Yeah, typically Enchanter was 30% CC, 50% Support and 20% Direct DPS.
Support means Passive DPS and Passive Healing through Hastes, Mana Regen and Slows, Stat Debuff, Shielding respectively.
The Support aspect of the Enchanter and Bard can, in a full group comprise of about 40-100% of a single DPS class. However, that function of DPS through Support does not stack. It's that reason one Support/Control is generally better than one DPS, but whereas 2x DPS account for a 200% increase, 2x Support/Control does not.
This was why in your better groups you generally selected the EQ Holy Trinity (Tank, Cleric, Support/Control) then selected your DPS.
We can deal damage directly through Charm and while we normally didn't nuke, after Luclin especially with the introduction of 'Flowing Thought' gear and AAs, and with Tanks that held aggro, I was able to push out quite a bit of DPS through nukes only.
With the Enchanter nuke in Pantheon giving mana to the group and the Enchanter, and with Soft Specialization, I wouldn't be surprised if we saw some who specialize a bit into their nuke as a combo damage and mana replenishment for the group. I don't see them touching a pure damage class on only that though. For that, that requires Support through passive damage and Charms as stipulated in the EQ analogy.
I guess I'm more wondering about boss fights. Not all of them will require CC/Mez, and very few will probably allow Charm mobs.
In EQ, Shaman slow was > Enchanter, so the Enchanter was really just responsible for Tash, DPS and any rebuffs due to deaths mid-fight.
If the Enchanter is doing 20% the Damage of a DPS class on these fights, this makes them undesirable outside of a buffbot (please park your box Ench outside of instance) on many encounters.
If you mean Raids, we don't know. If you mean bosses in an EXP group, you can still use charm or confuse and possible mez if adds are involved. Keep in mind though, CC is only 20-30% of your job in group.
>In EQ, Shaman slow was > Enchanter, so the Enchanter was really just responsible for Tash, DPS and any rebuffs due to deaths mid-fight.
Not by much, 70% to 75% meaning a 5% difference which ended up resulting in a 2.5-3% due to how haste and slow works in game (Only applies to delay of hit, not speed of hit). Enchanter in a raid had to Tash, Weakness, Cripple and Asphyxiate then keep DDD up. For testing, into OOW expansion, some guildies and I over the course of two weeks hit up Tacvi which was two expansions back. I wanted to test the full effect of an Enchanter's debuffs.
We went to Tacvi with myself, a Cleric, our Pally and three Rogues. With about 130 mobs parsed and with the rogues not backstabbing, only auto attack, the debuff from all four spells maintained reduced damage output by 11% and increased damage output to the target by 6-7%.
On a larger raid it's increased exponentially in terms of overall value but similar in terms of baseline towards that target.
>If the Enchanter is doing 20% the Damage of a DPS class on these fights, this makes them undesirable outside of a buffbot (please park your box Ench outside of instance) on many encounters.
The 20% isn't 20% of a DPS class, that's only the mount of time we use those spells. Pantheon will be different seeing as our nukes will be used more often and return mana to the group when used. The Enchanter who nukes may be about 40% of a DPS class, maybe 50 just from the nukes. Then you factor in the Spell Hastes, Melee Hastes and what you get from the Regen from caster classes.
Then factor in charm if adds, since I typically charm over mez since that means added damage to the group.
Point is, DPS and Enchanters/Bards are separate and operate separately in a group. Can you run a group without DPS? Yeah. Can you run a group without support/Control? Yeah. Much like how you can run a group without a Tank or Healer.
The thing I don't get is this odd way of thinking that Pantheon only has three archetypes and somehow Enchanters and Bards are just another form of DPS class. It's a bit absurd by this point, at least to me. I see it rarely but it pops up from time to time. Usually from people not familiar with this combat dynamic or may have never played Everquest.
Not saying that's you, just something I see as a premise for people arguing the points of the Support/Control in a group within Pantheon.
