Enmity in general

[Kavik]

A while ago it was stated that the enmity adjustments that were implemented a while ago would be the 'first stage' of enmity adjustments. No further adjustments have been forthcoming. We still have problems with enmity. This was very apparent in the Ark Angel EV fight. The battle took a very long time and eventually the whm hit enmity cap. Mob ran over and hit him and then returned to me as the pld, i had not died or anything else. This really needs to be fixed. Honestly, as having both pld and whm i would not mind enmity being on one person the majority of the fight. Pld is supposed to keep hold of the mob and 'save' everyone else. We can do this, as long as it's in the short term. Mayhap make everyone's elses enmity decay faster? I don't know, just something to make it easier for pld's to hold hate regardless of how long the fight takes. Could apply the same to RUN I suppose. People still care about this stuff. I'd suggest giving pld the ability to actually do decent damage so that when we inevitably lose enmity we can still be useful as a source of damage, but it has been explicitly stated that 'it shall not be done'.

[Kavik]

Necro-Bumping this thread because Enmity has not been 'fixed'. Enmity cap is still enmity cap and pld still doesn't have a decent way to deal with it. Even with a 119 Burtgang AND lvl 3 aftermath it is still a hate bounce scenario.

[Dale]

I think Enmity is fine.

This game would be boring if all anyone had to do was bring a paladin and turn everything into a tank an spank dps race. Part of what makes this game more fun than other MMORPGs I have played is there is actually some strategy involved and other party members actually become targets.

I think the real problem with Paladins is our most effective job ability for protecting party members who generate a lot of enmity - cover - is horribly designed. Trying to use it is a pain in the @$$. It should be like on other Final Fantasy games where it causes the Paladin to automatically leap in front of the member you are trying to protect or at the very least transfer the damage directly. Because making it a positional ability requires too much hassle and just isn't realistic.

I also think paladin gear should have a lot more -spell interruption on it so it could play it's role as a heal/tank more effectively.

[Malthar]

Enmity is not fine. The paladin is abe to hold hate for a few seconds, at most, before the dd's cap hate with massive damage, then hate bounces around like a kid on coffee. Even with perfect gear the paladin cannot hold hate. It's ridiculous and needs to be fixed.

[Mefuki]

http://forum.square-enix.com/ffxi/threads/42502-Please-fix-the-broken-enmity-system%21%21%21%21%21?p=510611&viewfull=1#post510611


The problem isn't how much hate the pld can get since a good one will be capped too. The problem is even how dmg enmity is calculated. It's based mostly on dmg dealt and a little on mob level... the problem with this is the amount of dmg enmity you can accrue on a mob varies wildly with mob hp. So even if you balanced enmity around some nms so that DDs would hit the cap around when it died if you then fought something with twice as much hp DDs would cap at 50%.

Specifically to compare most nms in 75 era when the enmity was semi balanced had what 40-50k hp? Maybe 100k on a few. Even with 100k hp you were looking at 153k dmg CE at most. And that was only alliance sometimes multiple alliance content. So if you spread it out between the DDs and account for some loss from dmg or -enmity gear it's fairly easy to make sure people don't cap till it's almost dead at least in theory.

Now we have mobs with 2 mil hp and even with the higher level and changes in enmity there is almost around 900k dmg CE available... when CE cap per player is 10k... so yeah it's actually possible to cap hate on some nms now after doing only 1% dmg to it <.< Mind you this is post dmg enmity adjustment. Before that same mob would have had over double that.

So yeah my proposal is to get rid of the whole level based correction factor and use mob hp instead. Such that every mob regardless of hp you will get the same amount of CE from dealing enough dmg to kill it. Something around enough to cap say 6 players or so. Maybe more for nms that you can assume you'd bring more than a pt for.... or add something that figures in pt size.

[Byrth]

Seconded.


Also, I think triplets made this post:

I think Enmity is fine.

This game would be boring if all anyone had to do was bring a paladin and turn everything into a tank an spank dps race. Part of what makes this game more fun than other MMORPGs I have played is there is actually some strategy involved and other party members actually become targets.

So Dale A thinks the Enmity system is okay and he enjoys not being able to use melee DDs and PLDs in the same party effectively.


I think the real problem with Paladins is our most effective job ability for protecting party members who generate a lot of enmity - cover - is horribly designed. Trying to use it is a pain in the @$$. It should be like on other Final Fantasy games where it causes the Paladin to automatically leap in front of the member you are trying to protect or at the very least transfer the damage directly. Because making it a positional ability requires too much hassle and just isn't realistic.

Dale B has lost so much faith in the Enmity system that he wishes the one ability in the game that effectively circumvents the entire enmity system was designed better so it could be used more. I hope he never meets that Dale A fellow. They'd surely have a heck of an argument.


