Any Enchanters go to Fan Faire?

[WAPCE]

I'm just wondering if there was any interesting class-specific discussion, or if anyone had a chance to ask a designer/dev in person about the raid effectiveness review that was promised in October 2005?

[Barobra]

<div></div>That's a really good question.

[dest]

<div></div><p>This Illusionist was at Fan Faire.</p><p>I had the good fortune to speak with our keeper at lengths concerning our class one evening and the discussion was quite informative.  Specifically upon our utility, our role, our limitations, as well as our function in raids.</p><p>The good news is that he is aware of our situation (limitations/restrictions) and assured me that the illusionist class will have at least one viable function/purpose in raids.  What that will be, when will it happen - remains unknown.  Hopefully it will be more then a symbolic bone tossed to the starving, but then again - anything is better then nothing.</p><p>So lets wait and see and hope.</p>

[Pins]

<div></div>From what I heard in the coercer chat last night, it has made me despise the devs.  Their solution, make all mobs follow the PvP Immunity feature(you know, place a stun on mob, it gets the immunity from stuns for the same duration as the stun afterwards).  If this was ever to happen, I hope we have a complete and utter revolt against this change.  So much so that we need to start campaigning against it NOW, before they even try to put it in the game.

[WAPCE]

All mobs everywhere, or just epics would follow the PvP stun ruleset?

[Pins]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>WAPCE wrote:All mobs everywhere, or just epics would follow the PvP stun ruleset?<hr></blockquote>Everything.  Root, stifle immunity also included.

[WAPCE]

That would be very amusing. Given that it would effectively kill the majority of mage soloing due to only one shot at a root, I'd imagine the uproar would be huge.

[Zebsen]

<div><div>Interesting.  If this is true, I missed my guess on what they had in mind for us. </div><div> </div><div>The good side is that some of our abilities would be viable against epics.  The bad side is that we'll trade off group and solo usefulness for it.  This is basically what I expected to some degree because like it or not, if our abilities work on mobs, we can really become overpowering fairly quickly in group situations.  I group regularly with another guild illusionist, and we can make almost any encounter (even named mobs that con orange to our tank) doable by timing our stuns correctly.</div><div> </div><div>The bad side to this is that there are a lot of various classes out there with brief stun/stifles that will need to be coached on not using these abilities.  Some pets (specifically ours) may also need revamped to remove some of their control effects from their repotoire. </div><div> </div><div>In PvP now, is there a way to tell when an immunity timer is complete?  Or do you have to time it yourself?</div><div> </div><div>Zebsen</div></div>

[zit]

<div></div><p>considering how many classes have stuns and stifles this would be the dead of the enchanter.</p><p>its not as easy as to "teach" them not to use those abilities. for many classes their stuns are at the same time one of their highest damage skills and for some tanks in addition also a tool they use for agro management. i am sure many groups would sooner go without chanter than be that restricted in what skills to use.</p><p>this might be ok against epics, although still not a satisfying solution, but against solo and heroic mobs this is not acceptable.</p>

[Posti]

the immunity against epics is ok by me, just need to learn to cycle roots and stuns effectively.as a blanket effect it would derail all mages ability to solo except for menial mobs. the immunity workthrough was made to balance the fights between PC's, and to take in all mobs to that would destroy an allready balanced encounter(the balance is mob HP vs pc HP) . a mage cannot get hit, so if control spells get nerfed then mages need to get buffed, or mobs need to be nerfed to keep things dooable.i cant imagine that SOE would implement this...it is absurdly counterintuitive. it would require the entire encounter system to be reworked. if it happened i would leave.<div></div>

[Ebarel]

<div>the day that happens i am gone. It will make fights as complex as "put any hack/slay in here" .</div><div>I hope they apply the same rules to taunts and heals then. This will really make the game enjoyable. Grouping will be hard though, but you will have all content for "your eyes only"</div><div> </div><div>The complexity of fights was dumbed down from day 1. There are almost no mobs left, maybe a few epics (few!) where you need anything else but</div><div>- uber tank</div><div>- enough healing</div><div>- DD</div><div>period</div>

[Rayvne2]

<div></div><blockquote><hr>Pinski wrote:<div></div><blockquote><hr>WAPCE wrote:All mobs everywhere, or just epics would follow the PvP stun ruleset?<hr></blockquote>Everything.  Root, stifle immunity also included.<hr></blockquote>Wow, that would suck.  Imagine being in a group situation and your mezzes wear off and you can't do anything about it.  They are coming for you and you are dead dead dead.  Can't really see this ever making it into the game.  Maybe as a epic only thing but, like other posters have said, you would need to tell everyone else in the raid with shorter stuns to lay off them since they would make yours immune and there would be room for exactly 1 stunner in the entire raid.  Woot.

