Enchanter Mesmerize does mem wipe too frequently

[azxten]

The Enchanter level 4 mez spell seems to mem blur every time. My understanding from past discussions of how overpowered Enchanter is was that this spell is only supposed to have a small chance to mem blur. I mentioned it seems to do it every time for me and others disagreed.

Here is a log I just took of chain casting mez on a green con flame goblin and then a blue con fire goblin. As you can see by the aggro message from the goblin it is forgetting about me on every cast and then reaggroing since I am standing next to it. To further prove this I hide immediately after a mez and con the mob indifferently confirming it has forgotten me and then when dropping hide I get the same aggro message. This is about 10-20 mez attempts which all successfully mem blur. Is this normal? This is extremely OP and is one of the many issues remaining with Enchanter that makes them ridiculous overpowered beyond anything that existed in classic.

Enchanter charm is too successful, mez mem blurs too often, the enchanter pet has way too much HP, and channeling rates are too successful on P99 which helps Enchanter more than any other class. Class is still OP and broken beyond belief is my impression.


[Wed Feb 10 08:10:04 2021] You say, 'Hail, flame goblin'
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:04 2021] blazing elemental begins to cast a spell.
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:05 2021] Your Mesmerize spell has worn off.
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:05 2021] Flame goblin tries to hit YOU, but misses!
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:05 2021] Flame goblin tries to hit YOU, but YOU dodge!
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:05 2021] flame goblin scowls at you, ready to attack -- You would probably win this fight..it's not certain though.
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:08 2021] Flame goblin tries to hit YOU, but misses!
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:08 2021] You begin casting Mesmerize.
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:11 2021] Flame goblin tries to hit YOU, but YOUR magical skin absorbs the blow!
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:11 2021] Flame goblin tries to hit YOU, but misses!
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:11 2021] Flame goblin has been mesmerized.
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:12 2021] flame goblin says, 'Die by lava - Die by flame - Fire Peak goblins kill and maim.'
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:14 2021] You begin casting Mesmerize.
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:17 2021] Flame goblin has been mesmerized.
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:17 2021] You have become better at Conjuration! (151)
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:19 2021] flame goblin says, 'Die by lava - Die by flame - Fire Peak goblins kill and maim.'
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:20 2021] You begin casting Mesmerize.
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:23 2021] Flame goblin has been mesmerized.
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:23 2021] flame goblin says, 'Die by lava - Die by flame - Fire Peak goblins kill and maim.'
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:25 2021] You begin casting Mesmerize.
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:28 2021] Flame goblin has been mesmerized.
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:30 2021] flame goblin says, 'Die by lava - Die by flame - Fire Peak goblins kill and maim.'
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:31 2021] You begin casting Mesmerize.
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:34 2021] Flame goblin has been mesmerized.
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:34 2021] flame goblin says, 'Die by lava - Die by flame - Fire Peak goblins kill and maim.'
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:36 2021] You begin casting Mesmerize.
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:39 2021] Flame goblin has been mesmerized.
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:41 2021] flame goblin says, 'Die by lava - Die by flame - Fire Peak goblins kill and maim.'
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:42 2021] You begin casting Mesmerize.
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:45 2021] Flame goblin has been mesmerized.
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:45 2021] You begin to hide...
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:45 2021] blazing elemental begins to cast a spell.
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:45 2021] flame goblin says, 'Die by lava - Die by flame - Fire Peak goblins kill and maim.'
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:48 2021] flame goblin scowls at you, ready to attack -- You would probably win this fight..it's not certain though.
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:49 2021] You are no longer hidden.
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:50 2021] You begin casting Mesmerize.
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:52 2021] Flame goblin has been mesmerized.
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:54 2021] flame goblin says, 'Die by lava - Die by flame - Fire Peak goblins kill and maim.'
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:56 2021] You begin casting Mesmerize.
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:57 2021] fire goblin wizard begins to cast a spell.
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:58 2021] Flame goblin has been mesmerized.
[Wed Feb 10 08:10:58 2021] You begin to hide...
[Wed Feb 10 08:11:00 2021] flame goblin regards you indifferently -- You would probably win this fight..it's not certain though.
[Wed Feb 10 08:11:06 2021] flame goblin regards you indifferently -- You would probably win this fight..it's not certain though.
[Wed Feb 10 08:11:07 2021] You stop hiding.
[Wed Feb 10 08:11:08 2021] flame goblin says, 'Die by lava - Die by flame - Fire Peak goblins kill and maim.'
[Wed Feb 10 08:11:08 2021] blazing elemental begins to cast a spell.
[Wed Feb 10 08:11:16 2021] fire goblin scowls at you, ready to attack -- it appears to be quite formidable.
[Wed Feb 10 08:11:17 2021] fire goblin says, 'Die by lava - Die by flame - Fire Peak goblins kill and maim.'
[Wed Feb 10 08:11:17 2021] Fire goblin tries to bash YOU, but YOUR magical skin absorbs the blow!
[Wed Feb 10 08:11:17 2021] Fire goblin tries to hit YOU, but YOUR magical skin absorbs the blow!
[Wed Feb 10 08:11:17 2021] You begin casting Mesmerize.
[Wed Feb 10 08:11:20 2021] Fire goblin tries to hit YOU, but YOUR magical skin absorbs the blow!
[Wed Feb 10 08:11:20 2021] The shimmer of runes fade.
[Wed Feb 10 08:11:20 2021] Fire goblin hits YOU for 16 points of damage.
[Wed Feb 10 08:11:20 2021] You regain your concentration and continue your casting.
[Wed Feb 10 08:11:20 2021] Fire goblin has been mesmerized.
[Wed Feb 10 08:11:20 2021] fire goblin wizard begins to cast a spell.
[Wed Feb 10 08:11:21 2021] fire goblin scowls at you, ready to attack -- it appears to be quite formidable.
[Wed Feb 10 08:11:21 2021] fire goblin says, 'Die by lava - Die by flame - Fire Peak goblins kill and maim.'
[Wed Feb 10 08:11:23 2021] You begin casting Mesmerize.
[Wed Feb 10 08:11:23 2021] Your Mesmerize spell has worn off.
[Wed Feb 10 08:11:25 2021] Fire goblin has been mesmerized.
[Wed Feb 10 08:11:27 2021] fire goblin says, 'Die by lava - Die by flame - Fire Peak goblins kill and maim.'
[Wed Feb 10 08:11:28 2021] Flame goblin hits YOU for 35 points of damage.
[Wed Feb 10 08:11:28 2021] Flame goblin tries to hit YOU, but misses!
[Wed Feb 10 08:11:28 2021] Flame goblin hits YOU for 40 points of damage.
[Wed Feb 10 08:11:30 2021] You begin casting Mesmerize.
[Wed Feb 10 08:11:31 2021] Flame goblin tries to hit YOU, but misses!
[Wed Feb 10 08:11:32 2021] Fire goblin has been mesmerized.
[Wed Feb 10 08:11:33 2021] fire goblin says, 'Die by lava - Die by flame - Fire Peak goblins kill and maim.'