I also think paladin gear should have a lot more -spell interruption on it so it could play it's role as a heal/tank more effectively.

Dale C doesn't know how Shield Mastery works, so he's probably a different person than Dale A or B.

[Dale]

Seconded.


Also, I think triplets made this post:


So Dale A thinks the Enmity system is okay and he enjoys not being able to use melee DDs and PLDs in the same party effectively..

I use melee DDs all the time effectively. And yes, I like how this game's enmity system works. Even when I play as a DD - because it makes me think about what I should do rather just spam the same rotation over and over.



Dale B has lost so much faith in the Enmity system that he wishes the one ability in the game that effectively circumvents the entire enmity system was designed better so it could be used more. I hope he never meets that Dale A fellow. They'd surely have a heck of an argument...


Cover has a recast and only works on a single target. It doesn't allow the paladin to effectively circumvent the entire enmity system. Just bypass it for a little while for a single person.


Seconded.
Dale C doesn't know how Shield Mastery works, so he's probably a different person than Dale A or B.

I'm aware blocking prevents spell interruption if that's what you mean. But that's not good enough in my opinion. I believe the Paladin should have very high -spell interruption so he can get spells off even when a block does not occur. This is especially true against multiple mobs or really fast-hitting ones.

We just disagree bryth. There is no need to try and get sarcastic about it.

[Dale]

Enmity is not fine. The paladin is abe to hold hate for a few seconds, at most, before the dd's cap hate with massive damage, then hate bounces around like a kid on coffee. Even with perfect gear the paladin cannot hold hate. It's ridiculous and needs to be fixed.

I like this. It adds more strategy to the combat and is an incentive for a damage dealers to play more carefully. So I think hate should bounce around - especially when massive damage is being done.

[Malthar]

There is no strategy when enmity is invariably capped. Unless you think the DD's should sit on the side and watch the pld fight. That's the only way your system will work.

[Dale]

There is no strategy when enmity is invariably capped. Unless you think the DD's should sit on the side and watch the pld fight. That's the only way your system will work.

In my experience: when the DD takes damage their enmity will decrease and no longer be capped. That's why I think it adds strategy to the combat. If the DD continues to pump out damage even after they attract the monster's attention to remain high on the enmity list they only have themselves to blame if they die.

That's why I like the system. It makes combat dangerous for damage dealers like I believe it should be. I've always preferred gameplay that rewards intelligent decision-making and respect for your opponent rather one that's all about spamming rotations so you can maximize damage on some silly chart.

[Malthar]

We are talking about the same game, right? You do realize you're the only one that believes your false logic, don't you? Let me prove my point. Does anyone else think enmity is perfect just the way it is?

[Zekander]

The enmity system in general is fine, it's the enmity cap that's the problem.

[Dale]

We are talking about the same game, right? You do realize you're the only one that believes your false logic, don't you? Let me prove my point. Does anyone else think enmity is perfect just the way it is?

Pretty sure it's the same game. ^^

I'm just describing the way it has worked for me and I tank a lot on my Paladin. I've never had a problem with this game's enmity system and like it. It's a breath of fresh air from other games that rely on the dull tank and spank model which can get boring.

When the damage dealer takes damage they should lose enmity - especially if they ease up or back off. The situation you describe sounds more like a damage dealer trying to show off instead of controlling their damage. Because I like that a NM will turn around and attack a DD after they use a hard hitting weapon skill. It adds more challenge and makes the AI better. It also encourages the DD to consider his defenses as well as his offense. And I think that's important.

I doubt it's a perfect system. Probably some improvements could be made. But I just haven't noticed any major flaws in it. Rather or not anyone else agrees with me - that's ok. I don't mind being in the minority :)

[Dale]

The enmity system in general is fine, it's the enmity cap that's the problem.

I think it's at a good spot.

I can usually hold threat pretty easily until a DD uses a weapon skill, then the monster will usually turn and attack the player who just nailed it. This is especially true if it was a skill chain or something. So it's working like I think it should. And the very skilled damage dealers know how to fit in weapon skills and still stay under the radar.

I've always believed that monsters should retaliate when a player hits them with something nasty. If they were to raise the cap that might would interfere with that. But I don't know that for sure.

[Byrth]

Here you go, Dale: http://www.bg-wiki.com/bg/Enmity

Lets look at how you'd defeat a BCNM boss (~1.1mil HP) using that system with a 3 DD, 1 PLD party. We can assume the DDs do only twice as much damage as the PLD. Given the emphasis on the Enmity system, lets ignore options like Trick Attack, Super Jump, High Jump, etc. because (with the exception of Decoy Shot) they're typically not solutions.

