Im happy to see these lengthy responses! Let me try to follow up on as many points as I can for now in as concise a manner as possible :)
- - First at Solieu - -
In the Tankadin model, I see the following Defensive stats: Avoidance, Mitigation, Damage taken (this gives me some percent like 16%, I'm not really sure what this variable is), Damage when hit, Chance to be crit. There are some other similar stats in
other categories as well, however, I dont believe I see a "total damage avoided" variable (unless this is the Damage Taken value which I am still unsure of) What I'm looking for would be a summary of both avoidance and mitigation, that is both the
damage avoided and damage reduced. So if I have 50% avoidance and 50% damage reduction, in a 100% hit scenario I would avoid 50% of the attacks, and of the remaining attacks I would only take half damage, so I would eliminate 75% of the possible damage. I
think that it would be beneficial to place high priority on this value in deciding the optimum gear selections. Instead of saying mitigation is worth x, avoidance is worth y, survival is worth z, if we combine avoidance and mitigation into a singular variable
the calculations would account for things such as my hypothesis about an inverse relationship in the values of armor and avoidance.
>>>> Armor's Inverse Value Correlation With Avoidance Hypothesis<<<<
My idea behind the armor and avoidance is that if I have 0 avoidance 0 damage reduction, then my first 1% of either would be equal in weight. Gaining 1% damage reduction, or 1% avoidance would provide the same overall eliminated damage taken. However,
if I have 50% avoidance, then only half of the attacks will hit me, and so the value of gaining 1% damage reduction is now inferior to gaining 1% avoidance.
To put it in example if I am tanking a fight where I will get hit 100 times for 100 damage each:
- at 0% avoidance and 0% damage reduction from armor.
+1% avoidance = 1 avoided attack = 100 damage elminated
+1% damage reduction = 1 damage reduced from 100 attacks = 100 damage eliminated
- at 50% avoidance and 0% damage reduction from armor.
+1% avoidance = 51 avoided attacks = 5100 damage elminated = a total gain of 100 damage eliminated
+1% damage reduction = 1 damage reduced from 50 attacks = 50 damage elminated.
If I go into the tank models for bear, prot war, tankadin, tank dk, I notice that bear and prot war support my theory, as avoidance increases the "mitigation" value of armor decreases in value. However, currently the tankadin and tank dk models
are telling me the opposite, that as avoidance increases, the "mitigation" value from armor increases. I believe the reason for this is this missing value of "total damage eliminated" that is present in both the bear and prot war models.
Though, I could be totally crazy :p
- - Back to Solieu Weight System Refining- -
Regarding your comments about the mitigation scale, as well as other options scaling, let me clarify that although the mitigation scaling number does seem rather ambiguous, I do not mind the number but rather the limit. Defaulting at 7,000 and maxxing
at 15,000 provides a little more than a 2x increase in the base mitigation calculation. In the prot war model the default is 1, and allows me to increase mitigation value to 3x. This number is a lot closer to how I determine the value of my gear. Simply allowing
a higher maximum value for mitigation would be fine, perhaps 21,000 or higher. I think the threat scaling is fine at the moment, I'm not sure why anyone would want to go all the way to 100x threat valueation but I dont see anything wrong with allowing it.
While im on the threat, I happened to notice that there is neither mitigation nor threat value on expertise in the tankadin model I am looking at. I know it is fairly difficult to code in the mitigation value of expertise, but I think a threat value could
be added in the meantime, however insignificant it may be.
- - Situation Weights - -
Multi-target situations do sound interesting but what I had in mind was something similar to the "boss attack" value. I was thinking that including boss spell damage would be beneficial as well. The higher spell damage could increase the value
of talents like [guarded by the light] or resistances or other spell damage reducing effects. For example Sapphiron is a predictable boss in regards to a steady and constant income of spell damage in addition to the physical damage.
This could be something as complicated as allowing setup for constant versus spike spell damage, as well as independent types of spells, perhaps you would give Naxx 10 a boss attack value of 20k average, Frost spell damage 2k, poison spell damage 1k, and
in turn support itemization including particular resistances. Or it could be much simpler and have only a "spell damage" field which would give value to total resistances provided by frost aura or motw buffs, but also talents or abilities that directly
reduce spell damage taken.
- - Value of stamina - -
As an example I believe that having 24k unbuffed hp is plenty in order to tank 10 man naxx. Perhaps right after hitting level 80, one would want to focus on getting to 24k stamina so that the healers will at least have time to react to incoming spell damage
(in case you dont have super amazing 0 latency healers who spam stopcasting macros on you through the entire fight) Once you have enough of a health pool that the healers are able to keep you alive (even if that means spamming heals the entire time) it usually
makes the most sense to start minimizing the damage you take, whether through avoidance or damage reduction or some other means.
The way I saw this implemented in the tree model was that you chose a desired health pool, and assigned a certain heightened importance to that health if you were below that value. So for example If I am a tank who wants 24k hp, I might decide that if
I am underneath that value, I want to put twice as much importance on health. In the code this might be done by setting the value for survival = default survival * x. where we declare x as: x = 1. if(hp < hp desired) then x = x + heightened weight)
A similar importance could be placed on thing such as reaching unhittable, uncrittable, hit cap, etc, though im not sure this is necessarily a good idea in all cases.
- Re: side question -
personally I use rawr mostly for comparing gear to see what really provides the best bang for my buck, especially with the optimizer. best in slot when you're in greens sometimes changes dramatically when youre in full epics. I also like rawr for giving
me a quick run down if a guildie or someone asks me for gearing advice :p