Archive for July, 2008

The End Heal of Lifebloom Generates No Threat

14
July 27, 2008
by Lume in ,

There’s been a debate raging amongst the druid community for the past year and a half. It started with a series of rather simple empirical tests a friend and I conducted in early March of 2007, the results of which we posted on Elitist Jerks. In short, we concluded the end heal of lifebloom generated threat for neither the druid nor the recipient.

In retrospect, we conducted this test sloppily. We were not careful to avoid threat anomalies and the argument had a couple holes in them. Regardless, I still believed our findings were rather conclusive, or at least more conclusive than those of others. However, some people on the EJ boards continued to argue that the end heal actually did generate threat for the recipient, because it displayed similarly in the combat log to prayer of mending—a spell that does generate threat for the recipient. This in and of itself is fallacious. Just because it appears in the combat log like a spell that does generate threat for the recipient doesn’t mean lifebloom’s end heal behaves similarly.

Flash forward to today, a year and four months later. Many patches and hotfixes have been implemented since the original test was conducted. Other tests have popped up in the discussion section of lifebloom on WoWWiki with the same conclusion as my own. But the debate rages on. Why? Because people see tanks pulling threat on the murlocs during Morogrim. What they fail to understand is that there are many different things going on during the fight that could potentially cause the warrior to pull aggro on the murlocs. Health stones, rage generation abilities and procs, PoM and earth shield procs, refreshing battle shout, etc. For this reason, people should not take their observations in such environments as suggestive of their beliefs.

Threat mechanics should be evaluated in a manner similar to how scientific tests are conducted. You wouldn’t study terminal velocity by pointing several industrial strength fans at a falling object, would you? I’d hope not. Neither would you test a chemical reaction between baking soda and vinegar by first mixing the vinegar with bleach (don’t do this; it creates a toxic gas). Similar logic should apply to testing game mechanics. You can’t accurately test the threat of specific components of lifebloom without simplifying the conditions and removing secondary and tertiary threat sources.

Being unhappy with my tests of old, and frustrated with the continuing debate, I have reconducted my test with results I feel are more accurate. Additionally, I have provided videos showing the premises used to reinforce my conclusion.

Initial Testing of the Threat on Lifebloom’s End Heal

Lifebloom is probably one of the more complicated spells in the game. Not only is there a HoT that can potentially cause threat for the druid, but the end heal has specific conditions for which it is triggered. In one condition, the HoT can run its full course and “blooms” into the end heal. However, the final tick of the HoT coincides with the bloom. So to simply put the spell on a warlock and have them life tap just before the final tick would create two simultaneous events (the HoT tick and the end heal) for which some value of threat is applied (even if it’s 0 threat, it’s still a value of threat).

Luckily, the end heal can be triggered by purging or dispelling lifebloom. And because there’s a one second delay on the first tick of the HoT, it can be purged or dispelled before it ticks. So the end heal can be isolated from the HoT portion of the spell by having an opposing shaman or priest on hand to dispel.

Unfortunately, however, there are a few actions we simply can’t avoid. These are as follows:

  • The warlock must body pull a mob.
  • The druid must taunt the mob off the warlock.
  • The druid must apply lifebloom to the warlock.

Each of these events could potentially cause threat. However, thanks to extensive testing done over the years, it is known that body pulling only puts a person on the mob’s threat list with 0 threat. It is also known that taunting can put someone on the mob’s threat list and grants the taunting player with a threat value equal to the threat of the previously aggro’d target. So taunting a mob off someone who merely body pulled will result in having both players on the mob’s threat list each with 0 threat.

However, I advise being careful about anomalies that can occur performing these simple tasks. For example, if a protection warrior blocks after taunting, he or she could generate threat from a shield specialization proc. Likewise, having natural perfection proc could potentially generate threat. This video highlights this issue:

We also have to consider buffing someone with lifebloom itself. Does the mere application generate threat? In the second pull of the video above, you can see me casting lifebloom on myself. The mob does not switch to me until it ticks, suggesting the application generates no threat. But we need something more conclusive.

So what I ended up doing was this:

  • A warlock body pulls a mob.
  • The druid applies lifebloom to the warlock.
  • The warlock removes lifebloom before it ticks.

Canceling lifebloom manually does not trigger the bloom. And because there’s a delay of one second before the first tick of the HoT, the buff can be clicked off before this occurs. So neither the end heal nor a tick of the HoT will happen, merely the application of the buff. So if the mob switches to the druid, the application of the buff generates more than 0 threat. If the mob does not, then the application of lifebloom generates no threat.

