactics to do a knockdown move (Stonefist works wonders) when enemy->performing action->grabbing.

As for timing taunt, you really have to watch for stuff like webs. The only time party members died was when I was interrupted while taunting or when additional enemies spawn right after a taunt. Webs were definitely annoying though.

Setting a tactic for casting regeneration on your tank early on is very good too.

Onlyasandwich wrote...

Shale is an amazing substitute. If
you do use Shale, I would recommend trying to leverage the immobilize
in his ranged line. No friendly fire, large aoe, some targetable range,
long duration, mobs can't do jack. Pop that and do your thing, then go
back to stoneheart when they get all wiggly again.

For Shale, I put her in DPS mode until she's out of stamina then activate Stone Aura for MOAR DAMAGE!  Later on, she's just not as good as Alistair, surprisingly.  Early (pre-15) she's a beast.

Modifié par tranj84cl, 05 décembre 2009 - 09:09 .

[Wompoo]

Always use Shale as my Tank, set and forget, she does a great job. Early game or late game she is a winner (and dispise Alistair... poof Paladin)
%3D

Modifié par Wompoo, 05 décembre 2009 - 10:00 .

[Matthew Young CT]

Javanaut wrote...

Avoidance is ALWAYS greater than mitigation. Mitigation is there to suck it up when you don't avoid. They go hand in hand when you're talking about tanking. But it's always better to avoid damage, rather than take damage and reduce it.

Zero damage is better than 50 damage minus 25 absorbed from armor

this is completely wrong. when damage in defense mode == damage in mitigation mode (ie we're talking about defense and armor reducing the damage taken by the same amount over time), mitigation is always better as you are not subject to statistical blips where you get hit constantly and die.

[Maedryc]

Matthew Young CT wrote...

Javanaut wrote...

Avoidance is ALWAYS greater than mitigation. Mitigation is there to suck it up when you don't avoid. They go hand in hand when you're talking about tanking. But it's always better to avoid damage, rather than take damage and reduce it.

Zero damage is better than 50 damage minus 25 absorbed from armor

this is completely wrong. when damage in defense mode == damage in mitigation mode (ie we're talking about defense and armor reducing the damage taken by the same amount over time), mitigation is always better as you are not subject to statistical blips where you get hit constantly and die.

Yeah, however reliable avoidance (like 90% avoidance...) is usually better than mitigation.
Avoidance isn't the way to go in games like WoW, where boss fights last 5+ minutes, with the boss swinging at the character at least a couple of hundred  times (which increases the chance of an unlucky streak of hits) for insane amounts of damage ( 50% or more of the tank's healthbar) and where losing the main tank often means that you're going to wipe. Furthermore, avoidance is usually kept low across the board in WoW ( and when it becomes too high, you usually see debuffs like Sunwell Radiance appear in the game ).
So, unless a boss can one-shot an avoidance tank ( and in DAO they can't ) or mitigation can reduce damage by 70-80% at least, avoidance is as good as mitigation in principle.
However, since in DAO stacking avoidance is easier than stacking mitigation, potions don't have a high cooldown and replenish a significant amount of your health and keeping your tank alive doesn't require that your healers spam healing spells like there's no tomorrow, he's right, avoidance is the way to go for a tank.

Modifié par Maedryc, 05 décembre 2009 - 10:39 .

[Matthew Young CT]

Maedryc wrote...
Yeah, however reliable avoidance (like 90% avoidance...) is usually better than mitigation.

well i was comparing equal situations. ie an amount of defense that will reduce damage over time by the same amount as the amount of armor we are comparing with.
i wasn't taking into account the fact that defense is much easier to get than armor. avoidance is lovely, i rate dex very highly.

Avoidance isn't the way to go in games like WoW, where boss fights last 5+ minutes, with the boss swinging at the character at least a couple of hundred  times (which increases the chance of an unlucky streak of hits) for insane amounts of damage ( 50% or more of the tank's healthbar) and where losing the main tank often means that you're going to wipe. Furthermore, avoidance is usually kept low across the board in WoW ( and when it becomes too high, you usually see debuffs like Sunwell Radiance appear in the game ).
So, unless a boss can one-shot an avoidance tank ( and in DAO they can't ) or mitigation can reduce damage by 70-80% at least, avoidance is as good as mitigation in principle.

yes, though you can phrase that as "mitigation is always at least as good as avoidance"
the claim that avoidance is ALWAYS better than mitigation is simply complete rubbish. its equal at best. the only reason avoidance is cool is its a million times easier to get than armor

However, since in DAO stacking avoidance is easier than stacking mitigation, potions don't have a high cooldown and replenish a significant amount of your health and keeping your tank alive doesn't require that your healers spam healing spells like there's no tomorrow, he's right, avoidance is the way to go for a tank.

well yes, but only when it isn't at the expense of mitigation. if you can get an equal amount of mitigation in a slot you should get that instead.

