Project 1999

Go Back   Project 1999 > Class Discussions > Casters

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
  #21  
Old 09-08-2021, 02:26 PM
Tann Tann is offline
Fire Giant

Tann's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 799
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samoht [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
If you remove the CHA check, that's one less chance to break.
if an npc no longer has to roll a saving throw against your 255 charisma then that's a win for them I would think, not the enchanter.
__________________
< Knights Who Say Ni >
Qeynos questing and leveling. (sashes & bread nerfed) | Off the beaten path 24-40. | P99 on a Chromebook!
Reply With Quote
  #22  
Old 09-08-2021, 02:31 PM
bilirubin bilirubin is offline
Kobold


Join Date: Jan 2015
Location: Plane of Mischief
Posts: 143
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Samoht [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Why would this be a nerf to charm? As it is, charm has several checks per tick for resist, cha, mr, etc. If you remove the CHA check, that's one less chance to break.
My understanding was that the addition of a charisma check gave an additional chance for the charm not to break, thus making them (in general) last longer if you have high charisma.
Reply With Quote
  #23  
Old 09-08-2021, 02:46 PM
Jimjam Jimjam is offline
Planar Protector


Join Date: Jul 2013
Posts: 8,699
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Izmael [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Not if charm ceases to be a viable mean of achieving things and people simply no longer bother charming. They will just achieve the same results by sleepwalking through content with more players instead of soloing or duoing.
Please, I can only get so excited.

Everything you described sounds so classic!
Reply With Quote
  #24  
Old 09-08-2021, 02:47 PM
Jibartik Jibartik is online now
Planar Protector

Jibartik's Avatar

Join Date: May 2015
Posts: 9,010
Default

It's pretty obvious when you are not wearing CHA gear as an enchanter so I imagine it will be like that.

It is by no means an issue when you're afk for 28 minuets of a 30 minuet timer, but it is obvious.
__________________
🏰🛡️🧙🏼Classic UI Quest🧝🏼🔮🗡️
🐾🦄 Classic Mob Safari 🐗🐾
📖🧛🍾The Wisest Necro🦇🧟💀
Reply With Quote
  #25  
Old 09-08-2021, 04:16 PM
Vivitron Vivitron is offline
Kobold


Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 111
Default

Here's the tl; http://www.eqemulator.org/forums/sho...d.php?p=266999, and here's the dr's:

Quote:
Originally Posted by Torven

CHA did not affect charm durations prior to the patch and it still does not.
Pets with 0 MR have the exact same break chance as before.
Depending on the pets's level relative to the charmer, in some circumstances charm will hold less often and in other circumstances charm will hold better than before. (because of the +4 level mod)

I based the previous charm break logic on a data sample I had personally made on AK in which I knew I was very diligent in keeping debuffs on the pet, and that sample just happened to be extremely average so I had a good guess already. If however your pet's effective MR is anywhere from 6-11, you'll get more breaks. ('effective MR' meaning the MR after level advantage debuffs etc is factored in)
and

Quote:
Originally Posted by Haynar
I have been asked to add this to p99. That will be a big change for them.
There's a whole lot in the tl including an explanation of why they believe these are the correct mechanics, and a bunch of non-charm mechanics, and I haven't fully been through it.

For charm, I think the two main questions are: 1. How does the minimum per-tick break chance compare before and after, and 2. How hard is it to get to that minimum compared to before.

For 1, based on my logs I think the minimum per tick chance is maybe moderately lower on P99 than on TAKP if that, (e.g. leading to ~6 minute and change average charms instead of ~5 minute and change). I don't think this change will be particularly painful.

2 is less clear to me.

Cha: I think cha is currently acting like a negative resist mod; and that you get one negative resist per probably every 10 or every 8 cha after 75, and that cha is probably either hard capped at 200 or 255 with no soft cap. Call it an extra -12 to -22 resist; it may be that you end up needing a couple negative mr items where you didn't previously, or it may be that we were already overshooting the resist floor on most of our charms.

Levels: The tl describes a +4 level bonus for charm checks and a -40mr bonus cap for charm checks; I wonder if P99 had either or both of these. The mr adjust for levels (described both in the tldr and consistent with EQEMU source) is that level difference squared divided by two is the resist adjust. So if we had neither the cap nor the bonus a level 60 would get a -50mr bonus on a level 50 mob. But a level 60 with a +4 bonus and no cap would get a -98mr bonus (14^2 / 2). My guess is P99 has neither the cap nor the bonus currently. If that's the case we could be in about the same place on, say, a boltran's charm at 60, (previously (60 - 53) ^ 2 / 2 = -24mr adjust, now (64 - 53) ^ 2 / 2 = -40 (capped) mr adjust, that's -16 mr gained; which is roughly what we lose from the removal of the per-tick charisma adjustment.)

