Grouping is almost never worth it if you are good at this game, lol.

[loramin]

You're absolutely right Ciderpress, just my memories ... and, you know, all the evidence (submitted over three years ago) ... eg. forum posts from live EQ devs, who (after breaking channeling in a 2006 patch) explained key details of how the mechanic worked.

[Namsaknoi]

I am with loramin on this one, 'You regain your concentration and continue your casting' message was a luxury, not the standard.

And to add to that, resists are broken here, broken in a sense that is more 'playable', on live 200+ resists would make you pretty much immune to that line of spells except unresistables, while NPCs resisted players spells far far more often, with timed spells like root, charm, mez far more likely resist and/or break every tick. Yes, that would make it nearly impossible to farm things anything above lguk with a chanter, but that was what it was on live, that would also make many caster and ae raid mobs far less effective, but it was what it was on live.

AC/atk is kind of broken here too, if corrected, then it would make most raid mobs even more trivial, like how on live 80+ players with BIS/near BIS gears would absolutely cream an AoW, whereas on P99 there is still some sort of challenge. Would make well geared monk and warrior better solo/duo farmers which may or may not be good for P99 if corrected to 'classic'.

[Jimjam]

SPELL COMMENTS
NO BRAINER 35 TO 47 IF YOU DONT' GET BORED..., By Telish (1/28/2001)

1) Go to oasis, get sowed, put air elemental up 2) Pull 4 specs, as they approach the shoreline charm one, make sure it's not in the water when you cast it... 3) Specs will cast wimpy DD lifetap on you, your pet will get pissed and attack the other 3 specs... 4) Watch your pet's health, when he's at 1/5 health or a bit less, cast invis, run yer ass off making sure your 4 specs (three full health one almost dead) are in a tight group... 5) Pick a full health spec and charm it, he'll get pissed at the 2 other full heatlh specs when they cast wimpy DDs on you, and so they fight.. 6) Your 1/5 health spec will still be coming after you. Root him, nuke him, leave his corpse for later... 7) Check your new pets health, he should be dying up pretty nice by now.. Invis to break charm.. 8) Rinse Repeat Also: Always dispense clarity to the zone, specially if you need sows etc, it may get annoying but you'll never be slow or low hit points... Also: You will go crazy doing this, especially during hell levels.. Get yer lazy self out of oasis and go do lower guk or something.. This is a piss poor strategy to levelling in my opinion -- tho very fast. Enchanters are meant for groups... A good enchanter, specially at high levels, is almost always the difference between life and death in the high level dungeons.. Oh yeah, and always use charm, not the upgrades... Doesn't last as long, but it lasts long enuff for what you are doing.. You wont be able to get the other upgrades off by the time your spec is in range and the spell hits.. This you can kite the spec and charm without it ever so much as scratching you... If you call getting doubled for 96 a scratch... Telish Khaotic 50 ench VZ

I was browsing old charm threads on archive.org and found this post, which is in era, and seems to say at 28th Jan 2001 charm spells weren't subject to level caps (like how in the first few expansions stuns weren't). Certainly by 2002 stun caps were put in.

https://web.archive.org/web/20010911...p?Id=38&Page=2

Obviously always take players' reported experiences with a pinch of salt, but an interesting mix of opinions on this page as to whether or not charm is worth it, and how to strategize it.

[Naethyn]

It’s a good recruitment tool.

[Ciderpress]

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

You're absolutely right Ciderpress, just my memories ... and, you know, all the evidence (submitted over three years ago) ... eg. forum posts from live EQ devs, who (after breaking channeling in a 2006 patch) explained key details of how the mechanic worked.

So, presumably nilbog, after making many many changes based on evidence, arbitrarily decided not to make this one.... why?

Cause he personally plays an enchanter on his own server and likes it being easier?

Couldn't it be more likely that during actual classic, people didn't fully understand what their chosen class was capable of, and now 20 years later they do?

I'm not claiming all the values are perfect and correct, but you seem to have some degree of paranoia that the main devs here are working against you, rather than just not being satisfied with the provided evidence?

I also don't really see channeling almost always working as being hugely game breaking. Encs die all the time on p99, especially when trying to do risky and bold things. They might not die as much as you'd like, I suppose?

[PatChapp]

We die plenty. I died 12 times today trying to cycle a single mob,unsuccessfully.
Granted she is lvl 61 and in a terrible spot, but still. Sometimes I can do her first try,but rng kills enchanters.

[Ciderpress]

Channeling isn't gonna save anyone when your pet eats your rune and bedlam and kills you faster than it takes to get a stun off. And it's not like it *never* fails here, it fails more than people think based on this non-troversy.

[loramin]

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

I'm not claiming all the values are perfect and correct, but you seem to have some degree of paranoia that the main devs here are working against you, rather than just not being satisfied with the provided evidence?

I also don't really see channeling almost always working as being hugely game breaking. Encs die all the time on p99, especially when trying to do risky and bold things. They might not die as much as you'd like, I suppose?

Look, I've played a Shaman to 60 here and on live: the experience is amazingly, incredibly, close. I had access to a 60 Druid on live too, and he played just like my P99 Druid. The same is true for every other class I've played, or played with ... save one.

Both here and on live Shaman were solo/grouping class. Necros and Druids were primarily solo classes, while Warriors and Clerics were mainly grouping classes. Every class has the same fundamental role both here and on live ... except for Enchanters.

Me pointing out that on live, Enchanters were a primarily grouping class that could solo, and here they are almost exclusively a solo class, is not paranoia. Neither is me linking evidence (that people smarter and harder working than me have uncovered) which explains at least part of why they are unclassic here.

[loramin]

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

We die plenty.

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

And it's not like it *never* fails here, it fails more than people think based on this non-troversy.

I have a very simple metric, for any emulator. If I'm judging (say) a Street Fighter 2 emulator, I don't watch a million dragon punches, and try to calculate whether they do the same damage as in the original.

Instead, I just watch people playing Ryu, and see if they use dragon punch. If the play the emulator a lot and stop using dragon punch, I know something is wrong with the emulator, because in the original game people who played Ryu a lot did use dragon punch.

Similarly here I'm not saying "Enchanters need to die 20% more" or anything. I'm just saying "people playing Ryu in our emulator aren't dragon punching" ... ie. "Enchanters in our emulator aren't grouping" ... and that is undeniably unclassic. I can find you a mountain of posts about Enchanters grouping in a million classic sources.

[branamil]

9 times out of 10 trying hard in grouping isn't worth it. You just get to the finish like 3.5% faster in a dead game anyways. And all you're really doing is picking up the slack of some diabetic house wife who AFKs to throw hot dogs in a pot of boiling water for her little piglet's "dinner".