Enchanter Race Question

[Samoht]

Well, since you want to keep arguing your tangent, I'll be happy to continue embarrassing you by debunking your so-called results.

Originally Posted by Raev [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

no, I didn't throw out any data

You admitted to... what word did you use? Massage? Massaging the data.

Originally Posted by Splorf22 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Loraen, L60/255 cha, L53 Ilis w/tash x10: average 118 seconds
Loraen, L60/200 cha, L53 Ilis w/tash x10: average 139 seconds (1 outlier, without 109 seconds)

Let's just stick with the important parts.

Originally Posted by Splorf22 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

199

[Thu Dec 27 17:12:26 2012] You begin casting Boltran`s Agacerie. 2:46 166
[Thu Dec 27 17:15:12 2012] Your Boltran`s Agacerie spell has worn off.
[Thu Dec 27 17:47:34 2012] You begin casting Boltran`s Agacerie. 1:22 82
[Thu Dec 27 17:48:56 2012] Your Boltran`s Agacerie spell has worn off.
[Thu Dec 27 17:49:30 2012] You begin casting Boltran`s Agacerie. 0:34 34
[Thu Dec 27 17:51:38 2012] Your Boltran`s Agacerie spell has worn off.
[Thu Dec 27 17:52:02 2012] You begin casting Boltran`s Agacerie. 1:18 78
[Thu Dec 27 17:53:20 2012] Your Boltran`s Agacerie spell has worn off.
[Thu Dec 27 17:53:37 2012] You begin casting Boltran`s Agacerie. 0:07 7
[Thu Dec 27 17:53:44 2012] Your Boltran`s Agacerie spell has worn off.
[Thu Dec 27 17:54:12 2012] You begin casting Boltran`s Agacerie. 0:33 33
[Thu Dec 27 17:54:45 2012] Your Boltran`s Agacerie spell has worn off.
[Thu Dec 27 17:54:58 2012] You begin casting Boltran`s Agacerie. 0:11 11
[Thu Dec 27 17:55:09 2012] Your Boltran`s Agacerie spell has worn off.
[Thu Dec 27 17:55:29 2012] You begin casting Boltran`s Agacerie. 7:11 431
[Thu Dec 27 18:02:40 2012] Your Boltran`s Agacerie spell has worn off.
[Thu Dec 27 18:03:01 2012] You begin casting Boltran`s Agacerie. 3:39 219
[Thu Dec 27 18:06:40 2012] Your Boltran`s Agacerie spell has worn off.
[Thu Dec 27 18:07:23 2012] You begin casting Boltran`s Agacerie. 3:48 228
[Thu Dec 27 18:11:11 2012] Your Boltran`s Agacerie spell has worn off.
[Thu Dec 27 18:11:23 2012] You begin casting Boltran`s Agacerie. 4:01 241
[Thu Dec 27 18:15:24 2012] Your Boltran`s Agacerie spell has worn off.

Wait, is that 11 iterations or 10? Your math says that an average of 10 iterations gave gave a time of 139 seconds. If you removed the top, you got an average time of 109 over 10 tests. Maybe you meant to remove outliers from both the top and the bottom. You would have gotten an average time of 121 seconds.

Originally Posted by Splorf22 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

255

[Thu Dec 27 16:44:29 2012] You begin casting Boltran`s Agacerie. 1:11 71
[Thu Dec 27 16:45:38 2012] Your Boltran`s Agacerie spell has worn off.
[Thu Dec 27 16:45:54 2012] You begin casting Boltran`s Agacerie. 3:38 218
[Thu Dec 27 16:49:32 2012] Your Boltran`s Agacerie spell has worn off.
[Thu Dec 27 16:49:58 2012] You begin casting Boltran`s Agacerie. 1:16 76
[Thu Dec 27 16:51:14 2012] Your Boltran`s Agacerie spell has worn off.
[Thu Dec 27 16:51:37 2012] You begin casting Boltran`s Agacerie. 2:02 122
[Thu Dec 27 16:53:39 2012] Your Boltran`s Agacerie spell has worn off.
[Thu Dec 27 16:54:07 2012] You begin casting Boltran`s Agacerie. 3:50 230
[Thu Dec 27 16:57:57 2012] Your Boltran`s Agacerie spell has worn off.
[Thu Dec 27 16:58:31 2012] You begin casting Boltran`s Agacerie. 0:57 57
[Thu Dec 27 16:59:28 2012] Your Boltran`s Agacerie spell has worn off.
[Thu Dec 27 16:59:40 2012] You begin casting Boltran`s Agacerie. 0:36 36
[Thu Dec 27 17:00:16 2012] Your Boltran`s Agacerie spell has worn off.
[Thu Dec 27 17:01:58 2012] You begin casting Boltran`s Agacerie. 1:42 102
[Thu Dec 27 17:02:04 2012] Your Boltran`s Agacerie spell has worn off.
[Thu Dec 27 17:02:06 2012] You begin casting Boltran`s Agacerie. 2:59 179
[Thu Dec 27 17:05:05 2012] Your Boltran`s Agacerie spell has worn off.
[Thu Dec 27 17:05:30 2012] You begin casting Boltran`s Agacerie. 0:25 25
[Thu Dec 27 17:08:53 2012] Your Boltran`s Agacerie spell has worn off.
[Thu Dec 27 17:09:04 2012] You begin casting Boltran`s Agacerie. 3:08 188
[Thu Dec 27 17:12:12 2012] Your Boltran`s Agacerie spell has worn off.