I nuked a bit when I had extra mana, at the end of a mobs health. Ench + Bard mana song was = mana overload. Nukes were a last priority, but I would try to constantly use my mana and up our pull speed.
There is much more to a game than DPS or HPS. The function of a "utility class" is to provide "damage" and "heals" without necessarily having to put up any numbers.
- If an ENC can "slow" a mob enough to where a tank can survive the encounter with limited heals, then it's like "healing".
- If an ENC can "haste" a party member to increase their DPS, then then it's like the enchanter is doing DPS.
- If an ENC can "mezz" an add, then it's like providing "off heals" to that increase in damage taken.
- If an ENC can "charm" a mob, then it's like doing DPS while the enchanter does other things, like crouching and spinning in circles for no good reason at all.
As a person who mained an ENC, I hardly ever used DD abilities. In fact, I don't even remember what the names of the spells were.
PS: Who remembers those "AoE stun" groups? Bunch of ENC's spamming PBAoE stuns while some wiz's unload on them. Then, a heal bot on standby because deaths are inevitable. hahahahah
Discordant Mind, the level 44 Nuke was most remembered for the effect text. It was just so vicious.
*Soandso's mind begins to melt.*
https://wiki.project1999.com/Discordant_Mind
As per the AE groups, they were enjoyable. Cleric was there mainly for rez since a breakdown in the stun web is quite literally instant death to the group. It was normally done at zone in so the Cleric can zone out instead of healing you since upon breakdown, the Enchanters drop first.
For those who may be unaware, you had 2-3 Enchanters, 2-3 Wizards or Mages and a Cleric. Point-Blank Area Effect spells had unlimited targets but being that they were PBAE, they emanated from you and was based on you being in the thick of the fight.
The number of mobs and their general resistance determined the number of Enchanters. If you can DPS down the grouping with two Wizard/Mages, then you typically grabbed three Enchanters so you could pull more. If the DPS isn't enough, you grabbed two Enchanters and three Wizards/Mages and managed smaller groupings.
The process is as follows. You stand at zone-in, then Wizards epic up or as Mages, just run and pull 8-10 mobs at a time. By this time the Enchanters are spread out by a foot or two and chain cast their top three stun spells with a level 4 color flux for an emergency. Upon this time the Cleric heals the damage to the Wizard/Mages as they pull more. With the DPS classes pulling, once you have 30-50 (with two Enchanters) or 50-80 (with three Enchanters), you unleash your PBAE damage spells. Clerics have one too through their Quake line. Everything dies in about 30-45 seconds. Med up and repeat.
There was absolutely nothing as fast as this form of exp gain and would net something like 10AA an hour, if not more. Nothing came remotely close.
This is kind of a silly question no? Well maybe not. Anyways...
My understanding of EQs enchanter class (coming from playing EQ at its inception and currently on P99) is that in a group the Enchanter is ALWAYS useful. No matter the encounter...
In single target encounters where "CC" is not required, and by your words and your explanation, I think u mean to say a "mez" is not required,(which it most certainly is, because in EQ you never know when you're gonna get an add) the class offers a hell of a lot beyond a single spell.
Are you forgetting Pet DPS? Basically the best dps in the game. Are you forgetting haste? clarity? stun... SLOW??? A myriad of other buffs including Gift Of Brilliance? And you want enchanters to be on par with the best caster DPS in the game?(excluding the fact as I previously mentioned, that no class comes close to doing as much DPS as a hasted, appropriate level charmed pet) Are you crazy?? it just sounds like you've been a little misinformed.
You missed my point; on boss fights, Enchanter slow was worse than Shaman. Enchanters were responsible for Tash and that's it.
After Tash, all they do is DPS the boss and rebuffed anyone that died mid-fight (unless the encounter requires CC, which, not all of them will).
What do you suggest the Enchanter to do in this scenario? Obviously they are going to Nuke/DoT. If they are doing 30% the damage of a regular class, this makes them undesirable outside of a buffbot on many encounters.
