Tactical Processor effects confirmed.Follow

Seems sort of redundant, as to me they are just reiterating what it says in the item description.

What? This came from Camate and I didn't see any other threads in particular explaining this attachment. So I'm not sure how I'm trolling. Really though, this isn't too shocking, it explains why it's so difficult to test.

Ok no, actually, I think I can wrap my head around this. Have you ever noticed how, for example, if the automaton has a maneuver up to use a job ability, and also has tp, or is a mage frame, it will never use the weaponskill and the job ability back to back but will have a chunk of time between the two?

Well, think of it like three concurrent timers- One where it takes in the situation and makes a decision, one where it acts using weaponskills or job abilities as tp/maneuvers allow, and the global spell casting timer. I'll call them I, A, and M, respectively.

So every time I comes up, the automaton gauges the current situation, and whether M is up or not, locking in what action it will perform next time A occurs. Now, if in the interval between I and A, something changes, the automaton would, in theory, act on out of date information.

The exact ramifications of this, though, are hard to tell, but if my understanding is right, we've had a hard time testing the tactical processor because we've not been looking at the right factors. We've been looking at the automaton to do things more quickly, when, perhaps, we should be looking for the automaton to reassess the situation more often, and thus make less incorrect decisions based on out of date information. The question is, then, how can we test to show that the tactical processor would be doing anything. I have a few ideas, but they're hard to pull off.

One possible test would be to take advantage of the soulsoother's much maligned na-spell priority. If I'm right, if you were to, say, take a poison potion in the interval between I and A, the automaton would still cure you. This would, obviously, take a lot of poison potions to get right, and very good timing. But, if someone were to go at it enough, they might be able to see how far apart I and A are without the tactical processor, then repeat the experiment with the processor attached, and compare the difference.

The other thing, depending on if my idea about this is correct and a possible exception to the rule, is that this might explain why valoredge shield bashes so infrequently, and so often too late. It may be that the mob has to be readying a TP move when I occurs, to trigger a shield bash the next time A comes up. Now, depending on just how the fine details of this go, it could be that the tactical processor may well have at least one valid purpose, that of improving valoredge's shield bash use timing.

Now, this is still subject to some unknowns. Are I and A completely separate timers, or a set cycle? If they are one cycle, does the tactical processor shorten the overall I to A to I again sequence, or merely the distance between I to A, possibly lengthening the distance to the next I.
Or, if they are on separate timers, does this mean that the automaton performs multiple I checks per A cycle?

Personally, I find all these questions interesting, if perhaps mostly academic.

EDIT: The delay between ranged attacks by sharpshot would work like this as well, functionally replacing M when using sharpshot instead of a mage frame. So at each I it checks if it has maneuvers for a job ability attachment, if it has tp for a weaponskill, or if it's ranged attack cooldown is available. A few simple tests then would determine what the priority is, in that case.

Edited, Aug 5th 2011 4:27am by VonCrown

I completely agree with VonCrown. I think the easiest way to test the theory is this:

Use soulsoother frame equipped with flashbulb and have a poison potion ready. Use the poison potion, deploy on the mob, and record the difference in time from the use of flashbulb and the use of poisona. That interval of time would be the frequency the automaton checks conditions.

That or instead of soulsoother for poisona, use eraser attachment on a melee frame so that way we test two JA timers.

Edited, Aug 5th 2011 6:40am by PBlackII

I just tested the eraser/flashbulb and the time of use between the two was consistently around 5 seconds with and without the Tactical Processor/Ice Maneuvers. This does not appear to affect back to back usage job ability attachments, so I think it confirms Aeria's suspicions that it does multiple tasks per check.

Perhaps looking at automaton job ability attachments isn't the right approach either, instead look at what we know what it should affect according to Camate's post: cure according to hp assessment, or weapon skills according to TP; the latter would be easier to test due to tactical switch.

I will see how fast it will use the same weapon skill in a row, I feel like it won't generate much results, but hey, it's something.