[Brocode]

:confused: create your own server, put chance at 0,0001% be happy

on real note, bug forums work with evidence not opinion

[Disease]

Your just trolling at this point man. Post proof, links, logs of in era proof of what is wrong.

[azxten]

Your just trolling at this point man. Post proof, links, logs of in era proof of what is wrong.

https://wiki.project1999.com/Mesmerize

1% chance to mem blur, happening 100%

I find it really interesting how people come cry in bug report threads about essentially nothing. Channeling was the same way. Pet HP amounts was same. People complaining and crying about whatever and in the end we find the evidence.

[Croco]

It doesn't matter what the wiki says. There's no guarantee the wiki is even accurate. Find in era proof of what you're talking about. Until then get out of here with your opinions. They're worthless.

[Gustoo]

Aggro comments from rmt plat pharmers that use enchies

Op posted a robust log and now some basic allakhazaming will show that the spell wasn’t supposed to be 100 percent.

[Croco]

I don't play an enchanter so wrong on that front. Still waiting for the in era proof.

[TripSin]

If you're going to make such absolutely ridiculous claims, please at least provide real proof. The least you could do here is record it. That "log" proves nothing and there's no way to know that's your actual log that was produced.

It's definitely not a 1% chance, though. I don't know why it says that on the wiki and on Allakhazam (however, on Allakhazam the first post explicitly mentions that the mem blur rate is much higher than 1%).

This site from 2001 claims a 95% chance of wipe (http://web.archive.org/web/20010505022101/eq.castersrealm.com/spells/enchanter/spelldescriptions.asp?SpellID=20). Other websites I'm seeing from early 2000's claim that mem blur success decreases as the NPC level increases. I just tried it out on an ape that was green to me in emerald jungle and it blurred 4/10 times.

[Jibartik]

I used to need to use mem blur spells on p99 but then around 2018 mez was like, 90% success rate and I havent cast a mem blur since.

[cubiczar]

The Enchanter level 4 mez spell seems to mem blur every time. My understanding from past discussions of how overpowered Enchanter is was that this spell is only supposed to have a small chance to mem blur. I mentioned it seems to do it every time for me and others disagreed.

Here is a log I just took of chain casting mez on a green con flame goblin and then a blue con fire goblin. As you can see by the aggro message from the goblin it is forgetting about me on every cast and then reaggroing since I am standing next to it. To further prove this I hide immediately after a mez and con the mob indifferently confirming it has forgotten me and then when dropping hide I get the same aggro message. This is about 10-20 mez attempts which all successfully mem blur. Is this normal? This is extremely OP and is one of the many issues remaining with Enchanter that makes them ridiculous overpowered beyond anything that existed in classic.

Enchanter charm is too successful, mez mem blurs too often, the enchanter pet has way too much HP, and channeling rates are too successful on P99 which helps Enchanter more than any other class. Class is still OP and broken beyond belief is my impression.

You should really search the forums before making a post:

Old mem blur and Mez Post (https://www.project1999.com/forums/showthread.php?t=250990&highlight=Mesmerize)

Then when you do that get a real test going (in that post someone did 96 Mez casts to see if they were close to what was expected) and actually post a log that shows what you say it does. You are making an assumption that because it is giving it's aggro message again that it was blurred. Maybe that is correct and maybe it isn't, but you haven't proved that here and it could just as easily be a side effect of the mob being mez'd rather than blurred.

Once you have proven that what you say is happening is actually happening - i.e. 100% blur rate with a large sample size (not the 12 casts you have in your log) - then actually work out the math given your stats, the mobs level and the spells "bonus" to the mem blur chance (in this case 1%) and see if it lines up with what is expected.

If you still think this calculation is wrong then you need in era evidence with specific mob levels and specific CHA stats and a decent enough sample size to show that the calculation currently being used is incorrect. I mean maybe if you get enough in era posts then you won't need all of that, but you have to do better than this garbage for evidence.

[azxten]

You should really search the forums before making a post:

Old mem blur and Mez Post (https://www.project1999.com/forums/showthread.php?t=250990&highlight=Mesmerize)

Then when you do that get a real test going (in that post someone did 96 Mez casts to see if they were close to what was expected) and actually post a log that shows what you say it does. You are making an assumption that because it is giving it's aggro message again that it was blurred. Maybe that is correct and maybe it isn't, but you haven't proved that here and it could just as easily be a side effect of the mob being mez'd rather than blurred.

Once you have proven that what you say is happening is actually happening - i.e. 100% blur rate with a large sample size (not the 12 casts you have in your log) - then actually work out the math given your stats, the mobs level and the spells "bonus" to the mem blur chance (in this case 1%) and see if it lines up with what is expected.

If you still think this calculation is wrong then you need in era evidence with specific mob levels and specific CHA stats and a decent enough sample size to show that the calculation currently being used is incorrect. I mean maybe if you get enough in era posts then you won't need all of that, but you have to do better than this garbage for evidence.

That thread has no logs, a 404 link, and an out of era dev quote that can no longer be found. The "96 tests" is a claim with no log which verifies out of era math that seems wrong. I already told you I proved the aggro message indicates blur by using hide. There is no evidence to support that CHA impacts mesmerize mem blur success rate or that mob level matters. Let's ask ourselves a very simple question....

The player is given a percentage bonus based on level, lower is better. < 17, bonus = 100, > 53 bonus = 25.

This seems to be the "dev quote" which can no longer be viewed. My question though is were they talking about mem blur or mesmerize mem blur chance?

If you get a 100% success chance to mem blur any mob below level 17 using Mesmerize why would the EQ devs have created a level 12 spell called Memory Blur? The only utility this spell would have is to eventually be better at mem blur success rate after you were fighting mobs that are level 17+ and really it would only have significant difference after 20+. It seems likely that math is related to memory blur spells but NOT the Mesmerize spell's mem blur component. It makes zero sense that they would give you a level 4 spell that has 100% mem blur success rate and then a level 12 spell that offers a higher success rate that is useless until you're higher level.

In classic people used the Memory Blur spell to kill steal mobs. No one was going around casting the level 4 mez spell to kill steal but apparently it had a ~100% success rate making it more efficient?