Once again, see 11 tests listed, so I will assume that your average was from 11 tests and not 10. If you had thrown out the top time to match the change you made to the results of the 199 test, and done the average with 10 results, the time would have been 107 seconds. That's actually 2 seconds shorter than the time you used for the 199 CHA. Removing the results from both extremes would have given you an average time of 116 seconds, which is 5 seconds shorter than the 199 tests.

What results can be inferred from these tests? None. The sample size is simply too small for anybody with even the smallest education to rely on. On top of that, you mishandled the data. You treated the results from the 199 tests different from the results from the 255 test. In your results, you used 21 tests and a strange way to remove what you deemed outliers. The real method to remove outliers only left us with 18 tests.

At any rate, it's insignificant. Your tests were done two and a half years ago, and a lot of things have changed since then. They are no longer relevant, no matter how hard you're trying to hang onto them.

But even if your proposed 10% longer duration was true between 200 and 255 CHA in spite of the alleged diminishing returns, people are still going to aim for 255 CHA. And what is the easiest way to get 255 CHA without going over? Gearing for 200 CHA and getting a 55 CHA buff from a shaman (or 205 + 50 self-buff).

And that, my friends, is why 200 is the soft cap.

Now, to explain why your other posts are poisoning the well, by calling the soft-cap 200, you're saying that people should aim for 200 CHA with self-buffs included. Your reasoning? Since you don't reach 200 CHA unbuffed, they shouldn't, either. Your own shortcomings are showing bias, and thus any reasoning that they should aim for less than 200 unbuffed CHA is by definition poisoning the well.

[k2summit]

Originally Posted by Samoht [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Well, since you want to keep arguing your tangent, I'll be happy to continue embarrassing you by debunking your so-called results.



You admitted to... what word did you use? Massage? Massaging the data.



Let's just stick with the important parts.




Wait, is that 11 iterations or 10? Your math says that an average of 10 iterations gave gave a time of 139 seconds. If you removed the top, you got an average time of 109 over 10 tests. Maybe you meant to remove outliers from both the top and the bottom. You would have gotten an average time of 121 seconds.



Once again, see 11 tests listed, so I will assume that your average was from 11 tests and not 10. If you had thrown out the top time to match the change you made to the results of the 199 test, and done the average with 10 results, the time would have been 107 seconds. That's actually 2 seconds shorter than the time you used for the 199 CHA. Removing the results from both extremes would have given you an average time of 116 seconds, which is 5 seconds shorter than the 199 tests.

What results can be inferred from these tests? None. The sample size is simply too small for anybody with even the smallest education to rely on. On top of that, you mishandled the data. You treated the results from the 199 tests different from the results from the 255 test. In your results, you used 21 tests and a strange way to remove what you deemed outliers. The real method to remove outliers only left us with 18 tests.

At any rate, it's insignificant. Your tests were done two and a half years ago, and a lot of things have changed since then. They are no longer relevant, no matter how hard you're trying to hang onto them.

But even if your proposed 10% longer duration was true between 200 and 255 CHA in spite of the alleged diminishing returns, people are still going to aim for 255 CHA. And what is the easiest way to get 255 CHA without going over? Gearing for 200 CHA and getting a 55 CHA buff from a shaman (or 205 + 50 self-buff).

