U33.2 aggro mechanic

[Chimmy]

It was previous action that made the previous mechanic what it was too. Calling it (or implying its) a bug is incorrect, as it is what the forumites lobbied for over years of time. This has occurred in two other occasions in this game as well, where the aggro mechanic has switched from the way it was before, to how it is now, and there has always been much discussion on the topic each switch. Attempting to iterate that this time it was intentional while the last time was a mistake however, is incorrect, as this the number of times this change from one to the other, and the amount of discussion that has ensued after each change, is well documented on these forums.

TL;DR?
1. Action was taken each time to make it what it was, not only on the times that made it what one side of the discussion desires.
2. Its wasn't only WAI when it worked the way you want it to, it was WAI when it worked the way you did not want it to as well.

P.S. This current mechanic is as "broken" as the last. Many have already begun remembering how to take advantage of the way it is "broken" now due to this having been broken the same way twice before, and are doing so, just like they did when it was "broken" before the previous change. How many of those on the forums celebrating this change currently under the guise of "its more realistic" are actually doing so because they favor the way it is currently broken over the way it was previously broken? The irony here is if I began showing videos of specific posters celebrating this change, in game taking advantage of currently broken mechanics due to this change (both past and present), I would be the one breaking the rules and take a hit for it, all the while they get away with it, while advocating it under the guise of "its more realistic and its only the last mechanic that was broken, not this one, honest".

Yeah I understand they are both broken, and honestly it sounds like this one is more broken or more accurately breaks certain aspects more than the other, and yes the last actions were also actions of course, but how long ago were they, hopefully this change means it will become a focus rather than just dumping this change and leaving it as is, which is not a result I would be happy with either.

So yes, as I have always said, a rollback may be the better option, just my opinion is that this change is hopefully a sign of developmental focus right now, meaning hopefully better AI for us all in the long run, which may be naive, time will tell, but for now I can hold that position happily enough, if it stays this way for months with no word and no further development plans then my position will probably change from where it is now.

[HuneyMunster]

DDO was not supposed to have less complexity than playing Whack-a-Mole via archery or assassination.

How do you consider assassination to be less complex that whack-a-mole?

[JOTMON]

Yeah I understand they are both broken, and honestly it sounds like this one is more broken or more accurately breaks certain aspects more than the other, and yes the last actions were also actions of course, but how long ago were they, hopefully this change means it will become a focus rather than just dumping this change and leaving it as is, which is not a result I would be happy with either.

So yes, as I have always said, a rollback may be the better option, just my opinion is that this change is hopefully a sign of developmental focus right now, meaning hopefully better AI for us all in the long run, which may be naive, time will tell, but for now I can hold that position happily enough, if it stays this way for months with no word and no further development plans then my position will probably change from where it is now.

Rollback is probably too aggressive, some tweaking to fix some of the issues..

~limited aggro daisy chaining bouncing.... something like..first mob aggro'ed has a 'chance' of aggroing those within 25', those in range do not continue the aggro to infinity and beyond..
~assassinate.. its a silent sneak kill.. and should not automatically aggro the entire room.. I can understand a chance of alert aggro.. but not everytime..
~Fix mob caster range.. aggro'ed caster bombers in different rooms or well beyond range should not be able to continue to drop cometfalls and commands or other caster attacks..
~Mob casters should not be able to cast through walls/gates or anything else that players cant cast through with the same range.
~while you are at it.. fix mob archer range.. arrows continue to hit their player mark 50 miles beyond eyesight away.. there needs to be a dissipation range..
~do something with tethering mobs.. they are aggroing from different rooms, attack a bunch of times then white don't before being killed to aggro again while aggroing mobs around them on the way.
~aggro'd mobs are leaving their ambush zones to attack players..
~aggro mechanic is extending beyond visual range.., seeing things like mobs piling up on closed doors.. and casters casting through doors that players cant get to, to open door to kill mobs aggro'ed on them..

~did I mention mob casters are casting through walls, doors, beyond normal expected range...