[Terron]

<blockquote><hr>zitha wrote:<div></div> <p>this might be ok against epics, although still not a satisfying solution, but against solo and heroic mobs this is not acceptable.</p><hr></blockquote>It would certainly be OK for epics, being an improvement on the current complete immunity. It would probably be OK for named heroics too.<div></div>

[Barobra]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> pjackson wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> zitha wrote:<BR> <BR> <P>this might be ok against epics, although still not a satisfying solution, but against solo and heroic mobs this is not acceptable.</P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>It would certainly be OK for epics, being an improvement on the current complete immunity.<BR>It would probably be OK for named heroics too.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV><BR>I mentioned this a while ago I think its a great answer to our epic problem. That way you cant have 5 enchanters constantly casting stifle. Maybe even make the immunity longer then the standard PVP immunity.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now as far as the named heroics I am not so sure about that. I kind of disagree here. Its hard enough getting groups to cooperate with CC as it is. This will make it even harder.</DIV>

[Pins]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Barobrain wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> pjackson wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> zitha wrote:<BR> <BR> <P>this might be ok against epics, although still not a satisfying solution, but against solo and heroic mobs this is not acceptable.</P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>It would certainly be OK for epics, being an improvement on the current complete immunity.<BR>It would probably be OK for named heroics too.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV><BR>I mentioned this a while ago I think its a great answer to our epic problem. That way you cant have 5 enchanters constantly casting stifle. Maybe even make the immunity longer then the standard PVP immunity.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now as far as the named heroics I am not so sure about that. I kind of disagree here. Its hard enough getting groups to cooperate with CC as it is. This will make it even harder.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Well, if it was enchanter only vs. epics, sure fine.  But if it's not, enchanter problems are still no longer solved because guess what classes have stuns and stifles?  All 24 of them.

[Nerj]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> destry wrote:<BR> <P>This Illusionist was at Fan Faire.</P> <P>I had the good fortune to speak with our keeper at lengths concerning our class one evening and the discussion was quite informative.  Specifically upon our utility, our role, our limitations, as well as our function in raids.</P> <P>The good news is that he is aware of our situation (limitations/restrictions) and assured me that the illusionist class will have at least one viable function/purpose in raids.  What that will be, when will it happen - remains unknown.  Hopefully it will be more then a symbolic bone tossed to the starving, but then again - anything is better then nothing.</P> <P>So lets wait and see and hope.</P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>We already have that one purpose in raid and that is mana bot. </P> <P>The follow on would be what is "our utility, our role, our limitations". In other words, what is their current "vision" of each Enchanter class? </P>

[Barobra]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Pinski wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Barobrain wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> pjackson wrote:<BR><BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> zitha wrote:<BR> <BR> <P>this might be ok against epics, although still not a satisfying solution, but against solo and heroic mobs this is not acceptable.</P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>It would certainly be OK for epics, being an improvement on the current complete immunity.<BR>It would probably be OK for named heroics too.<BR> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <DIV><BR>I mentioned this a while ago I think its a great answer to our epic problem. That way you cant have 5 enchanters constantly casting stifle. Maybe even make the immunity longer then the standard PVP immunity.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Now as far as the named heroics I am not so sure about that. I kind of disagree here. Its hard enough getting groups to cooperate with CC as it is. This will make it even harder.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Well, if it was enchanter only vs. epics, sure fine.  But if it's not, enchanter problems are still no longer solved because guess what classes have stuns and stifles?  All 24 of them.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>Also mez. But whats class defining for a wiz against epics? DPS? All 24 do that as well.