The level 4 mez spell, and all classic mez spells, never mem blurred mobs at any kind of significant rate. Certainly not ~100% success rate at level 30.

[cubiczar]

The level 4 mez spell, and all classic mez spells, never mem blurred mobs at any kind of significant rate. Certainly not ~100% success rate at level 30.

Prove it. Seriously man do your research and bring evidence. I'm not saying you are wrong, what I am saying is you haven't done any actual research and you have provided no evidence. Do the work or don't make a report. All of your posts are like this, lots of feels but no evidence.

Also you said that you proved it but you didn't, you used hide one time not every time. If you want good logs then do it right, cast invis con the mob then re-mez. More work? Yes, but it's better proof of what you are saying and relies on no assumptions. Again I'm not saying you are wrong just that you didn't bring the evidence you thought you did.

[azxten]

Prove it. Seriously man do your research and bring evidence. I'm not saying you are wrong, what I am saying is you haven't done any actual research and you have provided no evidence. Do the work or don't make a report. All of your posts are like this, lots of feels but no evidence.

Also you said that you proved it but you didn't, you used hide one time not every time. If you want good logs then do it right, cast invis con the mob then re-mez. More work? Yes, but it's better proof of what you are saying and relies on no assumptions. Again I'm not saying you are wrong just that you didn't bring the evidence you thought you did.

The most obvious "evidence" is what I just mentioned. Why would the devs give Enchanter a spell at level 12 that costs more mana for zero benefit over an existing spell?

Is there ANYTHING an Enchanter could do with level 12 Mem Blur that isn't done better by level 4 Mez at the level they get it? Is there any other spell in EQ that is like this? Some spells may offer questionable benefits vs mana and such but I don't think there is a single instance of an EQ spell being given that is worse than a lower level spell in all possible ways until you're 30+ levels higher than when you get the spell?

[cubiczar]

That thread has no logs, a 404 link, and an out of era dev quote that can no longer be found. The "96 tests" is a claim with no log which verifies out of era math that seems wrong. I already told you I proved the aggro message indicates blur by using hide. There is no evidence to support that CHA impacts mesmerize mem blur success rate or that mob level matters. Let's ask ourselves a very simple question....

That thread has no logs, has no evidence (well it has more than you it had a dev quote that used to work at least) and nothing got changed... see the point here?

Also you don't seem to get the point of the 96 tests, that was someone that thought the chance to blur was lower than what the poster was saying the calculation was, did the testing and proved to themselves there was no issue. So there was no need to post the evidence because they didn't think there needed to be a change.

You on the other hand DO think that something needs to change, therefore YOU need to bring evidence to prove that what is currently in game is wrong. In general the devs have made the game work in a certain way based on something, if there is an issue with that they want evidence showing there is a problem. So prove it, otherwise it's sorta pointless to post (unless Dolalin gets interested and does the work for you).

[cubiczar]

The most obvious "evidence" is what I just mentioned. Why would the devs give Enchanter a spell at level 12 that costs more mana for zero benefit over an existing spell?

Is there ANYTHING an Enchanter could do with level 12 Mem Blur that isn't done better by level 4 Mez at the level they get it? Is there any other spell in EQ that is like this? Some spells may offer questionable benefits vs mana and such but I don't think there is a single instance of an EQ spell being given that is worse than a lower level spell in all possible ways until you're 30+ levels higher than when you get the spell?

Feels aren't evidence, logic isn't evidence... do some work man. There are lots of things that don't make sense in this game, but it doesn't prove they weren't classic.

[DMN]

The most obvious "evidence" is what I just mentioned. Why would the devs give Enchanter a spell at level 12 that costs more mana for zero benefit over an existing spell?

Is there ANYTHING an Enchanter could do with level 12 Mem Blur that isn't done better by level 4 Mez at the level they get it? Is there any other spell in EQ that is like this? Some spells may offer questionable benefits vs mana and such but I don't think there is a single instance of an EQ spell being given that is worse than a lower level spell in all possible ways until you're 30+ levels higher than when you get the spell?

Good lord, man. Memory blue causes ZERO hate and CANNOT be resisted. Some mobs are also totally immune to mesmerize, on top of just being able to resist it.

[Brocode]

The most obvious "evidence" is what I just mentioned. Why would the devs give Enchanter a spell at level 12 that costs more mana for zero benefit over an existing spell?

Is there ANYTHING an Enchanter could do with level 12 Mem Blur that isn't done better by level 4 Mez at the level they get it? Is there any other spell in EQ that is like this? Some spells may offer questionable benefits vs mana and such but I don't think there is a single instance of an EQ spell being given that is worse than a lower level spell in all possible ways until you're 30+ levels higher than when you get the spell?


have you looked at some gear that give AGI to casters? why would a dev do it.

Bring proof to the game or go post your rant in RNF, because it seems more RNF than a BUG per say.

[azxten]

Feels aren't evidence, logic isn't evidence... do some work man. There are lots of things that don't make sense in this game, but it doesn't prove they weren't classic.

The problem with P99 is when players are asked to prove something that is almost impossible to prove but is obviously overpowered and questionably classic. A mechanic exists on P99 that is overpowered and then the ask is that we're supposed to prove it wasn't overpowered. Yet there is no evidence because this situation never existed. No one ever talked about Mez and it's mem blur component because it wasn't overpowered and didn't work this way. It's like if you had SoW have a 5% chance to make you move 10% faster than it normally would. Almost everyone would acknowledge this wasn't a thing but how are you supposed to prove it? The justification is always that there may be some hidden code that made it work this way and it's not just the spell data. Of course you can't find anyone talking about this because this wasn't something anyone discussed because it didn't work that way.

Where are the logs to prove SoW didn't sometimes make you move faster? Where are the discussions refuting it? Dev posts? None of it exists because it never happened so there is no evidence to disprove it. The evidence is the lack of evidence. Where are all the old Enchanter guides that mention using level 4 mez as a good mem blur alternative? Why do they always say it had a small chance to mem blur if they mention it at all? Why are there so many in era posts about mez, lull, and mem blur as a means to drop aggro? If mez was near 100% no one ever thought to mention you don't need to do all this extra work?

All you can find is some evidence that there was a "small chance" to mem blur from mez. Yet if you post actual logs showing it's at 100% at level 30 it's not enough. Well, the small chance must be based on your level and once you're level 50 THEN it will be a small chance of only 30-40%. Ridiculous. Honestly I'm kind of just going to give up on Enchanter.