[Talon_Moonshadow]

emphasis added (also, this whole post isn't all *directly* in response to this quote)

Assassinate is currently working like this and used to work like this before the 'mob obliviousness to dying friends bug' started. The reports that successful assassinates are automatically triggering aggro are incorrect. I've been testing it. I've assassinated plenty of mobs close to other mobs without triggering aggro automatically (with a way over-level character for the content tested). The nearby mobs start their search behavior after one of them is successfully assassinated.

I think the problem is that the bonus to spot/listen scores that mobs are now getting when their search behavior starts is just set to an extremely-too-high value/scaling according to quest level/mob challenge rating/or whatever. So, it seems like they're automatically aggro-ing when they're really just very quickly doing a spot/listen check [this is SUPPOSED to happen and is a BUG FIX] and that check happens to succeed in at-level content because of too-high spot/listen bonuses, and then they aggro, and it seems like they're automatically aggro-ing as a response to the assassinate.

Also, if they're right next to the assassin, they start blindly attacking the spot where the assassinate happened (right next to them)--something that is SUPPOSED to happen and is FIXED behavior--and then they usually knock the assassin out of stealth which prevents double-assassinating.

It seems to me that, in order to get double-assassinates working again, all they have to do is appropriately adjust the spot/listen score scaling of the mobs and possibly institute a very short delay after the initial assassinate before the mobs activate their searching behavior.

I don't think that's a large amount of tweaking and then we'll have BOTH double-assassinates working again AND mob AI that isn't utterly eye-roll-worthy, reducing gameplay to lower complexity than playing Whack-A-Mole... Some will only be happy if we go back to effortless archery and assassinating and skipping vast swaths of content with invisi-cheesing; but I'm sure a lot of people will be happier. Hell, at least in Whack-A-Mole, the opponents do something.

As for pulling mobs with the Assassin's Trick enhancement, I really don't think we were supposed to be able to emulate bluff-pulling (something that's supposed to require gear and skill point investment) with an enhancement that costs 1 AP.

[And, unrelated to assassinating, it seems like the radius within which mobs can 'communicate' aggro to one another probably needs to be lowered a little.]

It appears to me that our ability to lose agro by going back into stealth mode is not working like it did before this last update.
They do seem to go back to their attack the air mode, but seem to never actually lose agro.
They sometimes seem like they have lost agro, but only until you come near them again...

I need to probably do a real controlled test to be sure though.

[TallMikeM]

Rollback is probably too aggressive, some tweaking to fix some of the issues..

~limited aggro daisy chaining bouncing.... something like..first mob aggro'ed has a 'chance' of aggroing those within 25', those in range do not continue the aggro to infinity and beyond..
~assassinate.. its a silent sneak kill.. and should not automatically aggro the entire room.. I can understand a chance of alert aggro.. but not everytime..
~Fix mob caster range.. aggro'ed caster bombers in different rooms or well beyond range should not be able to continue to drop cometfalls and commands or other caster attacks..
~Mob casters should not be able to cast through walls/gates or anything else that players cant cast through with the same range.
~while you are at it.. fix mob archer range.. arrows continue to hit their player mark 50 miles beyond eyesight away.. there needs to be a dissipation range..
~do something with tethering mobs.. they are aggroing from different rooms, attack a bunch of times then white don't before being killed to aggro again while aggroing mobs around them on the way.
~aggro'd mobs are leaving their ambush zones to attack players..
~aggro mechanic is extending beyond visual range.., seeing things like mobs piling up on closed doors.. and casters casting through doors that players cant get to, to open door to kill mobs aggro'ed on them..

~did I mention mob casters are casting through walls, doors, beyond normal expected range...

I hope if the devs don't read any other post then they at least read this. WHile I agree that changes needed to be made to the ranged aggro mechanic, the devs really messed this up and introduced a clumsy and ill thought out "fix". I'm sure they didn't intend to, but the implications don't seem to have been thought through. The above post lays out clearly and succinctly what's gone wrong, please devs pay attention.

[Chai]

Yeah I understand they are both broken, and honestly it sounds like this one is more broken or more accurately breaks certain aspects more than the other, and yes the last actions were also actions of course, but how long ago were they, hopefully this change means it will become a focus rather than just dumping this change and leaving it as is, which is not a result I would be happy with either.

