Mage pet nerf 100% bot now....

[Dolalin]

I guess the question is, should something that's provably non-classic be kept because a lot of people have become accustomed to it? In this project the answer to that has traditionally been no.

If you have evidence that this isn't the way things were in 2001 then head off to the bug forums and provide it.

[loramin]

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

I guess the question is, should something that's provably non-classic be kept because a lot of people have become accustomed to it? In this project the answer to that has traditionally been no.

Except when it comes to charm.

Everyone knows charm wasn't half as widely used in classic as it is on this server, and yet no one seems to be surfacing any research to try and get it fixed (or if they are, the staff seems to be ignoring it).

[cd288]

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

Except when it comes to charm.

Everyone knows charm wasn't half as widely used in classic as it is on this server, and yet no one seems to be surfacing any research to try and get it fixed (or if they are, the staff seems to be ignoring it).

Standard Loramin post citing his own opinion and applying it to everyone else like “everyone knows!”

He’s the trump of P99 lol

[loramin]

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

Standard Loramin post citing his own opinion and applying it to everyone else like “everyone knows!”

He’s the trump of P99 lol

Did you play on live? If you did you'd know that it's not "my opinion" that Enchanters were regarded as a group class; it was a fact. And if you've seen my other posts, you should know there's also tons of classic evidence stating as much. Even the most basic descriptions of the class, on site's like Caster's Realm, explicitly say as much (https://web.archive.org/web/20010207.../enchanter.asp):

Soloing, whilst possible, is generally quite slow and as such they do not raise levels as quickly as some other classes as their experience is almost always through that of a group.

(And to be clear, that's not some "the game just started and no one knows anything" info ... it's from the earliest Caster's Realm archive I could find, which was two years into EQ!)

There is no question of opinion: charm is far more widely used here (not just by Enchanters, but also by Druids/Necros) than it was in classic.

[cd288]

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

Did you play on live? If you did you'd know that it's not "my opinion" that Enchanters were regarded as a group class; it was a fact. And if you've seen my other posts, you should know there's also tons of classic evidence stating as much. Even the most basic descriptions of the class, on site's like Caster's Realm, explicitly say as much (https://web.archive.org/web/20010207.../enchanter.asp):



(And to be clear, that's not some "the game just started and no one knows anything" info ... it's from the earliest Caster's Realm archive I could find, which was two years into EQ!)

There is no question of opinion: charm is far more widely used here (not just by Enchanters, but also by Druids/Necros) than it was in classic.

And you can also find in era posts and a guide talking about how Charm is an extremely powerful tool (and describing different methods of charm soloing). There’s plenty of contradictory evidence for everything you’re talking about

[xmaerx]

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

Except when it comes to charm.

Everyone knows charm wasn't half as widely used in classic as it is on this server, and yet no one seems to be surfacing any research to try and get it fixed (or if they are, the staff seems to be ignoring it).

Because "Hits for 70 damage" versus "Hits for 58 damage" is quantifiable and objective.

It's hard to find encapsulated break rates on something like charm, or crit fail rates on something like pacify, or blur rates on Mesmerize because it's all subjective, and people are dumb, were dumb, and didn't post a whole lot of accurate testing. They did, however, complain about damage often, hence those posts.

"My pet broke so much tonight! It was like.. twice as often as it will be on P99 20 years from now!" -Exists, somewhere, definitely.

Will reiterate: A lot of the things that make enchanters OP are meta-gaming borderlined exploits. A pet is FAR, FAR harder to recapture without a GCD reset, and far less useful without being able to paci/blur it.

[cd288]

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

Because "Hits for 70 damage" versus "Hits for 58 damage" is quantifiable and objective.

It's hard to find encapsulated break rates on something like charm, or crit fail rates on something like pacify, or blur rates on Mesmerize because it's all subjective, and people are dumb, were dumb, and didn't post a whole lot of accurate testing. They did, however, complain about damage often, hence those posts.

"My pet broke so much tonight! It was like.. twice as often as it will be on P99 20 years from now!" -Exists, somewhere, definitely.

Will reiterate: A lot of the things that make enchanters OP are meta-gaming borderlined exploits. A pet is FAR, FAR harder to recapture without a GCD reset, and far less useful without being able to paci/blur it.

Good point on the GCD reset aspect.

And you’re correct much of the “evidence” (besides channeling being way easier which is true but is not unique to enchanters and as I understand it is a client issue not a P99 issue) is old forum posts that are also contradicted by other posts (we even have an enchanter guide from back in the day on the P99 wiki that says charm is their most powerful tool). The problem is people only pick the forum posts that support what they want to see happen and then say the staff ignores evidence.

[loramin]

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

Because "Hits for 70 damage" versus "Hits for 58 damage" is quantifiable and objective.

It's hard to find encapsulated break rates on something like charm, or crit fail rates on something like pacify, or blur rates on Mesmerize because it's all subjective, and people are dumb, were dumb, and didn't post a whole lot of accurate testing. They did, however, complain about damage often, hence those posts.

"My pet broke so much tonight! It was like.. twice as often as it will be on P99 20 years from now!" -Exists, somewhere, definitely.

Will reiterate: A lot of the things that make enchanters OP are meta-gaming borderlined exploits. A pet is FAR, FAR harder to recapture without a GCD reset, and far less useful without being able to paci/blur it.

Exactly! So look, if:

A) the whole point of this place is to reproduce classic

B) we have a mechanic where no one knows exactly how it was on live (ie. what exactly the classic mechanic was)

C) we have behavior here which is clearly different from classic (Druids, Enchanters and Necros all playing differently than they did on live, contradicting point A .... which, again, is the entire point of this place)

... then maybe it would make sense to try tweaking that mechanic, to try and make things closer to classic.

But to be clear, I'm not saying "let's change the charm failure rate from 10% of the time to 50%"; that would be unclassic! I'm saying "let's change it to 15%, and see if this place looks closer to live afterward".

[Scalem]

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

Exactly! So look, if:

A) the whole point of this place is to reproduce classic

B) we have a mechanic where no one knows exactly how it was on live (ie. what exactly the classic mechanic was)

C) we have behavior here which is clearly different from classic (Druids, Enchanters and Necros all playing differently than they did on live, contradicting point A .... which, again, is the entire point of this place)

... then maybe it would make sense to try tweaking that mechanic, to try and make things closer to classic.

But to be clear, I'm not saying "let's change the charm failure rate from 10% of the time to 50%"; that would be unclassic! I'm saying "let's change it to 15%, and see if this place looks closer to live afterward".

Almost all behavior here is different from classic, what a silly argument.

[Dolalin]

Another one, which also proves that these pets were buffed in Luclin and hitting for 70ish wasn't in era:

8/14/02

Subject: Stealth fix to GV:A

The damage upgrades to the greater Vocarate
pets that occurred awhile back skipped over
the 59 air pet (up to that point, the best
group pet a mage had for their run through
59).

The last patch upped it's max damage to 68,
bringing it in line with the max damage of
the 60 water pet.


Happy happy, joy joy [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]

https://groups.google.com/g/alt.game...m/WosAQoGwjEAJ