Good and Bad Intimitanking Designs

[Angelus_dead]

Consider two competing possible design alternatives for how tanking a boss with Intimidate could work.

Option 1
"A high Intimidate skill lets me hold aggro on this boss, despite doing zero damage. I will hold shift to shield-block and click Intimidate every 10 seconds until someone kills the boss for me."

Option 2
"A high Initimidate lets my attacks hold aggro on this boss, despite doing under half the damage of some teammates. I will press shift to shield-block whenever I see an especially dangerous situation, such as:
* the boss winding up a special attack
* an extra monster attacking me
* the healer being distracted
* my AC buff wearing off
* getting a healing-immunity curse
* or simply me having low hitpoints.
At other times I will attack the boss, both to help win faster and as a necessary part of holding aggro, because Intimidate by itself isn't enough."

Which of those two designs would lead to a game that's more fun to play?

[k1ngp1n]

[khaldan]

... Can i phone a friend?

[William_the_Bat]

Option 2, while cool in theory, would make intimidate completely useless for my favorite use: getting a monster who's chasing a kiting archer or caster to stand still so I can kill it.

[Angelus_dead]

Option 2, while cool in theory, would make intimidate completely useless for my favorite use: getting a monster who's chasing a kiting archer or caster to stand still so I can kill it.

Whether that would happen depends on implementation details that I didn't specify.


First, the problem of kiting-annoyance is a somewhat separate problem that should be dealt with in the process of fixing ranged and spell DPS:
1. Monsters should have a lesser desire to waste their time chasing a kiter who's running away, when they could instead smash heads on someone standing nearby. That is, each monster has a multiplier factor representing how much better he is at attacking nearby enemies than distant ones. That multiplier is applied when sorting the aggro list to determine who to attack, so that a ranged player would not pull aggro unless his damage was several times higher (or if he'd made the mistake of stepping into melee distance).
2. Players who are chasing a monster should be able to hit it with their melee attacks, as long as their speed is fast enough to keep up with the enemy's backside. Players should not need to run in front of the monster to get their swings to register. This is a problem of networked position updates.

But even if kiting is never fixed in general, an adjustment to how long Intimidate can hold aggro from a boss doesn't necessarily have to prevent it from pulling aggro on a single monster. Suppose for example that Intimidate is allowed to get absolute aggro 1-3 times, and then there's a 60 second cooldown before it'll work like that again on that monster. Using Intimidate again would instead just give you a multiplicative aggro bonus, meaning that the 1000 damage you've done is counted as 3000 or 5000 when sorting the aggro list.

There are a lot of ways to do it, without causing your problem. The key distinction is that pulling aggro and holding aggro are different things.

[MrWizard]

option 3, bring all ac tanks and not worry about aggro

[Scraap]

Hate gen +100% every 5-10 ranks, in addition to the c'mere option at an additional x2 of that result, with the inverse for diplo perhaps? (spitballing figures, obviously, since we don't have raws on hate that I'm aware of at least.)

[Angelus_dead]

Hate gen +100% every 5-10 ranks, in addition to the c'mere option at an additional x2 of that result, with the inverse for diplo perhaps? (spitballing figures, obviously, since we don't have raws on hate that I'm aware of at least.)

I want to stay away from a passive effect, because that means you can't turn it off according to situation. And I don't want to base it on ranks, because that comparatively devalues other ways to increase your Intimidate number.

I'm thinking that a successful Intimidate gives you like a 10% aggro bonus per point of success, meaning it could easily be over 500% if your skill is really high compared to the monster's DC. That bonus would fade by 10% every few seconds until getting back to zero.

It's important to remember I'm talking about a multiplier on accumulated hate aggro, not the damage you're doing now. That means that someone who'd done 1000 damage compared to teammates who did 2000 and 3000 would immediately pull aggro if he Intimidated and got himself a 400% multiplier. The idea is that someone who presses Intimidate every 10-30 seconds can hold aggro against people doing 2x-3x his DPS.

