- Forums
- Final Fantasy XIV
- General Discussion
- An interesting read on Enmity & Shield Oath
An interesting read on Enmity & Shield OathFollow
http://ventusinvictus.blogspot.com/2013/09/endgame-paladin-guide.html
That was an awesome read. Exhaustive tests were one of the main reasons I loved FFXI.
I can only hope some aspects of FFXIV prove to be as cryptic, just to see the ensuing discourse.
Edited, Sep 23rd 2013 10:42pm by KaneKitty
I can only hope some aspects of FFXIV prove to be as cryptic, just to see the ensuing discourse.
Edited, Sep 23rd 2013 10:42pm by KaneKitty
Thanks for that post! I've been looking for a layman's guide to learning PLD before actually starting on it, or bugging my FC with all kinds of questions.
I have two slight problems with this.
First, just like in XI, there is a distinct enmity loss upon taking damage. Enmity lost depends on an equation between the amount of damage taken compared to your max hp.
They did good to keep the same relative amounts of HP, but what they apparently did not count upon were the hits they were taking. Not anywhere in that research of terrible sample size have i seen them adjust for damage taken, or attacks. Nor a mention of damage recieved, and by whom. It's this and the mention of "there's a diffirence, but we dont know what" that gives this the feeling of being a sporatic "Hey, got five minutes to hit something with me" kind of thing.
Second, there's an enmity bonus for the first person who hits a monster. It's just a straight +x amount, i'm willing to bet it is the exact amount in diffirence between the two players that they are having. Since they're having the exact same gear, they cannot catch up to one another.
All in all, my fear is that more and more clueless DPS are going to use this testing to call out their tanks to do something, when the eventual result is lacking at best. Tanks arent damage dealers. Tasks for Tanks can simply be divided into 1) Get hate, 2) keep hate, 3) try and take as little damage as possible. Outside of some VERY rare exceptions, the trade-off between 20% damage dealt, and 20% less damage taken when enmity is capped regardless is something that shouldnt be worth it to you.
Solo some super weak monsters? Go ahead, use Sword Oath.
Anything party-wise? Shield Oath or be a liability.
First, just like in XI, there is a distinct enmity loss upon taking damage. Enmity lost depends on an equation between the amount of damage taken compared to your max hp.
They did good to keep the same relative amounts of HP, but what they apparently did not count upon were the hits they were taking. Not anywhere in that research of terrible sample size have i seen them adjust for damage taken, or attacks. Nor a mention of damage recieved, and by whom. It's this and the mention of "there's a diffirence, but we dont know what" that gives this the feeling of being a sporatic "Hey, got five minutes to hit something with me" kind of thing.
Second, there's an enmity bonus for the first person who hits a monster. It's just a straight +x amount, i'm willing to bet it is the exact amount in diffirence between the two players that they are having. Since they're having the exact same gear, they cannot catch up to one another.
All in all, my fear is that more and more clueless DPS are going to use this testing to call out their tanks to do something, when the eventual result is lacking at best. Tanks arent damage dealers. Tasks for Tanks can simply be divided into 1) Get hate, 2) keep hate, 3) try and take as little damage as possible. Outside of some VERY rare exceptions, the trade-off between 20% damage dealt, and 20% less damage taken when enmity is capped regardless is something that shouldnt be worth it to you.
Solo some super weak monsters? Go ahead, use Sword Oath.
Anything party-wise? Shield Oath or be a liability.
KojiroSoma wrote:
I have two slight problems with this.
First, just like in XI, there is a distinct enmity loss upon taking damage. Enmity lost depends on an equation between the amount of damage taken compared to your max hp.
They did good to keep the same relative amounts of HP, but what they apparently did not count upon were the hits they were taking. Not anywhere in that research of terrible sample size have i seen them adjust for damage taken, or attacks. Nor a mention of damage recieved, and by whom. It's this and the mention of "there's a diffirence, but we dont know what" that gives this the feeling of being a sporatic "Hey, got five minutes to hit something with me" kind of thing.
Second, there's an enmity bonus for the first person who hits a monster. It's just a straight +x amount, i'm willing to bet it is the exact amount in diffirence between the two players that they are having. Since they're having the exact same gear, they cannot catch up to one another.