As you can see in the video, the mob does not turn to me after applying lifebloom, meaning it generates 0 threat. With this in mind, we can set up some conditions for testing merely the end heal of lifebloom. Here’s how the first test will be conducted:

  • Have the warlock body pull the mob. This puts the lock on its threat list with a value of 0.
  • Have the druid taunt the mob off the warlock. This puts the druid on the mob’s threat list with a value of 0. This also sets up a condition where the mob has the druid aggro’d, but the warlock is on its threat list, so any threat generating action performed by the warlock can be registered on the mob.
  • Have the druid apply lifebloom to the lock while the shaman spams purge, causing the end heal to trigger on the warlock before the HoT ticks.

If the mob turns to the warlock, the end heal generates at least some amount of threat on the lock, because it would only take a value greater than 110% of the druid’s threat for the warlock to pull aggro. If the mob does not turn to the warlock, however, there are four possibilities:

  1. The end heal generates threat greater than 0 for both the druid and the warlock, but equal for both.
  2. The end heal generates threat for only the druid.
  3. The end heal generates more threat for the druid than the warlock.
  4. The end heal generates threat for neither the druid nor the lock.

Furthermore, after triggering the bloom, we will have the warlock generate a small amount of threat by casting fel armor. This ability generates 50 threat. So this would give us an idea of the difference in threat between the warlock and druid, even if lifebloom did generate threat for one or both parties.

As you can see, the mob does not turn to the warlock when the end heal is triggered. However, we also see that the warlock was able to pull the mob off the druid with merely fel armor. With this in mind, we consider each possibility from before:

  1. The end heals generates the exact same amount of threat for both the druid and the warlock. If this is the case, then it generated between 1 and 499 threat for both, as 50 threat would cause the warlock to overcome the 110% threshold for any value between 0 and 499.
  2. The end heal generates threat for only the druid. If this is the case, then it generated 45 threat or less for the druid.
  3. The end heal generates more threat for the druid than the warlock. If this is the case, then, again, it generated 45 threat or less for the druid.
  4. The end heal generates threat for neither the druid nor the lock. The warlock pulling the mob with 50 threat does not rule out this condition.

Coming to a Conclusion: Testing Possibilities #1, #2 and #3

In order to rule out the possibilities that: 1) the end heal generates the exact same amount of threat for both the druid and the warlock, 2) it generates threat for only the druid, or 3) the end heal generates more threat for the druid than the warlock, we must add a fourth person to the experiment: another druid. Why another druid? Because they are likely to have a weapon skill that will cause only one point of glancing damage to a high level mob. Here’s how the experiment will be conducted:

  • A warrior will put on some extra gear, creating a health deficit so the end heal does not overheal.
  • The warrior will body pull a mob, placing them on the threat list with 0.
  • Druid A will taunt the mob, placing them on the threat list with 0.
  • Druid B will also taunt the mob, placing them on the threat list with 0.
  • Druid B will cast lifebloom on the warrior, and the shaman will spam purge on him.
  • Druid A will then do exactly one damage to the mob.

If druid B has any threat greater than 0 on the mob, druid A will fail to pull aggro with just one point of white damage, as it is less than 110% of anything greater than 0. But if druid A does pull aggro, this means druid B has 0 threat. And because the warrior shouldn’t pull aggro from druid B (considering our earlier test), this would mean the recipient also receives 0 threat from the end heal. This will definitively rule out the three possibilities in question and leave only the possibility that it generates threat for neither the druid casting lifebloom nor the recipient. So, without further ado:

As you can see, I pull aggro with simply one point of damage. We can then make the following conclusion: The end heal on lifebloom generates threat for neither the druid casting lifebloom nor the recipient of lifebloom.

Special thanks for helping me conduct these tests are deserved by: Silverstreak, Fenaldor, Cuppycake, Aware and Shards.

An Addendum: Purged vs. Natural Blooms

The article assumes that the bloom portion of Lifebloom from being offensively dispelled is the same as the bloom that occurs naturally from one that naturally expires.
–Xinhuan in a comment on the original article.

This is a valid concern expressed about the original tests. So further testing had to be conducted to strengthen the argument and provide more empirical evidence suggesting the end heal generates absolutely no threat, regardless of how the “bloom” is triggered. So an addendum must be made. Such is the way of the scientific and dialectical methods.