Enchanter pets have too high HP (proven), channeling is way too successful on P99 (proven), charm was so buggy/unreliable as to be usless in classic and most of Kunark (proven). The list goes on but Enchanter just keeps on being ridiculously non-classicly overpowered while other classes like Necro and Bard were nerfed for being overpowered in spite of classic mechanics.

Enchanter did not have 100% mem blur to level 30+ from a level 4 spell. Anyone who is being honest knows this is true. It never happened. It is widely "proven" already because as I said there are a ton of in era references to mesmerize having a "small chance" to mem blur not anything close to 100% let alone 50%.

Again....

MULTIPLE IN ERA SOURCES STATE MESMERIZE HAS A SMALL CHANCE OF MEM BLUR, I JUST POSTED A LOG OF 100% SUCCESS AT LEVEL 30. THIS IS NOT A SMALL CHANCE. THERE IS YOUR PROOF IT IS BROKEN AND NOT CLASSIC. NOT EVEN THE MATH IN THE LINKED THREAD INDICATES IT SHOULD BE THIS SUCCESSFUL.

KNOWN CLASSIC MECHANICS LIKE AE KITING AND PET ATTACK SPEED FROM WEAPONS WERE NERFED DUE TO BEING OVERPOWERED. ENCHANTER DESERVES THE SAME GIVEN IT NOW HAS AT LEAST 3-5 KNOWN NON-CLASSIC MECHANICS WITH EVIDENCE AND SEVERAL MORE QUESTIONABLE ONES.

You can pick either option. Enchanter is obviously broken given the evidence presented or Enchanter is obviously overpowered and needs a nerf same as some other "OP" classes that were non-classically nerfed. The only other option is that Enchanter will not be addressed because it is being protected as a preferred class. Which is it?

[azxten]

have you looked at some gear that give AGI to casters? why would a dev do it.

Bring proof to the game or go post your rant in RNF, because it seems more RNF than a BUG per say.

What is the point in providing proof honestly? Enchanter already has several proven bugs that makes it overpowered which aren't being fixed. If this was proven it would just be added to the stack and ignored.

[Jibartik]

after playing as many and as much level 60 enchanter as I and many others have here, I can tell you this much: when I say I feel a difference I am 100% correct.

[Brocode]

What is the point in providing proof honestly? Enchanter already has several proven bugs that makes it overpowered which aren't being fixed. If this was proven it would just be added to the stack and ignored.

P99 is not about classic, but a custom made to plead the Devs and most players, there are some Nerfs that should not happen and still happen like PBAOE/Insta Clicks/Level Requirement clicks/NPC infinite channeling etc.... if devs feel just as you are feeling like its OP maybe it gets a hit, even with proof doesnt mean it will get nerfed.

[Jibartik]

Good lord, man. Memory blue causes ZERO hate and CANNOT be resisted. Some mobs are also totally immune to mesmerize, on top of just being able to resist it.

Giants and raid mobs?

Mez causes like no hate. (in fact right now it erases all the hate lol)

And you don’t see a creature that’s it’s immune to mez until you’re level 50...

I mean look I’ve been enjoying that mesmerize has made me not need to memorize or even buy a member in the entire time that I’ve played green but come on guys let’s be a little honest here it’s pretty obvious that this is a bug.

what are you gonna say next that creatures are supposed to be able to run through walls and off of cliffs when you pull them?

[DMN]

Giants and raid mobs?

Mez causes like no hate.

And you don’t see a creature that’s it’s immune to mass until you’re level 50...

Mez has a a farily high hate component comparable to other high hate generating spells like snare/slows. Even if it only had an extremely small hate component it wouldn't change the fact that a zero hate generating spell is noticeably different from a hate generating one and an unresistible spell is different from a resistible one.

[Droxx]

And you don’t see a creature that’s it’s immune to mez until you’re level 50...

All giants (sand, hill, fire, ice, cyclops, frost, storm) are immune to mez and you can encounter a lot of them in your 30s.

[cubiczar]

Giants and raid mobs?

Mez causes like no hate. (in fact right now it erases all the hate lol)

And you don’t see a creature that’s it’s immune to mez until you’re level 50...

I mean look I’ve been enjoying that mesmerize has made me not need to memorize or even buy a member in the entire time that I’ve played green but come on guys let’s be a little honest here it’s pretty obvious that this is a bug.

what are you gonna say next that creatures are supposed to be able to run through walls and off of cliffs when you pull them?

I think what we are saying is bring some evidence, 12 casts with questionable assumptions about the aggro message aren't very convincing. First prove what you say is happening is happening (i.e. 100% blur with lvl 4 mez), then show that this number is different from what it should be (either with in era evidence or at least use the old threads to calculate what you think the % should be).

I haven't played my enchanter on blue lately, but when I did level 4 mez WAS NOT a 100% blur, I used it with crag spiders (level 18-22 mobs), they didn't fast regen often. When I used mem blur they didn't always start fast regen but they "usually" would. So yeah I'm skeptical of his assertions because he brought garbage evidence and then backed it up with nothing. My experience is that it doesn't work the way he says it does so until there is better evidence I'm going to assume he is doing it wrong.

Stack on top of that the fact that this guy obviously doesn't enchanter. He is assuming that the spell stat of Memblur(1%) means that Mez had a 1% chance of blurring the mob. While at the same time he completely ignores the fact that Memory Blur has a stat of Memblur(10%) and definitely worked more often than 1 in 10 both on live and here. What are the real numbers on how often mez should blur? I don't know but I know it wasn't ever 1% just like I know Memory Blur was never 10% but if I was trying to prove that I would at least have a couple of links to back that up.

[TripSin]

From 2001:

"A mesmerised monster also has around a 95% chance of having its Hate List wiped, similiar to the effects of Memory Blur."

http://web.archive.org/web/20010505022101/eq.castersrealm.com/spells/enchanter/spelldescriptions.asp?SpellID=20

[Jibartik]

Mez has a a farily high hate component comparable to other high hate generating spells like snare/slows. Even if it only had an extremely small hate component it wouldn't change the fact that a zero hate generating spell is noticeably different from a hate generating one and an unresistible spell is different from a resistible one.

Right now the safest/fastest thing you can do 1-49 when you have agro as an enchanter is to cast mez on a mob.

From 2001:

"A mesmerised monster also has around a 95% chance of having its Hate List wiped, similiar to the effects of Memory Blur."

http://web.archive.org/web/20010505022101/eq.castersrealm.com/spells/enchanter/spelldescriptions.asp?SpellID=20

So I have been curious since I came back for green, maybe there was a change to mez in velious's timelines? maybe that never got swapped out when green launched?

idk these are my thoughts Ive had while futzing around on green this last year.