[Sector11]

<font size="2">I believe many of you are jumping the gun in fear at this potential change. I also was at Fan Faire, and both Moorgard and Gallenite mentioned it at the Dev Brunch. Later that day, though, the same thought crossed my mind - so I took the opportunity to ask Lockeye for more clarification. If I understood him correctly, epic targets would follow the PvP-style system of immunity after stun/stifle/etc., prohibiting the stacking of stunners on a raid. All is well there - I think it's a viable strategy, allowing us to use our class-defining abilities, but not be TOO overpowering. Heroic and solo mobs would not, I repeat, <i><u><b>WOULD NOT</b></u></i> be subject to these immunity rules. We would still be able to keep mobs locked down in situations that require them. I made sure to explicitly as him about epic targrets vs. heroic/solo, so I believe I got him right. That said, Lockeye did state (at a panel as well as in my conversation with him) that he is in the midst of a long project to revamp all control spells in the game. What does that mean? The good: all classes' ability to control mobs will be adjusted, bringing down some of those who have passed enchanters in effectiveness. The bad: there will likely be more mobs with immunity to mental damage and/or control spells. All told though, I'm looking forward to it. Zobek 66 Illusionist Vindicate Guk </font><div></div>

[Impetus]

My interpretation of your post: yay we can use control spells on epics. Also, incoming nerf to all our control spells.Sorry Zobek, but after a 18 months or so in this game, the words "a long project to revamp [insert game mechanics here]" just don't exactly instill confidence in me.Although I'm looking forward to it, too, in a morbid curiosity sort of way.edit: Appreciate you posting the news, though.<p>Message Edited by Impetus on <span class=date_text>04-11-2006</span> <span class=time_text>03:50 PM</span>

[WAPCE]

<blockquote><hr>Impetus wrote:morbid curiosity<hr></blockquote> That's my position on all of it. I'll keep my fingers crossed, but seriously, what are the chances we're going to come out of any vast control mechanic changes saying "Wow, this is as good as the Mana Flow fix"?

[Impetus]

<blockquote><hr>Impetus wrote:My interpretation of your post: yay we can use control spells on epics. Also, incoming nerf to all our control spells.Sorry Zobek, but after a 18 months or so in this game, the words "a long project to revamp [insert game mechanics here]" just don't exactly instill confidence in me.Although I'm looking forward to it, too, in a morbid curiosity sort of way.edit: Appreciate you posting the news, though.<p>Message Edited by Impetus on <span class=date_text>04-11-2006</span> <span class=time_text>03:50 PM</span><hr></blockquote>To clarify, I mean that the history of our class and of large game changes is the reason why people are jumping the gun in fear. (Or at least the reason I am.) <img src="/smilies/283a16da79f3aa23fe1025c96295f04f.gif" border="0" alt="SMILEY" /><p>Message Edited by Impetus on <span class=date_text>04-11-2006</span> <span class=time_text>03:54 PM</span>

[Pins]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Sector11 wrote:<BR><FONT size=2>I believe many of you are jumping the gun in fear at this potential change.<BR><BR>I also was at Fan Faire, and both Moorgard and Gallenite mentioned it at the Dev Brunch. Later that day, though, the same thought crossed my mind - so I took the opportunity to ask Lockeye for more clarification.<BR><BR>If I understood him correctly, epic targets would follow the PvP-style system of immunity after stun/stifle/etc., prohibiting the stacking of stunners on a raid. All is well there - I think it's a viable strategy, allowing us to use our class-defining abilities, but not be TOO overpowering.<BR><BR>Heroic and solo mobs would not, I repeat, <I><U><B>WOULD NOT</B></U></I> be subject to these immunity rules. We would still be able to keep mobs locked down in situations that require them. I made sure to explicitly as him about epic targrets vs. heroic/solo, so I believe I got him right.<BR><BR>That said, Lockeye did state (at a panel as well as in my conversation with him) that he is in the midst of a long project to revamp all control spells in the game. What does that mean? The good: all classes' ability to control mobs will be adjusted, bringing down some of those who have passed enchanters in effectiveness. The bad: there will likely be more mobs with immunity to mental damage and/or control spells.<BR><BR>All told though, I'm looking forward to it.<BR><BR>Zobek<BR>66 Illusionist<BR>Vindicate<BR>Guk<BR><BR></FONT> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE>Wait, that's still crap then.  Why?  Because name a class that doesn't have a stun or a stifle?  Hrm, oh wait all 24 classes have stuns and stifles.  If this change happens, I won't be casting my stuns or stifles any differently vs. epics than I do right now, because everybody else's stuns/stifles are already part of their attack cycles because they do damage.  This is a change that does nothing to help enchanters.  And for a control spell revamp, great we're going to get the stick in our behinds.<BR>

