Question about taunt in SoD

Kelval

Dalayan Adventurer
Hello,

I have been wondering if taunt works the exact same way in SoD as it does on Live: it used to put you on top of aggro list +1. So if you are at 300 aggro and the first on the list is at 350, a successfull taunt would put you at 351.
How does it work in SoD?
 
Yeah, if you can get it to actually land. My exp is that taunt hits maybe 15-20% of the time, even with 250 skill.
 
Does the chance to taunt differ by how much hate is on a mob? Like 100 hate, easy for taunt to succeed, 100,000 hate very difficult?
 
Not as far as I know. Taunt either hits or doesn't. The exception being warrior AA ae taunt. It never fails.
 
I dont know if it is even possible but I always would have liked to see a fail/suceed message on taunt when I played Live. Can you add things like that to abilities in SoD? Or is it beyond the capability of the code?
 
From my experience playing several highly-geared warriors on this server, it seems that taunt has very little aggro generation versus the cmal gloves/wailfury/shortblade of chaos/patriarch.

I remember on live that when taunt would land it would be massive aggro, and it had a success message. The way that taunt seems to work here is that if the mob is on someone other than you, and you land a successful taunt, the mob will come off, but only if the taunt is successful. Perhaps a tweak is in order?
 
Draxx said:
From my experience playing several highly-geared warriors on this server, it seems that taunt has very little aggro generation versus the cmal gloves/wailfury/shortblade of chaos/patriarch.

I remember on live that when taunt would land it would be massive aggro, and it had a success message. The way that taunt seems to work here is that if the mob is on someone other than you, and you land a successful taunt, the mob will come off, but only if the taunt is successful. Perhaps a tweak is in order?
On Live, there is a taunt success/fail msg. The diff is that on Live it had a decent success ratio. I never parsed it, but it seemed like it had maybe a 1/3 chance or so once you maxed skill. When I said 15-20% success rate on SoD, I was being extremely generous.

And taunt does not or at least should not generate any aggro if you are already #1. In fact, a successful taunt if you are already #1 on the hate list should cause you to LOSE hate. You have 5000 hate, the 2nd person has 4500, a successful taunt should drop you to 4501. The lesson to be learned is DON'T SPAM THE TAUNT BUTAN. Save it for use when you actually lose aggro. Only AE taunt has an innate hate factor over +1.
 
Oh they must have added the success message after we left because I dont ever remember my warrior having a success/fail message.
So you will actually lose hate by repeatedly taunting if you are #1? That is news to me.
 
Drakun said:
Oh they must have added the success message after we left because I dont ever remember my warrior having a success/fail message.
So you will actually lose hate by repeatedly taunting if you are #1? That is news to me.

Not exactly. You may loose hate by doing so.
If another player is toe to toe with you, spamming the button is the best way to go; unless either the guy actually knows how to play and calms down on aggro, either you feel like explaining him (wich usually end with said player telling you to f*** off...). On raids or good groups, it's different since players *should* know how to play.
If you see that you are staying ahead np, the next taunt will most likely bring you down on the list.
 
Which in turn could cause disaster when the next heal lands on me because it could bring the healer's hate well above mine. I understand :)
 
Garluk said:
Yeah, if you can get it to actually land. My exp is that taunt hits maybe 15-20% of the time, even with 250 skill.

This may be true for ranger taunt, but warrior taunt is much more reliable, no?
 
All forms of taunt are pretty unreliable. Hybrid taunt is much less effective than warrior taunt, due to the caps being different (200 vs 250), but Warrior taunt still isn't nearly 50% success rate.
 
That is one thing that always pissed me off about live. As a lvl 66 warrior with maxed out taunt why should I fail over half the time. Too bad this isnt something we can fix in SoD.
 
oh yes, I did miss that. Pardon.

I'm going to go out on a limb here and say. . . SoD devs/admins probably CAN "fix" this, but they may not see a problem that needs fixing, here.
 
Is there any way we can add this somewhere more visible? This topic came up today during an adept raid where we wiped twice, partly because of aggro management issues.

It just seems pretty counter-intuitive that multiple skill successes using a skill will not make you do that skill BETTER, and in fact can actually cause you to lose hate / aggro much more easily. If this is actually how it is, I think putting this somewhere where people are more likely to read / learn how it actually works would be great so more tanks learn how to use it right. None of the tanks I grouped with tonight knew about this, after wiping twice one of the casters mentioned reading about taunt stuff in this thread... and well here we are.

I'd actually like to make it so multiple successes at taunt actually keep upping your aggro and spamming taunt would be a good thing (like a set +50 hate per success or something, for example). That's at least the way I've always used it before reading this thread. Someone in the group made a great point, I think. If you only want the Main Tank to have aggro (as a main tank should), with the way this skill is working the main tank will be the only one using taunt (and only when they lose aggro, to get the aggro back). This means that skilling taunt up (increasing your taunt skill) will be very hard for anyone who is never a main tank, unless they do a lot of soloing or something, because they should never be trying to grab the aggro off the MT. If it was more a static aggro increase or something per success though, this wouldn't be a problem.

Meh, I realize changing how taunt works will probably never happen, but I'd REALLY like to see the explanation more widely known somehow...
 
Back
Top Bottom