KoB build and RA's for S/B

[Halhammer]

Ok, lets do the math.

Ah sure grand, Captain Theorycraft.

Look, according to your math the best tanks on live have been speccing wrongly, for years. And also from own experience, lemme tell you theres way too many armour ignoring or non-physical abilities out there for me to prioritize armour over toughness.

And still when you miss that parry you go down like an Irish ********* on payday

Being Irish, I consider that highly racist.




j/k go on with yer Paddy bashing

[Keyser]

Ok, lets do the math.

Ah sure grand, Captain Theorycraft.

And you are doing exactly what here?

Look, according to your math the best tanks on live have been speccing wrongly, for years. And also from own experience, lemme tell you theres way too many armour ignoring or non-physical abilities out there for me to prioritize armour over toughness.

If I remember correctly from Norn and Drakenwald (after Carro-Merge^^) most tanks slotted armor. Dunno what happened on other servers.

Look, I dont want to tell you how to play. If you want to take more dmg against physical dds by slotting toughness thats totally fine. I dont care. But pls dont tell anybody who is looking for advice here that 2 is larger than 4.

[Halhammer]

And you are doing exactly what here?

Eh, not putting up some THEORETICAL equations?! Correct me if I'm wrong but that guy asked for some advice on KOTBS not some random numbers.

Look, I dont want to tell you how to play. If you want to take more dmg against physical dds by slotting toughness thats totally fine. I dont care. But pls dont tell anybody who is looking for advice here that 2 is larger than 4.

Yea nice try, if anything you're tryin to promote your little numbers game here. It's just impossible to factor in all the options. Maybe instead of calculating theoretical stuff you should go out there more often and play your, um let's say, KOTBS?! Just curious, who is that anyway?

[Keyser]

And you are doing exactly what here?

Eh, not putting up some THEORETICAL equations?! Correct me if I'm wrong but that guy asked for some advice on KOTBS not some random numbers.

Exactly, I gave advice based on facts, you gave advice based on... I dont know.

Look, I dont want to tell you how to play. If you want to take more dmg against physical dds by slotting toughness thats totally fine. I dont care. But pls dont tell anybody who is looking for advice here that 2 is larger than 4.

Yea nice try, if anything you're tryin to promote your little numbers game here. It's just impossible to factor in all the options. Maybe instead of calculating theoretical stuff you should go out there more often and play your, um let's say, KOTBS?! Just curious, who is that anyway?

McNulty. And yours? Shall we write in each others friendship book now?

[Halhammer]

Exactly, I gave advice based on facts, you gave advice based on... I dont know.

Theoretical facts, yes...

McNulty. And yours? Shall we write in each others friendship book now?

Halhammer, obv. Sure cool, luv ya long time hun bun <3

[Luth]

I play with this atm and will respec to this should i reach RR40 before T4 arrives.

I think the outgoing HD aura is pretty good, as it stacks with the incoming HDs to 66.6% debuffed incoming healing if the kotbs runs around the enemy backline and the enemy healers don't spread out far enough. It's also applied instantly and can't be removed like the other outgoing HDs.

About "focused mending": Iirc the 15% increased healing worked only if the group members stood around in 30 feet range around the knight with the aura (please correct if i'm wrong, dunno how it's implemented atm though), which is still good, but: I'm also no big fan of the tactic, as it is bound to that nearly useless aura.

[taccr]

About "focused mending": Iirc the 15% increased healing worked only if the group members stood around in 30 feet range around the knight with the aura (please correct if i'm wrong, dunno how it's implemented atm though), which is still good, but: I'm also no big fan of the tactic, as it is bound to that nearly useless aura.

I reported this quite a while ago. The current implementation is an aura wide healing buff which is borderline broken.
I didn't get any confirmation posts so the report was closed.

https://github.com/WarEmu/WarBugs/issues/2571

On topic. Use Jail spec in first post.

[Luth]

Yes, i remember the tooltip was completely missleading; my guess is that it worked like described in the tooltip at the beginning and got an undocumented nerf later, like with witchbrew. I don't think many people noticed it at all.

[Annaise16]

The order in which mitigation is applied, toughness before armor, is irrelevant in this situation. Anyone who argues otherwise has not understood the choice that is being made. Check this for yourself if you are unsure.

That is not true. It is highly relevant. Some example:
- your opponent has a 200 damage bonus
- your mitigation by toughness is 100
- your mitigation by armor is 50%

Then some part of the dmg calcalution looks approximately like this:
inc dmg = (200 - 100) * 0.5 = 200*0.5 - 100*0.5
(where I left out weapon dps, cast time multiplicator, base dmg, etc... ).

Thus our effective mitigation by toughness is just 100*0.5 and not just plain 100. If the order of mitigation would be the other way around, then I would not care about it. But as it is now, the gain from toughness highly depends on the order of mitigation and on armor as well.

Edit: If you see any mistake in the calculation, do not hesitate and tell me.

The argument is between between EXTRA armor and EXTRA toughness. The only calculation of interest is how the ADDITION of either talisman type reduces damage. You can only compare like with like, so you should be converting everything to PERCENTAGE CHANGES to incoming damage. The percentage changes are not influenced by the order in which mitigation occurs.

[Keyser]

The argument is between between EXTRA armor and EXTRA toughness. The only calculation of interest is how the ADDITION of either talisman type reduces damage. You can only compare like with like, so you should be converting everything to PERCENTAGE CHANGES to incoming damage. The percentage changes are not influenced by the order in which mitigation occurs.

If you use some other order you get in trouble because of the distributive law and it does not matter if you look at absolute or relative changes.

Spoiler:

Lets continue my example. We just change the damage from 200 to 300 (otherwise we get in trouble later).

So we take (300-100)*0.5 = 100 dmg at first. Now we add some toughness (lets say 20) and take a look at the relative change:
(300-104)*0.5/100 - 1 = -0.02 .
(That formula still depends on the order, but lets finish your thought.)

You say that the order mitigation does not matter when I consider relative changes. So lets turn around the order:
(300*0.5 - 100) = 50 and then we add the same toughness. Hence we get
(300*0.5 - 104)/50 - 1 = -0.08 ,
which is not the same as our result where we used the right order of mitigation. So the order does matter.

This is just some side note because hopefully we all use the right order of mitigation and not some other fancy formula.