Game Mechanics: Pulling while Invisible

[Nirgon]

http://www.afterlifeguild.org/Thott/bard_pulling.php

Nothing mentioned by Thott (who I'd say is a true EQ guru) regarding anything about invis pulling. He would certainly have known of it or mentioned it..?

[Daliant17447]

Wheres the thread about bards being able to cruise around VP at sow speed with rogue hide? Or are Nirgon/Treats not on to that one yet?

Good luck finding the patch notes about when this cool bard/ranger/halfling feature was added.
CLASSIC UNTIL PROVEN OTHERWISE [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Dullah]

Don't know if we'll ever find evidence one way or the other, but I don't remember it working like this on live. If you casted invis, it would only prevent you from agroing more mobs, not from preventing the agro'd mob from socialing. They didn't need to see you to assist.

[Daliant17447]

When an un-engaged mob encountered an engaged mob, the un-engaged mob would do 2 checks.

First, the un-engaged mob would check the engaged mob's faction, if the un-engaged mob was on the same faction or "buddies" with the engaged mob, it would social agro (regardless of whether or not it could see the engaged mob's target).

*If* the un-engaged mob wasn't on the same faction of the engaged mob, it would do a second faction check but this time on the engaged mob's target. If the engaged mob's target was KoS (scowling or threatening), the un-engaged mob would social agro. If the engaged mob's target was non-KoS (from invis or otherwise) the un-engaged mob would not social agro.

This means, using invis to pull mobs through other mobs without agroing them was possible, but only in situations where the mobs were on seperate factions. Mobs on the same faction would always assist each other even if a player was invis and the mobs couldn't see invis.

If you were "ally" in a city and you rooted a guard, your faction or "consider value" with that guard would change to "threateningly". Now if you ran through the city all the other guards would still consider you "ally". However, when your root wore off and the guard ran through the city, every guard he passed would social agro and also switch to "threateningly". In this example being invis wouldn't have changed the fact the guards will assist the other guard based on being "aligned" with that guard. This type of social agro is based off the mob, not the player, therefore being invis or not invis makes no difference.

An example where mobs would not social agro: A shadowknight snares the evil eye, then clicks circlet of shadows. He runs to a safe spot in the zone passing many frogs along the way but none of them see invis. As the evil eye passes each frog, the frog does the faction checks: 1) the frog is not on the same faction as the evil eye = no social agro = move to check two. 2) The target of the eye (The SK) is indifferent (due to invis) = no social agro.

Lets say the SK's invis wears off, now when the evil eye passes a frog, the frog does the faction checks: 1) the frog is not on the same faction as the evil eye = no social agro = move to check two. 2) The target of the evil eye (The SK) is now scowling (due to invis fading) = social agro.


Does this sound right to you guys? Cuz thats how I remember it. Being able to single pull a mob out of a group of mobs by having someone land an invis on you while you cast a spell is definitely not classic. Generally speaking when there is a group of mobs, they are all on the same faction and thus will social agro with each other. I'm about 95% sure this is how social agro worked, and yes I realize that means absolutely dick without evidence to support it.

[Daliant17447]

Oh, and since I don't really play here any more I guess I'll elaborate about the previous bug I mentioned. Sorry to anyone who is currently enjoying this bug. [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Currently, any class or race that can both hide and sneak (bards, rangers, halflings) can move around while retaining the effects of hide.

To do this you simply:
1) Invis yourself
2) Hide successfully
3) Sneak successfully

When you move, you will recieve the "you have moved and are no longer hidden" message but the effects of hide will remain until either your invis wears off or you break sneak. Because you are already invisible, you can't test your hide on yourself. The only way to tell if your hide was successful is to con a mob that would normally see through invis.

Working as intended? I for one don't recall bards being able to stack selo's song of travel with rogue stealth but unfortunately I can't find any patch notes to support this wild claim! [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[Xadion]

Originally Posted by Daliant17447 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

When an un-engaged mob encountered an engaged mob, the un-engaged mob would do 2 checks.