[cubiczar]

From 2001:

"A mesmerised monster also has around a 95% chance of having its Hate List wiped, similiar to the effects of Memory Blur."

http://web.archive.org/web/20010505022101/eq.castersrealm.com/spells/enchanter/spelldescriptions.asp?SpellID=20

I mean maybe that is true depending on the level of the person writing the description and what they are testing on but the problem with stuff like this is that it can be garbage.

For instance:

Memory Blur Page (https://web.archive.org/web/20001101144405/http://eq.castersrealm.com/spells/enchanter/spelldescriptions.asp?SpellID=44)

Note: The spell actually works by wiping an amount of damage done to the monster. If a monster has particularly large amounts of hitpoints it may take two or three blurs to wipe their list. The recast delay is quite long so don't expect it to save you all the time.

Now do we take this literally or just assume they don't know what they are talking about? The same is true for the 95% thing, maybe that is good info maybe it isn't, tough to say really. The dev quote from the other p99 thread on this is probably more reliable even though it is out of era because the base mechanics are less likely to get changed. But if you want to disprove the dev quote it probably needs a lot of in era posts so that you don't rely on a single opinion... like the hp deal for mem blur.

[TripSin]

Yeah, I wasn't trying to posit that as definitive evidence but more so to offer a counterpoint to the idea that the blur rate should be 1%.

[cubiczar]

Yeah I can't argue with you, the 1% thing is just way off, there was obviously more behind the scenes going on than just the raw spell modifier. I'm not sure it was ever as good as 95% on live though, even below level 17.

My memory says that when grouping in BB with my enchanter I would often mez stuff and have people break my mez and the mob would come for me. I also know though that I used to mez then debuff so did I just happen to debuff before they broke the mez? I don't know, and it doesn't matter because it's just my memories. Even questionable stuff like we found is better than my memory cause at least it hasn't degraded over time.

[Daldaen]

Memblur chance felt broken back when I played which is why I made that post 4 years ago. It sounds like it still is. However what I posted in that thread was accurate for PoP era and short any more substantial evidence of a chance, that is how it should function on P99.

A much more substantial issue however is that the memblur component from a mez spell should only trigger when the spell initially lands. Refreshing mez on a target should not trigger the memblur component again. You need to either wait for the mez to wear off and then recast the mez or you need to overwrite that mez with another mez spell (IE Mesmerize for Dazzle). But that brings up another long standing issue with enchanter mesmerize spell overwriting not functioning properly on P99.

[Dolalin]

Okay I don't feel like weighing the truth of this claim right now, but it was easy enough to pull some threads about mez/mem-blur from the eq-archives, so here they are.

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

https://web.archive.org/web/20001211033200/forums.castersrealm.com//eq/Forum19/HTML/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/eq/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&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/20040104092258/http://www.therunes.net/forums/viewtopic.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/20041107015446/forums.crgaming.com/eqbb/viewtopic.php?p=861536&amp

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


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-archives/blob/master/mailing-lists/eqenchanters/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/20020718065525/forums.crgaming.com/cgi-bin/eq/ultimatebb.cgi?ubb=get_topic&f=9&t=007338

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

https://web.archive.org/web/20000606132429/eq.castersrealm.com/forums/Forum19/HTML/000002.html

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

https://web.archive.org/web/20010714080828/www.everlore.com/magic/Magic.asp?ID=405&mode=details&spname=Memory+Blur&type=

[Dolalin]

From alt.games.everquest:

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

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.games.everquest/c/HtOZDql7tbA/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.games.everquest/c/v6C9NYcF3IQ/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.games.everquest/c/ve3Bb4XNYfk/m/cIxhxuPKEk8J

[Dolalin]

Possible that more things will pop up in the eq-archives index (still 3 million files to go...), but it's gonna be another month or two till it's done.

[Gustoo]

Good research. Obviously a problem with current mechanic. I really love these threads not to nerf characters but to just dig up the classic deets.

[Gustoo]

Can we make enchanter nerf changes after red 2.0 comes out so I can PL with an enchy buddy first?

[azxten]

Thanks Dolalin. A list of those resources and how to search would be great. The most interesting thing I saw so far in your links is that mem blur as an effect seems to have more nuance than it does on P99.

A "mem blur" apparently has two components. One is the reset of all damage done to the mob but no change to the aggro list itself. The other is the actual change to the aggro list which is apparently random in terms of how many people it removes and who it removes. Ranging from a complete wipe of all aggro to wipe of a single person which may not even be the caster.

There is a lot of discussion about how many times to cast mez or mem blur to be sure aggro was wiped. There is no mention of using the level 4 mez to mem blur mobs. It's like using Enthrall twice or Mez + Mem Blur + Mem Blur and so on. Lots of discussion about the best way to ensure you wiped aggro and none of them involve casting one spell let alone the level 4 one.

Tons to read there but so far it's pretty obvious P99 is a shell of how this worked on live and it's OP in the current state. Most of it reads similar to my feelings on charm and channeling. The mechanic is similar to live but it works way too well at lower levels. It's like the emulator team figured out how mez seemed to work in general for a spell like Enthrall or Dazzle and then made that the base mez function ignoring that the level 4 spell didn't work that way.

[azxten]

So far I see...

1. Mem blur always resets damage if successful but randomly removes from the aggro list from all to none as a separate effect.
2. Mez will never mem blur on a recast.
3. Possibly once a mob is mezzed no change will occur to it's aggro list until it has broken mez or been casted on. No social aggro, etc until mez breaks.

October 30, 2000 12:03 AM Click Here to See the Profile for Gemen Edit/Delete Message Reply w/Quote I recently did a test on this one myself, while hunting those rabid Spirocs in Timorous Deep. I had the level 4 Mesmerize and the level 34 Entrance spells. I'd just tashania one of the buggers, run a ways, and mez it with Entrance first. (This was before I became KOS with 'em, btw.) In the 4-5 nukes it took me to take one down, I never noticed a /con change with each entrance. Next I tried mesmerize, and easily 50%-75% of the time, the /con message changed back to the original, on 33-40+ mobs. So far as I can tell, as was earlier stated, that the longer the mez lasts, the less of a chance it has to blur. I suppose this is why I always thought Enthrall was broken, when it would almost never blur aviak guards in Lake Rathe, when Mesmerize would blur stuff all the time before then.

October 16, 2000 08:50 AM All of the mesmerize spells have a memory blur component, but past the low levels, it's extremely rare for the blur to actually work.

