|
|
|||||||
 |
|
|
Thread Tools | Display Modes |
|
#11
11-20-2019, 10:53 AM
|
|||
|
Eh, yeah, I guess I didn't look closely enough at his high vs low charisma tests. His tests against the level 50 mob were odd. His tests against the green con earlier in that thread (not specifically linked here) show no difference in duration or resists with 75 vs 205 charisma though.
His data definitely seems to suggest charisma doesn't HELP charm durations. It isn't entirely clear if it somehow hurts them I guess. It'd be interesting to see if the TAKP people found different sources besides these and all the classic-era anecdotes. What more interested me was his average and max charm durations on mobs of different level and magic resistance, and implications of those for p99's usual tashed, blue-con charms when solo and tashed, malod, blue-con charms when grouped. | ||
|
|||
|
#12
11-20-2019, 10:57 AM
|
|||
|
No classic data set is going to be perfect, or this controversy wouldn't still exist 20 years later.
What we're looking for here is a signal in the noise that says "CHA matters!" and it's not there, at least not from these runs. I messaged both Torven and Haynar and maybe they will chime in with a TAKP perspective if we're lucky. | ||
|
|
|||
|
#13
11-20-2019, 12:10 PM
|
||||
|
Quote:
I think we need more data points though. What's the MR of the mobs charmed in each study. What's the level of the Enchanter versus the level of the mob being charmed in each instance (the P99 test may have disclosed the player's level, but I didn't see it in the quote)? Both of those are established as two of the saves you have to make for a Charm break. IIRC, CHA is supposedly the third one and the least important of the three. That could explain why the CHA in the Live tests doesn't seem to make as much of a difference versus the duration, and perhaps the P99 tests MR and level difference is creating the long duration. | |||
|
|
||||
|
#14
11-20-2019, 12:22 PM
|
|||
|
Agreed on more data points, but I'm having to go out of the classic era now to provide them.
Anyways here's a post from 2003 testing whether CHA affects charm duration, verdict was that it did not. BUT it seems to have affected initial resist chance: Code:
Yandie (TD3)
A Crystalline Golem #1
str 146 Start End Duration Running Average
sta 153 23:52:34 23:53:41 0:01:07 0:01:07
agi 129 23:54:01 23:55:56 0:01:55 0:01:31
dex 112 23:56:27 23:58:03 0:01:36 0:01:33
wis 207 23:58:38 23:58:52 0:00:14 0:01:13
int 315 23:59:15 23:59:28 0:00:13 0:01:01
cha 305 23:59:44 23:59:58 0:00:14 0:00:53
0:00:16 0:00:35 0:00:19 0:00:48
PR 75 0:00:50 0:05:21 0:04:31 0:01:16
MR 184 0:06:06 0:06:52 0:00:46 0:01:13
DR 70 0:07:15 0:08:05 0:00:50 0:01:10
FR 156 0:09:47 0:10:11 0:00:24 0:01:06
CR 116 0:10:27 0:11:24 0:00:57 0:01:05
0:11:40 0:15:28 0:03:48 0:01:18
Buffs 0:16:03 0:16:35 0:00:32 0:01:15
SoW(Potion) 0:16:46 0:17:05 0:00:19 0:01:11
VoQ 0:17:18 0:18:24 0:01:06 0:01:11
AR 0:18:59 0:20:13 0:01:14 0:01:11
SoM 0:20:29 0:28:15 0:07:46 0:01:33
Air Elem 0:28:32 0:30:22 0:01:50 0:01:34
OS 0:30:33 0:31:41 0:01:08 0:01:32
2 55ish 0:32:01 0:32:18 0:00:17 0:01:29
cleric hp 0:32:29 0:33:19 0:00:50 0:01:27
buffs 0:33:41 0:36:21 0:02:40 0:01:30
0:36:40 0:38:35 0:01:55 0:01:31
Average 0:01:31
Casts 24
Resists 0
Resist %0
Yandie (TD3)
A Crystalline Golem #1
str 108 Start End Duration Running Average
sta 140 0:45:29 0:47:25 0:01:56 0:01:56
agi 129 0:47:37 0:51:40 0:04:03 0:02:59
dex 109 0:51:55 0:54:13 0:02:18 0:02:46
wis 188 0:54:48 0:56:14 0:01:26 0:02:26
int 288 0:56:29 0:56:38 0:00:09 0:01:58
cha 130 0:57:06 0:01:58
0:57:14 1:02:07 0:04:53 0:02:27
PR 63 1:02:26 0:02:27
MR 162 1:02:34 1:05:03 0:02:29 0:02:28
DR 58 1:05:22 1:08:12 0:02:50 0:02:30
FR 138 1:08:43 1:09:43 0:01:00 0:02:20
CR 130 1:10:01 1:10:13 0:00:12 0:02:08
1:10:26 0:02:08
Buffs 1:10:33 0:02:08
SoW(Potion) 1:10:41 1:12:57 0:02:16 0:02:08
VoQ 1:13:13 1:13:28 0:00:15 0:01:59
