Enchanter and Wizard changes coming.

Discussion in 'Casters' started by Sinestra, May 9, 2014.

  1. Ratbo Peep Augur

    I think you already determined that "exploit" was too strong of a term. And I would agree, because there was no "bug" involved whatsoever in any of this.
    As for the disconnect? Why limit that disconnect to the Enchanter class? :D
    The only "connect" seems to be coming from their keen interest in the PoWar.
    And ya - a disconnect would be the only way to explain a boost on one patch and a nerf on the next one.
    Obviously -someone caught a clue in between.
    And, yes, this will hinder raiding Enchanters. Who no doubt could have proposed better solutions, were they only communicated with first.
    Sinestra likes this.
  2. Vizier Augur

    I agree somewhat but at the end of the day EQ is THEIR game and whether or not they choose to interact with the players regarding changes they are making is completely up to them. Like it or not we players are in no way ENTITLED to any sort of dialogue about their designs for the game. If they do interact with us, like they did with Mental Contortion, then great. If not, then suck it up buttercup, take the hit and drive on.

    Whining and complaining about it is useless spam.
  3. sojero One hit wonder

    I was under the impression as I don't follow changes to enchanter spells that much as mine is only level 87, that the last boost was to the damage absorption. This change was to up the recast time and lower the agro, and only brought down a small portion of the boost in damage absorption that they had given you. I see this as bringing the spell in line with where they intended it.

    I don't feel that they have to ask permission to make changes to their game. If the choose to come to talk to us about the changes, that make them a better company and us happier players. They have a job to do and balancing the game by boosts and then reigning in those boosts if it was beyond what they had calculated because of unpredictable player nature is part of their job and helps the game in the long run. There is no other game on the market that has stacking issues and the amount of mechanics that EQ has, I don't think there is a single player or dev that has a 100% grasp on what happens all the time and every mechanic.

    I feel it is good to bring questions to the devs from the player standpoint, but if you want something done, you need to also put work in, and not just lambaste them because you "feel" you were wrongs, with no evidence to back it up. respect that they have jobs and they are trying to make the game more fun for you, and all the other players, there are 16 classes, and more balancing than I care to shake a stick at, and I think that with the limited resources on a 15 year old game they are doing a very good job.
    Vizier likes this.
  4. Ratbo Peep Augur

    True only in a strict legalistic sense.
    With very few brand new faces coming into the game, it's only the veterans and returning veterans that keep this (very) old ship afloat.
    "You're In Our World Now" was a great slogan in the beginning, back in the early days when EQ totally dominated the MMO scene. Now, the players have choices, and the FTP model opens up a few more choices. To a large degree "They're In Our World Now". So the more we can be treated like paying customers as opposed to cattle, with Mental Contortion type treatment and respect - the better everyone will fare.
    Sinestra likes this.
  5. Sinestra Augur

    I pay for a service. They are within their right to change whatever they want and I am well within my right to complain as much as I want. No need to suck it up, people who suck it up and don't complain are generally sheep. "Whining and complaining" worked for melees and has for other classes as well so your idea is obviously ridiculous.
    Jordis likes this.
  6. Ratbo Peep Augur

    That just about sums up any business relationship.
    Whining and complaining doesn't really work. But when the community responds in a logical manner, and explains why the latest "knee-jerk" is not really a good idea, in general they do listen. And that's a good thing. :)
    And ya, to just stand there and "take it like a sheep" - also accomplishes nothing positive. (If anything it breeds "quiet resentment" - which is a far greater threat to the bottom line than people still caring enough to complain.)

    Jordis and Sinestra like this.
  7. Pouncequick Journeyman

    I didn't say that event was balanced. I was suggesting that 'Any zone' is hyperbole. And if agro is reduced on the runes, how does the chanter hold agro? How many buttons does a warrior need to press to just tank (not to hold agro, just to tank)?

    Note by the way that 'any zone' includes a lot of zones where the chanter would likely be simply overpowered for whatever they were tanking, with or without runes.
  8. sojero One hit wonder

    Why would you WANT to hold agro as an enchanter?

    Isn't nuking a good way if you really wanted to hold agro, works well for wizards?

    Tanks press a bunch of buttons to do their job, I think every class now has to press upwards of 35-60 buttons at a min each min some up to 130+ a min.
  9. Pouncequick Journeyman

    If you are tanking (which is the concern here, is it not?) then you need to be able to hold agro.

    Enchanter nukes are significantly lower damage and longer refresh. Good luck holding agro with them. Also you'd have to be using them in addition to the runes, meaning even more of a mana bleed. The runes are deliberately mana expensive (not complaining about that, just pointing out an already existing 'failsafe' against rune tanking, also mentioned by many others in this thread).

    Tanks press a bunch of buttons to hold agro. What besides holding agro do they need to do to tank? They aren't hitting defensive '35 to 60 times per minute'

    And 130+ per minute? They are pressing more than 2 buttons per second? I find that exceedingly unlikely.
  10. Ratbo Peep Augur

    He was merely suggesting that a good reduction of the aggro portion of the runes would be a better cure for "rune tanking" than nerfing the runes themselves.
    And many, many, agree with that approach.
    Sinestra likes this.
  11. sojero One hit wonder

    No, I actually mean WHY would a chanter want to be tanking IE holding agro.

