Threat | Worth?

nymesis92

So is it even worth spec'ing into threat negation when cleric aggro is broken as ball sacks?

pugastrius

So is it even worth spec'ing into threat negation when cleric aggro is broken as ball sacks?

Unfortunately, it doesn't matter how little threat you generate if you're the only one on the agro table.

nunavailable

nymesis92 wrote: »

So is it even worth spec'ing into threat negation when cleric aggro is broken as ball sacks?

If your ball sack is as broken as Cleric aggro, you need to see a doctor right away...

howdydooo

The cleric aggro is broken, but if you're finding yourself tanking full dungeons, skirms, etc at 60, it's 100% tank error. I'm currently spec'd 3/3 in the threat reduction and it's made a HUGE difference...sure i'll tank an add from time to time and obviously on boss encounters (who isn't tanking on a boss), but every little bit helps. I've run with some fantastic tanks that make sure i don't get hit any more than necessary, and then i've run with some that had no concept of threat....My advice: go for 3/3 or at least 2/3 otherwise don't QQ about cleric aggro being broken

nymesis92

howdydooo wrote: »

The cleric aggro is broken, but if you're finding yourself tanking full dungeons, skirms, etc at 60, it's 100% tank error. I'm currently spec'd 3/3 in the threat reduction and it's made a HUGE difference...sure i'll tank an add from time to time and obviously on boss encounters (who isn't tanking on a boss), but every little bit helps. I've run with some fantastic tanks that make sure i don't get hit any more than necessary, and then i've run with some that had no concept of threat....My advice: go for 3/3 or at least 2/3 otherwise don't QQ about cleric aggro being broken

So is everyone being mislead by thinking Cleric aggro is broken because the game is filled with horrible tanks then? This should be interesting....discuss!!!

knoteskad

nymesis92 wrote: »

So is everyone being mislead by thinking Cleric aggro is broken because the game is filled with horrible tanks then? This should be interesting....discuss!!!

Either that or that 6% threat reduction feat is misleading and is actually some incredibly overpowered threat reducer lol.

Who knows. The guy that says stripping butt naked with Soothe on fixing threat has 1/3 in the feat, so maybe lol.

llfritzll

Personally I feel that they need to fix guardian threat and it shouldn't be the clerics responsibility. I know people would disagree, but let me explain my point of view.

We have soothe for 40% lower threat on heals, and a feat for up to 6% lower threat reduction. Immediately it should be obvious that the feat is practically meaningless compared to the class power. In order to slot the class power you have to sacrifice your ability to do your job as a healer.

I don't know how the previous poster is experiencing such a large difference based on the 3 point feat. Maxxed out its only a 6% reduction in threat which is tiny. Either the feat is bugged and its doing more than it says, or more likely the player is just grouping with better guardians and is mistakenly attributing it to the feat instead.

Guardians are a class entirely designed around managing threat. They have encounter powers that are entirely based on holding threat. They have marks to increase threat. On and on. If any class should be changed for the threat system its them. When the player chooses guardian they are signing up for a threat control class.

Otherwise in my opinion they need to take trickster rogues, control wizards, and great weapon fighters and stick them with required slotted class powers and feat costs in order to function properly in pve.



edit - there is actually a fairly easy fix for this, even if it is stolen from another game. Let the guardian place a mark or buff on the cleric where a large percentage of the clerics threat gets transferred to the guardian.

This makes guardians required in groups, fixes one problem, and solves healer threat issues, fixes a second problem.

greatheart88

llfritzll wrote: »

~Snip~

What he said. +1

lyaise

I regard the threat reduction abilities of the Cleric as utter bs. I have repeatedly run the same instances intentionally with and without these equipped.
My verdict is they are completely useless. Consequently you are entirely reliant on the group to make your daily skirmish/dungeon a reasonable experience...
or one where you spend all your time running round like some ridiculous Benny Hill chase scene, trailing countless mobs, using up endless pots and dying several times.

All this does is convince you to only ever group with people you know, never using the auto-queue feature.

Other games have heal-by-damage mechanics (and have manual targeting) -- nothing new here. So, they either need to sort out the Cleric threat as a whole. or make the specific threat reduction class abilities actually do something.

clevizzy

llfritzll wrote: »

Personally I feel that they need to fix guardian threat and it shouldn't be the clerics responsibility. I know people would disagree, but let me explain my point of view.

We have soothe for 40% lower threat on heals, and a feat for up to 6% lower threat reduction. Immediately it should be obvious that the feat is practically meaningless compared to the class power. In order to slot the class power you have to sacrifice your ability to do your job as a healer.

I don't know how the previous poster is experiencing such a large difference based on the 3 point feat. Maxxed out its only a 6% reduction in threat which is tiny. Either the feat is bugged and its doing more than it says, or more likely the player is just grouping with better guardians and is mistakenly attributing it to the feat instead.

Guardians are a class entirely designed around managing threat. They have encounter powers that are entirely based on holding threat. They have marks to increase threat. On and on. If any class should be changed for the threat system its them. When the player chooses guardian they are signing up for a threat control class.

Otherwise in my opinion they need to take trickster rogues, control wizards, and great weapon fighters and stick them with required slotted class powers and feat costs in order to function properly in pve.



edit - there is actually a fairly easy fix for this, even if it is stolen from another game. Let the guardian place a mark or buff on the cleric where a large percentage of the clerics threat gets transferred to the guardian.

This makes guardians required in groups, fixes one problem, and solves healer threat issues, fixes a second problem.

GF discussion: The threat marks are temporary. The marks themselves don't generate threat, its the actions while the mark is present that does it. Right now, I experience the mark dropping off before I can use "Tide of Iron" At-will to debuff the damage resistance of the mob in order to generate significant damage and threat on the mob with use of a daily or encounter. "Tide of Iron" At-will is very nice, but the short range hurts the usage of it when the Clerics are running for their life and with that the mob(s). Cleaving the mob with the Cleave At-will is ineffective. I spend a significant amount of encounter time searching for the mob in the encounter that I want ... in order to mark it. The Clerics have to run in order to stay alive which means the mark that was placed drops off as the mob gets out of range. Increase the mark duration or make it permanent on the mob once it is placed by GF and players would see more threat generation from the GF and aggro control.

avelinejones

Aggro is really ridiculous at the moment. As lyaise metioned, right now the Benny Hill theme is the cleric theme and it doesn't sit very well with cleric players. I'm actually holding off on playing my cleric until they implement some sort fix. I don't care whether they turn down heal aggro or up tank aggro, but something needs to be done. If they don't fix anything they could at least change the dungeon music to this , at least that would be worth a laugh or two.