So yes, as I have always said, a rollback may be the better option, just my opinion is that this change is hopefully a sign of developmental focus right now, meaning hopefully better AI for us all in the long run, which may be naive, time will tell, but for now I can hold that position happily enough, if it stays this way for months with no word and no further development plans then my position will probably change from where it is now.

The change is not a sign of developmental focus. It is a sign that they have flipped to the same mechanic we had around the MOTU release time, and once before that. This is now the third iteration of flipping between the two aggro mechanics.

The issue is the discussion is too polarized. If choosing between the lesser of two evils in broken game mechanics, the better mechanic for the current meta is the rollback, as it at least throws single target builds a bone in a game dominated by AOE trash clearing builds. This doesnt show development focus either however.

What would show development focus for me is changing it to something where hide and move silently actually matter, and are factored into the detection.

[Talon_Moonshadow]

I'd like to see mob reaction and encounter resolution at least partly tied to mob intelligence. In broad strokes - the smarter the mob, the harder it is to successfully continue the sneak/ranged attack. Extreme examples: finger a crowd of slimes with impunity, finger a single mind flayer and the remainder know where you are almost immediately.

I'd like to see that for sooo many different things in this game.

[Chimmy]

Rollback is probably too aggressive, some tweaking to fix some of the issues..

~limited aggro daisy chaining bouncing.... something like..first mob aggro'ed has a 'chance' of aggroing those within 25', those in range do not continue the aggro to infinity and beyond..
~assassinate.. its a silent sneak kill.. and should not automatically aggro the entire room.. I can understand a chance of alert aggro.. but not everytime..
~Fix mob caster range.. aggro'ed caster bombers in different rooms or well beyond range should not be able to continue to drop cometfalls and commands or other caster attacks..
~Mob casters should not be able to cast through walls/gates or anything else that players cant cast through with the same range.
~while you are at it.. fix mob archer range.. arrows continue to hit their player mark 50 miles beyond eyesight away.. there needs to be a dissipation range..
~do something with tethering mobs.. they are aggroing from different rooms, attack a bunch of times then white don't before being killed to aggro again while aggroing mobs around them on the way.
~aggro'd mobs are leaving their ambush zones to attack players..
~aggro mechanic is extending beyond visual range.., seeing things like mobs piling up on closed doors.. and casters casting through doors that players cant get to, to open door to kill mobs aggro'ed on them..

~did I mention mob casters are casting through walls, doors, beyond normal expected range...

I think a couple of those were issues in the previous mechanics, but that is beside the point, +10000 to getting those issues addressed.

[PermaBanned]

Easy to say "I thought it was broken" after Turbine changed it. The fact is, noone saw it as broken. It was regarded as a "tactic".

Maybe no one thought it was "broken," but it couldn't have been just me who thought it was silly I could attack one mob in a pack of 6 by firing an Arrow/Bolt, or even hitting them with a thrown Shuriken/Dagger/Axe ... and none of his fellow mobs notice/react?

Maybe not "broken," but certainly not "right" either.

That they botched the fix is no surprise, neither is that they broke a bunch of unrelated stuff in the process. I'd still call ending the "no one notices their fellow being pelted with a thrown axe" scenarios a step in the right direction. Hopefully they can unbotch the fix rather than returning the silly.


Regarding it's (now former) use as a "tactic:" yes, gaming the dumbass AI and making use of terrain features has always been a "tactic" for defeating encounters, kinda like...

• Standing next to certain pillers or corners where mobs will line up with their backs to you.

• Standing on invisible ledges to attack from safely.

• "Dangle Tanking" the Ravagers in TotDW.

• Swimming around while Balistas destroy themselves.

• Invis + Speed Boost for the "Stealth" approach.

All tried & true DDO "tactics." All silly. All could use a fix - just preferably one that only effects the targeted issues without all the collateral systems damage this fix has.

