I notice some difference in the aggro mechanics here from what I remember. It seems that proximity is way more powerful than I recall. Let's take the example of an incoming mob_01. It's been snared by the melee but not damaged much. On incoming the chanter tashes/slows/dots/cripples, which is a LOT of aggro, and only occasionally the mob will veer towards the chanter, and it seems to depend on how far away the chanter is. If it does aggro on the chanter, all the melee has to do is come stand next to it, and then if the chanter takes 1 step back, the mob will switch to the melee instantly. I remember aggro being a lot harder to shake than that. I never played on AK, so I don't know if this is AKcurate or not, but it's different than my (always suspect) memory. TLDR; - aggro declines with distance way more than I remember it doing.
The aggro you are noting is likely due to low level. It is based on the amount of HP the creature has. At higher levels, aggro will make a lot more sense to you when mobs have a decent amount of HP. I too agree it doesn't feel right or make sense, but most of my low level time on AK was either spent grinding in a group in HHK or powerleveling alts, both times I didn't really pay attention to aggro mechanics so I will default to those who performed tests on Live.
This has been a com I was also not on AK, but I can tell you the Agro mechanic is def wrong for the time period. I distinctly remember how I had to mash Taunt constantly when leveling (I am a war). Not to raise skill, but because I had crummy weapons and it was the only way to try to keep agro. I also know that (especially back then) proximity played a component. It was widely known among tanks (or at least warriors) that you retained some small advantage by being closer to the mob. As a result, I was always up in their greel. Nonetheless, I did not just automatically keep agro.
Proximity aggro is extremely high here. Most likely too high. Distance to the mob seems to play a big factor in it. As an example to why I think it is too high. 2 Monks work together on a pull. One Monk body aggros a mob and starts a train. Another Monk uses a root net to tag off a Mob from that train. Now that alone should bring the Mob off the train because the Monk has more aggro into it than the initial Monk pulling. But that isn't the case here all the time. The Monk with the root net charge also has to stand closer to the Mob to ensure it keeps coming after him. This is with both Monks outside of Mellee range of the tagged mob so it shouldn't be turning off the Monk that tagged it with a root net. But it does here.
Well, all I have is anecdotal memories rather than actionable data, but yeah proximity seems to be way too important. It always had some effect, but it wouldn't overcome the kind of aggro a chanter lays down with 3 debuffs in a row. My Ranger should have had to flame lick and snare several times to get the mob off of the chanter, and possibly have to just root the thing. If rooted, a mob would always go by proximity alone rather than by hatelist order, but otherwise the hatelist order took precedence. As far as being a war and mashing taunt, I think that was pretty standard. Wars have always really been hampered by lack of aggro, especially during early levels. That's why the introduction of enraging blow and that stuff was such an important event. But yeah, if you are NOT having to do that here, that seems like good evidence that proximity is overweighted. Taunt worked by transferring the amount of hate that the player on the top of the list had + 1 to the taunter. So, for instance, if a ranger snares and flame licks the mob several times on incoming, the taunting war would get all of that aggro instantly if taunt worked. If it didn't work, you'd get a dead ranger . Taunt doesn't add any aggro at all, it just transfers it. I notice that damage shield damage doesn't seem to aggro correctly, either. If my ranger tanks a mob with a DS on and doesn't swing, the mob should eventually peel off and go for the player that cast the DS. For me, thats a druid, and it may be that the proximity effect (she's standing back several paces) is blocking that mechanic from happening normally. I'll have to check more. I don't know that live is a good place to check this stuff, because of how much they've eased things up. For all I know this may be exactly how aggro works on live, but it's not right for our era as far as I recall. Again, I'll have to check though, I've only been leveling a short time here. Sit aggro may be too weak, as well. I've noticed several times that when the ranger and chanter are fairly close to the mob, and the chanter should have a good deal of aggro already but the ranger is currently on top, the chanter can sit down right next to the mob and it won't go for him. I clearly remember getting yelled at to stop sitting down too soon on raids because it made the mob ping pong.
I've been told roots are like 10 hate here. May explain why they don't rip out of trains easily. Mallets and Slowstones are 400 so do those rip out of trains? I know caster Stuns and Snares do, but I rarely use clickies on TAKP so far.