To make certain the purged bloom is the same, I had to test the bloom as it occurs naturally. To do this, we ran the following test:

  1. The mage body pulled a mob. This put the mage on the mob’s threat list with 0.
  2. I cast lifebloom on the mage. I generate 0.25 points of threat per amount healed with the HoT.
  3. I let myself die, clearing my threat on the mob.
  4. I resurrect and do merely one point of damage to the mob.

If the mob turns to me, the mage has less than one point of threat on the mob, meaning both the HoT and the end heal generated no threat for the mage.

As the video shows, I pull with merely one point of damage. This means the mage had 0 threat on the mob. This proves the “natural” end heal generates no threat for the recipient. However, it does not prove whether or not the natural bloom generates threat for the druid. For this reason, I turn to Xinhuan’s own testing:

Druid body pulls and takes some damage.
Druid casts Lifebloom on himself.
Druid clicks off Lifebloom after 1 tick. It healed for 67, no overheal.
Mage melees for 2-3 damage at a time.
Mage pulls aggro at 19 damage.

Conclusion: The Lifebloom HoT generates threat at 0.25 threat per 1 damage healed. We tested this with Rejuvenation as well, Rejuvenation generated threat at 0.5 threat per 1 damage healed. (67*0.25*1.1 = 18.425)

———————
Druid body pulls and takes some damage.
Druid casts Lifebloom on himself.
It healed for 67 for 7 times, followed by a 600ish final bloom, no overheal.
Mage melees for 3 damage at a time.
Mage pulls aggro at 130 damage.

Conclusion: The Lifebloom HoT generates threat at 0.25 threat per 1 damage healed to the druid. The bloom caused 0 threat to the druid. (67*7*0.25*1.1 = 128.975)

This reinforces my own tests of the threat generated by the HoT. Furthermore, it shows that the natural end heal generates no threat for the druid.

Special thanks to Xinhuan for inspiring more discussion and tests, as well as Althorn for helping me make the video.

Guides and Tutorials: Threat Mechanics

3
July 25, 2008
by Lume in

The entry is meant to serve largely as an introduction to the post I’ll be making soon after. However, it warrants its own entry because of the complexity of the subject matter. Be that as it may, you should know my take on threat is nearly identical to that of Kenco’s. So you can skip it if you’ve been there and done that. But I wanted to go into more detail on the basic concepts and highlight what I call “threat anomalies” (an important concept I think Kenco failed to discuss in his own guide).

Disclaimer: This post may induce conceptual and mathematical headaches.

Threat

“Threat” is a numerical value representative of the amount of hate a person has on a mob. After extensive evaluation of WoW’s threat mechanics, many players interested in the system have agreed to normalize threat around one point of “white damage” done to a mob. This means meleeing a mob for 100, without any threat modifying stances or talents, would generate 100 threat for a person on that mob.

Mobs can also use abilities that directly affect threat. For example, a mob can cast a spell that lowers a person’s established threat by a fixed percentage.

Threat Modifiers

Some classes have abilities and talents that affect their threat by a specific percentage. These percentages can create what are known as “threat modifiers.” For example, druids have a talent called subtlety that reduces the threat their spells generate by 20% at its maximum rank, meaning a modifier of 0.8 is applied to the threat of all the druid’s spells.

Many abilities have an innate threat modifier based on their threat production relative to unmodified white damage. For example, one point of effective healing done by healing touch generates threat with a 0.5 modifier. So if you heal a person for 5000, none of which is overheal, you will generate 2500 threat on a single mob. Holy light, on the other hand, has a modifier of 0.25, so a paladin who effectively heals someone for 5000 with holy light would only generate 1250 threat.

Furthermore, some abilities can have different modifiers for each component of the ability. For example, siphon life generates threat for its damaging component, but its healing component generates no threat.

Mobs can also use abilities that apply threat modifiers to people. For example, Kalecgos can place a debuff on someone that doubles their threat generation for a fixed amount of time.

Threat Lists

Each mob has what is called a “threat list.” A threat list is a catalog of players for whom the mob will react to threat generation. Certain actions can put a person on a mob’s threat list, including:

  • Body pulling the mob.
  • Damaging the mob.
  • Putting a debuff on the mob.
  • Buffing someone already on the mob’s threat list.
  • Healing someone already on the mob’s threat list.
  • Taunting the mob.

This list can vary, depending on how each mob is coded. For example, a mob could potentially be designed to use an ability that affects anyone in a given radius, and this mob could put those affected by the ability on its threat list. However, such abilities do not always put a person on a mob’s threat list, even though it might put them in combat. Many world mobs with demoralizing shout put anyone affected by it in combat without putting those people on their threat lists, for example.