AR 1:16:42 1:18:24 0:01:42 0:01:58
SoM 1:19:07 1:19:25 0:00:18 0:01:50
Air Elem 1:19:33 1:19:55 0:00:22 0:01:45
1:22:25 0:01:45
1:22:33 1:23:32 0:00:59 0:01:42
1:23:55 1:24:58 0:01:03 0:01:39
1:25:38 1:27:42 0:02:04 0:01:41
1:27:55 1:28:12 0:00:17 0:01:36
1:28:35 0:01:36
1:28:43 0:01:36
1:28:50 1:30:56 0:02:06 0:01:38
1:31:11 0:01:38
1:31:18 1:33:35 0:02:17 0:01:40
1:33:47 1:34:05 0:00:18 0:01:36
1:34:16 0:01:36
1:34:34 0:01:36
1:34:41 1:34:53 0:00:12 0:01:32
1:35:00 1:36:25 0:01:25 0:01:32
1:36:36 1:37:50 0:01:14 0:01:31
1:38:02 0:01:31
1:38:09 1:38:51 0:00:42 0:01:29
1:39:04 0:01:29
1:39:11 0:01:29
1:39:19 1:39:45 0:00:26 0:01:27
1:39:55 1:40:40 0:00:45 0:01:26
1:41:01 1:41:47 0:00:46 0:01:24
1:42:13 1:42:53 0:00:40 0:01:23
Average 0:01:23
Casts 43
Resists 13
Resist %30.23
| ||
|
|
|||
|
#15
11-20-2019, 12:37 PM
|
||||
|
Quote:
The chanter, Wandatin, was level 58 the day he made the thread and was testing charm against a green-con-but-exp-giving seafury (so like... level 42-43?) with no tash or other MR effects on the target. The next day, iirc, he posted in the same thread saying that he tested charms against a level 50 NPC with no tash, and then again with no tash but WITH Resist Magic (+40 MR). He presumably was still level 58 in the later tests he did since it was less than 24 hours later, even though he doesn't actually spell it out. | |||
|
Last edited by Tecmos Deception; 11-20-2019 at 12:40 PM..
|
|
|||
|
#16
11-20-2019, 12:41 PM
|
|||
|
The first question shouldn't be how stats impact charm on p1999 or how they did on live, it should be "does p1999 charm resemble classic under similar conditions".
Not entirely sure how parses from PoP are useful, they offer numbers which can't be compared to p1999. | ||
|
Last edited by derpcake2; 11-20-2019 at 12:46 PM..
|
|
||
|
#17
11-20-2019, 12:44 PM
|
||||
|
Quote:
I mean... if charisma doesn't boost charm durations at 305 charisma, then it seems pretty fucking likely that it wasn't going to boost charm durations at 250, 200, or anything else either, right? That it wasn't actually in classic era just means it isn't a key bit of evidence. Staff aren't dummies. They aren't going to base mechanics on non-classic era unless they absolutely have to. But if some classic-era evidence suggests charisma didn't affect charm duration, and there's no patch notes or other mention of changes to these mechanics, and post-classic-era evidence suggests that even more charisma still didn't affect charm durations... you see where I'm going with this. | |||
|
Last edited by Tecmos Deception; 11-20-2019 at 12:47 PM..
|
|
|||
|
#18
11-20-2019, 12:49 PM
|
|||||
|
Quote:
We don't know if charm on p1999 lasts longer then it does on classic, everything else being the same. Proving that CHA has more of an effect on p1999 then it has on live, would most likely lead to nerfing the impact CHA has on p1999. Doing this without answering the first question is not how this process should work. Quote:
| ||||
|
Last edited by derpcake2; 11-20-2019 at 12:54 PM..
|
|
||||
|
#19
11-20-2019, 12:54 PM
|
|||
|
Another possibility is that CHA did factor into the per-tick break check, but there was an effectiveness cap that was fairly low, like the vendor price CHA cap, which I think is 100-130ish (so says EQTraders).
That would actually align pretty well with past EQ dev posts on the subject vs these results. | ||
|
Last edited by Dolalin; 11-20-2019 at 12:59 PM..
|
|
||
|
#20
11-20-2019, 02:44 PM
|
|||||
|
Quote:
Quote:
The other data sets posted here are 1. an out-of-era test on an out-of-era level 62 mob and 2. a test on an extreme green-con (level 1 decaying skeleton). Neither addresses what the first data set is showing us - which is that in two separate test sets, the average duration of charm is twice as long for the enchanter with 75 CHA than it was for the enchanter with 205 CHA. | ||||
|
|
|||||
|
|
|
Linear Mode
