Warrior Aggro

[Enderenter]

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

What are they supposed to fix? Warrior aggro is supposed to suck. It sucked on live at the time, and it sucks equally here. There's not some missing aggro amplifier inherent in the warrior's auto-attack that the devs here forgot to switch on. A warrior's basic aggro is directly proportional to his damage output, and since this typically won't be extremely high, it takes proccing weapons to hold aggro with any kind of consistency. People just have to accept that if their group's tank is a warrior without proc weapons, they can't do their full DPS or debuff on incoming. It's working as intended, even though it sucks.

Not true - warrior aggro is worse on here than on live. Proc weapons were not a requirement for warriors on live to hold aggro, hence Lammy and Jade Mace being expensive, highly sought after weapons. You could hold aggro with two of either, or one of each. On here, that's unlikely even at lower levels.

It's just different on here. Pick up good proc weapons and you will do fine.

[greatdane]

No you couldn't. Lammy and JM were not tank weapons. You could hold aggro with them if you out-aggroed the other group members through damage output, which would be the case if your group was worse geared than you, but there was no mechanic that made warriors generate more threat than others.

A warrior, a rogue, a ranger and a monk walk into a bar. If they do the same amount of damage, they generate the same amount of threat, assuming that they don't lose or generate any from other sources (snare, procs, feign). If anyone deals more damage than the others, they generate more threat unless others have procs or use spells that generate even more threat. Since warriors aren't particularly great DPS (about on par with a ranger that isn't OOM), and will never outdamage a rogue or monk assuming equivalent gear levels, the warrior will not hold aggro from them by default. It's even harder against casters who generate huge, uncontrollable chunks of threat in one go.

Now, I can't say whether there's some mysterious bug that makes a warrior's melee damage generate less threat than that of other classes. If that's the case, sure, there's a problem. I doubt it is, and any issues with warrior aggro are likely related to other things such as some classes doing too much damage, or threat reduction abilities not working properly. You could never hold aggro reliably with a Lammy unless the rogue was using an even lower-end weapon or your casters waited an exceedingly long time before casting.

[azeth]

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

No you couldn't. Lammy and JM were not tank weapons. You could hold aggro with them if you out-aggroed the other group members through damage output, which would be the case if your group was worse geared than you, but there was no mechanic that made warriors generate more threat than others.

A warrior, a rogue, a ranger and a monk walk into a bar. If they do the same amount of damage, they generate the same amount of threat, assuming that they don't lose or generate any from other sources (snare, procs, feign). If anyone deals more damage than the others, they generate more threat unless others have procs or use spells that generate even more threat. Since warriors aren't particularly great DPS (about on par with a ranger that isn't OOM), and will never outdamage a rogue or monk assuming equivalent gear levels, the warrior will not hold aggro from them by default. It's even harder against casters who generate huge, uncontrollable chunks of threat in one go.

Now, I can't say whether there's some mysterious bug that makes a warrior's melee damage generate less threat than that of other classes. If that's the case, sure, there's a problem. I doubt it is, and any issues with warrior aggro are likely related to other things such as some classes doing too much damage, or threat reduction abilities not working properly. You could never hold aggro reliably with a Lammy unless the rogue was using a Dragoon Dirk or something.

i think you're forgetting the point of the lammy in the day was to affect your offhand swing. this doesn't fly on p99 since main & off swing indepedently here, but im sure you remember folks on live with Wurm in the offhand + lammy main for that reason.

Lammy's delay allowed the warrior to hold aggro as long as their offhand choice was high dmg or procd. nothing is different on p99 aside from duel wield mechanics.

[greatdane]

It dismays me that people still harbor such misconceptions. Your main and off-hand swings were always independent, and the belief that a fast main-hand weapon reduced the delay of your off-hand is a silly myth. It never worked that way, people just thought it did. They also thought harmony gave mana regen and leaving a camp made it respawn faster.

[Ronas]

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

It dismays me that people still harbor such misconceptions. Your main and off-hand swings were always independent, and the belief that a fast main-hand weapon reduced the delay of your off-hand is a silly myth. It never worked that way, people just thought it did. They also thought harmony gave mana regen and leaving a camp made it respawn faster.

Have a read
http://www.project1999.org/forums/sh...ad.php?t=39361