But you're right: it's hard to come up with exact numbers without being able to look at the game software and seeing what numbers are already used. Right here it's less important to come up with a specific design and just focus on which goal would be more fun.

[Nezichiend]

option 3, bring all ac tanks and not worry about aggro

...And make the quest take like a year to finish?

[MrWizard]

...And make the quest take like a year to finish?

rephrase: ac tanks that are combat oriented...

[Junts]

Whether that would happen depends on implementation details that I didn't specify.


First, the problem of kiting-annoyance is a somewhat separate problem that should be dealt with in the process of fixing ranged and spell DPS:
1. Monsters should have a lesser desire to waste their time chasing a kiter who's running away, when they could instead smash heads on someone standing nearby. That is, each monster has a multiplier factor representing how much better he is at attacking nearby enemies than distant ones. That multiplier is applied when sorting the aggro list to determine who to attack, so that a ranged player would not pull aggro unless his damage was several times higher (or if he'd made the mistake of stepping into melee distance).
2. Players who are chasing a monster should be able to hit it with their melee attacks, as long as their speed is fast enough to keep up with the enemy's backside. Players should not need to run in front of the monster to get their swings to register. This is a problem of networked position updates.

But even if kiting is never fixed in general, an adjustment to how long Intimidate can hold aggro from a boss doesn't necessarily have to prevent it from pulling aggro on a single monster. Suppose for example that Intimidate is allowed to get absolute aggro 1-3 times, and then there's a 60 second cooldown before it'll work like that again on that monster. Using Intimidate again would instead just give you a multiplicative aggro bonus, meaning that the 1000 damage you've done is counted as 3000 or 5000 when sorting the aggro list.

There are a lot of ways to do it, without causing your problem. The key distinction is that pulling aggro and holding aggro are different things.

Another optoin is to give intimidate a longer cooldown and have it use the model of WoW taunt abilities: providing aggro equal to the highest on the mob's table plus the excess required for it to change aggro.


So intimidating will get the mob onto you to stay as long as you can continue to out-threat everyone else, or will allow you to take the mob off someone who is no longer dealing any damage (eg, kiting), but also can't be used as often so if someone steals from you after you use it, that person is stuck with the aggro for a while.

It's actually a pretty good model they use for those taunt abilities, IMO.

[Angelus_dead]

It's actually a pretty good model they use for those taunt abilities, IMO.

Although note that WOW went through a lot of changes to that design. Originally a WOW taunt did not give you long-lasting aggro, and expired after a few seconds.

In fact, powers like Challenging Roar still do that today; apparently WOW players don't consider it a "real taunt", because it differs from the function of the ability specifically called "Taunt".

Oh, looking at that page I see that WOW has a pretty major difference from what you're describing: apparently the Taunt abilities there have no effect on regular bosses (which is basically the whole point of this suggestion).

[Ranmaru2]

I think that Intimidate could be used as a toggled ability like Power Attack and Combat Expertise:

Intimidate: This ability allows you to more easily single out targets on the battlefield and in sensitive conversations. For every 5 ranks in this skill you gain +10% hate generation to your attacks that activates when you turn on Intimidate Stance. This stance lasts for 1 minute and 20 seconds and has a cooldown of 2 minutes and 40 seconds. The hate generation from this stance stacks with all other sources of hate generation such as Divine Retribution, Defender Stances, and Item set bonuses.

In this way, the intimidate ability is retooled towards a more DPS based roll rather than you finding the perfect slur in every monster's vocabulary in order to hold their aggro for 6 seconds at a time. Also, this wouldn't provide too much of a hate generation bonus, as the max would be about 170% based on current intimidate values and would actually allow for other builds with more mild intimidate values to act as hate/intimidate tanks in the absence of having an absolutely intimidate-based character.

