Shadow knight aggro

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by Danth [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Yeah, we're very much on the same page. I prefer to call it pointless rather than dumb simply because such spam isn't hurting anything, either. +5-8 or so aggro per minute very much is pointless because in no world will it ever make a difference. It's too small a value. Neither is it hurting anyone though in a single-tank environment.

I took a look at my logs, which cover a few years of me playing off and on. Most of these logs were low blues (39 to upper 40s). 9000 taunts yielded about 4500 successes. Taunt seems to have roughly a 50% success rate in that situation when the skill is over 200. You aren't just getting a +1 to hate every 6 seconds. You are also getting a passive 8.33% chance to taunt a mob automatically at the right time. The 8.33% is 50% divided by 6 seconds. That is certainly not pointless in my book. This is especially true since you can just put taunt/disarm/beg/bash/slam on the same macro in single tank situations. SK's only have 5 fast cooldown combat skills, which is the same number of lines in a macro. It takes very little effort to get that 8.33% chance.

As I said before, you can always switch between taunt spam and targeted taunting as needed due to it's 6 second cooldown. In a group where everybody is playing correctly, agro loss is fairly rare to begin with. If you are at the point where the Enchanter is grabbing agro every 30 seconds, you need to figure out why that is happening, instead of relying on taunt to fix the problem. I think that might be the disconnect here. People don't seem to realize that you shouldn't normally be in a situation where you are using taunt often in a targeted situation. That is yet another reason why taunt spam generally isn't going to have a large opportunity cost.

Originally Posted by Danth [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I like Jimjam's notion that it may help an inexperienced tank who can't tell if he has aggro or not against rooted targets. That didn't even occur to me. I've done this job so long I've long since developed a sense for whether or not I'm generating sufficient threat and can't "think like a newbie" anymore. That's a fair use for it, then, in that situation for less-experienced players. That's the forum at its best--seeing ideas I would not think of on my own.

Agreed!

Originally Posted by Danth [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Closest I get to "taunt spam" is I'll more or less spam it on mezzed creatures (NOT my primary target obviously--lot of target-switching going on) to try to keep threat on them. Years ago I used to tag mezzed creatures with 0-damage spells, but that tactic grew too mana intensive when the P99 enchanter meta changed to spamming low-rank mez that memblurs constantly, hence wiping out my efforts. Taunt doesn't work as well--but it's free, and free is important in that environment. Still isn't necessary and could be called pointless work on my part, but I like to save the enchanter as many hits as I can since rune spells cost some money and my abilities cost nothing.

Indeed. Taunting or using shroud of hate/shadow vortex on mezzed mobs is a good way to build agro before it breaks.

[Danth]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You aren't just getting a +1 to hate every 6 seconds. You are also getting a passive 8.33% chance to taunt a mob automatically at the right time. The 8.33% is 50% divided by 6 seconds. .

I call it +1 and discount the other part of that only because I effectively never lose aggro anyway except when being exceptionally care-free. A player who plays a little differently than I do and doesn't go as hard on threat as I tend to may get more mileage out of it. Probably a case where we're not wrong, just different.

But, I also agree with you in that if you like using it--effectiveness be damned--you aren't hurting anyone and if it's more fun that way, go right on ahead. I'm not going to attack someone for doing it different than I do when results demonstrate we both will get the job done. The game allows for different ways of doing things, which I regard as a strength not a weakness.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by Danth [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I call it +1 and discount the other part of that only because I effectively never lose aggro anyway except when being exceptionally care-free. A player who plays a little differently than I do and doesn't go as hard on threat as I tend to may get more mileage out of it. Probably a case where we're not wrong, just different.

But, I also agree with you in that if you like using it--effectiveness be damned--you aren't hurting anyone and if it's more fun that way, go right on ahead. I'm not going to attack someone for doing it different than I do when results demonstrate we both will get the job done. The game allows for different ways of doing things, which I regard as a strength not a weakness.

I agree both strategies are viable. It's always nice to have variety in gameplay.

I don't think you should discount the 8.33% passive chance, however.