All in all, my fear is that more and more clueless DPS are going to use this testing to call out their tanks to do something, when the eventual result is lacking at best. Tanks arent damage dealers. Tasks for Tanks can simply be divided into 1) Get hate, 2) keep hate, 3) try and take as little damage as possible. Outside of some VERY rare exceptions, the trade-off between 20% damage dealt, and 20% less damage taken when enmity is capped regardless is something that shouldnt be worth it to you.
Solo some super weak monsters? Go ahead, use Sword Oath.
Anything party-wise? Shield Oath or be a liability.
First, just like in XI, there is a distinct enmity loss upon taking damage. Enmity lost depends on an equation between the amount of damage taken compared to your max hp.
They did good to keep the same relative amounts of HP, but what they apparently did not count upon were the hits they were taking. Not anywhere in that research of terrible sample size have i seen them adjust for damage taken, or attacks. Nor a mention of damage recieved, and by whom. It's this and the mention of "there's a diffirence, but we dont know what" that gives this the feeling of being a sporatic "Hey, got five minutes to hit something with me" kind of thing.
Second, there's an enmity bonus for the first person who hits a monster. It's just a straight +x amount, i'm willing to bet it is the exact amount in diffirence between the two players that they are having. Since they're having the exact same gear, they cannot catch up to one another.
All in all, my fear is that more and more clueless DPS are going to use this testing to call out their tanks to do something, when the eventual result is lacking at best. Tanks arent damage dealers. Tasks for Tanks can simply be divided into 1) Get hate, 2) keep hate, 3) try and take as little damage as possible. Outside of some VERY rare exceptions, the trade-off between 20% damage dealt, and 20% less damage taken when enmity is capped regardless is something that shouldnt be worth it to you.
Solo some super weak monsters? Go ahead, use Sword Oath.
Anything party-wise? Shield Oath or be a liability.
Nicely said. And yeah the sample is simply too small to generalize in the manner that is done. The sample should be done over a wider category and through all level ranges to truly be empirical. Sounds like a lot of hogwash I'm spewing right?
I used to be a parser addict in ffxi and always **** for the top of DPS charting as well as for fastest killing. I know that t accurately draw the appropriate conclusion in this scenario you need population of information to know how much hate the tank holds. You also need to not have some crazy DPS who's looking to make top DPS by aggroing the mobs before the tank can e even establishing the cycle of hate.
Stuff like that is important.
15 posts
Enmity is not lost by taking damage.
From what I have seen, emnity in 14 is a little different than the way that people are explaining it.
It appears (and this appeared the same in 1.0) to be a fixed value for the mob. The boost that is seen from first aggro is that 100% is moved to the person who initiates combat.
From that point on, the points are striped from the party to move to whoever is drawing hate (triggering an action).
So, when a mob aggros, no emnity is given. Once an action is triggered against the mob (which includes actions related to a person on the mob hate list) emnity is allocated.
By working off of this, As a tank, in 1.0, since combat was slower, it was easy to time emnity spike moves to be immediately after another party member performed a spike move. As a result, the person who triggered the first move would pull emnity from every other player to them, including me, I would then follow it up, and pull emnity from all other players, including the one that took some from me. As a result, they could climb on the emnity tree, but would not out-pace me.
With the faster combat, this is no longer possible. However, by using Cover (which is an action against the player on the hate list) or even buff actions (which don't use GCD), I can time a healthy spike of emnity. Flash itself is not good for immediate regain. However, Provoke is. If you time provoke after your first weaponskill, but before your emnity skill chain, you can get a very healthy spike. Also, you can (and it will not necessarily make your mages happy) use Convalescence to increase cure potency. This will cause mage actions to be more effective against you, therefore help balance emnity.
The only problem with that last bit is, if you are fighting several mobs, doing that will typically negate the effect of your flash (or hinder it greatly), as mobs you are only holding by flash and sword of scion will build up hate faster on your healer.
Now, am I saying any of this is 100% accurate? No. This is simply what I have observed, and I am posting it for those who like to analyze data to have a different perspective to look at.