Formula
1,100,000 = 3.5*DD
DD = 314286 damage

DDs cap Volatile and Cumulative Enmity when they do ~28k damage, but each will have to do another 286k damage somehow or the monster won't die. If you look at the page, you'll notice that the only way to lose any substantial amount of enmity is to either wait (which only loses VE), take damage, or die. First, lets investigate the waiting option. You lose 60 VE every second and gain ~1.08 VE per point of damage. So you could do 55 damage per second and not cap VE. This would take 5,200 seconds, or ~87 minutes. That's obviously not possible given the 30 minute time limit on every BC.

So lets look at damage taken. Every 1 damage you take loses you enough CE that you can do 2.8 damage back to the monster to regain the same CE. So each melee would have to take 102k damage in order to stay below the CE cap while doing 286k damage. They'd need to take 56 damage per second to beat a BC in exactly 30 minutes. That's a 500 damage AoE every 8-9 seconds, or 1500 damage for a party with 3 DDs.

Final option is to have your DDs die and reset their hate. They'd each need to die 10 times in order to kill the monster, so that's not really a viable option either.

So it's basically impossible to "control enmity" as a DD if you actually want to kill the BCNM boss in 30 minutes, unless you're going to lean on the options that I ignored for the sake of purely evaluating the enmity system.

[Reaper]

it seems the real issue is the disparity in the rates of enmity gain and loss(also the exponential curve mob hp has taken) since we've gained numerous ways to deal higher and higher damage(and thus massively increased our enmity gain) and at the same time, new enemies have large hp pools, necessitating this increased damage, but the decay rate for enmity has basically remained the same(aside from the one update that caused -enmity gear to increase enmity loss when damage is taken, but i have yet to see anyone take advantage of this)

[Dale]

Here you go, Dale: http://www.bg-wiki.com/bg/Enmity

So it's basically impossible to "control enmity" as a DD if you actually want to kill the BCNM boss in 30 minutes, unless you're going to lean on the options that I ignored for the sake of purely evaluating the enmity system.

Then why is it I do BCNMs all the time with DD who control their enmity Bryth?

And they don't die. At least not usually :)

[Dale]

it seems the real issue is the disparity in the rates of enmity gain and loss(also the exponential curve mob hp has taken) since we've gained numerous ways to deal higher and higher damage(and thus massively increased our enmity gain) and at the same time, new enemies have large hp pools, necessitating this increased damage, but the decay rate for enmity has basically remained the same(aside from the one update that caused -enmity gear to increase enmity loss when damage is taken, but i have yet to see anyone take advantage of this)

I wouldn't mind increasing the rate at which players lose enmity when they sustain damage. I could support that.

[Byrth]

I'm super glad you've found melee that can defy game mechanics and avoid tanking, Dale.

Spoiler alert, they don't. They take hate from you regularly and survive it.

[Malthar]

I'm pretty sure he's mistaking this game for another, Byrth. Either that or he's off his meds. I'm leaning more towards "off his meds" because he does not accept rational explanations, rather, choosing to stick with what he believes to be real.

[Dale]

I'm super glad you've found melee that can defy game mechanics and avoid tanking, Dale.

Spoiler alert, they don't. They take hate from you regularly and survive it.


Games where the tank always has threat gets boring to me and I like it when DDs have to play smart to survive and learn to control their enmity. And this can be done in the current system. Because I play with DDs every day who manage to do it.

And I already said DDs take hate regularly from me and survive it. So there is really no spoiler alert there.

[Dale]

I'm pretty sure he's mistaking this game for another, Byrth. Either that or he's off his meds. I'm leaning more towards "off his meds" because he does not accept rational explanations, rather, choosing to stick with what he believes to be real.

Or perhaps I'm not on medications and playing the same game - and you two are just playing with DDs who don't know how to hold back or control their enmity :)

Because to me it is far more rational to believe my own eyes and experiences rather a forum post about it.

[Mefuki]

Games where the tank always has threat gets boring to me and I like it when DDs have to play smart to survive and learn to control their enmity. And this can be done in the current system. Because I play with DDs every day who manage to do it.

And I already said DDs take hate regularly from me and survive it. So there is really no spoiler alert there.



I think that's just it though: DD's aren't holding back or controlling enmity. They "take hate regularly from me and survive it."

[Dale]

I think that's just it though: DD's aren't holding back or controlling enmity. They "take hate regularly from me and survive it."

I think you are misunderstand what I'm trying to say.

When I say hold back or control enmity I don't mean they always avoid threat and never take hits. That's one of the reasons I like this game's enmity system. Because DDs do pull threat and do take damage. I think it makes the combat more interesting.