Edited, Aug 5th 2011 8:10am by PBlackII

Flashbulb a bad thing to test it with, the automaton automatically uses it within seconds of a light maneuver going up or it's timer coming up. Tact should effect conditional abilities like eraser. Where it doesn't activate unless you have a status effect.

Shield bash would be the best thing to test it with in my opinion becuase it only effects decision making. And there's only a handful of things it has to decide, when to weapon skill, what spell to use within the combination of maneuvers, and when to use by condition only Job abilities.(Eraser, shield bash)

So you guys should be testing things like shield bash, eraser, etc. See if responds to a shield bashable tp move or -ga spell quicker then it normally would etc.

PS Yes black I know you also tested eraser.

I thought of some things we need to consider.

1) Does the introduction of a maneuver force the automaton to reasses the situation on the spot vs waiting for its natural check timer?

2) Does the check function work at all times or only during Deploy / attacking?

3) Does Tactical Processor raise the burden floor or raise the amount of burden of each maneuver?

As far as Shield Bash goes, I believe that it's actually programmed to react, as the automaton wouldn't know when a mob would use a move and thus wouldn't be able to queue it.

Edited, Aug 5th 2011 11:46am by AeriaAllslove

Assume the tactical processor is just like a faster processor for your computer. Faster tics in exchange for potential for overheating. The auto makes decisions on set intervals where an 'if' statment would be required. (Shield bash comes to mind) Let's slow everything way down and assume the autos standard processor tic is every second (its probably every few microseconds realistically.) Say a mob uses a tp move at 3.5 seconds, the bash will occur at 4, after the move goes off. Tactical processor could shorten the tic time, just like higher end processors do, allowing it to make faster decisions, and now bash at 3.7 or 3.6, possibly stunning the move.

More tics per second would create less 'down time' where burden can decay, making overloading easier.

It would probably only apply to times decisions need to be made, curing, weaponskilling, bashing... and now, a possibly easy way to test it, dispelling. Can we clock how long it takes to dispel a buff (once used by the mob) with and without the processor equipped? The resulting time might be impossible to calculate by eye or with the log. It also might be hard because monsters may use the tp move closer to, or further from the auto's set tic. It could use the move at 3.1 or 3.6, and the auto would still only dispel on its 4 tic, creating a natural variance. The tactical processor should shorten the average of that variance.

(Posting from phone, apologies for any grammar/autocorrect/nonsensical stuffs)

So Von, Basically you're proposing that the reason the automaton casts poisona over cure when you're in dire need of a cure, is because the automaton already decided to use the spell poisona before your HP fell into the red? The decision was just waiting on the cast timer for the next spell.

I guess the counter to this is that if the tactical processor was equipped, it might have re-assess that you needed a cure instead of a poisona before it cast poisona right?

I took Sharpshot out last night after work just to see if I could eyeball any changes in Machinette's behavior equipped with Tactical Processor rather than without it.

Observations:
1) Whenever I threw up a Light Maneuver, Flashbulb would go off before my animation completed, rather than wait a few seconds for it to happen.

2) Likewise, whenever I gave a Wind Maneuver (and the JA timer was ready) for Barrage Turbine, Mach wasted no time in using it (As in, Wind Man, Deploy, Barraged right away), again instead of waiting a few seconds.

3) Buffoon's Collar and Cirque Farsetto +1 combined seems to cover the burden accumulation penalty enough where you can still operate Maneuvers normally. Even using two winds back to back, I never Overloaded all night.

4) Mach was more prone to WS as soon as TP was 100% rather than wait a few swings for 120, 130, etc. Enemy HP varied each time. Without TacPro installed, Mach liked to wait until about 1/2 HP, even when TP was over 100% and appropriate Maneuvers were present.

This small test reminds me of another Tactical Processor test I saw some time ago, before we were told what it does (though I can't seem to find the thread any more). The Tester at the time determined that Eraser and other JAs seemed to go off sooner.

With this small amount of data, I can hypothesize the following:

1) Without TacPro, Check Function (CF) happens at already short intervals.

2) With TacPro, CF happens even faster.

