Are EQ2's Game Mechanics Anti Enchanter?

[Bawang]

<div>The following might be old news for people who've been playing enchanters in EQ2 for a while.  I just wanted to share my perspective and really ask more experienced players whether they think I'm right - or wrong - about this.</div><div> </div><div>My favorite class in EQ1 was an Enchanter.  I had stayed stayed away from EQ2 because, in my opinion, they had screwed enchanters with 3 mins Breeze and such.  I (very) recently started playing EQ2  because I saw they've corrected many things.  My Enchanter (Bawango) is only level 35 and that's my highest char.  What I say is from this noobish perspective and I'm quite willing to stand corrected by wiser minds.</div><div> </div><div>Naturally, I wanted to recreate as much as possible the experience of playing an Enchanter in EQ1.  So far, I've found this a frustrating exercise as I've noticed that we're now looked upon as more of a DPS class than a CC class.  Often in groups I was told "don't mez".  I asked myself "Why? what harm am I doing?".  The best answer I've come up with so far is that by mezzing I'm slowing the pace of the game and EQ2 players have gotten used to a VERY fast pace.  There's of course the little matter that, in most xp situations, mezzing is quite unnecessary because mobs are so much weaker than in EQ1 - relative to players - that if the group gets adds everyone can just pick a mob and "solo" it.</div><div> </div><div>Naturally, I don't mean to say that they set out to design a game that would make our class less needed.  I think it just happened that way as the game evolved.  I'm very disatisfied with my role in groups right now.  I'm a CC freak and group leaders are always asking for "MORE DPS!".</div><div> </div><div>I was secretly hoping that as my char grew in levels and got into raids that the epic mobs would again bring CC into its proper role.  But, alas, the word out is that epic mobs resist practically all of our signature spells (it says so on almost every one of our spell descriptions).</div><div> </div><div>I see no easy way out of this for the designers.  They're not going to change the game mechanics for our sake. I'm still able to save a group's behind from time to time, but in EQ1 this was an everyday kind of thing.</div><div> </div><div>In EQ1, the game was designed around the asumption that groups would be fighting one mob at a time.  This was made possible most of the time by monks' FD.  What that meant was that designers had to make sure that the mob was tough enough to give the group a challenge.  When a group got adds in EQ1, it was immediately in danger of being overwhelmed.  It was at this time that an Enchanter shined.  The Enchanter made the difference between a wipe-out and a victory.</div><div> </div><div>In EQ2, no one's afraid of a whole bunch of mobs coming to attack the group at once.  The mobs are so weak they don't really pose much of a danger and of course the death penalty is a joke anyway so no one's afraid of dying to begin with.  This directly impacts our class because players who are unafraid to die don't need the comfort of having a CC master nearby.</div><div> </div><div>We've been "downsized" as a class in EQ2.  But the worst part is designers don't seem to have a clear idea of where we fit in as a class.  It seems to me  that when they see our CC as being overpowering, instead of working on a creative solution the knee-jerk reaction is to disallow (some might even say nerf).</div><div> </div><div>As for the the game as a whole, I feel they've made it much too easy.  I do agree with them that it's more "fun".  EQ1 took itself much too seriously really.  Often you were so afraid to die and lose your corpse (and equipment), that you simply didn't take risks.  I wish they had found a middle ground.  Maybe there's still time.</div><div> </div><div> </div><div>Bawango</div><div>35 Illusionist - Crushbone</div><div> </div>

[Belizarius]

<div></div><p>You've certainly touched on some well known issues.</p><p>But it's worth taking a moment to point out one common misconception of lower level chanters, especially ex eq1 players.</p><p>A 'linked encounter' may look like several mobs.  But it's generally preferable to think of them as a single mob.  Plenty of classes have damage (and debuff) spells that affect a target group.  These linked mobs are usually weaker than average, they do less DPS and they die faster, than single heroic mobs.  By far the best tactic on those targets, is to AE like mad.  About the only time you want to mez 'within' the encounter, is if you are soloing or perhaps duoing.</p><p>Apart from that, the way I see it</p><p>- all encounters are designed either for a solo player, or a full/balanced group (apart from multi-group epic encounters).</p><p>- group encounters are not designed to require crowd control</p><p>- mezzing is therefore only useful, for 'adds' ie separate encounters joining in.</p><p>- there seems to be virtually no 'social' aggro in the lower to mid level zones.  Therefore, if you have a full group, for most of the game crowd control is pretty redundant.  Maybe if you pick a bad spot and get a roamer you will get to mez something.</p><p>(Some higher level zones seem to have something like social aggro).</p><p>So.  Mezzing can be valuable if you have 2 or 3 people in your group, trying to take on group content.  Our key ability lines are un-usable against epics and semi-redundant with a full group.  EQ2 seems to be a DPS game more than anything.  There is usually no place in a full group for a CC freak.  The CC strategy in eq2 is usually to kill things faster.  In most groups now I find myself mashing DPS buttons, about the only time I stun/stifle is against named heroics.  And as you point out, since people aren't afraid of death CC is an even lower priority.</p><p>If anything, it feels to me like chanters have become less and less important to the game since release, and I don't see it improving.  Complaints about lack of worthwhile utility have occasionally been answered by upping our DPS a bit as some attempt at 'balancing'.  Sometimes, people also like our power regen.  It doesn't seem like much of a role to me.</p>