[Enoach]

Maybe no one thought it was "broken," but it couldn't have been just me who thought it was silly I could attack one mob in a pack of 6 by firing an Arrow/Bolt, or even hitting them with a thrown Shuriken/Dagger/Axe ... and none of his fellow mobs notice/react?

Maybe not "broken," but certainly not "right" either.

That they botched the fix is no surprise, neither is that they broke a bunch of unrelated stuff in the process. I'd still call ending the "no one notices their fellow being pelted with a thrown axe" scenarios a step in the right direction. Hopefully they can unbotch the fix rather than returning the silly.

Fred hearing a noise and saying I'm going to investigate to Bob is one thing. But Fred just starting to bleed from a hole in his chest/arm/leg/knee is going to have a different effect on Bob.

Now if we had blowguns (something I think we should have for the stealthy types - nerve poisons, sleep effects etc) then Bob might think Fred is just swatting an annoying bug.

My feeling after a few more days of testing is that it there is still something wrong with the stealth part sheading the agro and something wrong with the range hit and how the rest of the dungeon is alerted - Higher the mob density of a dungeon like many of the newer ones where the mobs are stacked in groups 20 feet apart seems to keep that alert happening so far that it alerts groups that are outside the "Rubberband" range. However, I have noticed in quests where mobs don't spawn until a trigger occurs does not seem to be effected by this cascading agro until their trigger occurs. Example is Tide Turns first room. Mobs near the door you go through to start your sewer run did not get alerted until I got close to the door when they spawned.

[nokowi]

The aggro system was absolutely, definitively not working as intended for a looonnnnggg time. DDO was not supposed to have less complexity than playing Whack-a-Mole via archery or assassination.

This is a FIX. One that was implemented with poor scaling/balancing. But it was a FIX.

AND, they didn't completely break it. They restored it back to working order as intended, but with unbalanced scaling. The hyperbole doesn't 'persuade' them more 'persuasively'. Accurate descriptions of what's happening help them target their fixes and waste less of their time.

In U23, everything worked as intended for stealth and agro.

If you went to the mechanic to get something fixed, and the car came back with 5 new problems, would you say the mechanic fixed your car? Would you pay the mechanic?

The answer is no.

You can argue they fixed one thing (IF you think a system that massively favors AoE builds and no-threat tactics like perch points is a fix), but you can't argue that they fixed more than they broke.

Restored back to working order would be U23.

[nokowi]

Well, breath a deep sigh of relief then! You won't have to hear anything else from me about it. I'll excuse myself from the thread, further testing, and further feedback on the issue in any general forum threads and from communicating the feedback from the general forum threads into the players council discussion threads.

My "credibility"? "some other PC members" as if it matters. Am I a hive-mind with the other random people in a FOCUS GROUP? Is SSG paying me in some manner that I'm unaware of? Exactly how is my participation in a FOCUS GROUP relevant to anything I've said?

I'm not some elected political figure of DDO jockeying for legitimacy in the 'public eye'. The extent to which I couldn't care less about the perceptions of my "credibility" in the hallowed halls of internet gaming message boards cannot be understated. I'm just some person out there in the world who tested some aspects of the functioning of a change to a COMPUTER GAME and attempted to communicate the results into a mostly confused, vague, histrionic, 15+ page thread filled with about 95% squabbling and 5% details.

You reminded me that it's not worth the time and energy to interact on the general forums though. So...

Thanks.

I'll recommend you for the next player's council based on your exemplary 'credibility'.

We should be worried that you are strong supporter on the forums of things many players dislike, to the extent that they say the current implementation is broken. Players would be crying about nerfs (and not things being broken) if it was simply an issue of switching to a new ability or adjusting.

This is coming from someone who was on the 2015 PC.

I don't blame you for causing this mess, but your support of it is troubling.

[nokowi]

They restored it back to working order as intended, but with unbalanced scaling.

Shiv not working is not a unbalanced scaling issue.
"The hand of god" agro state is not a unbalanced scaling issue.

These are bugs, things that are broken.

[blerkington]

Well, breath a deep sigh of relief then! You won't have to hear anything else from me about it. I'll excuse myself from the thread, further testing, and further feedback on the issue in any general forum threads and from communicating the feedback from the general forum threads into the players council discussion threads.