3) I believe the CF occurs at all times, even when not Deployed. This is evidenced by still being able to Overload easily with TacPro while Retrieved / Not-Attacking (Pre Overload-supression gear). The Automaton may simply be checking HP, MP, TP, and possibly WSs to be ready to act when Deployed.

4) CF adds a negligible amount of Non-Elemental burden per check. However, quickly repeated CFs when TacPro is equipped can be too much too fast, especially with repeated same-element Maneuvering.

5) The introduction of a Maneuver forces the Automaton to run CF with the new Maneuver in consideration. This is evidenced with Maneuver-dependent Job Ability attachments firing upon use of the Maneuver if the JA timer is ready.

6) TacPro may prioritize Maneuver-dependent Job Ability attachments above other considerations. As mentioned above, my Flashbulb attachment fired almost immediately with TacPro vs. the few seconds it usually takes without it.

----------

Obviously, there is still much more testing to be done, but from what I can tell, Tactical Processor does seem to be doing its job. I'll be playing with the Stormwaker series this afternoon to see if I can get some data about it's spell casting behavior.

Not so much reducing the time between steps in a flow chart, rather how often it re-draws the flow chart based on new data. I'm still thinking of how to play with the Stormwaker to figure out how it will affect spell casting.

Edited, Aug 6th 2011 7:19pm by AeriaAllslove

Ok that's pretty interesting and i can see how tests run before had a hard time puzzling out its exact function. Still think i'll skip it for now, but still nice SE finally gave answer to the questions of what it does and how.

Exactly. One of the first things people tried was seeing if Shield bash reacted more quickly and could actually stun TP moves, instead of doing it way later. It didn't increase its performance in a noticeable way, so if TP really reduces check times... It's not enough to be noticed, thus not enough to be worthwile.

Hmmm disappointing. At the end of teh day this attachment could be useless. But I am extremely disappointed in this discussion. Some random tests on conjecture based on the vague information square has provided us and we are ready to just shelve this discussion again?

I tested it based on this theory and noticed no concrete proof it effected performance.
Community: The attachment useless.

Several people tested it in hopes of it making shield bash better. It doesn't in any noticeable way or cause it to react early enough to help.
Community: The attachment useless.

Parser picking up nothing. I see no difference. The attachment useless.

So this attachment returns to it's obscurity it's always known. But really this is quite a disappointing turn of events. Let's make a leap of faith for the sake of argument that since square specifically answer this question the attachment is in fact working and does effect something. Then let's look at the general response in an effort to understand it again. All I see is several people who are attempting but coming up with no results followed by people who just don't give a damn dismissing the whole subject entirely.

This attachment has development an ambiguity all it's own that is akin to the "Secret strategy" to properly take down Absolute virtue. It may a fruitless venture to understand the exact workings of this attatchment but square threw us a bone, no a whole leg. And I feel like we only bit it once and lost interest.

I am with anza. If in 6 years we had noticed anything of value it would be one thing.

As is, its basically the new generation of pups repeating what the last generation already tried for endless months, coming to the same conclusions. Its almost as bad as xiozen on the official forums claiming different animators 'affect performance'.

With no parseable difference observed by anyone ever, its not like we will magically notice 6 years later "oh hey, tactical processor actually shoots fairies from the eyes of our automatons while it ws's!"

i lol'd a bit.

At this point, I'm thinking the best we could do to get any sort of test out of it would be to get two pups, have them build identical setups, save for one of them having TacPro and one of them not (masters naked/identically geared, to remove any variance in performance/burden stats could cause), and parse general violence. Ideally, using the same maneuvers.

Mid-post edit: The above would also want to avoid attachments that don't have consistant effects- i.e. turbo charger good, coiler bad. A miniscule difference in luck might obscure the real data (of course, large sample sizes are good too)

All in all, I don't there's a 'magic functionality' like people are expecting, but I do think it causes a subtle beneficial change to the AI, one that's very hard to parse or find specific indicators for. Supposedly, it should make the automaton perform less 'wrong decisions', where it would act differently based on the situation at hand. But since there isn't a giant red blinking light saying 'Your auto was just a giant dumbass' (and since it won't affect the number one source of automaton dumbassery anyways, na spell priority), it's hard to tell when your automaton would have done something differently, if it had/didn't have a tactical processor equipped.