This has worked for me, and I tend to be very good at holding hate (with the exception of DDs that actually want hate, and in that case, there is no tank build that can truly effectively stop them from doing that against multiple mobs, or even at the start of a fight, or worse, if they start kiting the mob and continuing to hold hate... I have had a few of those).
It appears (and this appeared the same in 1.0) to be a fixed value for the mob. The boost that is seen from first aggro is that 100% is moved to the person who initiates combat.
From that point on, the points are striped from the party to move to whoever is drawing hate (triggering an action).
So, when a mob aggros, no emnity is given. Once an action is triggered against the mob (which includes actions related to a person on the mob hate list) emnity is allocated.
By working off of this, As a tank, in 1.0, since combat was slower, it was easy to time emnity spike moves to be immediately after another party member performed a spike move. As a result, the person who triggered the first move would pull emnity from every other player to them, including me, I would then follow it up, and pull emnity from all other players, including the one that took some from me. As a result, they could climb on the emnity tree, but would not out-pace me.
With the faster combat, this is no longer possible. However, by using Cover (which is an action against the player on the hate list) or even buff actions (which don't use GCD), I can time a healthy spike of emnity. Flash itself is not good for immediate regain. However, Provoke is. If you time provoke after your first weaponskill, but before your emnity skill chain, you can get a very healthy spike. Also, you can (and it will not necessarily make your mages happy) use Convalescence to increase cure potency. This will cause mage actions to be more effective against you, therefore help balance emnity.
The only problem with that last bit is, if you are fighting several mobs, doing that will typically negate the effect of your flash (or hinder it greatly), as mobs you are only holding by flash and sword of scion will build up hate faster on your healer.
Now, am I saying any of this is 100% accurate? No. This is simply what I have observed, and I am posting it for those who like to analyze data to have a different perspective to look at.
This has worked for me, and I tend to be very good at holding hate (with the exception of DDs that actually want hate, and in that case, there is no tank build that can truly effectively stop them from doing that against multiple mobs, or even at the start of a fight, or worse, if they start kiting the mob and continuing to hold hate... I have had a few of those).
http://na.finalfantasyxiv.com/lodestone/character/729735/
rfolkker wrote:
With the faster combat, this is no longer possible. However, by using Cover (which is an action against the player on the hate list) or even buff actions (which don't use GCD), I can time a healthy spike of emnity. Flash itself is not good for immediate regain. However, Provoke is. If you time provoke after your first weaponskill, but before your emnity skill chain, you can get a very healthy spike.
All provoke does is put you at the top of the hate list (which is great). but that's what is causing the perceived hate spike.
Correct, it is not so much perceived, it helps reset hate, and allowing me to maintain. Where throwing a flash out burns a GCD, and slows down my combo actually making it harder to regain or maintain hate.
You can actually trigger provoke immediately after you trigger your first weaponskill. You can then follow up with the rest of your emnity skill chain, and not lose a step (or a second for that matter).
Which was more of what I was trying to say. Provoke by itself is pretty worthless. However, doing your first weaponskill, provoke, and continue with chain makes provoke useful.
However, I will admit, on multi-pop boss fights, I will typically run to one mob, shield lob, run to the next, provoke, run to the third Shield lob. Pull them all together and flash. That way I don't have to wait for them to collect. But that really is a one off situation.
You can actually trigger provoke immediately after you trigger your first weaponskill. You can then follow up with the rest of your emnity skill chain, and not lose a step (or a second for that matter).
Which was more of what I was trying to say. Provoke by itself is pretty worthless. However, doing your first weaponskill, provoke, and continue with chain makes provoke useful.
However, I will admit, on multi-pop boss fights, I will typically run to one mob, shield lob, run to the next, provoke, run to the third Shield lob. Pull them all together and flash. That way I don't have to wait for them to collect. But that really is a one off situation.
http://na.finalfantasyxiv.com/lodestone/character/729735/
unless i'm really mistaken, provoke is only useless when its used on a mob that no one else has touched yet. ie provoking a mob that no one has touched will do nothing for you, since you're already at the top of the hate list just by being the first person to act on it. In other words, Provoke creates the ultimate "hate spike" but only in relation to whoever else is on the mob's hate list. You can use it to pull with, but unless i'm totally wrong here, that would be a waste of the ability.