[Sector11]

<font size="2">WAPCE & Impetus, I won't disagree with you that there is the potential for things to be overdone. The extreme over-nerf and subsequent fix that happened with our roots certainly highlights that. What gives me hope, though, is that I was told that after all this is done, enchanters should still hold our place as the best at crowd control. It may be better than what we have now, it may be worse - I guess we'll find out in a few more LU's, whenever they get done. It really is true when they say </font><font size="2">"Game Experience May Change During Online Play" on the box!</font> <font size="2"> Zobek 66 Illusionist Vindicate Guk </font><div></div>

[Posti]

"revamp of all control spells" you guys are still jumping the gun. if every class is nerfed in terms of control we will still be the kings of it(control not nerf hehe). so all classes have stuns/stifles, lets assume that the PvP immunity is implemented without a restructure of control spells. this only means that the raid will have to commicate more effectively inorder for the chanter to operate effectively. i see that as a plus. a revamp probably means that most classes will lose the larger part of their ability to stun/stifle, thereby making our role much more important. i was asked to leave a group the other day for a second healer. if i was the only class that could stun/stifle that might not have happened.  being asked to leave for functionality has got to be the biggest game killer i have ever expirenced. <div></div>

[zit]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Sector11 wrote:<BR><FONT size=2>WAPCE & Impetus,<BR><BR>I won't disagree with you that there is the potential for things to be overdone. The extreme over-nerf and subsequent fix that happened with our roots certainly highlights that.<BR><BR><FONT color=#ccff00>What gives me hope, though, is that I was told that after all this is done, enchanters should still hold our place as the best at crowd control.</FONT> It may be better than what we have now, it may be worse - I guess we'll find out in a few more LU's, whenever they get done.<BR><BR>It really is true when they say </FONT><FONT size=2>"Game Experience May Change During Online Play" on the box!</FONT><BR><FONT size=2><BR>Zobek<BR>66 Illusionist<BR>Vindicate<BR>Guk<BR></FONT> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>this all doesnt sound very encouraging.</P> <P>what does it mean that we then "should <EM>still</EM> hold our place as the best at crowd control" ?</P> <P>illusionist dont have a place as the best crowd control class atm.</P> <P>at least not against those stifle/stun immune mobs. yea, we rock against trash, but as soon as we are facing real challenging enemies, our CC become useless. a group is much better of to get a warlock when fighting named...and no, not only for the higher dmg, but also for the superior CC.</P> <P> </P> <P>from my understanding we have to expect a huge nerf incoming. most likely durations on stifle and stuns will get decreased and / or recast times increased. also some more immunities and restrictions put into game.</P> <P>what this all comes down to is, that healing becomes an even more important part. its the most vital role already, now getting another boost. and CC, which has always only been a "nice to have" but hardly really a required job in a group, getting reduced further in effectiveness.</P> <P> </P>

[JackAll]

<DIV>The king of crap.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Sounds good?</DIV>

[Rayvne2]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> zitha wrote:<BR> <BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Sector11 wrote:<BR><FONT size=2>WAPCE & Impetus,<BR><BR>I won't disagree with you that there is the potential for things to be overdone. The extreme over-nerf and subsequent fix that happened with our roots certainly highlights that.<BR><BR><FONT color=#ccff00>What gives me hope, though, is that I was told that after all this is done, enchanters should still hold our place as the best at crowd control.</FONT> It may be better than what we have now, it may be worse - I guess we'll find out in a few more LU's, whenever they get done.<BR><BR>It really is true when they say </FONT><FONT size=2>"Game Experience May Change During Online Play" on the box!</FONT><BR><FONT size=2><BR>Zobek<BR>66 Illusionist<BR>Vindicate<BR>Guk<BR></FONT> <BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P>this all doesnt sound very encouraging.</P> <P>what does it mean that we then "should <EM>still</EM> hold our place as the best at crowd control" ?</P> <P>illusionist dont have a place as the best crowd control class atm.</P> <P>at least not against those stifle/stun immune mobs. yea, we rock against trash, but as soon as we are facing real challenging enemies, our CC become useless. a group is much better of to get a warlock when fighting named...and no, not only for the higher dmg, but also for the superior CC.</P> <P> </P> <P>from my understanding we have to expect a huge nerf incoming. most likely durations on stifle and stuns will get decreased and / or recast times increased. also some more immunities and restrictions put into game.</P> <P>what this all comes down to is, that healing becomes an even more important part. its the most vital role already, now getting another boost. and CC, which has always only been a "nice to have" but hardly really a required job in a group, getting reduced further in effectiveness.</P> <P> </P><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR>I know everyone here is jumpy about nerfs etc etc... But who says that our CC is being nerfed.  Maybe they have realized that several other classes have CC abilities that are too powerful for what they are.  Maybe they will nerf other classes CC's and leave Enchanters alone so that we are more valuable.

