Foelock idea.

J

Jaen

Dalayan Beginner
I was thinking some of foelock. Though I agree that gloves was way to easy for wars to maintain agro, I think possibly some things may have been overlooked when adding this new feature to Warriors. I believe there are some times when a Warrior may not want agro at all.

Eg: Warrior is duoing with a mage/bl. In the past a war could attack a mob that was on a pet and have the pet tank while its controler can heal it. This is no longer possible as the first hit from the war will taunt it off the pet and with nobody to heal said war he gets to sit out most of the fight to watch the mage/bl solo.

Eg2: Kiting mobs. A warrior used to be able to hit mobs from the back as they are chasing someone who is running away from the mob. Although this is still possible, it is greatly impacted by the change as the war must wait so long for the "kiter" to get suffecient agro he may as well not be there at all.

That said, I'm sure there are plenty of other reasons a war may not want agro. Perhaps a /cm foelock off command is in order?

~Jaen
 
Jaen said:
I was thinking some of foelock. Though I agree that gloves was way to easy for wars to maintain agro, I think possibly some things may have been overlooked when adding this new feature to Warriors. I believe there are some times when a Warrior may not want agro at all.

Eg: Warrior is duoing with a mage/bl. In the past a war could attack a mob that was on a pet and have the pet tank while its controler can heal it. This is no longer possible as the first hit from the war will taunt it off the pet and with nobody to heal said war he gets to sit out most of the fight to watch the mage/bl solo.

Eg2: Kiting mobs. A warrior used to be able to hit mobs from the back as they are chasing someone who is running away from the mob. Although this is still possible, it is greatly impacted by the change as the war must wait so long for the "kiter" to get suffecient agro he may as well not be there at all.

That said, I'm sure there are plenty of other reasons a war may not want agro. Perhaps a /cm foelock off command is in order?

~Jaen
Click to expand...

If whoever has the pet tells the pet to taunt attackers and the warrior doesn't jump in at 99% health, he'll be able to dps instead of tank. Sure he has to wait, but that's how things go when you have a less than ideal setup sometimes.

If they add a command to turn it off or on, that'd be cool, but it's still possible to do what you say without that command. It's just a little harder.
 
I presume it would be difficult to make this potential command last after logging off or even zoning (like the pet taunt stuff) ; it's a cool idea though, I'm all with you on that, but this change seems to affect the role itself of the warrior, I don't see how it could be bypassed without it.
Oh I just got the idea of the begging skilll !!! problem is every class has this skill, but maybe it could be capped at 1 for non-warriors ? I know this sounds stupid but it would make the foelock basically a triggered high aggro tauntwould be more practical than /cm foelock 1
 
Dzillon said:
I presume it would be difficult to make this potential command last after logging off or even zoning (like the pet taunt stuff) ; it's a cool idea though, I'm all with you on that, but this change seems to affect the role itself of the warrior, I don't see how it could be bypassed without it.
Oh I just got the idea of the begging skilll !!! problem is every class has this skill, but maybe it could be capped at 1 for non-warriors ? I know this sounds stupid but it would make the foelock basically a triggered high aggro tauntwould be more practical than /cm foelock 1
Click to expand...

It would be FAR better to have it reset when you logged, or even when you zoned; as a war you're going to want aggro most of the time, hence the reason for implementing foelock in the first place. Imagine what a dunce you would feel if you wiped your raid/group because you forgot to turn foelock back on.
 
Man my idea was bullshit don't even read

But yeah making foelock by default and just toggling with a command would seem fair
 
Yea, those were some completely ridiculous examples. I guess I could have just said wru /cm foelock off?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom