Enchanter OP impact poll

[Dolalin]

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

Dunno about charm, but it sure seems like the Great Lull Nerf isn't present on P99 and never has been (folks have been bringing this one up since 2009).

Lull probably needs attention too.

I would say people generally want 'silver bullet' solutions to problems, and conversely, they expect problems to have one or two major causes.

In reality, that's not always the case. Rather, it's more common that lots of small related problems multiply into a big one.

(I've seen this pattern a lot in society and it's a big reason why we keep stalling on making progress on many issues in life, because we expect all problems to have big, obvious causes. If you suggest attacking tons of little problems, people start thinking it's a waste of time because they look at each little cause in isolation and think 'how could that cause all this?', so they lose interest and the thing never gets fixed. It's a flaw in human psychology.)

Enchanters being OP is a lot of little problems, with a few medium-sized ones like Channeling being OP on P99, that all multiply into a bigger issue. You have to attack all the little things in order to solve it.

[Jimjam]

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

Enchanters being OP is a lot of little problems, with a few medium-sized ones like Channeling being OP on P99, that all multiply into a bigger issue. You have to attack all the little things in order to solve it.

I think part of the channelling 'issue' is a hardware one.

A lot of client side stuff is tied to frames, like fall damage. It wouldn't surprise me if interrupts through push are handled similarly, and like fall damage, having a high FPS modern machine while things are exploding could tip the balance in favour of the player and stop a hit becoming an interupt.

[loramin]

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

Lull probably needs attention too.

I would say people generally want 'silver bullet' solutions to problems, and conversely, they expect problems to have one or two major causes.

In reality, that's not always the case. Rather, it's more common that lots of small related problems multiply into a big one.

(I've seen this pattern a lot in society and it's a big reason why we keep stalling on making progress on many issues in life, because we expect all problems to have big, obvious causes. If you suggest attacking tons of little problems, people start thinking it's a waste of time because they look at each little cause in isolation and think 'how could that cause all this?', so they lose interest and the thing never gets fixed. It's a flaw in human psychology.)

Enchanters being OP is a lot of little problems, with a few medium-sized ones like Channeling being OP on P99, that all multiply into a bigger issue. You have to attack all the little things in order to solve it.

As much as it's easier to believe that Nilbog just has a blind spot for Enchanters, I strongly suspect that it's really far more about this "little things" conjecture.

And again, a salute to you good sir for also doing the hard work (of nailing down all the small things that are wrong, and finding evidence of them).

[You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

As a side note; ever have any luck in getting that classic research holy grail site back up?

[Dolalin]

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

As a side note; ever have any luck in getting that classic research holy grail site back up?

Yes I've finished indexing with Open Semantic Search. It is not nearly as clean as Azure was, it thinks dates are phone numbers and all sorts of silliness, but the contextual search works great.

I need to clean it up a bit and at that point I'll see about making it publicly accessible.

[DMN]

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

Lull probably needs attention too.
.

Not sure what the "great lull nerf" actually was , since there were two big nerfs.

Originally lulls had the same resist rate as most spells, like root. It also originally lacked critical lull component( no aggro from failing). i believe this a was the first nerf/thing added relatively early, the resist increase in the second nerf.

P99 seems to have both of those nerfs currently in place.

[Dolalin]

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

Not sure what the "great lull nerf" actually was , since there were two big nerfs.

Not sure either, I haven't gone down that rabbit hole yet.

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

People like you and Dolalin were why mages were running around for months at lvl 50 with lvl 34 pets. E

There weren't any pets past 29 for mages for like 2 months after launch. It was the most classic EQ mage launch experience since 1999. Sorry [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

[DMN]

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

I don't need "proof": basic logic dictates that if you have many thousands of Enchanter players, and a good chunk are communicating on a forum, that they're going to share useful information with each other and make that information widely known (eg. the information that you can earn XP a whole lot faster by soloing than you can in a group).

The sad truth is 90% of the players back then ranged from bad to terrible. Only 5% were competent, and only 5% elite. perhaps even sadder, as this thread demonstrates, many of those original 90% still are in the bad to terrible range on p99 today, though thankfully the vast majority have moved into the competent range of the spectrum.

Now, many people back then didn't post their various exceptional accomplishments for fear of competition(other people copying them and then competing with them) as well as the main issue: the fear that the nerf hammer was just around the corner for anyone being a bit too boastful of their exploits. For reference see the necromancer for the first year or so of classic. Nerfed in virtually every patch. No one wanted to be the next necromancer. I solo'd the froglok king on my SK at level 50 with non-planar gear back then. Do you think I posted on any SK forums about it? Nope. Know why? First, the majority of people wouldn't believe it, most of the rest would use it as "proof" Sks are overpowered or don't have any other outstanding issues with the class, second, I didn't give a shit. I was in the 5% elite range, and I only cared what that 5% thought, not the 95% peanut gallery.

[loramin]

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

The sad truth is 90% of the players back then ranged from bad to terrible. Only 5% were competent, and only 5% elite. perhaps even sadder, as this thread demonstrates, many of those original 90% still are in the bad to terrible range on p99 today, though thankfully the vast majority have moved into the competent range of the spectrum.

Now, many people back then didn't post their various exceptional accomplishments for fear of competition(other people copying them and then competing with them) as well as the main issue: the fear that the nerf hammer was just around the corner for anyone being a bit too boastful of their exploits. For reference see the necromancer for the first year or so of classic. Nerfed in virtually every patch. No one wanted to be the next necromancer. I solo'd the froglok king on my SK at level 50 with non-planar gear back then. Do you think I posted on any SK forums about it? Nope. Know why? First, the majority of people wouldn't believe it, most of the rest would use it as "proof" Sks are overpowered or don't have any other outstanding issues with the class, second, I didn't give a shit. I was in the 5% elite range, and I only cared what that 5% thought, not the 95% peanut gallery.

I disagree: MMOG players are MMOG players, and humans are humans. The humans 20+ years ago are no different than the humans today.

Yes, we have more game knowledge today then we had back then: that is true and valid. But no, it does not explain why it was possible for Enchanters do vastly better soloing than grouping back then ... yet very few chose to do so ... and none of those few were wiling to communicate as much on the forums of the time.

Occam's razor: either only a few secretive uber players knew how to play the game, out of the thousands that played, and they didn't share that super l33t knowledge .. or the game was different back then, and what we have currently isn't classic.

[this user was banned]

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

The humans 20+ years ago are no differnt than the humans today.

Citation needed.

[DMN]

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

I disagree: MMOG players are MMOG players, and humans are humans. The humans 20+ years ago are no different than the humans today.

Yes, we have more game knowledge today then we had back then: that is true and valid. But no, it does not explain why it was possible for Enchanters do vastly better soloing than grouping back then ... yet very few chose to do so ... and none of those few were wiling to communicate as much on the forums of the time.

Occam's razor: either only a few secretive uber players knew how to play the game, out of the thousands that played, and they didn't share that super l33t knowledge .. or the game was different back then, and what we have currently isn't classic.

But enchanters weren't 25% of the server population back then, closer 2-3%. You've already read comments posted in this very thred of contemporary enchanters that were soloing fire gaint and ghoul lord camp. Hence, at this juncture Occam's Razor clearly suggests it was happening, you just simply never observed it.