Good and Bad Intimitanking Designs

[ManchesterLad]

Using that logic, there is no such thing a "too much grind," for example, because there are people who will play the game in spite of the large amount of ginding. Of course, that's just not how it is. People don't go through the grind because they enjoy grinding. they go through the grinding in spite of the fact that grinding is boring.

You are defending leaving boring parts in a game just because people can tolerate them, and then label them as fun.

Actually, believe it or not, grinds exist in MMOs because players due enjoy them (timesinks). A really awful feature could not exist if players weren't willing to partake in it, regardless of loot reward.

This is very true in games that has high mat requirements for crafting, which requires hours a day of nothing but mat harvesting. People do it because it's fun for them, with a reward that makes them keep coming back to harvest more.

Grinds originally existed to keep players occupied between expansions (mind you in a day before XBox and the ADHD/ADD it has caused in gaming - small maps; less buttons to push; everything streamlined for the 1hr attention span player). Today grinds are there also as timesinks for people "wanting something to do".

BTW, standing there taunting bosses is a mechanic in EQ, EQ2 and even WoW. WoW is a tad different because of the weapon dps factor (where in EQ/EQ2 multiple taunts damage and hold aggro - a more elegant aggro management way - and you're constantly taunting), but tanks even in WoW often have nothing more to do but to mark targets in raids/dispel/sometimes innervate.

So probably the real issue is some tanks are bored of just standing there. But that's the role of the MT, to draw all the hate onto them so others in the party won't get clobbered, and so casters and other melee can kill the boss/mobs. The perk? MT gets all the loving and buffed out of the kazoo to play that role.

[redoubt]

I never did the "twitch" thing, but I think I have a pretty active playstyle.

I search out the most dangerous foe and kill it first (while swinging at anything nearby while I decide which is the most dangerous.)

I don't let them stand behind me if I can help it. Sometimes its getting a solid object behind me and at other times I just move to prevent them from flanking me.

I swap to whatever method and/or weapon is approriate at that instant.

So anyway, it feels pretty active to me.

Now, back to the intim thing and how I've used it in the current implementation.

I've mostly solo'd my first 1 mil xp. I just hit level 10 and have been in exaclty 3 pugs so far. I've also run a chunk of elite quests with a paladin friend of mine. We both self heal. I've used intimidate to get mobs off of npcs that i need to keep alive and also to get mobs off of my pali friend. Never have I stopped swinging when I do. (I stopped using a shield at level 8 and went TWF.)

If intim switched to hate agro I might not be able to use intim as I do now. Yes, you guessed it, I'm a dex/AC build.

How does your proposed change work with a build and playstyle like mine?

[Borror0]

Because it leads to standing still in one place and doing monotonous things.

If we are to agree that standing still in one place and doing monotonous things is boring, there are three possible solutions:
1. Designers should avoid creating encounters were standing still is rewarded.
2. Designers should make changes to the game, so that standing still is more enjoyable and less monotonous.
3. Hybrid of the two possible solutions.

If you are to present the first possible solution as the best (or only) solution to the problem, then you have to explain why the other are rejected. That is something you have yet to achieve. While it's true that there are certain designs that lead themselves to monotonous fights, it is overly simplistic to blame the encounter's design. The flaw could very well be in other parts of the game. Perhaps the quests are fine and it's the character abilities that needs to be changed, for example.

High HP are "good" for increasing the duration, there are other ways.
A. For one it doesn't always have to be "one big mean boss".
B. There could be healing.
C. The boss could have bursts of damage so high that you don't want to stand and be hit, thus limiting the time spent damaging it.

None of these would change anything:
1. Intimidate is an AoE. Think of A Vision of Destruction's Orthons with an intimitank, if you need an example of how it plays out.
2. Healing, instead of high HP, still lead to a monotonous fight.
3. As you describe it, that does not sound fun. If it's threatening to a turtled intimitank, it's lethal to DPS builds.

Due to aoe heals carrying more or less the same cost as single target heals, in the face of AoE attacks this creates the incentive to stand still in a huddle

That objection is addressed in the very phrase you quoted.

You seriously do not think combat would be more fun if it was more reactive?
That it would be more involving if you could react to visual cues?

You're not asking the right question:
Do you think that making more reactive and less monotonous involves changing the design of Intimidate?

Yes, I do.

[Borror0]

Actually, believe it or not, grinds exist in MMOs because players due enjoy them (timesinks).

You're conflating intrinsic and extrinsic rewards. I am not. That's the difference in how we describe and view grinding.

[Aesop]

hmmm...


So how about that option where the intimidator is placed at the top of striking order and given an effective Hate Increase Buff.


