Project 1999

Go Back   Project 1999 > Class Discussions > Tanks

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #1  
Old 11-03-2022, 12:36 AM
Snaggles Snaggles is offline
Planar Protector


Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 3,528
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Soothsayer [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Not to interrupt a lively forum war, but how does narandi’s lance compare with frostreaver for threat? Both weapons have virtually identical ratios and the lance has a DoT effect, which apparently is worth a fair bit of hate.
Magic based dots are almost no hate, and none upfront. They land easy tho so you’re mainly picking up 6dps while it’s rolling and the hate that causes.

The Frostreaver has a stun component so even if it doesn’t land at all you get about 400 hate. 2ppm average would be over double the Narandi dot per minute even if it landed in the first swing.

Stuns (any duration), slows, blinds, ac debuffs, poison/disease counters are all normalized on blue to about 400 we seem to think. If the effect also lands damage initially or over time it’s extra hate.
Reply With Quote
  #2  
Old 11-03-2022, 12:50 AM
Soothsayer Soothsayer is offline
Sarnak

Soothsayer's Avatar

Join Date: Dec 2016
Posts: 263
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Snaggles [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Magic based dots are almost no hate, and none upfront. They land easy tho so you’re mainly picking up 6dps while it’s rolling and the hate that causes.

The Frostreaver has a stun component so even if it doesn’t land at all you get about 400 hate. 2ppm average would be over double the Narandi dot per minute even if it landed in the first swing.

Stuns (any duration), slows, blinds, ac debuffs, poison/disease counters are all normalized on blue to about 400 we seem to think. If the effect also lands damage initially or over time it’s extra hate.
I see… it’s quite bizarre that a low damage poison effect causes significantly more threat than a magic DoT that’s much more damaging, but anyhoo. Not much of a point complaining about game design decisions that were made decades ago, I guess. :/
Reply With Quote
  #3  
Old 11-07-2022, 01:13 PM
bobjonesp99 bobjonesp99 is offline
Sarnak


Join Date: Apr 2021
Posts: 226
Default

well threat generation worked differently previously but regardless i think the line of thinking is that debuffing a mob is considered by the mob to be a fairly threatening attack.

the problems with narandi lance is... many. first of all its piercing, which has a lower skill cap than slashing. as discussed previously, generally 2h weapons also have less white damage threat than comparable 1h weapons and less procs per minutes (2 procs per minute at 255 dex compared to 2 procs per minute for primary and 1 proc per minute for secondary). the ratio is ok, but unlike frostreaver it doesnt have the stun component to generate additional threat on each proc. its not that magic DoTs are inherently bad threat (in fact, the lance proc is a -100 fire check) but its bad for a few reasons.

general procs threat generation is DD + DOT + spell. the spell portion is capped at 400 and many of the effects (AC debuffs, slows, etc) will hit that cap. afaik, resisted procs generate full threat (i.e. the same amount as it would if it landed). so if frostreaver procs its getting 125 + 0 + 400 = 525, whether it gets resisted or not. on the other hand, when narandi lance procs it potentially getting 0 + 36*18 + 0 = 648... but that will only happen on a resist. since its a -100 fire check, it has a decent chance to land, and when it lands its only 36 threat per 6 seconds... and if you proc again, you get no benefit because the original DOT is still rolling and it doesnt stack.
Reply With Quote
  #4  
Old 11-07-2022, 11:36 PM
Jimjam Jimjam is offline
Planar Protector


Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 12,790
Default

At this point in the timeline shouldn’t dot aggro be frontloaded?
Reply With Quote
  #5  
Old 11-08-2022, 12:03 PM
bobjonesp99 bobjonesp99 is offline
Sarnak


Join Date: Apr 2021
Posts: 226
Default

its possible, but i'm not certain. could probably test by having someone melee a few rounds and then casting a low level dot (with no spell component.... disease cloud has poison counters for example) and seeing if it pull threat when it lands.
Reply With Quote
  #6  
Old 11-09-2022, 10:21 AM
mycoolrausch mycoolrausch is offline
Kobold


Join Date: Nov 2014
Posts: 171
Default

dot aggro only happens per damage tick, if resisted it's no aggro at all or very little

the warrior weapon design in velious being based around piercers, dots, poor ratios, and hate capped spells, is atrocious and immediately fixed in the next expansion never coming to this server. enjoy.
Reply With Quote
  #7  
Old 11-09-2022, 11:31 AM
Snaggles Snaggles is offline
Planar Protector


Join Date: Jul 2011
Posts: 3,528
Default

Spell aggro is only limited if you can’t cast the spell. Spells with certain components are extremely high in threat. Tash sticks for example for a melee vs the spell cast by an enchanter.

Dot damage aggro isn’t front-loaded. If it was spells like ignite blood and Splurt would act like 1-2k DD’s. They certainly do not.

The limited threat per proc spell effect (ie not having poison counters be cumulative) is annoying but the WESS was never intended to create twice the proc aggro of the red blade. Likewise it’s a truly stupid spell effect. Now it creates the proc aggro of a stun, slow, frostbringer, or ykesha which have some purpose to them. So you can actually pick a weapon that does good damage and has a functional proc, vs being a gimmick.
Reply With Quote
Reply


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 05:08 PM.


Everquest is a registered trademark of Daybreak Game Company LLC.
Project 1999 is not associated or affiliated in any way with Daybreak Game Company LLC.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.