[Maedryc]

Matthew Young CT wrote...

Maedryc wrote...
Yeah, however reliable avoidance (like 90% avoidance...) is usually better than mitigation.

well i was comparing equal situations. ie an amount of defense that will reduce damage over time by the same amount as the amount of armor we are comparing with.
i wasn't taking into account the fact that defense is much easier to get than armor. avoidance is lovely, i rate dex very highly.

Avoidance isn't the way to go in games like WoW, where boss fights last 5+ minutes, with the boss swinging at the character at least a couple of hundred  times (which increases the chance of an unlucky streak of hits) for insane amounts of damage ( 50% or more of the tank's healthbar) and where losing the main tank often means that you're going to wipe. Furthermore, avoidance is usually kept low across the board in WoW ( and when it becomes too high, you usually see debuffs like Sunwell Radiance appear in the game ).
So, unless a boss can one-shot an avoidance tank ( and in DAO they can't ) or mitigation can reduce damage by 70-80% at least, avoidance is as good as mitigation in principle.

yes, though you can phrase that as "mitigation is always at least as good as avoidance"
the claim that avoidance is ALWAYS better than mitigation is simply complete rubbish. its equal at best. the only reason avoidance is cool is its a million times easier to get than armor

However, since in DAO stacking avoidance is easier than stacking mitigation, potions don't have a high cooldown and replenish a significant amount of your health and keeping your tank alive doesn't require that your healers spam healing spells like there's no tomorrow, he's right, avoidance is the way to go for a tank.

well yes, but only when it isn't at the expense of mitigation. if you can get an equal amount of mitigation in a slot you should get that instead.

Well... the purpose of mitigation and avoidance is to reduce damage. As long as both reduce the same amount of damage, they're equal, in principle. If both can be cranked up to 100%, they're functionally equal.
In DAO, however,  mitigation is not really reliable, since it absorbs 50-100% of your armor value.
Moreover, it scales poorly ( especially true when you're playing on hard or nightmare ): the highest armor value you can attain in the game is around 60  (with an arcane warrior), so it will prevent an average of 45 damage. That's quite a bit, but finding bosses that hit for higher values is not hard. Furthermore, physical damage often comes with some kind of magic damage attached ( something that bypasses armor entirely).
Conversely,  defense scales twice as fast as attack does for a dex focused character; so, by the time you hit 14-15th level, you're pretty much unhittable. By the time your defense is 160-170, your armor might as well be 0 and it won't really matter, because you won't be hit, period.

So yeah, it's true that avoidance isn't always better than mitigation, but it depends a lot on the context and the rules of the game you're playing. In DAO ( unfortunately, because I find armor models to be pretty cool) it's just better.


Edit: I forgot to add that "getting an equal amount of mitigation in a slot" is not so easy as it appears: armor is a static number in DAO, while defense ends up reducing a % of damage.  The higher damage becomes, the less effective armor becomes. On the other hand, defense scales quite well with damage 

Modifié par Maedryc, 05 décembre 2009 - 11:12 .

[Matthew Young CT]

Maedryc wrote...
Well... the purpose of mitigation and avoidance is to reduce damage. As long as both reduce the same amount of damage, they're equal, in principle. If both can be cranked up to 100%, they're functionally equal.
In DAO, however,  mitigation is not really reliable, since it absorbs 50-100% of your armor value.

It's not totally reliable ya, but it's still less vulnerable to statistical outliers.

Moreover, it scales poorly ( especially true when you're playing on hard or nightmare ): the highest armor value you can attain in the game is around 60  (with an arcane warrior), so it will prevent an average of 45 damage. That's quite a bit, but finding bosses that hit for higher values is not hard.

True, but bosses that whack you once really hard aren't aren't common. Big archer groups are more common, and IMO tougher (will be worse if they buff archery too), and armor scaling is fine there.

Furthermore, physical damage often comes with some kind of magic damage attached ( something that bypasses armor entirely).

Haven't seen this much TBH. Maybe just not paying enough attention though.

Conversely,  defense scales twice as fast as attack does for a dex focused character; so, by the time you hit 14-15th level, you're pretty much unhittable. By the time your defense is 160-170, your armor might as well be 0 and it won't really matter, because you won't be hit, period.

Well yes that's not really balanced. Maybe need to split defense into 2 stats as with attack. Or just give mobs a nice attack boost:)

So yeah, it's true that avoidance isn't always better than mitigation, but it depends a lot on the context and the rules of the game you're playing. In DAO ( unfortunately, because I find armor models to be pretty cool) it's just better.

It's easier to get, not better Different things!

