Enchanter OP impact poll

[azxten]

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

Classicly OP where dialup made things scarier for charm

To me this fits into classically OP and needs a nerf. Same as Bard AE kiting, AE groups, pet attack delay from given weapons, etc. The same reasoning around disruption/trivialization of content from a classic mechanic that is too successful due to modern technology can be applied to Enchanter.

People questioning what proof exists. There is already bug reports showing charm was so unreliable and buggy in classic pre-kunark it would mostly result in dying. Everyone knows in classic pets pathed odd, fell through world, etc but on P99 they're almost perfect. We also already proved channeling rates are too high on P99 particularly at lower levels which greatly benefits Enchanter and allows them to survive. Saying there is no evidence just isn't true anymore. Pets as well. All pets across the board have too much HP and Enchanter has a similar pet to Nec/Mag when on live their pet was paper thin and had something like half the other classes pet HP. This is a minor aspect but it's just another way Enchanter gets more unclassic benefits than every other class.

The evidence is all there. P99 Enchanter is mostly accurate for a level 60, max channeling, and highly geared Velious era Enchanter. Except it plays that way from level 1 and the start of classic era. People keep trying to dismiss this. One of the latest Enchanter bug threads even has links to classic era posts of Enchanters talking about how completely useless they are and that they can't even mez. Mez was talked about as an emergency back up and multiple people even said they don't keep it memmed because of how buggy it was.

Live classic Enchanter died all the time from mez in groups where tanks couldn't pull aggro. They didn't tank 3-5 mobs and channel mez through it to solo large groups of mobs.

In a recent bug thread it was also proven mez should not mem blur mobs on recast. If a mob is mezzed, it can be mem blurred, and then it won't blur again until the spell wears off and is reapplied. This meant a mob being re-mezzed was actually stacking up aggro on the Enchanter instead of it being wiped regularly with each re-mez. Mem blur rates are too high on mez as well.

The evidence is there...

[Vivitron]

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

I mean, in general here yes, absolutely.

But there's been over a decade of bug reports about Enchanters, often with evidence ... and nothing has ever come of them. So it kinda makes you think more bug reports, with more evidence, isn't going to change the underlying issue (and that the underlying issue may actually be that Nilbog's a big Enchanter fan [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]).

Which bug reports are open with the balance of evidence suggesting P99 is wrong? I've been following azxten's quest and afaict the only report supported by evidence is animation hp (with showeq npc pet hp evidence).

[Vivitron]

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

One of the latest Enchanter bug threads even has links to classic era posts of Enchanters talking about how completely useless they are and that they can't even mez. Mez was talked about as an emergency back up and multiple people even said they don't keep it memmed because of how buggy it was.

Live classic Enchanter died all the time from mez in groups where tanks couldn't pull aggro. They didn't tank 3-5 mobs and channel mez through it to solo large groups of mobs.

In a recent bug thread it was also proven mez should not mem blur mobs on recast. If a mob is mezzed, it can be mem blurred, and then it won't blur again until the spell wears off and is reapplied. This meant a mob being re-mezzed was actually stacking up aggro on the Enchanter instead of it being wiped regularly with each re-mez. Mem blur rates are too high on mez as well.

The evidence is there...

You've been seeking negative descriptions of enchanters in the archives and credulously latching on to them.

[azxten]

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

Which bug reports are open with the balance of evidence suggesting P99 is wrong? I've been following azxten's quest and afaict the only report supported by evidence is animation hp (with showeq npc pet hp evidence).

I'd suggest reviewing this latest bug report thread.

https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...d.php?t=378303

Particularly near the end and the links Dolalin provided.

1. October 2000 thread from castersrealm forums, pretty good comments about effectiveness:

https://web.archive.org/web/20001211...ML/000811.html

2. June 2002 thread from castersrealm forums, a little out of era but still worth a read, mentions an 'upgrade patch' that might be worth nailing down, probably in Luclin if I had to guess:

https://forums.crgaming.com/cgi-bin/...c&f=9&t=007423

3. Nov 2003 thread from therunes.net (enchanter class site), touches on the 1% issue and it maybe not being totally accurate, pretty far out of era though, idk:

https://web.archive.org/web/20040104...php?p=9731&amp

4. Jan 2004 thread on Castersrealm, along with #1 it mentions that a chanter refreshing mez will never get a blur chance on a refresh of the mez, only if mez is not already active on the mob, also applies for other enchanters trying to refresh a mez. Again, rather far out of era though:

https://web.archive.org/web/20041107...p?p=861536&amp

5. This eqenchanters mailing list post from March 2000 says the following:

Quote:
Hey Horchata, enthrall is a good spell, (entrance is better)
and yes it does have the properties of a memblur, but its not %100.
I thought they nerfed mesmerize way back level 30 mobs kept attacking after
i mesd them. Its because the higher level they are above the spell level,
the more chance they resist the memblur part. Anyway when fighting level
35-53 mobs

youll find the mes series doesnt quite wipe the hate list, and will find
yourself attacked very often. Memblur isnt %100 either but its chance for
success are much higher. If a mob is in combat how do you wipe its hate if
it aggros you or a caster? Enthrall may only make it angry with you.
https://github.com/dbsanfte/eq-archi...html/2440.html