KojiroSoma wrote:
First, just like in XI, there is a distinct enmity loss upon taking damage. Enmity lost depends on an equation between the amount of damage taken compared to your max hp.
roxasn wrote:
Enmity is not lost by taking damage.
Okay, so... anyone know which is true? Because we have a lot of very confidently, definitively stated positions on this topic, many of which contradict one another.
Llester wrote:
unless i'm really mistaken, provoke is only useless when its used on a mob that no one else has touched yet. ie provoking a mob that no one has touched will do nothing for you, since you're already at the top of the hate list just by being the first person to act on it. In other words, Provoke creates the ultimate "hate spike" but only in relation to whoever else is on the mob's hate list. You can use it to pull with, but unless i'm totally wrong here, that would be a waste of the ability.
In the case that I listed above, I use it because it is not on GCD. You have to initiate an action against a mob to actually have emnity. Just because you are on a mobs hate list, does not mean it has emnity. Mobs appear yellow when they "Aggro" you. At this point there is zero emnity. The next action actually puts you at the top of it's emnity list.
So, in the case of Shield Lob, Provoke, Shield Lob. You can actually do that combination in 2.5 seconds, with Flash being at the 5 second mark. As opposed to Shield Lob, Shield Lob, Shield Lob, Flash (7.5 seconds), or even just wait to allow the mobs to collect.
So, yeah, I do it to save myself 2.5 seconds, and get more mobs off whoever they are going after. I use that alot in CM.
http://na.finalfantasyxiv.com/lodestone/character/729735/
rfolkker wrote:
Llester wrote:
unless i'm really mistaken, provoke is only useless when its used on a mob that no one else has touched yet. ie provoking a mob that no one has touched will do nothing for you, since you're already at the top of the hate list just by being the first person to act on it. In other words, Provoke creates the ultimate "hate spike" but only in relation to whoever else is on the mob's hate list. You can use it to pull with, but unless i'm totally wrong here, that would be a waste of the ability.
In the case that I listed above, I use it because it is not on GCD. You have to initiate an action against a mob to actually have emnity. Just because you are on a mobs hate list, does not mean it has emnity. Mobs appear yellow when they "Aggro" you. At this point there is zero emnity. The next action actually puts you at the top of it's emnity list.
what i'm saying is: whats the point of being at the top of a hate list of one. i can see the usefulness in repurposing Provoke as an off-GCD pull to get mobs on you initially but i'm not sure if its good practice or not. guess it depends on whether or not you lose hate on anything while Provoke is on cooldown. Everything i've read and exerienced has led me to almost exclusively use Provoke to regain hate if i lose it.
I was kind of saying the same thing. It really is only for that. But, I wanted to mention that in things like CM, where collecting the mobs to the center can be more important than holding hate, the faster I get them to the center, the more effectively they can be aoe-blasted..
So, it is more of a, yes, this is absolutely a Oh, crap, I need to get a mob back (e.g. if you retarget a mob, and trigger an ability with out actively selecting the mob, you can provoke a mob that is not your current target, and immediately you will switch back, you can also use this to split up your weaponskill. For example, you use WS1 and WS2 on mob one, retarget mob two, and trigger WS3).
By using off techniques like this, you have situational usages that go outside of what is proper, and are actually working towards what is effective for the situation.
But, yeah, until you have a feel for how to hold hate, and what and when to use your abilities, only use provoke when you absolutely need to get that hate spike. But keep in mind, you lost hate for a reason, and attempt to remedy the situation as fast as possible, or the mob(s) will run roughshot all over your party.
So, it is more of a, yes, this is absolutely a Oh, crap, I need to get a mob back (e.g. if you retarget a mob, and trigger an ability with out actively selecting the mob, you can provoke a mob that is not your current target, and immediately you will switch back, you can also use this to split up your weaponskill. For example, you use WS1 and WS2 on mob one, retarget mob two, and trigger WS3).
