You are on the side of the argument wanting things to change from the status quo. Therefor it's up to you to provide evidence that a change is needed. Not the other way around.

A change might be needed. I don't know. But I don't think you have presented anything resembling compelling evidence. Anecdotes about how "everyone who played in classic remembers X, Y and Z" is not good evidence, sorry.

I can only make the best argument I can with the evidence available. If you aren't swayed, that's your call, but ultimately it's not you that I'm trying to sway.

I mean at the end of the day, it probably isn't going to sway anyone because this isn't even in the bug forum lol. I wonder how often they even look here. But then, the bug forum requires actual evidence too.

People seem to love talking past each other & in circles here.

From the first page of this thread:

http://www.eqemulator.org/forums/sho...d.php?p=266999

Which is related to:

https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...d.php?t=395675

TL;DR - "Making channeling classic would represent a fundamental change to P99 gameplay mechanics which will reintroduce difficulty at all levels of the game and likely put an end to a lot of existing "cheesy" strategies. It may also even allow reverting AE group nerf changes as AE killing mobs would be significantly more challenging. This change will reintroduce a lot of the difficulty involved in soloing in particular especially indoors or without SoW/Jboots and in theory should encourage more grouping and social behaviour which I feel is lacking on P99 due to the ease of soloing and primarily related to channeling ability. It may also add to the difficulty of high level play including raiding and especially in situations where players are currently relying on being able to cast while being attacked by multiple high level mobs."

Hilariously this would also have a massive impact on Shaman soloing. Especially for non-Ogres :D

Maybe he does, maybe he doesn't, but I'm not just trying to convince him.

My point was, there's a bunch of Enchanter players who will not be convinced, no matter what I say, just as there was a lot of melee players who would not be convinced, no matter what evidence was presented, that combat bind wounds was unclassic.

Trying to convince such people is a pointless endeavor: I'm only trying to convince the convincible people. If I'm lucky, maybe a few who can research classic better than I can and provide more proof ... like the proof that started this whole thread ...

As a Barbarian Shaman, I say bring it! :D

Convinced of what, exactly? I don't know a single person/enchanter/poster who claims that the rate at which enchanters charm, both solo/grouping, as anywhere near the same rates it was during the classic time period. The fact is there were still in fact plenty of enchanters doing it, which you have already begrudgingly admitted, making this entirely unlike this red herring thats is bind wound that never happened in classic at all. Apples versus bowling balls.

the typical population of enchanters for most of classic was around 5-7% percent of the server, in vanillla on some servers it was as low as 2-3%. The population on p99 is, what? 30%? which is to say relative to classic you will be seeing enchanters doing anhything and everything from 500% more often to 1000% greater frequency.Mystery explained.

But the real question in all of this as I've asked you many times before and you conveniently ignore it, if you are so concerned about non classic RATES of behaviors, why do you have no issue with torpor soloing shaman or bard swarm kiting. anywhere around 10-15% of enchanters in classic were playing just as they do on p99 by mid kunark, while the percent of bards that where swaming dozens of mobs or shman torpor soloing high end obs : 0.0000000000000000001%. Why the bias, bro?

To me, that reads like an argument that our server is highly unclassic! In other words, because our emulator emulates Enchanters poorly, lots more people choose them than they would if our emulator was accurate. Thank you for the support :D

Or, like I keep saying:

(Only your point is reversed, so it's more like, if 3% of players played Ryu, and now 30% do on the emulator, that suggests the emulator made Dragon Punch too powerful.)

I got news for your loramin, no one cares what you think, especially after confirming what has long been suspected : you, both then and now, knew virtually nothing about classic enchanters. thank you for the rare honesty.

With something like the internal mechanics of a spell like charm, whatever people are saying about their own personal experiences with the spell does not stand up as evidence. On Zam, especially during classic, a huge chunk of these reported experiences are wildly innacurate or just plain wrong. Or they were even true, but only because they had some bad luck or just sucked (happens here too). Hardly anyone really knew anything about anything, even if they had access to the raw data. Which was also not the case with charm.

I think we can all agree that charm WAS significantly harder during live classic. But it was harder because of real things that have already been pointed out that none of us need a wayback machine to confirm as fact. (knowledge, hardware, server stability, internet connections etc.)

I hate tying anything involving this game into real life because it is just pretty cringy. But I will say that legal systems have statutes of limitations for certain cases for several reasons. One of them being that what you think you "experienced" or "how you "felt" decades ago is not evidence as there is a very high likelyhood it is not accurate compared to the actual facts. There would be a lot of wrongful prosecution otherwise.

Good post, Cat.

This thread, alongside another recent one, has brought me to the belief that the changes to life tap resists and rune aggro need to be rolled back.


Just because the broad availability of game knowledge has opened up skills and strategies to players which were previously unaware of them doesn't mean the core mechanics should be changed.