6. CastersRealm forums thread from June 2002 that is pretty detailed and has logs of tests comparing mem blurs and mez/enthrall etc, defo worth a read:

https://web.archive.org/web/20020718...c&f=9&t=007338

7. CastersRealm forums thread from November 1999 talking about mez and blur chances:

https://web.archive.org/web/20000606...ML/000002.html

8. Everlore page for Memory Blur, in era, but not much here, typical low-quality Everlore page.

https://web.archive.org/web/20010714...ory+Blur&type=

Reply With Quote Multi-Quote This Message Quick reply to this message
#33
Old 02-11-2021, 10:11 PM
Dolalin Dolalin is offline
Planar Protector

Dolalin's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Location: UK
Posts: 2,210

Default
From alt.games.everquest:

1. Thread from April 2000 discussing mem blur on mes:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.game...m/WBo1eHiX-roJ

2. Another one from June 2000 by the same ench that goes into some more detail:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.game...m/Ra2vvSHE-o0J

3. This is an "enchanters nerf list" from Feb 2000 and claims chance to mem blur on mes was reduced, not sure about timelines or veracity:

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.game...m/cIxhxuPKEk8J

There is a ton of great info in those links showing what the classic Enchanter experience was like and it's nothing like P99. People not memming mez because it didn't work so often from LOS bugs? AE Mez ignoring Z axis and hitting mobs through walls? Least played class?

Read through the posts, it's pretty telling. Enchanter was a garbage broken class in classic. You can even see that you could actually DOT mobs while they were Mezzed and Enchanters thought this was normal and expected. They consider it a nerf when it was changed. Absolutely zero discussion of charm as a viable way to play. It's almost never discussed. There is another bug thread where Dolalin provided links to evidence of how buggy charm was. Not just breaking often but just ridiculously bugged. Charmed pets wouldn't respond, would fall through world, etc.

My feeling after reviewing a lot of this is that charm was so broken and worthless it wasn't discussed often in classic era and so there isn't much info to go on in terms of how exactly it should function. I don't think P99 devs want to introduce horrible bugs like falling through world and such to provide the full classic experience. It's a bit of a rock and a hard place. When is a bug too much of a bug to consider it part of classic and when does fixing a bug result in a non-classic experience?

My argument is that if Enchanter charm was so bugged as to be mostly dangerous then allowing Enchanters to use it in classic era without those bugs is non-classically OP and it needs a nerf in some kind of way.

Ha ha! I can't tell you how many times I have had to sit down in
the middle of a horde to memorize Mesmerization FAST while the
tanks keep everything taunted off of me. Nowadays I keep it
ready, even if I can't really cast it because of the LOS bugs,
because it is still the group's "Get out of jail free" card. We
rarely have anyone who can evac.

No kidding. If you catch yourself with your Mesmerization, you are
going to fall down dead in approximately 24.5 seconds, and the rest
of your party will soon follow.

The spells through the wall bug is a killer. Any AE spell, like
Mesmerization, is going to wake up whatever is above you, below
you or through the wall. I wish Verant would fix that so that if
you can't see it or affect it, it doesn't notice the spell.

Oh ya, and where are all these enchanted items we were 'supposed' to be
able to make ??? Enchanters seem to be the most overlooked class in the
game .. maybe that's why there's so few of us ? I've been doing player
counts lately and found that the ONLY class that is less popular than
Enchanters is Shadow Knights .. even the rogues have us out-numbered =(

When's the last time the Enchanter was given an upgrade or had a spell
made more effective ?? (I'm not talking about the ability to make a
useless vial of mana either)

[azxten]

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

You've been latching on to any negative description of enchanters you can find in the archives and credulously latching on to them.

So first it's "show me the evidence" and then it's "you're only finding the bad evidence."

How about you find some evidence that charm was a relied upon tactic in classic EQ? Not Kunark, not Velious, but classic EQ. Find me someone talking about how useful it was and not the countless stories of Enchanters crying their class was a broken mess, the least played, and ignored.

I showed you mine, show me yours.

[Toxigen]

Can't you just enjoy this free game?

[azxten]

Charm wearing off message didn't work?

https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...ighlight=charm

Classic bugs with Charm

https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...ighlight=charm

Charm was less desirable in classic, in part, due to the myriad bugs associated with it. I thought I would post a thread I found that summarizes them, in case there's a desire to tune charm in the future:

http://web.archive.org/web/200006082...ML/001072.html

Charm didn't always stick:
Quote:
2. I hit the monster with charm and nothing happens! I don't get a resist message. Nothing. It just as if the mob didn't get charmed at all. One time I charmed a gargoyle in Mistmoore who proceeded to attack me while his intiate familiar friend beat on him. That sounds pretty bugged to me.
Pathing was very bad for charmed pets (and pets in general, tbh):
Quote:
3. You charm your mob and it amazingly disappears! Goes off somewhere and vanishes from sight. You get the 'Your Charm' has broken message. I just tell my party to zone, because you know it pulled the whole damn place down around your head. Usually a minute later, the whole zone shows up in one mass mob, your screen goes red with damage and you die.
You would occasionally take melee hits that were meant for your pet:
Quote:
Once in Kedge I charmed a piercer and sent it after another mob. As the piercer was valiantly killing off the mobs I was getting whacked along with it. Talk about symbiotic connection! However it was able to kill one of the 4 on it so I got exp right before I swam like a girly-man to the zone.
Pet would attack groupmates, e.g. if it were DoTed by a groupmate, even while charmed:
Quote:
the worst is when it gets bugged, but the charm goes off so you have a pet that it attacking groupmates, not attacking mobs, and your group cant fight back root/etc.. you also cant mez it because its your pet, rechaming is useless.

so you have to sit down, flip from quick access spells through 4 or 5 pages to get to invis. mem cast, get bashed.. mez.

---

If your charmed pet is attacking a group mate it is probably because they DoT'd the mob before you charmed. It still feels the DoT even though it is now under your control. About the only thing you can do is constantly issue the /pet back off command or just break the charm since the pet is pretty useless now.

---

Also, I'm not quite sure this works but in guk I had a druid get whaled on a few times by my pet because he had a dot on it.
/pet guard here and /pet sit down were bugged:
Quote:
/pet sit down and /pet gaurd here do some really funky things to my charmed pets.

They both do the same thing. I'll use one of the commands and my pet will stand still for a few moments. As soon as I back off a bit though, the pet will start wandering off in a different direction... I have to catch up to it and command it to follow me.
Charm break message seems to have often arrived late and been unreliable/bugged:
Quote:
Another buggy aspect is when a group member casts inviso undead on me to break the charm and I don't get the charm break message until a few seconds after.

---

Mixilplix, I have one better. I had a mob break charm, due to "natural" circumstances, and the message finally popped up 3 seconds AFTER my party had killed the loving thing (about a 15-20 second fight).

---

Root is in the same slot as charm, so i got the "you may only have one pet at a time" message, slapped myself in the forehead and rooted him. About 30 seconds later, I get the break message, and wait for the pet to come beat on me. But he doesn't, so i hit F1 twice, and sure enough, he still shows up as my pet. Later I got his break message. I'm guessing that even though the second charm didn't go through because I already had a pet, it still got counted, and so i got a break message for it.
So really there was a lot wrong with charm in classic. P99 has too many of these 'bugs' fixed

[azxten]

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

Can't you just enjoy this free game?

Yes, I do enjoy it.

I don't understand why people cry so much about trying to recreate an accurate classic experience. Even in the threads I just linked from Dolalin what is the first reply to all the classic charm bug evidence?

seek help

People are so fucking angry about what is obviously a non-classic, trivializing, OP class that sucks a lot of the challenge out of the game potentially being nerfed.

Where is the evidence? Where is the evidence? I can't see! Where? What? Huh? Dial up! People didn't know how to play! They're just making up stories! No one knew how EQ worked that's why Enchanter was the least played, most buggy, and most likely to die in any given situation.

Ok, clear evidence charmed pets attacked group members and so on. No, must have been dial up.

THE EVIDENCE IS ALREADY CLEAR.

[Jimjam]

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

Can't you just enjoy this free game?

I'd enjoy it more if it was even harder for warriors to get yellow/red con mobs off of enchanters.

[azxten]

https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...ght=channeling

While we're at it let me add this as well..

So Torven sent me the logic they use on TAKP which I've given to the P99 devs. They took their code from a client decompile so it's as close as I imagine you could get to accuracy. A Trilogy client decompile would be interesting to see, perhaps the logic is in there too (TAKP's client code has a few extra lines to handle channeling AAs, they modify the roll a bit). But looking at it I doubt it changed much.

Based on what I see, channeling is indeed overpowered on p99.

Low level characters should start out with only a 10% chance to channel through hits, which climbs a hill from a minimum roll of 39 to a maximum roll of 370, out of 391, as you progress your levels and channeling skill. It caps at 95% chance to channel.

Additionally you get a level bonus to channel if the spell you are casting is more than 5 levels lower than you are.

Chance to channel is effectively capped at 10% until level 6. Then it scales slowly upwards as a function of level and channeling skill.

My level 3 iksar shaman was about 50/50 to channel through hits on p99 which always felt off. Her chance should be 10%.

A level 10 caster with max channeling and casting a level 8 spell should have a 16% chance to channel.

A level 20 caster with max channeling and casting a 20th spell should have a 31% chance to channel. But casting level 4 gate, they would have a 44% chance to channel due to level bonus.

A level 55 SK with 210 channeling, casting Feign Death (level 30 spell for them) would have a 73% chance to channel (due also to level bonus).

That should give you an idea of how it scales.

At level 1 on P99 you have the channeling success rate of level ~30. This ridiculously successful channeling rate on P99 greatly benefits Enchanter especially at lower levels. Really though this is a whole other can of worms about why P99 is so easy and everyone just stacks up at max level easily zerging raid mobs.