Hypothesis on Burden

The dev's post about the tactical processor got me to wonder something.

1. Burden decays naturally over time - we all know this.
2. The dev post about the Tactical Processor suggests that while deployed, an automaton's cycle of checks accrue a small amount of burden that is negated by natural decay, but still present nonetheless.

It follows that an automaton must lose burden faster while NOT deployed because there are no AI checks running.

I think this is a safe assumption. Thoughts?

(can any devs perhaps confirm or shoot this down?)

It's still active, so even if it might not act on the checks, it could still do them.

Only way to really tell is to test overload while fighting and compare it while not fighting, both with and without TacPro.

Ofcourse, it would be so much easier if SE added a method to see the burden on the automaton.
Perhaps an <automatonburden> / <ab> macro line that would return something like
Automaton burden: [FIR]125% [ERT]22% [WTR]0% [WND]0% [ICE]0% [LTN]50% [LIT]25% [DRK]0%
100% would be the overload threshold, but without gear effects. (Elements within [] show the icon obviously, similar to synergy status lines.)
This would also have cleared up the mystery of the TacPro within days, since people would be able to observe the effect of it on burden.

As much as I love the idea of being able to observe burden, I feel like an essential part of the game about playing pup is having to mentally gauge and time your own maneuvers, feeling your way around what's risky and what isn't.

I would assume that SE wouldn't add such an indicator, but then again I said the same about NIN shadow counters long ago when you used to have to keep track..

Then again, an obscenely powerful attachment and or gear piece could 'unlock' such a command OR job ability that returns a line in the command window (much like Gauge and Libra)

(btw, planning on testing my hypothesis when I have free time again, since I dislike spreading ideas without reasonable backup)

http://ffxi.allakhazam.com/forum.htm...623266471965#1

somewhat out of date (mostly because I haven't gotten my hands on Cirque Farsetto +1/2 since the update to 90. It's from last sept/oct, but I stretched out the testing all the way up til I stopped playing frequently in may, and everything I found seemed to hold true up to that point.) testing I did a while back related to burden, overload, and maneuvers.

I used Nateypoo's previous burden testing as my starting point, and went from there. However, my testing was pretty much entirely done standing outside of town, nekkid, playing with gear. The idea that burden could be affected by the automaton being deployed never even occurred to me (even now, it does sound a bit far fetched, no offense, though tbh, I really wouldn't be shocked if it was, considering the oldDev team's love of overcomplication...)

I'll have to go take a look at the tactical processor post (Haven't had a chance to read it yet) and then I'll probably log on and play around with some testing, since I have nothing better to do tonight.

edit:
ok, someone be nice to me and link me the post where they said wtf tactical processor does, because I can't find it, and none of the posts I can find about their post actually cite the link (ie: fail) :mad:

edit 2:
based on what I'm reading on wiki about TP, and the OP, I've come up with 2, somewhat different ideas that should both theoretically work based on my own burden/overload testing.

Theory 1: The positive and negative benefits of TP aren't actually related, but rather, with the TP fit, either A: the β-Burden increase of a given maneuver is increased related to the number of Ice Maneuvers in effect, or B: the decay rate of α and/or β-Burden is reduced (meaning they decay slower) by an amount related to the number of ice maneuvers in effect.

Theory 2: Each time the "checks" the automaton performs occur; either A: all values of β-Burden are uniformly increased by an amount related to the number of ice maneuvers in effect, or much less likely (and something I seriously hope isn't the case due to how fucking asinine it would be to test, but isn't out of the question considering the oldDev's love of over-complication) B: the value of one of the β-Burden, or possible α-Burden amounts is increased based on the number of ice maneuvers in effect, where the elemental burden increased is related to the check that occurred (ex: if TP->WS check would increase fire burden)

The first theory is based off of the fact that I never trust wiki, and until I find/read the dev post for myself, I'm not going to 100% believe the "However, every time it performs a check, the overload value increases, so as the frequency of checks increases it will increase the possibility of an overload. " line; also, this theory just seems to fit better and be easier to implement/use/adjust for the devs. The second theory is the "just in case" theory in which the line about checks directly increasing burden amount is actually true and not just people misreading/poor translation/(un)intentionally vague wording, but also plausible based off of what I've math'd out, if somewhat more complicated.

The ultimate problem behind testing either theory is the lack of information related to just what the puppets' checks are and how often their base proc rate is.

It's buried somewhere in the huge PUP thread in General I think, but the text was pretty much copied verbatim to several wikis:

Quote:

---

The automaton periodically checks the information around the automaton and decides its next move (if HP took a hit, it will cure, if TP has been saved up, it will perform a WS, etc.).

When using the Tactical Processor the frequency of these checks is increased and allows the automaton to respond to variations in its environment quicker and more precisely.

However, every time it performs a check, the overload value increases, so as the frequency of checks increases it will increase the possibility of an overload.

---

Quote:

---

Originally Posted by Kristal

It's buried somewhere in the huge PUP thread in General I think, but the text was pretty much copied verbatim to several wikis

---

So that's the verbatim? damn. I guess that kills the likelihood of my first theory, which would have been a lot simpler to test... though I probably will still test it just to be certain. At the moment, I'm trying to work out just what the automaton "checks" for, and jesus christ is there a lot of potential shit to account for...

though, I guess that may explain just why it's taken them so long to address AI issues, because the more I work at this, the more fucking complicated it gets, and it was already stupidly complicated to begin with...