Feb 2000 nerf list

- Memory Blur Level Capped 35+ mobs/ Memory Blur
Chance with Mes Series Reduced

More proof Enchanter pet HP was laughably low as proven already:

Now as for our pets, in ALOT of cases they are a liability more than a
tool. Their damage output is only moderate and their HPs and AC are a
joke.

There is a bit of a timeline established there. Someone did "recent testing" posting Oct 30th saying the level 4 mez spell was blurring TD Spirocs ~50-75% of the time but Entrance never blurred. This supports the current P99 mechanic somewhat. Possibly Spirocs are higher leveling resulting in the lower success rate compared to the log I posted of level 25-30 mobs having ~100% success to blur.

Mem blur is capped for 35+ mobs and mem blure chance on the mes series is reduced from this nerf list presented Feb 2000.

It seems like mes did work similar in live to P99 but it was nerfed during classic and well before Kunark. One of the many broken functions of true classic. On that list it also mentions that you could do DOT damage to a mezzed mob and it wouldn't break. They mention having to "choose" now between dot or mez. Sounds like a lot of these were unintended effects the devs worked to fix after release.

I'd really like to hear more about that mem blur cap to 35+ if that is what they're saying. No mobs should be mem blurred if they're high level?

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)

From least played class in live to most played on P99? I wonder why...

Enchanter was a broken as fuck completely shit on class in real classic and wasn't made viable other than being a buff bot and doing group mezzes which frequently resulted in death from aggro until Velious. They made a vision of this class and quickly realized it was overpowered. Nerfed it down and forgot about it. We know from past threads Charm was so broken in various ways as to usually result in dying from bugs. Prove me wrong.

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.

Enchanters didn't even mem mez normally it was so buggy. Amazing. Multiple people mention not memming it and having to quickly mem during a pull and risk its various horrible aspects.

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.

AE Mez ignored Z axis and walls. Apparently was also extremely high aggro if resisted.

Enchanter is so OP on P99. Fascinating reads here.

[DMN]

Here is how mez/hate wiping spells worked.

At low levels they both worked at near 100%(95% as the devs liked the D&D system of always having at least 5% failure no matter what). Around mob level 30(im not 100% sure here but I'd guess it was around 30 were it started to become notable) the mez line started to slowly have its mem wipe component reduced. Memory blur (level 12 spell)still retained the near 100% memory blur chances for awhile even after the mez-blur chances were significantly reduced, so it did indeed have better memory blur but it just wasn't noticeable at low levels.

Because of the level scaling the people posting stuff in the forums of that time period may have completely different and "true" vies about how the spells worked,

[DMN]

You have to very careful when reading these old forum pots by people, doesn't matter the class or time period. Back then, the players were actively lobbying verant to nerf other classes and buff their own. That's hidden under the majority yo "this sucks" and "this is overpowered" type posts.


As far as enchanter in particular they are even more problematic. The way the class/abilities worked was complicated and especially complicated back then when the vast majority of players understood little of the mechanics. But more complicated yet in that the class was majorly revamped/changed all thought the first year. Many of the changes never made the patch list.

1. Most class/ability/spell sucks/overpower are essentially people lobbying verant to nerf/buff things, not actually accurate assessment of the class/ability/spell. it was well beyond the scope of typical grass greener behavior as they actually believed, perhaps corrrectly that by crying enough they could accomplish their agenda which was usually getting their own class buffed and other(s) nerfed.

2. Enchanter had a lot of issues when it was first released, as it was the last class added to EQ. It was virtually unplayed in the open beta and didn't exist in the closed beta until they very end.

3. Because of its rough state, it got a bad rep for "being bad" early on. This became a self fulfilling prophecy in some regards, and generally drove people away from playing it even more. "A bad workman always blames his tools".

4. It was considered a purely grouping class, similar to cleric. So many of the people inclined to play them naturally preferred to sit in a group in a supporting role. More importantly, none of them picked enchanter to push the envelope of soloing or duo type situations using the animations or charms. This meant that 99% of enchanter sit in groups with no charm, no animation, they purely buffed/mez'd for CC, and occasionally debuffed and generally had little graps on how anything worked outside of these parameters of play, and even then, as mentioned above because of the quirks of level scaling altering power effectiveness it would give an even more confused picture of what was going on.

A great encapsulation of all of this is seen on the "enchanter nerf list" link that Dolalin gave. He of course wants enchanters buffed, so the strategy is to make them look as weak as possible. He lists, for instance, that DD spells becoming partially resistant was actually a nerf, when in fact that was a huge buff -- particularly to soloing enchanters, and virtually irrelevant to grouping. He's either intentionally lying to hopefully gain a buff for his class, or he was simply completely ignorant of enchanter solo play.

[azxten]

You have to very careful when reading these old forum pots by people, doesn't matter the class or time period. Back then, the players were actively lobbying verant to nerf other classes and buff their own. That's hidden under the majority yo "this sucks" and "this is overpowered" type posts.


As far as enchanter in particular they are even more problematic. The way the class/abilities worked was complicated and especially complicated back then when the vast majority of players understood little of the mechanics. But more complicated yet in that the class was majorly revamped/changed all thought the first year. Many of the changes never made the patch list.

1. Most class/ability/spell sucks/overpower are essentially people lobbying verant to nerf/buff things, not actually accurate assessment of the class/ability/spell. it was well beyond the scope of typical grass greener behavior as they actually believed, perhaps corrrectly that by crying enough they could accomplish their agenda which was usually getting their own class buffed and other(s) nerfed.

2. Enchanter had a lot of issues when it was first released, as it was the last class added to EQ. It was virtually unplayed in the open beta and didn't exist in the closed beta until they very end.

3. Because of its rough state, it got a bad rep for "being bad" early on. This became a self fulfilling prophecy in some regards, and generally drove people away from playing it even more. "A bad workman always blames his tools".

4. It was considered a purely grouping class, similar to cleric. So many of the people inclined to play them naturally preferred to sit in a group in a supporting role. More importantly, none of them picked enchanter to push the envelope of soloing or duo type situations using the animations or charms. This meant that 99% of enchanter sit in groups with no charm, no animation, they purely buffed/mez'd for CC, and occasionally debuffed and generally had little graps on how anything worked outside of these parameters of play, and even then, as mentioned above because of the quirks of level scaling altering power effectiveness it would give an even more confused picture of what was going on.

A great encapsulation of all of this is seen on the "enchanter nerf list" link that Dolalin gave. He of course wants enchanters buffed, so the strategy is to make them look as weak as possible. He lists, for instance, that DD spells becoming partially resistant was actually a nerf, when in fact that was a huge buff -- particularly to soloing enchanters, and virtually irrelevant to grouping. He's either intentionally lying to hopefully gain a buff for his class, or he was simply completely ignorant of enchanter solo play.

