Question on Whirling Retaliation threat steal

[Erelgal2]

theres a red arrow for aggro over mobs head, how bout some other type of arrow showing threat leaches.

That would be cool, but I'd rather see a red or blue Down arrow over the heads of the players that we leached from, it would help me to judge who's in range of the skill.

[Gedachtnis]

Actually, has anyone actually paid attention to an out of range mob during a WR? It's possible the arrow appears.

But yea I agree with Eregal2, an indicator for the fellowship members would be much more useful with the WR mechanic.

And actually, again in theory, the Threat Drain from WR doesn't have an actual range limit.

It requires a condition to be met;

A Fellowship member being within 10m of you. Any mob that has that Fellowship member on it's Threat List will be affected by the Threat Drain no matter how far away the mob is from you.

[Gedachtnis]

The threat transfer is entirely separate from the melee portion of this skill and is not limited by targets. However each monster's threat is treated seperately. You may gain 10,000 total threat from 100 mobs but each mob only gains 100 threat versus you.

Just to clarify using the above example,

If 1 other Fellowship member is within 10m of me when I do a WR and I gain 100 threat against each mob, does that mean if 3 Fellowship members were in range I still only gain 100 threat against each mob?



I had thought aggro was based on a threat list that just kind of auto arranged players according to the threat they have generated or lost during a fight, with, in most cases, highest threat in the group having aggro.

IE for simplicities sake assume 3 players all in 10m range with p2 being the Guard, 2 mobs, equal threat on all mobs;
Bad Guy Mob - Threat List

p2- 1000
p1 - 900
p3 - 700

After a WR (only looking at the Threat Drain) the list would look like;

Bad Guy Mob - Threat List

p2- 1200
p1 - 800
p3 - 600



Your explaination seems to suggest the possibility of a threat list that compares the current aggro holder against each other player on an individual basis rather than a group basis.

IE same scenerio as above;

Bad Guy Mob - Threat List

p2/p1 - 1000/900
p2/p3 - 1000/700
p1/p3 - 900/700

After WR

p2/p1 - 1100/800
p2/p3 - 1100/600
p1/p3 - 800/600


Of course I'm most likely way off on how the mechanic works, and I am assuming that Transfer means they lose threat and I gain it. Any insight would be much appreciated.

[DackRover]

just shoot me now...

I just "quit" a thread in the warden forums where people are likewise resorting to the mathematical equivalents of mysticism and tarot cards to try and understand threat mechanics.

The Dev's do not really want us to understand and quantify these things. They have elected to keep it a "black box" and only give us vague generalizations so we can understand the ways and interrelations of how our skills work. That is all...and all you need to know really.

WR helps you...a little bit...its better to use it than not to... especially when dealing with mutliple mobs...it is helpful in certain situations in actually gaining some aggro from mobs that are attacking your fellows from ranges beyond your taunts or melee capacity, so long as your fellow him/herself is within 10m of you when WR fires.

What more do you need to know...do you sit there with a slide-rule while mashing buttons during an instance? If it works and you find it helpful...USE it...if not...don't...just get the instance and situational tanking task done as best you can...have fun.

I understand that computer games and MMO's in particular are likely to attract people who may be both A) on the intelligent side of the spectrum (jury is out, but I will accept this FSOA), and B) susceptible to obsessive compulsive and/or addictive behaviors.

That said...there is little exercise of a "healthy intelligence" to be found in obsessing over and trying to quantify the unknowable, which has largely been kept a mystery by design, except as to general effects. Just...don't...do it!!

Play the damn game...you've been told what the skill does...its enough.

*Edit -- before you rant back at my rant...in the paraphrased words of Gandalf: "I'm not trying to rob you [of your desire to understand], but to HELP you!"

[Gedachtnis]

just shoot me now...

I just "quit" a thread in the warden forums where people are likewise resorting to the mathematical equivalents of mysticism and tarot cards to try and understand threat mechanics.

The Dev's do not really want us to understand and quantify these things. They have elected to keep it a "black box" and only give us vague generalizations so we can understand the ways and interrelations of how our skills work. That is all...and all you need to know really.

WR helps you...a little bit...its better to use it than not to... especially when dealing with mutliple mobs...it is helpful in certain situations in actually gaining some aggro from mobs that are attacking your fellows from ranges beyond your taunts or melee capacity, so long as your fellow him/herself is within 10m of you when WR fires.

What more do you need to know...do you sit there with a slide-rule while mashing buttons during an instance? If it works and you find it helpful...USE it...if not...don't...just get the instance and situational tanking task done as best you can...have fun.