My "credibility"? "some other PC members" as if it matters. Am I a hive-mind with the other random people in a FOCUS GROUP? Is SSG paying me in some manner that I'm unaware of? Exactly how is my participation in a FOCUS GROUP relevant to anything I've said?

I'm not some elected political figure of DDO jockeying for legitimacy in the 'public eye'. The extent to which I couldn't care less about the perceptions of my "credibility" in the hallowed halls of internet gaming message boards cannot be understated. I'm just some person out there in the world who tested some aspects of the functioning of a change to a COMPUTER GAME and attempted to communicate the results into a mostly confused, vague, histrionic, 15+ page thread filled with about 95% squabbling and 5% details.

You reminded me that it's not worth the time and energy to interact on the general forums though. So...

Thanks.

I'll recommend you for the next player's council based on your exemplary 'credibility'.

You might have missed this, but in a post shortly before our last exchange I also said I thought that you were making a good contribution to the thread (about your post at 284 and in mine at 288).

My problem with some of your posts after that is that they move from a useful analysis of the situation to what appears to be a highly speculative attempt to excuse it. One of these approaches is far more useful than the other.

While I'm sure you are a person who is not being induced by SSG to shill for them, we've seen other PC members do this voluntarily and I for one find it quite nauseating. The last thing the game needs right now is community members running interference for the developers by excusing their poor work practices; it's just another barrier to honest self assessment and improvement in the long run. The first step is admitting there's a problem ...

For what it's worth, I do think you have something to offer this discussion. But I think that would be best done if you stuck to the topic rather attempting to justify the mess we have now and present it as an improvement in its current form.

It's unfortunate that my expressing this opinion has made you take your ball and go home. But if mild criticism of your behaviour by someone who may very well be just another opinionated idiot is enough to make you do that, then maybe these discussions are not for you anyway.

As for the PC recommendation, I've said it before: I'd rather stick a fork into my eye.

Thanks.

[Renvar]

They took a working system and completely broke it.

No. They took a broken system and attempted to fix it. The fix, however, created other problems. The issue is not that they broke a working system. The issue is that the fix they attempted was not properly vetted. There needed to be more testing, maybe even on Lama, so that the issues we are dealing with now could be identified and addressed.

Given that we have the changes now in production, the best course would be for the correct AI/aggro mechanics to be identified, the non-WAI ones to be identified, and a fix to be implemented. Preferably, with testing to ensure that things are working properly.

Asking for a roll back is pointless. It moves us no closer to a solution. We went from broken A to broken B. going back to broken A is a waste of time. Let's get to correct C.

[Aelonwy]

It seems as though in some quests at least, (those with few or no walls, and those with rice paper walls - that mobs can see and hear through easily), this new aggro mechanic could be massively abused with the right group or individual. Basically, gather massive aggro, CC+AOE everything to death, then strut smugly to any chests desired picking off stragglers as necessary. Might be a PITA on quests with respawns. Could be fun for awhile, might get boring though. How many quests are like this?

Quests that are supposed to have possible stealth solutions seem to be a bit FUBAR, like Blockade Buster. Protection quests probably got hairier too. Anyone tried Claw of Vulkoor recently?

Does anyone remember if the wildmen miners in Slavers of the Shrieking Mines are hurt by the sonic traps? Its been awhile since I've run the quest and I'd like to know what I might be getting myself in for before I head into that confusing wilderness zone.

[nokowi]

No. They took a broken system and attempted to fix it. The fix, however, created other problems. The issue is not that they broke a working system. The issue is that the fix they attempted was not properly vetted. There needed to be more testing, maybe even on Lama, so that the issues we are dealing with now could be identified and addressed.

Given that we have the changes now in production, the best course would be for the correct AI/aggro mechanics to be identified, the non-WAI ones to be identified, and a fix to be implemented. Preferably, with testing to ensure that things are working properly.

Asking for a roll back is pointless. It moves us no closer to a solution. We went from broken A to broken B. going back to broken A is a waste of time. Let's get to correct C.

