Three minutes as a recast time is a little excessive isn't it?

[TheWhiteRaid]

- Paralyze now takes 1 second to cast, the maximum stun duration has been increased to 6 seconds, and the reuse timer has been increased to 180 seconds. <DIV> </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>That is a little long for a stun that only lasts 6 seconds considering the stun we used before Paralyze  had a 2 second cast,  3-5 second stun, and a 45 sec recast.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Something like 60 seconds would be a little more reasonable.</DIV>

[Jan It]

<div></div>Why would it be more reasonable? You´re dishing out that number without any argument. From my point of view(not playing a wizzy, so I rely on your notes) the spell has been given a significant boost and has a much improved use for you now, aswell as the handling of the spell has been changed big time. Use before change: Stun a mob every 45 seconds to help the tank getting less damage. Long casting time ends mostly in an interruption if wizzy gets aggro. Use after change: Most important thing is the reduction in casting time. The chances of being interrupted if aggroed are halfed casting time wise, but probably even much less than that, because you can restart the spell and finish it befor the mob lands his next heavy attack. Combine the spell with a macro like "A %t is trying to hurt your beloved wizzy. Get him off me!!! /useability Paralyze" You´ll very often be able to give the tank 6 more seconds to get that mob off you and the priest the time to ward/heal you. I would at every time chose the new version over the old one and be very much willing to accept the new recast timer! <div></div><p>Message Edited by Jan Itor on <span class=date_text>04-04-2005</span> <span class=time_text>01:42 AM</span>

[Jadr]

<P>I think, as a wizard, that theres a somewhat counter intuitive factor that we actually get worse at stunning as we level.</P> <P>If you get a nuke that does a dps of 100 at level 10, and a nuke that does a dps of 20 at level 40, you dont really care. Its clearly broken, but it dosent effect you as you can contine to use the level 10 one.</P> <P>But stuns (and roots) are hard capped to what mobs they effect. You cant use Freeze after a cirtain level, it simply dosen't work on mobs anymore.</P> <P>Now clearly this is by design, and i kind of understand the logic behind it, but your never going to be popular forcing people to upgrade to a worse ability.</P>

[TheWhiteRaid]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Jan Itor wrote:<BR> Why would it be more reasonable? You´re dishing out that number without any argument.<BR><BR> <P> </P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE><BR> <DIV>Ok I think you missed my post.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Burning Intimidation is the stun that has a 2 second cast with a 45 second recast and it does about 250-350 damage.   It works on enemies up to level 48 and for the most part it goes off fast enough to stun the enemy without getting interupted.  Not to mention if he is stopping me from casting I can also stifle him to allow me to cast the stun.</DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>Paralyze as of now on live has a 4 second cast with a 45 second recast.   So yes Paralyze is getting an upgrade that it is getting the time cut by 3 seconds, but it is also getting raise of over 200% in it's recast.   It also is only doing about 150-250 damage.  </DIV> <DIV> </DIV> <DIV>My point is that the stun's recast is far too high.   I agree a longer recast time is needed, but 3 minutes is a little excessive.</DIV><p>Message Edited by TheWhiteRaider on <span class=date_text>04-04-2005</span> <span class=time_text>04:48 PM</span>

[Jan It]

Ok, I thought the paralyze spell was changed by the devs, but you were referring to Burning Intimidation. But I still see no argumentation here. "3 minutes is a little excessive" or "60 seconds would be more reasonable" are statements that should be based on arguments. I think I made clear in my post that compared to Burning Intimidation the spell Paralyze was probably changed to fulfill another purpose instead of casting it repeatedly every fight. My assumptions aren´t based on official information, but they are very logical. Additionally, if they are on different recast timers, you can still use BOTH of them on a mob up to lvl 48. So the spell ain´t an upgrade but a spells with comparable effects on a different spell-line. Finally what is that "stifle" thing you do to prevent interruption,another spell or a tactic? I could use such thing for my defiler, because the chances of casting a 4second spell without interruption while a high level ^^ is bashing on my head are very very small. <div></div>

[TheWhiteRaid]

<BR> <BLOCKQUOTE> <HR> Jan Itor wrote:<BR>Ok, I thought the paralyze spell was changed by the devs, but you were referring to Burning Intimidation. But I still see no argumentation here.<BR> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P><BR>My point is that it is a little out of wack with all our other stuns.  It just seems inferior to Burning Intimidation with that large recast.  It doesn't even out damage Burning Intimidation.   3 minutes is just too much for what the spell does compared to other stuns.</P> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr> </BLOCKQUOTE> <BLOCKQUOTE dir=ltr> <P></P> <HR> <P>Finally what is that "stifle" thing you do to prevent interruption,another spell or a tactic? I could use such thing for my defiler, because the chances of casting a 4second spell without interruption while a high level ^^ is bashing on my head are very very small.</P> <HR> </BLOCKQUOTE> <P> </P> <P>A "Stifle"  is basically to stop the mob from using special attacks or silence it.   It can still move and attack,  but it can't do any of its spells or combat arts.   When a mob is stifled it is harder for it to interupt you.</P>