Er, do the non-casters have KTM? If someone has neither KTM nor the Ace Threat mod(s) then of course you can't see their threat.

I just asked. That is indeed the case. I obviously haven't quite woken up yet. I got the impression from my guildmate though that threat mods could work in a general way even if the other person didn't have any mods. I take it that's not true?

What about Hamstring?
KTM never had a threat value associated with it, but since there are different assertions floating around (according to WoWwiki, the highest rank of Hamstring features a bonus threat of 181), I wondered if KTM really is right here.
I remember having pulled aggro while spamming hamstring when I was just at something like 90-95% of the tank's threat, but I'm not sure if that was because of hamstring or some other factor that might have gone wrong.

In this admittedly rather old thread there also were claims of hamstring having some extra threat associated with it, however it never was clear if it is only added when the target isn't immune to the slow-debuff.

Is there any reliable evidence available on this subject?

No, the fundamental basis of these mods is that threat needs to be reported firsthand. Without knowing targeting for some abilities, as well as talents, stance, etc., there's no way to generate an accurate picture of threat. All threat mods work by computing precisely how much threat the person running them is generating, and then broadcasting that value to other people running the mod(s).

Omen can parse input from people running KTM, though the two systems can be incompatible in many cases (global threat vs. target-specific). But if someone isn't running either, you'll never be able to see their threat.

Ahhh. Gotcha. Thanks for clearing that up.

The boar charge itself has no threat at all. If I just charged a mob, the threat generation was from white damage. Now, charge adds 550 AP to the next attack, but since that just increases white damage, no added threat calculations are needed.

I did some testing to see if I could nail down the threat of growl vs. charge+growl and it appears pretty significant.

Growl on it's own is 664 threat. (Boar has 699 unbuffed AP)
Charge + Growl on my boar generated 3,769 threat (1279 AP with charge)
So an increase of 580 AP generated an additional 3,105 threat!

Unfortunately, if there is an arbitrary AP value where AP starts adding to growl, we can't determine the formula without that value. Without a lot of testing with various AP boars, it's going to be hard to find it...

I can't speak for Screech or Thunderstomp, as I don't have any pets that use it.

I did a search (of this thread) and the last time lifebloom was mentioned you were saying that it wasn't behaving as expected. Did you ever figure out exactly what it is doing?

From the wowwiki article I linked, the formula for pets 60+ is

PAP Threshold = 28.14 * PLVL - 1235.6

For a 70, that works out to 734.2

This is what KTM is using, and so far, I've found it to be pretty accurate.

I think it was a false alarm from another bug relating to global gains. It's been correct since and Lifebloom seems to register correctly now.

I've just finished reading through all 18 pages, and I couldn't find an answer regarding this:

How does Threat-lib/Omen work regarding mobs that are currently crowd-controlled? AFAIK, it's a well accepted fact that crowd-controlled mobs do not gain any aggro against anyone.

Does it halt aggro recording on the CC'd mob? Or will it just continue recording?

If it's the later, it would cause innacurate readings on pulls with multiple crowd-controlled mobs.

So 5.7 threat per AP over the threshold matches what I saw ingame.

That is some serious scaling. Too bad Misdirect won't transfer Pet threat...

This prompts a healing threat theory question.

With multiple mobs and healing threat, is the threat split by the total number of mobs and discarded for CC-ed mobs or split only among the nonCC mobs.

Thanks for the reply. A question, though: I thought CC abilities (ie, Sap, Polymorph, Banish, Seduce) had easily parseable cues on the combat log (XXX is affected by Sap. Sap fades from XXX)? Or am I completely off on this one?

I can see the implications and the problems this could have with mobs that have the same name, but I wasn't sure if checking for these specific debuffs afflicting/fading would be too much a resource hog.


edit: Actually, nevermind the question. Even if it wasn't a resource hog, I guess it would do more harm than good since it's impossible to tell when you're dealing with same-named mobs, mod-wise. I'll take partially innacurate healing threat over completelly unreliable dps threat anyday and everytime.

Just wanted to stop by and thank you for the great work on this mod. Almost half of our guild is using it now over KTM.

Thanks for this addon. Not sure if this is the place to post an error that I have been getting with one of more recent builds of Omen. Happened quite often today in AV while switching targets.



I believe this is the verion of omen that I am using:

r39008

Error reports here are fine; I collect 'em where I can get 'em. I'll check it out.

http://forums.wow-europe.com/thread....94319875&sid=1
Hamstring (Rank 4) - 181 innate threat (the level 67 rank)
Lavina and me tested that in BC beta, and it should still be valid unless they changed it without notice.

As for the threat affecting targets immune to slow - I suspect threat still applies, and I think I read that the stuns from Improved Revenge still cause threat even if the target is immune to stuns (threat was ~20-50 or so, barely worth noting).

If someone wants to test it - Terokkarantula (http://www.thottbot.com/c20682) is immune to snares and freezes. Log your warrior, grab a partner and check it on that spider, should be easy.

There's also the issue that it's possible to do multiple CC spells on a single target. (I know I've seen a Turn Undead'd, Freeze Trapped, Shackled Spell Shade before)

Usually this shouldn't happen when communication goes well, but generally speaking threat appearing higher than it is tends to be less harmful than threat appearing lower than it is.

Too bad tanks often have a tendency to just in case taunt a mob that is CC'ed before breaking it or right after it. So they get all the global threat from the healers in say Omen so DPS sees the Tank is way ahead and go full out due to a misunderstanding.

Thats the biggest potential issue I see though would say I hope people understand how the tool actually works but most people I know will just assume it works perfectly. Then decide they hate it when it doesn't because of their own misunderstandings.

Didn't they recently change Taunt so that it gives threat on CCed targets?

2.1.0: "Taunts: The taunt system has been adjusted so that Warrior Taunt, Druid Growl, and Paladin Righteous Defense will now grant the player the correct amount of threat even when the creature or its target is crowd controlled."

Or did I misinterpret that?

i think cryect was trying to say that healing threat will be reported as higher than the true value, so if a warrior taunts a mob that's about to break cc, he'll be reported as having the inflated threat of the healers, which in turn will give the dps a false sense of threat security.

Yep, the taunt itself transfer threat fine its just the who's actually the highest on the threat list that is wrong.

By the way I don't see a great solution for this just saying what the worst possible issue I can think of is.