Project 1999

Go Back   Project 1999 > Server Issues > Resolved Issues

Closed Thread
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #11  
Old 11-06-2009, 04:19 PM
Takshaka Takshaka is offline
Aviak


Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 82
Default

I havent tested this yet. But I know for sure that pets(read pets, not animations) could attack mezzed targets on Live in at least in 2000. I played a chanter back then and I remember having great problems with idiot mages who didnt know how to attack the right target.

*ironically I just started playing on this server the other day as a mage...
Last edited by Takshaka; 11-06-2009 at 04:24 PM..
  #12  
Old 11-06-2009, 04:31 PM
Reiker Reiker is offline
Banned


Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 939
Default

Okay... at release in 1999 there was no protection against pets breaking mez. Pets broke mez a lot and enchanters were sad. But that was life, EQ was hard.

I distinctly remember a patch I think around Velious where they added two things:

a) Pets will disengage a mezzed mob.
b) You cannot make a pet attack a mezzed mob.

Currently, a) does not happen (good). B does however, which is the issue. It's not even anything too major, but just another classic inconsistency to point out.
  #13  
Old 11-06-2009, 04:35 PM
entilza entilza is offline
Aviak


Join Date: Nov 2009
Posts: 53
Default

This made the difference between a good pet controller and not...

And the risk factor of using a pet in dungeons.
  #14  
Old 11-06-2009, 04:50 PM
guineapig guineapig is offline
Planar Protector

guineapig's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 4,028
Default

http://everquest.allakhazam.com/history/patches.html

This should help. I dug around but couldn't find anything but that's not to say it isn't there. It's a lot to control+f through.

This is starting to make a little more sense now. I still think Animations were meant to have a different rule-set than other pets since there is no way to control them.

EDIT:
It seems odd that the predominant crowd control class should be equipped with the "absolute worst possible mez breaking nightmare machine".

As it works now when I have to mez an add I simply root it and when mez wears off i just get close enough to get hit once and my pet takes over.
Last edited by guineapig; 11-06-2009 at 04:57 PM..
  #15  
Old 11-06-2009, 08:52 PM
Caelor Caelor is offline
Skeleton


Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 19
Default

If a MOB is mezzed as the initial action, a pet will not break the mez if commanded to attack. If a MOB hit the chanter, and then got mezzed, the pet will break the mez immediately, or after its current target is dead. This is not ideal behavior but is classic.
  #16  
Old 07-22-2010, 12:38 AM
datapunk79 datapunk79 is offline
Decaying Skeleton


Join Date: Jul 2010
Posts: 2
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by guineapig [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
http://everquest.allakhazam.com/history/patches.html
It seems odd that the predominant crowd control class should be equipped with the "absolute worst possible mez breaking nightmare machine".
Not to beat a dead horse but I totally agree. The mechanics of an animation should be in line with their chanters crowd control ability. Doesn't seem right, and I was much happier with a smarter animation.
  #17  
Old 07-22-2010, 11:34 PM
mimixownzall mimixownzall is offline
Fire Giant

mimixownzall's Avatar

Join Date: May 2010
Location: Western OK
Posts: 642
Default

The animation was done as a way of ballance. Enchanters weren't meant to be a pet class. They were given an animation to help level. Imagine if a mage had as much CC as a chanter? Would be pretty OP.

Besides, chanters dont use their pet after a while anyways.
  #18  
Old 07-23-2010, 02:40 AM
mmiles8 mmiles8 is offline
Fire Giant

mmiles8's Avatar

Join Date: Jun 2010
Posts: 642
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by mimixownzall [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
The animation was done as a way of ballance. Enchanters weren't meant to be a pet class.
In terms of classic, this, this and this^.


You're either going to be able to mez effectively, or have a small chance that your pet will pull a mob off of you so you can continue to cast a mez that will likely get broken. And by small I mean none, since pet taunt doesn't work like player taunt.

Mezzing contraindicates the use of an animation. Attempting to do otherwise results in posts like these.
  #19  
Old 07-23-2010, 05:13 PM
Chicka Chicka is offline
Kobold


Join Date: May 2010
Posts: 156
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by guineapig [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Wait, can anyone else confirm this? Because that sounds insanely backwards. Why would you want your pet to attack a mezzed mob (speaking strictly as a chanter).
It's not a question of want, it was the way it was. No self respecting chanter had a pet out in a group back in the day, just didn't happen.
__________________
--

Quote:
Originally Posted by Aeolwind View Post
I <3 detriment.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Tronjer View Post
10 years ago I split up as well with my ex gf over EQ. Didn't even realize her move out, as I was raiding at this time.
  #20  
Old 07-23-2010, 06:04 PM
Lazortag Lazortag is offline
Planar Protector

Lazortag's Avatar

Join Date: Apr 2010
Posts: 3,635
Default

I would really like someone to provide proof of all the stuff being asserted in this thread since I play a Bard and Bards have mez, and would probably prefer if things were changed so that mez's interaction with pets wasn't confusing.
Closed Thread


Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off

Forum Jump


All times are GMT -4. The time now is 04:04 PM.


Everquest is a registered trademark of Daybreak Game Company LLC.
Project 1999 is not associated or affiliated in any way with Daybreak Game Company LLC.
Powered by vBulletin®
Copyright ©2000 - 2025, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.