Enchanter OP impact poll

[Keebz]

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

https://xornn.tripod.com/Circles/7th_circle_(24-28).htm

That site was updated into 2002 so some of the values might not be entirely in timeline, but it's definitely close.

[Keebz]

Speaking of research, this note is interesting
"Charm is immediately removed from charmed NPC's when the character that charmed them casts invisibility."

http://www.tski.co.jp/baldio/patch/20020213.html

Did it not work like this before?

[G13]

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

You're basically saying the status quo, which very likely is entirely emulated code based on formulae reverse engineered from a version of the game many years past classic, shouldn't be questioned. Like, feel free to be unconvinced by OP and provide constructive criticism, but saying stuff like "it can't be proven" is defeatist and not in the spirit of the project.

I'm so tired of this pathetic tactic

"So you're saying" (followed by nothing I actually said) Ok Cathy Newman

"Everybody Knows" OP constantly does this

These are phrases used by people that don't have an argument or any evidence in an attempt to persuade stupid people. I've sarcastically even used them a few times in this thread

We're 10+ years into the project. "Research" is a joke because it consists of trying to find obscure angelfire pages or guild blog posts that nobody ever read to prove something that could potentially affect the gameplay of a lot of people. I'm sorry, I have a standard of evidence and that isn't it.

Go find an original EQ developer. Get the original source code. You know REAL data to compare it to. Then we can have a discussion.

That's not what this thread is though. This thread is yet another attempt at creating a narrative to get what the OP wants. It's dishonest and yes, that annoys me.

[Keebz]

Originally Posted by G13 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

Go find an original EQ developer. Get the original source code. You know REAL data to compare it to. Then we can have a discussion.

This entire project is based on evidence much less direct than what you suggest is the barrier to entry for "a discussion".

[cd288]

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

This entire project is based on evidence much less direct than what you suggest is the barrier to entry for "a discussion".

I mean it’s based in part on the client code and then patch notes and legitimate EQ sources. From what I understand, it’s pretty rare that a random hearsay post from a random player from 21 years ago is used as evidence to make a change

[cd288]

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

https://xornn.tripod.com/Circles/4th_circle_(12-15).htm

"Find your blue mob (I always fight blue mobs unless Charm-Soloing--and even then I suggest blues, but you can manage white/yellow if you're just really into dangerous fights"

So this guy is posting mostly from early classic time period and he is managing to charm solo using yellow and white mobs.

It gets better

"Drekaar solos charm style with 85 Charisma."

And he isn't even using a GCD clicky yet charm soling yellow cons with 85. ROFLMAO.

edit:

More fun inclusions:
Blanket of Forgetfulness - Targetted AE Memory Wipe, and the source of my absolutely favorite solo style now with Mr. Jerky. (I'll explain later.) I haven't had the amazing spell not blur anything yet, though reaggros still occur.

100% memblur chance, right? So much for all those aggro problems, eh? Heh. Like I posted in the bug forum this and the other AoEs blurs are currently nerfed on p99 and do not target pets, tough they should.


Well that's settled. Enchanters need a big buff on p99.

Can’t believe I forgot about that one. That’s probably the most in depth enchanter guide that we have available (it’s on the wiki as well) and the guy literally talks about charming as the Enchanter’s most powerful tool.

So OP, as I said for every post you can find of someone saying it was like X back in the day, you can find posts directly contradicting them.

[Keebz]

Originally Posted by cd288 [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

I mean it’s based in part on the client code and then patch notes and legitimate EQ sources. From what I understand, it’s pretty rare that a random hearsay post from a random player from 21 years ago is used as evidence to make a change

Those are good sources, but wouldn't contain things like exact resist formulae for certain spell lines.

My point is not so much to say OP's evidence is compelling, but that such discussions can be valuable if they are rooted in evidence and research. I disagree with the attitude that "we can never know" and that even considering it is a waste of time.

[G13]

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

Those are good sources, but wouldn't contain things like exact resist formulae for certain spell lines.

My point is not so much to say OP's evidence is compelling, but that such discussions can be valuable if they are rooted in evidence and research. I disagree with the attitude that "we can never know" and that even considering it is a waste of time.

We won't ever really know

Unless you have access to the original code from Verant 20 years ago

Feel free to find it and post it

Otherwise threads like this are purely speculation and the suppositions can never be proven. Not to mention the changes they are asking for are never in good faith or altruistic AT ALL

P.S. I don't play an enchanter and have no skin in the game, but threads like this trying to get a class nerfed while said poster continues to enjoy their class is about as low as it gets

[magnetaress]

Lots of creepy ppl seem rly pro Enchanter unclassic OPness. Guess they are into nonconcentual charming/domming. Manipulation. Controll. Brainwashing.

Makes a lot of sense they don't want their virtual rohypnol nerfed.

[DMN]

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

Lots of creepy ppl seem rly pro Enchanter unclassic OPness. Guess they are into nonconcentual charming/domming. Manipulation. Controll. Brainwashing.

Makes a lot of sense they don't want their virtual rohypnol nerfed.

Your evidence is incredibly compelling, megatardess.