What I mean when I say they hold back or control their enmity is they control their damage to the point they don't die. In other words - they are cautious enough not to bite off more than they can chew and work in sync with the tank rather then trying to compete with them for enmity. Which is usually done to show off or something I find - and why I think death is an appropriate outcome in a situation like that.

[Byrth]

Yeah, you have to ask yourself why you bother using a paladin in those fights when your DDs can survive regularly taking hate (known in some circles as tanking).

The answer is that some people design their parties under the assumption that their DDs will (probably) die at least once per fight and they bring a Paladin as insurance in case all their DDs die and they need to hold the monster until a party member unweakens. So the Paladin is effectively only tanking the monster to keep it from killing the mages. Sometimes groups like this do manage to win without deaths, but it's far from normal because the healers become preoccupied with keeping the Paladin (the most durable job in the party) alive at the expense of the DDs. It ends up being a sloppy death fest more times than not, but I'm not going to deny that the strategy also can generally beat lower tier BCNMs. That doesn't validate the Enmity system, though.

[Dale]

Yeah, you have to ask yourself why you bother using a paladin in those fights when your DDs can survive regularly taking hate (known in some circles as tanking).

The answer is that some people design their parties under the assumption that their DDs will (probably) die at least once per fight and they bring a Paladin as insurance in case all their DDs die and they need to hold the monster until a party member unweakens. So the Paladin is effectively only tanking the monster to keep it from killing the mages. Sometimes groups like this do manage to win without deaths, but it's far from normal because the healers become preoccupied with keeping the Paladin (the most durable job in the party) alive at the expense of the DDs. It ends up being a sloppy death fest more times than not, but I'm not going to deny that the strategy also can generally beat lower tier BCNMs. That doesn't validate the Enmity system, though.

I understand your point. But even on difficult tier battlefields I find the enmity system works well. If the DD dies that's probably because they busted off a weapon skill without being prepared for the consequences. And I like that. It makes the combat more strategic and dangerous rather the tank just offering a blanket safety net for others to go crazy.

Also to add some perspective - I've always been of the belief that all melee jobs should be able to tank. I don't think any content should require a paladin. And if a samurai/monk or warrior etc. has the gear and the support available to them to live through the battle and tank while doing lots of damage I see no problem with this.

What makes a paladin good in my opinion is their defense and ability to live through damage without nearly as much support. For example: I've done difficult tier battlefields without any mages or healing support. And that's something a monk or samurai tank would never be able to pull off. So Paladin does have advantages. But in a group make up that is rife with tons of support and healing power you are probably correct and a Paladin wouldn't be the most efficient choice. But I don't think that is a flaw in the system. It just allows for other melee jobs to tank as well - though at the expense of needing a lot more support to do it.

[Selindrile]

I like it when DDs have to play smart to survive and learn to control their enmity. And this can be done in the current system. Because I play with DDs every day who manage to do it.

How? Once you do 28k damage your Enmity is capped according to Byrth (and arguing math against Byrth is a lost cause unless you're one of a select few) here are a few choice numbers using the math he laid out to see if such a thing would be possible.

Turning their back to the mob for 5 seconds? - This means you can do 277 damage before you recap enmity, which is less than one attack round.

Turning their back to the mob for 30 seconds? - This means you can do 1666 damage before you recap enmity, which is less than one WS.

Trick Attack? - That's nice and all that it lets the THF get away without generating enmity for that one WS, but it doesn't actually provide anything to the PLD, as he's generally enmity capped anyway.

Jumps? - Generally in these strategies people are /Nin to avoid large TP moves, which casting utsusemi also generates more enmity than the killing of its' shadows relieves.

Decoy Shot - This is a real solution, because with -20 Enmity and Decoy up, normal shots don't generate any enmity, you're staying under the VE from the occasional WS and with relic Gun/Bow they're intentionally low-VE options, making this the reason you see Pld+Rng parties.

How exactly are your non-Rng DDs "controlling their enmity" (which, if they're taking hate from you regularly, you can't really say they are) and still managing to kill the monster within the time limit, it's not really possible, you're better off having your melees just hit their hybrid DT set whenever the mob is spinning or shadows are down and not bringing a Pld at all if you want to go the melee route, but there is also as Byrth said taking a Pld to hold the mob if the DD happen to all die at once, it's not exactly elegant, but it does work, at least up to D on most fights, from personal experience.

[Dale]

How? Once you do 28k damage your Enmity is capped according to Byrth (and arguing math against Byrth is a lost cause unless you're one of a select few) here are a few choice numbers using the math he laid out to see if such a thing would be possible.
.

I'm not sure what to tell you Selindrile.

I did 3 battlefields yesterday with all melee DDs. No one died - and they pulled threat off of me several times through-out every single one of them. Yet they were still able to control their threat well enough that I was able to get hate back before any of them died.