It could also be that the check intervals are so small by default that lessening them has little to no actual impact.

Edited, Aug 9th 2011 12:07pm by VonCrown

I'm not discouraging testing (though I'm certainly not wasting my own time on it, been there done that), but I AM discouraging spreading misinformation and irrational optimism. PUP tends to attract a lot of that at times, especially based on theories that never seem to have hard data to back them up. We already know it doesn't affect timers for Flashbulb/Strobe/Economizer, Shield Bash timing, spell recast, spell priorities, etc. - we've known those things for YEARS from actual testing. If someone wants to do more testing on a crappy attachment, be my guest. All I ask is that any test be accompanied by legitimate data and a clear description of the testing method.

TacPro likely does SOMETHING (assuming it's not been broken all along), but that something is so impractical and of such little benefit that it might as well not exist. Maybe the puppet closes a skillchain 0.3 seconds sooner? Maybe full Stormwaker frame calculates what hp% the mob is at a second or two sooner to decide/pre-load the next spell to be cast (since casting enfeebles/nukes for SW is largely determined by mop hp%)? Whatever it does, it's not going to be game-changing. If it was, someone would have noticed it already by now. I'm willing to bet that whatever the effect is, it's not beneficial enough take up one of my 12 attachment slots from other worthy choices.

Edited, Aug 9th 2011 2:58pm by Anza

To clear up any misunderstanding, I'm not saying you did give any misinformation. My comment is more directed at other people who might be reading S-E's comments and getting overexcited (PUP does seem more prone to such reaction than other jobs). Also, I never said it's hopeless to test. Just that I don't feel it's worth my own time considering the many hours of testing the community has already done in years past. I think everyone here understands not to expect something amazing, but please feel free to test if you want.

To me, I view spending time worrying about TacPro in the same light as doing weapon/gear DoT testing comparisons for lv40 gear in today's FFXI - you can certainly get some accurate data, but the end result isn't going to be that relevant to a high level PUP with better options.

To anyone out there, if you ARE set on playing with TacPro, I'd look toward full Stormwaker or maybe even Harelquin. TacPro was around long before Soulsoother/Spiritreaver heads, and SW/Harle are the frames most reliant on hidden AI timers. It also wouldn't shock me if S-E broke TacPro's potential uses during one of the many stealth SW AI changes back in the old days.

And that's about all the time I need to spend thinking about TacPro. No hard feelings though Laxedrane, I certainly have nothing personal against you - please don't think I'm trying to jump on you or anything.

Proceed.

Edited, Aug 9th 2011 9:18pm by AeriaAllslove

(from below)

How about PM it to me then?

Edited, Aug 9th 2011 9:23pm by AeriaAllslove

I was going to say just that, but noticed you mentioned it before I could. Perhaps it did something back when it was first added, and they broke it right after before anyone figured out what it did. Since SE didn't even seem to know what the damn thing does, it doesn't appear broken to them.

I can see the devs talking. "Do you guys know what the tactical processor does?" Everyone shakes their head no.

Someone replies, "Just read the text, it's fairly obvious, it tells you exactly what it does! No one reads the text these days! For years people have said that sidewinder does 5 times damage, but clearly, the text says it does quadruple damage! Read people!"

Someone chimes in, "Oh, isn't it like the Nanban Kariginu that gives +accuracy and +evasion when you eat a pamama?"

Someone else chimes in, "No, it's more like the Avengers increasing accuracy as your hp decreases."

...Right.

(For anyone missing it, SE stated that those are hidden effects of those items, and in testing, no one has been able to find an accuracy bonus from either. Sidewinder I just threw in because I'm feeling catty, and it took them YEARS to fix the text on that, which I found funny.)

I kind of miss the daily flame threads. You made me nostalgia D:

http://ffxi.allakhazam.com/forum.html?fjob=18&mid=1180983781125697207&howmany=50

Ah the good ol' days.