    I may be wrong bug TANKING is in no way a job of an enchanter.

    and tanks do a lot more than just defensive, they have agro, and OMG they want to maximize their dps with what they can during that too.

    not in front of my computer but I hit reprove bash taunt when needed (usually just hit if a pet is there, guarantees top of agro) clickie nukes gouging blade as they are up. Then we get into spells, and anything else we may need like epic, spire, defensives etc. so yeah we hit a ton. On a pally its almost the same. I cannot comment on wars as mine is only 85.
  12. Pouncequick Journeyman

    With due respect, you seem to not even being trying to listen.

    Which chanters are arguing in favor of being able to tank?

    Near as I can tell you are arguing from the point of view of a tank, who feels threatened in your primary role (over one specific event) and wants a chanter ability nerfed into oblivion above and beyond the degree needed to resolve your concerns.

    Meanwhile you talk about the number of keystrokes you allegedly use as a warrior to dps, even though that is an independent role from tanking.... it does help with agro but nevertheless, if a chanter was for some reason tanking, what independent role would they be doing? Certainly not dps.....
    Jordis likes this.
  13. sojero One hit wonder

    You stated in a previous post:

    Thus my question, Why would you want have agro?

    I'm sorry, your not understanding what I'm asking:

    WHY would you as an enchanter WANT to have agro?

    I'm just curious why you would want to have agro as a chanter. also as to how many keys, I said all classes are clicking that many times per min, meaning we are all busy. your statement makes no sense unless you can provide a valid reason a chanter would want to have agro.

    as a side note, not a war, and I in now way am threatened or even affected by this change.
  14. Pouncequick Journeyman

    As I said, you aren't listening. The problem was chanters being able to tank raid content (even if it was just one encounter). If the chanter can't hold agro, isn't that problem solved?

    Indeed. In fact if all other classes other than yours are nerfed it doesn't threaten you as a tank. If you felt this change threatened or affected you, you would be less inclined to defend it. As such you aren't making much sense.

    You said :

    If you aren't a tank, what class are you when you are hitting 'reprove/bash/taunt?'
  15. sojero One hit wonder

    Ah that makes sense, I was not putting what you had said before together with what else was in your post to make it sound that way, see clarify and everything makes sense. I play a SK as my main. You said War, not tank :) Also I was nerfed recently with the epic click + bp click + MC etc, and I didn't complain a bit, I tried to help mitigate it to reflect the actual use it was intended for, but in no way cared that it brought swarming under control, I was actually happy about that.
  16. Pouncequick Journeyman

    The concern on the part of chanters here is that the runes are used for survival when CC'ing. They dropped the agro with most chanters are likely fine with, but they also increased the refresh making them a lot harder to sustain, meaning higher risk to chanters.

    Chanters are to some degree tanks, in that any CC fail (and they do happen especially trying to CC groups) almost certainly beats on the chanter first. The intent of runes is to help the chanter survive that. This change significantly reduces chanter survivability in such circumstances. The fact they hit both agro and refresh seems knee-jerk, and not particularly well thought out.

    It wouldn't be the first time Enchanters have been set aside by Dev fiat.
    Jordis and Sinestra like this.
  17. Sinestra Augur

    Yes, the ability to take hits is what the Enchanters want generally. Taking hits while not being able to do much DPS without peeling it off the Enchanter while you regroup or get somone else in to actually tank is what Rune tanking is really about.

    Using a pet to grab aggro and hold it because of the PoWar's gimmick mechanics was a problem. They should have just severely dropped the aggro from casting a rune and possibly dealt with how Enchanters work with said gimmick. Instead they dropped a small potion of the aggro, nerfed the recast, upped the cost, and lowered the protection.

    Enchanters don't really want to be group or raid tanks, but being able to stand there and take hits until your mana runs out in most situations without really DPSing is not an exploit and it isn't overpowered if they would actually do it correctly.
    Jordis likes this.
  18. Lily Augur

    Because lemonade is bad?
  19. silku Augur

    Why not make judicator get angry or just dispel runes if the person yanking has them?
  20. Jordis Augur

    Suit yourself, but I'll keep my big girl pants on and continue to discuss this; it is apparently never going to change unless we get mad enough to do more than quit or main change, which does at times seem to be the developer's goal.

    Take a GOOD look at the Enchanter class on Magelo. Check by servers. I can tell you that the MAJORITY of the enchanters on EMarr are bots, alts and retired that are being boxed, if anything at all, including several in the top 10. The MAJORITY of the class aren't playing they're being boxed if at all. There is no evidence that can convince the developers that the change didn't need to happen other than some other class decided that enchanters were "tanking." Yes, I survived and "tanked" the Judicator (as have several other enchanters I know) using runes and a number of other disciplines and spells; but the ones I know of are all high end group equipped or raid-equipped which means that our HP alone is more than some tanks on the low end. AC mitigation aside, with a healer it's possible to stand up to what is a GROUP mob. There is no evidence of an exploit,

    Another thing you fail to take into account is that we were never officially told this was going to be changed. This thread began with a report of something happening on the test server. A thread was posted saying it was counterproductive for us to be discussing it. It got shut down right away when a third thread showed up. The wizards and the melee got a chance to discuss it with developers. Where, exactly, was ours? Maybe I just missed it???
    Sinestra likes this.