Pet Magic Accuracy + 20 (-_-;)

[Xilk]

So I was trying to test out a Hybrid TP set today.

Interesting points are this:
Ankusa Axe / Izizoeksi
Heyoka Cap
Totemic Jackcoat / Ankusa Gloves / Thurandaut Ring +1
Artio's Mantle / Tali'ah Seraweels +2 / Ankusa Gaiters +3

The idea is to have decent tp stats (haste, and accuracy) to go w/ Pet tanking (Pet DT / PDT, Pet enmity)

I tried to fight a Single Apex Jagil in Woh Gates using Left-handed Yoko

There were no trusts.

I could not keep hate on my pet at all.

I kept using snarl as quickly as I could. I was only using 2 pieces in my TP set which had a constant Pet enmity: Izizoeksi and Heyoka Cap for a total of 15 Pet Enmity in my TP set.

I was shocked that I had to constantly stand far back trying not to meleee, and not to pull hate recasting Utsusemi and wait for snarl recast. I embarrassingly ended up dieing. Partly because I took too many hits early on and i was lazy with Utsusemi shadows at beginning, but mostly because Keeping Enmity on Pet was so difficult.

I really liked using Yoko to tank several Unity or Zi'tah NM's and I did not have trouble keeping enmity on pet. I was suprised it made such a difference.

but what really struck me was how incredibly difficult it was to keep Enmity on my pet. I really miss the Pet Enmity +20. Granted, i accept why it was removed, but this example really showed me how it left a hole behind. It would be really great if Pet Enmity Gear affected Snarl. So that we could actually Transfer more Enmity to pet.

[Isola]

20 Enmity isn't what caused that. That's 2 pieces of gear worth of enmity, this change is not that dramatic, don't try to oversell it.

BST pets are not meant to tank, they have no enmity tools like an automaton does.

Snarl already takes 99% of your enmity, it can't really be improved. Maybe BST should've gotten master enmity-20 instead.

[Xilk]

20 Enmity isn't what caused that. That's 2 pieces of gear worth of enmity, this change is not that dramatic, don't try to oversell it.

BST pets are not meant to tank, they have no enmity tools like an automaton does.

Snarl already takes 99% of your enmity, it can't really be improved. Maybe BST should've gotten master enmity-20 instead.

Beastmaster Pets aren't meant to tank??

Have you ever played Beastmaster?

Even if we IGNORE the entire SOLO history of BST and CHARMING MOBS and having them tank for you,

1/2 the Current Jug Pets are DESIGNED to be Tanks! LOOK at their Stats! LOOK at their Abilities!

Generous Arthur, Fluffy Bredo, Alluring Honey, Aged Angus, Hurler Percival, Crude Raphie, Three-star Lynn, Herald Henry, Vivacious Vickie

Another small handful aren't straight out tanks, but have some abilities that lend themselves to tanking.

Yes, you are right that BST's biggest trouble with tanking is Enmity Control.

We also have more Pet Enmity gear than Pup or Smn.
The problem is we don't have great ways to apply that gear.

Snarl is a Fantastic Ability. However, the best use for all that Pet Enmity Gear would be Snarl, and it doesn't work.

THIS is EXACTLY how it could be improved!

We don't want Master Enmity - 20. Haven't you ever Tanked on Master? We have some really good defensive gear. Cap DT at 50% AND cap out Killer Effects + for ~68% Damage Reduction, AND 33~50% Intimidation Rate (depending if NM or not). The challenge is ofcourse Enmity Control. but we can get a fair bit of Enmity+ gear,. Support Jobs: /blu, /dnc, /war, and /run can all help with the Enmity tools Along with some good balances to other aspects of the job.

Fixing Snarl would go a long way to enabling that Enmity control, without letting bst overcome any other job in tanking. Obviously when using Snarl, you WANT more Enmity on pet. Letting us use the tools we have that way would only fit well together. It would have the synergy of all the really good abilities in this game.

Second, all those tanking Ready moves: Secretion, Metallic Body, Scissor Guard, Bubble curtain, Zealous Snort, Rhino Guard, Water Wall, etc Generate ZERO enmity.
This second option would be particularly simple to adjust. It could be modified on a case by case basis and tuned in just the right way. Then using pet Enmity set would actually make sense in conjunction with these ready moves.

