On Thu, 30 Mar 2000, Danny Craigg wrote:

> >Not true. that would only occur is vs every mob I was a few % points
> >behind. Odds are if I was even 80% as effective as them I would win out by
> >random chance vs some mobs when I did well and they did not and I would get
> >the mob attention. This never happened.
>
> Not really. The mobs are programmed to react to combat in a pre-defined
> manner. If you're not doing anything to taunt the mob (ie, debuffing,
> healing its opponents, etc), it's going to be based purely on the amount of
> damage you are doing and your proximity. Hence, if Player A is doing just
> 5% more damage than Player B, with proximity being equal, and nothing
> factored in except damage, the mob is going to focus on Player A. I believe
> that's John's point.

Yes that was my point. Kit's point is that variability in his
damage would make it so at 95% the ranger's effectiveness, he
would outdmaage the ranger more than 1% of the time.

But in a way though, that just emphasizes my later point - you
just can't tell how effective you are relative to others via
this type of test. You have to get in there and parse the
data to figure out average damage/time. Then there will be no
question.

--
John H. Kim
kim@...