Hadden (and respecting camps)

Discussion in 'Time Locked Progression Servers' started by EchoFreya, Sep 29, 2020.

  1. Loze Elder

    lol

    MotM doesn't just reduce damage taken, it transfers all aggro to the pet owner. YOU CAN NOT PET TANK MotM MOBS.

    Yes Phinny is easy.
    No you can't stay underwater without worn/spell/song EB long enough to get to him and kill him, regardless of your swim skill in era.
  2. Tweakfour17 Augur


    So if just a capped swimming gets you ~15 minutes underwater (it doesn't, but I'm going off the info you're saying), then why is there a big rush to recast EB on the MT if he gets dispelled?

    You've been called a well polished troll by a few others and I wasn't really buying it but now I'm starting to wonder..

    Also if its such an important task to recast EB immediately then don't you think that lends weight to why someone would want a worn EB item such as a fishbone earring? Can't dispel worn effects..
  3. Loze Elder

    To call him a troll is to insult the true trolls. I've done battle with many trolls over many forums over many years. CaptainVideo is no troll.

    I'm sure Hicks is highly insulted by everyone calling Vidya a troll.
  4. Captain Video Augur


    Because players are lazy and don't skill up swimming. It might not be as much as 15 minutes at swimming = 250, but it's a lot closer to 15 than two. The dispel isn't a critical thing to taking down Phinny anyway, so having EB as a worn effect vs. a spell shouldn't really matter. It feels like some people who are challenging me on this are doing so because it calls into question why there needs to be a cash market for an item like Fishbone Earring to begin with, which is the only real reason it's ever farmed.


    My understanding of MotM is that this is false. MotM is strictly damage mitigation. If a named is separately flagged as a raid mob, then and only then does it lock out pet aggro. There is not a 1:1 correlation between MotM-tagged mobs and raid targets. This keeps coming up over and over in the context of people lobbying for more AoCs on non-raid targets. If Phinny is flagged as a raid mob on TLPs, then yes I am wrong about being able to tank him with pets on a TLP. But that would be totally illogical for devs to do, since Phinny is easily single-grouped, and the same was true in-era.
  5. Loze Elder

    No.

    I couldn't find the official post, but from EQ Mage Tower:
    And yes, everything intended as a raid target, whether it can be 1 grouped or not, is flagged with MotM. A couple of events in Frostcrypt can be 1 grouped in era, so your definition of a raid target is flawed. Just because it's 1 groupable doesn't mean it wasn't intended to be a raid target, it just means it became trivial too soon, or people learned to cheese it.
  6. Captain Video Augur

    MotM is implemented as a spell, and there's nothing in Lucy about any pet effect. The pet logic has to be coded separately, which means it can be either on or off separate from MotM itself. This is a Prathun question, and he's not here.
  7. Ruhi Augur

    he's a dug a real deep hole roflmao
  8. Tweakfour17 Augur


    Your understanding is wrong. Period. Some mobs are flagged as raid mobs and will not allow a pet to tank them if there is a player in melee range, trash in LDoN raids are an example of this. Backup out of melee range and the pet can then tank. MoTM adds a whole other layer, any and all aggro that a pet generates adds directly to the aggro of the owner. And any mob with MOTM will NEVER target the pet. Ever. By your own admission you don't raid on TLPs so I'm not sure why you are so confidently incorrect about raiding on TLPs but you only need to log into one and ask any mage how many times their pet has gotten them killed on raids

    As soon as an expac where motm rolls off unlocks the mobs that used to have motm can now be pet tanked, so unless the unlock script is also flipping flags on every raid mob from 5 expacs ago, this is also wrong.
  9. Captain Video Augur


    This is something I'm 100% sure I have right. First off, MotM unlocks aren't counting expacs, they're counting five calendar years since the original expac release. Kunark-based MotMs have not yet unlocked on Mangler, they will very shortly when DoN unlocks, which is coming up. That's five years difference, not five expacs. There's a Prathun post about this somewhere.

    Second, the code for the pet logic wouldn't need to have any raid mob flags changed, it can do what it needs to do by looking at the MotM flag (gets flipped) and separately the raid mob flag (never changes). It's a trivial task, there aren't that many affected mobs per expansion. Lucy doesn't lie. Show me the Lucy data for any MotM level where it does something/anything with pets.
  10. jeskola pheerie

    Only chain armor classes tank. Next level.
  11. Tweakfour17 Augur

    It's most definitely tied to expansions, maybe they don't count them all and skip the junk ones like LoY or LDoN but MoTM rolls off based on certain expansion unlocks and not by date. They are timed to coincide when those mobs could spawn as fabled.

