#41
|
||||
|
Quote:
| |||
|
#42
|
|||
|
whoa guys chill and read my wiki
(LOL) | ||
|
#44
|
|||
|
If you read Dolalins research it’s extremely weak. It’s not even remotely close to statistically significant or comparing like variables. The classic era (supposedly couldn’t personally verify) test had a small sample size and didn’t control for the effects of magic resistance debuffs. The test was 25 samples, and found a weak negative correlation between charisma and charm duration, where less charisma slightly improved charm duration.
I’d argue (and gosh darn it I’m a guy in the internet!) that magic resist/small level differentiation caused most of the volatility seen in the test results and as a result of a very high standard deviation the 25 sample size is not enough to draw any meaningful conclusions. He did test magic resistance later, and found it was strongly correlated with charm duration.
__________________
- monstra sunt vera, nos sunt
| ||
|
#45
|
||||
|
Quote:
also considering channeling - it's being looked into seriously by dedicated curators P99 is really great. It is really great at what p99 does. The spirit and soul of classic matters too, and the feel does aswell. I'm glad Nilbog sticks to his guns and demands serious evidence. It means changes like this are more likely to stick. Still, I wish I could run my classic feeling custom box. It wouldn't be p99 though. | |||
Last edited by starkind; 11-18-2021 at 01:00 PM..
|
|
#46
|
|||
|
person who doesn;t play p99 comes in to talk about charming
lol! | ||
|
#47
|
||||
|
Quote:
Furthermore you are so eager to prove that (100% unfounded) belief that you're willing to attack and tear down the excellent work another researcher volunteered their time to find ... while completely ignoring the fact that all classic research is similarly crappy old posts like that one? And again, you're doing this attacking while not even trying to do a fraction of what Dolalin did (ie. find even the tiniest bit of evidence to support your point)? Do I have that correct? Or is it simpler than that: maybe just that you have no respect for what this place is about? Because I'm truly starting to think you don't care if Enchanters (or anything else here) is classic: you'll just make any argument you can (ie. throw as much spaghetti as you can at the wall) in the hope that something sticks, so you can keep playing your class the (unclassic) way you like. But if you've enjoyed this place even a fraction as much as I have, I think that's a disrespectful position to take: the one and only thing our benevolent overlords here have asked for, in exchange for limitless free gameplay, is help making things more classic.
__________________
Loramin Frostseer, Oracle of the Tribunal <Anonymous> and Fan of the "Where To Go For XP/For Treasure?" Guides Anyone can improve the wiki! If you are new to the Blue or Green servers, you can improve the wiki to earn a "welcome package" of platinum and/or gear! Send me a forum message for details. | |||
Last edited by loramin; 11-18-2021 at 09:12 PM..
|
|
#48
|
||||
|
Quote:
Maximum chaos would be going with Torven's speculation on the first resist system and changing resists across the board to live's pvp formula. | |||
|
#49
|
|||
|
It's classic enough to still be fun but it's approaching meh status. We have played for years with stuff slowly getting "fixed" but it's becoming more about nerfing xyz than making it classic. I have one or more of each class that I'm leveling up and I don't want to see any more nerfs. I spent weeks in KC when Kunark came out and good enchanters would charm while grouped and it was awesome. I always wanted an enchanter in the group. Yet some of you clowns are saying that enchanters didn't charm during that era. I lived it and the ones in the know certainly kicked ass.
| ||
|
#50
|
|||
|
Enchanter charm has been nerfed with last patch so ?
| ||
|
|
|