Think about it this way. People spend months raiding to get +50 HP in a slot, which probably equates to less than a 1% increased chance of survival. Instead of spending months raiding, you can just macro a skill you get for free onto another skill you are pressing anyway, and get a free 8.33% passive chance to jump to the top of the hate list.

I am not saying you are doing this, but I think people don't seem to understand that they are doing a lot of things in this game that only provide small bonuses. I find it strange that they are willing to argue over small bonus A (taunt spam, for example), while unanimously agreeing over small bonus B (something like +50 HP in a slot).

[Danth]

Hah, yeah, I tend to be unenthusiastic about +1 here, +2 there. EQ tends to be a "big numbers" game where you need quite a bit of something before you notice good effect. That's why I never upgraded a couple of my Thurgadin-quality armor items to Skyshrine--for the huge cost involved, it wasn't going to let me do anything I can't already do, anyway.

My bain does not compute the ~8% chance because I see it as a zero per cent chance--because I'm not really ever losing aggro to begin with, taunt or no taunt. It's a case where I'm interpreting the setup through the lens of how I play. Once in awhile when it doesn't matter I might go lazy-mode and let something flip onto the shaman once in awhile but only when nobody involved cares. I can accept that other folks may play a bit differently, and as long as they're still getting the job done--good enough.

[bcbrown]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

You are also getting a passive 8.33% chance to taunt a mob automatically at the right time. The 8.33% is 50% divided by 6 seconds. That is certainly not pointless in my book.

How would you calculate the percentage chance of flipping aggro back for the other strategy, of not spamming taunt and only using it after aggro flips off you? I'm happy to accept your value of 50% innate success rate for the skill; it makes all the math much easier.

Your strategy is: spam taunt whenever it comes off cooldown; if you ever lose aggro, cast an aggro spell, right? The other strategy is: don't spam taunt; if you ever lose aggro, taunt and then cast an aggro spell, right? Given that you're in the scenario where aggro flips, you calculate an 8.3% chance to flip it back before an aggro spell lands. With the second strategy, in that same scenario, what's the chance to flip it back before an aggro spell lands?

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by bcbrown [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

How would you calculate the percentage chance of flipping aggro back for the other strategy, of not spamming taunt and only using it after aggro flips off you? I'm happy to accept your value of 50% innate success rate for the skill; it makes all the math much easier.

Your strategy is: spam taunt whenever it comes off cooldown; if you ever lose aggro, cast an aggro spell, right? The other strategy is: don't spam taunt; if you ever lose aggro, taunt and then cast an aggro spell, right? Given that you're in the scenario where aggro flips, you calculate an 8.3% chance to flip it back before an aggro spell lands. With the second strategy, in that same scenario, what's the chance to flip it back before an aggro spell lands?

It depends on the player who is tanking and the group member who acquired agro. Taunt has a melee range. If you press taunt a fraction of a second too late when the mob runs away, it will fizzle and you will get the "out of range" message. This puts taunt on cooldown too. That is a zero percent chance of success. If you don't use taunt due to laziness or fear of wasting it (which can hinder your reaction times), you also have a zero percent chance of success.

Realistically speaking spamming taunt has a higher percent chance of success than 8.33% simply due to removing reaction time from the equation. Conversely, waiting to use taunt has a lower percent chance of success due to factoring in reaction time. How much closer do the two percentages move to the middle of 8.33% and 50%? It is dependent on the player who is tanking, as each person has a different internet connection, keyboard, mouse, monitor, and reaction time.

This is why agro spells are much better. They don't have an instant fail mechanic if the mob runs out of melee range, they don't heavily rely on reaction time, and they have a much higher chance of applying agro.

Taunt has a 6 second cooldown and isn't reliable, so you cannot "waste it". Spam it or save it, both methods are viable. The cooldown is also fast enough to where you can switch your tactics as needed by the group at any moment. There is no realistic scenario in which a group will wipe because an SK (who has agro spells) didn't taunt due to 2 seconds remaining on their taunt cooldown, regardless of the reason why taunt is on cooldown.

You are guaranteed to get nothing from taunt if you never use it, so you might as well use it and get something!