Agro generation is based off mob hitpoints. Torven has done extensive testing on this and it's pretty well coded for here. I think people missed Haynar's sarcasm in his post debuff spell agro is pretty much a non-issue until level 50ish when you start having to be careful with your tash/slow/snares Up until level 50+, I could tash+slow on incoming and pet would get immediate agro. Now I typically have to wait until ~98% to tash and ~95% to slow or i'll get summoned. If I wait until ~90% I can attempt slowing twice, and so on. Sitting will cause a summon until the pet does a bit more dmg, and so on... at low levels it's not something you have to worry about at 50+ you have to be more careful on mini-raids with lvl 60+ mobs I get summoned quite often when debuffing tash+slow with 2+ groups attacking the mob, and this is with waiting for assist before casting, and pausing between slow attempts, etc... backing up a little bit sometimes allows proximity agro to kick in for the warrior to resume tanking, but it depends how careful I've been with watching my agro. if a mob turns towards you, ease off with the debuffs until the MT has got more agro which is why I value ac+hp as very important for enc so you can survive a few summons from un-slowed raid trash mobs...
Debuff aggro is pretty low on raid targets as well as long as you don't sit. That is my point. Prox aggro or Hate inside Mellee range seems to be really high. Debuff from range and you rarely have any issues.
Well, be that as it may, all I can say is it seems wrong and does not fit with my recollections. In 10+ years of playing, I have never heard anyone say that aggro is based off of mob hitpoints before, in live or on P99. That doesn't really mean anything, but it's true. If Torven has tested it (on live, I assume?) and if all of the old AK players think this is correct for the era, well then alrighty.
have a read EQLive Hate List Logic and Spell Hate Values http://www.eqemulator.org/forums/showthread.php?t=39819 this is just a small insight into the amount of work TAKP devs do to ensure code is accurate if you have done your own testing that trumps or conflicts with the above, then feel free to submit it and it can be reviewed
I fully trust Torven and his parses. That said, I have never felt so strong about a topic related to an inaccuracy of a mechanic. I started playing a war in late 2000, and played through like 2013. I don't know if and when this changed on live, but in 2000/2001/2002, this just was not the case. Taunt was not useless at low levels.
I'm not disparaging Torven or the devs or anything about TAKP, I am sure it is exactly accurate to live. The problem is, I think, may be that live is not entirely accurate for TAKP's era. If you guys are happy with it, then fine, I was just describing how different it was from what I expected. I'm new here and I thought there might be a problem, so I mentioned it. The prox aggro reduction just seems really extreme here. *edit* Wow, that thread is something. Interesting read. The part about aggro scaling with HP makes sense to me on any debuff that would reduce HP. If I have a small HP pool and you clip me for 10%, that's a small number. If I have a huge HP pool and you clip me for that same 10%, it's a huge amount of hate. A max hate ceiling makes sense in that situation. Otherwise for debuffs that don't reduce mob HP I don't understand the mechanic, but it is what it is I guess. Peace.
I played an enc 2000-2003 and also on official alkabor mac server, and i agree with you. Agro was definitely different on eqlive back at that time. However, I have zero data and zero ability to improve the current implementation on this server. As such, I accept it and adjusted and got used to it. It's totally fine at higher levels imo. And it's probably a lot better than other eqemu servers (I have no experience to back this up, never made it past lvl 16 on p99, rip). TAKP devs be praised!
I just blind or root when aggro is being annoying. I was always a healer on live tho, so aggro from my memories is "why am i getting aggro, tanks do your jobs!"
You guys are not wrong, it is definitely not accurate to how it was fifteen years ago, 100% certain. Surely people remember casters pissing off the tanks by taking aggro and then running around like chickens with their heads cut off while the warrior tries to taunt, at lower levels? Totally unnecessary here. You just have to get out of range while the tank is in range (again, lower levels), and that tank will hold aggro just fine. But it happened all the damn time back then. Torven is accurate to today's Live but today's Live is not accurate to fifteen years ago Live. But unless he wants to take guesses, this isn't changing, no one has the numbers from then.
Does anyone have more info on what this change was from the 12/9/2008 patch notes? https://forums.daybreakgames.com/eq...es-tuesday-december-9-2008-sneak-peek.153940/