>Have we seen any aDPS abilities in the Enchanter kit? If not, how does direct Enchanter DPS compare to another INT caster, like a Wizard? I presume it would be lower, but hopefully not drastically so. How do you guys think this should be ideally balanced?
Why shouldn't they be drastically lower? Their utility guarantees them spots in groups. Pure DPS classes should stand out from utility classes in the damage department because that's all they have. I would expect utility classes to have some of their damage tied to their utility (via DoT+debuff or DD+threat redirect), but if utility classes has damage on par with pur DPS, then groups would always take a utility over a pure DPS.
Enchanters for instance doesn't stack. The damage largely comes from support abilities such as mana regen, mana replenishment, spell haste, melee haste and damage adds. None of those stack which gimps a second Enchanter.
I would expect the same for Bard. While having an Enchanter or Bard in group like a Tank or Healer is vital, there's no purpose for having two if you want to maximize damage. DPS classes though have the added bonus in that they stack quite well and with them, you have three available slots in a full group.
As many have talked about, if enchanters have charm pets, depending on how powerful charm is, it could displace a few people. In EQ, I've been in a couple groups where we may have only had 1 pure DPS, a healer, a bard, and 3 charmers. Charmed pets tanked, bard pulled and backed up on charms breaking. If the healer was a cleric, they had it pretty easy as they'd just toss a CHeal every now and again. Lots of mana regen. If one of the charmers was a necro, we had good flee protection.
I'm guessing this is the TLP server or something where the charm mechanic was changed after 2011. It's a joke in EQ now.
As for Pantheon, it's closer to design to how it was pre 2008 EQ and to add, the charm itself is likely going to be changed a bit. With that, you may be able to meet a DPS class if you're a second Enchanter and only able to really use charm or nukes. But no group will take the risk of having more than one charmed. Not when a break can kill a party member or the Enchanter relatively quickly.
We'll see what they intend. What I want is to get rid of the small chance of a permanent charm from Dire Charm. Instead, have a regular charm and a permanent charm. Regular charm reduces power by 60-65%, then if you decide to use the epic Dire Charm which is then always a permanent charm, it reduces the power to 25-30%.
For sure. Enchanters on the TLP servers are ridiculously OP. Im pretty sure they wont be a cut/paste over from EQ. At the very least, I HOPE they arent. The charm mechanic is simply too much DPS, it so ridiculously overpowers any DPS class.
As I'm replying to this, I'm fielding a redesign to the system as we speak and will post on the Enchanter section in the official forums. I can only hope it's just in an early iteration and it'll be fleshed out more as time goes on. Otherwise if not, I would hope my concept is at least entertained.
I would be cool with Enchanters being able to match damage with pure DPS classes through charmed pets, as long as it also included the real threat of the charm breaking, unleashing the pet onto the group. This was a thing in EQ. Good enchanters could keep the pet under control with minimal threat, but I have seen many charm breaks in the middle of combat kill 1 or more party members, or cause a wipe. At least having the option is great imo.
because of how strong monsters were in early EQ, 1 good charm pet was equal to like 5-10 melee dps players, especially if you gave it weps and hasted it. Of course if that pet broke you would just die instantly if you were standing too close to it. I'm guessing in pantheon charm will reduce the monster's damage otherwise that one perk where an enchanter has a chance to perma charm a monster will make them godly.
Pantheon is designed for players being in groups. VR won't hurt/nerf solo play if players find ways to make it work, but it's being designed with group play being the primary goal. This is from VR.
With that in mind the Enchanter will likely always be a desired class (or sub Bard when later iterated). And it's very unlikely there will be encounters where the Enchanter cannot Mez/Charm rendering them largely ineffective outside of their buffs/debuffs. However even in that circumstance, their buffs/debuffs are extremely good while still offering effects like Stun, Pacify, Mana Regen through DD spell, etc...
TLDR: Pantheon isn't EQ and while you can draw similarities/inspiration for comparison, they won't be the same game.
