Enchanter OP impact poll

[magnetaress]

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

Enchanter appeals to people who are into accruing power through deceit, distortion and manipulation.

This is why they should be nerfed into the weakest class regardless of classic or anything.

Everquest would have been WOW if it weren't for Enchanters.

[azxten]

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

We doing feelings-based science again? This should go to rnf.

Nope, channeling proven too successful from client decompile. Not to mention the multiple other evidence backed bugs people don't even want to talk about like mez mem blur.

Mez mem blur is a big one and people seem to hate it being brought up. You know how you can use level 4 mez to just step away from a mezzed mob and then wipe it and walk away? Yeah, that shouldn't be possible. You have to let mez break and then re-mez for it to wipe at which point in most dungeons the mob will be in range to re-aggro.

Mezzing already mezzed mobs to mem blur and walk away is not classic and proven so.

Also if a fight goes long and you use the level 4 mez multiple times that aggro stacks on the Enchanter and is not wiped away with recasts. Contributing to more difficult aggro management than exists on P99.

Ignoring the evidence and claiming it's made up feelings doesn't make it true. Feel free to browse all the linked evidence bug reports and classic era discussions on page 2 of this thread.

Don’t discount how much your PC affected your EQ experience.

Yes, this was also tested by me and confirmed. You can just alt tab away from EQ to simulate lag and check your /loc as a mob hits you vs having game focused. You will see a massive difference in move distance.

However, people are acting like this means we should leave things as they are. Wait why was Bard AE and Chardok AE nerfed due to "technical limitations" if we're going to use that as an excuse to leave channeling alone?

Also regardless of that aspect channeling is also too successful on P99. Proven as mentioned above and linked on the second page of this thread.

DMN

Confirmed angry Enchanter? Where did you go? You've been here calling me an idiot, telling people to ignore me, saying all my evidence is made up and contradicted. I ask you to clarify on things like mez and pet HP and now you're off arguing with other people and ignoring me. Ok. I think it's pretty clear who is lying and making up bullshit to protect Enchanter.

Swarm kiting was definitely a thing on live.

I am personally responsible for the AE limit introduced on live to nerf Bard AE kiting because I wrote a paid article for a cheat site on how to walk underwater, use /circle, and other automation to level from 1-60 in a day. The day the article came out it was reposted on Sony forums and nerfed by end of day. Yes, it was a thing on live.

I will probably compile another list of all the evidence and issues with Enchanter to better define the power curve of charm through the classic era. From what I've seen there is more than enough solid technical proof, in era discussion, and existing precedent for nerfing abused/overpowered mechanics on P99 to make a very compelling argument.

Also for the record people act like I'm saying Enchanter should be a gimped worthless class. Only at the start of classic and especially at lower levels. P99 Enchanter in Velious era seems pretty accurate other than the channeling rate. There is a charm power curve that doesn't exist on P99 but did exist on live.

By the way earlier someone linked an Afterlife Bard thing, it actually says Bards are better than the other classes at charm and were able to charm planar gods before Verant figured out the loophole and nerfed it. Is everyone cool if Bards get to charm raid bosses like on live but Enchanters can't? That's totally cool right and we should leave it in game until the same time it was nerfed on live no matter how many Bards go into planes and solo clear the entire thing with some help, right?

[knucklehairs]

This thread is petty let it die or move it to rnf

[DMN]

Curious. You forgot a couple dozen words to quote following my name. Wonder why?

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

Mister "high level enchanter", who is so supposedly concerned about classic who ostensibly should be able to easily test the animation hit points himself, care to explain why you haven't actually tested it but still decided to make two different threads regarding it now, both making incorrect claims on the matter?

[magnetaress]

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

Nope, channeling proven too successful from client decompile. Not to mention the multiple other evidence backed bugs people don't even want to talk about like mez mem blur.

Mez mem blur is a big one and people seem to hate it being brought up. You know how you can use level 4 mez to just step away from a mezzed mob and then wipe it and walk away? Yeah, that shouldn't be possible. You have to let mez break and then re-mez for it to wipe at which point in most dungeons the mob will be in range to re-aggro.

Mezzing already mezzed mobs to mem blur and walk away is not classic and proven so.

Also if a fight goes long and you use the level 4 mez multiple times that aggro stacks on the Enchanter and is not wiped away with recasts. Contributing to more difficult aggro management than exists on P99.

Ignoring the evidence and claiming it's made up feelings doesn't make it true. Feel free to browse all the linked evidence bug reports and classic era discussions on page 2 of this thread.



Yes, this was also tested by me and confirmed. You can just alt tab away from EQ to simulate lag and check your /loc as a mob hits you vs having game focused. You will see a massive difference in move distance.

However, people are acting like this means we should leave things as they are. Wait why was Bard AE and Chardok AE nerfed due to "technical limitations" if we're going to use that as an excuse to leave channeling alone?

Also regardless of that aspect channeling is also too successful on P99. Proven as mentioned above and linked on the second page of this thread.