And that, my friends, is why 200 is the soft cap.

Now, to explain why your other posts are poisoning the well, by calling the soft-cap 200, you're saying that people should aim for 200 CHA with self-buffs included. Your reasoning? Since you don't reach 200 CHA unbuffed, they shouldn't, either. Your own shortcomings are showing bias, and thus any reasoning that they should aim for less than 200 unbuffed CHA is by definition poisoning the well.

Jesus Christ bro

[williestargell]

All the other stats have "soft caps", I personally think it's pretty safe to assume that charisma operates in approximately the same manner. Everyone I know other than the current argument pretty much takes it for granted that it's a soft cap (ie, you still gain a benefit up to 255, it's just less benefit per point).

IMO an enchanter should have OVER 200 charisma while buffed. I prefer to operate at about 225 cha, 255 int in addition to wearing a fair amount of +mana and hp gear. I'm an erudite with raid gear but nothing uber. I can do all that as an erudite but it if I was a high elf I could drop a couple cha items for more hp.

If I'm buffing a raid, I need the big mana pool to cast VoG , C2, Enlightenment, and coming in velious Gift of Brilliance on even 1/3 of the raid if there are 3 chanters without making the raid wait or resorting to clicky haste.

[Norathorr]

Should in this case we gear the ench for cha levels to het to 255 with our self nuffs, decreasing cha as we gain new cha buffs and adding Hp items or int gear as the slots open up?

[Raev]

Originally Posted by Norathorr [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Should in this case we gear the ench for cha levels to het to 255 with our self nuffs, decreasing cha as we gain new cha buffs and adding Hp items or int gear as the slots open up?

I think it would be fairly difficult to get 255 charisma without planar gear and decent self buffs. http://wiki.project1999.com/Magelo_B...erGuideClassic is a cha-build gnome with charisma oriented gear and still only hits 173 unbuffed; you could get +20 from being a full-cha high elf, 8 from Loam Shoes (a good idea if you can afford them), and +14 from charisma rings (dubious imo since 110 HP is so huge at lower levels). That would be 215 if I am doing my math correctly, so you still wouldn't cap without the L49 self buff. Maybe you could find another slot or two and cap at L34 instead.

[captnamazing]

I'd recommend you go High Elf, as enchanters have the ability to take on any appearance (so you can go gnome for wall-peek). HEF also look pretty cool as enc.

I went ERU because the raw INT attracted me, and ENCs get CHA buffs earlier on - but I do think I would have preferred HEF.

[Endorra]

It's worth noting that, if you intend to solo in dungeons as an enchanter, you will eventually find yourself doing a naked CR. Even the most careful enchanters with WC hats will have an whoops or two now and then.

You'll be very glad you went High Elf with a bunch of CHA - my base is 110. With the self-buff to CHA that's 160. Some enchanters bank a bit of CHA gear to help with CR's; you'll need less of it and it makes a HUGE difference on lulls as you're trying to get back to your body. Howling Stones comes immediately to mind.

[Phantasm]

High Elves get more CHA
Dark Elves get innate hide

play what you have fun with [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[williestargell]

...+14 from charisma rings....

not a good idea to base your charisma on ring slots imo. Those slots are the easiest slots to get magic resists or hitpoints. I'd be sticking to the 5/55 rings or djarns there and swapping in MR rings when needed.

Loam shoes and shoulders are great for their slots for charisma.

You are correct about planar gear. That's alot of charisma for a non-planar enchanter, as you get planar gear you would want to start swapping out cha items for int/mana/hp. I'd lose the opaline earrings for crafted hp/mana immediately out of that setup.

Remember at high levels the self charisma buff is very large at 40, and the shaman cha buff is even bigger at 55 if you're in a raid.

[Tecmos Deception]

Originally Posted by williestargell [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

not a good idea to base your charisma on ring slots imo. Those slots are the easiest slots to get magic resists or hitpoints. I'd be sticking to the 5/55 rings or djarns there and swapping in MR rings when needed.

Rings should probably be AC, HP, or MR at high levels or when you are in very tight quarters. But a lot of enchanters level in outdoor zones or in dungeons like CoM or KC where there is enough room that you can stack the hell out of charisma for better lulls and charms and just keep distance between yourself and pets/mobs so that you're not getting hit in the first place.

My new chanter will be rocking charisma rings from the time he can afford them until he starts fighting summoners.