I understand that computer games and MMO's in particular are likely to attract people who may be both A) on the intelligent side of the spectrum (jury is out, but I will accept this FSOA), and B) susceptible to obsessive compulsive and/or addictive behaviors.

That said...there is little exercise of a "healthy intelligence" to be found in obsessing over and trying to quantify the unknowable, which has largely been kept a mystery by design, except as to general effects. Just...don't...do it!!

Play the damn game...you've been told what the skill does...its enough.

*Edit -- before you rant back at my rant...in the paraphrased words of Gandalf: "I'm not trying to rob you [of your desire to understand], but to HELP you!"

lol you're free to ask questions or rant all you want, these are public forums after all, by the same token so am I, despite your preemptive attempt to head off anything I might say in response.

Did you notice I didn't ask for any exact formula or detailed description of how exactly Threat worked? Graalx2 offered a peek behind the curtain. How terrible for someone to try to understand what that peek revealed a little better. I said ANY insight would be appreciated. You could also note I said I may be totaly mistaken in my understanding. You see how that works;

Response;

It works similar to your first example

It works similar to your second example

It works like a combination of the two examples

Your right, it works completely differently than either example.

In my example I meant per Fellowship member in the 10m range. (or irregardless of)

Gee, a request phrased in a way that allows for an answer without giving exact details, who'd of thunk it? You seem to assume I'm demanding some detailed answer, that if I got no reply from Graalx2, or didn't get a detailed mathamatical formula I'd have some sort of melt down or my fun would be diminished. One has to wonder if you actually read and/or understood my post.

See how a vague answer would give insight on how all our skills work without laying out the actual formulas? Neato hmmm?

Though I do appreciate you trying to tell me what I need or do not need to know, how I should play, etc. I think I'll stick to my way if you don't mind. I have plenty of fun.

EDIT: It's rather ironic that the quote you paraphrased regards Gandalf himself trying to understand the "unknowable" . While ignorance may be bliss, it's rarely helpful.

[DackRover]

Nope...nothing demanding, annoying, ignorant or obsessional about THAT reply! Clearly I had your underlying sentiments confused.

BTW...the quote was from Gandalf trying to calm Bilbo down after advising the need to "let go" of the soul-sucking obsession which the ring literally embodied. Don't worry though, Bilbo got pretty angry with Gandalf for his trouble as well.

[Gedachtnis]

Well, I might suggest that you reread the posts in question, because one of us, definately has anger issues and an apparent need to tell people what they need and don't need. Reading comprehension is a wonderful thing.

I am well aware of when the quote happened. Gandalf did not wish the ring to be out and about. He was still unsure what it was beyond a magical ring. He was curious, and always pressed to find out what he could about the ring, how Bilbo aquired it, where it was currently, it's origins, etc.

Here let me help you with what would have been much better quotes;

He that breaks a thing to find out what it is has left the path of wisdom.

Perilous to us all are the devices of an art deeper than we possess ourselves.

It is not our part to master all the tides of the world...

Anyways, there is actual intelligent conversation to be had, so this is your last snack. Remember, when you point a finger at someone you have even more pointing back at yourself.

[DackRover]

Whatever you say Bilbo...I hope you eventually can let go of your pseudo-intellectual "precious" before your hair and teeth fall out...fortunately there is less risk in your "having fun" doing things "your way" (i.e., mental masturbation), than there lay beneath Bilbo's potentially hanging on to HIS obsession. You certainly sound very happy. Mild annoyance as might result to others from reading redundant and pedantic questions will hardly be a threat to world order.

My suggestion was simply that your (and others') energies would be better spent playing the game and seeing if the skills have good effects for you...nothing more...nothing less. That the answers were already given with respect to the practical application and effects you questioned...well, if you can't recognize that from the full posts as existed in the thread prior to your post, then I fear there may be little hope of satisfying you with anything short of the "actual underlying formulae" you disclaim requiring. In short, I don't believe you...there is always more required to feed obsession. Put it down Bilbo! Don't touch it...its evil! ( can you recognize that 2nd reference...not from LOTR).

Check that "angry" finger your pointing BTW...it is you who first directed words like "ignorant"...questioned my attentiveness and/or reading comprehension amidst your own poorly written and grammatically challenged phrasing. I only note this because your ad hominem attacks are increasing and becoming less subtly masked -- I generally prefer not to devolve to this "you spelled d-bag wrong" level, even where a disagreement is more severe than this distraction...but you sound like a particularly fun fellow, as you claim!

[DackRover]

Here let me help you with what would have been much better quotes;

He that breaks a thing to find out what it is has left the path of wisdom.