They reinstalled U22. They did not attempt to fix anything prior to doing so (evidence: same issues as U22).

I don't mind if they fix U34.2.

You have no knowledge that they are going to fix U34.2 (they had 12 updates to do so), or that doing so is easier than rolling back to a system that didn't break certain builds.

What we do know is that more is broken in U34.2 than before, and that devs have a long history of never fixing things that are broken. I listed the broken things earlier. Feel free to respond to them one-by-one if you disagree.

If it's going to take 9 months to fix, it certainly is appropriate to ask for a rollback for those negatively affected. It's not pointless to give those players affected 9 months of gameplay they enjoy.

I prefer a rollback now, with the U34.2 fix you suggest WHEN IT IS ACTUALLY FIXED. Even if this is two weeks worth of time (a record fix for DDO), it is not pointless to give players an enjoyable experience. It's what you should strive for when creating/managing a game.

You can't tell me my preference is wrong, and you can't support your own position with any facts, because you don't have them.

[Ellihor]

Asking for a roll back is pointless. It moves us no closer to a solution. We went from broken A to broken B. going back to broken A is a waste of time. Let's get to correct C.

No, it's not pointless: it is the logical course of action. We were closer to a solution before the last patch than we are now. Broekn B is more broken than broken A (and the way it's broken now creates problems for players, the way it used to be did not do that). They just had to fix the issue: mobs were not being activated if you attacked their allies standing next to them.

Probably they used a sound system for that. Instead of fixing, they added a mechanic that spreads the aggro fully, including for alert purposes. It is easier to fix the situation by rolling back this mechanic and simply fixing the bug. Actually, it may be the only solution, unless they want to add a whole new code for the aggro (that is probably going to be broken or break something totally unrelated) and I don't see why doing this would make sense.

[Enoach]

No, it's not pointless: it is the logical course of action. We were closer to a solution before the last patch than we are now. Broekn B is more broken than broken A (and the way it's broken now creates problems for players, the way it used to be did not do that). They just had to fix the issue: mobs were not being activated if you attacked their allies standing next to them.

Probably they used a sound system for that. Instead of fixing, they added a mechanic that spreads the aggro fully, including for alert purposes. It is easier to fix the situation by rolling back this mechanic and simply fixing the bug. Actually, it may be the only solution, unless they want to add a whole new code for the aggro (that is probably going to be broken or break something totally unrelated) and I don't see why doing this would make sense.

I agree it is not pointless, but I disagree that the "Whole" is more broken then it was before.

Based on what I read and understood they tried to do two things.

1) Remove the ability to shoot someone from far away and only get that mob to react
2) Modify Bluff so that a Failed bluff has a negative effect on pulling agro (In the past a failed attempt did nothing, much like open locks you could just continue to try)

Now if they simply the range damage part only pulling one in theory it would have been no different then if a melee type snuck in and popped out of stealth and said "Hi" with their weapon. But we didn't get that. What we got was a call to arms that expands very far within the dungeon - not as far as some try to make it out, but much further then it should.

What this tells me is that it is very possible it was not the ranged part of the agro change that caused what we are seeing. It is very likely it is the change on a failed bluff.

So if that is the case then this last change did fix the range agro part. But in doing so it is effected by the change to bluff.

While I understand that a rollback seems to be a quick solutions, but it may not be the best solution. Which appears to me to be to fix the issue that is causing the cascading agro to occur. Right now a rollback would potentially lose the good things that occurred like GS Handwraps. If you think dealing with the agro issue on the forums is vocal, imagine dealing with the issue of taking away items.

[Aelonwy]

Seems I didn't remember Slavers of the Shrieking Mines well at all. Just for everyone's information, there was absolutely zero issue with that quest and the new aggro mechanic. I had forgotten that the wildmen miners don't aggro unless you approach them within a certain proximity. They are almost animated background objects until they are activated.

Shooting mobs from sneak, or long distance did not attract everyone in either Slavers or Ghola-Fan. In fact, unlike Reclamation, I didn't notice any difference in the aggro whatsoever. This was while playing my 2arty/10 mechanic.