Quote:
Originally Posted by G13
[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Again, the majority of players that PLAYED, (not wrote obscure angelfire guides nobody read back then) stacked INT. Chanters were mezing and buffing back then. 99% of enchanters back then stacked INT. Everyone knows this.
Nobody back then probably read that. There weren't things readily available like wikis. We're talking 20 years ago. Again, 20 years ago enchanters were stacking INT. Maybe there was a cry in the wilderness, but that doesn't prove anything.
You're trying to validate your claims based upon an angelfire page that nobody even read back then and it doesn't PROVE anything. Get a grip.
You don't keep your pet when charm soloing. Especially when leveling. You don't need it hold for very long.
Channeling is a skill with skill ups. It's not far fetched to believe the higher your skill at channeling the better your ability to cast a spell through combat. That's the point. Again, you have proved nothing. Everything is conjecture based upon a bias against the spell. Every argument against you is a bias for the spell. There simply isn't anything concrete that proves charm wasn't as reliable back then as it is now. Believe me, I've checked and it always comes back to the differences between playstyles, knowledge and meta NOW as opposed to 20 years ago.
Yes and you should be able to get it off
Have you ever watched a good enchanter play the class? They don't rely on their channeling skill to keep things locked down
It has not been proven false. You are in error if you believe that "nobody knew how to play an enchanter back then". The point is they played the class DIFFERENTLY then they do now. Stop being so pig headed.
You have this weird all or nothing thinking about everything. Just because it wasn't discussed on some obscure angelfire page does not automatically lead to your biased conclusion that "we all know". Stop with the mental gymnastics and childlike attempts at manipulation.
The reality is we won't ever know. There is simply no way to prove it. You can keep trying but it's a pointless endeavor. We're talking about dozens of servers with thousands of players on each server. All that data in regards to how each individual person played their respective class is lost in time.
Pure speculation and flawed childlike reasoning
Your perspective is completely skewed by this need to nerf a class and frankly you should be ashamed of yourself
|
Sorry channeling is way too successful and plays right into Enchanter charm being OP. Accept it. Evidence already provided.
10 year old P99 thread on Charm which has a FOH guild post quoted which is now lost
https://www.project1999.com/forums/a...p/t-35049.html
http://www.fohguild.org/forums/90145-post124.html
Quote:
|
I have been using charm for many years in much the same way I use it now. Before any expansions were released, enchanters were soloing the ghoul lord and fire giants area with charmed pets. When kunark was released, we kept pets in groups in Sebilis that doubled the entire groups experience over a 4 or 5 hour experience grind. During Velious, we could charm giants in Kael that easily netted twice the exp normally recieved in an experience group. Velious is where the environments started to change and become much more favorable to charming. Once equipment and player stats started reaching the proportions they did in velious, the risk of charm became trivial. The only problem with Velious and Luclin was that there were not many areas where charm soloing was much more effecient then grouping. So most enchanters ignored the ability.
|
Exactly as I've stated. Classic Enchanter was not as OP as Velious Enchanter. It was a very gradual ramp up in power. Note they never mention using pets in groups until Kunark. They call out risk of charm only being trivial with Velious level gear. Fits with earlier quotes from Angelfire page on needing 170+ CHA minimum to have some level of success.
Quote:
|
Back before kunark, we would go solo fire giants for the thrill. IT was damn scary because a charm break at the wrong time meant about an 80% chance of death. With POP, a charm break at the wrong time means you cast the following spells: wom, run til spell gems refresh, mez your pet, retarget the prey, cast root. If it knocks your rune off, pop eldritch rune and root. ZERO risk. none, nada. You have to be a complete and utter idiot to die to a situation like that.
|
Exactly. Using charm was very risky pre-Kunark and things like fire giants would more often than not result in death if charm broke. Their description of the trivial nature of charm in POP sounds more like classic era P99. Oh charm broke? Whatever, just channel whatever spell you want right through the melee. Channeling is the key to why Enchanter couldn't charm easily especially in dungeons where they would be getting hit and had no space to kite for recasts.
Enchanter COULD do certain things but it was very risky in the sense that a few random rolls could guarantee death in just a few seconds. That doesn't happen much on P99 in my experience. The tank can always pull aggro off the Enchanter. The Enchanter can always channel in melee. The risk side of the risk v reward equation is missing.
Quote:
|
I cast this on a Dark Ritualist in the MM tower the other day for grins, and it was lasting upwards of 5+ minutes. To give you an idea of how long this lasts, two of my buds had time to duel, the loser got rezzed, and then medded to full all w hile the pet remained charmed. This wasn't a one-time shot either. I've noticed this routinely lasting for 4 to 5 minutes before breaking (though I've sometimes had it break after 20 seconds LOL) Not only that, in the new patch as of today we will get a message when Charm is going to break. WOOHOO!!!!! No more sudden surprises when that Hill Giant or Seafury is about to turn on you The run of chanter twinks with each patch continues.
|
Again, talking about how Charm was getting better in 2001, people are starting to play Enchanter now. This old P99 thread is fascinating because it's a bunch of Enchanters crying that OP Charm was nerfed and trying to prove it was more powerful. It sounds like Charm was eventually mostly returned to it's overpowered state after being nerfed in the past.
I suspect this happened, based on that thread, because people were able to prove "charm duration" was different for live than P99 had nerfed it to. This still ignores the channeling side of the equation though. They likely proved duration was unclassically nerfed to be too sporadic and the other side who wanted Charm nerfed was unable to pin down what exactly made charm non-classic.
It's channeling...
Channeling remains the elephant in the room and is most often referenced in classic era posts by Enchanters when mentioning "dying immediately" and "charm risk." Charming in a confined space was accepting a high percentage chance of a guaranteed death and this isn't true on P99.
The FOH poster even hits that nail on the head when they mention Velious had more spread out mobs and larger zones which allowed Enchanters to charm more effectively than classic/Kunark.
Why are bigger zones better for charm? Channeling. You had space to root mobs. You had space to run around. You could step out of zone and jboot/sow and actually use run speed to kite in Velious areas like Kael.