By using off techniques like this, you have situational usages that go outside of what is proper, and are actually working towards what is effective for the situation.
But, yeah, until you have a feel for how to hold hate, and what and when to use your abilities, only use provoke when you absolutely need to get that hate spike. But keep in mind, you lost hate for a reason, and attempt to remedy the situation as fast as possible, or the mob(s) will run roughshot all over your party.
http://na.finalfantasyxiv.com/lodestone/character/729735/
-REDACTED-
Scholar
1,339 posts
KaneKitty wrote:
KojiroSoma wrote:
First, just like in XI, there is a distinct enmity loss upon taking damage. Enmity lost depends on an equation between the amount of damage taken compared to your max hp.
roxasn wrote:
Enmity is not lost by taking damage.
Okay, so... anyone know which is true? Because we have a lot of very confidently, definitively stated positions on this topic, many of which contradict one another.
The second one. People trying to bring FFXI terribad hate mechanics into the discussion when talking about FFXIV need to stop. The *ONLY* thing in common between the hate system of FFXI and the hate system of FFXIV is the word enmity. Enmity decay was disproven in 1.0 and every beta test thereafter. It doesn't decay.
Frankly, as nice as his read is (and his idiotic comments about LOLdefense just like a lot of BG morons) his testing is baseless. He's taking two variables and trying to prove his case and doesn't have a control. ARR's threat was tested with a tank and a healer and using the healer to fine tune and see where and how enmity worked. The cures went up and down trying to find a formula and a method of calculating threat as best as possible. Over the course of several weekends was how the currently accepted enmity rules were tested and tried, and until someone actually makes enough of an effort in the same vein to disprove them they're not going anywhere.
So far, all his blog post shows is that he disdains defense (
) doesn't bother to use Awareness ( you get crit by Mountain Buster once and you'll change your damned tune ) and loves to throw out random theories and try to state they're fact without actually backing them up. A handful of doing random stuff one afternoon isn't a test and it doesn't prove anything.
Edited, Sep 24th 2013 1:11pm by Viertel
KojiroSoma wrote:
Second, there's an enmity bonus for the first person who hits a monster. It's just a straight +x amount, i'm willing to bet it is the exact amount in diffirence between the two players that they are having. Since they're having the exact same gear, they cannot catch up to one another.
Didn't the guy say they reversed roles and the results were still the same? Also shouldn't whoever uses the emnity boost ability come out ahead on the hate list anyway, which the guy said didnt happen? Not trying to start a fight bit did you read the article?
Edited, Sep 24th 2013 1:42pm by reptiletim
Viertel wrote:
KaneKitty wrote:
KojiroSoma wrote:
First, just like in XI, there is a distinct enmity loss upon taking damage. Enmity lost depends on an equation between the amount of damage taken compared to your max hp.
roxasn wrote:
Enmity is not lost by taking damage.
Okay, so... anyone know which is true? Because we have a lot of very confidently, definitively stated positions on this topic, many of which contradict one another.
The second one. People trying to bring FFXI terribad hate mechanics into the discussion when talking about FFXIV need to stop. The *ONLY* thing in common between the hate system of FFXI and the hate system of FFXIV is the word enmity. Enmity decay was disproven in 1.0 and every beta test thereafter. It doesn't decay.
Frankly, as nice as his read is (and his idiotic comments about LOLdefense just like a lot of BG morons) his testing is baseless. He's taking two variables and trying to prove his case and doesn't have a control. ARR's threat was tested with a tank and a healer and using the healer to fine tune and see where and how enmity worked. The cures went up and down trying to find a formula and a method of calculating threat as best as possible. Over the course of several weekends was how the currently accepted enmity rules were tested and tried, and until someone actually makes enough of an effort in the same vein to disprove them they're not going anywhere.
So far, all his blog post shows is that he disdains defense (
) doesn't bother to use Awareness ( you get crit by Mountain Buster once and you'll change your damned tune ) and loves to throw out random theories and try to state they're fact without actually backing them up. A handful of doing random stuff one afternoon isn't a test and it doesn't prove anything.