I freely concede that the above quote you listed succinctly, artfully and PERFECTLY states what I was driving at behind saying "just play the game," rather than trying to needlessly disect the absolutes of the WR mechanic, when the "tools" at our disposal are intentionally left blunt and inadequate by the dev's.

We know what it does...which mobs it essentially effects (the idea of adding swirlies over those it does reach is interesting), and that it is a weak leach akin to the warden's weakest of three.

That ought to be good enough, else you seek to depart the path of wisdom!!

Nice job on that quote...thank you, genuinely

[Rainyman]

Just to clarify using the above example,

If 1 other Fellowship member is within 10m of me when I do a WR and I gain 100 threat against each mob, does that mean if 3 Fellowship members were in range I still only gain 100 threat against each mob?



I had thought aggro was based on a threat list that just kind of auto arranged players according to the threat they have generated or lost during a fight, with, in most cases, highest threat in the group having aggro.

IE for simplicities sake assume 3 players all in 10m range with p2 being the Guard, 2 mobs, equal threat on all mobs;
Bad Guy Mob - Threat List

p2- 1000
p1 - 900
p3 - 700

After a WR (only looking at the Threat Drain) the list would look like;

Bad Guy Mob - Threat List

p2- 1200
p1 - 800
p3 - 600



Your explaination seems to suggest the possibility of a threat list that compares the current aggro holder against each other player on an individual basis rather than a group basis.

IE same scenerio as above;

Bad Guy Mob - Threat List

p2/p1 - 1000/900
p2/p3 - 1000/700
p1/p3 - 900/700

After WR

p2/p1 - 1100/800
p2/p3 - 1100/600
p1/p3 - 800/600


Of course I'm most likely way off on how the mechanic works, and I am assuming that Transfer means they lose threat and I gain it. Any insight would be much appreciated.

I believe your first case is correct.

[Malakho]

I agree with rainy. based on Graal's description, its per mob, but each toon that is on the mobs hate list will be another toon you will pull aggro from for that mob. So in your example #1, if the party was 6 rather then 3, the guards threat on that mob would be 300 higher (100 for each other party member that you leeched threat from for THAT mob.)

If there were 10 other mobs, though, you wouldn't have an extra 3000 threat on that first mob, only 300 extra on each individual mob.

And its best to ignore trolls...arguing with them is feeding them...they grow fast.

[Gedachtnis]

I agree with rainy. based on Graal's description, its per mob, but each toon that is on the mobs hate list will be another toon you will pull aggro from for that mob. So in your example #1, if the party was 6 rather then 3, the guards threat on that mob would be 300 higher (100 for each other party member that you leeched threat from for THAT mob.)

If there were 10 other mobs, though, you wouldn't have an extra 3000 threat on that first mob, only 300 extra on each individual mob.

And its best to ignore trolls...arguing with them is feeding them...they grow fast.

Yea, that sounds right. I think the fact that he gave a quantity of mobs and not a quantity of players threw me for a loop. It probably shouldn't have, but things like that happen.

I've actually found the Dev's very willing to give information on how things work and/or what they mean if someone isn't clear and just asks. I had a hard time figuring out the difference between Harm and Damage, every community member had a different idea. So I asked a Dev on the forums, lo and behold, he explained it.

As for trolls, it's amusing to watch them perform for snacks, it's like feeding seals at the zoo. The main difference being the seal understands the person with the food is the one controling the performance.

[DackRover]

According to Wiki sources: In Internet slang, a troll is someone who posts inflammatory, extraneous, or off-topic messages in an online community, such as an online discussion forum, chat room or blog, with the primary intent of provoking other users into an emotional response.

Yes...Ged, you sure do make a fine troll with your continued personal invectives seeking to further goad a person into continuing hostilities -- one who has already extended an olive branch to you in another thread, and even praised you within this one.

My original point stands...we know how the skill works and what it does...so just use it already and see what it does for you.

I am sorry you must have felt personally attacked by that genuine message... I never suggested that you were too lazy to review the tool tips and/or prior posts or lacked adequate reading comprehension to understand these and already sufficiently answered similar questions...those types of rationalizations and personal attacks regarding my message came from you instead first, despite strong temptation to do likewise.

I would bet you a virtual gold that when the dev's come across "continued pecking" such as has been embodied in this post, that it is less than a pleasing aspect of their job which sorely tries their patience...and hence why answers from them occasionally lapse into human responses born of exasperation such as "so just don't die!" -- which is an actual paraphrase greatly bemoaned on the warden boards, uttered by Graalx himself and replied to a warden similarly "pecking away" at an issue that concerns their ability (or alleged lack thereof) to recover threat control after a death and a rez during an instance.

