|
|
|
|
#1
10-01-2012, 10:57 PM
|
|||
|
You guys are all proposing a false dilemma. The choice is not between CHA and INT. If it was, I'd go cha all the way unless I was fighting L56+ mobs when Rapture is useful (its a huge manahog). I don't think its a huge difference but I would trade 500 max mana for a 10% increase in charm durations and not think twice about it (5% I'd have to consider a bit but I'd probably do it).
The choice is between CHA and HP. And I am firmly on the side of HP there. When you start charming L50+ mobs with weapons and epic haste against L55+ mobs that hit for 200+ . . . you need HP and AC. Loraen has 75 starting CHA and just epic+insidious halo+sky shoulders+sky neck+buff gets him to 180. Throw in the CHA you get from a Hiero cloak and random hate pieces and you'll hit 200 without trying, and after that my personal opinion is HP/AC all the way. | ||
|
|
|||
|
#2
10-02-2012, 02:14 AM
|
|||
|
Thanks for clearing that up Splorf/Loraen. I remember grouping with you on your monk alt in KC where i was "healing" you with the str rune cause we couldnt find a real healer, lol.....I enjoyed that. I read your guide and liked it, thank you for posting that to the wiki.
As Loraen said, I don't think that anyone is denying that charisma plays a role in charm duration...what is being questioned is whether or not you get a significant increase in the duration and thus if the gear used to amp up cha would be better spent on something else.....like AC and hitpoints to increase your survivability. I think even an increase in mana would be good in case you need to rune yourself or the cleric in a dire situation, or if you like to stun to save cleric mana. You can still keep a kick ass charmed dps pet and do all of this with less charisma. My understanding is that higher levels affects duration most, then the mob's MR....and then charisma being a third check. In my experience the third check is so weak you're better off with more AC and HP. I fully understand the argument that even a slightly longer duration = less mana spent on charming over time. But the trade off is lessening your survivability via Ac and HP for a slight increase in charm duration time that is so gimp there are many posts with many pages over the years questioning its signifigance. Again, yes it is true that even a small duration increase of 10% will save you a chunk of mana...but swapping some cha gear for survivability gear just might save you even a ton more time and mana spent waiting for a rez effects timer to end so you can spam extinguish fatigue and rebuff. One thing that i think also has been mentioned is that charisma also apparently can affect whether or not a mob resists charm....thus eating up your mana even more if resisted. I cant even remember the last time a mob has resisted charm, but obviously that is going to hurt you if you are using a mana hog like Boltrans. It really comes down to a question of gameplay preference. The following link is to a post that was done by someone who said they did some work to gather data on duration..this is from post-velious live...their result was that they thought charisma affected duration time possibly less than 10%. If someone would like to repeat this test doing something similar with P99 mobs and post to this thread their results that would be awesome.....I wish the devs would just state exactly how the formula worked in terms of the cha third check impact in relation to the first two checks instead of allowing post after post on this year after year ...lol. The Enchanter is a thinking persons class, which is why we have civilized debates about stuff like this, whereas other classes might be flaming each other over minor disagreements. Here is the link from 2003(this debate just never ever ends): http://www.therunes.net/forums/viewtopic.php?t=1148 | ||
|
|
|||
|
#3
10-02-2012, 05:28 AM
|
|||
|
Am in full agreement about survivability being #1 (Hp/AC), I didn't want to imply CHA was #1, just that it's hard to defend putting int above cha except in very specific situations. Fortunately even with with very affordable gear you can get your hp/ac up a good bit and still boost charisma. Hard to do all three though without having to sacrifice one of them somewhere.
In fact the importance of survivability is more proof that increased charisma trumps int. Nothing quite as dangerous to a chanter as your quadding massively hasted pet breaking. Even a small increase in charm duration would add up over the course of a session. And personally, I think the duration difference is probably greater than 10%, possibly a lot greater. Getting more tempted to test it empirically... [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] Also, that link to tests based on live was interesting. I know here I almost never (possibly never?) see a charm resist unless I'm using the wrong charm spell. -Propo Fol | ||
|
|
|||
|
#5
10-01-2012, 01:17 PM
|
|||
|
gnome chanter, maxed creation cha. wear incandescent mask and gloves for the small amount of cha over planar gear or +hp +mana items. wear +hp ac rings and earring over anything mana related. at lvl 60 i have about 40pts below 3k mana... considering tot and c2. you will NEVER need anymore mana... if you do.. your doing something terribly wrong. please stop playing your chanter... CHA > ALL
| ||
|
|
|||
|
#6
10-01-2012, 07:11 PM
|
|||
|
Bottom line, CHA > INT for priority, and here's why. CHA helps charm duration*. As someone said earlier, if you're not charming as an enchanter you're doing it wrong. And increasing your average charm duration (decreasing breaks) directly saves you mana. You get the same benefit (our flagrantly overpowered pets) at a lower mana cost over time as each break is very expensive (charm + stun + possibly mezzing etc. based on your personal tactic, plus time lost medding or doing something else productive while you deal with pet, any dmg you take being healed, etc). If you decrease your break rate, even by a very small amount, you are in essence increasing your effective mana regen (by getting the same benefit over time of pet at less mana expenditure for said pet). That's it right there, the reason I personally believe charisma totally, absolutely trumps intelligence as a priority for a chanter.
