Holding aggro

Z

Zarimus

Dalayan Beginner
The tactic of using a defensive tank to absorb attacks is an interesting game mechanic. Obviously you don't want all encounters to be simply a single warrior holding all aggro while everyone else unloads on the mob, but anything less is seen as a failure by the MT and a cause of group wipeouts.

It would be nice if there were some indications from the mob that they were considering breaking aggro and going to pound on some squishy caster, so the MT could try and taunt to get it's attention and any other tanks could get ready to react. You could have suspense build and frantic adjustments to what the group was doing without actually having the mob turn and rip the enchanter's lungs out.

Something as simple as "[creature's name] howls in anger at [character]" (or glares at, or hisses at, whatever) giving you a clue that after a short delay period they're going to switch targets. Said character can then either lay off the nukes, fire off a divine barrier, evade, jolt or whatever while the MT tries to taunt the attention back.
 
That kinda makes it...very very easy. It completely removes any skill involved in aggro management.
 
Depends how easy you make it to drag aggro back to the tank I suppose. The current game mechanic is:

a) someone gets on top of the hate list other than the tank
b) mob attacks new target
c) tank hits taunt repeatedly
s) target does whatever they can to stop generating hate
e) eventually taunt succeeds, mob dies or target dies

Player skill revolves around not generating more hate than the main tank and the main tank reacting fast enough to taunt the mob back onto them.

I'd like to see something more active for the main tank to do, which involves being told they are losing aggro and having some options for regaining it - and by that I don't just mean an early warning that they have to hit their taunt button. They would have to have a couple of other abilities that were situational. Maybe they take a voluntary lowering of AC to tempt the mob to hit them, maybe they do a short burst of furious damage. Maybe they threaten the mob so that it understands that turning its back on them will immediately result in a critical hit. All of those could be done with stances perhaps.

Similarly others who are not the main tank could react, maybe the wizard fires off a massive nuke to distract the critter from the cleric, maybe the rogue needs to choose that moment to threaten backstab with a stance (I dunno, look dangerous?), maybe the group can keep juggling the mob's aggro without ever falling below the delay factor that would cause it to stop hitting the MT.

Example:

Cleric does a heal
Mob growls at cleric, group has 5 seconds to regain or shift aggro
Tank taunts, nobody has any idea if it succeeds or not
Wizard panics, fires big nuke
Mob growls at wizard, group has 5 seconds to regain or shift aggro (tank still being hit)
Tank shifts to "come on, hit me ya loser!" style with lower AC but more hate generation (stamina being used)
Five seconds passes, everyone holds their breath, mob continues beating on tank
Tank shuts off style, considerably banged up

Or something like that. I just like the idea of being proactive rather than reactive. There's obviously some fine tuning needed to the idea so it isn't completely safe for everyone (i.e. ping-ponging delayed aggro between two wizards while the tank takes all the attacks).
 
It would require the combat system to be completely redesigned for this to be viable and not turn into a handholding feature.
 
Lets look at this reasonably, by simulating a real life example...

You are in a fight with 12 people (and Bruce Lee enough to handle 12 at once) and you are focusing on this one guy because he is the biggest and toughest (main tank) and you want to get him out fo the way first. All of a sudden this other guy pulls out a gun (big ass wizzy nuke/cleric CH) and you realize he is, at least atm, the most dangerous. How do you react?

(A) Growl at him to let him know you are angry that he has a gun (you havent learned to dodge bullets yet), then wait 5 seconds before attacking him.

(B) Ignore the big guy completely, since he is less of a problem than the gun. Switch your attention to the guy wiht the gun, break his knees, arms, and neck, then return your attention to the big guy.

If you chose answer (B), congratulations, you get a gold star!

Although it would make it easier in a group, it would be obscene for a mob to give a warning before changing targets. You pissed off the mob, expect to get hit. The only warning that you should get is seeing the mob move towards you before the "loading, please wait" message comes up.

A good tank will be waiting to hit that taunt button the instant the mob moves.
 
The best thing I can suggest in being proactive is trying your best to manage aggro. I know warrior's lack in terms of ways to quickly gain aggro (as taunt isn't perfect, nor should it be) - and based on this thread, some things are being looked at in terms of assisting with warrior aggro already.

And there are already stances that assist in increasing damage output.

Side Note, you can always try finding ways to work with it. Such as letting someone else build aggro and then let the warrior taunt off to move to the top of the list - course if taunt fails you need a backup plan :D
 
Isn't what you're asking for basically warning before losing aggro? It would be the exact same dynamic as now, only minus the challenge. As a tank you should already be going into aggro-generation mode if a mob is being burned down or if fast heals are flying. Your suggestion just A) removes the uncertainty factor; and B) creates the opportunity for abuse. It's the same thing as early sit aggro. Have two wizards take turns nuking. First one gets the growl, second one gets the growl, first one, second one, etc. The mob never goes anywhere, as long as it picks a new target within 5 seconds. It'll just sit on the tank until it's been burned to the ground.

Plus, what about having a puller other than the tank? That's 5 seconds of beating on your ranger before moving off.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top Bottom