Now I'm unsure about how the stacking works between Hate Generation effects, but this would supply two possible scenarios:

1) Additive Total Bonus

We'll suppose an intimidate value of 65 (easily acquirable) from a 15 fighter, 3 paladin, 2 monk TWF/THF ac build :

Total Hate Generation from skill: 130%
Levik's Defender Tier I (DT armor and bracers): +20%
Defender of Siberys tier II: +100%
----------------------------------------------------
Total Hate Generation: 250% hate generation for the time of Intimidate Stance and Divine Retribution

2) Multiplicative

If Hate Generation works in a multiplicative fashion, then:

Total Hate Generation from skill: 130%
Levik's Defender Tier I (DT armor and bracers): +20%
Defender of Siberys tier II: +100%
----------------------------------------------------
Total Hate Generation: 312% hate generation for the time of Intimidate Stance and Divine Retribution

This would mean that unless you have a Dark Monk up there firing off Touch of Death like there's no tomorrow or a Frenzied Berserker who is having the most lucky critical streak in the world, you should usually be able to establish enough aggro in that initial 1 minute and 20 seconds. If you needed more help you can toggle it on again after the timer goes away to help.

This would also allow monks to take intimidate as well to establish aggro, making builds such as the Metaru that are built for Hate Tanking to have another source of Hate generation that it could rely on to serve the purpose of the build.

[ManchesterLad]

Another optoin is to give intimidate a longer cooldown and have it use the model of WoW taunt abilities: providing aggro equal to the highest on the mob's table plus the excess required for it to change aggro.

So what's a solution that is in the framework of DnD? Higher skills in dps as a aggro mechanic; a specific new enchancement (something akin to what EQ2 does with aggro management, where actual dps isn't required but button pushing various taunts that do damage instead); aggro generated by existing enhancements (e.g., Paladins with high diplomancy, turning it into a dual ability much like LoH can kill undead and heal allys)?

Since DDO already divides specific enhancements based on race and class, perhaps if a player is X class, they can have Y abilities. So instead of diplomancy working like it does with paladins to thwart threat, instead, that class it'll seek the player. Where for a casting class it'll work as it does now.

It's a much more elegant design, while still preserving the DnD rulesets.

[oberon131313]

3) instead of taking time to implement new design, fix existing tier 3 enhancements to provide the correct hate bonus.

[krud]

Option 2
"... despite doing so little damage with my stupid little one-handed weapon that it makes no difference whether or not I swing.... .:

fixed

[Lleren]

Consider two competing possible design alternatives for how tanking a boss with Intimidate could work.

Option 1
"A high Intimidate skill lets me hold aggro on this boss, despite doing zero damage. I will hold shift to shield-block and click Intimidate every 10 seconds until someone kills the boss for me."

Option 2
"A high Initimidate lets my attacks hold aggro on this boss, despite doing under half the damage of some teammates. I will press shift to shield-block whenever I see an especially dangerous situation, such as:
* the boss winding up a special attack
* an extra monster attacking me
* the healer being distracted
* my AC buff wearing off
* getting a healing-immunity curse
* or simply me having low hitpoints.
At other times I will attack the boss, both to help win faster and as a necessary part of holding aggro, because Intimidate by itself isn't enough."

Which of those two designs would lead to a game that's more fun to play?

The way it is presented, Option 2.
Presented to make Option 1 look better, well Option 2 as well =D
Heck I'd be deliriously happy if there was a toggle button and an clicky for the skill.
Same for the Diplomancy and Bluff skills

[diamabel]

Can't you already combine 1) and 2)? Do all that you described with suggestion 2) and additionally hit intimidate whenever needed/the timer has expired?

[sirgog]

My preferred approach:

Activating Intimidate generates an amount of instantaneous threat, that is determined by how much you beat the mob's Intim DC by.

Under this system, Epic Lailat might have a DC of 65 (it's presently 80). If you roll a 72, you've beaten the DC by 7, so you generate a small amount of threat (perhaps equal to dealing 7x7x7 = 343 damage). If you roll an 81, you generate 16x16x16 = 4096 threat.


(These numbers may need to be modified, but the basic idea remains - attacking and intiming is more effective than attacking alone).

[Visty]

/not signed

nerfing builds is never good