I did not expect the loss of pet enmity +20 to be very noticeable. My whole point above is that it IS. this is coming from a player WHO Actually knows how Bst works in ALOT of situation. I play BST in most every situation.

I tank, I DD, I BURST on bst. I SUPPORT on bst. I play Pet Only, I play both side by side. the Enmity Change gives me a Significant Detriment in some content and playstyle.

The whole point of the change was about Enmity control and detriment to playstyle. All this change did was shift it to a different Playstyle.

I'm suggesting an elegant and balanced solution that would allow both playstyles.

[Nyarlko]

The point in the change was that REMA augments require Job Master to unlock. It had no genuine basis in actual job balance concerns.

I know that you've done extensive testing on Snarl and Pet Enmity, but have you verified the Snarl and Master Enmity connection? The mechanics of the JA make it seem like it would be purely master-based when determining the amount of enmity to transfer. It's possible that Master Enmity has no impact either, which could also make sense since it is a "transfer" and neither party is actually "gaining" or "losing" enmity in any standard way. Snarl may simply replace the values directly w/ no other checks involved. I believe that's how the SCH SP "Caper Emissarius" works and enmity+/- doesn't factor in at all with it as far as I can tell. I could be wrong about it since there's also not a ton of info on it.

Personally, rather than worry about rebuilding a possibly wonky JA, I'm a lot more in favor of increasing base enmity gen for Ready buff moves for pets that are classified as tank jobs. I would be quite unhappy if Pondering Peter's curaga suddenly started generating enmity, but it still makes zero sense that crab buffs don't generate any enmity either. This feels like it might be possible to implement w/o having to rebuild systems at least.

[Xilk]

The point in the change was that REMA augments require Job Master to unlock. It had no genuine basis in actual job balance concerns.

Sure, but the reason the player didn't want to be master was because he never wanted enmity on his pet because he is pure DD. That's just a matter of playstyle preference.
My reasoning is the same but different direction.

SE thought this was good reasoning.

I DO want enmity on my pet... sometimes . Thats the whole point of Snarl. so it seemed the most elegant solution to the concern, imo.

The mechanics of the JA make it seem like it would be purely master-based when determining the amount of enmity to transfer. It's possible that Master Enmity has no impact either, which could also make sense since it is a "transfehave you verified the Snarl and Master Enmity connection? r" and neither party is actually "gaining" or "losing" enmity in any standard way.

Have I verified that the the Enmity pet gains is Exactly the amount of Enmity the Master loses? No, I have not devised a test for that. I Did assume that is how it works by the description of the Job Ability. Also, I have long fought with only master and pet (no trusts). I would use snarl approximately every 30s, varying for when I want to use a high-enmity move right before snarl, to maintain Enemy's attention on my pet.

I have also fought in groups with others, where another player has pulled enmity away from my pet, and I use snarl to again cause my pet to regain Enemy's attention.

I think this behavior is expected if Snarl Subtracts current enmity from master (but does not remove master from enmity list) and adds it to Pet's Current Enmity. This is how I understand Snarl to function. I do not think it would function this way if the Pet's enmity was merely replaced with the master's. I'm pretty confident it is subtracting the master's enmity and adding it to the pet's.

I think either or both enmity adjustments would be welcome for Bst.

I understand modifying how Snarl functions might be more challenging or disruptive, but honestly I don't think it would be. If you think of how you would need to program such a function anyway, it must be subtracting a variable from Master enmity, and adding a variable to pet enmity. It has to be doing that already. That's just how programming works. So it how hard is it to multiply that variable by Pet Enmity +/- variable in the process?
I really don't think its any harder than that. I'm trying to think of unintended consequences, and sure I don't know the source code, so I can only guess, but it seems pretty standards adjustment stuff for this game.

I think if they made the change, the Rabbit Curaga would gain enmity as if a player cast a Curaga just as much. I understand that its fun to have hate-free Cures, but I think that fits into game Balance just fine. Currently we pretty much only get enmity on master or pet from Damage dealt. Subjobs can give more tools, and I guess we also have Feral Howl, but pretty much we are on Damage Dealt for VE. Thats it. I would be willing to deal w/ normal curing Enmity dynamics for Lulush or Peter in exchange for Actually having Enmity from those ready moves. They aren't really the same enmity mechanics between Wild Carrot and other Ready Moves though. Job Ability Vs Curing.