[Rayvne2]

<div></div><p>Whether to CC or not largely depends on the group imo.  If the group is handling Yellow mob groups it is far more likely to want CC then if they are killing white/blue mobs where aoe is generally the best answer. </p><p>A lot of the time I will agree with the group to CC the main ^^ or ^^^ mob in a group of linked mobs and they can aoe all the lesser adds then concentrate on the main one at the end.  This seems to work really well.  Having someone to mezz in the group will allow the group to handle more difficult encounters then they could without.  No one can argue that point but few look at it that way.</p><p>If seems that everyone loves Illusionists in the group once they are in the group but they are well down on the list of people to invite before they are in the group. </p><p>Also, generally, melee based groups tend to appreciate CC a lot more since they can tear through mobs one at a time really efficiently and the healer will never go oop.  I've been in melee based groups and been able to lock down 6 or 7 mobs (grouped and solo mob adds) by using my group mezz, group stun, and my single mob mezz.  At the end of the encounters they only go "Wow, that was a certain wipe.  mezzers rule.".  Groups with caster DPS generally are not ideal for a Illusionist since they want to aoe nuke everything so they can /flex at the end of a battle.  The group leader telling them that they are not allowed to aoe causes a lot of them to break down in tears.</p><p>We do things for groups to enhance DPS that they don't understand and do them without asking.  Some day, when dps in a group comes up and people are parsing and laughing at my DPS compared to theirs, I am going to drop the haste buffs and bring up my pet.  Instead of stunning to help the healer save power I will just go all out dps.  Maybe when they parse and see their dps plummet, mine go up, and the healer going oop,  they might understand what we bring to a group.</p><p> </p><p>Whenever I play a alt in a full group and there isn't any CC I dislike the whole situation.  It seems very chaotic and "seat of the pants" and being from EQ1 like the OP I came from a game where chaos meant corpse runs.</p>

[Nupr]

<div></div>Actually EQ2 was designed to not need crowd control.  It's only really useful in less then full group settings.  When it's necessary in full group scenarios, chances are that your initial mezzes have already been broken and people are wiping while you wait for a recast timer.

[zit]

<div></div><div></div><blockquote><hr>Rayvne2 wrote:<div></div><p>We do things for groups to enhance DPS that they don't understand and do them without asking.  Some day, when dps in a group comes up and people are parsing and laughing at my DPS compared to theirs, I am going to drop the haste buffs and bring up my pet.  Instead of stunning to help the healer save power I will just go all out dps.  Maybe when they parse and see their dps plummet, mine go up, and the healer going oop,  they might understand what we bring to a group.</p><p></p><hr><p></p></blockquote><p>I have done just this. Parse groups with my "enhancing buffs" and without, stop mezing and stunning and focus on dps and watch ppl power. The result was disillusioning. The healer usually didnt go oop, the dps of the other group members didnt drop noticeable.</p><p>This matches exactly with what i experience on my alts that hardly ever have grouped with an enchanter. Its never been a problem to be without a mezer, power never is an issue and up to two (yellow con) adds can be handled without much trouble.</p><p> </p><p>With my enchanter i have been in a lot of different groups recently, guild groups and pick up groups alike. There have been exactly 2 situations where i in all honesty can say my CC was needed and made a difference in the outcome of the battle.</p><p>One was when we did The Nest for the first time and pulled the named at entrance without clearing the floor from minor mobs before. That was fun.</p><p>The second was when our tank went afk and we decided the dirge would make a good replacement for tanking those yellow con heroics.</p><p>In every other situation the group would prolly been better of to replace me by a conjuror. I dont tell them though... I keep them in the believe that i can significantly boost their dps with my uber enhancing skills and i occasionally will mez an add just for show although the mob wasnt posing a threat.</p><p>Yea, i keep up the illusion that i am the most valueable group member, i am an illusionist after all. Some ppl start to realize the truth though and the more experience they get with the new zones the less we will be thought after again. I enjoy as long as it lasts.</p><p>And no, i dont think we are sux in groups. I just dont think we are that great as some enchanter think we are.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p>Message Edited by zitha on <span class="date_text">03-06-2006</span><span class="time_text">02:02 AM</span></p>