Edit: I forgot to add that "getting an equal amount of mitigation in a slot" is not so easy as it appears: armor is a static number in DAO, while defense ends up reducing a % of damage.  The higher damage becomes, the less effective armor becomes. On the other hand, defense scales quite well with damage 

True but 1 armor is always > 1 defense when damage < 100. Which is almost always. So yes it gets less effective the higher the damage, but it is still better in most cases. ETA: my bad on average better until 75 damage cos of 50-100 armor thing. still most critters do < 75 dmg

I think we agree though that defense ends up having a greater impact on your characters survivability. That is only because it is far easier to get though, not because it's better per se.

Modifié par Matthew Young CT, 05 décembre 2009 - 11:34 .

[Maedryc]

[quote]Matthew Young CT wrote...

[quote]Maedryc wrote...
Well... the purpose of mitigation and avoidance is to reduce damage. As long as both reduce the same amount of damage, they're equal, in principle. If both can be cranked up to 100%, they're functionally equal.
In DAO, however,  mitigation is not really reliable, since it absorbs 50-100% of your armor value.
[/quote]
It's not totally reliable ya, but it's still less vulnerable to statistical outliers.
[/quote]
Once avoidance hits 100%, you're not vulnerable at all, actually 100% means you dodge every blow. 
[quote][quote]
Moreover, it scales poorly ( especially true when you're playing on hard or nightmare ): the highest armor value you can attain in the game is around 60  (with an arcane warrior), so it will prevent an average of 45 damage. That's quite a bit, but finding bosses that hit for higher values is not hard.
[/quote]
True, but bosses that whack you once really hard aren't aren't common. Big archer groups are more common, and IMO tougher (will be worse if they buff archery too), and armor scaling is fine there.
[/quote]
Yeah, but defense is factored into missile deflection. You can dodge/parry arrows easily, what ruins your day are stuns ( something you can prevent with high phys res or a bit of strategy)
[quote]
Furthermore, physical damage often comes with some kind of magic damage attached ( something that bypasses armor entirely).
[/quote] [quote]
Haven't seen this much TBH. Maybe just not paying enough attention though.
[quote]
Conversely,  defense scales twice as fast as attack does for a dex focused character; so, by the time you hit 14-15th level, you're pretty much unhittable. By the time your defense is 160-170, your armor might as well be 0 and it won't really matter, because you won't be hit, period.
[/quote]
Well yes that's not really balanced. Maybe need to split defense into 2 stats as with attack. Or just give mobs a nice attack boost:)
[/quote]
Eh, unfortunately, increasing attack is not an option. A good solution would be cutting the str/dex contribution to attack and defense ( to, say, 0.1 or 0.2 instead of 0.5) and making attack and defense scale with level.
If you just increase the mob's attack value, those poor sods with low defense will just be hit even more often; furthermore, you'll face situations where dex doesn't really make a difference unless it's really, really high.
[quote][quote]
So yeah, it's true that avoidance isn't always better than mitigation, but it depends a lot on the context and the rules of the game you're playing. In DAO ( unfortunately, because I find armor models to be pretty cool) it's just better.
[/quote]
It's easier to get, not better Different things!
[/quote]
If it costs less to get ( and it does ) and can be stacked until it grants you 100% avoidance, it is better
Especially considering that armor is a static value. 100% avoidance makes you invulnerable to physical damage regardless of how much damage your opponent does. Mitigation, being a static value instead of a percentage, can still be outstripped by damage 
Sure, you could make the argument that if you increase attack rather than damage then mitigation becomes more valuable ( and I'm inclined to agree ), however you have to put things in context. In DAO, you can reach 100% avoidance, and that makes any other form of mitigation redundant in most situations.
[quote][quote]
Edit: I forgot to add that "getting an equal amount of mitigation in a slot" is not so easy as it appears: armor is a static number in DAO, while defense ends up reducing a % of damage.  The higher damage becomes, the less effective armor becomes. On the other hand, defense scales quite well with damage 
[/quote]
True but 1 armor is always > 1 defense when damage < 100. Which is almost always. So yes it gets less effective the higher the damage, but it is still better in most cases. ETA: my bad on average better until 75 damage cos of 50-100 armor thing. still most critters do < 75 dmg

I think we agree though that defense ends up having a greater impact on your characters survivability. That is only because it is far easier to get though, not because it's better per se.
[/quote]
[/quote]

Yes, that's pretty much the point. However, in principle, neither is mitigation. It depends on the context, and you have to keep into account how much putting defense rather than armor on any given item costs in terms of budget.
That's pretty much my point: if putting 1 point of armor on an item "costs" as much as putting 5 points of defense on the same item, then unless a mob deals 20 or less damage/hit, stacking defense is better
Now, if damage mitigation were a percentage rather than a static value, and if it could be cranked up to 100%, then I'd agree with you that it would be better.

Modifié par Maedryc, 06 décembre 2009 - 01:04 .