Any bonuses to lull critical resist rates (which I hope are well accepted) and MEZ resist rates (which I personally have no idea about without doing some kind of empirical testing) are both just icing on the cake. *As a response to the idea that charisma doesn't have any impact on charm duration, and people who think it does = confirmation bias -- I understand the argument but disagree. If your CHA buff happens to fall off and you get 4 breaks in a row, someone could fall into confirmation bias and think CHA mattered when it was really a coincidence, sure. However, what I have had happen many, many times is be in a group charming, no variables changing, and kind of go into autopilot mode and let my CHA buff lapse. I might never go under 60% mana all night, but suddenly find myself struggling to keep a minimal reserve up for an extended period, with no remarkable changes in kill rates, etc. I pretty much know now this means I should check my charisma buff and often find it has faded. Fixing it generally leads to a recovery of my mana reserves in the intermediate term. I realize this is personal experience and ideally, we'd have some empirical evidence (which I am now tempted to gather!), but in lieu of such evidence I am confident in saying CHA has at least SOME benefit to charm durations, enough to be significant for mana expenditure purposes. While the difference with CHA may not be very big, even a small (10% duration on average boost) for a high charisma would trump a deeper mana pool, and I believe the benefit of CHA is probably bigger than that. -Propo Fol | ||
|
|
|||
|
#7
10-01-2012, 10:05 PM
|
|||
|
This is like when people say chocolate doesn't make you break out with zits. It's not superstition or confirmation bias when it happens consistantly every time. I've played many many hours charming over the years and charm duration most certainly is effected by charisma.
| ||
|
|
|||
|
#8
10-02-2012, 11:35 AM
|
|||
|
To put it very simply... When charisma buff drops, enchanter and cleric mana start to drop. I don't feel like I need any more evidence than that.
I think survivability is better served by not having charm drop as often. I keep alternate gear sets w/ me always anway. I can go max int or max hp in a few clicks if the need arises. | ||
|
|
|||
|
#9
10-02-2012, 01:39 PM
|
|||
|
I hate to be a blunt ass, but yes Virginia, you do need more evidence. Your 'gut feeling' is the same reason that people used to burn witches at stake and that George Washington died from leeches.
Here is the problem. Lets say Charisma has a high effect on charm durations, and it effects them linearly. Everyone will get 200 charisma without trying; the question is whether to go for 255 at the cost of HP gear. We know the softcap is 200. So lets say cha after the softcap counts 50%. That means 255 is effectively 227.5; 227.5/200 = 13% extra. Now charm has a huge variance (anywhere between 1 tick and 15 minutes) and worse than that it has a long tail. I don't feel like trying to do some math but you're going to need probably 50 samples @200 and 50 more @255 to have statistically significant results. In addition, you're going to have to account for the level of the mobs, whether they were charmed or maloed, and so on, so the only really good way to handle this is to sit there for 5 hours charming the same mob 100 times. And even the effect of Charisma may be more prevalent with higher-level mobs, so you'd have to do two tests with mobs of a different level. So who knows. At least for my int-build guy, increasing charisma isn't that easy. I could swap the granite bracer 5AC/15hp for a 7CHA bracer, and the BS electrum earring 2AC/35HP for the 6AC/4CHA one. But beyond that, do you really want to swap a 5ac/55hp ring for 7 charisma? P.S. Sollanix: I remember that. It was on my warrior twink too, only he wasn't very twinked as I had just reactivated him. We should try again sometime, Sakuragi is 58 now and in addition he has a fungi/bloodpoints so basically he can tank slowed mobs forever without heals [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] | ||
|
|
|||
|
#10
10-02-2012, 04:59 PM
|
||||
|
Quote:
And that's why i disagree with how complicated your proposed testing would have to be. Yes, that would all be great, but as you pointed out what we have right now is experienced based opinions (worth a lot more than nothing but not much vs. actual measured data). We don't even have a rough order of magnitude on the effect of charisma on charm duration right now. And this isn't rocket science, its a (pretty stupid) game. Data at the level of that post you linked to would be more than adequate for our needs. A fairly simple test I am considering that could be done while exping -- grab a cleric buddy, go exp for a few hours with the same charmed pet. Spend hour with all cha gear off, spend an hour with it all on. Tally the breaks in each scenario. Easy enough to do, just need to keep the pet alive, record start and end times of when the gear goes on/ comes off, and count breaks in the log. See what it spits out after one cycle, then do it again, etc. If charisma has any significant impact on charm duration it should emerge from the data fairly quickly (and repeatably). Obviously if there is no big difference there's not much point in checking again with 200 vs 255 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.] -Propo Fol | |||
|
|
||||
 |
|
|
Hybrid Mode