[zit]

<P>^^ i wished i were still a young and optimistic illusionist like you . :smileywink:</P> <P>but experience can teach a lot.... :smileyindifferent:</P>

[Barobra]

<DIV>Who does CC better then us? We have 4 mezzes (yes 4). One lasts for 50 seconds that can't be interupted, another is like quick draw mcgraw with a .5 second cast time...which has saved so many healers...I am really quick with that spell...I love it. The problem I think is not that we are not the best CC cause we are, its that its hard for it to be useful in many situations.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Why are we arguing if we are the best CC? This does not make sense to me. The problem is CC effectivness GAME WIDE for any class, period.</DIV>

[Rayvne2]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Barobrain wrote:<BR> <DIV>Who does CC better then us? We have 4 mezzes (yes 4). One lasts for 50 seconds that can't be interupted, another is like quick draw mcgraw with a .5 second cast time...which has saved so many healers...I am really quick with that spell...I love it. The problem I think is not that we are not the best CC cause we are, its that its hard for it to be useful in many situations.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Why are we arguing if we are the best CC? This does not make sense to me. The problem is CC effectivness GAME WIDE for any class, period.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>The only way CC is really going to become valuable in EQ2 is if the mobs start to hit as hard as they did in EQ1.  The only way that you could tackle mobs in EQ1 is by slowing them 60-70%.  Adds were much much more dangerous because unslowed they were a wipe incoming.  I don't think this will ever happen in EQ2, especially the way mob's are linked so you can't use a skilled puller to split the camps, so CC will never be as important as it was in EQ1.</P> <P>That said, I think Enchanters in EQ2 are more valuable then they were in EQ1.  If they want the power regen you need to be in the gorup not sitting in the guild hall or PoK buffing the masses with 3 hour mana buffs.  There are ALWAYS adds in the EQ2 due to linked encounters.  Sure they can be killed without any CC but being able to mezz one while killing the other is very valuable and makes fights much more ordered.  In EQ1, if you had a skilled puller, you didn't get adds.  When I played a ranger in EQ1 I was embarassed when I brought an add to camp and the enchanter had to mezz.  FD pullers never brought adds with them.  Most people in EQ would choose a shaman or beastlord before a enchanter as a slower for a xp group since they were considered to be better DPS.</P>

[zit]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Rayvne2 wrote:<BR> <BR> <P><BR>The only way CC is really going to become valuable in EQ2 is if the mobs start to hit as hard as they did in EQ1.  ...<BR></P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>The problem is not that there wouldnt exist hard hitting mobs, the problem we face atm is that against those mobs our CC abilities dont work.</P> <P>And the problem we are going to face with that CC revamp is that reduced effectiveness of stuns / stifles will become a more general rule and not only limited to some HoF mobs and several T7 nameds.</P> <P>I always had the impression that illusionists were pretty nice balanced since LU13 (with the exception of raids). We had some value in group and could contribute our fair share. We still could easily be replaced by many classes, which shows that we also werent an overpowered necessity. to cut into our CC abilities will shift this balance. atm we are a good substitute for a second healer, i dont expect this to be the case any longer after revamp (just like we cannot substitue a healer in HoF or against several T7 nameds anymore).</P> <P>my guess is that we also dont get anything in return. if we are lucky we might get some vague promise that for compensation our power drains will get some fix. which then will take them at least another 2 expansions till those fixes go live, if ever.</P>

[Anachronomicon]

<DIV>I think one of the biggest stumbling blocks they've come across with the enchanter is their desire for it not to be necessary to have one.  They seem to tailor everything so that you can get around having to have an enchanter.  I think if they gave up and started working with the assumption that some situations *will* require that, then they can start making progress.  Otherwise just let us pick a new class.... I mean you need everything else right.. You have to have a tank.. you have to have a healer.... you have to have DPS......</DIV> <DIV>I am going to have to join the "/watch on in morbid fascination" camp.</DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </DIV> <DIV><SPAN class=time_text></SPAN> </DIV><p>Message Edited by Anachronomicon on <span class=date_text>04-13-2006</span> <span class=time_text>04:08 AM</span>