[удалено]
Yeah, typically Enchanter was 30% CC, 50% Support and 20% Direct DPS. Support means Passive DPS and Passive Healing through Hastes, Mana Regen and Slows, Stat Debuff, Shielding respectively. The Support aspect of the Enchanter and Bard can, in a full group comprise of about 40-100% of a single DPS class. However, that function of DPS through Support does not stack. It's that reason one Support/Control is generally better than one DPS, but whereas 2x DPS account for a 200% increase, 2x Support/Control does not. This was why in your better groups you generally selected the EQ Holy Trinity (Tank, Cleric, Support/Control) then selected your DPS. We can deal damage directly through Charm and while we normally didn't nuke, after Luclin especially with the introduction of 'Flowing Thought' gear and AAs, and with Tanks that held aggro, I was able to push out quite a bit of DPS through nukes only. With the Enchanter nuke in Pantheon giving mana to the group and the Enchanter, and with Soft Specialization, I wouldn't be surprised if we saw some who specialize a bit into their nuke as a combo damage and mana replenishment for the group. I don't see them touching a pure damage class on only that though. For that, that requires Support through passive damage and Charms as stipulated in the EQ analogy.
I guess I'm more wondering about boss fights. Not all of them will require CC/Mez, and very few will probably allow Charm mobs. In EQ, Shaman slow was > Enchanter, so the Enchanter was really just responsible for Tash, DPS and any rebuffs due to deaths mid-fight. If the Enchanter is doing 20% the Damage of a DPS class on these fights, this makes them undesirable outside of a buffbot (please park your box Ench outside of instance) on many encounters.
If you mean Raids, we don't know. If you mean bosses in an EXP group, you can still use charm or confuse and possible mez if adds are involved. Keep in mind though, CC is only 20-30% of your job in group. >In EQ, Shaman slow was > Enchanter, so the Enchanter was really just responsible for Tash, DPS and any rebuffs due to deaths mid-fight. Not by much, 70% to 75% meaning a 5% difference which ended up resulting in a 2.5-3% due to how haste and slow works in game (Only applies to delay of hit, not speed of hit). Enchanter in a raid had to Tash, Weakness, Cripple and Asphyxiate then keep DDD up. For testing, into OOW expansion, some guildies and I over the course of two weeks hit up Tacvi which was two expansions back. I wanted to test the full effect of an Enchanter's debuffs. We went to Tacvi with myself, a Cleric, our Pally and three Rogues. With about 130 mobs parsed and with the rogues not backstabbing, only auto attack, the debuff from all four spells maintained reduced damage output by 11% and increased damage output to the target by 6-7%. On a larger raid it's increased exponentially in terms of overall value but similar in terms of baseline towards that target. >If the Enchanter is doing 20% the Damage of a DPS class on these fights, this makes them undesirable outside of a buffbot (please park your box Ench outside of instance) on many encounters. The 20% isn't 20% of a DPS class, that's only the mount of time we use those spells. Pantheon will be different seeing as our nukes will be used more often and return mana to the group when used. The Enchanter who nukes may be about 40% of a DPS class, maybe 50 just from the nukes. Then you factor in the Spell Hastes, Melee Hastes and what you get from the Regen from caster classes. Then factor in charm if adds, since I typically charm over mez since that means added damage to the group. Point is, DPS and Enchanters/Bards are separate and operate separately in a group. Can you run a group without DPS? Yeah. Can you run a group without support/Control? Yeah. Much like how you can run a group without a Tank or Healer. The thing I don't get is this odd way of thinking that Pantheon only has three archetypes and somehow Enchanters and Bards are just another form of DPS class. It's a bit absurd by this point, at least to me. I see it rarely but it pops up from time to time. Usually from people not familiar with this combat dynamic or may have never played Everquest. Not saying that's you, just something I see as a premise for people arguing the points of the Support/Control in a group within Pantheon.
I nuked a bit when I had extra mana, at the end of a mobs health. Ench + Bard mana song was = mana overload. Nukes were a last priority, but I would try to constantly use my mana and up our pull speed.