[Barobra]

<div></div><div>In general there is definatley not really a need for mez and its kind of sad when you are an enchanter.</div><div> </div><div>One of my biggest problems with it as well is the lack of knowledge of what actually breaks a mez. I myself am not really sure of every single little skill of each class and what breaks our mez. For instance, I have heard and I don't know if this is true but the necro pet has a pet buff that can AE taunt or dmg not sure but if they have a skill on top of that taunt that causes dmg whenver they do a hostile spell.... Or I have seen personally when the tank had thorns on him and just because he did an ae taunt it broke mez.</div><div> </div><div>There is soooooo many skills in eq2 compared to eq1 it really is hard to keep up. I will constantly go back on my log and its hard to pinpoint who actually broke the mez or why. Maybe the tank switched targets real quick just to single taunt that triple up....so when someone was targeting him and then broke the mez simply because he was assisting the tank.</div><div> </div><div>I think maybe I should setup a seperate chat tab that just shows who breaks mez. And eventually I would figure out what breaks it for sure.</div><div> </div><div>But when I am in sanctum and no one is breaking my mez....we are so much safer down there and can take on multiple mobs constantly. It really is a very useful tool. Just no one cares to use it. And honestly in alot of situations its a tool that is not needed.</div>

[Belizarius]

<div></div><p>It's not just casters that like to AE.  Zerkers in particular seem to hate being asked not to AE.</p><p>I did actually use mez to good effect recently.  We were racing to beat another group to a named in Sanctum of Scale.  Our Conjuror pet pulled the named, which came with a couple of adds.  They quickly swatted the pet, the conjuror and the tank in short order.  By then I had them all mezzed.   We rezzed up, rebuffed, killed the minions and then the named.</p><p>Without my mezzing it would have been a wipe and we would have missed the named too. </p><p>That was fun but, this is the exception rather than the rule.</p><p>If we had not been racing to get the mob, chances are it wouldn't have been an issue.</p>

[Grimda]

<div></div><p>I'm only 22 but having fun so far.  Finding groups has been hot and cold.  Between mezzing, controlling pet, avoiding aggro, and dps support its a fairly complicated class which I like.   Generally I'll leave a group if they can't appreciate or grasp the concept of mezzing. </p><p>Last night I was exp grinding with a full group. It felt good and made the group more interesting by bringing something to the table other than just dps. And there's nothing more fun than the occasional heroic opportunity to singlehandedly save your groups [expletive haxx0red by Raijinn]!! By the end of the night the group was complimenting me highly and I left having been added to a few friends lists.  Since I've found most people don't understand/appreciate the enchanter classes this felt really good.  Hopefully the class progression goes equally well for me. At least for now my 53 ranger and 60 wizard are on ice.</p><p> </p><p> </p><p> </p>

[Manyak]

<div></div><p>In EQ2, Illusionists are a DPS class. CC spells are just secondary abilities. Kinda like a guardian has taunts for his primary abilities, and then some attacks as secondary ones.</p><p>At lower lvls, illusionists are MUCH more valuable than at higher lvls. At lower lvls the gear ppl can get isnt on par with the higher lvl stuff, where u can cap some stats and get alot of mana regen. Also, lower lvl toons are missing alot of good spell lines that theyd have at higher lvls. Not to mention, ull run into alot of new players who are inexperienced. So thats where illu skills really come into play, and can really help a group out if the illu knows what hes doing (like knowing when to mezz, when to stun, and when to dps). But at higher lvls, any group can handle 3 adds, and if the group is really good they could prolly handle up to 6 or 7. So that makes an illu completely unnecessary.</p><p>And in '[Removed for Content]' groups, even at higher lvls, an illu is great to have. Take this for example - sometimes when i play my brigand (lvl 34), i usually end up tanking instead of the fighter in the group cuz i have more mit and avoidance than them (yay twinkage) and can hold aggro on a single target ALOT better than most of the inexperienced tanks. But when we get an add, theres no way i can hold aggro on both mobs at once, and thats when the illu would mezz. This would also end up being the same at higher lvls too, if u ever have a brig tank <img src="/smilies/69934afc394145350659cd7add244ca9.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /></p>

[KaltenAlTh]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Bawang wrote:<div> </div><div>Are EQ2's Game Mechanics Anti Enchanter?</div><div><hr></div></blockquote><p> </p><p>Yes.</p><p> </p>