Edited, Sep 24th 2013 1:11pm by Viertel
I'm genuinely curious, is there a write up somewhere that I can read that spells out the testing method you mentioned? I'd like to see the other side of this. The topic is very interesting, I love to see the game mechanics dissected like this.
I personally have a theory that the formulas used in the game are so complex even SE doesn't understand how they work. Kind of like when I have a 95% chance to hit in Botany and miss 4 times in a row...
reptiletim wrote:
I personally have a theory that the formulas used in the game are so complex even SE doesn't understand how they work. Kind of like when I have a 95% chance to hit in Botany and miss 4 times in a row...
Well, as a side-note, I did an extremely rudimentary test on that very topic.
Lvl.15 BTN. 93% Success chance. 25% HQ chance (Leaf Turn always active).
Hit: 130 (92.85%)
Miss: 10 (7.14%)
HQ: 44 (31.42%)
Now I realize that I only did 140 attempts (because then I dinged 16 and it changed my chances, heh), but my results show that there's nothing wrong with gathering: my rates of success and failure were almost eerily aligned with what would be expected, and my HQ rate was actually a little higher than expected. Sure, it could be that other materials are glitched or something, but overall I attribute outrage towards the R.N.G. as misleading vividness (i.e., if you miss three 95% chances in a row you remember it, whereas the thousands of successes you have over the weeks are forgettable and blur together).
Viertel wrote:
So far, all his blog post shows is that he disdains defense (
) doesn't bother to use Awareness ( you get crit by Mountain Buster once and you'll change your damned tune ) and loves to throw out random theories and try to state they're fact without actually backing them up. A handful of doing random stuff one afternoon isn't a test and it doesn't prove anything.
Edited, Sep 24th 2013 1:11pm by Viertel
i wasn't too impressed by his write up tbh. sidebar: i wish people would stop putting crappy keybinding setups in their guides :/
reptiletim wrote:
I personally have a theory that the formulas used in the game are so complex even SE doesn't understand how they work. Kind of like when I have a 95% chance to hit in Botany and miss 4 times in a row...
i have a theory that people tend to look for order in the midst of randomness. see above post.
Edited, Sep 24th 2013 2:58pm by Llester
-REDACTED-
Scholar
1,339 posts
reptiletim wrote:
I'm genuinely curious, is there a write up somewhere that I can read that spells out the testing method you mentioned? I'd like to see the other side of this. The topic is very interesting, I love to see the game mechanics dissected like this.
I personally have a theory that the formulas used in the game are so complex even SE doesn't understand how they work. Kind of like when I have a 95% chance to hit in Botany and miss 4 times in a row...
I personally have a theory that the formulas used in the game are so complex even SE doesn't understand how they work. Kind of like when I have a 95% chance to hit in Botany and miss 4 times in a row...
Second point first: I don't think they're to complex. Anyone that played 1.0 for a serious length of time pre 1.19-1.23 era will tell you how ridiculous the formulas were then. It's at that point Yoshi's team looked at them and publically said "We're just going to throw them away and start over." The phrase "using simple calculations" were used a few times and if anything it's the players that are trying to theorycraft basing everything off of how FFXI did things that is mucking up understanding.
It's also people that are trying to run off of out-dated 1.0 info too. The most notorious is the concept from 1.0's "Your first action doesn't actually do anything hate-wise" that still believe in. Shield Lob > Provoke > Shield Lob on the pull is retarded and a waste of a cooldown. Or the person that stated "Just like FFXI, enmity decays" when that has never, ever been the case in FFXIV and while good amount of Kanican's testing has been changed in ARR that constant has not.
As to your first point it's somewhere on daevaofwar.net. He basically did a control where he tested (using broken weapons to reduce cures if need be) to arrive at the enmity values that have stayed true so far even in early access. The link in the first post is useless as evidence because he's trying to test one variable against another, with no control, and stating "This is broken." and just gives anecdotal evidence as to why it's broken.
Recent Visitors: 17
All times are in CST
Anonymous Guests (17)
- Forums
- Final Fantasy XIV
- General Discussion
- An interesting read on Enmity & Shield Oath
© 2024 Fanbyte LLC