I don't know the specifics of how they do it because I don't play their jobs for them. But I have played with other melee DDs who are quite the opposite and pull threat off me and keep it the entire fight no matter what I do. And they usually end up dying or draining my MP dry as a result. So it has to do something with their style of play rather just some massive flaw with the enmity system.

And just because a DD takes threat from me regularly I don't think that means they aren't controlling their threat. As I mentioned earlier, I believe all melee jobs are entitled to do some tanking. I've always disliked combat systems where one player - the tank - almost always has threat.

Combat is more interesting to me when the action is spread around. It also gives increased relevance to the defensive abilities a lot of jobs that are considered melee DDs have. So for example: I see no problem with a Samurai pulling threat on purpose so he/she can tank the mob for awhile and use up some of their defense abilities. I even try to encourage it so long as they know when to let up so I can get it back.

[Selindrile]

I don't know the specifics of how they do it because I don't play their jobs for them. But I have played with other melee DDs who are quite the opposite and pull threat off me and keep it the entire fight no matter what I do.

I know exactly how successful DDs are successful, because I've cleared most most battlefields on D without a tank (haven't done Return To Delkfutt's yet without Pld, though I hear it's very doable with Nins, haven't tried that myself), simply bouncing hate between melee DDs efficiently, a problem is, there's absolutely no reason to do this (on most fights) if you have Rngs, and it really limits subjob options in these scenarios making for very repetitive fights. And even if you do bring melee, you limit yourselves generally to the more survivable ones who fight in hybrid sets pretty often.

Smart DDs hit appropriate DT sets when they're going to get hit, and turn their back when shadows (or whatever else they're using to mitigate damage efficiently) are down, that's controlling their damage taken, and WHEN they have enmity, but that's -NOT- controlling their enmity overall, they have just as much as you do, you simply have hate because you did the -LAST- thing, the enmity system is really easy to understand, if you can't explain some bit of special technomagic that these people have access to that others don't the more likely thing is that you're just mischaracterizing what exactly the good DD are doing rather than the bad ones.

[Malithar]

I don't know the specifics of how they do it because I don't play their jobs for them. But I have played with other melee DDs who are quite the opposite and pull threat off me and keep it the entire fight no matter what I do. And they usually end up dying or draining my MP dry as a result. So it has to do something with their style of play rather just some massive flaw with the enmity system.

Optimizing DD output isn't a new fangled idea among MMOs. What you're describing above is the difference between someone who does (or at least more so) compared to someone that doesn't. As far as draining your MP or them dying, that's kinda the point we're at. MP refresh is ridiculous. Healing output is ridiculous. Outside of insta-gib TP moves or status effects rampaging your ability to keep someone alive, there's very little in the game anymore that carries a threat of death, outside of a bad healer.

If you feel that someone doing bad DD so that you can sorta pseudo maintain hate and tank is a workable and interesting system, then by all means. It's already been said multiple times that you can clear content that way, but that doesn't exactly give a reasonable use to the tank jobs.

[Dale]

I know exactly how successful DDs are successful, because I've cleared most most battlefields on D without a tank (haven't done Return To Delkfutt's yet without Pld, though I hear it's very doable with Nins, haven't tried that myself), simply bouncing hate between melee DDs efficiently, a problem is, there's absolutely no reason to do this (on most fights) if you have Rngs, and it really limits subjob options in these scenarios making for very repetitive fights. And even if you do bring melee, you limit yourselves generally to the more survivable ones who fight in hybrid sets pretty often.

Smart DDs hit appropriate DT sets when they're going to get hit, and turn their back when shadows (or whatever else they're using to mitigate damage efficiently) are down, that's controlling their damage taken, and WHEN they have enmity, but that's -NOT- controlling their enmity overall, they have just as much as you do, you simply have hate because you did the -LAST- thing, the enmity system is really easy to understand, if you can't explain some bit of special technomagic that these people have access to that others don't the more likely thing is that you're just mischaracterizing what exactly the good DD are doing rather than the bad ones.

Have you tried clearing a battlefield without a healer? If you haven't give it a shot sometime - then you might see why there can be a good reason to do it.

We are basically talking the same language though, just using different words. But it doesn't just have to do with who did what -LAST-. Controlling the amount of damage you do is a factor as well. It's not just about who did what last and limiting the amount of damage they take.

And I agree the enmity system is easy to understand. If you start getting hit and stop doing damage you will lose enmity and no longer be at the enmity cap. And that's basically what I've been saying this whole thread and why it's possible for someone to control their enmity.