First, the un-engaged mob would check the engaged mob's faction, if the un-engaged mob was on the same faction or "buddies" with the engaged mob, it would social agro (regardless of whether or not it could see the engaged mob's target).

*If* the un-engaged mob wasn't on the same faction of the engaged mob, it would do a second faction check but this time on the engaged mob's target. If the engaged mob's target was KoS (scowling or threatening), the un-engaged mob would social agro. If the engaged mob's target was non-KoS (from invis or otherwise) the un-engaged mob would not social agro.

This means, using invis to pull mobs through other mobs without agroing them was possible, but only in situations where the mobs were on seperate factions. Mobs on the same faction would always assist each other even if a player was invis and the mobs couldn't see invis.

If you were "ally" in a city and you rooted a guard, your faction or "consider value" with that guard would change to "threateningly". Now if you ran through the city all the other guards would still consider you "ally". However, when your root wore off and the guard ran through the city, every guard he passed would social agro and also switch to "threateningly". In this example being invis wouldn't have changed the fact the guards will assist the other guard based on being "aligned" with that guard. This type of social agro is based off the mob, not the player, therefore being invis or not invis makes no difference.

An example where mobs would not social agro: A shadowknight snares the evil eye, then clicks circlet of shadows. He runs to a safe spot in the zone passing many frogs along the way but none of them see invis. As the evil eye passes each frog, the frog does the faction checks: 1) the frog is not on the same faction as the evil eye = no social agro = move to check two. 2) The target of the eye (The SK) is indifferent (due to invis) = no social agro.

Lets say the SK's invis wears off, now when the evil eye passes a frog, the frog does the faction checks: 1) the frog is not on the same faction as the evil eye = no social agro = move to check two. 2) The target of the evil eye (The SK) is now scowling (due to invis fading) = social agro.


Does this sound right to you guys? Cuz thats how I remember it. Being able to single pull a mob out of a group of mobs by having someone land an invis on you while you cast a spell is definitely not classic. Generally speaking when there is a group of mobs, they are all on the same faction and thus will social agro with each other. I'm about 95% sure this is how social agro worked, and yes I realize that means absolutely dick without evidence to support it.

I heart dalliant but this is not how it always was. There was a patch that effectively added the 2nd (or first on your explanation) check, I have not had time to look for it in depth but I may once I get back to work.

[Nizzarr]

Originally Posted by Rellapse5 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

on Eqmac i am ally to chardok i cannot invis pull singles, they all social

case closed. Fix this shit asap.

[Nirgon]

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

case closed. Fix this shit asap.

Verified on EQ Mac.

Nirgon and Nizzar agree (I really have no reason to agree with him on anything, yet here I am).

This is an essential fix to keep things fun and challenging. I would have thought this was an obvious fix as well. "Oh hey! People are using invis to single pull, how'd that get in there?"

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

I'll have to admit what is going on here with invisi pulling the whole zone is just as bad as the "perma pac" bug on EQmac. Sucks the fun straight out of the game.

Another one of my least faves but he's right!

[Daliant17447]

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

case closed. Fix this shit asap.

+1 Fix this obviously broken mechanic. Its sad that people are defending this shit in the name of easy pixels.

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

sorry peeps but "on EQ Mac" does not = "how it should be on p99"

You're right. "How it was in 1999-2001" = "how it should be on p99". In this case, "How it was in 1999-2001" = "how it is now on EQ Mac".

It is plain as day that the people claiming "invis pulling worked on all mobs as long as there were no see-invis" are only making this claim to protect their current methods of farming pixels, and its pathetic.
Also, hide and sneak should not 100% clear FD memory, it has never worked that way in EQ.

[CrystalBlue]

Originally Posted by Rellapse5 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

on Eqmac i am ally to chardok i cannot invis pull singles, they all social

I'll have to admit what is going on here with invisi pulling the whole zone is just as bad as the "perma pac" bug on EQmac. Sucks the fun straight out of the game.