AoE Threat

It is important to note some abilities divide their threat generation based on the number of threat lists on which a person resides. For example, a druid on the threat lists of ten mobs will have their threat caused by healing touch divided by ten, spread evenly across each mob. So effectively healing someone with healing touch for 5000 will generate 250 threat for each mob that has the druid on its threat list.

Healing, power gains (energy, mana and rage) and AoE buffs like battle shout typically divide the threat generation by the number of threat lists. But this might not always be the case, given WoW’s mutability and unique cases. For example, while the mana gained from the proc on Insightful Earthstorm Diamond generates threat at this point in time, the mana gained from life tap currently generates no threat.

AoE damage is typically not divided by the number of targets affected. This was not the case with some spells in the distant past, but most have changed to reflect this fundamental concept.

Aggro

A person with “aggro” is a mob’s primary target. This is not always the person highest on a mob’s threat list, however. This is because there are different values typically required to pull aggro from someone else. For a person in melee range of a mob, they must usually exceed 110% of the threat attributed to the player currently with aggro. And for a person outside of melee range of the mob, they must typically surpass 130%.

It’s important to note that a person with 120% of the currently aggro’d target’s threat will pull if they duck into the mob’s melee range, even if they do nothing before and after crossing into melee range.

Some mobs use abilities that can drop the standard requirements to 100% or below. Knockbacks used on the current player with aggro will typically do this. So even a person below the traditional ranged and melee thresholds, they can still pull if they are above 100% of the aggro’d target when he or she gets knocked back.

It is important to note that anyone simply targeted by a mob does not necessarily have aggro on that mob. Mobs will sometimes target a person to cast a spell on them, but they subsequently return to the player with established aggro once the cast has complete. Likewise, spells that cause the mob to select no one can work similarly and it is not always an indicator of someone losing aggro on that mob.

To further complicate the idea of aggro, some mobs do not actually aggro anyone nor follow the traditional guidelines of threat. Some mobs indiscriminately pick targets to cast spells on and cannot be forced to attack anyone highest on threat. Most prominent of these mobs in the current expansion is probably Dorothee and the Shade of Aran in Karazhan.

Taunting

Warriors have an ability called “taunt.” This ability forces a mob to aggro the warrior for a given amount of time. It also grants the warrior threat equal to the value of the previously aggro’d target before the taunt. If the warrior already has more threat than the person off which they taunted, however, their threat does not change. Paladins and druids have righteous defense and growl respectively. These abilities are simply variations of the warrior taunt and apply the same concepts of threat.

A person cannot pull aggro from a person taunting as long as the taunt debuff remains on the mob. However, once the taunt debuff has dropped, the traditional aggro thresholds of 110 and 130% apply.

Threat Anomalies

A “threat anomaly” occurs when threat behaves or mobs react to threat generation in an unexpected manner.

There are many game mechanics that can have strange effects on threat. For example, some adds during boss encounters will often spawn and ignore all threat generation mechanics for a short period of time. This is prominently evident during the Shade of Akama encounter in Black Temple, as the door adds spawn and ignore any threat generation for a short period of time. On the other side of the spectrum, some adds during encounters spawn with an established amount of threat on random targets. This is most evident during Solarian in Tempest Keep (or at least was when I was doing the encounter over a year ago).

Such examples no longer produce “anomalies,” as they are currently understood mechanics. Rather, variables that are still unknown cause anomalies. As new patches are introduced with new proccing gear, new proccing meta gems, new proccing enchants, and changes to abilities, new anomalies are always introduced and can take a lot of time to dissect between each patch. And sometimes various anomalies are debated exhaustively without any real conclusion. I believe how threat affects Patchwerk and Supremus‘ hateful strikes is still argued to this day, because it is also affected by people’s current hit points, and possibly people’s positioning and how latency can affect the server’s registration of each player’s position.

Testing Threat

The only way to accurately test threat mechanics is to do so by first understanding conditions that create anomalies, or by removing the conditions that create them. Unfortunately, this is difficult given certain environment. Getting 25 people to risk wiping because you want to experiment with Supremus’ hateful strike is near impossible. And you can’t exactly remove the positioning and latency issues unless you bring enough healers to keep the tanks and melee alive when the fire spawns right under their feet. So people often use Patchwerk as a reference point, but there’s a possibility his and Supremus’ hateful strikes aren’t similar enough to make perfect parallels.

