Quote:
Originally Posted by Rygar
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
So I'm digging into this further, the main comment that is convincing everyone here is this one:
The legitimacy of this post is really called into question because of Dev interview comments on 1/29/01:
Later poster calls him out on the recast timer not being able to sustain on 2 mobs as he claimed to do:
Some very late commentary I found seems to imply this is still broken in 2006 and a sucky spell:
http://everquest.allakhazam.com/db/spell.html?spell=194
In regards to the 25% memblur (which the wiki page lists and most likely is not accurate), this Carbon makes it seems like every tick is going to work and you only re-aggro with spells. However, old Lucy history shows this used to be a terrible 1% mem blur chance in the old spdat.
http://lucy.allakhazam.com/spellhist...94&source=Live
This 1% value was referenced in my other links previous in the page, which by Dec 2002 had the higher values mentioned as well on the page:
At the time of that post the SPDAT was a 25% per pulse, and often (assuming it was pulsing) would not work at all. If our in era SPDAT is 1-2%, it would certainly explain why it would hardly be working even if it pulses 4 ticks. I'll try and obtain a legit copy of the SPDAT for the value (I'm assuming the dev team has one anyways).
In other words, this Carbon guy seems like he read up on the spell and made himself out to be this amazing plane buster enchanter but was called out on a lot of falsehoods in his story.
Even so, other commentary implies it 'works on seafury cyclops' but 'doesn't work in hate' (if true, another strike against Carbon the Plane buster), other people saying around 1/28/01 that it now works, yet documentation that it was still broken after this or a terrible success rate. Perhaps it was buggy, perhaps it worked for a short time but got broke again, not absolutely sure.
All I know is I'm not seeing a lot of praise for this spell even out of era after the 25% chance to blur, so even if fixed to allow multiple successful blurs (I couldn't find that interview), the odds would be so low I can't imagine you'd want it in your spell line up. |
That post you linked says he wrote it the day before, so it was written on 1/28/01 at the latest. We can say with certainty the reports he was basing that comment off of were from no later than 1/28/01, but again we have no idea if he was talking about it being broken 2 hours before he typed that up or 2 years. There is no possible way to know.
That's not the main comment that convinces me, four different people saying it was fixed is what convinces me. Two different people specifically say "Verant has fixed this spell". I could get the argument for one person, not four.
Seafuries have a small aggro range compared to planar mobs. If you are standing near a mob when it blurs it immediately reaggros and breaks the blur. That is likely what was happening to the second guy.
A person saying 6 months later it was casting "4 crippled memory blurs" solidifies that it wasn't broken again. If you read the comments for any memory blur people mostly thought they sucked because they thought it was dumb they didn't always work, there was no message that said if they were "resisted"(didn't work), and they didn't really get the usefulness of them.
What we have:
4 first hand comments from 1/28/01 or later saying it was fixed and worked
1 dev comment based on second hand information from 1/28/01 or before saying it was broken with no idea what time frame he was referencing.
Lucy data isn't full proof. There is probably 20 comments from Casters Realm forums saying Glamour of Kintaz was able to mez level 56/57 mobs in 2001, specifically Seb Juggs and the higher level Myconid but Lucy data doesn't have it being able to mez mobs over 55 until 7/24/2002. I would make a bug report about GoK but I haven't got around to spawning Undertaker Lord to make sure it's broken on P99 based on that wrong spell data since I found those comments, though I'm pretty sure it is.