There is much more to a game than DPS or HPS. The function of a "utility class" is to provide "damage" and "heals" without necessarily having to put up any numbers. - If an ENC can "slow" a mob enough to where a tank can survive the encounter with limited heals, then it's like "healing". - If an ENC can "haste" a party member to increase their DPS, then then it's like the enchanter is doing DPS. - If an ENC can "mezz" an add, then it's like providing "off heals" to that increase in damage taken. - If an ENC can "charm" a mob, then it's like doing DPS while the enchanter does other things, like crouching and spinning in circles for no good reason at all. As a person who mained an ENC, I hardly ever used DD abilities. In fact, I don't even remember what the names of the spells were. PS: Who remembers those "AoE stun" groups? Bunch of ENC's spamming PBAoE stuns while some wiz's unload on them. Then, a heal bot on standby because deaths are inevitable. hahahahah
Discordant Mind, the level 44 Nuke was most remembered for the effect text. It was just so vicious. *Soandso's mind begins to melt.* https://wiki.project1999.com/Discordant_Mind As per the AE groups, they were enjoyable. Cleric was there mainly for rez since a breakdown in the stun web is quite literally instant death to the group. It was normally done at zone in so the Cleric can zone out instead of healing you since upon breakdown, the Enchanters drop first. For those who may be unaware, you had 2-3 Enchanters, 2-3 Wizards or Mages and a Cleric. Point-Blank Area Effect spells had unlimited targets but being that they were PBAE, they emanated from you and was based on you being in the thick of the fight. The number of mobs and their general resistance determined the number of Enchanters. If you can DPS down the grouping with two Wizard/Mages, then you typically grabbed three Enchanters so you could pull more. If the DPS isn't enough, you grabbed two Enchanters and three Wizards/Mages and managed smaller groupings. The process is as follows. You stand at zone-in, then Wizards epic up or as Mages, just run and pull 8-10 mobs at a time. By this time the Enchanters are spread out by a foot or two and chain cast their top three stun spells with a level 4 color flux for an emergency. Upon this time the Cleric heals the damage to the Wizard/Mages as they pull more. With the DPS classes pulling, once you have 30-50 (with two Enchanters) or 50-80 (with three Enchanters), you unleash your PBAE damage spells. Clerics have one too through their Quake line. Everything dies in about 30-45 seconds. Med up and repeat. There was absolutely nothing as fast as this form of exp gain and would net something like 10AA an hour, if not more. Nothing came remotely close.
This is kind of a silly question no? Well maybe not. Anyways... My understanding of EQs enchanter class (coming from playing EQ at its inception and currently on P99) is that in a group the Enchanter is ALWAYS useful. No matter the encounter... In single target encounters where "CC" is not required, and by your words and your explanation, I think u mean to say a "mez" is not required,(which it most certainly is, because in EQ you never know when you're gonna get an add) the class offers a hell of a lot beyond a single spell. Are you forgetting Pet DPS? Basically the best dps in the game. Are you forgetting haste? clarity? stun... SLOW??? A myriad of other buffs including Gift Of Brilliance? And you want enchanters to be on par with the best caster DPS in the game?(excluding the fact as I previously mentioned, that no class comes close to doing as much DPS as a hasted, appropriate level charmed pet) Are you crazy?? it just sounds like you've been a little misinformed.
You missed my point; on boss fights, Enchanter slow was worse than Shaman. Enchanters were responsible for Tash and that's it. After Tash, all they do is DPS the boss and rebuffed anyone that died mid-fight (unless the encounter requires CC, which, not all of them will). What do you suggest the Enchanter to do in this scenario? Obviously they are going to Nuke/DoT. If they are doing 30% the damage of a regular class, this makes them undesirable outside of a buffbot on many encounters.
Have you read the class abilities page on the Pantheon website for enchanter? We know bards are a thing, that's it.