Say we have 2 characters A and B


A is a THF Barb with a bad attitude that does lots of damage

B is a S&B Intimidate heavy sob


A has done approx 20000 damage at 2000 damage per tick
B has done approx 10000 damage at 1000 damage per tick

B successfully Intimidates moving his effective damage for purposes of determining aggro to 21000 damage (the highest aggro damage +5%) and at the same time gives him a stacking Hate Generation increase of 25%


Thus Intimidate would not HOLD aggro it would just gain aggro until someone out DPS'd his new standing again... and it would grant him extra consideration for the aggro he would actually generate... additionally this would have to come with a reasonable cooldown


THis would work better if they would simultaneously improve the effectiveness of S&B in general...


see other S&B thread about how I'd like that to be accomplished (coughassive blocking and Shield bashing cough


Aesop

[zealous]

If we are to agree that standing still in one place and doing monotonous things is boring, there are three possible solutions:
1. Designers should avoid creating encounters were standing still is rewarded.
2. Designers should make changes to the game, so that standing still is more enjoyable and less monotonous.
3. Hybrid of the two possible solutions.

If you are to present the first possible solution as the best (or only) solution to the problem, then you have to explain why the other are rejected. That is something you have yet to achieve. While it's true that there are certain designs that lead themselves to monotonous fights, it is overly simplistic to blame the encounter's design. The flaw could very well be in other parts of the game. Perhaps the quests are fine and it's the character abilities that needs to be changed, for example.

That objection is addressed in the part you left out of the very phrase you quoted. The way I see it you would design quests based on mechanics, that isn't necessarily the case. You are correct in that they shouldn't be viewed as separate.

None of these would change anything:
1. Intimidate is an AoE. Think of A Vision of Destruction's Orthons with an intimitank, if you need an example of how it plays out.
2. Healing, instead of high HP, still lead to a monotonous fight.
3. As you describe it, that does not sound fun. If it's threatening to a turtled intimitank, it's lethal to DPS builds.

1. I did mention sally yes. Efficiently locking the orthons might require a second aggro grabber though. Also, for both sally and orthons mixing hate with intim as backup works quite well.
2. Not necessarily. Healing can function in the same way as HP against a steady stream of incoming damage with the exception that a too low stream of damage won't make a difference. There are also more dimensions to it; amount, interval, activation time and number of targets.
To take a hypothetical example; imagine that the shroud pt4 gnolls would be able to swap targets to heal one target or both gnolls to their sides as as well as casting death ward and resurrection. If not healing themselves unless below a certain treshold and single target healing being more potent than healing neighbours, this might make it so that in order to kill all the gnolls you need to damage all of them and then focus damage on one. Another option being to focus all damage on harry and damage through the healing. A third option to immobilize the gnoll in some hopefully non-monotonous way.
3. Not if it is possible to get out of the way. Horoth and Lailat already function in this way to some extent.

That objection is addressed in the very phrase you quoted.

Fair enough, ambiguity of parentheses an all.

You're not asking the right question:
Do you think that making more reactive and less monotonous involves changing the design of Intimidate?

Yes, I do.

Fair enough.
The main use I see for intimidate is for regular questing; establishing initial hate aggro, peeling mobs and things going haywire. If you're playing fast paced you might wan't to use quite often, if things go haywire you might want to singlehandedly control the mobs for longer than 6s.

As stated I do believe that added AoE hate on a successful intimidate would be a good thing.

I also believe changing the way mobs attack hooks interact with their attacks back to the way it was would be a more important change for reducing monotony. The way ogres used to work where you could actually sidestep the attack or that you could block in anticipation of a giants stomp was more fun than the current "homing ogres of three automatic hits before you have much chance to react getting the damage when 3m away".

[eonfreon]

THis would work better if they would simultaneously improve the effectiveness of S&B in general...


see other S&B thread about how I'd like that to be accomplished (coughassive blocking and Shield bashing cough


Aesop

I like your ideas, but I think the most relevant part is what I quoted above.
Because as it stands, the way you described, the S&B player would be hard-pressed to keep the aggro. The only way I could see it working is if the duration and cool-down are not monkeyed with AND simultaneously S&B combat is improved.

Because if Intimidate no longer locks aggro, simply grabs it and determines it as you go along, then S&B needs a major damage overhaul, otherwise the Hate modifier will have to be far higher then +25% to even have a chance of retaining aggro in most situations. Let's not forget Caster's burst damage in there.

The way I'm understanding this whole discussion is that there should be an incentive not to simply stand and shieldblock.

That's fine, but I don't think shield-blocking and intimidating need to be "penalized" to make fighting and intimidating more rewarding.

I think before they monkey around with Intimidate they should lay the framework for ways that all can benefit from it.

Because as it stands the only reason someone only shield blocks is because their damage output contribution may not outweigh their damage received while not shield-blocking. Because shields have become a funny thing: they've become all-or-nothing, even moreso then intimidate.

The best shield is what Tower +5, let's say you can max out Dex (because in some cases people lose AC with Tower Shields due to their Dex), so what a Tower Shield = +7 to AC while not blocking?
A Shield spell, clickie, wand = +4. So it is quite possible, for the duration of or most of the duration of a fight, for a TWF or THF with all the AC gear and buffs, to be only 3 AC behind a S&B. So if the S&B had "perfect AC" meaning only hit on a 20, then the TWF and THF are likely to be hit on a 17. They are very well protected as well, with far, far greater damage output.