Yes, the Crab pets would actually be MUCH more appreciated if they could actually generate Enmity. Three of Five moves are Defensive: Bubble Curtain, Scissor Guard, and Metallic body. 2 Are offensive: big Scissors and Bubble Shower.
Honestly this is a wonderfully balanced set of skills for a pet tank. You have modest Damage w/ Big Scissors and Bubble Curtain (Curtain doubles as defensive debuff (str down) and Crowd control/tanking to get on everything's enmity list). Then you balance the timers between Bubble Curtain, Scissor Guard and Metallic body. Its just he rite amount of work to focus on tanking.

I really appreciate how Crab pet is Designed, but then.. our only way to get pet enmity is by dealing damage, but crab is turtled up and not a very good damage dealer. It will never generate much enmity itself. If we are relying on snarl, then master using a good sub can generate enmity, but staying in tanking gear, master won't build up much enmity either. Certainly not as much as any other competent dd.
Its like we are given 75% of the tools to get the job done is an elegant and balanced way, then 1 pieces was forgotten or neglected.

[Nyarlko]

Sorry, I wasn't clear before. What I was asking is if you have tested using master Enmity+ for increasing Snarl enmity output to the pet.

We also seem to be looking at how Snarl functions from different angles. In either case, Master enmity ends up at 1CE and pets end up with a total of what the master lost plus their previous values. What I believe happens when the Master activates the JA Snarl (assuming you are in range of both targets):

1. Master enmity is recorded and then set to "1".
2. Pet enmity is set to: current enmity + recorded value of master's enmity.
EX: Master has 1,000CE/2,000VE and Pet has 1,000CE/3,000VE when master uses Snarl.
I'm going to ignore the 1CE that is left behind on the master for simplicity's sake
What you seem to be saying is: After Snarl, master loses/subtracts 1,000CE/2,000VE and Pet generates/adds an extra 1000CE/2,000VE.
What I'm saying happens is: After Snarl, master's enmity is set directly to 1CE/0VE and pet is set directly to 2,000CE/5,000VE.

Mechanically and coding-wise, there is a huge difference between changing a value by overwriting it with a new value, and adding/subtracting from a value to get the new value. If the "transfer" term used works the way I believe it to (overwriting,) then Enmity+/- effects from both master/pet would never actually come into play during the JA. This would probably be simplest to test using other jobs. THF can both take/give percentages of their own enmity on short CDs, tanks can access truckloads of Enmity+ gear, etc. If THF's Collaborator is not affected by Enmity+ gear being worn by either self or target, (and I haven't found any relevant testing that shows that it does,) then I'd say we're probably looking at a system similar to what I'm proposing, which means that it's pretty darn unlikely that it would be workable to adjust it for BST.

Increasing enmity gen from buff moves seems like an infinitely simpler solution to me that should have far less chance of breaking anything.

[Xilk]

That is a worthy idea to test to see if wearing master enmity+ gear for snarl is effective.
It would seem a sad waste of Pet Enmity gear, but you can get more master enmity gear than pet enmity gear still.

I can use the same test as before, and simply use master enmity set during Snarl. if they go to pet, it works, if they go to master it doesn't.


Thank you for your detailed example.
Even if the Pet Enmity Variable is overwritten, which at some point it is, The calculation takes place somewhere. They have to Add Pet Enmity and Former Master Enmity together. During that calculation stage it could be modified to multiply by Gear Enmity also.

[Nyarlko]

That is a worthy idea to test to see if wearing master enmity+ gear for snarl is effective.
It would seem a sad waste of Pet Enmity gear, but you can get more master enmity gear than pet enmity gear still.

I can use the same test as before, and simply use master enmity set during Snarl. if they go to pet, it works, if they go to master it doesn't.


Thank you for your detailed example.
Even if the Pet Enmity Variable is overwritten, which at some point it is, The calculation takes place somewhere. They have to Add Pet Enmity and Former Master Enmity together. During that calculation stage it could be modified to multiply by Gear Enmity also.

The point I was trying to make is that Snarl does not necessarily have to use the standard formula, and if it does not, then there is a good chance that enmity mods never even come into play. If that is the case, then it seems rather risky to alter the code that deep. I'd rather not have them adjust Snarl, just to have them revert the change immediately because it affected other jobs' JAs like Accomplice/Collaborator/Caper Emissarius.