Diamaht wrote: » At one point in the stream Steven thought the mobs agro'd him because he's a priest, the devs then said they don't think that's the case. It should be the case. You gain an advantage by bringing a direct counter into an area. You are doing less work to kill the mobs, which is great. That's just smart, engaging gameplay, but I think you should also do a little more work to protect that advantage. The enemy should, on a basic level, recognize the increased threat and work the eliminate it. More specifically agro radius from a direct counter (like a priest in a crypt, or a water mage in a volcano) should be slightly larger and when all agro math is equal the counter should draw agro by default. Finding and bringing a perfect matchup into an encounter should be rewarded by an smoother encounter, but it also should be the parties job (mostly the tank) to protect their advantage. The mobs should be smart enough to recognize the largest threat and work to eliminate it.
Azherae wrote: » I disagree with this because having a harder-set 'Larger Threat' on engage or similar things often leads to 'cheesing'. Whereas a standard 'hate mechanic' can be built around with some consistency, anything beyond 'Oh hey this aggros to healers first because they are healers' or 'this builds extra enmity against healers when they take actions' leads to overpredictability. The reason I disagree is because at least with MOST of the things a Tank needs to do, there is SOME skill involved. It isn't automatic. Anything 'automatic' I disagree with.
Trenker wrote: » I think mob aggro should also consider range on their hate list. In the video a couple of Zombies just walked past the Cleric on their way to the fighter on the other side of the encounter. Arguably the Cleric was in a bad position, so the mobs should have whacked him, if only once on their way to the top of their hate list. This will promote thinking about positioning more.