I suppose I allowed myself to lapse into just such a human response, but was indeed genuine in my actual underlying missive.

[Dom12]

My original point stands...we know how the skill works and what it does...so just use it already and see what it does for you.

Except we don't "know how it works".. we know roughly, yes. As someone who get's into the math-fu, I completely support Ged in looking for further detail/explanation. If you don't care, then great, continue enjoying the game. But don't assume that when others try to delve for more information that their desire for that extra info is hindering, or somehow reducing, their enjoyment of the game.

Also regarding your point on "pecking," I'm sure it gets to be annoying after a point. But if someone asks you a question and doesn't fully understand your answer, does it annoy you so terribly if they ask for clarification? I hope the devs aren't so trivial as that (and in my experience, Graalx2 has not been so).

[DackRover]

Perhaps so and fair enough Dom...I already acknowledged on my own a realization that I had lapsed into a frustrated response. As stated in my first post on this theme, I was just coming off of a blistering thread of such repetitive and circular argument on the warden forum, so perhaps jumped too quickly here after already having more gently suggested earlier in the OP thread a path of "wisdom" as urged also within that good quote Ged provided above, and by at least one other post-er that then "agreed wholeheartedly" with my sentiments. There exist numerous sorties in and out of various aspects of threat mechanics in old threads, and the result is always the same.

We don't know by design...because they really don't want us to...my suspicions as to why that is: because they simply are not interested in getting too involved in encouraging just these types of attempted dissections of the mechanic.

My motives are sincere...my human exasperation arguably misplaced / displaced from other topics...and yet if you go back and reread what I posted and my earlier posts...I think most will recognize that it did not warrant the increasing degrees of hostility, attacks and truly troll-like reactions that followed from others, as I contrastingly became increasingly conciliatory. Ged felt personally attacked...I already directly apologized for that unintended effect.

[VmirTehPwn]

uttered by Graalx himself and replied to a warden similarly "pecking away" at an issue that concerns their ability (or alleged lack thereof) to recover threat control after a death and a rez during an instance.

It's not alleged, there is a lack of threat copy which further hinders wardens as raid tanks. Why should wardens be excluded from raids because of our skill set? That's ridiculous. Almost as ridiculous as you trying to prevent further discussion of WR by those who wanted more clarification on it.

[DackRover]

There were wardens in that thread in the warden forum that argued they could successfully recover from death despite the lack of an aggro copy skill...the word alleged was meant to modify that prospect, not whether or not there is an aggro copy skill in the first place.

Wardens, such as you, equate the lack of an engage-type skill with being total failures in raid situations...other wardens do not agree and have suggested this is the failure of the player to overcome and adapt with other given skills. I don't play a warden, but have seen several recover threat after a death with my own eyes and do have my own opinions on the matter, BUT I don't have first-hand proof playing the class myself...hence, to me it is an "alleged inability to recover after a death and rez." I don't care whether you do or do not, this thread was not about that anyway and I suspect few guards who posted in this thread are too concerned about it either. You could post your opinions on that point where others might care, perhaps that very thread which went on for pages and pages after just a couple of days...so rampantly that it made my head spin and I arrived in our forum with an attitude, unfortunately.

In the end, I think there are excellent wardens who are NOT being excluded from raids at all, and several wardens posted that those who are being so and who are expressing "doom and gloom," are simply not making the most of their charcaters and are just looking to externalize explanations of why the class rather than them is the failure. I can't speak as to that, but am only accurately relating the counterpoint presented by other wardens and as appeared in the thread titled "Are we Blinded by our Love of the Warden." I ran away from the thread after a few days or participation, and half wonder whether you might have followed me here solely to make more noise.

As to the rest, I think I explained myself fully and apologized where necessary.

[VmirTehPwn]

There were wardens in that thread in the warden forum that argued they could successfully recover from death despite the lack of an aggro copy skill...the word alleged was meant to modify that prospect, not whether or not there is an aggro copy skill in the first place.

My mistake then. Yes, there are some bosses that wipe aggro when they change phases. Otherwise, the only 'solution' is to chain DC using questionable tactics and that's prone to all kinds of problems.

Wardens, such as you, equate the lack of an engage-type skill with being total failures in raid situations...other wardens do not agree and have suggested this is the failure of the player to overcome and adapt with other given skills.

No, wardens are quite capable of tanking raids. They're just at a disadvantage in every way compared to a guardian. Ergo, warden will only tank if you can't find a guardian. I find that unacceptable

I don't play a warden ... and several wardens posted that those who are being so and who are expressing "doom and gloom," are simply not making the most of their charcaters and are just looking to externalize explanations of why the class rather than them is the failure.