I think that is fair but I also there is a lot of downplaying how broken Enchanter was. Enchanter in my mind was like a framework for a class that was never finished or tested as you said. These classic quotes show that and it's not just one person. Enchanter in live was broken. It wasn't broken as in OP it was just broken. Past evidence of this already exists for charm including warping pets, trains, etc.

If P99 was truly classic Enchanter basically wouldn't exist as a class. It would be so buggy as to be extremely undesirable. Only useful in groups to buff and mez and would almost as frequently wipe groups as save them. The player would die regularly due to a combination of bugs, resists, channeling, etc. This was the classic live Enchanter experience and why most people didn't play it.

Charm and pets are a good example. In actual classic pets alone let alone charmed pets would often result in your death in dungeons due to bad pathing, falling through the world, and so on. P99 by not having these bugs has created an OP unclassic class in Enchanter.

You can read post after post from those links above and see some clearly very knowledgeable people about spell mechanics at the time still talking about how shitty their class was. Literally no one was talking about charming and the "they just didn't know how to use it" argument is getting old. Same with the mez mem blur. From what I've read it seems pretty clear something changed. It worked like it does on P99 and then it was nerfed for exactly the same reason as I'm bug reporting it here. It's OP and never worked this way for most of classic through Velious. It should be about the first 1/2 of classic and then reduce success percentage. There are about a dozen posts spread throughout those links which all allude to this having happened and a major change taking place.

[Dolalin]

DMN has some wise words there. 95% of the work in trying to research stuff like this is separating the truth from the fiction/whining/lobbying-narratives.

As for how I do research, you can go to groups.google.com and search alt.games.everquest yourself. You can also add filters to the search by adding, say, "before:2002-01-01" to the end of your search to only return in-era threads.

I search the eq-archives git repo with a semantic indexer I've got going locally (Open Semantic Search). When it's ready I'll make it publicly available, it speeds up searches a LOT and gives contextual searching. You could also build your own against the eq-archives repo, might take a few months, or you can wait for mine to be done up to you :D It gets through about 40,000-50,000 docs a day on a good day. 3.2 million left to go, ~6 million total.

[xmaerx]

Mez does blur very often. It's definitely not 100%. Probably closer to 60 or 70%. Actual blur spells, however, blur more often.

https://wiki.project1999.com/Memory_Blur

Whatever that modifier is gets adjusted significantly. If mesmerize is a 1% chance and works 60% of the time, a 10% chance might work.. 66% of the time. Or perhaps it fails a tenth as often. Perhaps there are calculations taking place that are not immediately obvious. Perhaps there's no perhaps involved, and enchanters have known this for some time.

It's definitely *not* a 10% chance. Nor is Blanket of Forgetfulness a 20% chance.

https://wiki.project1999.com/Blanket_of_Forgetfulness

In fact, I'd go so far as to say that Blanket might apply its blur chance twice by that descriptor, which is why I've had it fail *MAYBE* once, ever.

All blurs are performing well beyond the listed percentage.

Furthermore the blur on Mesmerize might be powerful, but that is often a DOWNSIDE also. Spamming mez to interrupt or lock things down while soloing, for example, can give mobs health ticks. It also doesn't blur mobs that are immune to mez, as far as I can tell.

Memblurs are also beneficial spells. Not hostile. They do not resist, and are significantly more useful as a result.

No, I don't need proof, because I'm right, and so is the server config for memblurs. Evidence from the past likely doesn't realize that the "blur" effect is significantly more noticeable on pacified or far away mobs. The "Higher level less effective" commentary is likely a symptom of larger aggro ranges, or closer quarters.

EDIT: If you want to know the real reason enchanters are batshit broken, see: the exploit known as GCD resetting.

[Gustoo]

Man it would be funny if enchanters were always hyper OP and people just sucked so bad. Lets hop in a time machine and win everquest. Thats what we would do with a time machine right?

Does using a clicky to reset cooldown only impact your bottom slot spell? or all?

I think thats a classic mechanic though.

[xmaerx]

Man it would be funny if enchanters were always hyper OP and people just sucked so bad. Lets hop in a time machine and win everquest. Thats what we would do with a time machine right?

Does using a clicky to reset cooldown only impact your bottom slot spell? or all?

I think thats a classic mechanic though.

It impacts every slot to wipe the 2s Global Cooldown, and *reduces* the recast of the top slot by ~2 seconds, as well as wiping the global cooldown. If it weren't for that, recapturing a hasted charm pet would be 10 times harder. Locking down several mobs would require longer duration mez. Casting several level 4 mez's to blur something would take 10 times as long, especially with resists included. Hell, even buffing the raid would take exponentially longer, and cost you a lot more mana ticks from sitting down.

GCD resets may have been classic, but they were not readily available, and were likely not standard. You basically needed jboots inventory slotted or a spyglass, since they put a "short cast time" on the rod of insidious glamour that is not present on P99.

If this GCD resetting was common practice, there would be commentary on the only reasonable option for doing so, from Zam. https://everquest.allakhazam.com/db/item.html?item=6166

This gives enchanters cheap, easy access to one of the best gdc resets in the game which can be abused right out of the gate.

[azxten]

Mez does blur very often. It's definitely not 100%. Probably closer to 60 or 70%. Actual blur spells, however, blur more often.

https://wiki.project1999.com/Memory_Blur

Whatever that modifier is gets adjusted significantly. If mesmerize is a 1% chance and works 60% of the time, a 10% chance might work.. 66% of the time. Or perhaps it fails a tenth as often. Perhaps there are calculations taking place that are not immediately obvious. Perhaps there's no perhaps involved, and enchanters have known this for some time.

It's definitely *not* a 10% chance. Nor is Blanket of Forgetfulness a 20% chance.

https://wiki.project1999.com/Blanket_of_Forgetfulness

In fact, I'd go so far as to say that Blanket might apply its blur chance twice by that descriptor, which is why I've had it fail *MAYBE* once, ever.

All blurs are performing well beyond the listed percentage.

Furthermore the blur on Mesmerize might be powerful, but that is often a DOWNSIDE also. Spamming mez to interrupt or lock things down while soloing, for example, can give mobs health ticks. It also doesn't blur mobs that are immune to mez, as far as I can tell.

Memblurs are also beneficial spells. Not hostile. They do not resist, and are significantly more useful as a result.

No, I don't need proof, because I'm right, and so is the server config for memblurs. Evidence from the past likely doesn't realize that the "blur" effect is significantly more noticeable on pacified or far away mobs. The "Higher level less effective" commentary is likely a symptom of larger aggro ranges, or closer quarters.

