new patch ench charm

[Lasher]

In groups? Most imo. I know i always tried to get malosini line on my charmed pet if i had a mage/sham. I used to duo BoT mini bosses with mage as an ench quit well

[Pezmerga]

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

In groups? Most imo. I know i always tried to get malosini line on my charmed pet if i had a mage/sham. I used to duo BoT mini bosses with mage as an ench quit well

Yeah sorry about that, I meant early on in EQ. Everything was trial and error so people didn't always use the best tactics. It isn't proof, but obviously using Malo and Tash will make Charm seem OP'd compared to not using Malo.

[Blingx]

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

Yeah sorry about that, I meant early on in EQ. Everything was trial and error so people didn't always use the best tactics. It isn't proof, but obviously using Malo and Tash will make Charm seem OP'd compared to not using Malo.

I would be inclined to believe this, however, this line of thinking is also in direct contrast to what many pro-charm posts have been saying. Namely the "I can't solo xx anymore," "Back in my day we solod xx for fun," "ect."

Where are the "malo + tash and my charm is less or equal to charm without malo or tash." posts/logs/ss/data.

[Murphy]

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

I think what Glitch said earlier made sense. How many Chanters on live back in the day were using tash AND malo for charmed pets?

Why wouldn't they use both magic debuffs when in the guide they mention remezzing / rooting / stunning? Honestly I don't think they were so stupid as to say "Hey don't bother debuffing MR as much as possible since all these spells work 100% of the time". Now whether or not they made a connection between -MR and charm duration is another story, but I doubt all players in the year 1999 - 2001 were autistic.

[fauxreigner]

I'm a little late to the party here, and I'm admittedly not contributing much to this discussion when I make these points, but here it goes:

1) Anecdotal evidence of how long/short a charm lasted isn't extremely helpful, nor is anecdotal evidence of how long someone's charm lasted in 1999-2002. Unless we compile and analyze some rather huge data sets from some time in 1999-2002 and come up with probability distributions of how long charm lasted, we're not going to accurately describe how things worked in the old days.

It seems like these changes are being made based on anecdotal evidence and argued against based on anecdotal evidence. Although it's all we have, it's not very fruitful.

2) Mostly an iteration on point 1. Since players use different tactics on this server than on live in the 1999-2002 era, we are comparing apples to oranges. Cliche description, I know, but that's exactly what it is. Until we either have the original source or some extensive data to interpolate how long charm should have lasted, there's no rigor in anyone's argument.

If the goal is to balance the game, then the devs can do whatever they want. If the goal is to emulate 1999 exactly, we need to send some statisticians back in a time machine. Otherwise we're just turning knobs until the picture looks clear.

[Brain]

Someone just email McQuaid and ask him if charm should last 30seconds 90% of the time or have a genuine SOLID CHANCE of lasting up to the max duration.

kthxbai

BTW: To all the dev's out there who contributed to this charm nerf...

There's a huge difference between "fixing" an OP'd spell and destroying it's utility completely. And you guys just crossed the line. So thank you, thank you so much - you're making the gaming experience of 1/14 of your player-base a heck of a lot worse.

*golf clap*

[Striiker]

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

2) Mostly an iteration on point 1. Since players use different tactics on this server than on live in the 1999-2002 era, we are comparing apples to oranges. Cliche description, I know, but that's exactly what it is. Until we either have the original source or some extensive data to interpolate how long charm should have lasted, there's no rigor in anyone's argument.

Well, not true. While the debate is centered around the higher level charm issues, I had issues with charm doing exactly the same thing I did on live in early 2000. Back then, I could charm very effectively in North Karana at around level 16 or so. On this server, it was pointless (if it landed, it dropped very quickly.. 1 or 2 ticks). My characters were as close to identical as possible with perhaps a few very minor gear differences (in that I was better equipped on P1999). I used the identical tactics and it was a complete failure. So, I would not be so quick to dismiss the anecdotal evidence offered.
I know that we can't base the server upon this because people may intentionally or unintentionally skew things into the positive.

[Glitch]

Well, BoT was in some expansion long after I stopped playing. By then, people figured out how to play. The point I was trying to make is that in 1999, people didn't understand the game mechanics as well as they did later on and may not have known how critical MR was to charm.

[Brain]

Charm wasn't a 10, if 10 is perfect... Charm has been nerfed twice on this server, this being the second...

But yeah, not really sure what other kind of evidence you dev's are looking for.

Excellent post chron, thanks

[nalkin]

lol enchanters till qqing... nice. The glory days are over my friends. Hold onto your butts cause ezmode is over. Remember, it never hurts to put that /lfg tag on.