The fact that you do not lack these aggro tools, and have never played a tanking class that does, means you don't have a real appreciation for how important they are in a raid.

I ran away from the thread after a few days or participation, and half wonder whether you might have followed me here solely to make more noise.

Sorry, but you did bring it up and I was merely correcting a misconception.

[SashaPayneDiaz]

Since the goal of all tanks is to have *more* threat on Mobs than the others in their group, leeches are twice as powerful as simple threat builders. They take "x" threat away from the fellowship member and transfer that "x" threat to the Guardian. So the Guardian's threat gained *relative to other group members* is 2x + threat from the skill's damage.

Plus whirling tends to hit a lot of untagged mobs in a swarm and bring them over to you.

I've found whirling to be a good threat management skill, and since it's most useful in a swarm, where you're getting a lot of parries, it's up a lot. If you stay close to your fellows a few applications will add up fast.

[DackRover]

Here is a link to the latest thread (2nd growing thread in less than a week on the warden forums, on the identical topic Vmir is bringing to our forum, and in which Vmir also appears and is contradicted by several good wardens arguing differently):http://forums.lotro.com/showthread.php?t=320054

I am thankful that you cleared up any misimpression that I may have gave to my fellow guards Vmir -- this thread is about WR however, so my digressive explanation of where my own frustration came from after visiting "your" forum, and it being misplaced here, has unfortunately now "chased me" back here officialy and in any event.

The position you take is disputed Vmir, but not by "us" or me, nor really is that being done "here"...I am indeed sorry my comment caught your attention, but suggest you have done your level best to "correct" me at this point, and further that the "debate" you are concerned with yet wages along numerous threads on the warden forum.

Good Luck -- I wish you satisfaction and enjoyment with your class.

[Forohir]

Since the goal of all tanks is to have *more* threat on Mobs than the others in their group, leeches are twice as powerful as simple threat builders. They take "x" threat away from the fellowship member and transfer that "x" threat to the Guardian. So the Guardian's threat gained *relative to other group members* is 2x + threat from the skill's damage.

Plus whirling tends to hit a lot of untagged mobs in a swarm and bring them over to you.

I've found whirling to be a good threat management skill, and since it's most useful in a swarm, where you're getting a lot of parries, it's up a lot. If you stay close to your fellows a few applications will add up fast.

A leech is by no means twice as powerful as a simple builder--not by neccessity at least. It all depends on how much is leeched and how much a threat builder builds.

If Shield Blow gives me 1000 threat, then it's still much better than a leech which steals 100 threat from each member of the fellowship.

Without numbers, it is impossible for us to know.

Keep in mind that the effectiveness of a leech is also dependent on your fellowship size. In a 3 man, it's not helping you very much. In a 12-man, you are only leeching from half the raid. A simple threat builder, on the other hand, always puts you up over your fellows the same amount, whether you are in a duo or a raid.

Even in a 6-man, the ideal group size for a leech (where you are stealing threat from every other person you are defending), you are only stealing threat from them A) if they have it to begin with (they may not have hit that monster and B) if they are in range of the leech. Once again, a simple threat builder has no such requirements.

Again, without numbers, it is impossible for us to know. That being said, I spam Whirling Retaliation like crazy and it serves me very well.

[Hakon_Stormbrow]

I have been doing a lot of tanking in SG with my guard in overpower. I was curious as to how i was holding aggro over champs... Now I uderstand it is Whirling retaliation. Between that and traited vexing blow, you can easily hold aggro on multiple targets. (best to start off with a challenge though to get them all on you so you can get some parries.).

Loving Whirling!!

[Azerog]

Yeah Hakkon. I really learned to love whirling pre book 7 when threat was so borked. I generally had few problems tanking multiple mobs and I credited to using whirling all the time (or else everyone else in the groups I was in just felt sorry for the poor guard ).

[Alderhaun]

Unfair?

It's not a competition. And even if it was, the classes are so entirely different and have such entirely different skillsets that any comparison of skill vs. skill is silly.

I'm a Guardian fanboi too, but even I realize that there's no reason to assume that their skills should be similar in range, duration, effect, or anything.

I'm sure Wardens would love it if Defiant Challenge lasted for more than 5 seconds or had a much quicker animation, like our two Challenge skills do.

I wish Turbine felt the way you do about classes. Like RK vs Mini.

RKs have to attune to switch from DPS to Heals.

Minis got swatted with the nerf bat a while back and were given a 10s buffer after dropping WS. Seems a lot like attuning to me.

CHOO CHOO!!