EDIT: If you want to know the real reason enchanters are batshit broken, see: the exploit known as GCD resetting.

Doesn't explain the nerf to mez blur that was mentioned or the past thread finding the same that blur chance is too high. Plenty of people talked about mobs walking away and using the blur on mez. It appears these mechanics were well known during classic era and they were nerfed and complained about as well. This is more evidence to counter the "people didn't know how to play" narrative.

I suggest reading some of these old Enchanter posts to find out what live was really like in classic. Like I already said, multiple people mentioning they didn't even mem Mesmerize because it was so unreliable due to bugs and difficult to survive getting aggro.

All of the evidence points to a vastly different Enchanter game on live vs P99 but the same tired arguments keep being rolled out about people complaining to get their class buffed, they didn't know how to play, no one knew what CHA did, no one knew how their spells worked. No.

It's really interesting to even see mentions that high level Enchanters basically did nothing on raids except cast buffs. It is mentioned they couldn't charm or mez anything in planes. Probably due to the same combination of bugs and aggro.

I still say channeling is one of the biggest reasons aggro is shrugged off by P99 Enchanters. Starting at level 1 you can easily cast in combat even with multiple mobs. Nothing even close to this happened in live. The flip side is the already proven fact that charm was so buggy it was never used. The mentions of LOS bugs with Mez. The widely known problems with pets falling through floors, etc. Channeling and charm are both proven to have been different in live. There are bug report threads already.

Chanters were a group only class. They didn't solo. They were buff bots in raids and didn't have charmed planar mobs fighting for them.

Just the thought that Brad "The Vision" McQuaid would have released classic planes and watched Enchanters charming those mobs burning everything down and easily recharming is ridiculous. This never happened and it was never even close to possibly happening.

[Danth]

If this GCD resetting was common practice, there would be commentary on the only reasonable option for doing so, from Zam. https://everquest.allakhazam.com/db/item.html?item=6166


While they don't mention it on the telescope, people do discuss cooldown resetting in relation to the earring that drops off Grachnist. While not the majority, enough players knew of that trick that I wouldn't classify it as "rare." I saw folks doing it once in awhile. To a degree players were scared of talking about "powerful tricks" as openly as we do here on P1999 out of fear of Verant nerfing them.

If Daldaen is right--I can't say, I did not play an Enchanter, then or now--it might explain the difference we see. Mez might blur quite a bit, but if it only does it on an initial cast, not on refreshes, then more and more aggro would be piling up.

Speaking of nerfs, P1999 does not appear to replicate the "Great Lull Nerf" that lasted from early Classic until mid-Luclin at least, or whenever the lull line was revamped. Those spells were nerfed host-side, not client side, so it doesn't show up in the spelldata files used by P99 as a basis for its spell information. Can't say I mind, my Paladin enjoys having a reliable means of splitting and it could be argued the spells were "broken" since a spell that can't be effectively used for its designed purpose is hardly working correctly.

Danth

[Vivitron]

since they put a "short cast time" on the rod of insidious glamour that is not present on P99.


I think it is present on p99. The reason I think so is because if you move while spamming rod clicks some of the clicks get interrupted, but I never noticed interrupts on my jboots.


[Sun Feb 07 12:24:24 2021] You begin casting Alliance.
[Sun Feb 07 12:24:24 2021] You feel quite amicable.
[Sun Feb 07 12:24:24 2021] You begin casting Alliance.
[Sun Feb 07 12:24:24 2021] You feel quite amicable.
[Sun Feb 07 12:24:25 2021] You begin casting Alliance.
[Sun Feb 07 12:24:25 2021] Your spell is interrupted.
[Sun Feb 07 12:24:25 2021] You begin casting Alliance.
[Sun Feb 07 12:24:25 2021] Your spell is interrupted.
[Sun Feb 07 12:24:26 2021] You begin casting Alliance.
[Sun Feb 07 12:24:26 2021] You feel quite amicable.

[DMN]

There were really three key things that happened in the first year. Clarity was added to the class, tash was made unreistable, and GCD reset gained more wide spread use. Tangentially but also importantly, a lot more gamers started getting cable internet. I remember personally going from 500-600 ping at prime time down to 100-150. Massive difference for enchanter.

[xmaerx]

I suggest reading some of these old Enchanter posts to find out what live was really like in classic. Like I already said, multiple people mentioning they didn't even mem Mesmerize because it was so unreliable due to bugs and difficult to survive getting aggro.

Where did you prove this? Because I think you're confused.

Also the "Blur doesn't work on subsequent casts of mez" is likely a critical misunderstanding. They likely don't realize mobs can't change their targets while mez'd. The main method of testing if something is blurred is to /assist it, and that just doesn't cut it.

[xmaerx]

I think it is present on p99. The reason I think so is because if you move while spamming rod clicks some of the clicks get interrupted, but I never noticed interrupts on my jboots.


[Sun Feb 07 12:24:24 2021] You begin casting Alliance.
[Sun Feb 07 12:24:24 2021] You feel quite amicable.
[Sun Feb 07 12:24:24 2021] You begin casting Alliance.
[Sun Feb 07 12:24:24 2021] You feel quite amicable.
[Sun Feb 07 12:24:25 2021] You begin casting Alliance.
[Sun Feb 07 12:24:25 2021] Your spell is interrupted.
[Sun Feb 07 12:24:25 2021] You begin casting Alliance.
[Sun Feb 07 12:24:25 2021] Your spell is interrupted.
[Sun Feb 07 12:24:26 2021] You begin casting Alliance.
[Sun Feb 07 12:24:26 2021] You feel quite amicable.


Yes, but the "small cast time" was to prevent spam casting it on other people. Whatever the cast time is on P99 doesn't seem to solve that problem, and was likely a guess meant to preserve its function as a GCD reset.

As for the Grim Aura clicky, it does seem like it was "relatively known" by mid Velious. Still attesting that it is more of a power boost for Enchanter than any other class in the game, and what pushes us into "broken" territory.

[MaCtastic]

Mez does not blur at 100%. Proof, just had a mob in ally with not blur after mezz if it 17 times in a row. The. Raptured and it worked.

[DMN]

That's because it was a higher level mob most likely, unlike the OP and the pathetic level 20ish goblin he was mezing, which, just like classic, tend to blur quite easily.

[wagorf]

Go to PoM, lvl 4 mez some mob there (One, Two, A1 mobs) 1000 times. Count the number of times it con indiff after mez.

I bet its around around 30% of time. 1% is fuckin way off, so dont try to bring in the bullshit "show evidence" argument.