Game Mechanics: Definitive proof of Lull and Charm being wrong on p99

[Zuranthium]

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

Break\resist\crit resist rates seem to be pretty in line with what is described here already.

No, lol. Resists/breaks on charm should be happening, at minimum, 2x as frequently as they currently do. For lull the chance is much worse.

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

When killing a named in chardok for example, I find it's more likely that something goes wrong (crit resists or charm breaks forcing a gate) than to have a perfect round of paci-charm-kill-gate.

Lull on those mobs in Chardok shouldn't work in the first place. Mobs level 50+ literally can not be lulled in Classic EQ, and mobs level 40-49 should resist lull 55% of the time at minimum!

https://www.eqemulator.org/forums/sh...11&postcount=9

The exception is for Bard lull, Kelin's Lugubrious Lament, which worked much better than the Enchanter/Cleric lull line (but of course, 18 second duration only).

[Goregasmic]

By floor they mean base value or absolute minimum? Because with charisma you'd get -10 or -25 depending on the era.

This is also resists and not crit resists. It is better on p99 but naked in high end group dungeons you still get a lot of resists. And even geared, 51+ it isn't pretty.

I'd still like to know these people's charisma setup. They say lull has low aggro so they're pulling with it but unless it is another p99 thing, they seem to be unaware that initial aggro gives little aggro no matter which spell you use.

[Zuranthium]

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

By floor they mean base value or absolute minimum?

That's the absolute minimum. Doesn't matter what your CHA is or what debuffs are used or what the level gap is, the roll can not be improved beyond that number. Not only that, but it applies every tick for ending early. Lull absolutely never meant you were free to roam around a certain area for minutes at a time, and even just for breaking a camp you pretty much were never going to fully lull a group of Level 40+ NPC's (and literally impossible to even land on Level 50+ NPC's).

Also, all non-damage spells in Classic EQ that weren't unresistible had a minimum 3% chance of resist no matter what, and it was minimum 11% chance if you weren't at least 11 levels higher than the target.

[Goregasmic]

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

Lull absolutely never meant you were free to roam around a certain area for minutes at a time, and even just for breaking a camp you pretty much were never going to fully lull a group of Level 40+ NPC's (and literally impossible to even land on Level 50+ NPC's).

Honestly at 40-49 charm is stable enough in that level range that it is almost less work to just mess them up. Mobs start having enough HP that calm won't last long enough.

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

Also, all non-damage spells in Classic EQ that weren't unresistible had a minimum 3% chance of resist no matter what, and it was minimum 11% chance if you weren't at least 11 levels higher than the target.

Yeah that's messed up. Last time I had a resist was fighting 38-42 mobs at 45 and the resists were rare. I tash almost everything but still. Pretty sure I had more resists on live on my wizard and IIRC their nukes are -10.

[Keebz]

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

https://www.eqemulator.org/forums/sh...11&postcount=9

Torven rules so hard. That whole thread is amazing.

[Renault]

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

No, lol. Resists/breaks on charm should be happening, at minimum, 2x as frequently as they currently do. For lull the chance is much worse.

The exception is for Bard lull, Kelin's Lugubrious Lament, which worked much better than the Enchanter/Cleric lull line (but of course, 18 second duration only).

Does this mean Bard's lull is basically untouched here, giving them a real dungeon pulling specialty?

[WarpathEQ]

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

Does this mean Bard's lull is basically untouched here, giving them a real dungeon pulling specialty?

Yes bard lull works effectively on P99 just as I recall it working back on classic live, resists are uncommon but happen, crit resists are very uncommon, mob con matters a lot. As indicated its short duration (18 seconds) so likely didn't have the extra layers of resist checks that seems to be missing from P99 on other class lines.

[Goregasmic]

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

Does this mean Bard's lull is basically untouched here, giving them a real dungeon pulling specialty?

The song Kelin`s Lugubrious Lament was hardcoded to be special. What this song did was halve the target's effective resist value, and it had a floor of only 5 MR. This made it the best lull spell by far and the only one that could be used on level 50+ NPCs. It's only a few ticks and I suppose Sony wanted to give bards something unique so that's probably why they made this exception.

Can't say for sure because we don't know how bard lull is coded on here but it seems like if it changes it won't change much and will be leagues ahead of regular lulls.

Presently lull lets enchanters bypass a lot of content but the 18sec bard lull has limited use so it kinda makes sense to leave it mostly untouched. The pacify nerf from 7mins to 3.5mins alone made some camps more complicated and some impossible. Bard lull makes you calm like 2 mobs for a quick pull I guess, nothing gamebreaking.

[Jimjam]

The existence of a floor, and that for bard lull it was apparently notably low at 5 has very interesting connotations for other spells. Interesting.

[Goregasmic]

One thing I'm not sure I understand, from the link above:

The resist rates for lulls in classic were the following: (assuming the NPC did not have higher MR than these floors)

On targets level 1-14: 11% (10 MR floor)
On targets level 15-24: 21% (20 MR floor)
On targets level 25-34: 34% (33 MR floor)
On targets level 35-39: 43% (42 MR floor)
On targets level 40-49: 55% (54 MR floor)
On targets level 50+: 100% (100 MR floor)

To be clear: this is a tiered floor, not an override. If you cast Lull on a level 1 NPC as a level 1 player, the resist rate would be 26% because the standard MR at level 1 is 25. So even at lower levels the spells weren't that good.

Says mob MR at lvl1 is 25.


This link apparently states 50+ mobs have 26+ MR and scales slowly:

https://docs.eqemu.io/server/npc/npc-scaling/

Considering a level 1 mob supposedly has 25MR (seems high?) the above table could be wrong?

If it is right, this would mean the whole tash line would be mostly useless until you face certain raid targets and its main use would be to help slow land.