Confirmed angry Enchanter? Where did you go? You've been here calling me an idiot, telling people to ignore me, saying all my evidence is made up and contradicted. I ask you to clarify on things like mez and pet HP and now you're off arguing with other people and ignoring me. Ok. I think it's pretty clear who is lying and making up bullshit to protect Enchanter.



I am personally responsible for the AE limit introduced on live to nerf Bard AE kiting because I wrote a paid article for a cheat site on how to walk underwater, use /circle, and other automation to level from 1-60 in a day. The day the article came out it was reposted on Sony forums and nerfed by end of day. Yes, it was a thing on live.

I will probably compile another list of all the evidence and issues with Enchanter to better define the power curve of charm through the classic era. From what I've seen there is more than enough solid technical proof, in era discussion, and existing precedent for nerfing abused/overpowered mechanics on P99 to make a very compelling argument.

Also for the record people act like I'm saying Enchanter should be a gimped worthless class. Only at the start of classic and especially at lower levels. P99 Enchanter in Velious era seems pretty accurate other than the channeling rate. There is a charm power curve that doesn't exist on P99 but did exist on live.

By the way earlier someone linked an Afterlife Bard thing, it actually says Bards are better than the other classes at charm and were able to charm planar gods before Verant figured out the loophole and nerfed it. Is everyone cool if Bards get to charm raid bosses like on live but Enchanters can't? That's totally cool right and we should leave it in game until the same time it was nerfed on live no matter how many Bards go into planes and solo clear the entire thing with some help, right?

100% accurate.

I was there. Thank you for your service.

[azxten]

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

Curious. You forgot a couple dozen words to quote following my name. Wonder why?

Sagar's Animation

https://wiki.project1999.com/Pet_Guide#Enchanter_Pets

450-700

[Sat Mar 20 13:06:59 2021] A skeletal monk hits Xibaner for 50 points of damage.
[Sat Mar 20 13:07:02 2021] A skeletal monk hits Xibaner for 34 points of damage.
[Sat Mar 20 13:07:11 2021] A skeletal monk hits Xibaner for 9 points of damage.
[Sat Mar 20 13:07:17 2021] A skeletal monk hits Xibaner for 50 points of damage.
[Sat Mar 20 13:07:23 2021] A skeletal monk hits Xibaner for 7 points of damage.
[Sat Mar 20 13:07:23 2021] A skeletal monk hits Xibaner for 2 points of damage.
[Sat Mar 20 13:07:26 2021] A skeletal monk hits Xibaner for 22 points of damage.
[Sat Mar 20 13:07:26 2021] A skeletal monk hits Xibaner for 17 points of damage.
[Sat Mar 20 13:07:29 2021] A skeletal monk hits Xibaner for 50 points of damage.
[Sat Mar 20 13:07:29 2021] A skeletal monk hits Xibaner for 50 points of damage.
[Sat Mar 20 13:07:29 2021] A skeletal monk hits Xibaner for 50 points of damage.
[Sat Mar 20 13:07:38 2021] A skeletal monk hits Xibaner for 50 points of damage.
[Sat Mar 20 13:07:41 2021] A skeletal monk hits Xibaner for 50 points of damage.

441

https://www.project1999.com/forums/s...d.php?t=369148

Mynthi Davissi in Mistmoore had their 29th circle enchanter pet captured in the sheet. It was 25th level with 442hp.

Ok so there is some basic testing to confirm I'm right that HP is too high. Level 29 captured pet had same HP as level 24 pet on P99. HP scaling is off as I thought that thread had confirmed already. Wiki seems mostly accurate and shows the larger incorrect HP values.

I see Summon Dead giving 21-25 pets in the sheet.

Summon Dead (lvl29) is another pet spell whose range was wider on live than on P99 as evidenced in the sheet.

Confirmed if you look at data in bug report as well. Level 21-25ish pets had ~450 HP but were summoned by the level 29 spell. On P99 you get these HP values from the 24 spell.

All pet classes should have pet HP nerfed and level ranges increased.

Channel rates should be reduced.

Mez should be fixed to not mem blur on recast.

Reasses Enchanter after.

P.S. Look at this:

Haunting Corpse 24 18-22 650-700
Sagar's Animation 24 19-23 450-700

Level 19 Enchanter pet from data has 316HP.
Level 19 Necro pet from data has 642HP.

Maybe it is just Enchanter? In any case, there is your proof. Enchanter pet HP value is too high like I always said.

So I'm an idiot, lying, making up shit, blah blah blah, right?

[Jimjam]

Good work there! You need to do more than just identify what is wrong, you also need to find evidence for what the correct numbers (or at least less incorrect) are to get a change made.

[DMN]

Well, isn't that strange that mister "high level enchanter" doesn't have a 29th level summon spell to compare to the exact same summon spell level of the pet he hopes to compare it to. Makes sense. Not.

If it was a level 24 summoned pet, it's far below any level 25 ish mob, which appeard to be what you are fighting, which measn the mob should be hitting your pet 80-90% of the time, yet strangely despite being in combat long enough for around 6 kicks, the monk mob in question never lands a single kick, making me suspect your log is complete bullshit.