[Barobra]

<DIV>I posted my view on why mez is less effective already. Its not just that groups can handle it without us, its many factors. The biggest reason I see a broken mez happen is simply autoassist which was not in eq1, and the 30,000 skills that break mez that people dont even understand. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I played eq1 for a very long time and the only reason I picked a chanter in eq2 was because they were so powerful in eq1. Anyone would pick up a chanter if they saw him LFG in eq1.</DIV>

[Rayvne2]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Barobrain wrote:<BR> <DIV>I posted my view on why mez is less effective already. Its not just that groups can handle it without us, its many factors. The biggest reason I see a broken mez happen is simply autoassist which was not in eq1, and the 30,000 skills that break mez that people dont even understand. </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>I played eq1 for a very long time and the only reason I picked a chanter in eq2 was because they were so powerful in eq1. Anyone would pick up a chanter if they saw him LFG in eq1.</DIV><BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>At higher levels I think Enchanters did more LFG than any other class in EQ.  At least that is what all the enchanters in my guild used to complain about all of the time, over and over and over and over, in guild chat.  Personally I loved grouping with them and it is one of the reasons I chose the class when moving to EQ2 but that is what I remember.</P>

[Sadaro]

A few replies to various folks:SITUATIONS WHEN OTHER CLASSES HAVE SUPERIOR CCEpic mobs with rootable epic adds.  Wizards have an AoE root and can lock down the adds much more effectively than enchanters, especially since our mez still doesn't work.SITUATIONS WHEN NEW STUN RULES WILL BE USEFULGrouped epic mobs can be a real problem -- a huge DPS spike in the beginning, and massive DPS lasting until the first mob is dead.  Keeping just one (non-targetted mob) stunned/stifled 50% of the time make these encounters much easier.  With the long stuns and stifles, Illusionists are an excellent choice for this roll.USEFULNESS OF CCI'd like to see more situations where *any* crowd control is a requirement -- or, at least, amazingly useful.  The Ring event in Blackscale Sepulcher is an excellent example.  To succeed, you must kill 4 separate heroic mobs within a short time limit.  The best solution uses an enchanter to mez any mobs at 10% hit points and hold them there.  However, plenty alternatives exist including: rooting the 10% mobs (and avoiding PBAoE in the area), getting a really good tank and sufficient healing power, alternate mez-using classes, etc.Imagine a ring event where, instead of a group of 6 mobs, you spawned 6-10 yellow^^^ mobs over a period of 10-20 seconds.  Yeah, you might be able to throw enough brute force at the event to finish it, but a handful of CC makes a much better solution.  Again, you have a little strategy: do you root mobs (so you can use PBAoE's), allocating one mob per rooting class, or do you have a single enchanter mez 3-6 of them?Another alternative is a mob that is immune to any damage, but susceptible to stun, stifle, interrupt, and mez.  This mob 'calls for help/gates in an ally' anytime one of his 4 protectors (each white/yellow^^^ or so), with the protector being replaced in 5-10 seconds.  If all protectors are dead, then the boss mob can be damaged.  Again, this type of event has multiple solutions, but being able to stun/stifle/interrupt the boss mob is the most elegant solution.The return of social aggro has helped make crowd control more useful, but the layout of the dungeons frequently works to minimize the requirement for crowd control.  With a little foresight, a good tank can find a clear area, use that to pull single groups until the next area is clear, then move on.  Single adds happen occasionally, and double/triple adds happen rarely.  However, it's the double/triple adds that require crowd control.  Maybe some of the dungeons need more wandering guards?  Or guaranteed adds when you pull certain mobs?  Effective groups can handle one or two additional mobs without crowd control, so, again, there are ways around this.  I wouldn't recommend this for all dungeons -- allowing a solo character to sneak through a dungeon with a combination of invis, killing key see-invis mobs, etc should still be allowed in many dungeons.Finally, I'd note that enough classes have some form of crowd control, and enough other classes have some for of mez, that these suggestions would not just benefit enchanters.Sadari70 IllusionistMistmoore