    So you're saying the fact that MOTM mobs will NEVER target a pet and all the pet's aggro transfers to the owner is a hardcoded thing in the pet behavior and only looks for the MOTM buff and otherwise has nothing to do with the mob or motm buff itself?
  12. Loze Elder

    I will say that I read the 5 year thing, and it does make sense, because there were expansions where I expected MotM to fall off on Coirnav, but it didn't until the next expansion.
  13. bardybard Augur

    Google is your friend.

    https://forums.daybreakgames.com/eq...-motm-a-thing-on-phinny-at-this-point.248510/
    https://forums.daybreakgames.com/eq/index.php?threads/game-update-notes-april-18-2018.248650/
  14. Captain Video Augur


    It's tied to the expansion release which falls closest to the five calendar year rule. The fact that it matches the timing of Fabled may have been a part of why Prathun chose to do it that way. Here is a quote from Prathun which I copied second-hand from Zam, it was taken from a forum post somewhere around Apr '18. Patch notes from that month are relevant:

    "We've changed how Mitigation of the Mighty buffs and stats are applied to bosses so that they are no longer applied when it's 5 era years after the content was introduced.

    So...
    Original EQ bosses stop using MotM once Gates of Discord has unlocked.
    Kunark bosses stop using MotM once Dragons of Norrath has unlocked.
    Velious bosses stop using MotM once Prophecy of Ro has unlocked.
    Luclin bosses stop using MotM once The Buried Sea has unlocked.
    Planes of Power bosses stop using MotM once Seeds of Destruction has unlocked.

    This coincides to when Fabled activate, so it should not be possible to get a boss that is both Fabled and has MotM."

    EDIT: I see that Bardybard beat me to it, and went so far as to link to the patch notes.


    No, I'm saying it's hard-coded into the mob behavior, and is keyed to any mob with both the raid flag and MotM flag set. It is possible for a mob to have MotM but not be raid flagged, in which case pets would work as normal. MotM has never been the be-all-end-all of TLP adjustments. You also have things like Mark of the Old Ways, for example. Unfortunately, a lot of this remains in Prathun's head and was never properly documented, at least not so far as we the players know. For anyone who wants to keep arguing this issue, I continue to point back to Lucy.
  15. Tweakfour17 Augur


    Got an example or is this just a theoretical thing?

    This is mostly true but falls apart at the PoP -> SoD, PoP* launched Oct 29, 2002, 5 years after that was TBS with SoF launching Nov 13, 2007. SoD didn't launch until Oct 21, 2008 1 week shy of 6 years. Not really important, my original post that got us on this topic was just to highlight that as soon as the expac opened that dropped MoTM, pets could now tank raid mobs. /shrug


    *According to Wikipedia anyways, maybe its wrong
  16. Skuz I am become Wrath, the Destroyer of Worlds.

    If you don't have Captain-Video on ignore by now you're just asking to be amazed by his determination to be completely and utterly wrong as much as he can be. I don't think it's a wind up either, he just cannot differentiate actual everquest facts & information from stuff he just made up or pulled out of his backside.
    Loze and Bobbybick like this.
  17. Captain Video Augur


    Obviously I thought Phinny was an example. I'm not volunteering to set my actual gameplay aside and go on a wild testing spree on this, but even if I did, how can a testing plan even be formulated when there is no published list for TLPs as to what has been reverted and what hasn't, and which targets are actually raid-flagged and which aren't. This is what I meant when I said "all in Prathun's head".

    One example that comes specifically to mind is Korocust in Chardok B. The Ranger 1.5 visits that zone. I've solo'ed him at 65 (not molo, actual solo) on Live in all-Elaborate gear, which is arguably no better than Time+Elemental in-era. And yet he has MotM on Mangler! Why? It doesn't make a difference, he can still be solo'ed there too. Plus Chardok B is in the hotzone rotation on Live, so there are times when you can get a boatload of XP for killing him. Was he reverted for TLP? How does anyone know?

    I describe things based on what I know, and what I surmise, about how the code works. I don't know about the design decisions, I would have always yielded to Prathun on that. In his absence, you guys are putting all sorts of energy into defending [undocumented] design decisions of his, which are to me, at times, stupefying. Maybe I'm the one that's stupid, but somehow I don't think so.
  18. Tweakfour17 Augur

    Whose defending undocumented design decisions? It doesn't really matter HOW MoTM works in the code, the fact is if a mob has it then pets can NOT tank it. Period. The End. You are free to suppose that it is possible for a mob to be flagged motm and not flagged "raid" and so a pet could tank it but w/o an example you're just making stuff up.
    Loze likes this.
  19. Skuz I am become Wrath, the Destroyer of Worlds.

    Yes, nailed it.
    Loze likes this.
  20. Captain Video Augur


    You don't agree with my analysis, and that's fine. People are entitled to their opinions. I'm not sure why my opinion is such an obsession with you, but whatever. All of this rhetoric has side-stepped the original question, which remains unanswered:

    Name one encounter in the game no higher than level 50, and not a raid encounter, where you actually need EB. I still don't believe there is one, and I think the whole sidebar about Phinny and MotM has just been an excuse to hide the fact that a swath of TLP experts are too stumped to give an answer. And I stand by my assertion that the only reason anyone farms that stupid earring (which, I remind you, was at the core of the OP) is for RMT.