Speculations on 30 yard Taunt change

[Heartwood]

Realistically the increase from 20 to 30 yards for Taunt is based on bringing it into line with Hand of Reckoning. However, there has been some interesting discussion on the tanking forums regarding whether this was tied into upcoming encounter designs or could be utilized on tauntable mobs to trivialize fights.

Code: Select all

                 War A                                War B










                                 DPS/Healers

Two Protection Warriors with Vigilance on each other stand 30 yards apart, and DPS/Healers make the 3rd point of a equilateral triangle 30 yards away from the two tanks. The boss/mob would be taunted between the two tanks reducing the dps output of the boss on each tank to (8 seconds - 2 * (time to travel between the tanks before attacking)). If DPS/Healers exceed threat, then the travel time to their group would ideally be enough time for one of the tanks to taunt back.

Is it viable? Don't know, haven't tried it. Vigilance would be nice for the damage reduction, but would decrease the threat ceiling minimally for DPS. Other tanks could be used, but wouldn't have the vigilance option. Interesting theory, but whether it will ever be a boss-fight mechanic is debatable.

My other thoughts would be a MDing hunter assigned to each tank to boost the leap-frogging threat levels. The only situation where this would be worth while would be a fight where the bosses' dps output is too consistently high or 'bursty' for healers to heal through.

[Gnomerman]

that is an interesting theory heart. i'll comment more after i have time to put some serious thought into it and creat a rational, inteligent, understandable post.

althought highly situational, i think trying it on patchwerk once our gear improves (our raids) to the point where we are barely killing him at the enrage timer.

[Brulan]

i'll comment more after i have time to put some serious thought into it and creat a rational, inteligent, understandable post.

Not possible! <3

[Heartwood]

Patchwerk wouldn't be a good example for this type of strat., non-tank melee would end up eating hateful strikes since the tanks would be spaced out. As Gnomer pointed out, the enrage timer would also be an issue as the dps output of each of the tanks would also be decreased to ranged attacks only when not tanking the boss. Melee would also lose dps as well while chasing around the boss. That's why I file this under, "interesting, but would it ever be actually useful?"

[Gnomerman]

pffft! it is 100% possible for me to write in an epic manner. it just requires more effort that i wish it put in.

note

heart, i think that threat gen would be an issue, i havn't done any math yet, but even with hunter md's you won't be able to match the threat gen of some of us more threat sensitive classes (read mages).

however if the warrior tanking the mob switched its vigilance target to a high threat dps, and then when it got taunted from the warriro to switch to the other warrior, that may help the threat deficit. heroic throw should help when its up

[Heartwood]

The use of Vigilance is useful in two cases here:

a) Damage output of the boss is simply too high to consistently survive, therefore the 3% damage reduction is helpful at the cost of a lower threat ceiling for dps.

b) Damage is consistently survivable ping-ponging the boss back and forth, therefore put vigilance on a high-tps DPS member to raise the threat ceiling.

There'd be nothing wrong with DPS pulling threat off one of the two tanks, just so long as its near-ish the end of the time the boss would have been on that tank so that the bosses' time to travel to the DPS/healer position is greater than when the next Taunt becomes available. Doing so would be helpful in actually decreasing the total time that the boss is DPSing the tanks.

[hyrion]

Patchwerk is taunt immune on heroic.

[Elvenbane]

Patchwek is untauntable....

[Lealla]

Allow me to insert my 2 copper pieces here: does the damage reduction effect from Vigilance stack with the one from Blessing of Sanctuary? I'm pretty sure it does not.

Anyway, while this is certainly an interesting bit of theorycraft, I have a feeling that it's going to be far too situational to really be considered an exploit. How many bosses:

a) Have DPS mechanics such that diverting a portion of their damage output would significantly improve tank survival.
b) Do not have mechanics that would render this technique suicidal, such as cleaves, breaths, hatefuls, etc.
c) Are not so threat sensitive that DPS would risk pulling from the tanks.
d) Are tauntable.

Now, it's certainly possible that Blizzard could introduce a boss that requires bouncing taunts to defeat. That would be very interesting. I envision something along the line of the "Fist of Stone" buff cast by some mobs that increases their damage but reduces their movement speed. Combine this with an unbreakable snare and you set the stage for a taunt bounce fight.

[Gnomerman]

there have always been bosses that require a taunt rotation, brutallis comes to mind. ok patch is not tauntable, i fail okay? what do i know, i go pew pew, don't pull aggro, and don't die.

[Ecnailla]

1st boss in spider wing ?

A. tauntable.
B. has an ablity that makes the tank run and kite.
C. Could be simply taunted by a tank at max range. (even if 2nd tanks still has to kite some, they have a nice lead)


Not that we have any problems with this boss, and it isn't exactly bouncing, but still kind of the same thing.

[Lealla]

I'm talking about a boss where the difference between a 20 yard and 30 yard taunt actually makes a useful difference. The range on Locust Swarm is 30 yards, so the increased taunt distance would have no effect on that encounter whatsoever.