In many scenarios an AC Tank cannot get "perfect AC" and is hit far more often than that. Or the damage comes from sources that bypass AC altogether. So that's when the all-or-nothing of a shield comes in: the Blocking DR.
Which requires you to Hold Shift and stand there.
It's not Intimidate that does this. It's that shield DR is Blocking DR. Only PRE's are granted any kind of passive Dr other then shields with some magical properties. Thus a Kensaii is no better off with a shield in hand then say a Barbarian. Only a Stalwart Defender or a Defender of Syberis can get additional character-based DR.
So when the to-hit is so high that AC is barely helping, or the damage source bypasses AC altogether, then the only recourses to minimize damage are to shield block or deal a lot of damage and kill the foe faster. A shieldbearer is hard-pressed to "do a lot of damage" compared to damage taken.
In a group setting there are others who can deal the damage, thus an "aggro-holder" who is wiling to shield block is a Cleric's friend. He centers most of the spike damage on himself and he's in a "mode" that greatly reduces damage, keeping healing resources down.

The true culprit is not the way Intimidate is implemented, but the way that damage is mitigated by a shield.

[krud]

A is a THF Barb with a bad attitude that does lots of damage

B is a S&B Intimidate heavy sob


A has done approx 20000 damage at 2000 damage per tick
B has done approx 10000 damage at 1000 damage per tick

B successfully Intimidates moving his effective damage for purposes of determining aggro to 21000 damage (the highest aggro damage +5%) and at the same time gives him a stacking Hate Generation increase of 25%


Aesop

I like it, but instead of a fixed % above highest damage, perhaps base the % on your intimidate skill. Those with a higher intimidate will generate a higher threshold to overcome.
edit - if calculating agro from existing hate is too much to code, another possibility is to just reset the agro to zero with each successful intimidate, and give the intimitank a new threshold based on their intimidate score.

Another aspect is that cleaves and AoE attacks should generate much higher hate in relation to their damage output. It may even need to be as high as +1000% while the mob is intimidated. It would encourage the use of these feats while shield blocking. That would also make intimitanking less boring.

and one more time - make smites a main hand attack while shield blocking, instead of a shield smite!

but I still think the best way to encourage s&b intimitanks to attack would be to make an exclusive one handed ESoS-like weapon Who wouldn't want to swing something like that?

[Scraap]

Another aspect is that cleaves and AoE attacks should generate much higher hate in relation to their damage output. It may even need to be as high as +1000% while the mob is intimidated. It would encourage the use of these feats while shield blocking. That would also make intimitanking less boring.

Ohh. Scrappy likey. Particularly given that an intimitank is one of the few builds likely to *want* to be swarmed when in non boss-agro situations. Of course, that brings us back to the current relative worth of ac, dr, and just pulling 1-2 mobs at a time with high dps from a survivability standpoint past around level 12-15+ quests.

[Angelus_dead]

The WoW Taunt seems interesting, but I'm not sure I fully understand how it functions. Does it put you at the top of the aggro list, by just a small margin, making continued DPS from someone else near the top likely to pull aggro back? I think I'd have to see that in practice.

Yes, so even if many bosses weren't arbitrarily immune, WOW Taunt could not be used to handle the topic of this thread, which is holding long-term aggro while others do damage.

A WOW Taunt is a powerful ability to rescue someone who got aggro he shouldn't have, such as a teammate who thought he could kill a mob but didn't and now is feeling very squishy.

In any case, one of the functions I'd prefer Intimidate to retain is the ability it grants for one character to take control of a poor situation by wrangling aggro and allowing everyone else to recover, such as when a Horoth tank goes down.

Adding WOW Taunt mechanics would make it easier to do that, as that'd basically mean you only need to succeed on one Intimidate and then you can shield-block. (Whether it's good gameplay to make it so easy is a separate question)

[Angelus_dead]

Another aspect is that cleaves and AoE attacks should generate much higher hate

That is different from the stated and historical function of Cleave attacks, which is to help you do damage. (It resembles an import from some other MMORPG).

If Cleave is given any optional ability to produce hate out of proportion to its damage, that should only be after first fixing it to be properly useful for damage dealers. (That means that if a Tempest3 Ranger19/Fighter1 using Haste and Haste Boost does a Cleave on two monsters, his DPS will not be lower than attacking normally)

[nitronisto]

think it was someone on page 4 that said should go like wow style of intimidate, being a X wow pali tank (yes still waitin on my refund for life i wont get back) the hate system was based alot on the EQ style witch was X amount of players beating on the mob making hate, tank has hate generating weapon bonus and stance * if ours were fixed this would work* and what would happen as i remember it is when you hit intimidate (taunt in those games) you were given 100% +1 hate and what that ruffly did in there coding system was the highest dps had 100% hate, u got +1 witch made u now the highest dps and u retained that until the now 2nd highest hate 99% over took you though dmg.

DDO's tank/ intimidate system is the first one of its kind that i have experienced were the tank can have a solid lock of agro for X amount of time regardless of the dps. and that has its ups n downs as pointing out here, the EQ/WoW system does have flaws to as any raider from those games will tell you, if u got ballz to the wall dps the 101 hate u make only last for a split second and so its more dependent on the dps throttling themselves .