Now, when Haynar says he's been asked to add this to P99 I wonder what is included in "this", because there are a bunch of non-charm mechanics in that tl. The biggest that I saw so far is this: "mobs 6 levels and under below the caster will never aggro [from lull]". That would be a significant buff; some of the high plat solo spots have trash mobs that cap out at level 53.

Edit: My tld;dr: I wouldn't be surprised if we see average "easy charm" duration go from ~6.5 minutes to ~5.5 minutes; or if some few specific charms need a piece or two of -mr gear that they previously didn't, but I would be surprised if we see effects on charm larger than that.
Last edited by Vivitron; 09-08-2021 at 04:25 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #26  
Old 09-08-2021, 04:41 PM
Baler Baler is offline
Planar Protector

Baler's Avatar

Join Date: Mar 2014
Posts: 9,753
Default

This seems like something that should have been fixed 10 years ago.

People got set in their ways and have had the carpet pulled out from under them.

How many guides, videos, forums posts and wiki pages are incorrect now. Years of information for new players to view is now thrown out the window. Yeah I get it reaching the classic but did it have to wait this long? really?
That's my only complaint.
__________________
P99 Wiki
I'm no longer active, thank you for the years of fun.
Last edited by Baler; 09-08-2021 at 04:45 PM..
Reply With Quote
  #27  
Old 09-08-2021, 04:56 PM
Danth Danth is offline
Planar Protector


Join Date: Oct 2009
Posts: 2,679
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vivitron [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
l. The biggest that I saw so far is this: "mobs 6 levels and under below the caster will never aggro [from lull]". That would be a significant buff; some of the high plat solo spots have trash mobs that cap out at level 53.
.
Doesn't TAKP's chosen era post-date the Luclin-era Lull revamp? If so then their lull mechanics are irrelevant to those used on P1999. Granted, once in awhile P99 adds nonclassic post-era changes in an effort to curb abuse (ie, like rooted dragons).
Reply With Quote
  #28  
Old 09-08-2021, 05:00 PM
Vivitron Vivitron is offline
Kobold


Join Date: Apr 2020
Posts: 111
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Danth [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
Doesn't TAKP's chosen era post-date the Luclin-era Lull revamp? If so then their lull mechanics are irrelevant to those used on P1999. Granted, once in awhile P99 adds nonclassic post-era changes in an effort to curb abuse (ie, like rooted dragons).
I missed that, thanks.
Reply With Quote
  #29  
Old 09-08-2021, 07:46 PM
Tann Tann is offline
Fire Giant

Tann's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 799
Default

Quote:
Originally Posted by Vivitron [You must be logged in to view images. Log in or Register.]
No offense to Torven but.. he's saying the EQ dev in 1999 is wrong about CHA helping charm duration and is citing a crapton of data gathered from the live client and pop era (takp) client??

or did I read those links wrong?
__________________
< Knights Who Say Ni >
Qeynos questing and leveling. (sashes & bread nerfed) | Off the beaten path 24-40. | P99 on a Chromebook!
Reply With Quote
  #30  
Old 09-08-2021, 09:00 PM
Tann Tann is offline
Fire Giant

Tann's Avatar

Join Date: Oct 2010
Posts: 799
Default

^^ to add

"Geoffrey Zatkin answered a question in 1999 where he claimed that charisma had a role in charm durations. He was also either wrong or charm changed before PoP went Live...As a developer myself I can attest that it's easy to get stuff wrong when taking a cursory look at code, so disputing developer claims isn't as presumptuous as it seems."

https://youtu.be/gqW42BFqVjo at 23:10 Geoffrey Zatkin talks about designing enchanters... 30:10 when he mentions charm.

Just saying, I don't think he was "taking a cursory look at code" when he said CHA effects charm duration considered he designed them.
__________________
< Knights Who Say Ni >
Qeynos questing and leveling. (sashes & bread nerfed) | Off the beaten path 24-40. | P99 on a Chromebook!
Reply With Quote
Reply

Thread Tools
Display Modes

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 12:25 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 - 2021, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.