[Dale]

Optimizing DD output isn't a new fangled idea among MMOs. What you're describing above is the difference between someone who does (or at least more so) compared to someone that doesn't. As far as draining your MP or them dying, that's kinda the point we're at. MP refresh is ridiculous. Healing output is ridiculous. Outside of insta-gib TP moves or status effects rampaging your ability to keep someone alive, there's very little in the game anymore that carries a threat of death, outside of a bad healer.

If you feel that someone doing bad DD so that you can sorta pseudo maintain hate and tank is a workable and interesting system, then by all means. It's already been said multiple times that you can clear content that way, but that doesn't exactly give a reasonable use to the tank jobs.

I don't agree with the way you characterize it because I don't consider it doing bad DD. I consider it doing smart DD.

We just approach this from a fundamentally different perspective. I believe a tank's job should be to protect other party members - but not necessarily hoard the enemy's attention constantly. This game's enmity system: and how it allows other jobs to acquire threat has always been something I liked about it. So I don't see this it as a flaw.

As far as healing out-put and MP refresh being ridiculous - that would depend on the party set up. For example: if a group of melee DDs and a paladin went into a battlefield that wouldn't be the case. And if a single one of those DDs simply went crazy and hoarded all the threat even while their defensive abilities were down they would end being a burden and would sustain a lot more damage and drain up a lot more of the Paladin's MP than necessary and would risk causing the group to wipe. But if the melee DDs played smart and allowed room for the Paladin to protect them and re-aquire threat when needed the Paladin would be not only be reasonable in that situation but a huge asset.

But anyway: you agree content can be cleared this way so we really aren't disagreeing over any substantial. We just have different preferences in combat systems. You favor one where the tank holds all enmity while the DD use optimized rotations for max damage and I favor one where enmity is more interchangeable and retaliates when damage is done and its the tank's job to get it back before the damage dealer dies.

[Malithar]

As far as healing out-put and MP refresh being ridiculous - that would depend on the party set up. For example: if a group of melee DDs and a paladin went into a battlefield that wouldn't be the case. And if a single one of those DDs simply went crazy and hoarded all the threat even while their defensive abilities were down they would end being a burden and would sustain a lot more damage and drain up a lot more of the Paladin's MP than necessary and would risk causing the group to wipe. But if the melee DDs played smart and allowed room for the Paladin to protect them and re-aquire threat when needed the Paladin would be not only be reasonable in that situation but a huge asset.

Yeah, h'okay. Using extenuating circumstances to make a point doesn't really work out when you're balancing a system for the entirety of the game, not some Valkurm Dunes nightmare party of a Pld and 5 melees. I really can't imagine that working out for anything beyond normal for any fight. Acc becomes a major issue, and without buffs, you'd focus too much gear and food towards Acc, neglecting everything else. Never mind being absolutely devastated with any chain of AoEs.

The 25 page derail in the Job Adjustments topic suddenly makes sense with the case you were making with a shield War. They won't pull hate as quick. -.-

You favor one where the tank holds all enmity while the DD use optimized rotations for max damage and I favor one where enmity is more interchangeable and retaliates when damage is done and its the tank's job to get it back before the damage dealer dies.

Actually, I like it the way it is now for the most part. DDs need to be changed in such a way that they don't cap enmity within seconds, and shedding enmity should come at a faster pace, whether through damage, turning, whatever. Without /Drg, you have no options currently that are viable, and even /Drg won't help a melee keep up with the enmity they're gaining. I don't want a mob glued to a tank by default like some games do, I want them to work for it. But I want them to be capable of getting hate, not just hitting cap and fighting with every other person to be the last to have an action on the mob. Building near retarded setups is not the answer to that.

[Dale]

Yeah, h'okay. Using extenuating circumstances to make a point doesn't really work out when you're balancing a system for the entirety of the game, not some Valkurm Dunes nightmare party of a Pld and 5 melees. I really can't imagine that working out for anything beyond normal for any fight. Acc becomes a major issue, and without buffs, you'd focus too much gear and food towards Acc, neglecting everything else. Never mind being absolutely devastated with any chain of AoEs.

The 25 page derail in the Job Adjustments topic suddenly makes sense with the case you were making with a shield War. They won't pull hate as quick. -.-.

The example I gave Malithar wasn't an extenuating or rare circumstance. That is a common occurrence for me because most of the people I play with prefer to play as melee DDs. So for me, the situation I describe is very common and happens almost daily.

Not sure why you are bringing up the job adjustment topic or what that has to do with my post so think I'll avoid commenting on that. Don't think I have the energy to go through that again. So I'd ask you to please not try to stir that up.