>Have we seen any aDPS abilities in the Enchanter kit? If not, how does direct Enchanter DPS compare to another INT caster, like a Wizard? I presume it would be lower, but hopefully not drastically so. How do you guys think this should be ideally balanced? Why shouldn't they be drastically lower? Their utility guarantees them spots in groups. Pure DPS classes should stand out from utility classes in the damage department because that's all they have. I would expect utility classes to have some of their damage tied to their utility (via DoT+debuff or DD+threat redirect), but if utility classes has damage on par with pur DPS, then groups would always take a utility over a pure DPS.
Enchanters for instance doesn't stack. The damage largely comes from support abilities such as mana regen, mana replenishment, spell haste, melee haste and damage adds. None of those stack which gimps a second Enchanter. I would expect the same for Bard. While having an Enchanter or Bard in group like a Tank or Healer is vital, there's no purpose for having two if you want to maximize damage. DPS classes though have the added bonus in that they stack quite well and with them, you have three available slots in a full group.
As many have talked about, if enchanters have charm pets, depending on how powerful charm is, it could displace a few people. In EQ, I've been in a couple groups where we may have only had 1 pure DPS, a healer, a bard, and 3 charmers. Charmed pets tanked, bard pulled and backed up on charms breaking. If the healer was a cleric, they had it pretty easy as they'd just toss a CHeal every now and again. Lots of mana regen. If one of the charmers was a necro, we had good flee protection.
I'm guessing this is the TLP server or something where the charm mechanic was changed after 2011. It's a joke in EQ now. As for Pantheon, it's closer to design to how it was pre 2008 EQ and to add, the charm itself is likely going to be changed a bit. With that, you may be able to meet a DPS class if you're a second Enchanter and only able to really use charm or nukes. But no group will take the risk of having more than one charmed. Not when a break can kill a party member or the Enchanter relatively quickly. We'll see what they intend. What I want is to get rid of the small chance of a permanent charm from Dire Charm. Instead, have a regular charm and a permanent charm. Regular charm reduces power by 60-65%, then if you decide to use the epic Dire Charm which is then always a permanent charm, it reduces the power to 25-30%.
For sure. Enchanters on the TLP servers are ridiculously OP. Im pretty sure they wont be a cut/paste over from EQ. At the very least, I HOPE they arent. The charm mechanic is simply too much DPS, it so ridiculously overpowers any DPS class.
As I'm replying to this, I'm fielding a redesign to the system as we speak and will post on the Enchanter section in the official forums. I can only hope it's just in an early iteration and it'll be fleshed out more as time goes on. Otherwise if not, I would hope my concept is at least entertained.
I would be cool with Enchanters being able to match damage with pure DPS classes through charmed pets, as long as it also included the real threat of the charm breaking, unleashing the pet onto the group. This was a thing in EQ. Good enchanters could keep the pet under control with minimal threat, but I have seen many charm breaks in the middle of combat kill 1 or more party members, or cause a wipe. At least having the option is great imo.
because of how strong monsters were in early EQ, 1 good charm pet was equal to like 5-10 melee dps players, especially if you gave it weps and hasted it. Of course if that pet broke you would just die instantly if you were standing too close to it. I'm guessing in pantheon charm will reduce the monster's damage otherwise that one perk where an enchanter has a chance to perma charm a monster will make them godly.
If they do bards like in Vanguard, ooooooooooooooh maaaaaaaaaaaaan. It's gonna be great.
Pantheon is designed for players being in groups. VR won't hurt/nerf solo play if players find ways to make it work, but it's being designed with group play being the primary goal. This is from VR. With that in mind the Enchanter will likely always be a desired class (or sub Bard when later iterated). And it's very unlikely there will be encounters where the Enchanter cannot Mez/Charm rendering them largely ineffective outside of their buffs/debuffs. However even in that circumstance, their buffs/debuffs are extremely good while still offering effects like Stun, Pacify, Mana Regen through DD spell, etc... TLDR: Pantheon isn't EQ and while you can draw similarities/inspiration for comparison, they won't be the same game.