[bcbrown]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

If you press taunt a fraction of a second too late when the mob runs away, it will be wasted and you will get the "out of range" message.

What's a reasonable estimate for this time threshold (i.e. how long it takes the mob to run away out of taunt range)? A half second? A second? Assume a caster took aggro, not a melee DPS, so it's running away. Assume (for now) it's unsnared.

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Each person has a different internet connection, keyboard, mouse, monitor, and reaction time.

What's a reasonable estimate for human reaction time (time to perceive plus time to click) and electronic latency (time from click to server registering action)?

I'd guess between a quarter second and a half second for human reaction time, plus about 50-150 ms for internet latency. Does that sound reasonable?

I just took a reaction-time test, and got between 0.28 and 0.32 seconds: https://faculty.washington.edu/chudl.../redgreen.html

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by bcbrown [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

What's a reasonable estimate for this time threshold (i.e. how long it takes the mob to run away out of taunt range)? A half second? A second? Assume a caster took aggro, not a melee DPS, so it's running away. Assume (for now) it's unsnared.



What's a reasonable estimate for human reaction time (time to perceive plus time to click) and electronic latency (time from click to server registering action)?

I'd guess between a quarter second and a half second for human reaction time, plus about 50-150 ms for internet latency. Does that sound reasonable?

I just took a reaction-time test, and got between 0.28 and 0.32 seconds: https://faculty.washington.edu/chudl.../redgreen.html

Assuming you know the answer, what is your point you are trying to make? Let's go with your number for now and say 0.5 seconds.

[bcbrown]

Originally Posted by DeathsSilkyMist [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Assuming you know the answer, what is your point you are trying to make? Let's go with your number for now and say 0.5 seconds.

I don't know the answer for the first question. I'm far less experienced at EQ than you are, and I've never played a tank.

I'm not trying to make a point. I'm trying to Do Science. Part of the process is to come up with unbiased estimates/measurements about the context of the system of whatever you are modelling.

I suppose my ulterior motive is that I want you to accept that my estimates are reasonable before doing the calculations, as I hope that will make it more likely that you're willing to accept the results, whatever they may be.

So far we've agreed upon a provisional value for reflex time of 0.5 second. How about the time before a fleeing mob is out of taunt range? Is a second a reasonable value for that? A tenth of a second? I really have no idea.

[DeathsSilkyMist]

Originally Posted by bcbrown [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I don't know the answer for the first question. I'm far less experienced at EQ than you are, and I've never played a tank.

I'm not trying to make a point. I'm trying to Do Science. Part of the process is to come up with unbiased estimates/measurements about the context of the system of whatever you are modelling.

I suppose my ulterior motive is that I want you to accept that my estimates are reasonable before doing the calculations, as I hope that will make it more likely that you're willing to accept the results, whatever they may be.

So far we've agreed upon a provisional value for reflex time of 0.5 second. How about the time before a fleeing mob is out of taunt range? Is a second a reasonable value for that? A tenth of a second? I really have no idea.

To answer your question about fleeing mobs, it will vary based on the velocity of the mob and the distance the player is to the mob when it starts running. If you are within max melee range of the mob when it starts to run, you have less time to react than if you are standing on top of the mob. I don't have a data set available on hand, or the melee range + average mob velocity to do an accurate guess. This data is harder to get, as it's more dependent on the specific player and the specific mob in question. Some players habitually stay at max melee range, while others habitually get closer. Things like root also play a factor, since you will be trying to stand closer to a rooted mob, but this is dependent on your group composition.

I am not really sure what you are after here. If you read my posts, I haven't been saying that spamming taunt is statistically better than saving taunt for the right moment. Everybody in this thread (including myself) agrees that timing a taunt correctly has a higher chance of success.

I have been countering the point that spamming taunt does nothing, or has a negative effect. Mathematically this is 100% incorrect. You have at least an 8.33% chance of succeeding if you spam taunt. If you don't use taunt because you are afraid of "wasting it", you have a zero percent chance of success.

Since taunt has a 6 second cooldown, your opportunity cost of switching tactics in the middle of the fight is small. This is especially true since an experienced Knight will never rely on taunt. It is a nice to have, not a vital tool.