Actually, I like it the way it is now for the most part. DDs need to be changed in such a way that they don't cap enmity within seconds, and shedding enmity should come at a faster pace, whether through damage, turning, whatever. Without /Drg, you have no options currently that are viable, and even /Drg won't help a melee keep up with the enmity they're gaining. I don't want a mob glued to a tank by default like some games do, I want them to work for it. But I want them to be capable of getting hate, not just hitting cap and fighting with every other person to be the last to have an action on the mob. Building near retarded setups is not the answer to that.

I didn't know you were content with the current enmity system. I got the impression from your posts that you wasn't and preferred more of a tank and spank model. So now I'm sort of confused what we are arguing about?

I would support making enmity shed at a faster pace when players receive damage. I even mentioned that in an earlier post so we agree about that. I'm dubious about raising the enmity cap though, because I'm worried it might cause enemies to stop retaliating as effectively. But I'd be willing to give it a shot and see since a few paladins on this board seem to have such a huge problem with it.

[Malthar]

I really don't know why you guys keep arguing with Dale. He believes the sky is green and nothing will convince him otherwise. If you tell him to look up and see the blue sky he will tell you you're lying and it's some sort of trick and he will never look up again.

[Dale]

I really don't know why you guys keep arguing with Dale. He believes the sky is green and nothing will convince him otherwise. If you tell him to look up and see the blue sky he will tell you you're lying and it's some sort of trick and he will never look up again.

That wasn't very fair considering my last post was agreeing with many of the points made since he seemed relatively content with the enmity system - just thinks it could use some tweaking.

But the reason I'm not going to agree with a few of the paladins in this thread is they aren't correct when they give the impression you can't control your enmity on this game and everyone will just end up at enmity cap exchanging blows based on who did what last. That's just not the case. Because you can control it. I and people I play with control it every damn day on this game.

Can the system be improved? Sure. But it's not nearly so bad as people make out.

[Selindrile]

Have you tried clearing a battlefield without a healer? If you haven't give it a shot sometime - then you might see why there can be a good reason to do it.

Yes, have done so on normal plenty, a proper paladin takes next to no damage on many of these fights on Normal or less, so if you're just trying to get a somewhat gimpy melee friend a win, can go in with a Rng + Pld + AFK Gimp and just duo it for their AA clear. (have done this quite a few times)

That said, I have no idea why not bringing a healer would convince me for the need for proper use of PDT sets and defensive abilities when I already said this is what good DDs do.


We are basically talking the same language though, just using different words. But it doesn't just have to do with who did what -LAST-. Controlling the amount of damage you do is a factor as well. It's not just about who did what last and limiting the amount of damage they take.

This is where you don't understand the enmity system, after a certain point, you're both capped on enmity pure and simple, and all that matters at that point is whoever did the -LAST- thing to the enemy. Making sure you're not hitting it when your damage mitigation tools (Read: Utsusemi) aren't up is smart, sure, but that's not making better use of your time than intentionally lowering your damage, that makes 0 logical sense, once your tank is enmity capped anyway.


And I agree the enmity system is easy to understand. If you start getting hit and stop doing damage you will lose enmity and no longer be at the enmity cap. And that's basically what I've been saying this whole thread and why it's possible for someone to control their enmity.

If you start getting hit and stop doing damage, you will lose 55.5 damage worth of enmity per second, so you'll return to the enmity cap extremely quickly (as everyone but you seems to have noticed) the moment you start hitting it again, it's not about controlling enmity after the first 90 seconds of the fight or so, it's about controlling "whoever did the last thing to the mob" all the melees are at or very near cap.

Rangers, (because of decoy shot primarily) are the only ones who actually should consciously try to be aware of their enmity, melees generally just notice the mob spin and realize they're at cap, so don't hit it when my damage mitigation is down because I'm going to pull hate, really straightforward.

I realize you need finite numbers for a computer, so there will always have to be a cap on enmity, but really, it's the cap that screws everything up, if we could simply raise the enmity cap by 100,000xCurrent Cap (or any other suitably large number) and not change anything else, I would be happy with the system we have in place, melees would still have to keep their enmity under control behind the pld, as their enmity would be going up faster than the plds if they went all out, and if this were the case, the real game world would actually work as you're describing it now, but the cap throws all this out of the window. This would create a minor issue if the Pld died of the DDs having a lot of enmity, admittedly, but no worse than the old days, and a more than acceptable tradeoff.

I like the idea of FFXIs enmity system, I like the way enmity worked in the old days of FFXI, when we simply didn't realistically hit the cap but other things were mostly the same (except curing), but now, it's more than a little borked.

[Dale]

Yes, have done so on normal plenty, a proper paladin takes next to no damage on many of these fights on Normal or less, so if you're just trying to get a somewhat gimpy melee friend a win, can go in with a Rng + Pld + AFK Gimp and just duo it for their AA clear. (have done this quite a few times)

That said, I have no idea why not bringing a healer would convince me for the need for proper use of PDT sets and defensive abilities when I already said this is what good DDs do..