But let's assume it's not bullshit. The pet in question would have regenerated around 50 HP by the end of this fight, and the last hit of 50 damage could have overkilled the pet by 49 points of damage, leaving you with what could have been closer to 341, not 441.

At a minimum You should have found a level 25 pet summoned by the level 29 spell, though I could excuse not considering regen and overkill as a factor of your mental handcap.

[azxten]

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

Well, isn't that strange that mister "high level enchanter" doesn't have a 29th level summon spell to compare to the exact same summon spell level of the pet he hopes to compare it to. Makes sense. Not.

If it was a level 24 summoned pet, it's far below any level 25 ish mob, which appeard to be what you are fighting, which measn the mob should be hitting your pet 80-90% of the time, yet strangely despite being in combat long enough for around 6 kicks, the monk mob in question never lands a single kick, making me suspect your log is complete bullshit.

But let's assume it's not bullshit. The pet in question would have regenerated around 50 HP by the end of this fight, and the last hit of 50 damage could have overkilled the pet by 49 points of damage, leaving you with what could have been closer to 341, not 441.

At a minimum You should have found a level 25 pet summoned by the level 29 spell, though I could excuse not considering regen and overkill as a factor of your mental handcap.

I don't have the pet spell because I haven't needed them. I assure you I could go higher but I don't care. I knew you'd cry about that which is why I included the 24 pet summon data of a level 19 pet.

So you're asking about kick, which would just make the pet HP even higher, okay. I likely didn't consider it when filtering.

[Sat Mar 20 13:07:01 2021] A skeletal monk tries to strike Xibaner, but misses!
[Sat Mar 20 13:07:08 2021] A skeletal monk tries to strike Xibaner, but Xibaner dodges!
[Sat Mar 20 13:07:16 2021] A skeletal monk tries to strike Xibaner, but misses!
[Sat Mar 20 13:07:24 2021] A skeletal monk tries to strike Xibaner, but misses!
[Sat Mar 20 13:07:32 2021] A skeletal monk strikes Xibaner for 25 points of damage.
[Sat Mar 20 13:07:40 2021] A skeletal monk strikes Xibaner for 9 points of damage.

It's actually strike. That extra 34hp roughly makes up for any regen. You're right maybe it did more damage on the last hit. So the data says 316hp, we see a pet that had 441 + 34hp with -50regen and a max overhit of -49. So something like 475 damage taken - 99 potential non-max HP damage/regen which is 376. So in the most generous calculation the pet still has too much HP by about 60hp if compared to a level 19 pet summoned with the level 24 spell. That's a lot of difference on a pet that should only have 316hp.

Dec 15, 1999

Not sure if who knows this or not, but there is pet that spawns that you can
kill over and over and over again. The respawn time on this pet is roughly
7 seconds. It's level 21-25, doesn't run, has around 500 hp's, and is
currently camped by groups for hours on end, for the above reasons. It's a
level 29 enchanter animation.

Only the level 29 summon reaches pet levels that have this level of HP. A level

What does Wiki say P99 level range is?

19-26 for 24 spell
22-28 for 29 spell

Is this accurate? I don't know but it's not in line with that data where a level 29 Enchanter pet should be level 21-25. Level 22 pet was 382 and level 23 402 for Enchanter. The classic data being referenced from the capture matches with this 1999 post.

Who's pet is the level 23 data? Ezmirella in NK. Level 30 Enchanter so it's the level 29 summon. Who's pet is the level 19 data? Rephas in QHills level 28 Enchanter so it's the level 24 summon. Rephas has a max level pet of 20 from the level 24 summon spell and the HP total is 336. That is 30hp lower than the lowest possible HP total for my test of a level 24 summon on P99.

So even if I got lucky and got the highest level 24 pet summon on my one test, you add regen, and "overhit", the pet has 30/336 HP too much which is 9% too much. Except your regen rate was 7 plus a little to get 50hp of regen in 42 seconds. And the overhit likely wasn't 1hp. So the pet is likely closer to 15% too much HP.

So, yes, even with regen and the most possible "overhit" scenario the pet still has too much HP for a level 24 summon according to this classic data.

Don't fight it.

If it was a level 24 summoned pet, it's far below any level 25 ish mob, which appeard to be what you are fighting, which measn the mob should be hitting your pet 80-90% of the time, yet strangely despite being in combat long enough for around 6 kicks, the monk mob in question never lands a single kick, making me suspect your log is complete bullshit.

By this way this is fucking hilarious to me because the pet actually almost soloed that monk. It had 10% hp left at the end. Yeah, exactly. A level 24 pet summon by an Enchanter shouldn't be soloing mobs that are same/higher level than it but that is what they do. They function just like a mag/nec pet.

[Baler]

What are your thoughts on druid, shaman & necromancer charms.
Is it classic for druids to charm wolves in Kael?
Did necromancers run charasis back in the day?

And how about puppet strings, the recharge cost is too dang high.