One of the reasons threat mods like KTM and Omen have never been 100% accurate is because recognizing, understanding and removing anomalies in every case is an endless feat. Furthermore, coding bugs can create erratic behavior in various running scripts and change the results of a given test. But you can at least increase the accuracy by reducing anomoly-creating conditions and conducting repeated tests. For example, you can trigger the end heal on lifebloom and prevent the HoT from ticking by purging it with a shaman of the opposing faction, allowing you to test the end heal’s threat directly without the HoT creating secondary threat during your test of the end heal. This type of testing is important when dissecting the threat of a given spell or ability.

Conclusion

“Established” testing might not always be accurate. Unless repeated and extensive experiments have been conducted and reported with no logical fallacies, you shouldn’t always take what is written as gospel. “We tested the threat of the end heal on lifebloom and concluded that it does not generate threat” is not evident of fact. It does not provide empirical evidence. It does not detail the experiments used to prove the claimed law. It is simply conjecture.

Casting doubt on the results of someone’s test is part of the scientific method. It is an important step in the refutation or reinforcement of particular concepts and conclusions. The empirical evidence taken from an experiment is the foundation on which an argument should be built. And if the foundation itself is flawed, then so too is the argument. But if the foundation is sound, the argument structured well, and all doubt has been exhausted, then it can be written into law.

Until Blizzard patches the game and changes the law itself.

WotLK Beta Review: The Death Knight Tutorial

4
July 22, 2008
by Lume in

The Disclaimer

Before you read this entry, you should know it contains spoilers regarding the death knight starting area. The storyline here is so rich with lore I don’t want to ruin it for those who wish to avoid advanced information. However, as a commentator, I feel compelled to write and relate my experiences. Also, if you do not mind being spoiled, the videos and my account of the experience might be of interest to you. If they are, please continue reading after the cut. If not, stop reading now.

Also, it should be noted that Vimeo no longer supports gaming videos, so these will be deleted by September 1st. I expect this entry will be outdated by then, so I am going to go ahead and use Vimeo anyway for the streaming videos. Enjoy, until then!

(more…)

Apologies for the Silence; Alpha-Beta!

0
July 18, 2008
by Lume in

I apologize to my readers for having been rather quiet lately. I’ve been searching for a new job and that’s taken up quite a lot of my time. I’ve also been busy recruiting for the guild. It’s an endless and burdensome chore in the summer months. I think I’m going to go insane if I can’t find a restoration shaman who actually attends more than 90% of our raids. It’s especially frustrating, because we have a shaman who sleeps in after our raid is scheduled to begin and he almost never posts when he is going to be absent for reasons other than that. So I guess we’ll just keep looking for shamans until we find at least one who can actually raid 90% or more and enjoy doing it.

And, finally, I had been working on a video covering lifebloom threat. However, I’m backing out of making it a full blown video. I’ve discovered I am terrible at narration. To compound the issue, I’m also terrible at piecing clips together to coincide with my broken voice over. It’s so horrible I’m planning to just write an entry and provide clips relevant to the discussion. I will offer my lovely voice to a couple clips as a consolation to those who might want to hear it, however.

As a brief summary of the information gathered from our tests:

  • The end-heal generates no threat for both the druid and the recipient.
  • The heal over time generates 25% of the amount healed in threat for the druid.
  • And the mere application of lifebloom generates no threat.

I’m not sure when the entry will be complete. I have to figure out what I want to discuss and in what order. I may actually write an entry introducing people to the terminology and mechanics behind threat beforehand.

Alpha and Beta Entries: Incoming!

Finally, with the NDA now lifted, I’m at liberty to discuss my involvement and experiences with the alpha. This means I will also be providing you, from here on, with media and my opinions on the progress of the beta. So look for such entries in the coming weeks and months.

PlusHeal

0
July 14, 2008
by Lume in

Healing Revealed

Several healing bloggers have banded together to create and moderate PlusHeal: a forum community explicitly for healers. While the goal is not to detract from my own blog, there are some healing-related topics I am not interested in writing about on my blog. Hence, I’ve thrown my name into the hat of moderators at PlusHeal and I’ll be a part of the druid and theorycrafting teams. If I don’t feel like saying it here, perhaps someone will feel like saying it there. And if you really must know something about healing, you can always ask!

The team behind the community currently includes:

We’re hoping our oversight and moderation techniques will bring the quality of our forums to a standard higher than usual for most WoW communities. But it wouldn’t be a community without members, so please make you’re way to the site if you’re interested in participating!

Go to Top