I meant to try it on a difficult battle field without a healer. That was the context of your post. Though even on normal ones I disagree and think it can be useful too.

But anyway, the reason I suggested to try it without a healer is because it can give you more of a reason to bounce around hate effectively since you said there was absolutely no reason to do this where I think there can be. It wasn't to prove to you DDs should use PDT sets or their defensive abilities.




This is where you don't understand the enmity system, after a certain point, you're both capped on enmity pure and simple, and all that matters at that point is whoever did the -LAST- thing to the enemy. Making sure you're not hitting it when your damage mitigation tools (Read: Utsusemi) aren't up is smart, sure, but that's not making better use of your time than intentionally lowering your damage, that makes 0 logical sense, once your tank is enmity capped anyway..

But this isn't what you are understanding about the enmity system:

If someone starts taking a lot of damage and stops doing damage they will no longer be at the enmity cap. This idea that everyone is going to end up an enmity cap and stay there no matter what a player does just isn't the case.

And it makes sense to lower your damage intentionally if you are taking more damage than you or your group can handle. It might wouldn't if the enmity system works like you describe and everyone is forced to remain at the enmity cap no matter what. But again: that's not how the system works.




If you start getting hit and stop doing damage, you will lose 55.5 damage worth of enmity per second, so you'll return to the enmity cap extremely quickly (as everyone but you seems to have noticed) the moment you start hitting it again, it's not about controlling enmity after the first 90 seconds of the fight or so, it's about controlling "whoever did the last thing to the mob" all the melees are at or very near cap.



I do recognize the player can move back up to enmity cap quickly if they continue to dish out damage. That's been my whole point all along and why I said players need to intentionally lower their damage when they start getting hit if they want to shed enmity and not be at the cap. So the very thing you are saying everyone but me doesn't recognize is actually the one thing I do recognize where as you are failing to recognize what they can do about it.

All that being said, I wouldn't mind increasing the rate at which players lose enmity once being hit or increasing the enmity cap as long as it didn't interfere with a monster's ability to retaliate. I just maintain the current system is functional and it is possible for players to control their enmity. It's not so flawed that everyone is going to just end up at enmity cap no matter what they do and hate is going to bounce around willy-nilly based on who did what last. That's only the case if you allow it to be.

[Malthar]

So, everyone is out of their minds except you. The madman thinks world crazy, save himself.

[Dale]

So, everyone is out of their minds except you. The madman thinks world crazy, save himself.

First: a few paladins on this thread don't represent everyone Malthar. And I don't think they're out of their minds just being obstinate for some reason and won't just admit that it's possible to control your enmity on this game.

I'm not saying the system is perfect. But it's not bad either and is far superior to a lot of other MMORPGs I've played.

[Malthar]

...just being obstinate for some reason...

So, the rest of the world is obstinate. Is that what you think?

[Dale]

So, the rest of the world is obstinate. Is that what you think?

I don't think the rest of the world is obstinate. I do think there are a few paladins in this thread who are being obstinate though and exaggerating the problems with this game's enmity system to make it seem worst than it really is.

Why do you keep talking about the rest of the world?

[Malithar]

Why do you keep talking about the rest of the world?

Because the game includes experiences beyond your bubble examples and ill comprehension of how the system actually works?

Just a guess.

[Malthar]

Dale: "You're a liar and I refuse to acknowledge you further! You do not exist. You have never existed."

[Dale]

Because the game includes experiences beyond your bubble examples and ill comprehension of how the system actually works?

Just a guess.

Malithar.... you really need to work on your manners.

That aside, I've seen what people are referring too. But you can avoid remaining at enmity cap if you want. And I know the system works - it's not complicated. If you take damage and stop doing damage guess what - you are not longer at enmity cap. That's how the system works.

I'm not repeating myself anymore so I'm just going to end it here. Only to say my bubble examples were meant to highlight when certain strategies can be effective.

Besides, you've already basically agreed with me in this thread and said you were largely content with how the system works. Youjust offered a few ways to improve it of which I wasn't even against. So you are just going out of your way to try and be insulting as usual. Keep it up and I'll start looking for my ignore button :)

[Dale]

Dale: "You're a liar and I refuse to acknowledge you further! You do not exist. You have never existed."

I don't think anyone is being a liar. I just think they are being obstinate and refusing to acknowledge that there are ways to avoid staying at the enmity cap if they want. The enmity system on this game isn't so flawed that players can't find ways to work within it.

In other words: you are not doomed to everyone staying at capped enmity and hate ping ponging around based on who did what last no matter what players do.

[Malthar]

Why did you disappear for so long?